Opinion

INEXPERIENCE CAN BE A GOOD THING (Published on September 9, 2009.)

This was my first edi­to­r­ial. It got gen­er­ous praise from my edi­tors and from two University of Toronto  Mississauga (hence­forth referred to as UTM) offi­cials. It’s also my favourite edi­to­r­ial. Not because of the praise, but because, I sup­pose, writ­ers tend to be fond of their first baby.

When renowned graphic designer Paula Scher was asked to incor­po­rate ele­ments of graphic design into the archi­tec­ture of the Museum of Modern Art, the Metropolitan Opera and the New York City Ballet—a job that nei­ther she nor any­one she knew had ever done before—she started by revis­it­ing these loca­tions. “Why can’t the sig­nage be on the floor?” she asked. “New Yorkers look at their feet.”

Ms. Scher later found out that the actors and actresses who worked in these insti­tu­tions took their cues from the floor, and so her idea, far from being novel eye-candy, evolved into a sys­tem that many thought inno­v­a­tive as well as use­ful. The best way to accom­plish seri­ous design, con­cluded Ms. Scher, is to be totally and com­pletely unqual­i­fied for the job.

To be sure, Ms. Scher did not mean to her­ald igno­rance in and of itself. Neither did she mean to brush qual­i­fi­ca­tions aside. She merely sug­gested that those who are new to the job—rookies, if you will—tend to have less restricted ways of think­ing. They are more likely to think out­side the box, to chal­lenge con­ven­tions, to look at the floor and ask them­selves a ques­tion that old hands never thought of ask­ing: Why can’t the sig­nage be on the floor?

The Medium this year is com­posed mostly of new staff. Amir Ahmed, our fea­tures edi­tor, only began writ­ing for us last year. Sports edi­tor Andrew Tysiak, though inex­pe­ri­enced is as enthu­si­as­tic and hard­work­ing. Su Lyn Liew may be new to copy edit­ing for a news­pa­per, but her abil­ity to prune prose and give it force and direc­tion is unpar­al­leled by some of her older and sea­soned col­leagues. And Saaliha Malik, for­merly with the UTMSU, had never writ­ten a news­pa­per arti­cle before, but has already demon­strated a nose for news and the hunger to chase after it.

As for myself, Im per­haps the youngest per­son to ever assume the editor-in-chief posi­tion —alas, not that young in terms of age, but in terms of years worked at The Medium. Which, in my case, means exactly one.

I do not mean to dis­credit expe­ri­ence. Experience mat­ters. Experience saves your ass. More impor­tantly, expe­ri­ence tells you what other starry-eyed ide­al­ists have tried but didn’t suc­ceed with.

Ali Kasim, my for­mer editor-in-chief, cur­rent men­tor and eter­nal friend, was an expe­ri­enced writer and edi­tor who improved this paper in ways I can only hope to emu­late. Michael Di Leo, vet­eran arts and enter­tain­ment edi­tor, puts his expe­ri­ence to good use—that is, with­out allow­ing it to kill his originality.

And Matthew Filipowich, com­pos­ite edi­tor, photo edi­tor and web­mas­ter, has been doing this stuff for years. His enthu­si­asm and cre­ativ­ity are sec­ond to none. These guys are in no dan­ger of becom­ing fossils.

Some of you may sus­pect that I’m only try­ing to pro­tect myself against any future screw-ups. “Oh,” I could say, “I was new. I didn’t know better.”

Others may con­clude that in quot­ing a pres­ti­gious designer, and thereby com­par­ing my team and myself to her, I’ve set too high a stan­dard for us—that I will have dug our efforts into a hole the size of one of the ditches that now lit­ter our construction-mad campus.

Perhaps.

I will also say that peo­ple don’t fail because they are inex­pe­ri­enced —at least not always. They fail because they are not will­ing to learn. People don’t suc­ceed because they are expe­ri­enced; they suc­ceed because they work hard and because they are pas­sion­ate and because they try to look where no one looked before. I can’t promise that we will become a pio­neer cam­pus news­pa­per, or even a bet­ter news­pa­per. But I can promise we will try.

We have already done a few new things. We’ve recently launched a Twitter account, @mediumonline, where we will post links to our arti­cles. We’ve revamped our web­site by adding RSS feeds, a tip line sec­tion and a new mul­ti­me­dia con­tent sec­tion where we will post pic­tures that didn’t make it to the printer. UTM stu­dents and staff are encour­aged to sub­mit their campus-related pho­tos and videos to this new sec­tion (to my fel­low iPhone users: fire ‘em up).

Lastly, we are also enhanc­ing our news sec­tion by adding a col­umn that will fea­ture UTM– and U of T-related news snip­pets. And we will attempt to focus more on what hap­pens within our cam­pus. In this issue, we fea­ture a map of the new con­struc­tion sites, an arti­cle about said con­struc­tion and another about the well-known, yet under­used RAWC.

Overdue changes, per­haps, and even ele­men­tary ones. But other news­pa­pers are still not doing any of it. Newspapers whose teams per­haps stopped looking.

We thereby hope to address the con­cern that fur­rows the brow of many a news­pa­per­man: how to keep our read­er­ship. Given that we The Medium rely on stu­dents levies instead of income gen­er­ated by sales, we may not have to worry about our finances, but thats not an excuse to run from the changes that afflict the indus­try. Steady funds or not, we must modernize.

In doing so, I hope that the many stu­dents who have never read these pages —stu­dents from places as diverse as Austria and Australia, Chile and China, and with inter­ests as diverse as eco­nom­ics and biol­ogy —will decide to pick up every issue. In it, they will learn more about the one thing that unites us all: the University of Toronto Mississauga.

IT’S OUT JOB. (Published on September 29, 2009.)

