Fact Checking the Big Debate


In the first debate, teams made many claims and assertions, some of which bent or deliberately ignored the truth, or proposed policies blatantly unachievable. As an independent press, we at The Stork feel the need to hold teams accountable to their claims. Various teams made the following assertions or proposals, each of which bends or ignores contradicting factual evidence.

Watch The Big Debate here,



Claim 1: We need a housing bureau to stop rising rents in Segovia – White

31480282903 624e9c51d8 b
The rent is too damn high! (or is it?) via Flikr

This claim echoes those of previous student governments and many people living in Segovia, both locals and students. They claim that while rents continue to rise, living conditions for student apartments fall below standards. However, our 2019 investigation found otherwise.

“A flat in 2007 was worth almost twice what it is worth now,” according to an administrator at Sweet Home Segovia whom The Stork interviewed during this investigation. Many of the price increases under Sweet Home Segovia stem from an increase in “demand [for] more services such as cooking and cleaning,” demand which IE students themselves create. Segovia costs still fall far short of those in Madrid, where students pay drastically higher rents. However, a housing bureau could still aid in connecting Segovia realtors to students.

Thus, we deem this claim false


Claim 2: We created a project with the Law Society – Black Team

The Black Team also claims that they have established a project with the Law Society to help student entrepreneurs. However, sources from within the society say differently. “Nothing except an exchange of ideas” has happened so far, says our source. They also said that the law society responded after the initial discussion, saying “we won’t be discussing or planning anything further until after elections.” 

The Law Society also released a statement saying, “In no way does the IE Law Society endorse any particular Student Government Team” and that they will partner with any Student Government team. While it is true that the Law Society will work with Student government moving forward, the projects seem in no way to be exclusive to the Black Team.


Claim 3: Academic standardization within degrees – Multiple Teams

Multiple teams claim that they can implement rules requiring teachers to plan their syllabi, teaching styles, and lesson topics around each other. While some professors already standardize their methods with their fellow professors, implementing this on a large scale would come into conflict with professor’s autonomy. This impacts a very touchy subject for college professors who value such autonomy. To enact this policy, Gold Team must get approval from individual professors willing to participate in these limitations rather than a blanket policy for professors as they promise. 

Thus, we deem this policy improbable.


Claim 4: Differentiation between participation and attendance – Red Team

Over the past two years, many student government teams have promised this policy – a distinction between attendance and participation in evaluations. However, this policy is a non-starter for the administration, and the successive administrations which attempted to change the participation guidelines made no progress. We see no reason that this next administration would change the administration’s mind on this issue.

Thus we deem this policy infeasible.


Claim 5: The current mascot was not democratically chosen – Yellow Team

75543593 10156515004721440 2142127321270714368 o
The current mascot, CammIE (via Facebook)

This claim serves as the justification for Yellow Team’s policy of a round of voting for a new IE mascot. However, contrary to Team Yellow’s belief, Campus Life held a democratic poll choosing the mascot of IE, which resulted in the choosing of CammIE, the blue chameleon, as the IE mascot. Therefore, this justification does not hold any factual basis. 

Thus, we deem this claim false.


Teams made many more statements than the ones presented above, some of which included falsehoods and false promises. However, we felt a responsibility to address these in particular,  as these inaccuracies and promises fell outside the realm of common public knowledge. If anyone has information relating to these or any other claims or promises made by any election teams, please contact us at ieustork@gmail.com.

Edit: A previous claim about Team Black was recently debunked and taken out to accommodate new information.

More from Author



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here