Rape has no punchline Blog no evil
Features Page 25
Oh Canada!
pages 14-15
The Beaver
David Held resigns from the LSE Stephanie Gale
David Held, Graham Wallas Professor of Political Science at the LSE and co-director of LSE Global Governance, stepped down this week to take up a position at Durham University. There are alleged links between Held and Saif al-Islam Gaddafi. This announcement came shortly after Lord Woolf announced that his enquiry into the School’s relationship with Libya has been completed. An article printed by the Guardian states that Held’s departure is regarded internally as the latest consequence of the LSE’s acceptance of the Gaddafi International Charity and Development Foundation’s (GICDF) donation. The article implies that the expected results of the Woolf Inquiry will criticise the “close consultations” between LSE scholars and the Gaddafi regime. It has been alleged that Held had
significant ties with the Gaddafi family. In June 2009, he was appointed to the board of the GICDF, though he subsequently resigned upon being advised to do so by the LSE Council. Several national media outlets have described Held as Saif al-Islam Gaddafi’s academic adviser, though Held said, “This is simply untrue. He was supervised in another department.” Despite this, Held is often described as Saif al-Islam’s “informal academic adviser.” When Saif al-Islam delivered a Ralph Miliband Memorial last May, Held introduced him as “someone who looks to democracy, civil society and deep liberal values as the core of his inspiration.” On 20th February 2011, Saif al-Islam gave an internationally broadcasted speech on Libyan state television declaring that the protesters in Tripoli would be “eradicated” if they continued. Having watched the speech, Held described Saif al-Islam as “a young »6
Social Page 34
08.11.2011 Newspaper of the LSE Students’ Union thebeaveronline.co.uk facebook.com/beaveronline
LSE establishes PhD exchange programme with UCT »Page 6
Judith Rees, Interim Director of the LSE, and Max Price, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cape DavidTown Heldsign an agreement for PhD exchanges between the universities. | Photo: Nigel Stead Photo: Nigel Stead
fail rate at Annual Fund going strong ST108 despite government cuts 22.2 per cent Sydney Saubestre
The Annual Fund continues to grow, despite the end of the government’s Matched Funding Scheme and some of the most drastic budget cuts that Higher Education has ever seen. Through the scheme, every £3 of donations made to Higher Education institutions would be matched by £1 of government funds. Despite this, the Annual Fund raised £902,196 from 3,273 donors, a fifteen per cent increase from the previous year. The Annual Fund provides invaluable support for students who need extra funding to attend the LSE.
The fund receives project proposals and decides whom to allocate the funds to using a balanced set of criteria it believes will benefit LSE students and staff both now and in the future. Areas supported by the Annual Fund are meant to holistically enhance the School. For example, the new Students’ Center was allocated £100,000 and the LSE Students’ Union Hardship Fund received £80, 000. Smaller projects included buying beanbags for the Library and supporting India Week 2011. Heather Campbell, Head of the Annual Fund, encourages current students to apply before the deadline this Wednesday. “The Annual Fund seeks to fund projects that attract the best
Apology The Beaver would like to formally apologise for the “Houghton Street Headache” article in the 1st November issue of the Beaver. The article made light of a number of issues that are very serious, namely violence against women, and we sincerely regret any negative ramifications that this had.
We take full responsibility for printing the article and would like to apologise to all of those on campus who were offended by the content. We have taken steps to rectify our mistake, and hope that we can use this to educate ourselves and others who didn’t realise the impact of their words.
Course EC220, “Introduction to Econometrics,” has a 19 per cent fail rate, with 57 out of 300 students failing the module in total. Meanwhile, 22.2 per cent of students fail ST108, “Probability and Statistics for the Social Sciences,” and 16.7 per cent fail MA107, “Quantitative Methods.” Lily Li, a current Mathematics and Economics student, said that she was surprised with how advanced the level of Maths was in some of her courses. “Maths is far more advanced than what we did at A-Level,” she said, “even though I did further maths, it’s still difficult for me”. In terms of results at department level, Mathematics and Economics hold the record for the highest percentage of degrees failed, with 11.5 per cent of students fail»3 ing Mathematics and
and brightest students regardless of their financial situation, enhance the student experience, promote academic excellence, engage with the wider world and create sustainable facilities and a world class campus,” she said, adding, “we would very much encourage any students seeking funding for their projects or societies to apply for funding from the LSE Annual Fund.” Over the last few years, the LSE has received considerable media attention regarding its donors. Last year, Howard Davies resigned after the School came under criticism for accepting a donation from the Gaddafi International Foundation for Charity Associations. The School has also come under »3
Alice Dawson
LSE Governor granted bail
LSE professors brief Politics societies debate White Paper House of Lords
»5
Victor Dahdaleh, an LSE Governor, honorary fellow and donor of over £1 million to the School, was granted bail last week, after being charged with corruption, conspiracy to corrupt and acquiring and transferring criminal property on the 24th October. He is alleged to have been involved in a £700 million bribery and money laundering scheme overcharging Aluminium Bahrain, (Alba) by USD$65 million a year from 1993 to 2007
Some classes are more difficult than others; this may seem evident, but the disparity in failure rates based on course enrolment is sizable. Statistics have revealed the modules most frequently failed by students at the School are Economics and Mathematics. Grade distributions for undergraduate courses at module level from the 2010-2011 academic year show that students are more likely to fail based on which course they are enrolled in. Many Economics, Mathematics and Statistics courses have much higher failure rates than the average LSE course.
»5
Members of the Labour, Conservative, Green, Liberal Democrat, and Socialist Workers’ Societies debated the implications of the government’s White Paper at an LSE Students’ Union event held last Wednesday. The debate was intended to raise awareness about the reforms proposed by the White Paper ahead of the 9th November National Demo. The event was organised by the politics societies in conjunction with the Debate Society and the Students’ Union.
»6
LSE Professors Deborah James and Alice Forbess have briefed the House of Lords on legal aid on the 1st November. James and Forbess’ paper “Rights, Welfare and Law. Legal Aid Advocacy in Austerity Britain argues that legal aid cover should not be cut before the government’s new Universal Credit is fully implemented. Their paper presents several case studies and makes a series of recommendations to the government.
2
News
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
Editorial Board Executive Editor Nicola Alexander editor@thebeaveronline.co.uk Managing Editor Duncan McKenna managing@thebeaveronline.co.uk News Editors Bethany Clarke Sydney Saubestre Heather Wang news@thebeaveronline.co.uk
Collective Presca Ahn; Raidev Akoi; Ahmed Alani; Nicola Alexander; Hasib Baber; Fadhil Bakeer-Markar; Vishal Banerjee; Ramsey Ben-Achour; Alex Blance; Liam Brown; James Bull; Georgina Butler; Benjamin Butterworth; Adam Burk; Bobby Cee; Simon Chaudhuri; Gurdeep Chhina; Bethany Clarke; Oliver Courtney; Tomas Da-Costa; Aisha Doherty; Eden Dwek; Kareem Elsawi; Allie Fonarev; Katy Galbraith; Yan Giet; Justin Gest; Ira Goldstein; Aula Hariri; Yisum Heneghon; Charlie Hodgson; Tahiya Islam; Harriet Jackson; Judith Jacob; Felipe Jacome; Alex Jones; Megan Jones; Naeem Kapadia; Sam Tempest Keeping; Pooja Kesavan; Vivek Kotecha; Andreas Kuersten; Ashok Kumar; Daniel Lahey; Dominic Lam; Elizabeth Lowell; Jamie Mason; Duncan McKenna; Nitya Menon; Anna Mikeda; Rimmel Mohydin; Vincent Mok; Maaike Mossel; Aditi Nangia; Bianca Nardi; Chu Ting Ng; Brett Noble; KerryRose O’Donnell; Kyle Packer; Aameer Patel; Anup Patel; Rajan Patel; Sachin Patel; John Peart; Alex Peters-Day; Chloe Pieters; Shrina Poojara; Danielle Priestley; Pern-Yi Quah; Rahim Rahemtulla; Annika Ranga; Anjali Raval; Ricky Ren; Aimee Riese; Chris Rogers; Leonora Rumsey; Conor Rushby; Ahman Sahni; Thienthai Sangkhaphanthanon; Amrita Saraogi; Lukas Slothuus; Luke Smolinski; Katerina Soukeras; Andre Tartar; Kerry Thompson; Jack Tindale; Vladimir Unkovski-Korica; Aliabbas Virani; Heather Wang; Sam Williams; Matthew Willis; Chris Wilkins; Oliver Wiseman; Natalie Wong; Vincent Wong; Daniel Yates; Alexander Young.
The Beaver is printed on 100% recycled paper. In 2006, recycled paper made up 79% of UK newspaper raw materials. Please recycle your copy.
Comment Editor Rimmel Mohydin comment@thebeaveronline.co.uk Features Editor Alex Haigh Gurdeep Chhina features@thebeaveronline.co.uk Design Editor Ahmed Alani design@thebeaveronline.co.uk Social Editor Shrina Poojara social@thebeaveronline.co.uk Sport Editors Maz Fletcher Maxim Owen sports@thebeaveronline.co.uk PartB Editors Kerry-Rose O’Donnell Aameer Patel partb@thebeaveronline.co.uk
The Beaver
Photo Editor Aisha Doherty photo@thebeaveronline.co.uk
Established in 1949 Issue No. 756
Web Editor Liam Brown web@thebeaveronline.co.uk General Manager Anoli Mehta info@thebeaveronline.co.uk Collective Chair Chris Rogers With thanks to our Copy Editors Kanika Singh Ehae Longe Lisa Strygina
Union Bashō Exceptional Circumstances One-off? So...UGM was interesting. Who said the Beaver does nothing? Bashō is the Beaver’s evasive haiku poet. He’s meant to go to the Union General Meeting so you don’t have to. Unsurprisingly, he wasn’t at most of the
Telephone: 0207 955 6705 Email: editor@thebeaveronline.co.uk
T
Make your march
his week will see the National Students’ Demo against the governments Higher Education “White Paper.” On 9th November, students from across the UK will gather in London to express their discontent and anguish at the proposals in the government’s paper, which advocates the marketisation of the higher education system in Britain. Standing alongside them will be students from the LSE. And we shall be supporting them. The White Paper, entitled “Students at the Heart of the System,” proposes that there be a cap on the total number of students allowed into universities each year and that universities be able to compete for top students. We believe this element of the paper introduces competition into the higher educational system, changing the philosophical demeanour of the section, away from education as a right and towards education as something to be fought for. We don’t believe that
education is conditional and we don’t believe that people should be squeezed out of what should be their meritocratic right to education by altering the stance of universities to one which emphasises monetary and competitive elements. The government’s White Paper will result in higher education being the reserve of the rich. This is not just. Higher education is not only a right, it is also now a necessary stop on the road to a successful career. If we do not take a stand our society will be the worse off for it. The White Paper, if unchanged, will result in a burgeoning economic and class gap and levels of student debt equivalent to the US where students are effectively punished for seeking education. Apathy is not an option. Many current students may feel there is no need for them to join the march as the cuts will not directly affect them. We would like to dispute that viewpoint and implore all students to join our Students’ Union this Wednesday. From
next year, all new UK students will pay £8,500 to attend our institution and up to £9,000 for other universities. Students, particularly at the LSE, recognise the effect of higher prices of education. We will be robbed of the benefits of an educated population. We may miss the next Stelios; our siblings and our friends may miss out on a top career because the obstacles to their success are too high. We understand that our country needs to cut public spending but we will not accept that education is an area where this can be allowed to happen. We must, as an entire student body, support the march. The battlefield is our campus and the time is now.
The Collective is The Beaver’s governing body. You must have contributed three pieces of work, or contributed to the production of three issues of the paper (editorially or administratively), to qualify for membership. If you believe you are a Collective member but your name is not on the list above, please email
collective@thebeaveronline.co.uk The Beaver would like to thank the LSE students who contributed to this issue. The Beaver is published by the LSE Students’ Union, East Building, Houghton Street, WC2A 2AE. Printed at Mortons Printing. The Beaver uses pictures from flickr.com which have been issued under a Creative Commons license.