My then-news edi­tor and cur­rent editor-in-chief (EIC) Saaliha Malik loved this one. She even linked to it on her Facebook page, mean­ing it, I sus­pect, as a con­cil­ia­tory sign to stu­dents who believed our paper was hell­bent against them. Still, her reac­tion was most enthu­si­as­tic about my open­ing line. “You quoted Coco Chanel?!” gasped Saaliha. Yeah, I’m afraid I did.

Coco Chanel once said, “Friends, there are no friends.” She was prob­a­bly refer­ring to the fash­ion world, or per­haps about life in gen­eral. But from what I’ve seen at The Medium in the last year and half, she might as well have been talk­ing about journalism.

Journalists have no friends. Neither do news­pa­pers. We make friends, often, but the rela­tion­ships tend to be short-lived. We also have quite a few ene­mies, as well as lots of peo­ple who are mildly dis­pleased with us and a bit wary too.

Yet they all read our pages. This, ulti­mately, is what matters.

From the begin­ning of the aca­d­e­mic year, the UTM admin­is­tra­tion has adver­tised its efforts to pre­pare against the swine flu. It put up ads through­out the cam­pus and posted guide­lines on its web­site. We talked about it in this paper and splashed it across the cover page, which I can only assume made every­one happy. Students were bet­ter informed, UTM appeared ready and car­ing, and we looked, well, informed and caring.

Contrast this with what is hap­pen­ing now. UTM has mod­i­fied the library hours,  killing them, if you will, thus turn­ing us into the only U of T cam­pus with­out a 24/5 library. Yet none of the stu­dents I spoke with had a clue about this. Could it be because no ads were placed on cam­pus? Could it be because the changes were only men­tioned, ever so dis­creetly, on the library website?

I can only pre­sume, now that we are bring­ing this out into the open, onto our cover page, our web­site and our Twitter stream, that UTM offi­cials won’t be happy with us.

Something sim­i­lar hap­pened last week with mem­bers of a cer­tain UTM aca­d­e­mic soci­ety, one that we have had cer­tain scuf­fles with in the past. As I stood at the Get Experience Fair, flanked by two of our edi­tors, two guys with ties and a girl in a dress snatched the lat­est issue of The Medium from our table and pro­ceeded to read the arti­cle on page three, jab­bing their fin­ger at it and mut­ter­ing things like, “That’s not true.” They never looked at my edi­tors or me in the eye. They didn’t engage in a respect­ful debate. They just blab­bered for a good two or three min­utes before shak­ing their head in dis­gust and pac­ing away.

I thought the arti­cle that so angered them was pretty fair. Something tells me they didn’t agree.

To the UTM offi­cials who might not be ecsta­tic with us, to those two guys with ties and to every­one whom we will upset this year, I say this: it’s our job.

It’s our job to talk about the things that hap­pen on cam­pus. Some things will make peo­ple look good. Others will make peo­ple look bad. More to the point, it will make the same peo­ple look good today and bad tomor­row. Or the other way around.

Our crit­ics will say that we have an agenda and that we’re biased. If what they mean is that we have an opin­ion, they are right. The issue of objec­tiv­ity in jour­nal­ism is a tricky one. I have always main­tained that jour­nal­ists should be aware of their biases so that they can keep an eye on it. Pretending not have a bias will only result in it stick­ing its head out some­where between the lines.

I pre­fer the con­cept of fair­ness. We strive to be fair, and that means being bal­anced. We strive to present both sides of an argu­ment, to obtain quotes from all, to hear every­one involved before we write the story. That’s what we tried to do in the last issue, the one with the story that two guys with their ties didn’t like, and in this one when we cov­ered the new library hours. Sure, we inter­viewed stu­dents who were upset and we inter­viewed UTMSU President Joey Santiago. But we also inter­viewed library representatives.

To be sure, I appre­ci­ate why some peo­ple wouldn’t want some things to be adver­tised or exposed. We at The Medium don’t walk around talk­ing about our typos, of which there have been more than an accept able amount in the last two issues.

In the end it comes down to this: we have to write the story. Someone alerts us about under­age drink­ing? We have to cover it. The library closes down ear­lier than most stu­dents find con­ve­nient? We have to cover it. The uni­ver­sity pre­pares itself for swine flu? Guess what we have to do.

We won’t always please every­one, but then nei­ther should we. For if we did, if we wor­ried about the feel­ings of every­one, we wouldn’t be doing our jobs.

TAKING A CLOSER LOOK. (Published on October 19, 2009.)

I always thought it a shame many stu­dents didn’t seem to appre­ci­ate staff at their uni­ver­si­ties— from clean­ing employ­ees to pro­fes­sors. Here’s my lit­tle homage to them. The staff, not the students.

This news­pa­per aims to inform us about UTM. It’s right there in the name­plate —“ The Voice of University of Toronto Mississauga. That, more than ever before, is our focus this year. We’ve con­cen­trated on cam­pus news as opposed to national and inter­na­tional news. We’ve writ­ten about the RAWC.

We’ve pub­lished stu­dent prose, fea­tured ECSPERT and the CCIT Council, and lent many stu­dents a space in these pages – just look at the amount of con­trib­u­tors in every weeks masthead.

We have, in other words, writ­ten plenty about stu­dents, for stu­dents. Unfortunately, thats not all we have done. Forgetting that UTM is not just about stu­dents, we’ve treated UTM staff as if it were com­posed of face­less, robotic bureau­crats. They are most cer­tainly not.

