PLEASERECYCLE

PLEASERECYCLE

Disclaimer: The sole responsibility for the content of this publication lies with the authors. Its contents do not reflect the opinion of the University Students’ Council of the University of Western Ontario (“USC”). The USC assumes no responsibility or liability for any error, inaccuracy, omission or comment contained in this publication or for any use that may be made of such information by the reader.

Volume 10, Issue 5April 2011

www.mitsc.ca

AwardsmitZine

1stannual

Warren Steele // Upper Year Instructor of the YearJohn Reed // First Year Instructor of the Year (pictured)

Also in this issue: ANNOUNCING THE NEW MIT STUDENTS’ COUNCIL & MIT SOPH TEAMGUEST ARTICLE: DETHRONING HOMOSANCTITY BY FIMS GRAD STUDENT JOSEPH NORATCOMMENTARY ON THE CRTC, MIDDLE EAST REVOLUTIONS, ON-CAMPUS ACTIVISM, AND MORE

“Anyone who tries to make a distinction between education and entertainment doesn't know the first thing about either.” - Marshall McLuhan

WRITERSErika Casupanan, Paul Craig, Mathu Jeyaloganathan, Eric Klingenberger, Sarah Koopmans, Alex McCann, Joseph Norat, Sarah Prince, Emily Stewart, Julian Uzielli, Aaron Zaltzman

COPY EDITORSMay Chow, Gillian Cummings, Marisa Dametto, Nicole Gibillini, Mathu Jeyaloganathan, Vincy Kwong, Kristen Rosehart, Andie Wright, Steven Wright

ILLUSTRATORSJordan Coop, Gillian Cummings, Olivia Griggs, Meg Hackney, Warren Kong, Lauren McVittie, Bailey Wells, Sabrina Zavarise

cover photo by Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood

EDITOR-IN-CHIEFHadrian Mertins-Kirkwoodzine.editor@gmail.com

HEAD COPY EDITORTaylor Pearcezine.copyeditor@gmail.com

LAYOUT EDITORMary Wongzine.layouteditor@gmail.com

ADVERTISING AND WEB EDITORJonathan Foranizine.adteam@gmail.com

STAFF

CONTRIBUTORS

CONTENTS

READ THE ZINE ONLINE

www.scribd.com/mitZine

3Editor’s NoteA memorable year (in review)

OpinionsStudents missing out on reading skills

4Letter from the (Outgoing)PresidentERIKA CASUPANAN

MITSC 2011/2012Introducing the new students’ council

MIT Soph Team 2k11Introducing FIMS’ orientation leaders

5mitZine Awards 2011Announcing the inaugural winners

6Dethroning HomosanctityHow I learned to forget “meaning” and simply love informationJOSEPH NORAT

8In a (Culture) JamApologizing for the apologyMITZINE STAFF

9All Bottled UpWhy bottled water’s environmental and ethical issues need to be exposedEMILY STEWART

10The Self-Branding BurnIn the age of Web 2.0, people are being turned into productsPAUL CRAIG

12“Yes, We Love this Country”What we can learn from progressive NorwaySARAH KOOPMANS

13Be¢oming Famou$Financial strain from the pursuit of fameSARAH PRINCE

14Telecommunications TyrannyWhy the Canadian public should be embarrassed by the CRTCJULIAN UZIELLI

16The Middle East Domino EffectTracing the revolutionary spiritMATHU JEYALOGANATHAN

17From Dictatorship to DemocracyThe road ahead and a reflection close to homeERIC KLINGENBERGER

18Rhetoric Trumps Reason at UWOWhy propaganda invalidates Israeli Apartheid WeekAARON ZALTZMAN

20Alumni SpotlightFeaturing Liz TrinnearALEX MCCANN

mitZine Volume 11 ApplicationsThe search for a new team of creative boundary-busters

EDITOR’S NOTE

Perhaps the “best issue ever” mantra is overdone, and I’ll avoid it here, but I will say that you are currently holding one of the most ambitious and original Zines we’ve ever put together. It is a fitting end to a monumental year which saw the mitZine grow by leaps and bounds and FIMS itself continue to solidify its place within the Western community.

While researching for the mitZine Awards, our humble attempt to draw attention to some of the hardest working and most under-appreciated individuals in the faculty, I was struck by how much members of the FIMS community cared about each other. Although those outpourings of affection are somewhat lost in our one-page feature, I cannot adequately describe how intensely students wanted their instructors and peers to be recognized for what they do.

If there’s anything I’ve learned from my Zine experience, it’s that we are surrounded by a lot of incredible people here in FIMS, and that you need to participate in a variety of arenas to see them all at their best. It’s another tired mantra—“get involved”—but it’s a worthwhile one. The people I’ve had the good fortune of working with on the MITSC, in the sophing community, on various sports teams, and in other extracurriculars, not to mention in my MIT classes, are truly inspirational, and without them my university experience would not be a fraction of what it is.

Looking Ahead

On that note, the incoming MITSC is a stellar group that I am lucky enough to be a part of for another year. Carefully selected by incoming President Zach Valliant and VP External Jess Bronstein from a competitive field of applicants, the new council will build on the many wide-ranging successes of the outgoing MITSC.

It is a great honour for me to hand over the reigns of the mitZine to newly appointed Editor-in-Chief Jonathan Forani, an immensely talented writer and leader who will undoubtedly take the Zine to new heights in the coming year. I look forward to seeing his exciting vision for the publication become a reality.

Congratulations are also due to the newly selected MIT Soph Team, who are going to rock O-Week 2011 like never before.

As a part-time student myself slowly reentering academia with an interest in reading philosophy, I am astonished at the heavy course load—not to mention all the socializing and extra-curricular activities—that many students attempt to juggle around me. It is not my intention to answer just why my classmates are speeding through their education in three or four years, but to suggest that perhaps we need to rethink why we are here in the first place. We are becoming addicted to the quick fix of instant gratification. Cell phones are keeping us in constant connection and the desire to update our statuses through online social

networking is easily leading us down the perpetual path of procrastination. We need to remember that old virtue: patience. Relearn the act of listening and reading. Let it sink in. Ask questions after lecture and visit your professor during their office hours. Get to know them. Consider part-time studies instead of a full load. And for those who doubt a longer sentence of higher learning, just remember: education was not meant to be a race to the finish line. You are here to learn, not to compete. Slow down. Unplug. You might just learn something.Carolyn Brown

STUDENTS MISSING OUT ON READING SKILLS

OPINIONS

Acknowledgements

Volume 10 of the mitZine was (if I may say so myself) a resounding success, and, as this is my last editor’s note, I would like to thank just some of the countless individuals that helped me to accomplish what I did this year.

Firstly, thank you to my staff, Taylor, Mary, and Jonathan, and our many talented contributors without whom the Zine would not be possible. Thanks to my Zine forefathers, Paul Sham and Armand Vladau, and those who came before them, for laying the groundwork of this wonderful publication. Thank you to my challenging and inspiring professors, especially Faucher, Comor, and Babe, for helping me to critically evaluate society’s “big picture” and optimistically consider the role we play in deciding its future. Many thanks to all of the amazing personalities in FIMS and at UWO that make me enjoy today and look forward to tomorrow.

And finally, of course, thanks to Mom and Dad. For everything else.

Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood mitZine Editor-in-Chief

A MEMORABLE YEAR (IN REVIEW)

Mitchell Sturm (HEAD SOPH)Genevieve La Cute (ASSISTANT HEAD SOPH)

Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood (ASSISTANT HEAD SOPH)

MIT SOPH TEAM 2K11

LETTER FROM THE (OUTGOING) PRESIDENT

Hey everyone. Can you believe it’s already April? It seemed like just yesterday we were trudging through 5 feet of snow on campus (but then again we are in London so that isn’t far from impossible). I’m sure we can all agree that second term was a whirlwind. I’ll try to tell you what I’ve been doing.

March was filled with USC Vice Presidential elections. Incoming and outgoing members of the USC were able to vote for the USC’s VP Finance, VP University Affairs, VP Student Events, and VP Campus Issues. As voting members of the USC, Brandon Sousa (the outgoing MITSC VP External), Zach Valliant (the incoming MITSC President), Jessica Bronstein (the incoming MITSC VP External), and myself met with all of the VP candidates to discuss their platforms. Congratulations and best of luck to the incoming USC Executive: Andrew Forgione (President), Marissa Joffre (VP Campus Issues), Jennifer Valadao (VP Finance), Nicole D’Alessandro (VP Student Events), Pat Searle (VP University Affairs), and Eliot Hong (Communications Officer).

