5Model European Union Strasbourg 201Strasbourg Snitcher

Friday, 17. April 2015

SIMPLY THE BEST

Daily News of Model European Union Strasbourg 2015Issue No 06/15

Follow us: #MEUs2015

So here we are; worn-out, exhausted and hung-over. Our time here at the Eu-ropean Parliament is coming to an end. It is the end of an incredible week, the end of pastries for breakfast and the end of the greatest love story ever told: one of a President and his ties. If one were melodramatic one might say it is the end of an era.

Therefore, it is only fitting that we look back on the last week with sweet nos-talgia and remember our best moments.

I spoke with Alexander Baldwin, a Brit playing the role of the Minister of Slo-vakia, who thought that ‘after hearing how often [the U.K.] should leave the EU, it [was] great to actually see one of the real benefits of being part of it.’ Not

only that but he instinctively answered my question ‘What was the best part of the week?’ with ‘Honestly, the people’; he was not alone in this belief. Nándor Révész, the Minister of Luxembourg noted that although it is ‘cliché’, it was all of us who made it so special for him.

French interpreters Lucile Fayard and Isha Dalays loved the ‘fights in the Par-liament’ as ‘they’re pretty funny [for them]’ especially as they have ‘to be in the speakers’ shows and it’s pretty funny to interpret’ some of the things they say. With such charismatic and passionate speakers such as Donald De Vinck De Winezeele and Mr Wolf it’s not surpris-ing that many people loved the heated arguments and the fervent speeches. Tobias Wagenhäuser, Greek MEP for EPP stated that there were ‘so many emotional debates in the Parliament’, as did Lobbyist Zhang Yinana who

found them to be ‘so interesting’. Pav-lin Hristov, a member of EFDD, loved how there were ‘a lot of discussions that were highly technical and complex but [that] still had some funny moments’ - we have to commend the MEPs for finding a good balance between serious and light-hearted. Having said that, we have to raise a glass to the inspiring and amazing interpreters for their continu-ous hard work – there were too many people complimenting them to be able to quote them all!

However, this week would not have been as challenging as it was if it weren’t for the fact that the organisers managed to give us wild, fun and brilliant nights out. Lobbyists Mario Husillos Vidic and Emilio Raya Saez both expressed their love for the 1920s party last night. Journalist Isotta Rossoni expressed her love for her fellow Editor- who just

Sian Morganhappens to be me- and our crazy dance moves from the 1920s party, along with our slow descent into ‘[craziness] in the journalists room and all the singing and dancing.’ I completely agree with my partner in crime and fellow ‘Troll’ Isotta – it’s been weird and wonderful.

When asking people for their least fa-vourite part of the week, I received an-swers such as ‘I wish I’d slept more’ or ‘I wasn’t a fan of the sandwiches’ or ‘I think using Facebook as a form of com-munication wasn’t the best’, but all of these little issues and quibbles were greatly outweighed by the positives. So, thank you organisers, coordinators, ca-terers, officers, commissioners and eve-ryone involved; I think it’s clear - MEU Strasbourg 2015: in the words of Tina Turner, we are simply the best. We’re better than all the rest.

Issue No 06/152 | Friday, 17. April 2015 — Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —

The second reading of the Data Protec-tion Regulation in the European Parlia-ment is coming to an end. Although not finalised, it can be said that it has been very successful. Many of the important discussions were settled, but having covered the Data Protection Regulation since the beginning of the week, I real-ized that some controversial topics were eventually not included as amendments and an important question remains un-answered.

The EP passed amendments largely re-lated to privacy rights, higher level of sanctions and the cooperation between the Commission and the European Data Protection Board (EDPB). The Minis-ters were rather vocal about the raise of sanctions from 2% to 5% of the global turnover and the privacy rights. An earli-er debated topic, the renewal of consent on two years basis as proposed by the EP, was eventually not accepted by the Council. The summary of the Terms and Conditions was disputed in the EP, but the Ministers, on the other hand, largely agreed on this clause. The higher level of sanctions firstly led to an outrage of the Ministers, claiming that this significant rise will simply lead to a degradation of

the economic advantage the European market would have in relation to other markets. No amendments passed; how-ever, a majority of the Council accepted that “up to 5%” would set the maximum percentage in case of violations. The Council found consensus on the removal of the two years basis consent renewal in regards to the Data Regulation. The EDPB role has substantially increased and the majority of the ministers pre-ferred to entrust some of the Commis-sion’s powers to the EDPB. Instead of having the Commission consult the EDPB prior to any decision; the EDPB is allowed to decide for itself. The EP is currently writing and still discuss-ing the second reading, but a significant change in the content of the amendments will be unlikely.