Theres Douglas Leeies at the Registrars office, who helps stu­dent after stu­dent with a patience and gen­eros­ity that never fail to amaze me. Theres that polite grin­ning lady serv­ing cof­fee in the CCT build­ing, who once told me that I had some­thing to do with horses in a pre­vi­ous life. Theres that gen­tle­man of a shut­tle bus dri­ver – I wont men­tion his name – whom I over­heard last week on the cell phone. He was talk­ing to some­one, pos­si­bly a rel­a­tive who was ill, and his voice was full of con­cern. Yet many stu­dents who climbed onto that bus ignored his greet­ing. And theres Stephanie Sullivan with her charm­ing accent out of a British movie, who accom­mo­dates pro­fes­sional writ­ing stu­dents requests with ease, per­fect man­ners and effectiveness.

Then, there are pro­fes­sors. Some, per­haps many, are bor­ing. Others are just plain awful. (A cer­tain Philosophy pro­fes­sor in the North Building was so rude and mean and pro­duced such unfair tests that many of us dreaded that class, despite being sea­soned third and fourth-year veterans.)

On the other hand, many UTM pro­fes­sors are excel­lent. Three of them changed my life. Others made me think, made me want to learn beyond what they offered in class. They all made me a bet­ter man.

I cant be alone in this. I know there must be stu­dents out there who admire and respect some of their pro­fes­sors. Yet we have never inter­viewed any of them at The Medium. Or rather, we never had. Not until two weeks ago, when we sat down with one pro­fes­sor to dis­cuss his likes and dis­likes, about what he wants to instil in stu­dents, about Dexter and Nazi Germany and jiu jitsu and how to teach kids to love broccoli.

There are quite a few rea­sons why we never did it before. First, we never thought it’d be pos­si­ble to per­suade a pro­fes­sor to share per­sonal beliefs. Second, pro­fes­sors seem reluc­tant to approach us, let alone write for us—I still remem­ber how sur­prised we were last year when Philosophy Professor Paul Franks sent a let­ter to the then-editor. (By the way, Professor Franks, thank you.)

I’ve often scratched my head, won­der­ing what the rea­sons were behind this reluc­tance. A gen­eral bias against media? A mis­trust toward a stu­dent (read, ama­teur) news­pa­per? A fear that stu­dents will take too many lib­er­ties with whichever pro­fes­sor decided to step for­ward into the spotlight?

Only one way to find out. This is why I sat at my desk two weeks ago and wrote Professor Dax Urbszat a lengthy email, one in which I tried to antic­i­pate every pos­si­ble rea­son why he might say no to an inter­view and coun­tered it with assur­ances that wed be pro­fes­sional and wouldn’t com­pro­mise his pri­vate life and on and on.

His quick reply? A sim­ple, “Why not?”

I first met Professor Urbszat in my first year, when I took PSY100. The course was fas­ci­nat­ing, not just because the sub­ject itself was fas­ci­nat­ing, but because he made it alive and rel­e­vant and fun. So much fun, in fact, that I enrolled in a psy­chol­ogy as a major the next year.

My admi­ra­tion and grat­i­tude are not uncom­mon. Professor Urbszat is pos­si­bly the only pro­fes­sor ever to have a student-created Facebook group pro­nounc­ing him a super­hero. (Seriously.) Ask any psy­chol­ogy stu­dent about him and they will tell you they love him. They will tell you he’s great. They will tell you he teaches in a prac­ti­cal way (he likes the term holis­tic ) and that he tries to make you see how you can apply it in your day-to-day life.

As for the inter­view itself, we decided to lay it out in a novel way, elim­i­nat­ing the ques­tions them­selves. Typical Q & A for­mats tend to bore read­ers. This way, I hope, will seem more interesting.

So, before you turn to page 8, let me ask you this: do you know any pro­fes­sor or clean­ing per­son or UTM offi­cial or TA who, in your opin­ion, is doing an out­stand­ing job? If you do, then let us know. We will do our best to pro­file him or her, much like we did with Professor Urbszat, so that we can all learn about staff and pro­fes­sors as human beings, about what dri­ves them to come to work every day and make a difference.

Here’s hop­ing that this will be the first of a long series of pro­fes­sor profiles.

YOU ASKED FOR IT.  (Published on October 26, 2009.)

It’s always both­ered me when peo­ple cry once some­thing that they never use is taken away from them.

The Library (I can never bring myself to call it the Hazel McCallion Academic Learning Centre) announced this Friday that it would resume the 24/5 sched­ule that it aban­doned less than a month ago (see the arti­cle on the cover page). We can once again study in the library as late as we wish. (Not that I or any­one I know ever stayed there after 8 p.m.) More impor­tantly, we don’t have to bow our heads in embar­rass­ment when UTSC or St. George stu­dents boast about the hours of their libraries.

So, we got what we wanted. We’ll never know whether we got thanks to the UTMSU cam­paign, or The Medium’s cov­er­age, or the stu­dents who told the Principal dur­ing the town hall event on October 2 that they were against the reduced hours, or to the Provosts Office sud­denly com­ing up with the nec­es­sary cash. I like to think it was because of our cov­er­age, but of course it was most likely a com­bi­na­tion of all of the above.

Two con­clu­sions can be drawn from this unex­pected turn­around. Firstly, stu­dents have power—more than they think. There is, how­ever, a caveat to this power: It needs to be used wisely. In the case of the Library’s new hours, stu­dents not only had a rea­son­able goal, but also fought for it in a mature way—never mind those who booed a fel­low stu­dent when she dared won­der aloud whether maybe UTM had a point about can­celling the 24/5 service.

Other than that shame­ful bout, there were no T-shirts depict­ing a raised mid­dle fin­ger or invit­ing the library to screw itself. Such gim­micks may be good for pub­lic­ity; they may stir up the masses, but they sure don’t invite respect­ful, intel­li­gent debate.

The sec­ond con­clu­sion is not so easy to arrive at, per­haps because of its impli­ca­tions: that other UTM ser­vices may suf­fer because of funds that were allo­cated to the Library so that it would remain open. UTMSU President Joey Santiago assures us that this wont hap­pen. But how can we be so sure?