Aside from USC elections, I met with other presidents of small faculties to learn more about how their respective councils function in order for me to make recommendations to the MITSC for next year. In terms of FIMS, I have been working with the Undergraduate Student Fund Committee to approve funding proposals and review previous projects that have been funded. I have also been organizing an MITSC gift to the eventual FIMS space in the new building (if you weren’t aware, FIMS will be moving to the old Ivey building in a few years).

March is always a huge transitional month for the MITSC. I helped out Zach and Jessica with selecting the new council. The pair has picked an amazing team (see left) and have been working very hard to transition the new members. Be sure to give them any feedback on what you’d like to see in FIMS next year. With the end of the year on its way comes MITSC constitution review. I’ve been working with the outgoing MITSC to review and amend the constitution to better prepare the incoming council for next year. Lots of policy fun!

The rest of the MITSC has been busy with second term events and initiatives. Keep your ears open for two more big MIT events. April 1st will be MIT Career Day where MIT alumni and industry professionals will talk about their media careers. April 8th will be a last big bang for the graduating students because it is MIT Grad Day. Mediations, FIMS’ undergraduate academic journal, will be complete before the school year ends as well.

Since this is the conclusion to my “letter from the president” series (I probably won’t be president by the time you read this!), I want to take the time to say thank you. I am undoubtedly lucky to have worked with a talented council and serve a passionate student body that continues to inspire me. It was my pleasure to represent this faculty and the lessons I have learned will follow me to all of my future endeavours (and dance floors).

Rule the world, FIMS.

Your outgoing MITSC president,

Erika Casupanan

mitsc2011/2012

EXECUTIVE

PRESIDENTZach Valliant

VP EXTERNALJess Bronstein

VP ACADEMICTaylor Pearce

VP COMMUNICATIONSJonathan Silver

VP EVENTSJennifer Stranges

VP FINANCEKelly Mark

NON-EXECUTIVE

FACULTY REPRESENTATIVEJessica Segal

GRADUATES REPRESENTATIVEJesse Graham

MTP REPRESENTATIVEJordan Coop

MPI REPRESENTATIVEKatie Hetherman

CHARITY COMMISSIONERPaula Brent

ALUMNI RELATIONS COMMISSIONERLinley McConnell

HEAD SOPHMitchell Sturm

MITZINE EDITOR-IN-CHIEFJonathan Forani

STREET TEAM COORDINATORMatt Wright

PRODUCTION COORDINATORHadrian Mertins-Kirkwood

WEBMASTERDavid Arromba

CHAIRPERSONRebecca Trautwein

Celena BaggioTaylor Bernier

Ian ClarkeJordan CoopEmily DugganSarah EllamEmily Fister

Jonathan ForaniMeredith Hardie

Ally JohnsonBridgit Kazor

Linley McConnellTessa Medlock

Johanna MoonanBrooke MorganAlanna OsborneRachel Petford

Lianne PittsJamie Rajf

Taylor RiversRichard Ruggiero

Lizzie Sarjeant

Alex SmithJenny Stranges

Zach Valliant Essery Waller

Carling WatsonBailey Wells

Hannah WrightMatt Wright

Sabrina Zavarise

Check out the September 2011 issue of the mitZine for complete MITSC profiles.

MITZINE AWARDS 2011UPPER YEAR INSTRUCTOR OF THE YEAR FIRST YEAR INSTRUCTOR OF THE YEAR

WARREN STEELE JOHN REEDHONOURABLE MENTIONS: SELMA PURAC, EDWARD COMOR HONOURABLE MENTIONS: AJIT PYATI, SHARON SLIWINSKI

MITSC MEMBER OF THE YEAR

JESSICA SEGALHONOURABLE MENTIONS: JESS BRONSTEIN, HADRIAN MERTINS-KIRKWOOD

MITZINE CONTRIBUTOR OF THE YEAR

JULIAN UZIELLIHONOURABLE MENTIONS: SARAH KOOPMANS, PAUL CRAIG

17 FIMS instructors were nominated by upper year undergrads for the inaugural mitZine instructor of the year award, a distinction that went to Warren Steele, who topped the competitive field with a convincing 25% of upper year votes.

Steele, who instructed four courses in 2010/2011, is humble about the acknowledgement. “It’s immensely flattering to be recognized by the students, especially in a department like MIT which is full of so many great profs,” he tells the mitZine. “Teaching is a strange thing. I’m never sure if a course is successful until it’s over. But if I have any kind of impact at all then I do so by remembering those profs who mattered to me. What stands out even now is their enthusiasm for the subject and their ability to make the topic matter. I think the best teachers are the most engaged and the most surprising.”

Steele was followed in the category by Selma Purac and Edward Comor, who earned 15% and 13%, respectively, of the popular vote.Selection process: voted on by upper year FIMS undergraduates in an anonymous online survey in response to the question: “Name one undergraduate instructor in MIT/MTP/MPI that stood out to you during the 2010/2011 school year for excellence in teaching.”

With a staggering 88% of the first year vote, John Reed was the overwhelming favourite of FIMS frosh in 2010/2011. The renowned instructor of MIT 1500 stood out for his engaging lectures, passion for course material, and genuine approachability.

Self-described as “the poor man’s Tim Blackmore” (a joke that is surely lost on this crop of first years), Reed is very gracious for the recognition. “I just try to teach the kind of class that I’d want to take,” he says.

“My hope is if you like the class you’ll be more open to the concepts that I want to communicate. You can take those concepts with you to all kinds of other great MIT courses, taught by your future favourite MIT profs. Then you take what you know out into the world and make it a fairer, more dynamic place.”

Ajit Pyati (MIT 1700) and Sharon Sliwinski (MIT 1200) also earned nods from first year voters.Selection process: voted on by first year FIMS undergraduates in an anonymous online survey in response to the question: “Name one undergraduate instructor in MIT/MTP/MPI that stood out to you during the 2010/2011 school year for excellence in teaching.”

With a commanding 60% of her peers’ votes, Faculty Representative Jessica Segal was the MITSC’s pick for standout council member of 2010/2011.

Working largely behind the scenes on the Undergraduate Affairs Committee, Segal was instrumental in pushing through reforms that will positively impact FIMS undergrads for years to come. Most notably, she helped to eliminate MIT’s grading range for elective courses—a change that will take effect in September.

Segal, who has been reselected as Faculty Representative for next year’s MITSC, will be joined by runners-up Jess Bronstein (15% of the vote) and Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood (10%), who are also returning to the MITSC but in new capacities.Selection process: voted on by members of the 2010/2011 MITSC in an anonymous survey in response to the question: “Which member of the 2010/2011 MITSC stood out to you for going above and beyond their given responsibilities to make an exceptional contribution to FIMS?”

Selected from a field of more than 80 mitZine contributors, Julian Uzielli stood out in 2010/2011 not only for his exceptional writing but also for his incredible dedication to the Zine.

In a year that saw unprecedented growth for the mitZine, including a 28-page print issue and expanded online presence, Uzielli was a key contributor who offered his well-researched and poignant commentary on a variety of local, national, and global issues. He was actively involved in the development of each issue, offering insight into the Zine’s direction and working with other writers to provide interesting and original content.

Writers Sarah Koopmans and Paul Craig were also recognized for their exceptional contributions and consistent involvement.Selection process: picked by mitZine editorial staff to recognize the contributors with the greatest quality and quantity of contributions to the mitZine during the 2010/2011 school year.

and oxygen. As the categories converge however, your defining characteristics become subtler; you are different from your fellow students because you grew up in a different town or you receive better grades, or any number of other things.

The differentiation of things is not necessarily restricted to the physical realm and indeed plays an essential role in information studies; it should not be difficult, especially for a student at FIMS to navigate a library and choose a particular book. The successful navigation of a library is not predicated on a patron’s ability to distinguish between one book and the next at the elemental level, this would be chaotic especially since most books are comprised of similar if not identical materials. The identification of a particular resource among many is predicated upon a series of semantic differences that are embedded in the very language we use to describe it; the title of a work, the subject of a work, the unique combination of sentences that the book contains, and myriad other characteristics make it different from every other book.

Our ability to differentiate is our pervading heuristic but it is also our limitation. To measure difference, apply intelligible human structures, and attribute meaning seems to be the only model for study within the discourse of information. Can there be information without human intelligibility, without

meaning? Information is always subjected to its ability to produce a measurable effect in the lifeworld; the contemporary study of information is predicated upon meaning. This is a reductive paradigm.

What is information outside of the realm of meaning? Misinformation and disinformation are still concepts that are predicated on meaningfulness; in fact, those two terms add critiquing prefixes to the root word that necessarily imply a particular purpose, so they are not helpful. The human is a mediator of information; meaningfulness is merely the parameter through which the intelligibility of information can be measured in the human mind. That is to say, the human is an arbiter of information and meaningfulness is our algorithm.