There are certainly good points to the amendments which settle complicated questions. Discrepancies in opinions existed with regards to the nature of the document: is a directive or a regu-lation more appropriate? It is going to stay a Regulation, and rightly so. A directive would allow Member States to implement these measures upon their own discretion. It is understand-able that Member States wish to retain some level of control, especially if their respective policies supersede the mini-

mum the Regulation dictates. Having a directive defies the purpose of having one Single Digital Market, as Member States still can adopt varying standards. The regulation additionally finally gave form to the EDPB. Until now it was un-clear to what extent the EDPB would be involved, although the specifics are yet to be implemented, this is already a substantial step forward. A third matter concerns the question whether churches are companies, which inevita-bly brought in several moral delibera-tions. How can a church considered to be a house of worship involve dangers in data management? The Council settled the issue by specifying that the exercise of economic activities is succumbed to Data Regulation.

Little has been decided, however, on the potential burden on Small and Medium Enterprises and the question whether alleviation is necessary. Secondly, the balance between freedom of speech and the right to privacy seems unfairly skewed towards privacy rights. Much had been amended on consent of the user. This is undoubtedly important, but can on the other hand also be misused in the public sphere. It is clear that the data of public figures is less protected than private persons, but determining the ex-tent, to which this applies, has been left

The Data Regulation Proposal: the Good and the Bad

out. Moreover, the 1995 Data Regula-tion has included special categories for alternative rules, but these categories have not been revised. After twenty years, it seems unlikely that these cat-egories can be identical, seeing the vola-tile and rapid changes within the digital environment.

Eventually, the underlying question – the freedom of the ‘Digital Single Mar-ket’ – is not clearly answered. In a simi-lar manner that there are theories related to the degree of freedom of the market, this debate of Regulation or freedom is equally relevant for the Digital Market. Should there be a freedom of market, meaning without governmental regula-tions? Or is it necessary to regulate the Internet due to the dangers it contains and the great unknown it presents? The Internet is still hugely misunderstood and its limits are largely unknown. These dangers could lead to unknown circumstances. For this reason, a degree of regulation is required; where we would set this threshold, however, is not yet determined.

This was a week of great achievements, but important deliberations have lacked political consensus or were insufficient-ly addressed.

Alexandra van Walraven

One of the moments impossible to forget from this week was MEP Niko Wolf’s musical number in the debate, where he played Internationale in the chamber as a

protest for the lack of Nationalism. The leader of GUE/NGL has become one of the most fervent voices in the Parlia-ment.

Wolf graduated with a degree in Phys-ics and Phylosofy from Munique, the Leader of the faction became one of the most known and watched MEP. His statements focused on the protection of European citizens, against the institu-tions and the present economic scheme is dangerous in his opinion. He opposed the Right to be Forgotten in regards to freedom of speech, with the argument that it would give the opportunity to erase articles found offensive.

The MEP was disappointed with some of the decisions made by the EU regard-ing the EBU and the Data Protection Regulation, calling the Members of the European Parliament “cowards” and “servants of the financial system”. The result on the amendments proposed by his group do not surprise him, for the “they are capitalist fascists” working for the banks. Niko Wolf says he is com-

mitted to his liberal values and his party will continue fighting, he stated that his values are not for sale.

Under his leadership the Data Protec-tion Regulation got an amendment sub-mitted by the GUE/NGL faction, ap-proved. Said amendment was in regards to the protection of gender and sexual orientation. Additionally, their amend-ment concerning the criteria to allow uncomfortable articles to be erased by request was also approved. He support-ed the creation of the feminist faction, even though he lost one of his colleagues to it, as he considers gender equality to be of the upmost important, especially in the parliament.

At some point, he suggested the EFDD should withdraw from the Parliament (he then regretted saying this later) and supports the idea that the European Un-ion is becoming more and more like the Soviet Union.