After all, U of T President Naylor him­self asked which ser­vices stu­dents were will­ing to sac­ri­fice in order to keep the library open 24/5.

If indeed no ser­vices get cut, then one ques­tion arises: why did UTM change the library hours in the first place if money was not a prob­lem? On the other hand, if money was a prob­lem, how was the Provosts Office sud­denly able to extend the hours back to what they were before? I find it hard to believe that the stu­dents’ protests had noth­ing to do with the old hours being reinstated.

All that mat­ters for now is that the library is back to its reg­u­lar hours. It would be fool­ish take it for granted. We cried when some­thing was taken away. Let’s use it now that it is given back.

AN OBLIGATION TO DEMAND THE MOST OF OURSELVES. (Published on October 25, 2010.)

An appeal to get up and  do some­thing, rather than wait for oth­ers to do it.

Last week UTMSU rep­re­sen­ta­tives met with depart­ing Vice-President Orchard to dis­cuss what they wanted from the next pres­i­dent. (Predictably, the issue of tuition fees was chief on their list.) Vice-President Part-Time Affairs Ibrahim Hindy sug­gested a prin­ci­pal who will go out of their way to get to know stu­dents, meet­ing with them for two hours a month as a min­i­mum requirement.

“This is the University of Toronto,”  said Mr. Hindy. “You demand the most of us as stu­dents, and we have the right as stu­dents to demand the most of our principal.”

Sensible as Mr. Hindy’s sug­ges­tion was, it made me think about some­thing appar­ently unre­lated to the topic of tuition fees or even the topic of the next vice-president. It’s the basis of this edi­to­r­ial, and can be summed up as “We have the right to demand the most of ourselves.”

On sec­ond thought, make that “We have an oblig­a­tion to demand the most of ourselves.”

The seed was for this idea was planted one after­noon, two or three years ago, in a Communication, Culture and Information Technology Advisory Board meet­ing, when a stu­dent com­plained that the CCIT pro­gram wasn’t well-known. This, he argued, meant that he would have a dif­fi­cult time find­ing a job when he grad­u­ated. Other stu­dents nod­ded their agree­ment as CCIT pro­fes­sors duti­fully scrib­bled notes on their notepads.

When I got home that night, I looked CCIT up in Wikipedia. By then the CCIT pro­gram had existed for at least a cou­ple of years. Hundreds of stu­dents had learned ele­ments of com­mu­ni­ca­tion, from cyber­law  to web design to the his­tory of radio. Yet none had thought of cre­at­ing a Wikipedia entry for CCIT. So I did. (Someone has since deleted it. That’s beside the point, although I do plan on find­ing out why they did that.)

The idea blos­somed fur­ther when I heard that Michael Di Leo, The Medium’s arts edi­tor, had failed to find a sum­mer job. Michael could have raged on against the econ­omy and the depres­sion and how bad stu­dents have it. Instead, he part­nered with a friend to cre­ate his own a company—a yacht– and deck-cleaning busi­ness. Hard work, to be sure. But it made him some money.

The idea finally mate­ri­al­ized into a draft for this edi­to­r­ial when I heard about the Erindale Filipino Students’ Association and its ini­tia­tive to raise money for vic­tims of Hurricane Ketsana. They didn’t just sit down and weep for the losses that their coun­try­men suf­fered. They did some­thing about it.

I don’t mean to deny that some stu­dents may have a hard time pay­ing their tuition fees, or mak­ing the most of UTM, or gath­er­ing the nerve to knock on the door of a UTM official.

What I am say­ing is that going through hard times is the point. It’s no pic­nic hav­ing two jobs while going to school full-time, like my sis­ter did last year. It’s not easy to take four courses and a paid intern­ship and work at The Medium, like Saaliha, our news edi­tor. Neither is it pleas­ant to feel a knot in your stom­ach every time you get a let­ter from OSAP, like I do.

But tough times are part of the expe­ri­ence. Tough times come when you do  your best, when you try and beat the odds. Tough times are some­thing that all stu­dents should expe­ri­ence. They teach you what it’s like to work until mid­night even though you have an exam next morn­ing. They make you tougher and they make  you a bet­ter stu­dent, and they will pay off when you get that job that you couldn’t have got­ten oth­er­wise and when you retain that job because you already know what it’s like to work your ass off.

Some stu­dents have legit­i­mate rea­sons to com­plain about high tuition fees or about UTM being inac­ces­si­ble to stu­dents. Whatever they are, I do not mean to dis­credit them—not as long as these stu­dents can look at their reflec­tion in their mir­ror and tell them­selves, I did my best and still couldn’t suc­ceed. I applied for OSAP but was rejected. I tried — really tried — to find a job or two while I went to school part-time but was unable to. I grad­u­ated but couldn’t find a job—even though went to the Career Centre work­shops and cold-called a bunch of com­pa­nies and kept going door to door, no mat­ter how many peo­ple had slammed them to my face.

OUR NEAR FUTURE. (Published on November 29, 2009.)

After mock­ing New Year’s res­o­lu­tions, I pro­ceed to list the paper’s.

One January after­noon of my first New Year in Canada, a lit­tle over five years ago, at around four o’clock, not the busiest time at most gyms and cer­tainly not at mine, I stood in front of a dozen car­dio machines and noticed that every sin­gle one of them was occu­pied by enthu­si­as­tic patrons. I hadn’t seen any of them before. I stepped into the weightlift­ing room. It too was full. A trainer I was friendly with brushed past me. I grabbed his arm.

“What’s going on? Are you guys giv­ing away free passes?”
He shook his head. “New Years res­o­lu­tions, he scoffed. Most of these peo­ple will work out like mad for a cou­ple of weeks, then never come back. It’s the same every year.”