Correction The Beaver would like to apologise for a mistake made in last week’s paper. The apology is in relation to an article entitled “War crimes judge on internaitonal law,” which appeared in the 1st November 2011 issue. A photo that accompanied the article was inaccurately labelled as a photo of Judge Patrick Robinson. We would like to apologise to Judge Robsinson for this error. The Beaver assumes full responsibility for this error, and would also like to apologise to our readers for any confusion caused by the article.
Beaver announcement As an Editorial Board, we would like to clarify the Beaver’s position as regards anonymity in the newspaper. As a general rule, we will not publish anonymous articles, but we reserve the right, as an Editorial Board, to permit anonymity in certain exceptional circumstances. These situations may include scenarios where there is a personal story or distinctly sensitive issue at hand, or where we, as an Editorial Board, feel that there may be individual repercussions for the person involved. The Beaver is now availalbe to read online in .pdf format at:
WWW.THEBEAVERONLINE.CO.UK
The Beaver | 08.11.2011
»
continued from page 1
and 10 per cent failing Economics. On the other end of the spectrum, students are least likely to fail Anthropology and Geography and Environment, with failure rates of 0.2 and 0.3 per cent respectively, at department level. Despite the high failure rates on certain courses, Danny O’Connor, Press and Communications Officer, wishes to ensure students that LSE is not unforgiving. “In virtually all cases the failures are redeemed when the students re-sit the exams” he said. LSE has a re-sit procedure in place for students who fail one or more of their courses. According to the School’s website, ‘students are automatically re-entered on any deferred, discounted or failed courses, including those which are not assessed by written examination, at a cost of £60 per unit and £35 per half unit. Students who fail more than one module, thus rendering them unable to progress to the next year of study, can return as unregistered students to complete re-sit examinations with full access to the library and IT facilities but no access to tuition. However, the stipulations to receiving a degree are “undergraduates are eligible for the award of a degree if they have no more than three unredeemed fails across all 12 papers”. Students may feel reassured by O’Connor’s remark that “over the last five years a great deal of work has gone into driving down the failure rates for some of the largest courses”. LSE’s achievements in this field have been recognised by a report commissioned by the Electric Paper, called ‘Effective Course Evaluation The Future for Quality and Standards in Higher Education’. The School was identified as having made good progress in encouraging high student response rates to course feedback questionnaires as well as ensuring that students’ opinions are delivered to staff in a timely and accurate manner. Despite this, some students have chosen to swap failed courses in favour of alternative modules in order to avoid either re-sits or have fail marks included on their degree transcripts. To some, this means that the final degree subject is changed midway through their undergraduate studies; eg. a BSc of Government and Economics to a BSc of Government. One such student, who asked to remain anonymous, describes their reason for dropping the Economics part of their Government and Economics course, switching to just Government and thus forced to repeat their second year. “I think a lot of students found the micro-economics exam very hard. I have consistently found that I have done far worse on economics modules -I don’t think that Government is easier than Economics but I do feel like the exams are much more erratic and harder to prepare for. It just makes sense for me to wipe these bad grade off my transcript because it looks really bad to employers.” Other students don’t want to prolong their studies and decide to continue with class they find difficult, no matter how much they struggle and how poorly they do. A 3rd year Government and Economics students who failed their Microeconomics course decided to continue with both majors: “ I don’t want to extend my university experience by another year. I just know that I have to try extra hard at Economics and spend much more time on these modules.” The high drop-out rates from certain courses makes it apparent that some exams are considerably more difficult to pass than others. The same student mentioned that “many are choosing to take the minimum number of economics options this year.”
»
3
News
continued from page 1
criticism for accepting money from Sheikh Zhayed in exchange for naming a theatre after him in the New Academic Building. “Impact,” a newsletter for supporter’s of the LSE, annually prints a list of the School’s top donors. The next installment is due out in January. These “major donors” contribute at least £5,000, and are especially honored. According to the Press Office, most contributions in this category are donated for a specific project or purpose, such as an endowed chair or research position, and usually come with stipulation from the donors as to what they would like to see the money
put towards. According to the most recent list, published in January 2011, only three organisations donated more than £1 million to the School last year; Abraaj Capital Limited, The Aman Trust and the Emirates Foundation- down from the five donations of that size from the previous year. The Emirates Foundation has agreed to provide LSE with several “substantial grants in support of the LSE’s upcoming Centre for Middle Eastern Studies, as well as to enhance collaboration between British and Emirati universities.” The Emirates Foundation has made three donations to the School of over £1,000,000. Several organisations and news articles have called for greater transparency in the donations made to the LSE. The Centre for Social Cohesion
released a report in 2009 showing how large UK universities, including as Oxford, Cambridge, SOAS and Edinburgh, lacked transparency in identifying their benefactors. Often, there is little notice as to where benefactors get their money from and which firms they are investing them, and according to the report, “universities need to be wary of accepting donations only from those who do not contradict their own charter.” According to a spokesperson for the School, donations made to the LSE are currently reviewed using guidelines drawn up in 2009. “Following the fall-out from the donation from the Gaddafi Foundation” these guidelines are “under review and will incorporate any recommendations that may be made by Lord Woolf when he reports.”
News in brief
BIG PAY RISES, SMALL PAY CUTS FOR EXECUTIVES
Executives in major corporations receive proportionally larger increases in salaries to reward their successes, than they get cut from their salaries to punish bad performance according to research from the Centre for Economic Performance at the LSE. The research also shows that when the firm’s economic performance improves, pay rise for chief executives is much more than the rest of the workforce. The LSE researchers concluded that it is the company’s responsibility to explain to the shareholders and the public that executives’ pay is closely linked to the Company’s performance.
IMMIGRANTS ECONOMICALLY BENEFICIAL TO UK
According to recent research, regularising undocumented immigrants already residing and working in the United Kingdom would be economically beneficial. Doing so would bring in more than £3 billion pounds to the UK’s economic revenue. Antiimmigration activists in the UK claim that migrants are a drain on national resources and will lead to rapid overpopulation, but studies show that rising immigration rates counteract the UK’s falling birthrate and that taxes paid by migrant workers far outweigh the costs to the government.
GERGES DISCUSSES UPCOMING BOOK
Fawaz Gerges, LSE Professor of Middle East Politics and International Relations, was interviewed by WBEZ, a Chicago-based public radio station, to discuss his upcoming book “The Rise and Fall of Al-Qaeda.” The book focuses Al-Qaeda’s degeneration into a feuding factions that have effectively neutralized themselves and pose little threat to the world. Through a brisk history of Al-Qaeda, Gerges argues that the Western world has become ensnared in a “terrorism narrative” that overstates the threat and perpetuates the unfounded belief that Americans are in danger of another attack by Al-Qaeda.
LSE RESEARCH HELPS TO CLOSE THE PENSION GAP Donations by world region Information from the Annual Fund Report
Beaver Editor questioned at UGM Bethany Clarke
Attendance at last week’s Union General Meeting (UGM) was higher than usual as students arrived to question Nicola Alexander, the Executive Editor of the Beaver, over the content of the “Houghton St. Headaches” Agony Uncle article published in last week’s issue of the paper. The article, which appeared in the Social section, was described as “abhorrent” and “deeply offensive, and totally sexist and misogynistic” by attendants at the UGM. Alexander admitted that the article was “distasteful at best” and that “in retrospect it is absolutely wrong.” She said that the Beaver is “very sorry about what happened. I’m very, very sorry it went in the paper.” In a question addressed to Alexander, one audience member said that he has to “question her judgment” in light of her decision to print the piece. Alexander answered, the “judgment was made under a very pressurised situation,” but that ultimately “it is our mistake for printing it.”
The article has been the source of strong criticism by a vocal group of students at the School. In an open letter published on Facebook, the Students’ Union Feminist’s Society described the article’s content as “sexist and offensive” and called for the Executive Editor and the Social Editor to “reconsider” their positions at the paper, “having failed to adhere to basic editorial standards.” On Friday morning, an online petition was created, enabling students to become signatories of the Women’s Society’s letter. When asked why she would not step down at the UGM, Alexander said, “I have an obligation not only to the student body, but also to the Editorial Board, and at this point I don’t think it is constructive for me to step down.” Alexander met with the Students’ Union’s Women’s Officer on Wednesday to discuss the article and the steps that the Beaver will be taking to redress the situation. At the UGM, she said that she felt they had reached a “very constructive outcome.” The paper published on 8th November will include a front-page apology, a double page spread on violence against women in the Comment section and a letter to the Editor
regarding the content of the article. The “Houghton St. Headache” feature has been permanently removed from the paper. Alexander said that the article highlighted the danger of the “casual attitude” towards sexist jokes prevalent among young people, and showed concern for “the ramifications it has had for women on campus.” Alexander said, “This will become something that we [the Beaver] are even more conscious of.” Students at the UGM also urged Alexander to release the names of the article’s authors “so we can hold them to account ourselves.” The article was published anonymously, as is often the case for Agony Aunt or Agony Uncle pieces. Alexander said that the identities of the authors are best left protected in the current situation but would be disclosed once she felt that there was an improved “environment.” Alexander suggested releasing the names to a select group within the Students’ Union, who could then talk to the Agony Uncles about the ramifications of their words. The authors of the piece will be writing a Comment article about the consequences of their column.
Pensions expert Edward Truell used LSE reasearch to pen a proposal to ease the public sector pension deficit. The public sector pension gap is at a record £1.3 trillion; Truell states that it is necessary to find a solution as the public secotr defiicit is a “black hole” that could collapse at any time. The plan would be to issue £1.3 trillion from the Treasury, to fill the pension hole in. But afterwards, there would be £1.3 trillion in assets to invest, as pension liabilities do not need to be paid out immediately.
LSE TO AWARD NOBEL PRIZE WINNER HONORARY DEGREE
The LSE is to award Professor Muhammad Yunus, the founder and former managing director of Grameen Bank and winner of the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize, an Honorary Degree of Doctor of Science at a special ceremony on Thursday 24th November. The award of an Honorary Doctorate, given to “persons who have made an outstanding contribution to the increased understanding, or appreciation of “the causes of things” and their practical application in the social sciences or related fields” is one of the most prestigious award the LSE can bestow.
GOT A SCOOP?
Got a story that you think we should be printing? Send us an e-mail: news@thebeaveronline.co.uk
4
News
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
Sulzberger on the future of print Dariya Golubkova As part of its initiative to bring together journalists and the public to discuss issues surrounding the media and its impact on society, the POLIS Media Agenda Talks series welcomed Arthur Sulzberger Jr., current publisher of the New York Times and chairman of the New York Times Company. Mr. Sulzeberger addressed the future of print journalism and its current transition into the digital age at an event titled “The Digital Transformation of the New York Times,” which was well attended by students, faculty and guests, including John F. Burns, current London Bureau Chief of the New York Times. Quality in the world of journalism carries many meanings. To Sulzberger, quality is rooted in reporting accurately and honestly, while being able to engage communities in a variety of ways, many of which were not possible ten years ago but have since become the norm. At the beginning of his talk, Sulzberger referenced a comprehensive report compiled by the research
group Netprospex. Their study aimed to report the “use of social media by businesses across the United States,” and ranked the New York Times Times as the most social company based on (online) social presence. These findings put the New York Times ahead of global conglomerates such as Adobe, Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Apple. They also showcase what Sulzberger refers to as the New York Times priority of the “utilization of social media,” which in turn allows the company to find “great success building upon our readership.” The story of the reach of the New York Times within the social media atmosphere can be told both empirically and normatively. Empirically speaking, the main Facebook page of the New York Times is home to 1.7 million fans and their main Twitter account has 3.8 million followers. But that, as Sulzberger puts it, “doesn’t even begin to tell the story.” The numbers increase to 15.8 million followers on Twitter when the pages of all the New York Times’ journalists are added in as well. But perhaps the most telling empirical clue as to the influence of the New York Times within the social media field is the fact that a story from the New York
Times is tweeted every four seconds. Normatively, the reach of the New York Times is best exhibited by journalists like Nicolas Kristof, Chris Chivers and Lydia Polgreen. Kristof’s reporting from some of the world’s most war-torn locations has created real-time communities, while Chivers’ use of Tumblr and Twitter to “draw back the veil on his reporting, posting stories and snippets before they appear in print“ allows for real-time updates and journalist-reader interaction. Polgreen’s work on India during her time as a New Delhi correspondent is now currently being expanded into a blog element under the title “India Inc.” The commitment of the New York Times is influenced first and foremost by their audience: “We have an incredibly enlightened, sophisticated and intelligent group of users who are highly engaged with our products. Our efforts with social media are meant to tap into that knowledge.” It is the focus on what they, the users, can share with the New York Times and what the New York Times can share with other users that Sulzberger believes to be at the root of the company’s success with digitalising their content. The altering culture of news con-
tent and its readership has pushed for the following changes within the New York Times company—expansion of their online discussion and community features, the redesigning of their comment section and the currently under-development “trusted commenter” program, which will allow a select group of readers with a history of high-quality comments to have their responses published in opinion pages at their will. This is in addition to digital enhancements, such as videos and live photo footage, as well as the award-wining graphics and aesthetic beauty of the New York Times’ iPad application. All such efforts have led to an “increasing level of engagement in our site,” said Sulzberger, “includes more time spent, more stories read and more videos viewed.” The New York Times underwent considerable criticism when it instilled its policy of paying for unlimited content online. Regardless, it still holds its position of a top newspaper website, with about “45 million unique viewers a day,” not to mention its ongoing reputation of quality journalism. Responding to a question from the audience about the realistic longevity
of print journalism, Sulzberger made it a point to state that the carbon copy of the newspaper will be around longer than most people expect. Sulzberger ended the event with a promise to not compromise the standards of quality of writing due to financial pressures and increased news pace, and to continue utilizing media through all its platforms. “We see great value in social media; it’s critical in keeping us part of a global conversation.”