“He is brilliant, but very extremist” says Yannick Soumaroo, from the EPP,

Diana Tavares

The Big Bad Wolfwho recognizes the political skills of his colleague. “His speeches are great”, as for François Terranova, from the S&D, find it ‘impressive that he is fluent in five languages, and [that this] adds to the his character”. Terranova noted that “his speeches are good, and even though he is Leader of a small faction, he still man-aged to become a noticeable presence in the EP”.

Gabriela Miankova, from ALDE, recog-nizes that Wolf “tries very hard to artic-ulate his ideas” and is passionate, but his radical views cannot convince Europe. As for the Lobbyists, Olav Mydland comments that Mr. Wolf “is totally dif-ferent from me” and has outdated values that are “not up to date with society. If the GUE/NGL faction ever gets their amendments accepted in the parliament, it will destroy the European economy”.

Now, it is for Mr. Wolf to decide whether or not he plans to continue his path to dominate the night.

Issue No 06/15 Friday, 17. April 2015 | 3— Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —

The European Parliament spent the past week debating the Data Protection Regulation and the European Bank-ing Union. In order to make progress in debates on such delicate topics, the contribution of each and every MEP is important. Otherwise, the number of seats would be reduced, but there are always political figures that stand out more than others. And if Mr. Winn-ezeele, Ms. Risso and Mr. Wolf are the most eloquent speakers at the EP, there is more to being a good politician than charisma. MEPs’ ability to keep their factions together, to compromise and convince others to vote for their propos-als must be highlighted. So who got to the podium?

Mr. Pascal Nohl-Deryk: He is not just an expressive speaker, but is also extreme-ly persuasive. Even though ALDE is a small faction, he has managed to create strategic alliances with other factions. If he’s sometimes workedbehind the scenes – i.e. cooperating with the Press Team to give his faction more visibility- his ideas were crucial in the unfolding of the negotiations. Nohl-Deryk’s compe-tence and highly positive results make him one of the most respected members of this week’s sessions.

Ms. Gloria Bozyigit: She started in ALDE, and moved to the PFE mid week. A change of this kind takes cour-age. She didn’t just change factions, but she created a new party out of thin air. If her political talent was already no-ticeable at the beginning of the week, well, after standing up for gender equal-

ity, her speeches acquired renewed pas-sion. Her strong personality has so far allowed her to succeed in the political sphere. The focus on gender equality, which she has managed to introduce in the debates, has convinced the EP to ac-cept one of the PFE’s amendments. Her ability to listen calmly could benefit the faction further, provided that her pro-gramme acquires a broader European vision,that goes beyond a mere focus on female/male quotas.

Mr. Felix Fehling: Faithful to his faction’s ideology, Fehling does not need to raise his voice to be heard. He is a leader with clear ideas – everything he says is calibrated – and he has the posture of a public figure. He played a crucial role in the negotiations to reach middle-term agreements with other MPEs in the de-bates in Parliament. Although at times

Maria Salomé Fernandesthe ERC adopts a rather polemical stance, Fehling still finds rational argu-ments to convince others. Aside from his right-wing populism, he is reasonable enough not to judge amendments in ac-cordance with who proposed them, but based on their real potential. Watch out though – this does not mean he will vote for them; merely that he will use them to his advantage, as he did with the gender equality proposals.

Bigger factions are more likely to see their amendments pass. Extreme fac-tions are more likely to defend outra-geous positions that cause scandal. But apparently, the best politicians are to be found in small factions. The ones whose will and patience are constantly put to the test.

MEPs: THE ROCKSTARS

Yesterday, the Council voted on the Amendments for the Data Protection Regulation. “We had some very surpris-ing voting behaviour in the chamber”, said Adela Zabrazna, Minister of France at the press conference on Thursday. “I will refrain from naming and shaming, but yes, some countries are actually vot-ing against what is in their interest and that was not only the case when it came to the Data Protection Regulation but also regarding some amendments of The Banking Union”, she stated. “The UK was part of the blocking minority as well as Spain. It was an ideological clash that is now hopefully in the past”, speci-fied Bekeryte, Minister of Cyprus.

Antonios Fiala, Minister of Denmark and Council Rapporteur also confirmed: “Yes, there were some block coalitions within the council that made finding consensus quite hard.” Furthermore Ga-briele Rosana, Minister of Bulgaria, no-ticed that “for some amendments there [was] some misbehaviour that was not expected: an unnatural coalition.”