I wasn’t aware of New Year’s res­o­lu­tions as a cul­tural phe­nom­e­non until that January evening. People in many other coun­tries are not in the habit of pub­licly com­mit­ting them­selves to a new goal in December. It sounds like a good idea, one worth emu­lat­ing, pro­vided you choose a real­is­tic goal, break it down to mea­sur­able steps, reward progress and announce the goal publicly.

Its not December yet, but this is our last issue for 2009, so I thought I’d list The Mediums goals for the New Year. Risky move, you might say, espe­cially given my intro­duc­tion. But like Einstein said, “Anyone who has never made a mis­take is some­one who has never tried any­thing new.”

Besides, we do owe it to our read­ers to share our vision for The Medium.

Here are our res­o­lu­tions for 2010:

  • to add more info­graph­ics to our print version
  • to add more videos to our site
  • to get more writ­ers and photographers
  • to get a car­toon­ist (alas, maybe our tough­est goal)
  • to write more about science
  • to con­tinue to fea­ture oppos­ing op-eds
  • to improve lay­out by redesign­ing the mast­head and the index box.

In addi­tion to list­ing our goals, I’d like to thank our read­ers and con­trib­u­tors. Our read­ers, of course, jus­tify our exis­tence as writ­ers. Whenever you learned some­thing about UTM that you didn’t know, when­ever you picked up a paper because a head­line or photo grabbed your atten­tion, when­ever we made you smile, when­ever we made you frown, when­ever you praised us and when­ever you crit­i­cized us —you made our day. You gave a pur­pose to our work. And for that, we thank you.

As for our con­trib­u­tors: you may not real­ize it, but this paper wouldn’t be pos­si­ble with­out all of you. Thanks for all the hard work, the ded­i­ca­tion, and the sup­port.   Lastly, I’d like to announce our new Assistant Editors. They became Assistant Editors by work­ing hard almost every week. They proved they were reli­able, not just by turn­ing in their sto­ries on time, but also by say­ing, when need be, that they wouldn’t be able to take on a spe­cific assign­ment (word to the wise: edi­tors will always pre­fer writ­ers who refuse an assign­ment they wont be able to hand in to writ­ers who promise, then fail to deliver).

And so it gives me great plea­sure to wel­come Katherine Luczynski and Stephanie Marotta, our Assistant News Editors; Patricia   Figueiredo, Assistant Arts and Entertainment Editor; William Robertson and Sarah Malagerio-Bruno, Assistant Sports Editors; and Edward Cai, Assistant Photo Editor. We know you will help us make The Medium a bet­ter paper.

ARE STUDENT’S IDEALS NAIVE? (Published on January 4, 2010.)

Disgusted by the media’s treat­ment of its hereto­fore favourite, Tiger Woods, I won­dered whether I would man­age to hold on to my prin­ci­ples once the stakes will become higher.

That’s it. 2009 is over, and with it, the first decade of the mil­len­nium. We’re re all prob­a­bly com­ing up with new res­o­lu­tions. Some of us may even have a plan as to how to carry these out. This year will for sure be dif­fer­ent, we tell our­selves, if nobody else, although it’d prob­a­bly make a lot more sense to tell every­body else—shame and fear of fail­ure are pow­er­ful motivators.

But it’s not 2010 I want to talk about. Neither do I want to talk about res­o­lu­tions. I want to talk, if only in pass­ing, about pri­vacy, about media, and about mar­i­tal infi­delity. I want to talk, again in pass­ing, about Tiger Woods, but mostly I want to talk about life after uni­ver­sity and how it will trans­form us students.

The whole Tiger Woods episode revolted me. Not because he cheated on his wife. That’s between him and her. It revolted me because every­one wanted to know about it. Mostly, it revolted me because the media hap­pily obliged. Or per­haps it was the other way around: Not too many peo­ple wanted to know about it, but the media still ran with it and inflated it and made every­one aware of it, includ­ing those of us who believe that even celebri­ties have a right to pri­vacy. Either way, the media’s mas­sive cov­er­age of the Tiger Woods scan­dal upset me. Sure, I under­stand why they did it, espe­cially in these days of dwin­dling news­pa­per sales and with a media rev­o­lu­tion rum­bling in the hori­zon: They did it because they want to sell. They did it because they want to sur­vive. But in order to sur­vive, they may have become whores.

I, on the other hand, don’t t have to worry about sales—at least not as much as your aver­age paper does. This week, for exam­ple, we ran a story about Tiger Woods, and in it we men­tioned, how­ever briefly, the scan­dal that has afflicted him and his fam­ily. We had to, because the arti­cle dealt with the money he’s cost his investors. But we included no juicy details or alle­ga­tions or irrel­e­vant names.

It’s a fine line, to be sure, the one that divides your prin­ci­ples and real life. I think, though, this time, we man­aged to remain on the good side.

In the last day of my Journalistic Investigation class, just a few weeks ago, my pro­fes­sor held a news­pa­per cover page with a close-up of a man. He’d been attacked by a pit bull and was miss­ing half his face. This man had gone to the news­pa­per and asked for his pic­ture to be printed. He said he wanted every­one to be aware of what could hap­pen to them. The pro­fes­sor asked us, “If you were pro­fes­sional news­pa­per­men, would you have agreed?” I said I would, if only to hon­our the man’s courage, adding that I’d rather quit than print that pic­ture with­out his con­sent. Other stu­dents dis­agreed, argu­ing that pub­lish­ing the pic­ture would likely dis­turb readers.

All our rea­sons were altru­is­tic. None had any­thing to do sales, which is prob­a­bly the most deter­min­ing fac­tor that decides what ends up splashed across a front page of other newspapers.