Photo: flikr user Pbelskamp
Anders gives tips on scouting “The One In A Million” Shu Hang
George Anders Photo: Annie Ren
George Anders, founding member of Bloomberg View’s Board of Editors, delivered a public lecture entitled “The Rare Find” at the Hong Kong Theatre last Wednesday. The lecture focused on how to “recognise greatness” and the pitfalls that recruiters should avoid. According to the Pulitzer Prize winner, there is a “blind spot of how we think about recruiting,” especially in jobs that involve interacting with people - which is “what LSE graduates do” - such as consulting and law, and therefore fresh approaches are needed. Instead of having an unrealistic “20-item checklist” while reviewing Curriculum Vitaes, Anders advised recruiters to narrow their focus to a few key attributes. “If we think only in terms of starting with a pool of candidates and knocking people out one by one,” he said, “we miss the people with a few remarkable skills that can take them to greatness.” Essential traits that recruits should pay attention to are efficiency, a desire to improve and most importantly resilience, he claimed. “When we write up our CVs, we want to portray them as an uninterrupted success. And yet...a lot of things can go wrong, and it’s how you deal with the things that go wrong that determines whether you will be successful or not.” He also added that employers should “compromise on experience, but don’t compromise on character,” and that “personalities that take a few moments to appreciate” should not deter someone from getting hired. Anders then showed the audience an example of a “jagged CV,” which described a college dropout with limited work experience and an appearance like (of?) “Ho Chi Minh.” It turns out that the Curriculum Vitae belonged to Steve Jobs in his twenties, which surprised members of the audience. “The first time, we all see the
flaws,” he said, “but Don Valentine, the senior partner of Sequoia Capital said, ‘I don’t care if he’s a college dropout and spends as much time traveling in India as he does building up a work history. This is someone who just might be able to achieve greatness.’” Anders went on to say that recruiters should take a chance on “talent that whispers” by broadening the search to people overlooked by competitors due to their gender, ethnicity, geographical location and non-traditional career paths. On the other hand, he warned employers against being overly obsessed with “talent that shouts” as they may not be suitable for that particular job. He also cited Tom Cruise’s fat paycheck and disappointing box office performance as an example to show that “perfect” candidates are often overpriced due to “The Winner’s Curse.” During the Question and Answer session, Anders admitted that only 10 per cent of employers are “ready” for the jagged CVs - though the number is growing rapidly - and to be safe, students should “do what you need to do in CV land” while using the interview to showcase hidden talents. He also stressed the importance of “the bottom part of the CV” and that students should try to stand out with achievements outside the classroom. Anders also criticised the practice of “searching for affinities” during interviews. He said that while useful in cocktail parties, this practice is not important in assessing a candidate’s potential. Jackson Partridge, a first-year Economic History student, found the public lecture “very helpful” and said that it provided useful information for prospective employees like himself. However, he was still unsure if he should use a “jagged CV” to apply for jobs.
News
The Beaver | 08.11.2011
5
Debate kicks of Demo preparations Naomi Russell
Representatives from the spectrum of political societies at the LSE met last Wednesday to debate the implications of the coalition Government’s
White Paper on education prior to the National Demonstration on 9th November. The event was organised by the Politics and Debate Societies in conjunction with the LSE Students’ Union and was intended to raise awareness of the proposed changes to the Higher Education system. The debate was chaired by Azeem
O’Leary observes parallels between Iraq and Sudan Abir Qazilbash
Professor Brendan O’Leary delivered a talk entitled “Why do some multiethnic states break down, whilst others stay together?” to a full audience in the New Theatre, East Building, last Monday. O’Leary compared how federalism has maintained state integrity in Iraq, while there has been a secessionist movement by consent in South Sudan. O’Leary is the Lauder Chair in Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania and a former professor in the Department of Government at the LSE. His wide-ranging experience in the field of ethnic conflict studies includes working as an UN Senior advisor, working in Iraq as a constitutional adviser to the Kurdistan regional government and in Sudan with the Chatham House Institution to promote dialogue between the conflicting northern and southern regions. Through his experience, O’Leary noticed numerous similarities between Iraqi and Sudanese ethnic conflict and hence found it surprising that the question of the lecture addressing these two particular countries has rarely been asked. In order to explain why Kurds in Iraq weren’t as ardently secessionist as South Sudanese, O’Leary gave a humorous visual illustration. He then warned that “dialogue, power-sharing and negotiation...make you fat.” In essence, power-sharing also has its costs. From his experience, O’Leary observed “six remarkable parallels” between both states. First, both were apogees of the British Empire in the 1920s and were created out of preceding Ottoman legacies. Moreover, both countries are illustrations of the British merging of three separate regional unities - Mosul, Basra, and Baghdad in the case of Iraq and North Sudan, South Sudan and Darfur in the case of Sudan. In terms of regional similarities, both countries mark the orthern and southern boundaries of the Arab world, thus giving way to clear distinctions of ethnicity and culture. Until 2005, both countries had a “Sunni-dominated elite” dominating cabinet, military and public enterprises. Less than five per cent of the Sudanese population, originating from three northern tribes, dominated the government and the private sector as an oligarchy. Winston Churchill famously said: “The degree may vary with time and place but the political supremacy of the army always leads to...the ruin of commerce ...due to overbearing pride and sensual indulgence,” a quotation that O’Leary linked to his fundamental question. Returning to the fundamental question: why did Kurdish leadership go against their public’s majority
consensus in favour of secession and independence, and instead opt for a federal state? O’Leary believes that Kurds have no constitutional obstacle to holding a referendum if they wanted to do so. He explained that their government were cautious not to repeat previous attempts at secession, which resulted in “impoverishment and no prospects of exporting their oil.” Conversely, working inside Iraq could build “full domestic independence.” He rejected the proposed reason that attributed the common factor of Islam bridging conflict between Kurds and Iraqis for a lack of Kurd succession as a sufficient explanation. He further disputed the view held by some academics such as Paul Collier at Oxford that regions with lootable natural resources were inevitably destined for conflict, noting that rebellions were historically underway well before any significant knowledge of each country’s “petrol riches” was discovered. He also disagreed with the view that the strength of the armies in the conflict-stricken region affects likelihood of secession. Conversely, one answer he saw as viable was that the the Kurds had their autonomy “generally respected.” The key difference that prevented secession in Iraq was that it had largely “fair and free elections.” There is also the geopolitical reason that the United States was actively opposed to the secession of Kurdistan but more neutral in the Sudanese conflict. O’Leary explained this further in the Question and Answer session, responding to a question about the role of the international community by saying that the U.S wanted a centralised Iraq in 2004 and this was not to “serve a republican, anti-federal agenda.” In fact, the core U.S interest was to strengthen a Baghdad regime to balance against the perceived threat of Iran. The ensuing Question and Answer session was very lively, with some audience members personally attached to the issue. Professor Daniel Miller from the Government Department felt the focus of the talk was too centred on a structural explanation going back to the past and the contrast between structural and instrumental decision making. O’Leary maintained that it is necessary to combine short and longterm analyses. A question about the future of African diplomacy was raised: “Is there no hope for Sudan with the South gone?” To respond, O’Leary highlighted some optimism with the South agreeing to give the North reasonable access to tools, but at the cost of accepting that the disputed territory “belongs” to the South. The regime would not survive very long in the South if it is unable to find an alternative to the oil pipeline through North Sudan. O’Leary acknowledged that there were prospects for further antagonism within the North.
Sulemaji, President of the Debate Society. Those taking part in the debate were Maxwell Woodger-Bacon for the Conservative Party, Ben Butterworth and Jon Allsop for the Labour Party, Lee Bunce for the Green Party, Sam Barnett for the Liberal Democrats and Lois Clifton for the Socialist Workers’ Party. The views represented by the students were diverse, ranging from the Conservative Party’s defence of the proposals to the Green and the Socialist Workers’ Party’s argument that education should be free. The event was well attended, with lively and occasionally heated involvement from the audience. Some controversy emerged from a suggestion by some of the larger parties that there was less validity in the opinions represented by the smaller parties such as the Green
Party and the Socialist Workers’ Party. A key issue discussed was what the psychological effects of higher tuition fees will be on potential students from lower socio-economic backgrounds. One of the main issues that emerged was whether or not the coalition Government’s decision to raise tuition fees was an austerity measure or was ideologically motivated, something the Conservative representative failed to address directly. Wider questions about the nature and purpose of university education were raised, including whether it is a personal investment for self-improvement or for the benefit of society as a whole. Lukas Slothuus, Community and Welfare Officer, pointed out that regardless of ideology, right-wing governments such as the current government in Denmark do not charge tuition fees as
they recognise that this does not benefit them and society as a whole. Some of the debate descended into “party politics” and bickering between the candidates of the three biggest parties about the success and failures of previous policies. Several audience members commented on the futility of such activities and how reflective it was of politics as a whole. Lee Bunce, representing the Green Party, claimed: “It is clear tonight that the three main parties were met with huge hostility from the audience and the smaller parties, yet they continued to argue among themselves. No convincing defence of the White Paper has been made.” All except the Conservative representative confirmed that they will be attending the National Demonstration next Wednesday.
Students at the Big Education Debate Photo: Annie Ren
LSE Governor facing corruption charges granted bail Bethany Clarke
Victor Dahdaleh, an LSE Governor, honorary fellow and donor of over £1 million to the School, was granted bail last week after being charged with corruption, conspiracy to corrupt and acquiring and transferring criminal property on 24th October 2011. Allegedly, he was involved in a £700 million bribery and money-laundering scheme. Dahdaleh is alleged to have acted as an agent for Alcoa, the world’s largest producer of aluminum, in the overcharging of Aluminium Bahrain (Alba), an aluminium producing firm owned by the Bahraini royal family, by
USD$65 million a year from 1993 to 2007. The charges brought against Dahdaleh are the result of a two-year investigation conducted by the Serious Fraud Office in partnership with the United States Department of Justice and the Swiss authorities, following the filing of a civil suit against Dahdaleh in the United States in 2008. The Victor Pillip Dahdaleh Foundation funded a £25,000 scholarship for Palestinian students enrolled in the M.Sc. Global Politics programme at the LSE, which was co-ordinated by Global Governance. Global Governance, which received £300,000 of a pledged £1.5 million donation from Gaddafi International Charity and Development Foundation (GICDF), was permanently closed on 31st July 2011.
According to a statement made by Allen and Overy, Dahdaleh’s lawyers, “He is confident that he has done absolutely nothing wrong,” and “He will be vigorously contesting these charges at every stage, confident in clearing his good name.” Last week, a spokesperson for the LSE said, “The School is mindful that Victor Dahdaleh faces serious allegations; however, the case against him is ongoing and he has not been found guilty of any crime. Mr Dahdaleh has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty and so will remain a governor of the School while the case proceeds. The School will reconsider his position once a verdict has been reached.”
News
6
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
Harris stands firm by China and financial services
LSE students sleep out...