Perhaps the most illuminating examples of information outside of the realm of human intelligibility reside in technologies. A QR code without a reader is but a series of unintelligible black and white squares, but with the correct mediator it is translated back into the original coding and becomes a URL, a dataset, or even natural language. Without a human to give structure and meaning to the mediated information, is the QR code still information? Is a human agent even required for communication to occur?

I am a medium for entropy; from information I have concocted meaning. That is to say, information is not contained in the pages of a book, or in the oscillations of a voice; information is the chaos from which meaning is envisaged for human purposes. Of all the possible words I could have written, these are the ones you are reading (or not). If my style is eloquent and my syntax lucid, these sentences will ideally convey purpose. The validity of this paper will almost certainly be measured by the extent to which it is effective; it will only be published if it is meaningful and pertinent. Meaningfulness, however, is a reductive lens through which to view information.

Meaningfulness is sacrosanct for information studies, and it is justifiably so; to measure meaningfulness is the very onus of human comparison. The color blue is only blue because it is not yellow or red, or any of the other colors in the visible spectrum. The only way to communicate an entity that is meaningful is by explicitly relating that it is not some other entity. The defining characteristic of that which has meaning is the extent to which it can be distinguished in communication. You have a meaning that is different from the air you breathe based on several defining characteristics: you are mostly constituted by carbon and water whereas the air in earth’s atmosphere is mostly nitrogen

written by Joseph Norat, FIMS graduate student (MLIS) // illustrated by Lauren McVittie

HOW I LEARNED TO FORGET “MEANING” AND SIMPLY LOVE INFORMATIONDETHRONING HOMOSANCTITY

GUEST ARTICLE

[mitZine v10.i5] 7

In The Mathematical Theory of Communication, Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver completely exclude the human agent from their model of communication. It is not that information has a meaningfulness that can be transmitted through a communicative channel, but that from all of the possible messages (information) a single message is relayed. It is chaos and disorder that constitute information, not meaningfulness or unity. Rather than extracting and critiquing the individual elements of the model, the more relevant question for information science is: how is the message chosen from the entropy that is information?

It is very simple to picture a human as the sender of a particular message: these very words are emblematic of that exact model. In this situation, meaningfulness is the only guise for information to take, but let us convolute the model: what if a machine sent a message for a human to receive? The language of the computer sender (in the most derivative form) is simply a computation of binary circuitry and logic gates. For the human to understand this information it must be decoded and arranged in natural language, or at least an intelligible set of symbols that convey a particular meaning. The natural language that we use to convey ideas necessarily includes semantic meaning so it is understandably difficult to conceptualize communication without meaning. What happens if we remove the human agent altogether from this model?

Some may recall the distinct and unpleasant

sound made by a 56k modem accessing an internet service provider. This sound is an analog manifestation of information and it is one that is completely unintelligible to the human ear. The sound was designed only to relay messages between computers, and it does so with a fair amount of accuracy (if not speed). For the computer, the message that was relayed through the sound will affect real changes: another disk may be booted, a cookie saved, or any number of internal

processes that do not require intervention, nor do they necessarily manifest visually or in a way that interfaces with the human. Information then,

can affect a demonstrable change for the computer regardless of whether a human is involved.

We are arriving at a crossroads. If we use meaningfulness to determine the extent to which something is information then we are necessarily relying on the comprehensiveness and accuracy of our tools: our eyes and our ears as much as our oscilloscope and our thermometer. This is the fault of contemporary information science studies. Information is only recognized when it is manifested meaningfully in the human world. This paradigm may have served us well in the past but we have an increasing interest in being able to interact with a mediator that is not human: the computer.

Humans may hold a monopoly over the attribution of meaning, but what good does that do us? By some ambrosial encumbrance we have given ourselves the exclusive right to ordain meaning, but the usefulness of that ordination is coming to

an end. Meaning enables very specific effects in the lifeworld, but information enacts digital changes daily without the interference of humans (and I do mean interference). Algorithms that are preprogrammed into search engines determine the outcome of queries based on autonomous web crawlers. These crawlers handle and process information in much the same way humans do. They may be designed to follow a single set of constricting algorithms, but they code, decode, send, receive, and manipulate autonomously as mediators, just as we do.

At present, personal electronic technologies are little more advanced than the basic functions of a human but at quicker speeds and with greater accuracy. But, as our technologies are advancing, so must we conceptualize information appropriately. IBM’s flagship AI project Watson is already capable of mind-boggling complexity. Watson’s ability to choose a particular message is based on a series of algorithms; the algorithms are employed to reduce all possible information to an intelligible fact that is then relayed, but is that message meaningful to Watson?

The better question is, does it need to be? What about the meaningfulness of a message makes it any more valid? We have simply priveleged ourselves by convoluting the definition of information to the point of stagnation. When we are confronted with an entity that challenges our concept of intelligence we regroup inside of our self-righteous basilica, shouting: “this is a place where only the meaningful may reside!” Let us shed this sanctimonious shell and simply informationalize.

“It is chaos and disorder that constitute information, not meaningfulness or unity.”

8 [mitZine v10.i5]

IN A (CULTURE) JAMAPOLOGIZING FOR THE APOLOGY

written by the mitZine Editorial Board

We would like to issue a formal apology for that other “formal apology”.

A few days after the February issue of the mitZine hit stands, us editors were presented with an interesting predicament: tucked into each freshly-printed copy, a conspicuous slip of paper that explained just how “deeply, truly, honestly sorry” we were for publishing two articles that “stood in defiance of our editorial standards”. It not only raised a lot of eyebrows regarding censorship of student media, but also implicitly disowned the two quality writers involved. Several hundred copies were picked up before we could remove all of the fraudulent letters from the Zines.

Although the apology was signed “The Zine Team”, those who follow this publication closely could certainly guess that we had nothing to do with it. From the casually cut-and-pasted mitZine logo at the top to the inconsistently formatted “the MIT Zine”, it’s obvious this apology letter was anything but official.

But if it wasn’t a real retraction, what was the motive? Why did someone figure that now was the time for our very own MIT student publication to experience some homegrown, MIT-inspired culture jamming? Perhaps most importantly, did they accomplish their goal?

By definition, to culture jam is to subvert, and in that respect our anonymous contributor succeeded (in)famously. Unfortunately, when evaluating this demonstration in the broader context of culture jams around the world, our little activist comes up short.

The phrase “culture jamming” implies a disruption of mainstream culture. Two examples of notable jams in recent years include changing the Esso logo to “E$$o” and substituting the classic iPod advertisements with images of Abu Ghraib and the tagline “iRaq”. Both of these tactics noticeably disturb our preconceived notions of mainstream corporate culture and affect the way we think about them.

What the phrase doesn’t imply is that the disruption needs to be blatant. Consider the notorious “Yes Men”: similar to our anonymous contributor, the Yes Men pose as corporate figureheads and make public statements to the media. In 2004, for example, a Yes Man posing as a Dow Chemical representative on the BBC announced a “$12 billion plan to finally, at long last, fully compensate the victims” of the 1984 Bhopal disaster, the worst industrial disaster on record.

The Yes Men are an extreme example of culture jamming, but have motivated copycat demonstrations by individuals around the world. What the mitZine experienced in February was certainly inspired by activists like these, so why wasn’t the retraction letter found in the February issue an example of culture jamming?

To put it simply, the mitZine is not mainstream.

Apple, Esso, McDonald’s, Nike, and the mitZine. One of these things is not like the other.

The mitZine has always prided itself on its “otherness”—after all, we do call ourselves “an alternative student publication” (it’s in our masthead)—and although our anonymous contributor may have meant well by boldly inserting a fraudulent letter into each issue, culture jamming the mitZine is nothing but counterproductive. This publication exists to give you an uncensored voice. Trying to silence others’ with misleading apologies is not only hypocritical but also dishearteningly disrespectful.

So what’s the alternative to culture jamming our alternative publication? Actually write for it. A letter to the editor, a blog post for the mitZine Online, or an article for the print edition are all marvelously constructive responses to an argument you disagree with.

Culture jamming is awesome (and we endorse it), but please choose your targets carefully. Direct your creatively disruptive energy towards society’s exploitative powers, not your local, student-run publications. We want to work with you, not against you.

In addition to apologizing to the Gazette for the defamatory remarks found in the letter, we’d like to assure our writers that the editorial team at the mitZine fully supports their right to write. Our constitution states that we are a “platform of free expression for all students of UWO” for a reason: we don’t do censorship. The retraction letter found in the February issue was a blatant violation of the very principles the mitZine stands for.

What’s the point of culture jamming when you’re disrupting something that’s totally free and available for you to use?

This is your outlet; use it as you will.