At the end of the class, the pro­fes­sor said, that it would be nice if we could all main­tain that integrity. I don’t know if she was opti­mistic. I know I’m not. At the time, I meant what I said about quit­ting my job, but would I really do it? If I was work­ing for a big paper or a TV sta­tion, mak­ing decent money, mak­ing my way up, would I quit over a principle?

For that mat­ter, would the stu­dents who now denounce cor­po­rate greed decline a job offer from, say, Nike? Would those who claim to pro­tect the envi­ron­ment refuse to work for GM?

Being aware of the pos­si­bil­ity of  betray­ing my prin­ci­ples may seem to indi­cate I’m already will­ing to betray them. I like to think the oppo­site. Being aware of this pos­si­bil­ity, I hope, means I’m ready to rec­og­nize the risks, the signs, and steer away from them.

Or not. We shall see.

PUBLISHERS BEWARE. (Published on February 8, 2010.)

My lit­tle reflec­tion (some would say for­lorn hope) about the poten­tial of ebooks to change the text­book industry.

Growing up in a poor coun­try was not a cool expe­ri­ence for me. But now that I live in a rich coun­try, I am often intrigued by the per­spec­tive that my child­hood gave me.

Take text­books, which are pretty rare in many Cuban schools. Students often share them, pass­ing them along as relics. (They can’t pho­to­copy them, given the government’s dis­like for all means of dis­sem­i­na­tion of infor­ma­tion and its sub­se­quent ban on the pur­chase of these devices.) In fact, many pro­fes­sors do with­out books alto­gether, rely­ing on hand­outs, scrib­bling long tirades on the black­board and demand­ing that stu­dents take page after page of notes.

This was a very dif­fer­ent expe­ri­ence from the one I lived at UTM, where fail­ure to buy a required text­book can be a bad idea. Professors expect all stu­dents to get them, and in fact, base their entire cur­ricu­lum around a spe­cific text­book, which can change from year to year.

This has, of course, cre­ated quite an impor­tant mar­ket, one that can force stu­dents to spend up to $900 per year on text­books, the prices of which have increased four times the rate of infla­tion over the past decade, accord­ing to a 2005 Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) study.

Sadly for us stu­dents, the text­book mar­ket does not oper­ate accord­ing to the same eco­nomic prin­ci­ples as a nor­mal con­sumer mar­ket. The fac­ulty chooses the prod­uct but do not buy it, while the stu­dents, who use the prod­uct, do not have the option of choos­ing it. The price is thus removed from the pur­chas­ing deci­sion, which results in text­book pub­lish­ers enjoy­ing of a dis­pro­por­tion­ate mar­ket power to set prices in a mar­ket already affected by a seri­ous lack of competition.

As for pho­to­copy­ing, stu­dents in Canada do have the machines at their dis­posal, but they too face restric­tions to unre­strained pho­to­copy­ing of their books (albeit for dif­fer­ent rea­sons than in Communist regimes). Thus, many of us came to rely on tusbe.com, that incred­i­bly use­ful site that allows us to buy and resell text­books with­out hav­ing to pay a commission.

Yet there is hope—and not too far down the road. A solu­tion to the text­book prob­lem may come in a few years, in the shape of Apple’s shiny new iPad and the flood of market-changing devices that it touts. There has been much talk about how these devices will change the pub­lish­ing land­scape, with read­ers fore­go­ing printed mag­a­zines or books in favour of their elec­tronic equiv­a­lents. Whether most con­sumers will actu­ally pay for these books is a mat­ter of debate—witness what hap­pened with the music mar­ket. I know peo­ple who’ve  lis­tened to a lot of music over the last few years, but did not pay for any of it.

Publishing houses prob­a­bly fear that the same will hap­pen to them. On the other hand, they have prob­a­bly learned the les­son that the music indus­try paid for so dearly: fight­ing tech­nol­ogy and attempt­ing to pun­ish dis­trib­u­tors of ille­gally down­loaded mate­r­ial is sure to back­fire on them, alien­at­ing con­sumers and dimin­ish­ing their will­ing­ness to pay high prices for the same con­tent they can get free elsewhere.

This is prob­a­bly why soft­ware com­pany ScrollMotion announced that it will develop iPad-friendly ver­sions of text­books for edu­ca­tion pub­lish­ers like McGraw Hill, Houghton Mifflin and Kaplan only a week after the iPad launched. Features that may make it into the iPad text­books include video, inter­ac­tive quizzes, the abil­ity to record lec­tures, high­light and search text and take notes.

For those who doubt that the iPad will sell, think­ing it just an overblown iPod, there are other options, such as the dual-screen enTourage eDge, which has also entered into deals with pub­lish­ers to cre­ate dig­i­tal text­books. The eDge has a 9.7-inch e-ink screen on one side for read­ing and a 10.1-inch LCD screen that accepts sty­lus inputs for hand­writ­ing (some­thing the iPad lacks).

Digital text­books are admit­tedly noth­ing new. McGraw Hill, Pearson and other text­book pub­lish­ers already sup­port CourseSmart, a provider of col­lege text­books in eText­book for­mat on a com­mon online plat­form. CourseSmart offers eText­book ver­sions of col­lege text­books at a cost of 50% less than the print ver­sions of the same titles. The com­pany cur­rently sells more than a third of all col­lege text­books in online format.

Digital books, how­ever, have so far lacked the ideal medium. Reading a CourseSmart book on an iPhone screen will likely induce more headaches than just pay­ing for a reg­u­lar text­book would. The new tablets will change this with their big­ger screens. And even if they didn’t hold the promise of lower text­book prices, they will still make things eas­ier for stu­dents, allow­ing them to search for and book­mark text and high­light it in dif­fer­ent colours. Students will also be able to write notes or use a built-in micro­phone to record audio notes, all while car­ry­ing dozens of text­books into one slim tablet. They will also be able to take inter­ac­tive quizzes and track their right and wrong answers on the device.