Even though, it seems likely that consen-sus will be found in the Council, yester-day’s behaviour of the Spanish Minister Mihaela Karcheva definitely caused a stir. Not only did she not seem worried about Ireland’s idea of joining the Unit-ed Kingdom, but Karcheva also didn’t share the other ministers’ impression of a blocking-behaviour in the Council. “Every country has its own vote. The only thing Spain does not like was that

all of our proposals were rejected“, the representative of Spain commented. However, today she did not want to comment on the other Minister’s im-pression of a blocking since she believes in sovereignty.

Nina Gabrych, Minister of Estonia, told us that she had “the impression that some countries decided more on a personal level – at least it looked like that. [She got] the impression that they [didn’t] engage enough in the discus-sions and later on, [would] vote against important amendments. That’s why we couldn’t pass a lot of them yesterday”, stated Nina Gabrych, Minister of Es-tonia.

Could Spain’s support of the Euro scep-tic Minister of UK, Dominik Hüller, (who recently gave the middle finger to

Daniela Prugger

“SURPRISING” VOTING BEHAVIOUR DUE TO INSUFFICIENT PREPARATION?

the European Unio) be tracked back to an insufficient preparation of Karcheva? As a member of the Eurozone whose economy was evidently struggling and whose youth unemployment rate was nothing but rising in the past years, Spain should overthink a siding with Hüller.

“At least today, the sceptical countries approached the Ministers who pro-posed some amendments and explained their doubts. We really want to have agreement – especially when it comes to the Banking Union”, said Gabrych and explained the Irish Minister’s idea of joining the United Kingdom was a statement “that was not really thought through.”

Issue No 06/154 | Friday, 17. April 2015 — Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —

Editors Sian Morgan Isotta Rossoni

Journalists Francisco Daniel Garcés Maria Salomé Fernandes Anouk Heili Rikke Mathiassen Daniela Prugger Alessandra Sinno Diana Tavares Alexandra van Walraven

Photographers Marlene Stocker Petar Georgiev Santiago de la Presilla

Impressum

Follow us:

/user/MEUStrasbourg

/modeleu

/beta_europe

So, this is the end. We have reached our last issue of the Strasbourg Snitcher. It’s been awesome writing for you guys. We continue to hope you love us as much as we love you. Yours forever, Siân and Isotta xxxx

By Sian MorganIsotta Rossoni

A WORD FROM OUR EDITOR...

Every single movie comes to an end. ‘MEU Strasbourg 2015’, our fairytale movie has already entered its final stretch but, behind the scenes there is a team (sometimes hidden) helping others: the screenwriters of this story. There are about sixty from all over Europe and not everyone is here and, as they confess, they are one of us (yes, they also wake up at 6AM to come here).

As many of you know, the first step to make a movie is to open applications to prospective candidates and then choose the topics that will be discussed at the European Parliament, the set for our conference. After this, it is time to select the characters - the real protagonists: MEPs, Ministers, journalists, interpret-ers & lobbyists. “We got about 600 applications”, confirmed Josef William-son, Head of Participants Coordination, who also had the pleasure of announc-ing the good news to those selected. “I have sent about 400 emails during the last months”, which is a small part of the 9,000 emails he has sent –among which

he replied to the following question: should I pick up the shampoo from the airport? True story.

To make sure everything was completely ready for the conference, the organizers met a couple of times in different Euro-pean cities and through this, they bond-ed and have become close friends. “Most of the organizers had met each other already, most of us were participants previously”, says Dina Rokic, a 2014 participant, as a Printed Press Journal-ist and current Journalist Coordina-tor. “The relationship is really good; it is very brotherly-sisterly, because we have been in constant contact over ten months”. Over the last ten months, they have designed the timetables, prepared the introductory classes for the Webi-nar, shared jokes, and resolved all ad-ministrative bits and bobs.

However, arguments are also part of the meetings, as Williamson confirms. Even though we cannot sit in on these meet-ings, we can confirm that they are essen-tially like Game of Thrones but without deaths. Unfortunately we have not had any confirmations of love stories within

the organizers; however Strasbourg Snitcher thinks that Max and Lia would make a lovely couple.