But why not use it right?

Dear readers,

Thank you.

[mitZine v10.i5] 9

ALL BOTTLED UPWHY BOTTLED WATER’S ENVIRONMENTAL AND ETHICAL ISSUES NEED TO BE EXPOSEDwritten by Emily Stewart // edited by Nicole Gibillini // illustrated by Bailey Wells

Forget that image of glacial springs cascading into your Dasani and Aquafina bottles – it’s just treated tap water, people. That might be less surprising if you knew that Coca-Cola and Pepsi own Dasani and Aquafina, respectively. But did anyone expect anything less from two of the world’s largest food and beverage corporations? Next time you want to fork out the change for a cool bottle of Dasani because you think tap water is gross, reconsider.

Not only are companies like these feigning H20 superiority and thereby unnecessarily hurting our wallets, they are making major dents in our environment. The construction of the bottle itself costs companies a fortune and has a major negative impact on the environment. Some 38 million plastic bottles are made from a barbaric 1.5 million barrels of oil annually.

Jasmine Coates, a first-year Psychology student at the University of Waterloo, is one of bottled water’s greatest opponents: an informed consumer. She recognizes many environmental and ethical issues attached to the sale of bottled water.

“The environmental impact of water bottles is in the resources used to make the bottles and ship them around the world, not just the bottles that don’t get recycled,” she clarifies. “The extraction of the water itself can also upset the balance of the surrounding ecosystem by affecting groundwater supplies.” This is something Coates notes is particularly harmful to

people in areas dependent on well water.

Coates also finds it unethical for companies to abuse our right to water for their profit.

“We want our water to stay public,” she says. “These companies provide a stepping stone to the privatization of our water resources.”

Coates feels that the biggest problem with the sale of bottled water is the simplicity of solving the problem: all you have to do is not buy it. She reveals that a great way to halt the sale is to encourage friends and family to not buy it and discourage its sale at any events you are involved with.

“There is always some kind of alternative,” she reasons.

High priced tap water and plastic-filled junk yards aren’t the only controversies attached to the industry. In 2004, Dasani was under fire for producing bromate-contaminated bottles in the United Kingdom. News of the cancer-causing chemical’s presence resulted in a UK-wide pull of Dasani bottles from store shelves.

Locally, actions are being taken to reduce the sale of

bottled water. In 2008, the city of London proposed a ban against the sale of bottled water in sites such as golf courses and arenas. Since the idea was not challenged, the law was passed successfully.

On campus, the EnviroWestern group has raised awareness on the issue. Focusing on their demographic, they had a “water pong” booth in which each toss of a ping-pong ball helped students learn about the negative effects of bottled water. Those who won received a free reusable water

bottle. Throughout the year, the group provides students with free reusable water bottles and coffee mugs.

Both EnviroWestern and Coates agree

that banning the sale of bottled water in public areas is a step in the right direction. The next step? Instead of fearing your city’s water and opening your wallet, turn on your tap.Sources:http://www.usatoday.com/money/advertising/adtrack/2007-08-19-water-etc_N.htmhttp://www.phnompenhpost.com/index.php/2011030347129/Business/coca-cola-enters-water-fray.html

“Some 38 million plastic bottles are made from a barbaric 1.5 million barrels of oil annually.”

THE SELF-BRANDING

BURN

written by Paul Craig // edited by Steven Wright illustrated by Sabrina Zavarise

IN THE AGE OF WEB 2.0, PEOPLE ARE BEING TURNED

INTO PRODUCTS

literature,” while it seems less approachable (I know that I haven’t read many managerial tours de force lately), merely refers to a certain corporate-styled rhetoric that often arises when discussing branding.

The language of branding (and therefore self-branding) is the language of business—a fact that reveals much about its intentions. “As a product you are a unique brand and projecting this will enable you to set yourself apart from the competition,” insists Rebecca Fuller, a career consultant. Published by The Guardian in the article “Seven ways to build a personal brand,” Fuller proves to be adept at reducing human relations to business jargon. The second rule, for example, is to “find a way of articulating your brand to the customer,” with Rebecca Fuller explaining that “the customer is your future employer. Consider what your customer wants and how you, the product, will benefit them.” As before, the hopeful employee is a ‘product,’ and the employer is a ‘customer.’ Presumably hiring an employee would constitute a ‘transaction,’ after which the employee is added to ‘inventory.’

Hearn notes this abundant use of economic language as well. She specifically mentions the term “braggables”, used to describe workers’ top qualities, and in an unusually sentimental passage, she quotes Will, a man who applied personal branding to his marriage: “‘My wife is the most important person in the world to me. Because she is

and afterwards my classmate Luke Tincknell insisted that Forgione won because “he had the best brand.” I’m sure we all remember Forgione’s sky blue hoodies, his Twitter-esque logo, his wonderfully vague “For You,” and his creative music video. We didn’t so much elect Forgione; we bought what he was selling.

In my email, personal branding is ambiguously defined as “what sets you apart from others.” Obsessed with ‘selling oneself’ and ‘satisfying customers’, it sounds like a new, socially acceptable form of prostitution. So what exactly is self-branding, aside from being the gnarliest craze to come out of corporate America since fluorescent lighting?

Alison Hearn, an MIT professor at Western, discusses branding in her article “Meat, Mask, Burden.” “The production of a branded ‘self,’” writes Hearn, “involves creating a detachable, saleable image or narrative” with the ultimate goal of “ produc[ing] cultural value and, potentially, material profit.” According to Hearn, branding oneself is a process requiring us to reinvent ourselves as “saleable” personas, from which we may expect to “profit.” Hearn goes on to write “self-branding is clearly expressed and delineated in certain management literature as a necessary strategy for success in an increasingly complex corporate world.” Here, Hearn clarifies what she meant by “profit”: professional success. Her mention of “management

It was probably a cold and frosty morning on February 2nd, 2011, when I woke up to an email from Western inviting me to “A Special Networking Event for Students.” After seeing the word “networking” I prepared for the worst. Upon reading further, it seemed that I was being offered “an amazing opportunity to learn how to promote [myself] effectively”; in other words, to “brand” myself.

As a participant, I would learn to: “define a brand promise, ... gain a better understanding of what it is [I am] selling, [and] ... understand how to increase the advocacy of [my] brand.” Seemingly, all it would cost was a few hours of my time—and maybe a small piece of my soul. Ultimately, however, I went to my MIT class instead, thus ending one of my more harrowing encounters with self-branding.

Ignoring that email, however, has not seemed to have diminished the prevalence of branding. There have been plenty of high-key branding initiatives around Western of late, and even if you haven’t received a steaming heap of ‘an opportunity of a lifetime’ in your inbox, you’d have to have lived under a larger rock than Weldon not to notice. The UWO administration, for example, has embarked upon a $265,000 initiative to “overhaul Western’s brand.” Similarly, during the latest bout of Student Presidential elections, an integral part of Omid Salari’s platform was “beefy marketing” (ie, branding) for the USC. Salari didn’t win of course,

[mitZine v10.i5] 11

“The language of branding is the language of business.”

the number-one customer in my organization, I have to make sure she’s 100 percent satisfied and happy with the product.’” While it’s true that the language of branding is strange to those of us acclimatized to speaking about people like they’re humans, the core of self-branding is very simple. Those who endorse self-branding believe that a strong personal brand is the key to professional success. This formula for success represents its most compelling attribute, its key ‘braggable,’ and perhaps begins to explain its appeal for us as students.

As university students, our academic journeys are slowly coming to a conclusion. Having valiantly ascended the levels of Canadian schooling, it appears that higher education has led us to a precipice. Ever closer to our degrees, it is not much longer that we will be sheltered by academia. As much as leaving French philosophy behind excites us, emerging from our shadow world of forms and into the unfamiliar ‘real world’ can be an extremely daunting prospect. It’s a world of dogs eating each other; a world where those who snooze lose. Out ‘there’, we’re told, experience breeds experience, as if asexually. It’s unclear if skills that we’ve gained in university will be valuable later in life. The possibility of a ‘devalued’ bachelor degree (an issue debated regularly in The Gazette) speaks to these fears.

In this light, it’s easy to see how something that portends to be sound business logic might infiltrate

our lives. Self-branding, ostensibly an instruction manual for professional success, begins to sound like common sense. As a saleable version of you, a brand might be necessary. To get hired, we’ll need an ‘in,’ an ‘edge,’ a little of what the French call je ne sais quoi. And just what is this je-ne-sais-quoi? Well, The Guardian can tell you, in seven easy steps.

However, one can’t help but feel that something isn’t quite right. Underneath the veneer of a brand lurks an undertone that, frankly, is pretty insulting.