Pessimists will bet that pub­lish­ing com­pa­nies will refuse to sig­nif­i­cantly lower prices for elec­tronic ver­sions of text­books. But text­books com­pa­nies would bet­ter tread care­fully: stu­dents are a tech-savvy, irrev­er­ent lot, one that has only put up with the high costs of text­books because they lacked the tech­no­log­i­cal means to fight it. Once given access to an elec­tronic ver­sion of a text­book, they will likely find a way to unlock what­ever DRM pro­tec­tion is slapped to it. Alternately, it will only take one scanned copy of a text­book, saved as a PDF file, to spread from tablet to tablet with a vengeance.

So, iron­i­cally, the future of text­books in North America may look a bit like the past in poorer coun­tries: one stu­dent will get a hold of a copy and give it to all of his or her class­mates. And they won’t have to tran­scribe it—pushing a but­ton will do.

POLITICS IS ALWAYS THE SAME. (Published on February 22, 2010.)

All politi­cians are the same. Especially those who claim the opposite.

I always thought uni­ver­sity cam­puses are a reflec­tion of the coun­try they are in. Take UTM. Like Canada, it has a small, yet diverse pop­u­la­tion. Its mem­bers like to grum­ble about things, yet are proud that they come here—how else can you explain their defen­sive reac­tion when oth­ers look down on UTM?

Moreover, UTM and Canada have their own police, their own news­pa­pers and their own admin­is­tra­tions. Lastly, both UTM and Canada have their own politicians—in our case, we have the UTMSU executives.

Of all the UTM seg­ments I referred to, none tries so much to dif­fer­en­ti­ate itself from its national coun­ter­part as the UTMSU. The Union protests on the streets. The Union pur­ports to strive for change rather than pre­serve the sta­tus quo. And rather than don­ning suits and ties, the Union’s exec­u­tives make a point to dress in student-like attire—some even add a slanted base­ball hat to their outfit.

But for all their efforts, some UTMSU exec­u­tives behave remark­ably like the very peo­ple they are try­ing to dif­fer­en­ti­ate them­selves from. This year alone, the Union has been fea­tured promi­nently across these pages for donat­ing student’s money toward the legal defense coun­sel of a col­league, for mis­man­ag­ing proxy votes and for dereg­is­ter­ing one stu­dent from a con­fer­ence because of her affil­i­a­tion with dif­fer­ent cam­pus orga­ni­za­tion (us) and the cost involved in send­ing her there. If you think it all sounds too much like your reg­u­lar old scandal-ridden polit­i­cal party, you’re not alone.

The Union’s lat­est escapade involves inter­fer­ing with the nom­i­na­tion process of can­di­dates for next year’s ticket. Of course, if you lis­ten to what the exec­u­tives involved in this antic have to say, that’s not what they were doing. Not at all. When these exec­u­tives secretly met with the pres­i­dents of the largest stu­dents clubs on cam­pus, weeks before the nom­i­na­tion process began, in a room that no ordi­nary UTM stu­dent can access, it was not to get these pres­i­dents to per­suade their club’s mem­bers to vote for a spe­cific UTM exec­u­tive. It was just to seek their input.

There are many rea­sons why the whole thing stinks. It stinks because the incum­bent gov­ern­ment is throw­ing its weight behind the can­di­date it favours, thereby reduc­ing the chances of any other stu­dent win­ning, espe­cially stu­dents who are cur­rently not asso­ci­ated with UTMSU. It stinks because if the UTMSU really thought cau­cus meet­ings like the last few were open and fair, it would make them part of its elec­tions pro­ce­dure code, open­ing them for all stu­dents regard­less of how close they are to the Union or how many mem­bers their club has. As it is now, your aver­age UTM stu­dents only seems to stand a chance, elections-wise, if he or she runs a large club and if he’s privy to secret UTMSU-organized meetings.

VOTING DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE. (Published on March 15, 2010.)

A futile appeal for UTM stu­dents to get off their asses and vote (only 33 % ended up doing it, a record low).

Voting will take place this week at UTM. Not many stu­dents tend to bother with elections—in a cam­pus that counts around 11,000 stu­dents, only 600 voted last year, when one ticket ran, and around 2,500 the year before, when two tick­ets ran. This year we have, once again, two tick­ets, which may mean a larger turnout. Moreover, both tick­ets are formed of UTMSU executives—the first in a quite a few years.

Add our cov­er­age of con­tro­ver­sial UTMSU-related events, and it’s tempt­ing to believe that many more stu­dents will cast their bal­lot this year.

I’m not so opti­mistic, partly because for the longest time, I was one of those stu­dents who didn’t care much about cam­pus pol­i­tics. Like many oth­ers, I didn’t think it mat­tered who ran things at UTMSU—in fact, I wasn’t even sure what the UTMSU was or what it did.

The Medium taught me that it does mat­ter who runs the UTMSU. The Student Union, after all, has a large bud­get (a mil­lion dol­lars last year), 60% of which goes for wages. The Student Union has grown con­sid­er­ably in the last few years, con­trol­ling the Student Centre and tak­ing over the part-time stu­dents asso­ci­a­tion and elim­i­nat­ing UTSU at UTM. Current UTMSU exec­u­tives claim to rep­re­sent us, and to an extent they do, whether we like or not—when a Union-organized rally swarms the streets of down­town Toronto, it’s UTM stu­dents that spec­ta­tors see. Then they lump us together in their minds despite our dif­fer­ent back­grounds and polit­i­cal opinions.