Vincent Wong Staff Reporter A large number of students slept rough on Houghton Street on Thursday, 3rd November to raise money for the homeless. Photo: Dina Fahmy
»
continued from page 1
man torn by a struggle between loyalty to his father and his family, and the beliefs he had come to hold for reform, democracy and the rule of law.” In June 2009, the LSE’s Global Governance program was pledged a donation of £1.5m by the GICDF to fund a “research programme on North Africa, focused on politics, economics and society.” The donation was to be paid over the course of five years, though the LSE only accepted £300,000 before breaking off its relations with Libya. The money received has been put towards a scholarship for North African students studying at the School. According to an article in the Guardian, leaked LSE documents state
that Saif al-Islam Gaddafi was allowed to lay out the “objectives and expectations” of Global Governance. In a statement, Held said, “At no time did Saif al-Islam Gaddafi or anyone from his foundation have any authority over the research we were conducting.” Global Governance was permanently closed on the 31st of July 2011. Judith Rees, Interim Director of the LSE, said, “The research conducted within LSE Global Governance has been outstanding and will now thrive anew within departmental homes.” Carried out by Lord Woolf, the former Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, the Woolf Enquiry was commissioned as an “independent, external inquiry into the School’s relationship with Libya and with Saif al-Islam Gaddafi and into related matters.” The enquiry was completed on the 17th of October 2011, though its findings will not be published until the
University of London reaches a conclusion as to the academic integrity of Saif al-Islam Gaddafi’s Ph.D. According to the LSE’s website, the results of the two investigations are expected to be published “later in the Michaelmas term.” Lord Woolf’s “report is based on the substantial amount of documentation provided to me by the School, a large number of interviews with witnesses and submissions made directly to the Inquiry.” Held will be transferring to Durham University in January, where he will take up the post of master of University College and chair of Politics and International Relations. Regarding his transfer, he said, “I certainly did not resign because of concerns about Libya, nor did I have to resign for any reason connected to Libya or the Woolf Inquiry.” He added, “Durham is an outstanding university and excellent research environment.”
members, it is very important to get some international experience, to meet other academics, and to form networks that will last them into their academic careers and research careers.” He added that the programme will enrich UCT, as it will “gain access to expertise that is otherwise not open to them.” UCT, which is largely considered to be the best university in Africa, has established similar PhD exchange programmes with eight African universities. UCT and the LSE first became official institutional partners in May 2010. At the time, UCT became the LSE’s fifth academic partner.
Professor Worthington, the LSE’s pro-director for research and external relations who signed the agreement between the two universities, said, “We are particularly pleased to be allying ourselves with what is widely considered to be Africa’s finest university.” She added: “This is a continent where so much that is crucial to the world is happening and we look forward to working with UCT to improve our understanding and to have real impact in addressing some of the continent’s major challenges.” The LSE also runs other PhD exchange programmes, including on with Peking University in Beijing.
ment and three case studies involving different kinds of vulnerability are presented in the paper. Amid of waves of protest against the coalition Government’s plan to impose a 10 per cent cut of legal aid fees, James and Forbess argue that legal aid cuts threaten the right of vulnerable people to access legal advice for the welfare. The academics put forward that “legal service providers offset systemic failure and make possible access to justice in several key ways.” For example, “Legal aid advisers negotiate directly on behalf of vulnerable clients whose cases have merit but who are unable competently to represent themselves,” and “such advocacy plays a key role in ensuring the implementation of laws and procedures.” The academics said that they observed several cases in which the advisers challenged government
agencies to fulfil their legal obligations when they had failed to do so. They think, “Had this support not been in place, clients would have lost appeals and faced the possibility of financial ruin through no fault of their own.” After stressing the importance of legal aid cover, James and Forbess gave five recommendations to the government. Firstly, all welfare benefits appeals should be retained “in order to prevent perverse incentives to delay the addressing of problems until they are eventually deemed eligible for legal aid.” Secondly, a “polluter pays” clause need to be introduced to subside cost burden, since much legally aided work is the result of systemic failure in government office. Thirdly, legal aid cover for debt, housing and welfare benefit appeals need to be kept in place for disadvantaged young people between the ages
LSE and UCT establish PhD exchange programme Bethany Clarke
Judith Rees, Interim Director of the LSE, signed an agreement for PhD exchanges with Max Price, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cape Town (UCT) on the 24th October 2011. The scheme will give two LSE Ph.D students the opportunity to spend a year studying at UCT and vice-versa. Dr. Price said that the creation of the exchange programme is “valuable because for most students and faculty
Sir Thomas Harris, vice-Chairman of Standard Chartered Capital Markets Ltd, criticised popular views on China and the financial services industry in his public lecture at the LSE last Tuesday. His talk, entitled “The Role of a Foreign Bank in China,” surveyed China’s financial history and Standard Chartered’s place in it since the mid1800s and outlined his views about the country’s future. It was the second lecture in an annual series hosted by the Confucius Institute of Business London, which is based at the School. The pessimists about China, he thinks, are wrong: “There are problems. The growth rate is likely to come down, [but] the authorities are sufficiently aware of risks that they will act if things are going wrong. The track record of the Chinese government is extraordinary. “I’m confident China will avoid Japan’s mistakes and embrace openness and liberalisation. China’s authorities have the opportunity to make Shanghai the global financial centre [which] Tokyo failed to become. Our [Standard Chartered’s] role is to help them as they reform the banking system.” In the Question and Answer session following his talk, the chair of the lecture, Professor Danny Quah of the Department of Economics, asked Harris what he thought about the Chinese authorities’ concerns regarding “Big Bang” liberalisation. Harris replied that given the challenges they face, they cannot be criticised for being cautious: “[Caution] has served them well. What is impressive about the way Chinese regulators move forward is the sequencing and careful thought.” Responding to a question about the prospects of the renminbi becoming a world reserve currency, he said: “It’ll happen – China’s too big an economy for it not to happen. But it’ll take much longer than most people think. The Chinese authorities are
feeling their way from stone to stone in the riverbed.” Later questions concerned the financial services’ industry. Harris was also asked about his views on Basel III, to which he replied: “Capital is only part of the problem. Most of the banks which collapsed in the 2008 crisis did so not because they were undercapitalised, but because of liquidity challenges. Northern Rock and Lehman Brothers were fully capitalised and they still went bust. Liquidity is just as, if not more important, than capital.” He was also asked what he thought of moves to split the retail and investment components of some banks and about border-less banking. “That [would be] going in the wrong direction. You don’t make the system more secure by balkanising it, either geographically or operationally,” he replied. “Banks like Standard Chartered and HSBC showed that having a diversity of banking facilities enabled you to be a shock absorber rather than a transmitter.” On whether the UK financial sector is too big, Harris said: “The evidence is clear. This is a sector where Britain has a clear competitive advantage. We only have to look at the tax revenue generated from the industry, which by themselves can pay more than the total education system. For people to suggest that we should seek to reduce the scale of the industry is to my mind absolutely bonkers.” Other questions concerned Standard Chartered’s role in China’s development. Harris said that the bank is helping the expansion of Chinese businesses into Africa by providing “groundbreaking facilities” and reiterated the point that it is lending directly to small- and medium-sized firms in China. He added that because the presence of foreign banks in China is so small, with less than 2 per cent of bank assets, he is “under no illusions that we [can] have a massive macroeconomic impact.”
LSE academics brief the House of Lords on legal aid cover Heather Wang
Professor Deborah James and Dr. Alice Forbess in the Department of Anthropology, who are working on ethnographic research in collaboration with Community Links, a charity based in Newham, East London, briefed the House of Lords on legal aid cover on Tuesday, 1st November. James and Forbess’ “Rights, Welfare and Law. Legal Aid Advocacy in Austerity Britain” is a qualitative in-depth research paper that highlights particularly vulnerable categories of people who are at the risk of being denied access to justice under the new guidelines set out in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LASPO) Bill. A number of recommendations to the govern-
of 18 and 25. Fourthly, legal aid cover for debt, housing and welfare benefit appeals should also be retained for people diagnosed with severe mental illness even if their income is above the new and stricter thresholds. And lastly, only after the new Universal Credit system has been implemented should the scope of legal aid cover drastically cut. The researchers then presented three case studies. The first case is about a 22-year-old Ugandan-born British citizen who was being evicted from his council flat. The eviction was the result of his attempt to stop depending on benefits, which is described as “ironic.” James and Forbess think this case “illustrates what is likely to happen if, following LASPO proposals, vulnerable people must wait until threatened with homelessness to access legal aid funded advice.”
The second case talks about problems a native Punjabi speaker encountered, which the academics think illustrates the problems people with severe language difficulties would face when they encounter system failure and highlights the role played by advisers in promoting the implementation of new laws. The last case is about a diagnosed schizophrenic who regularly experiences rather serious symptoms. She was starving “in order to meet the large payments demanded by the council so as to clear the debt before the end of that financial year.” In the conclusion, James and Forbess reiterate the importance of retaining legal aid support until new arrangements are firmly in place.
The Beaver | 08.11.2011
Advertisement
7
8
Advertisement
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
Comment
The Beaver | 08.11.2011
9
Blacklisting the White Paper LSE needs to stick to its roots and fight for what is right Alex Peters-Day
T
he Higher Education White Paper represents the greatest attack on Higher Education that we’ve seen in decades. More than the introduction of tuition fees, top-up fees or the Higher Education cuts seen last year; this is an unprecedented ideological attack on the very nature of Higher Education in the United Kingdom. At a time when public sector cuts are affecting all swathes of society, a time when unemployment amongst young people is at its highest level in years, a time when universities across the country are facing course closures, reductions in class-sizes and teaching hours; now is our time to take a stance and create a change. The Government’s Higher Education White Paper seeks to put commercial interests and employers at the heart of the system, not students. Included within its myopic vision are mechanisms to allow for the privatisation of universities; the forcing through of a two-tiered system of universities, serving to further cement the idea of top universities as being a privileged reserved to only the elite in our society and a shift towards the conception of Higher Education as a market place with students as consumers, left with
little rights and a false illusion of real choice. Not only do many believe that Higher Education should not be marketised, I’d argue it cannot be a market in any real understanding of the term as there is no exit strategy in universities, thus removing the possibility of choice. Many criticisms and responses to the White Paper have
been published and submitted to the Department of Business and Skills, we will be engaging in a lobbying campaign to try and convince MPs to block the bill and vote against the proposals to fundamentally destroy the concept of public higher education in the United Kingdom, and we will be continuing our valuable discussions
Join her on the 9th of November Photo: flickr user _thebeaveronline
with the school to discuss the implications and how we can protect LSE from these cuts and changes. However, much more must be done if we are serious in our criticism of the Governments’ cuts and proposals and this is why I am supporting and mobilising for the National Demonstration on 9th November. Demonstrations are just one way in which we as students can stand up and have our voices heard. Uniting as one with thousands of students from up and down the country, LSE students have a real opportunity to shape discourse nationally and internationally about how we want our university to look. Demonstrations, campaigns and protests have a history of creating change and creating debate. The white paper is awful not only in its proposals but also in the way it is written and how it has been presented. If we are serious about this we must bring this issue to the forefront of the general publics’ minds. The message is not yet out clearly- students, academics and workers have an opportunity to do this now on the 9th November. LSE students have been at the forefront of movements and change throughout our history. One of the key reasons why the LSE Students’ Union has such representation and such a strong voice within the school is partly down to the mobilisation of thousands of students for the last five ecades here at LSE, standing up for what we believe in and enabling real change within the school and the wider world. The reason Houghton Street is pedestrinased?
Because when a student was hit by a car in the 1980’s LSE student and the Students’ Union held a demonstration which caused the pedestrinsation of Houghton Street. The reason we have a nursery available for students and staff? Because in the 1980’s LSE students occupied the library and convinced the school to provide this service which was more recently defended through successful campaigning in 2009 when moves were made to shut this invaluable service down. From the living wage campaign which in 2008 successfully entitled all staff at LSE to receive the living wage, to campaigning to keep Wednesday afternoons free for undergraduates to partake in our societies and sports clubs and mobilising thousands of students last year in the largest campus campaign seen nationally for decades. Campaigning, and campaigning successfully, is part of our heritage. On 9th November, LSE students will continue this and I will be proud to march alongside them. So if you believe university is for a greater social good, if you believe the benefits of a university education cannot be summed up in graduating starting salaries, if you believe university is a key tool to enabling social mobility and justice in our society, and if you believe that we have a right to have our voice heard and be listened to, I urge you to join us at 11:00 am on Houghton Street this Wednesday.