Self-branding perpetuates the idea that we’re somehow insufficient. As people, we’re flawed, irrational, and messy; and because of this we’re also un-employable, or so self-branding would have us believe. All that we are is not good enough and if we want to succeed we have to become something else: a brand. We are encouraged to think of ourselves as products, because as products we are more valuable. Self-branding, then, encourages us to change fundamentally in order to please potential employers who supposedly already think in these terms.

Being a person, by this logic, is secondary to getting a job; our humanity is not only extraneous, it is obtrusive. It complicates things unnecessarily, and must therefore be discarded. Rather, our value comes primarily from working diligently, from ‘delivering returns,’ and not from who we are.

We’re all university students, and we all know how hard it is to learn. We have readings to do, homework to complete, assignments to hand in, and exams to study for—all of which must be done concurrently. We’re all familiar with Red Bull-fueled all-nighters, with entire days devoted to studying. We do it, and we’ll continue to do it, because we’re confident that we’re bettering ourselves. We accept the challenge because we know that it is only by challenging ourselves that we can improve. Our education isn’t meant to efface who we are, but to shape who we will become.

When I get an email implying that what I’m learning may not be an asset to finding a job—that until I can ‘market myself’ I’m not employable—it’s insulting. I bust my ass in university, pursuing knowledge relentlessly. I believe that I’m valuable for who I am, even without a ‘brand promise’. As far as I’m concerned, employers looking to hire self-proclaimed ‘products’ can do as they please. However, if they are interested in a reliable, university-educated, critical thinking employee, it’s a seller’s market.

written by Sarah Koopmans // edited by Marisa Dametto // illustrated by Gillian Cummings

WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM PROGRESSIVE NORWAY

“YES, WE LOVE THIS COUNTRY”

Late one June evening a few years ago, I sped across Norway’s countryside on a high-speed train between the small towns of Tønsberg and Ottestad. As I gazed across the passing fields, I couldn’t help but marvel at the phenomenon of the midnight sun, and the evocative magnificence of a nation that was unlike any I had ever visited. The country’s beauty aside, my first (and lasting) impression of this Scandinavian country was of its kind and generous people.

I had landed at a tiny airport in Sandefjord, in southern Norway, with vague instructions to take a shuttle bus to a train station which would carry me north to a leadership seminar. As I stood outside with my suitcase, trying not to look like a confused tourist, a middle-aged Norwegian couple approached me, asking if they could help. They seemed trustworthy, so I explained my situation. My new acquaintances, Stefan and Inga, had met another girl on the plane who also needed a ride, and offered us a chance to cram ourselves, along with all of our baggage, into the back seat of their tiny car. After the other girl was dropped off, I still had a couple of hours before my train, so Stefan and Inga delayed the next leg of their own trip to be my tour guides around Tønsberg. After my impromptu tour, they made sure I had the right ticket, gave me their contact information and then waved good-bye—though it was not the last I would see of my unofficial Norwegian welcoming committee.

A country about the size of the state of New Mexico, Norway has fewer residents than the GTA, yet has one of the longest and most rugged coastlines in the world, possessing many mountains, fjords, and islands. A socialist democratic constitutional monarchy officially titled the “Kingdom of Norway”, this prosperous welfare capitalist nation is one of the top five wealthiest countries in the world. Although it was once one of the world’s poorest nations, the discovery of oil in 1960s led to a substantial decrease in poverty.

For Norway, free education is one of the most socially levelling factors the country boasts; foreigners can even study for free! A Norwegian friend of mine, Annhelen Sperrud, says she is grateful for her country’s system of free education: “[It] means that everybody can take higher education if [they] want to; that’s a blessing,” she explains. “The government wanted to make sure that everyone would have the same opportunity in life, whether [they] came from a rich family or not. And this has helped! We have a huge, well-paid middle class, some rich and some poor.”

But in Norway’s terms, “poor” is a very different thing than in most countries, and she continues, “[either way], most of us are ‘equal’.”

Norway is perhaps one of the countries that Canadians can most identify with. Socialized education, health care, and majestic landscape aside, the people of Norway are equally as respectful and courteous as Canadians—if not more so.

However, Norwegians also tend to complain. According to Sperrud, “We don’t know how other people in other countries struggle. We see the pictures on TV, but don’t understand it. So we keep on complaining, thinking our problems are so huge [but] they’re not. It’s embarrassing!”

Like any first-world country, Norway’s wealth has led to certain social attitudes among its citizens. Silje Mikalsen, another friend of mine, is disappointed in the consumerist tendencies of her

nation: “[I dislike] the way we’ve become pretty spoiled and materialistic,” she says.

Despite these issues, both Sperrud and

Mikalsen are grateful to be Norwegian, and I am grateful to count them among my good friends.

And for Stefan and Inga? They showed me more hospitality than any strangers ever had and even opened their home to me the night before I flew out of Norway. Once again, they were my tour guides, showing me the country’s southernmost point. Over dinner, a tour of their cottage, and a daylight nightcap, this humble couple’s kindness formed my perception of a country I would be proud to call my own— if I weren’t already a proud Canadian.

“Socialized education, health care, and majestic landscape aside, the people of Norway are equally as respectful and courteous as Canadians—if not more so.”

[mitZine v10.i5] 13

written by Sarah Prince // edited by Kristen Rosehart // illustrated by Olivia Griggs

FINANCIAL STRAIN FROM THE PURSUIT OF FAME

BE¢OMINGFAMOU$

Every year, parents sacrifice their savings so their children can attend acting, modeling and singing competitions. Even though chances are slim their child will walk away with a contract, parents are willing to gamble their children’s tuition funds.

For middle class families, the pursuit of fame is a great financial strain and often requires stage parents to adapt their diet and lifestyle accordingly. One parent told Fame Junkies author, Jake Halpern, that akin to living on a student budget, “you eat a lot of mac and cheese, and you skimp on Christmas.”

Even though a sleazy talent agent suggests a youngster has Brad Pitt’s charm or Julia Roberts’ good looks, it is unlikely that travelling to Las Vegas for a competition will drastically change their career path. Nevertheless, some parents are even willing to relocate to accommodate their children’s auditions because as Hollywood publicist Michael Levine remarks, “in American life today, maybe a currency worth more than money is fame.”

Yet even that may not be enough for parents and children to give up hope. Addictions expert Chris Nakken reveals that addictions offer “illusions of fulfillment” and Halpern adds that people fantasize about fame for its illusion of love. In a recent tweet, PR guru Kelly Cutrone described TLC’s Toddlers in Tiaras as child abuse. It would take one hell of a PR campaign to successfully disguise the ugliness that occurs behind the scenes.

Unfortunately, the allure of fame makes fetching Paris Hilton’s coffee especially appealing for youth with low self-esteem, Halpern explains. Aside from perhaps a small cameo role in a reality show about their boss, an assistant’s life is often miserable. An anonymous celebrity personal assistant informed

Halpern “when you’re on a movie set… you are known as so-and-so’s assistant. You don’t have a name. You’re not a person—you’re an assistant.” Imagine if your younger cousin or sibling expressed interest in being a movie star’s unknown sidekick—that’s a frightening thought.

Moreover, the public obsession with celebrities makes privacy a greater cause for concern. Fans are so obsessed with movie stars that none of their starstruck behaviour is surprising anymore. In one instance, over-the-top fans swarmed actress

Audrey Totter: “they were tearing at my dress for souvenirs,” she explains. That’s disgusting. In reality, the shards of her dress were most likely later put up for auction on eBay.

Considering the nation’s obsession with fame, the low turnout when MuchMusic producers came to UWO searching for a new VJ proves just how critical our faculty’s student body truly is. When offered the opportunity to potentially be the next George Strombolopolous, without any financial investment needed, people stayed home.

Finally, much of aspiring actors’ obsession with fame is fuelled by entertainment magazines, but these rags are ultimately salacious trash. Perhaps if impressionable youth realized you can look pretty without following a tabloid’s tips about how to lose six pounds, three inches and some dignity in ten days, then they wouldn’t beg their parents to make such significant sacrifices.

“Fans are so obsessed with movie stars that none of their starstruck behaviour is surprising anymore.”

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has been in the news quite a bit recently. Though the national regulatory body for media generally doesn’t call too much attention to itself, over the first two and a half months of 2011 it has been unusually active and detrimental to the public interest.

According to its website, “the CRTC’s mandate is to ensure that both the broadcasting and telecommunications systems serve the Canadian public.” 1 Considering it took me a significant amount of time to find that basic, integral information, which should be on the home page, the CRTC has already demonstrated its faults. Sadly, the CRTC’s misdeeds extend far beyond poor web design; lately, it seems it has been actively trying not to live up to its mandate. The CRTC has established itself as a completely counter-productive, out of touch, and frankly, embarrassing organization.