More impor­tantly, what­ever the Union decides to do, it does so with our money. This is not unlike the gov­ern­ment, which never gen­er­ates money—it merely redis­trib­utes what it taxes from of us. Yet many for­get this fact, think­ing a government—or union—generous when it does some­thing that ben­e­fits us, and tight-fisted when it doesn’t.

We have lit­tle con­trol over how much of our money is taken away and dis­trib­uted back to us, but we do have more of a say in how this money is dis­trib­uted back to us. In UTMSU’s case, do we want our hard-earned money to rep­re­sent us as if we are one voice, or do we want our voice to renew our Student Union?

We’ve done our part. We’ve cov­ered the Union and the elec­tion process as best we could. At the request of a reader, we whipped together a brief descrip­tion of what each UTMSU exec­u­tive does. Lastly, we encour­age you to attend today’s all can­di­dates’ debate in the Blind Duck at 2 p.m., where both Vickita Bhatt and Henry Ssali will answer your questions.

Whatever hap­pens, whether you cast a bal­lot or not, you have a say in this. Why not say it out loud?

Sounds just like what many an ordi­nary cit­i­zen has to say about the way their nation is run.

A SALES PITCH. (Published on March 29, 2010.)

My last editorial.

Like many of you, I’m grad­u­at­ing in  June. This is there­fore the last edi­to­r­ial I’ll ever write for The Medium. Knowing this, I’m tempted to write with a vengeance and to touch on many top­ics. I’m tempted, for exam­ple, to intro­duce next year’s ter­rific team, to rem­i­nisce about my expe­ri­ence at our news­pa­per, to thank the count­less peo­ple who con­tributed to The Medium this year, and to reflect on what it’s been like to work in what many would con­sider a dying indus­try. But I can’t do a decent job if I focus on so many dif­fer­ent issues—not in the space of one col­umn, and not unless I want to bore you to death.

So, after much con­sid­er­a­tion, I decided to make my last edi­to­r­ial a sales pitch for The Medium. Before I do that, how­ever, I do have to thank Amir, Michael, Su Lyn, Andrew, Saaliha, Matt, Heather, and Romano, among many oth­ers, for help­ing make us a bet­ter paper, one that saw twice the amount of online hits than in the pre­vi­ous year. I also have to wish Saaliha Malik, my suc­ces­sor, the best of luck, and to pub­licly state my faith that both the new team and her will do an amaz­ing job.

Working as Editor-in-Chief of this news­pa­per has been one of the most fruit­ful expe­ri­ences of my life. Ali Kasim, pre­vi­ous EIC, wrote in his last edi­to­r­ial that he had learned more on the job than he ever did as a stu­dent at UTM. I won’t go as far, but I will say this: in the one year that I worked as EIC, I learned what I would’ve needed two years to learn at UTM. There are many rea­sons for this, but I can best sum it up with the fol­low­ing old say­ing: “Tell some­one how to do some­thing and they’ll for­get. Show them, and they may not remem­ber. Involve them, and they’ll understand.”

UTM has no jour­nal­ism pro­gram, so other than a hand­ful of Professional Writing pro­fes­sors, we have no one to tell or show us how to make a news­pa­per. This leaves us with no choice but to get involved and to under­stand. We come to the office every day, and since we don’t have any­one to teach us, we sim­ply sit down and do it. We don’t do a per­fect job—far from it. We pay for our mis­takes dearly, more so than in any uni­ver­sity course—every time we make one, an upwards of 5,000 read­ers notice, be it a mis­quote or typo splashed across the cover page.

But far from dis­cour­ag­ing us, this lim­i­ta­tion encour­ages us. In the process of work­ing (and mak­ing mis­takes), we learn about inter­view­ing and writ­ing and edit­ing. We learn about time man­age­ment and about Robert’s rules of order. We learn about our­selves and our fel­low stu­dents and our profs. More to the point, we learn about UTM, the one thing we all have in com­mon, and the one thing we will all remem­ber for our entire lives.

Look at this issue alone. Reading it,  you will learn about  an inter­est­ing exper­i­ment that involves a toonie and well-meaning man­age­ment stu­dents, about UTM’s soon-to-happen pre­scribed burn and about the best secret on-campus loca­tions to hook up. You will learn about all this and more, but you won’t learn as much as the stu­dents who wrote and edited these stories—these stu­dents had to go out,  meet the per­son they pro­filed face to face and visit new loca­tions. They had to think and focus. They had to get involved. They had to understand.

Many UTM stu­dents seem to think its hard to work for us. Stefanie Marotta, for­mer assis­tant news edi­tor, told me last week that in her first year, she stood in the main floor of the Student Centre, twist­ing her hands and eye­ing our office upstairs with appre­hen­sion. She even­tu­ally knocked on our office door, but I won­der how many other lost the nerve and left.

Yet it’s not hard to work for us. Almost all UTM stu­dents have pub­lish­able writ­ing skills. And they all have skills that they can improve, with our help and their own per­se­ver­ance. So please take a deep breath, go up the stairs and knock on our door. I promise you this: if you ever wanted to do it, but end up not, you will regret it.

As I find myself near­ing the end of my days at UTM, I know I will miss many things. I will miss this dusty office, and the friends that I made, and the late night Psychology classes and the CCIT labs and the antic­i­pa­tion of read­ing a story aloud in a PWC class. But most of all, I will miss not doing the things that I always wanted to do, like enrolling in the debate club or going to the Olympic weightlift­ing sem­i­nars. Even if join­ing The Medium does not rank high on your per­sonal list of things to do at UTM, you can bet your bot­tom dol­lar that work­ing for our news­pa­per will allow you add new things to that list.

Leave your comment

Required.

Required. Not published.

If you have one.

Please leave these two fields as-is:

Protected by Invisible Defender. Showed 403 to 658 bad guys.

 


COPYRIGHT © 2010 - 2011 ALAIN LATOUR. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.