In the hands of revolutionaries
Just because I don’t agree with you, doesn’t mean I’m wrong Ahmed Alani
W
hen I initially decided to write this piece, I had a pre-conceived idea of what it would be: directed at a certain section of the student body that is extreme in its approach to campaigning, it was initially a comment piece telling them to calm down and really get over themselves. However, this past week has opened my eyes to the LSE Students’ Union in a way that I would never have imagined. As such, I’ve reworked my piece to accommodate these new insights. Sadly, I have become entirely disillusioned with the Union as a whole; whereas before I took issue with a certain faction of the university, I now take issue with a much broader crosssection of our representative body. At this stage, let me just mention that my problems are not in any way directed at the Sabbatical Officers – as I’ve told others previously, I believe that they have outdone their predecessors by a considerable margin in terms of being able to relate to students, their personal and professional conduct, their
campaigns and in terms of justifying their positions as leaders of our Union. Nor is this directed at the heads of the Media Group or any heads of Societies. Though I wish to develop on this further, I stand by my original thought: a quarter of the way into my third year at LSE and I really have had enough of those seeking revolution and berating those who don’t meet eye to eye with them. I’m speaking now, for the unrepresented majority: the apathetic. Quite frankly, admirable though it is for you to adopt a cause and devote yourself fully to it, for the love of God, take it easy. For too long now, I’ve put up with people smearing my university experience by demanding more from every single body of authority and constantly expressing their dissatisfaction at, well, everything. What annoys me, however, is not your campaigning as such – morally and objectively speaking, your campaigns are admirable and should be supported; for the most part, I find you seek socially just outcomes and such campaigns should be as inclusive as possible. I do, however, take issue with your campaigning methods, and your approach to things at the LSE. I find your collective power threatening and off-putting – your strong opinions are backed up with vapid support from others in your social circle, to a point where your collective jeering at those whose views don’t align with your own
verges on bullying. Thankfully, we’re at University, and “bullying” per se is so easily avoidable. Thus, I feel your approach is counterproductive, as any successful LSE campaign ought to somehow include the silent majority and not exclude them. Sadly, I feel that this approach has stemmed your success in terms of campaigning. There is a distinctly negative perception towards some of you as individuals and this manifests itself in a reluctance to support your projects and motions. A campaign such as “The Only Way Is Ethics” should have university-wide support, and successful though it has been, I can’t help but wonder if its success has been marred by preconceptions directed at some of those involved in the campaigning process. On a personal level, I have little to no issue with most of you, I just feel that you need to review your collective approach if you want to connect with a broader group of students. Your passions need not be so concentrated within LSE, and it might be constructive for you to channel some of that energy to projects outside of our Union. Many of you undoubtedly do so already, but life really does go on after University, and unless you choose to act as our previous Education Officer does in returning to the LSE to castigate future generations of campaigners, you will eventually
need to move on. As it stands, I do not think that the LSE is the place to start a global revolution and instigate an entire shift in social attitudes. Moving on, this past week saw unprecedented controversy directed at the Beaver. As it has been addressed elsewhere, I’m not going to comment any further on the matter other than to reiterate what a grave error in judgment by the Editorial Board it was to publish the piece. My focus, however, revolves around the resulting backlash, where many of you called for the Executive Editor of the Beaver to step down. Unsurprisingly, many felt personally offended by the piece, but I can’t help but wonder if there is a group of individuals that is seizing this opportunity to pedal through personal issues with the Executive Editor. Many individuals, themselves the sources of similar jibes as those made in last week’s Agony Uncle, seem to have rapidly become indignant to such remarks. In doing so, it seems that those who were previously vehemently against the avid campaigners have now united with them in their joint hatred of the Beaver. This would seem to be a pleasant harmony of the Union, were it not for the fact that this common ground is founded upon fake relations. And herein lies my issue: a certain group of those who previously opposed the campaigners is comprised
of underhanded, two-faced and frankly repulsive individuals. They truly redefined the word “fickle” in their attitude this week and I reiterate my advice that they also need to find more constructive outlets to channel their energies. Many of them hold positions in our Union and yet quietly ridicule it, the Beaver and campaigners alike in their personal time. As they sit bitching about and insulting ‘radical’ individuals of the Union in private, they publicly display a united hatred with them towards a newfound common enemy – the Beaver. Frankly, I find these individuals to be far more irksome than the aforementioned campaigners, because whilst the campaigners are open about their opinions, these cowards hide behind their façade and congratulate one another on their insulting remarks. As such, the levels of self-propagation and the farcical ‘common views’ that have developed in our Union really do sicken me to the core. Our Union is full of more politics, backstabbing and bitchiness than is necessary or appropriate for an institution like the LSE. I’ve lost a lot of faith in many who at some point or other, claim to represent our student body, and it is for this reason that I don’t feel we can progress as a Union.
10
Comment
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
Commenting on your comment Haters gotta think twice Chloe Kiliari digs deeper into Kunal Gupta’s defence of investment bankers Chloe Kiliari
I
must admit that reading the article by Kunal Gupta (“Haters gonna hate”) which appeared in issue 753 of the Beaver made me rethink. His article put forward a well-justified case defending investment bankers and offered me a good chance to re-ask myself some basic questions. Do investment bankers, specifically those at LSE who will eventually become them, deserve their reputation? Do “haters” have a reason to perceive them in such a negative way? Firstly, it seems to me that a lot of “haters” who openly criticise the industry as a whole, often do not have a balanced view as they are not perfectly informed about what the job of an investment banker entails. The hatred is definitely not rational in such cases. Any generalisation, such as “all investment bankers are overestimated and overpaid” is, to say the least, invalid. To say that they are all to blame for international economic woes overlooks the fact that we are all individuals - and only capable of so much. It runs the risk of equating real criminals to hard-working individuals who continue to be actively interested
in the societies they live in. Not only is this an unfair comparison, it is also the wrong comparison to make. And yes, I do believe there should be “right” and “wrong,” even if these two concepts are artificial constructs. As a result I do not wish to concentrate on why the investment banking profession is evil and I do not wish to repeat the arguments of those who are short-sighted enough to complain that investment bankers have sent this world to hell. If we were to adopt these views, we would be faced with accepting any argument that follows a similar logic, such that all politicians are also corrupt until eventually every single one of us is equally selfish and unkind. We should not be afraid to admit that in this world there are nice people and there are less nice people, even if we are all to some extent self-interested “monsters”. Similarly, there are good and bad investment bankers and there are good and bad future investment bankers. But leaving generalisations aside, do “haters” actually have any real reasons to hate? Not all “haters” are jealous, although I am sure that some do envy the success and - why not - the insurmountable courage of those who apply for internships and go through exhausting selection procedures to secure a place at an investment bank. I believe that the nice “haters,” unlike the jealous ones, can actually distinguish between those who are applying to gain some valuable work experience
and those who are simply after an
We have a right to blame them for underestimating the intelligence of anyone who opts for a different career path internship that would make them feel more intelligent than the person next to them. I believe benevolent “haters” do not have any problem with humble, honest and hard-working people. No problem with anyone who wants to try his luck with investment banks, always knowing that he is nowhere near conquering the world. No problem with anyone who quietly pursues the opportunity to learn and challenge themselves by applying for a place in
such a competitive industry. And no problem with the person who admits, with a smile, that they would do with some extra money in the summer. But us “haters” do have a problem with those “current LSE students who are budding investment bankers”. You know, the ones that already dress, act and talk as if they are thirty-yearold investment bankers at the peak of their career. I think we have every right to criticise those overconfident, arrogant people who barely take the time to question themselves and their choices. We have every right to blame them for the negative externalities that they impose on us when we have to bear listening to them talk about what offers they got and where they will -with all certainly- work in the future. We have every right to blame them for all the stress they cause to both those who have dreams other than investment banking, as well as to those who are working hard for an internship. Moreover, we have a right to blame them for underestimating the intelligence of anyone who opts for a different career path. It is unfortunate that people who did not come here to work in the financial sector end up convinced that the only worthwhile work experience is in investment banking. Attending LSE Careers banking events, one can find people from different departments and with diverse interests. This, of course, should not be taken to mean that everyone is interested in
investment banking. In reality it is the perfect proof for the externality phenomenon that I have been describing above. These really loud and arrogant “current LSE students who are budding nvestment bankers” cause some of our fellow students to eventually abandon their dreams in favour of what they have been convinced is the only option available to clever people. And this is exactly what ‘haters’ hate. Reasonable? I think yes. Coming back to Kunal’s article, I would like to clarify that I do agree that not all investment bankers deserve such a negative reputation. But at the same time, “haters” have their reasons to hate. They still retain the right to hate the minority of people who make our career choice and our experience at LSE so much more complicated. Things are simple. If you have come here to be an investment banker, I do understand you need to get into the profession as early as possible. And if you are not going to interfere with my mental health by passing on your stress to me, by all means go for it. Now with regards to those people, who have come here with dreams other than investment banking, make sure you stick to your dreams. Do not give in to pressure by those who talk as if they are already at the top of the world. At least at an undergraduate level, I feel we have time to first try gaining some experience in our most preferred field.
You must be this smart to WHAT? Mark Heffernan responds to Worby’s claim last week to limit suffrage Mark Heffernan
W
inston Churchill once said “The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.” Matt Worby is not Winston Churchill. Nor, apparently, does he share our wartime leader’s taste for irony, unless his piece last week on limiting universal suffrage went above my head and was actually one of the great satirical works of our age. Worby’s well thought out argument was, essentially, that the reason we have such banal figures in the British political arena is because the average voter is a fist dragging Neanderthal incapable of critical thought beyond clapping our hands at token promises from Whitehall. His solution? To limit the franchise, meaning only those with sufficient intellectual power can take part in participative democracy, and politicians can implement unpopular policies that only the intelligent understand are for the good of the nation. Not only is Worby’s thesis flawed, it is a highly dangerous, ill-researched piece that only just stops short of demanding an oligarchy of the educated. “The electorate was also, on average more informed” in the olden days, we are told, as opposed to today’s
morons. This grammatically suspect point is an interesting one, one of course backed up by reams of data and studies – if only Worby had shared them with us. As it is this is conjecture, and quite suspect conjecture at that. Were the population of the 1950s really more informed? Or were they actually more sexist, racist and homophobic than today’s society, and just as reliant on the printed press for opinions? Is it Enoch Powell he wishes for as a more statesmanlike politician, or perhaps Oswald Mosley? Both were Oxbridge educated, both would be given the vote under Worby’s regime at the expense of others. For Matt assumes that intelligence is the most important factor in allowing a person’s voice to be heard. Nonsense, on two fronts. Firstly he has completely disregarded the centrality of morality to a person’s worth. He calls for steps towards Plato’s “Philosopher Kings”, yet it seems surprising that a man of Worby’s “mental horsepower” would not examine this theory in more depth. For Platonic leaders need not only to be intelligent (and a very different intelligence to that Worby proposes, as any first year Government student should know), but also that they have good motivation; they work for society’s good. He thus makes the assumption that somehow brainpower rids us of any self-interest. That the great minds at Houghton Street float around, “The Wealth of Nations” in one hand and alms for the poor in the other. Of course the intelligent aren’t all well-meaning. They’re just as
self-interested as anyone; look at the number of LSE graduates going into Goldman Sachs against those going into Amnesty International and tell me otherwise. Empathy is surely what makes voters important; a desire to help our fellow man and for the growth of society as a whole. I’d rather be ruled by a well-meaning fool than a calculating bastard any day, and just look at the elected Mayor of London to see if I am alone. Yet Worby’s attack on democracy as we know it is not simply one of oversight, it is one of repugnant ethical value. He declares that democracy is only good for creating “a certain style of leadership”, never considering that it might have any intrinsic value in itself. Universal suffrage was simply a “nice idea”. Pankhurst et al. did not devote their lives to achieving universal suffrage just because the votes of women would make Britain a better place, they did it because democracy is an end in and of itself. To vote in our society is to exercise one’s right of selfdetermination, to become a human in a society of equals. Finally, Worby’s Test™. He proposes one much like the “the driving test”. We would be given “30-45 minutes” to prove ourselves worthy of a voice for the rest of our lives; a kind of University Challenge but with your basic human rights at stake. The test would be in “multiple languages” (how delightfully modern!) and would be able to be taken “under supervision, in one’s abode”, because nothing says freedom like a government enforcer entering the home to preside over my doom as I try to remember the basics
of Kant’s Categorical Imperative. In all honesty, I suspect Worby’s article will be ignored as the arrogant, delusional piece it is, and maybe outrage is the reaction he was hoping for. It is hard to see any grounding in reality in his piece, and I suspect it was written merely as a vehicle for his cutting edge jokes about Dad’s Army and Caesar. That does not mean, however, that it should not be challenged. It is a cliché, but people really did give their lives so we can be free, not so the elite can decide what is good for the rest as they did through centuries of oppression. If you want to change political life Matt, go
and appeal to the public and be elected on merit. Although I would hasten to guess that you’ll have to limit the suffrage to one beforehand to get anywhere at all.