To illustrate my point, I’ll take a look at two

examples from this year, and one from 2008. In reverse chronological order: the official approval of Bell Canada Enterprises’ (BCE) purchase of CTV; the recent ruling on usage-based Internet billing (expertly covered in last month’s Zine by Gillian Marsh); and, for nostalgia’s sake, the absolute mockery that was the much-hyped “Do-Not Call List” of 2008. These instances show the apparent contempt that the CRTC, which is subsidized by the Government of Canada—er, excuse me, The Harper Government, as it is now officially called2—has for Canadian consumers.

I know many readers will disagree with my analysis of the BCE-CTV deal on principle, so let me first make one thing clear: I am not opposed to capitalism, nor do I think that mergers and acquisitions are inherently negative. I do, however, believe that the government and its institutions have a duty to protect citizens from unchecked monopolization and corporate greed. It is also important to note that a similar merger occurred in

2000, when BCE bought CTV for the first time. It proved unsuccessful, however, and CTV was sold in 2005.

According to the CRTC, “[the Telecommunications Act of 1993] imposed a requirement to forbear where the Commission finds that a telecommunications service or class of services is or will be subject to competition sufficient to protect the interests of users.” 3 This essentially requires the CRTC to approve any mergers and acquisitions in the telecommunications industry to ensure they are legal, in order to prevent the formation of monopolies.

Although BCE first announced their plans to buy CTV for $1.3 billion back in September, the deal was not approved by the CRTC until the first week of March.4 The reason for the delay was probably related to the sheer size of the deal. BCE is Canada’s largest telecom company, providing services across a wide range of media including television, Internet, and telephones, and CTV is Canada’s largest private broadcaster, whose holdings include MuchMusic, MTV Canada, and The Comedy Network. Furthermore, until the deal’s approval, CTV was the only Canadian private broadcaster not yet owned by a content distributor.5

This consolidation of media giants will give Bell an unprecedented amount of power in the Canadian media landscape. As many MIT students will recognize, this is a textbook example of vertical integration: business practices whereby the means of production, distribution and exhibition of media are all controlled by the same company, facilitating monopolistic business practices within a market. BCE, the country’s largest exhibitor, now owns CTV, the country’s largest distributor and producer, meaning we, the consumers at the bottom of this chain, are in a position to be exploited.

No matter whether you support the acquisition or not, it cannot be denied that this is an enormously monopolistic move by BCE. It’s basic economics: monopolization decreases market competition, which means that Bell’s incentive to produce quality content decreases, while its ability to control (and therefore raise) prices increases.

Given that the Telecommunications Act specifically charges the CRTC with preventing monopolistic practices, it would appear it has neglected its duties. Technically, I admit, the market is not yet a full monopoly: BCE still has major competitors in Rogers and Shaw. But it’s unquestionably a step in the wrong direction.

In approving the deal, the CRTC attempted to uphold their mandate by including certain requirements for BCE, but they are questionable at best. One of the stipulations states that “[BCE must] allow for the carriage of at least 43 additional television services, including local, and regional conventional stations and independent community stations.” 6 This may sound promising at first glance,

WHY THE CANADIAN PUBLIC SHOULD BE EMBARRASSED BY THE CRTCwritten by Julian Uzielli // edited by Mathu Jeyaloganathan // illustrated by Jordan Coop

TELECOMMUNICATIONS TYRANNY

[mitZine v10.i5] 15

but aside from being rather vague, it is important to make a distinction between diversity of content and multiplicity of content. Nowhere does it say that these 43 additional stations can’t just be local clones of generic, low-budget news channels. I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for this acquisition to kick start a new era of thoughtful, compelling journalism in Canada.

According to CRTC chairman Konrad von Finckenstein, “[BCE] will invest $245 million in the Canadian broadcasting system, of which more than $140 million will be allocated to new Canadian television and radio programming.” 7 Although this number is the product of a formula regularly applied to corporate mergers, to me, committing a grand total of $245 million to the supposed improvement of Canadian broadcasting and programming seems low for a corporation that reported its revenue, according to their annual report to shareholders, as totaling $17.7 billion in 2009. Also on that point, according to a letter from the Writers Guild of Canada to the CRTC in 2007, “the average budget for [TV] drama is very high at $1.2 million per hour.”8 If that’s the cost of production alone per episode of television, then $140 million will buy us about 116 hours, or just under five days, of new programming. This is clearly a token requirement that will be of negligible benefit to Canadians.

The BCE-CTV takeover will put an unprecedented amount of Canadian media power into the hands of a single corporation, and for the reasons outlined above, is therefore detrimental to the public interest. I don’t deny that I benefit from the content and services provided by Bell and CTV; we all do. However, in my opinion, the threats to competition and innovation posed by this deal far outweigh any tangible benefit to the interests of Canadian citizens—interests that the CRTC claims to represent.

While I’ll admit that the BCE/CTV example’s negative consequences aren’t necessarily self-evident, the CRTC’s January ruling allowing usage-based billing (UBB) for Internet use seems to me, and many others, to be an obvious cash-grab. UBB poses absolutely no benefit to the consumers that the CRTC is supposed to represent. As I mentioned above, this issue was covered in last month’s Zine as well as receiving widespread coverage in the general media, so I won’t go into too much detail. However, the CRTC’s complete lack of regard for the public interest on this issue cannot be understated.

Right now, Canada’s Internet infrastructure is owned largely by major Internet service providers (ISPs) like Bell and Rogers. Smaller ISPs, like Teksavvy, lease bandwidth from them at wholesale rates for resale; this is allowed in order to create competition in the market to help keep prices down for consumers.

The UBB ruling (which, thankfully, Industry Minister Tony Clement has vowed to overturn), would have

allowed major ISPs to start charging companies like Teksavvy retail prices (comparable to those paid by regular business customers). The smaller ISPs would have been unable to compete, and would probably have folded. Additionally, ISPs would have been allowed to impose lower bandwidth caps on their customers, while charging anywhere from $1-$4 per gigabyte once customers had exceeded their new lowered limits. All of this was approved by the CRTC, in what looks suspiciously like an attempt on the part of Rogers and Bell to eliminate competitors.

The ISPs say growing Internet traffic necessitates the limiting of bandwidth. This logic leads to prohibitively high prices for Internet use, which would be crippling to many Canadian businesses. It is very difficult to stay competitive in today’s digital economy without reasonably priced access to high-speed Internet. When a highway in a growing city becomes congested, putting a tollbooth every kilometer is not a productive way of tackling the problem. In the long run, it is much more efficient, and beneficial, to improve the infrastructure to allow for new traffic.

Some defend the ISPs on the grounds that as businesses, they have a right to make a profit. And under most other circumstances, I would agree. However, a corporation’s right to profit should be upheld within reason, and in this case, ISPs are not only being unreasonable, but exploitative. The incremental cost to an ISP to provide 1GB of bandwidth is less than one penny, and they propose to sell bandwidth back to consumers at a markup of over 10,000 per cent.9 Combine that with simultaneously lowering bandwidth caps and forcing competition out of the market, and it is difficult to see this decision as anything less than an egregious disregard for the interests of Canadians on the part of both ISPs and the CRTC.

This brings me to the simplest, and most outrageous, of the CRTC’s offences that I will examine. Remember the Do-Not-Call list? It was first announced in September 2008 by the CRTC as a means to allow Canadians to opt out of receiving telemarketing calls. All you had to do was add your number to the list, and your dinners would, supposedly, remain uninterrupted forevermore. It seemed too good to be true; it was.

I remember putting my own phone number on the list immediately after hearing about it, and enthusiastically telling my parents that we could expect a significant drop in unsolicited calls. I also remember not noticing much of a difference. Many other Canadians expressed similar confusion, and in January 2009, the CBC revealed the reason for the lack of change: the CRTC was selling the registry list online. That’s right: if your number was on that list, the government organization charged with protecting your rights as a media consumer was literally selling you out. Reportedly, in Toronto you could buy 600,000 names for $50.10

Even more than the previous two cases, this leaves me absolutely slack-jawed at the obvious disregard the CRTC seems to have for its mandate. While it may be possible to argue in defense of the CRTC in the previous two cases, I cannot imagine a way in which blatantly lying to consumers, and then turning around and profiting off that lie, can be seen to “ensure that both the broadcasting and telecommunications systems serve the Canadian public.” I can’t help but envision shadowy figures seated around a boardroom table, laughing through clouds of swirling cigar smoke, trying to outdo each other with the most absurd and deceitful way they could swindle the Canadian public.

These have been only three of the most well known examples of the CRTC’s questionable actions in regards to its assigned purpose. Obviously, the Commission has been less than exemplary of late in its duties to protect the Canadian people from excessive corporate power, unfair pricing, and its own predatory lies.