A few weeks before the conference, not only do the participant’s hearts ac-celerate, as do the organizers’, as they wait hopefully to see all their hard work come to life. Coordinating cam-eras, reminding the participants not to upload any pictures from within the EP on Facebook, resolving doubts, helping out, partying (the more enjoyable part of their job, we imagine). So, if you have seen an organizer angry or stressed, do not worry, they really are just working super hard to make sure you have the best experience of your life.

Our time here is coming to an end: it is only a few hours left until we have to get back to reality. All of us will be on our way back home, back to work or school or university again; and with us, the or-ganizers. They are not as different as we thought; actually, why don’t you apply to be an organizer? Don’t forget your time here and keep your experience here in the best file cabinet: our memory. See you at the Oscars.

2015 Organizers: Behind the Scenes

Francisco Daniel Garcés

Today is the last working day of a long week. A week characterized by inten-sive days, filled withhard work, discus-sions, debates, strict deadlines, knowl-edge-sharing, diverging opinions, strong emotions. To end this week with a smile, I’d like to share with you a couple of fun facts, which you may be unaware of.

WEIRD (UNTRANSLATABLE) ACCENTS

Yesterday, during the Ministers’ Press Conference, some MPEs started speak-ingin a tight German accent. Initially, my Italian interpreter was taken aback, but in an attempt to render an accurate translation, she started speaking in a Tuscan accent. Ms. Claudia Carbonara, one of the Italian interpreters, said that

when Lukas Prinz, the President of the Council “started speaking in German, with an accent from Koln, [she] was re-ally amazed and [she] thought it was re-ally very funny”. But she admitted that she wasn’t wholly surprised: indeed, she argued that she almost saw it com-ing. In fact, in the first couple of days she had unexpectedly found herself hav-ing to translate Marseille dialect. “The second time round”, she commented, “when Mr Prinz did it in the Coun-cil, I already knew what to do,so I put on a Tuscan accent. I just tried to play along:I wanted to be as funny as him, so I thought of speaking in Tuscan”.

CRAZY DANCERS

Ms. Bettoli, Minister of Finland, is ex-tremely professional, but what many of you may not know is that she is also a ‘hog-wilddancer’: she literally con-

quered the dance floor in her stylish heels. Her roaring ‘20s steps yesterday were just fabulous. We hope you also caught sight of Ben, our amazing Head of Layout and Design, who surprised us all with some pretty funky steps.

CALLING ON MARX AND DANTE ALIGHIERI

In the past couple of days, Dante and Marx probably turned over in their graves. Some MEPs decided to call on them during their speeches in the chamber. Alessandro Dasara, from the ECR, said he’d speak in the language of Dante Alighieri in response to Mr. Niko Wolf’s request to speak in Karl Marx’s idiom. Very witty indeed!

It has been an incredible week and hope you can take these and other memories back home with you!

Meanwhile at MEU

Alessandra Sinno

Issue No 06/15 Friday, 17. April 2015 | 5— Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —

Lobbyist Louis McLatchie, widely kown as “the Google-girl”, is able to wake up even the most hung-over MEP when delivering her compelling speech-es. She has received so much attention, that certain participants even grouched a bit in the corners about the fact that she has received so much media attention. The 19-year-old Scot definitely knows how to make an impression.

“Her speaking skills are very good”, Pascal Koenig, Minister of Greece says. “Enthusiastic and passionate”, Alexan-der Baldwin, Minister of Slovakia, adds.

McLatchie herself, however, appears extremely modest when talking to the Strasbourg Snitcher about her pas-sion: public speaking. Even though she already has almost six years of experi-ence, she still recognises the shaking feeling that easily sneaks up, when you have to deliver an important statement in front of a large crowd. She mentions this Monday, the first day of the MEU, as an example:

“I was very nervous at that point”, she

says: “The worst part is before you start. But when you start speaking it is fine, cause you have got the speech you have prepared, so you just have to read it. And, you know, we can all read”.

McLatchie is smiling as she explains, gesticulating with her hands to under-line the most important points. Her voice is light, but engaged. She started practising public speaking when she was around 13 years old – a skill, which she developed during different debating competitions in high school. This week she has used her experience to advocate the interests of the - not always popular - it-giant, Google:

“I do enjoy speaking”, she says, “I like finding arguments that people haven’t really thought of and bringing them to Parliament. “

During the conference McLatchie de-livered five speeches in total in both the Parliament and the Council, represent-ing Google in the Data Protection and SMEs in the Banking Union debates, respectively. Yesterday, she spoke on be-half of all lobbyists about how the Data Protection Regulation could eventually lead to censorship, and ended the per-

formance quite dramatically by walking out before the Q&A:

“It caused a bit of a stir”, she laughs qui-etly: “I picked up my laptop, and while I was walking out I was like “I don’t want to be a part of this undemocratic Parliament any longer, I have nothing left to say”.