Ciao, Shalom, Bonjour Photo: flickr user _ tvol
The Beaver | 08.11.2011
Comment
9
Hereditary House of Lords
Matt Worby’s take on what needs to be taken care of in the House Matt Worby
W
ell the time has come for someone to bring this up, even though it hasn’t been in the news recently. I think it is time to sort out the House of Lords reform once and for, in all likelihood 30 years. I’m aware that we have several other incidents to be dealing with, but I believe that with an upper chamber that regains its strength we would be able to see a vast improvement in the quality of governance of this country. I’m going to begin with what I want from this House. I want independence, guidance and the ability to act as an effective check on the government. This treads a fine line, as to attain true independence I can’t see any way of allowing an elected upper chamber. Whilst we then might get into the dangerous situation of the unelected possible impeding a popular government, on the whole I believe a House that can’t be kowtowed by the political parties over the ballot box is more advantageous. I intend to borrow from the present situation, but let’s expand slightly. I would want to go back to the two year delaying period that the 1911 Parliament Act
initiated. Obviously other than Money bills. This holds for a nice compromise, allowing for time to reflect and ensure the best course is steered, but reduces the potential for the blocking of popular will. Because, apparently, we have to remain a democracy. Now down to the composition of the chamber: Let me first deal with the Lords spiritual. I actually think there is a place for religion in government. After all, we have a fusion of church and state, and their position forms a centre stone of what I want the upper house to be. Moral men and women holding grounded views on society and are well respected in their community. What’s not to approve of? Firstly the number would stay broadly the same as in the present Parliament, just under 5 percent. But they would no longer just be members of the Church of England. The numbers would be proportioned based on census details. I’m aware that divided faiths may not come to an agreement over which half gets to have their representative, but with tighter categories in the census this problem can be mitigated i.e. Orthodox and Reform Judaism could be split in the census if necessary. I’m aware there might be the teensy problem of the atheists, well if they can’t agree on however representatives they’re given then they can be left unfilled and they don’t get represented. As for complaints that they’re not a religion, get
categorised elsewhere in the census. Then I’ll listen. The presence of these representatives would give the House a unique and representative take on the Laws it replaces, making the House representative a little bit at a time is progress. Next up is the hereditary peers. I want to keep them for two reasons.
Moral men and women holding grounded views on society and are well respected in their community Firstly you get rid of them and all you have left is a bunch of people sat in cat fur and watch straps. If you don’t get that then go and watch Blackadder, series 2-4 and when he goes forth, then maybe you won’t be quite such a heathen. Secondly, because when elected
from within their own group you have a pool of incredibly experienced Law makers who are willing to turn up and dispense on essential legal matters. They’re also un-beholden to the government for promotion to the chamber, or for keeping them happy with minor sinecures or treats. Their considered judgments hearken back to a time when Great Britain on the whole was more considered, and led by statesmen. It also gives us all something to aspire to, after all, who wouldn’t want to be Lord of the Manor? Things were better when we as a nation were united, most of society united, standing by our respective hedgerows, bright eyed and bushy tailed. A more glorious time, I’m sure you’ll all agree. Then we come to the main body of who I want to make up the House, these would be peers based on the hereditary inheritance, but from the office they’ve held. If you hold an office for its full length, or for more than 5 years, if the term is unlimited then you should have a seat of the House of Lords, until there is an adequate predecessor to replace you. So imagine the head of the Army retires after 8 years of Long service, He’d be given a peerage, and allowed to dispense judgment on Laws of the Land, using the institutional knowledge gained whilst they held their position. Then after 5 years, if their predecessor resigns, they take up the peerage. Simples. By implementing this system
I’m trying to avoid any undue influence the government may have on the hand out of peerages to supporters, in the similar way that a LSE electoral candidate gives out confused manifesto promises and flyers. The finite list of positions would be chosen by a specially convened by a committee, with an equal proportion of members of the government, opposition and present Lords (Obviously totalling up to an odd number, otherwise that’d just be silly). I imagine positions such as Director General of the BBC, Permanent Secretary to the Cabinet Office, Chief Editor of Private Eye and the General Secretary of Unison would all be included. I’m aware we would need to remove the vast majority of current Lords, but change can be good. I hope such reforms would allow for a sense of stability to be felt in the Upper House, and for governments, regardless of political inclination, to be checked more strongly. But given this, I imagine no government in its right mind would agree, oh well, gives me an excuse to be a blatherskite.
Done with London
Why Ehae Longe thinks touching down in London has lost its thrill
Ehae Longe
W
hen I was younger, London was that magical place that I always loved coming to. I wouldn’t be able to sleep for the last couple of nights before our summer trips to the place with “Buckeengam Palizz.” I would cry until my parents took me to Madame Tussauds, London Dungeon, and all the other kiddy tourist traps. The streets seemed to light up as if I were in Michael Jackson’s “Billie Jean” music video, revealing something new with each step. Not anymore. The streets are now more like they were in the “Thriller” video - the scary monsters lurking in every corner being my worries about work deadlines and essays. Coming to university in London has made my castle in the sky come crashing down. Last year, my roommates and I lived in Covent Garden. I was so excited to be in such
a famous part of London, ready for all the fun I would have. But after three weeks there, the novelty wore off. I started to get bored at looking through the windows of all the pretty shops, or stopping at the weekly- erected market stalls to get pastries. It became an annoyance for me to have to dance my way past tourists to make it to my classes on time. In going down Aldwych to get to university, the cool-looking shows on offer with the bright blue and pink signs began to melt into the other buildings around me. All the noise of London that was so potent for the tourists turned into a shattering silence within a year of living here. So sad. Think about it. It’s bound to happen: when there’s a fire alarm in the morning, and you come out to London streets in your pyjamas; when you roll out of bed and go to class in sweats with a dodgy smell from last night; when you walk by crowds outside the most popular clubs with groceries in your hands- then London becomes cheap. Living, studying, or working somewhere long enough will always do this. Sometimes I regret not going to university in Manchester. Or Warwick! At least, students in campus
universities may see London as a fun place to come to on the rare weekend- as a getaway. Sort of their Las Vegas- holding escapades like a closed book for reference. But kids who study in London, right or not, are convinced they’ve seen the best of England, and may be forced to look to Continental Europe for their own getaway. I’m a third year student now, and that does some scary things. It’s like having a mid-life crisis: you feel like old cargo seeing all the vitalised happy people walking around; it puts you in a struggle to get the best out of the time you have left. Especially being a foreign student, it has made me think hard about making London fun again, knowing that this might be my last time living here. So I set about this task. I was convinced that there would be things in London that would help to rebuild its castle status for me. As I searched through options, I felt like one of those pompous kids with their noses up, echoing repeatedly, “I’ve tried that.” I had gone to see “Lion King,” “Wicked,” “Stomp,” even “Thriller.” Definitely ticked all the boxes of “culture.” Yep. But then I came across the Royal Opera House. This building had seemed to be hiding
from me in my past journeys- probably because my eyes had been glazed over all those times. I went inside, and I felt the sudden oozing of fresher air than in the world I just came from- this definitely had to be my novelty. It could be my castle with a fort strong enough to block out most tourists, and with walls impenetrable to my academic woes. But then I realised, novelty comes at a price. I was trying to be really cool, and book tickets to see “la Traviata”, apparently one of the most famous operas. Not having very much knowledge about these things at all, I expected to spend my usual £30 on a ticket. No more than £50. I thought this was quite a good range. But when I looked at the seats on offer, I almost choked whole on my seedless grapes. The prices averaged out at about £150, with the highest costing £820. Realising that I was not quite an LSE investment banker yet, I decided to take my ball and go home. Sure, there were cheap seats- cheap being a euphemism for crap, that is. The most easily available seats seemed to be these “cheap” ones on the far ends- the seats that all the other audience members would feel bad for you in- stuck behind a
pillar, only hearing sounds that would probably be more comforting over the radio. Those were the seats you sat in at the Opera that show you just don’t fit in. With all the other guests wearing bespoke suits and designer gowns, and you wearing a Jane Norman dress, being asked to go get wine, that’s an obvious enough indication. Yeah, this was not going to work out. I have spoken to so many people about how London has changed for them after studying here. They all say the same things. But it would obviously be more tolerable with having something here to look forward to, that was a bit less accessible to everyone else, or even a bit less desirable. I guess there is novelty to be found, but its only still “novelty” because there are so many people that can’t afford these cool things. I would never be bored of London if I could afford to go to cool art gallery parties with pretentious people that make up their own words; and opening nights of ballets and operas. That would be the life. But it seems that, for now, before I cash in big time, Europe would have to be my getaway. I checked Thomas Cook. There are some really cheap package deals.
12
Comment
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
F lirting with vegetarianism
How Alex Haigh’s break up with meat didn’t last too long Alex Haigh
M
y experiment has finally ended. After enduring the hardship and suffering of vegetarianism for a whole month I have finally finished my ordeal. The “environmental experiment” to not eat meat or cheese for the month, opened my eyes to a lifestyle that I thought was very alien to me. In fact, not much changed. Four things I learnt: vegetarian options are generally very similar – but worse – versions of their meat-based relatives; fast food was not created for vegetarians; to never be off your guard, especially not in a McDonald’s; and finally, the pizza shop outside Zoo Bar is to my vegetarianism what Satan was to Jesus at the pinnacle of the Temple... unfortunately I cannot claim to have Jesus’ willpower. My experiment was by no means accurate or reliable. Firstly, a month may have been too short. The thought that I would be able to start eating meat in fewer than 30 days kept me going and meant that I could fore go the temptation in the knowledge that I could engorge myself in a few weeks. Secondly, I did fail twice. First, Zoo Bar’s oh-so-tempting pizza that one inevitably forgets and then regrets in the morning was too much for me so I succumbed within the first two weeks. The second failure was ridiculously stupid on my part. After noting to myself that I could not get anything good in McDonald’s, I sat down with my friend who had bought some chicken selects. As the name suggests chicken selects do have at least some meat in them. Long story short, she offered me one and I ate it. Half an hour later I realised that I’d failed; I wanted to cry
in agony but unfortunately I was in a cinema and most people watching a comedy do not want to hear someone crying in the middle of their film. Obviously here I am using hyperbole for effect but in seriousness I was very annoyed. Anyway, I had a lot of time to think about vegetarianism so now I would like to give out some of my opinions. I am not talking about vegetarians who become vegetarian for health reasons or dieting. I’ll get on to those later. My focus will be on vegetarians that are vegetarian for animal welfare or environmental reasons. Now, I am not in any way saying that what they are doing is pointless or wrong; I simply think many vegetarians are missing two things. Firstly, I think many vegetarians miss the point. In my experiment I attempted to completely cut out all meat and all cheese. My view is that this is ridiculous. Why pigeon-hole yourself into a diet that cuts out more than half of all meal options. Vegetarianism, in the environmentally conscious sense, is a way to overcome the prevailing attitudes of society that one should eat as much meat as one can afford or can stomach. I will use the age-old adage of Meat-eaters: “If we shouldn’t eat meat now why have we always eaten meat in the past.” Now the simple answer to this is that we eat vast amounts more now than we ever had in the past. This simple answer is useful to explain my opinion on vegetarianism. Yes, people eat far too much meat but no, that does not mean that vegetarians have to cut out meat altogether. Meat has good qualities as well as bad. Both sides should think about moderation. Finally on this point, if you are a newly turned vegetarian or any vegetarian that is not a vegetarian for religious purposes do not refuse vegetarian food simply because it has been touched by meat; you’re being foolish. Secondly, vegetarians are missing a trick. If, like I’ve said, vegetarians forget their dogmatic approach to
carnivorous indulgences they will become part of the market and help make producers take notice. Some polls estimate the UK vegetarian population at four million. If four million people were to enter the market demanding more transparency in the meat production process, as well as higher standards for the environment, higher standards for animal welfare and higher health standards, producers and legislators would take notice. Through standard market-based means instead of shouting like extremists from the outside in, this new section of the market could trigger an improvement of all these standards while informing society of the problems surrounding the meat industry. They could help to raise the price, while at the same time reduce people’s appetite for meat and the goals all sides of vegetarianism could be realised. As my friend said to me half way through the experiment, “if we shouldn’t eat meat why are animals made out of food,” obviously said in jest, this comment does highlight the important point that consumers will never give up meat. But if we show them the problems and risks related to eating meat we can hope to change attitudes and possibly reduce the problem. Finally, to people who are vegetarian for the health implications related to meat. I am not going to waste much space on these people because most of them could not count on my respect – especially those who give up meat for a diet. Unless you have a medical condition that means you really should not eat meat, like gout, there is no reason to give up meat entirely. For those who give up meat for diets, you aren’t thinking clearly; eat less food, don’t give up an entire food group simply because you have no self-control. For those who do so for other health risks, but have not been advised to by their doctor, we are not living in the middle ages eating meat is no more dangerous than any other everyday activity – if you are worried, just eat better quality
Tucking in Photo: flickr user _ zeevveez meat. This is simply my opinion on a personal experiment; I don’t mean to offend anyone unless you have given
up meat as part of a diet... then I hate you. Also - Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall definitely stole the idea from me.