But don’t just take my word for it, get informed: visit the links I’ve referenced, read blogs, write to your MP, sign a petition or tell the CRTC how you feel about the ways they are spending your tax dollars, at www.crtc.gc.ca. And by all means, disagree with me: restore my waning faith in our government and its institutions. Please, whatever you do, just don’t be complacent.

Perhaps I’ve been unfair, though. After all, the CRTC’s mandate states only that they must “serve the Canadian public.” The implication may seem clear: “serve the Canadian public interest.” But it is, admittedly, terribly imprecise. Personally, I see “serve” as in “at your service.” But clearly, the CRTC interprets it differently: “serve” as in “you got served.”1 http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/backgrnd/brochures/b29903.htm2 Reported by Peter Mansbridge on CBC’s The National, March 4, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXywZ7ycXTI3 http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/t_review05.htm4 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/bce-ctv-deal-remakes-media-landscape/article1702385/5 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/03/01/crtc-federal-court-tv-fee.html6 http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainment/CRTC+approves+purchase/4398208/story.html7 Ibid8 www.writersguildofcanada.com/files/WGC_Sub_CRTC2007_9F.pdf9 This point was brought forward, and elaborated upon, by George Stroumboulopoulos on CBC’s The Hour http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rUsRCyS6PU10 http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2009/01/23/donotcall.html

THE MIDDLE EAST DOMINO EFFECTTRACING THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRITwritten by Mathu Jeyaloganathan // edited by Andie Wright // illustrated by Warren Kong

Tunisia. Egypt. Bahrain. Yemen. Oman. Libya.

What started with one man fiercely protesting his anger over the inability to earn a living on the streets of Tunisia, has evolved into a generation vehemently expressing their anger and rage. Over the course of three months, tens of thousands of protestors have taken up arms to convey their dissatisfaction with their governments. In a decade where civil disobedience in developed countries is heavily frowned upon as ineffective and wasteful, passionate protestors in the Arab world have made a case for it.

On January 3, 2011, 26-year-old university graduate Mohamed Bouazizi decided to ring in the new year by setting himself on fire. In past weeks, Bouazizi, who was a fruit merchant in Tunisia, had had his fruit confiscated by a policewoman. Bouazizi reported the police women to the government and after filing numerous complaints, decided he had had enough. He doused himself in gasoline and set himself alight. Now viewed as a martyr, Bouazizi helped to trigger a wave of civil disobedience and protests that have overwhelmed Northern Africa.

Bouazizi’s death revealed to many the Tunisian that his or her frustrated feeling of despair was shared by the population. Communicating through social media such as Facebook and Twitter, Tunisians rallied around the belief that freedom should be inherent and protested. Along with protesting and riots, civil workers such as lawyers went on an

indefinite strike. Protests ran until January 15, and the next day Tunisia’s President Zine el Abidine Ben Ali fled the country. The country has since been endowed with a interim government that has announced that official elections will be held in July.

The protests in Tunisia was the trigger many people in the Arab world needed. The success of the protests effectively demonstrated the power of civil disobedience and launched protests in neighboring countries. But if civil disobedience is such a powerful force in the Arab world why is it failing to have an impact in the developed world?

On December 9, 2010, thousands of demonstrators surrounded the parliament building in central London, England, to protest the planned federal tuition fee increase to nine thousand pounds a year. Believing that the increase in tuition would make higher education increasingly inaccessible, many official student, teacher, and equity organizations came together to express their concern over the impending decision.

Despite the imperativeness of the cause, the message was drowned out by images coming from Scotland Yard portraying arrests, injuries and extreme violence. Unlike in the Middle East, the show of support had no influence on the decision itself. If the protests in England were so ineffective, then why did they happen?

Much can be said about the nature of civil disobedience itself. Going right back to the American

Revolution through to recent education protests in England, civil disobedience has always played a part in the democratic process. But with each passing decade, the significance and potential impact of civil disobedience has decreased. Although the major protests themselves have waned little in size, their impact has decreased disproportionately.

As demonstrated in the G20 protests, government’s are temporarily forgoing the unwritten rules of democracy to handle the “expected” riots violence. Without giving citizens a chance to peacefully express their concerns, the state is already prepared to ignore the validity of any concerns expressed by the people. Maybe this is why citizens are resorting to violence. If attention is brought to any of the causes, then maybe the risk of injunction is worth it.

In the Middle East, civil disobedience is a result of oppression. In the developing world, civil disobedience is touted as a way in which “individuals articulate their frustration” (Kelly, BBC). Frustration is a subset of oppression. If frustration bubbles up high enough then civil disobedience will occur. In the politics of diplomacy, there is no place for this so-called civil disobedience. But does that only say in certain times and places diplomacy should be a foreign concept?

[mitZine v10.i5] 17

FROM DICTATORSHIP TO DEMOCRACYTHE ROAD AHEAD AND A REFLECTION CLOSE TO HOMEwritten by Eric Klingenberger // edited by Vincy Kwong // illustrated by Meg Hackney

In the wake of the recent Middle Eastern revolutions, one word has been ambiguously buzzing through the media without much reflection: democracy. Those who have democracy supposedly love it, praise it, and encourage everyone else to try it, like it’s a specialty dish from a restaurant. But what exactly constitutes democracy? Most will claim it is individual freedom protected by law and distributed through rights; that it is the most effective form of government because power is distributed amongst the masses; that it is a way of guaranteeing political freedom. More importantly though, in light of these recent revolutions, is the difficult transition that accompanies the new foundation of a democracy. The countries that have recently succeeded in removing corruption are now beginning slow reformations towards the promised and idolized ideology. Tunisia and Egypt have only begun the process; revolution is, after all, just the first step in a long journey. The real question is, what will result from the newly found freedoms?

Westernized politics, including social freedoms, are being ushered into the Middle East. Elements of our underlying economic structures are bound to follow. In hopes of achieving wealth and prosperity, these reformations will likely open markets by removing previous restrictions, instituting some form of a capitalist induced system. Freedom will be used to support greater global exchange and foster more progress. Consider Egypt, where a good portion of the population lives on $2 a day. Will they not aspire to develop their politics and economy in the shadow of the successful, like Canada and The United States? It should be no surprise that the reformations necessary to support a shift from corruption to full-blown democracy are no easy tasks. Therefore, it is logical to assume these transitions will rely on the precedence and support of those who have made the shift centuries ago. Democracy will introduce the oppressed to a new world of freedom and opportunity, while economic transitions are likely to follow.

It is usually held true that two democratic states will never engage in warfare. Any country with a McDonald’s is an ally to a country with a Subway. Moreover, liberated countries will be free to expand their commercial industries, increasing the amount of trade, enabling a wider access to services and

offering more resources for cheaper production. All of this can help nurture economic growth and support societal infrastructure expansions. Just how beneficial this form of economic transition can be, however, remains questionable. Consider the capitalist system, in which the rich usually get richer, and the poor usually get poorer.

Take this reflection closer to home. Look at how our economy and politics distribute wealth so unequally. The middle class is vanishing. CEO’s are climbing the corporate ladder to unprecedented heights of power and wealth. People work for a living, pay for a place to exist, follow enforced laws with little question, and equate what precious little time they have with monetary value. Not to mention our fetishized addictions with ever-updated forms of technology. This is life, as we know it, in the twenty-

first century. Sure we may have democracy and political freedom, but we still support a flawed economy. This lifestyle—this forced competition of urban survival—has only

existed for a century, arguably two. There are other ways to organize ourselves in which we could work to reinforce social harmony instead of inequality.

In this day though, it is challenging to even comprehend an alternative to our current standard of living. It is hard to imagine a world that would not revolve around the production of commodities for consumption and profit. Capitalism is ingrained in our consumer-culture. So, how will these Middle Eastern countries benefit if they fall into the ignorant trap of consumerism that we have? Can we not reform the economic conditions that undermine human equality and work to create a system that honours human empathy? Humans share the frailty of life. We feel the suffering of our comrades. We are not hardwired for violence and aggression, but rather for sympathy and compassion. Otherwise, why else would the world be so quick to respond to the humanitarian crisis caused by the revolutions? Why else would the world be watching the news to cheer on our fellow beings as they fight for the freedoms we have enjoyed since birth? It is possible to reorganize how we live, to develop our societies while encouraging peace without forced competition. It is just unfortunate that we have all been sucked into this system, without even considering the possibility of an alternative.

“How will these Middle Eastern countries benefit if they fall into the ignorant trap of consumerism that we have?”