This provoked divided opinions in the audience: while for example the Minister of Luxembourg, Nándor Ré-vész, wrote that McLatchie’s exit was ”staged”, journalist Daniela Prugger called her performance outstanding. She was in particular impressed by McLatchie’s public presence and elo-quence.

“She just seemed really comfortable in what she was doing”, Prugger says: “I smiled at her, because I thought it (her speech) was great, and she looked back at me and twinkled. And it was just re-ally funny, you know”.

But does a persuasive public speaker necessarily make a successful lobby-ist, who can turn rhetoric into law? McLatchie is not eager to go into details when asked which Ministers, MEPs and amendments she may have influ-

Rikke Mathiassen

The Google-girl: ”I was absolutely terrified the first time I had to speak in public”

enced during the conference:

“There have been amendments com-ing through which I was vocal for. I am glad they took the advice of my course”, McLatchie says.

Three pieces of advice for speaking in public:

• If you are nervous, pretend that you are talking to just one person (for example a friend or a mother) and forget that you are in fact talk-ing to an entire room full of people.

• Keep eye contact with the people listening to you while looking calmly to one side of the room at a time. If you find it awkward to look your audience directly in the eyes, look in between the chairs instead – they can’t tell the differ-ence!

• Exaggeration is a great thing. If you use exaggerated words like “ridiculous” to describe something you don’t like, it makes it stand out more. However, always stick with the truth when stating facts, or your credibility will be gone in a second.

Some people love us, some people hate us. We are journalists. We’re on the lookout for stories: that’s our job. Al-though we really enjoy stirring things up, entertaining you and actually report-ing the day-to-day ‘drill’ here at MEU, our role is perhaps tougher than let on. We work really hard to produce a pretty awesome newscast and let’s be honest, a kick-ass newspaper. Behind all the hu-mour and wit there’s a bunch of hard-working, dedicated people. But how do we go about doing what we do and what does a day in the life of a journalist look like? I am sure you’re all dying to know!

Well, like everybody else we wake up at the crack of dawn, scramble to find decent clothes to wear and jump on the tram to the EU Parliament. Our work-ing day begins at 9 a.m. sharp, where we gather in the Journalist room and discuss our article ideas. While there’s a lot going on every day here at MEU, coming up with original, catchy topics is not a walk in the park. Luckily, we are a great team and with the help of our Journalist Coordinator, Superstar Dina, we put our heads together and cooper-ate to achieve the best possible results. Since most articles involve interviews with MEPs, Ministers, lobbyists or in-terpreters we use our coffee and lunch breaks - often depriving ourselves of the much needed coffee (oh, so dedi-

cated) - to mingle among participants and elicit useful information. After this, the frantic typing begins. We work un-der very tight deadlines, as articles must be submitted by 2 p.m. at the latest for the editors to have enough time to make changes and for Ben, the Head of Layout and Design to play around with them. Journalists usually head to the chamber straight after this, to catch up on the discussions of the day in preparation for the press conference. I can safely say that past 2 p.m. the ‘fun’ begins- for the edi-tors at least. Sian and I edit five articles each in one hour. This is when we give the best of ourselves. Singing, dancing, checking out hot guys on Facebook, cracking terrible jokes- this pretty much describes what we get up to whilst edit-

A Day in the Life of a (Printed Press) Journalist

Isotta Rossoniing. Ben is privileged enough to witness all this and competent enough to work on the newspaper’s layout and design at the same time. The newspapers are printed and folded between 4:30 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. In the meantime, journal-ists discuss questions for the Press Con-ference, which usually runs from 5:30 till 6 p.m. This is when we get a chance to put MEPs on the spot and make them uncomfortable. And yes, in case you’re wondering, we just LOVE doing it. Yet the best part of our day is seeing the end product of our work: the printed copy of the Strasbourg Snitcher. Even bet-ter is seeing you guys laugh your heads off whilst reading our articles. I know, we’re too good to be true!