Homeless on Houghton Street
Future six figure salary earners brave the streets to see how the not so fortunate do it
L
SE students spending the night on campus? If exam season was looming you wouldn’t bat an eyelid, but it’s early November so what gives? A worthier cause than exams, you could say. We slept rough on Houghton Street last Thursday to raise awareness of the problem of homelessness in the UK - and London in particular - and to raise money for the commendable charity Anchor House. With 40+ confirmed attendees on our Facebook event, the homelessness campaign was set to get Houghton Street busier than Crush in Lent term. However, as the rain started pouring numbers dwindled and 40 became 10. But neither the poor turnout nor the persistent rain could crush our spirits as we got ready to brave the cold weather and do something that, realistically, we’d probably never be forced to do again. The same couldn’t be said, unfortunately, of the residents of Anchor House who came to meet us before we slept out. A group of individuals visited LSE to share with us how Anchor House provided them with shelter and helped them get back on their feet by developing their skills and reintegrating them Photo: flickr user_Ilovefishtown
Dina Fahmy
into society. This was an excellent way for us to see the tangible results of our campaigning. The aim of the sleep-out was to parallel the conditions of homeless people in order to open our eyes, as much as practically possible, to their difficult world. So, we decided to ban tents and stick to cardboard and newspaper mattresses. As I went searching for empty boxes on Kingsway I got nothing but looks of disdain from many passers-by - just a glimpse of one of the emotional hardships endured by the homeless on a regular basis. Admittedly, before starting this campaign I wasn’t aware just how serious this problem is, but I’ve learnt that in London alone there are around 300 people sleeping rough every night. That’s just a fraction of the overall national homelessness figures. While many will blame the problem as self-inflicted, arguing that homeless people have drunk themselves into their plight, this is rarely the whole truth. Often the causes are external and include lost jobs, broken families, refused asylum, physical and psychological abuse; the list goes on. Anchor House recognises this and it’s important for more people to end their ignorance and appreciate this too. With over £1,000 raised - and
counting (donate at www.justgiving. com/sleepingout) - this campaign has shown how something starting so small can grow so quickly. Our very own Director, Judith Rees, has endorsed the sleep-out explaining that “LSE is woven into the fabric of a city which includes great wealth and dis-
advantage side by side and we should remember...the need to reach out to those around us”. We are continuing to work on this homelessness campaign with a Citizens’ Rally in the pipelines, so watch this space.
The voice of the homeless Photo: flickr user_SnapSpy
Comment
The Beaver | 08.11.2011
13
Letters to the Editor
Dear Madame,
We, the undersigned students, have read the “Houghton Street Headaches” column (1st November, page 28) and would like to call into question your editorial judgement in publishing this offensive piece. The article advocates sexual violence and rape and perpetuates misogynistic attitudes. Comments, such as “Always remember: it’s not rape if you shout surprise” and encouraging punching your sexual partner in the back of the head (‘donkey punching’), amongst others, normalises the attitude that physical violence against women is acceptable. This creates a culture of objectification, where men’s mentalities are desensitized to their others as human, and women are ashamed to report sex crimes, as well as a criminal justice system that also brushes them aside -- only 6.5% of reported rapes result in due conviction. We are aware that this piece was supposed to be satirical; however, in the context of the one in four women who will experience domestic violence in their lifetimes, two women a week who are killed by their partners or ex-partners, and approximately 80,000 women who experience rape or attempted rape each year, this is no laughing matter. Closer to home, 68% of women students have experienced sexual harassment on campus. The article trivialises the experiences of survivors of rape and sexual violence. It is, therefore, no wonder that when attitudes such as those in the article are fostered, only 10% of women students who have been seriously sexually assaulted report it to the police and even fewer to their universities. You have failed to recognise that publishing this article has wider social ramifications: for the victim who chooses not to report sexual harassment and for the perpetrator who has been conditioned to feel justified in his abusive actions. The Beaver is published in the LSE Student Union’s name and is responsible for upholding the SU equal opportunities policy (as according to the by-laws). The article published in last week’s paper was undoubtedly in breach of these responsibilities due to its sexist and offensive material. The Beaver’s constitution states that the Executive Editor “is responsible and shall have ultimate editorial control over the final content” (4.4). As Executive Editor, you are accountable for the articles published in The Beaver,
alongside with the Editor of the Social Section, in which the column appeared. We, therefore, call upon you to reconsider your positions -- having failed to adhere to basic editorial standards. Yours Sincerely,
Lucy McFadzean (LSE SU Women’s Officer) Alex Peters-Day (General Secretary) Amena Amer (Education Officer) Lukas Slothuus (Community and Welfare Officer) Alice Stott (Co-President of Feminist Society) Coco Roberts (Co-President of Feminist Society) Sherelle Davids (Anti-Racism Officer) Robin Burrett (Post Graduate Officer) Benjamin Butterworth (LGBT Officer) Mairead Moore (Mature and Part Time Officer) Lois Clifton (Environment and Ethics Officer) Polly McKinlay (Disability Officer) Charlotte Gerada (Former SU General Secretary) Emir Nader and Ash Bicford-Gewarter (Feminist Society Men’s Officers) Emma Kelly (LGBT Society President) James Maltz (Board of Trustees) Kimia Pezeshki (Station Manager of Pulse Radio) Labour Society Feminist Society Atheist and Humanist Society Along with a further 175 LSE Students, and 93 signatories from the wider student community, including LSE Alumni and Bristol Feminists. Dear Madame, We, the undersigned students, have read the “Houghton Street Headaches” column (1st November, page 28) and the criticism of it by sections of the LSE student body. We believe the article was in poor taste, and acknowledge that you have accepted this point and apologised publically, on behalf of the paper, for the mistakes involved with printing
this article and any offense that has been made. We note that, though satirical, some members of the LSE student body have found this article distressing and insulting, and fear for social ramifications of the article. We also acknowledge that you have ordered a double page spread to be given over, in the next issue to the topic of violence against women. And that though this cannot entirely make up for the offense, we believe this takes an important step in demonstrating the Beaver’s commitment to pursing a stronger editorial stance towards these sensitive issues. Additionally we note the introduction of new editorial guidelines to prevent such events happening again, showing a further commitment to a professional editorial policy for the Beaver. As Executive Editor, we believe you have reacted promptly and reasonably to the article and its response. We acknowledge that the job is done on a voluntary, unpaid basis, and often involves working in a highly stressed environment; we also accept that the job of Executive Editor of the Beaver Newspaper requires extensive time commitments in addition to being a full time student at the LSE, while many other London Universities have paid Sabbatical Editors in charge of their student papers. We do not agree with calls for the Editor to stand down, and fully endorse and have full confidence in Nicola Alexander as Executive Editor of the Beaver Newspaper. Yours Sincerely, The Beaver Editorial Board Dear Madame, This week’s Beaver editorial was a disgusting display of an editorial board more interested in payback than argument. The context of the editorial was this: an officer of the Students’ Union, becoming upset with an article, called up the Beaver in tears to request a retraction. Was this a professional reaction on their part? No. Was it an understandable, human reaction that demands sympathy? Yes. To publish a passive-aggressive “we’re in charge, get used to it” editorial in response - while not even naming names resembles the kind of thuggish public
threats that characterized Mafia control of Chicago. We deserve better from our newspaper than this. Yours Sincerely, Alec Webley Dear Madame,
Two weeks ago Mohammed Morley wrote a dogmatic article in support of Shariah law. While every student at the LSE has the inherent right to practice and express any religion or belief of their choice, they have no right to push it on others as Morley so unsolicitedly did in the past issue. Particularly, we take offense to the line ‘it is an obligation upon every Muslim, [sic] to believe that it [Shariah] is the best way of life.’ He further explained that ‘the Shariah encompasses everything in Islam and vice versa. They are in essence synonymous terms.’ Not only did he declare the Shariah as synonymous with Islam, something that the vast majority of Muslims and scholars of Islam all over the world would reject but he also posited that ‘in essence our belief and conviction in the Shariah stems from our belief in God. It is an obligation upon every Muslim, to believe that it is the best way of life.’ As if that were not enough, he then attempted to indoctrinate moderate Muslims by declaring that, with the obligation of every Muslim to follow the Shariah, its barbaric penal code must logically be followed as well. While Morley acknowledged that many people would ‘raise eyebrows at the punishments’, he justified Shariah’s penal code by arguing that it is ‘a purification of your sins, in order to avoid the greater punishment in the Hereafter.’ We raise several objections to this. In Shariah, there are a specific set of punishments known as the ‘Hadd offences’. There are seven such offenses: sedition, robbery, robbery with violence, apostasy, drunkenness, unlawful sexual intercourse (pre-martial, adulterous, or homosexual), and falsely accusing someone of unlawful sexual intercourse. Some of these actions are clearly not immoral--there is nothing wrong in being gay, or enjoying a drink, or choosing when or whom to have sex with, or converting or even dropping religion. Moreover, even if they all were true offenses, the punishments laid out by Shariah surely do not fit the crime. Theft is typically punished by
the removal of a hand while sexual offenses often carry a gruesome penalty of either lashing or stoning. For apostasy, few can forget the public Fatwah (an Islamic pronunciation of law and part of Shariah) Ayatollah Khomeni issued to all Muslims calling for the murder of Salman Rushdie, the author of The Satanic Verses. Belief in these fundamental laws is not just reserved to the few extremists either (for one thing, Khomeni was a popular leader). The Hadd offences are punished using these extreme methods to the letter in Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Somalia while existing in practice in parts of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Nigeria, Indonesia, and elsewhere, effectively governing the lives of millions. Shariah is neither ‘just’ nor ‘merciful’ as Morley calls it. There is only one word to describe such behaviour. It is barbaric and ought to stir far more of a reaction than mere eyebrow raising. Yet Morley justifies such law by claiming it saves you in the afterlife. If that were true Mr. Morley yes, you would be right. However, the burden of proof is still on you and you have yet to prove to us the existence of your God. Until you do, do not peddle your monstrous, false, and downright evil beliefs to the rest of us. If you wish to solely submit yourself to celestial masochism by all means, but, please, keep it to yourself. When the ASH society complained to The Beaver regarding the publication of Morley’s article we received the official response that The Beaver only censors articles ‘that are deemed libelous and could result in legal action or anything we feel is in bad taste.’ Although we stand behind the absolute freedom of speech, we feel the endorsement of Shariah law in the Union newspaper is only a few steps away from endorsing Nuremberg, apartheid, anti-gay, and misogynistic laws. As such, it must certainly be in ‘bad taste.’ In light of the Shariah Article and, more topical, the Agony Uncle section in last week’s edition, the ASH society would like to stand with the Feminist society in calling upon the Executive Editor to seriously reconsider her position, having failed to appropriately determine what constitutes ‘bad taste.’ Yours Sincerely, LSE SU Atheist and Humanist Society
BEAVERITES, YOUR NEWSPAPER, INCLUDING ALL YOUR OPINIONS AND COMENT PEICES WILL NOW BE IMMORTALISED. YOU CAN GET ACCESS TO A PDF VERSION OF THE PAPER ONLINE AT:
WWW.THEBEAVERONLINE.CO.UK
Rape is not a 14
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
Comment
A word from Lucy McFadzean Its not funny when its happened to In light of these events I would like to draw attention to a motion that has been recently passed in the Women’s Assembly. The “Zero Tolerance to Sexual Harassment and Discrimination Policy” has come from the NUS Hidden Marks Report, which states that 68 per cent of female students have been sexually harassed. It is designed to lower this figure, by drawing attention to, deterring, and preventing sexual harassment and discrimination in union spaces. These union spaces will include (but is not limited to) The Three Tuns, The Quad, The Underground, the gym and the Pulse studio, where the staff will be fully trained in the processes involved in dealing with sexual harassment and discrimination complaints. Go to www.lsesu.com and click on the Women’s Officer page to find out more about the ins and outs of the motion.