WHY PROPAGANDA INVALIDATES ISRAELI

APARTHEID WEEK

RHETORIC TRUMPS

REASON AT UWO

written by Aaron Zaltzman // edited by Gillian Cummings // illustrated by Jordan Coop

Since the beginning of March, and continuing on and off for weeks, our school, and numerous other campuses around the world, have born witness to an event entitled Israeli Apartheid Week (IAW). This annual event was brought to Western by the Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights club. Its purpose was to garner support for the idea that Israel is an apartheid state, on par with pre–1993 South Africa. IAW, aside from being offensive to Jewish and Israeli students, is also something that needs to be addressed.

In the broader perspective, an event like IAW has no place on our campus; the conflict in the Middle East is so complex, so long, and so multifaceted that it is impossible to even begin to understand without first learning everything about it. I do not want this to come off as a political argument; to do that would require an educational discord of nearly a hundred years of intertwining histories. On principle I fully support robust political dialogue and I think that many people do not know as much about the Israeli-Palestinian situation as they should.

The problem with Israeli Apartheid Week is that it is not a robust political dialogue. It does not lend itself to open discussion, is not meant to encourage bilateral understanding and, despite what some supporters claim, it is not meant to educate. It is, in reality, a very well crafted smear campaign.

In the words of the organizers themselves, “the aim of IAW is to educate people about the nature of Israel as an apartheid system and to build Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaigns as part of a growing global BDS movement.”

The mission statement itself should tell you all you need to know about the problem with IAW. Its raison d’etre is to create resentment for the State of Israel, and to undermine support for it. That’s not education; it’s propaganda.

And it’s shrewd propaganda, too. The event is purposefully called Israeli Apartheid Week, not

[mitZine v10.i5] 19

Palestinian Awareness Week. The word “apartheid” conjures up images of white South Africans cruelly persecuting the black population. From the moment you hear that word, it is meant to define your entire perspective. It is meant to make you see Israel as the racist aggressor and the Palestinians as the innocent victims.

This is part of the larger reason of why the rhetoric of IAW is so effective. The organizers employ images of dead bodies, of helicopters advancing on children; they refer to statistics of dead civilians and tell stories of children being killed in fighting. They do this because they know the most effective way to short-circuit your critical thinking is to attach the information to a powerful emotion. When you see a picture of a dead child and someone tells you she died during Gaza’s fighting, you don’t wonder what the reason is for the military engagement that this child died in; your thoughts immediately jump to the injustice of a state murdering children.

Half-truths are the main tool of IAW. Almost every individual fact the organizers quote is true, but no context is given for them. Plenty of time is spent talking about the West Bank separation fence but no words are given toward explaining that the fence was built to keep out the suicide bombers that murdered hundreds of civilians, including Israeli Arabs, nor to the indisputable fact that it succeeded in its purpose.

The half-truths are even more damaging than lies; you can disprove a lie, but a half-truth requires explanation and information. It’s a lot easier to quote the countless UN resolutions against Israel than it is to explain that the Arab world has tremendous influence in the voting process. It’s a lot easier to make someone feel sympathy for a child who was shot dead by Israeli soldiers than it is to explain to them that the child was firing an AK-47 at the time.

The organizers of IAW would have you believe the conflict is simple. The truth is that no aspect

of this conflict even comes close to simplicity. Every problem is a result of a chain of events that stretches back to decisions made a hundred years ago by people who had absolutely no stake in the situation.

Representing the conflict as good vs. evil, or as anything but complex, does nothing to further the cause of peace. It does not build a partnership between people seeking a common end; all it succeeds in doing is polarizing the situation and further dividing the two sides.

During Israeli Apartheid Week, you will only hear the organizers espouse the evils of the country. You will only hear how the Palestinians are the innocent victims of Israeli aggression. Why? How does it further the cause of peace to portray the conflict as a black and white issue, if it is so clearly a complex problem?It is because the organizers don’t want you to see both sides. It is because they aren’t advocates for peace. In holding IAW, they are supporting an event that, at its very core, does not accept Israel’s right to exist. Their sole purpose is to demonize Israel and to undermine its international support. In the words of Stephen Lupker, a Western Psychology Professor, “I’m not convinced that very many of them are doing this for any reason other than they would like to see the end of Israel. I don’t believe that there are too many people in this group who are doing this on the idea that it’s going to make for a two-state solution. Most of them, I would say, probably would like to see the end of Israel.”

Israel is not perfect; it has its problems and has made mistakes, like every country has. All I am trying to convince you of is that your opinion should not be based on what you hear during an event like Israeli Apartheid Week, which is motivated by hatred. A true understanding of the situation cannot be attained by the emotional half-truths of those with hate-fuelled political agendas; it demands nothing less than a complete knowledge of the history behind the country.

All that IAW accomplishes is providing misinformation, creating a deeper divide between those who seek peace, and to serve the ends of those who call for the destruction of the Jewish Homeland. If a true peace is ever going to be achieved, it will do so only when we have risen above the hatred that fuels movements such as Israeli Apartheid Week.

If we fall short of that, we ensure only more destruction.Sources:“Current Knesset Members.” The Knesset Website. Government of Israel, 2011. Web. 2011. <http://www.knesset.gov.il/mk/eng/mkindex_current_eng.asp?view=0>.Hunter, Catherine. “Http://www.child-soldiers.org/childsoldiers/CSC_AG_Forum_case_study_June_2006_Occ_Pal_Territories_Hamas.pdf.” Child-soldiers.org. Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, 7 July 2006. Web. <http://www.child-soldiers.org/childsoldiers/CSC_AG_Forum_case_study_June_2006_Occ_Pal_Territories_Hamas.pdf>.“Text of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Speech.” Nytimes.com. The New York Times, 30 Oct. 2005. Web. <http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/30/weekinreview/30iran.html?_r=1&ex=1161230400&en=26f07fc5b7543417&ei=5070>.Chatterley, Catherine. “A History of Israeli Apartheid Week.” Nationalpost.com. The National Post-Full Comment, 3 Mar. 2011. Web. <http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/03/03/catherine-chatterley-a-history-of-israeli-apartheid-week/>.

“It is not a robust political dialogue and it is not meant to educate. It is, in reality, a very well crafted smear campaign.”

In December of 2009, fourth year FIMS student Liz Trinnear landed her dream gig as a VJ and the newest face of MuchMusic. After finishing her exams for that year, Liz started working for MuchMusic a mere two days later and described the whole experience as “extremely surreal, but very exciting. The first few months of work were very overwhelming.”

Liz certainly jumped feet first into the industry. Between learning scripts, talking points, hand counts, which cameras to look at and experiencing first hand how long hair and make-up took, she was meeting hundreds of people, being live on-air, doing autograph signings, and trying to forget about nerves. It was a lot to process at once. A little over a year later, Liz has flourished and established her personality at MuchMusic. Looking back at the beginning of it all she reflects, “it was intense, but I wouldn’t have had it any other way.”

From setting herself apart from 4,000 other hopefuls in the beginning to adapting to her new role, taking part in extra curricular activities and balancing internships at Western helped a lot. Doing things outside of academics is not just about experience, but also demonstrates your own unique interests and personality. Liz says, “I did a few internships prior to MuchMusic and they weren’t glamorous. Working for free as a student is hard, but in the end it all pays off.”

Along with joining the Western Snowboarding Club, Liz was also involved with CHRW, became a first year rep on MIT’s Student Council, then Street Team Coordinator, and in her final year, VP of Events. “FIMS rules! It’s such a close-knit family of students and the faculty is one of the most accommodating and supportive I’ve ever seen. FIMS is #winning.”

So what was the transition from university life to the working world like?

“Starting to work in the ‘real world,’ as our parents would say, is like starting school all over again: new people, new material to learn, new environment, and a new lifestyle to get used to.” Ever the social butterfly, Liz quickly fit in to her new surroundings. “The team at MuchMusic is very similar to the FIMS faculty: very supportive.”

“Self-promotion never hurts when it is done right, so by showing people you are a hard worker and willing to go the extra mile, they will remember you.” The most important, if cliché, thing to remember is to just be yourself. That’s what the panel of judges found so magnetic about this quirky blonde. As her MuchMusic bio attests, “on screen and off screen, what you see is what you get. [Liz] is just like everyone else... she just has an incredible job.”written by Alex McCann edited by May Chow

ALUMNI SPOTLIGHT: LIZ TRINNEAR

check out mitzine.wordpress.comfor more information on applying for the following positions:

Managing Editor // Editorial Team (A&E, Student Life, World) // Web Editor // Graphics Editor

Email applications to mitzineVOL11@gmail.com by April 8th @ 4pm.

“You never need an argument against the use of violence,

you need an argument for it.” ~ Noam Chomsky

mitZine Volume 11 ApplicationsThe search for a new team of creative boundary-busters.