In light of the offensive material printed in last week’s Beaver (Houghton St Headaches, page 28, issue 755), and following the meeting held last Wednesday evening, it was decided that it was important to counterbalance the piece with education and explanation. The many who did not find the piece satirical wanted to explain to the few why said article was so offensive and why it is important that violence against women is not made into a joke. Furthermore, I and many others wanted to ensure that the discourse remained about the real problems at hand and did not descend into an internal LSE conflict and result in personal attacks on students, leaving the real problem a ghost in the background. Lucy McFadzean LSE SU Women’s Officer
women you love. By a women at the LSE I get that the “it’s not rape if you shout surprise” is meant to be a joke. Honestly I do, but that is what makes it all the more offensive. Beyond even offensive, it just makes me want to cry. How rape can be read as a joke, and although deemed “distasteful” can still be printed, shows just how far society goes to forget about rape and the women who survive it. It is as if these women don’t exist, and their experiences aren’t valid – clearly no one thought of them when proof-reading the “Agony Uncles” piece. I cannot deal with being dismissed as a moaning, tedious feminist who cannot take a joke. My grandmother has a daughter and granddaughter both of whom have been raped. I have seen within my own family
what a grievously violent act rape is, and how years later its effects still resonate. I am not able to do justice to the multitude of emotional repercussions; I’m not sure how well I understand them myself. I feel I can only begin to understand some of the meanings of the crime of rape from considering the more tangible impacts – listening as the whole family is rung to be told about how a daughter has been raped; explaining to a university why you need a year out; having to spend time explaining to police in a foreign country exactly what happened; years later relationships with men remain ambiguous. I hate the way that the implication of rape jokes is that rape doesn’t happen, or at least not to people like us
(whoever that us may be), so we can laugh about it. The disgraceful truth is it happens all too often – and just because you don’t always hear about it does not mean it doesn’t happen to people you know. Reading that “it’s not rape if you shout surprise” reduced me to tears because it belittles the experiences of rape survivors, who are people just like the women in my family.
4% of women who have been sexually assaulted report it
A humour-less joke. By a Rape Crisis Centre Counsellor I’ve been asked to write something briefly on the issue of rape jokes because I’m a support worker at a rape crisis centre. I was thinking that a feature I’d love to see would be something from a comic, explaining why rape jokes aren’t funny, but then I realised that to take them at face value like that would be conceding too much ground: no one tells rape jokes because they think they’re funny. That line about shouting “surprise?” Seriously? We all know that this isn’t about humour, because if it was, then the Beaver would have published something actually funny, something we’ve not already heard seventeen thousand times before, and in the medium of badly spelt Facebook groups, as well.
Yawn. Superfucking yawn. So we’ve established that they’re not about humour. What are they about? One of the key tenets of support work at rape crisis is listening: we do a lot of listening without saying very much at all. That’s because, over the forty or so years that rape crisis centres have been in operation, they’ve found that one of the most powerful things we can offer is a space that is the woman’s own: no one is going to talk over her or ask her to explain herself or impose their own feelings onto her, let alone disbelieve her. For many of the women (and men) who use our service, that’s the first time they’ve encountered a space like that, that’s not full of noise. Not literal noise,
I mean: the noise of other people’s reactions and demands for explanations, and minimisations (“haven’t we talk about this enough?”) and misogyny (“dressed like that?”) and, yeah, jokes. What I’m trying to convey to you is that rape jokes don’t happen in a vacuum: they are part of, and feed into, a wider culture where women are routinely silenced or shouted down or ignored. All. the. fucking. time. I mean, that’s the generous interpretation of what rape jokes are about. The less generous intepretation focuses less on the way that survivors are silenced, and more on the way that jokes are part of testing the waters and shoring up support for misogyny among - well, you know, rapists. You
Elizabeth Fraser; “banter” or hate? The oracle that is Urban Dictionary defines banter as “chat that is playful, intelligent and original.” I find this definition somewhat problematic given that most comments I’ve heard written off as banter were not remotely intelligent or original. If banter was once synonymous with wit and hilarity, this no longer seems to be the case. Rather banter is aggressive, often cruel speech. It is increasingly used, as glorified by the bizarrely popular Facebook group, to justify totally inappropriate and unacceptable behaviour. I appreciate wit as much as the next person, and I would readily defend anyone’s right to free speech, no matter how flagrantly idiotic their opinion seems to me. However, the problem with excusing the most offensive and ignorant of statements so long as those who express them shout “banter!” is that, firstly, they generally aren’t funny, but most importantly they give carte blanche to say anything without having to justify it. “Banter!” has become a get-out-of-jail-free card for making obnoxious “jokes,” because it subjects those who object to them being branded humourless, oversensitive, and having their opinions dismissed. Bringing out the defence “it was only a joke” deters people from raising objections to remarks even when they aren’t funny, but are in fact highly offensive. While to some this may seem petty, it can in fact be really harmful. Allowing discriminatory and ignorant attitudes to continue unchallenged
implies that they are acceptable, and normalises deplorable and harmful ideas. I think a clear example of this is the growing ubiquity of rape jokes. I would hope that just about everyone could agree that rape is a most vile, disgusting and completely inexcusable crime, yet the frequency with which it is joked about is extremely worrying. The recent “Agony Uncles” column in the Beaver, which advised that “it’s not rape if you shout surprise,” to my mind undoubtedly crossed a line between risqué humour and unfunny and offensive ignorance. However, a number of people I have talked to simply dismissed the comment as “banter.” At what point do we draw the line and admit that some remarks are so damaging that they cannot be written off as jokes, and must be confronted? This article is not calling for an end to wit, even if it is a little offensive, but is objecting to serious issues, like sexual violence, being trivialised by people making obscene remarks and stifling objections by excusing their comments as banter. It’s time to stop using banter as a shield, and to start challenging “jokes” that make light of sexual violence.
1 in 7 students experiences a serious sexual or physical assault
don’t have to have read your Freud to know the phrase “many a true word said in jest,” and bearing in mind that one in four women will experience sexual violence during their lifetimes, that’s a lot of rapists who are invisibly among us, along with survivors. Obviously there’s not a direct line of causation. But equally, most rapes aren’t the paradigmatic “stranger/alleyway” scenario, they’re much more about pushing and pushing and pushing at someone’s boundaries, and
its easier to push someone’s boundaries if you’ve been marinated in a culture that’s all like, “hey man, rape’s no big deal” and its easier to push someone’s boundaries safe in the knowledge that should anyone say anything, you know you’re surrounded by like-minded misogynists. Because, like, women should learn to take a joke, right?
punchline
The Beaver | 08.11.2011
Comment
15
Elizabeth Fraser highlights the disturbing facts about sexual assault Editorial Note Sexual assault is an uncomfortable topic, and yet represents something everyone fears. The grave implications of sexual assault, both for the victims and wider society mean it is something we need to confront and become more informed about. It’s high time then to address the key questions surrounding sexual assault, and counter some common myths. First of all, what is sexual assault? Rape Crisis defines sexual assault as “an act of physical, psychological and emotional violation, in the form of a sexual act” including rape, which is the “penetration of anus or vagina (however slight) with any object or the penis.” It is important to stress that no one asks to be or deserves to be sexually assaulted or raped. Victim blaming is not only wrong, but excuses the perpetrators, who are entirely responsible for their crimes. Horrifyingly, it happens more than you probably expect. In the UK it’s though that only 15 per cent of serious sexual assaults are reported, due to a variety of factors including threats
by the perpetrator, and humiliation felt by the victim. Clearly this shows a shocking culture of fear and shame surrounding sexual assault that prevents victims from pursuing justice. But who can fall victim to sexual assault? The answer is anyone, regardless of age or gender. While the majority of victims are women, men also experience sexual assault. According to Home Office statistics, 23 per cent of women and 3 per cent of men experience sexual assault, and 5 per cent of women and 0.4 per ent of men experience rape. This is occurring much closer to home than we might think. According the NUS, 14 per cent of female students have been the victim of serious sexual assault or serious physical violence while at university or college. It is thought however that only 10 per cent of female students who have been seriously sexually assaulted have reported it to the police, and only 4 per cent have reported it to their institution. The impact of sexual assault is profound. It has direct health
consequences for the victims including physical injury and sexually transmitted infections, as well as longer term consequences. Sexual assault is a violent and terrifying experience which is extremely traumatic, both at the time and well into the future. Survivors of rape and sexual assault are all affected differently by the experience and cope in different ways, but according to Rape Crisis, more common consequences of sexual assault include post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety and panic attacks, depression, and social phobia. The frequency and severity of sexual assault, as well as the reluctance of victims to report it, demonstrate why it is such a serious offence, and why we must treat it as such.
23% of women in the UK experience assault
We would like to thank the LSE SU Women’s officer, in conjunction with the LSE SU Feminist Society for helping us put together these two pages. The articles are submitted by members as well as non-members of the LSE SU Feminist Society. Some of the articles on these pages are anonymous, this is in keeping with the Beaver’s recently established policy (see page 2) on anonymity which states that anonymity will be granted in circumstances where the Editorial Board believes the content of the article to be poignant and highly sensitive or personal in its nature. We respect that readers have the right to hold the authors of articles to account. Therefore, if there are any queries or complaints about any of the articles please e-mail the Beaver or the LSE SU Feminist Society who will ensure that you get a response from the writer without compromising their anonymity. The Beaver would like to apologise for printing the “Agony Uncles”column in issue 755
(page 28). The ramifications of the casual humour used in the column are brought to light in this double page spread. The LSE SU Feminist Society have penned a Letter to the Editor outlining their position with regards to the “Agony Uncles” column. This letter is signed by 172 sudents. The letter is on page 13 of the Beaver. The Beaver is currently working closely with the LSE SU Women’s Officer to rectify our error in judgement - this includes adding extra Editorial checks and launching an Editorial Board training programme with the Part-time Students’ Union Officers. Thank you to all the students who have already e-mailed us with constructive feedback and ideas for ways that we can improve. Please e-mail editor@thebeaveronline.co.uk with any concerns or queries about the Beaver.
Sonja Spoo insists you cannot label victims Violence against women does not have a race or class. Violence against women does not know any boundaries and, violence against women is never funny. This summer, I had the distinct privilege of working as a counselor at a domestic abuse shelter in Philadelphia, USA. While working there, all of my previous notions of “who” was a domestic violence victim and survivor and “why” were completely deconstructed. I counseled poor and rich women, black, white and otherwise.
I saw women come in bloody and beaten both physically and emotionally. I saw women in fear for their lives and their children, ashamed and silenced. However, I also saw women who had incredible strength and heart. It is much too easy in society to label women as “deserving” of their fate when they find themselves in abusive situations. It is also much too easy to put a face on violence against women. The way the media portrays and glorifies abuse against women is
persistent yet subtle. However, it is also important to not victimized these women, or portray them as weak. They are survivors and individuals who find themselves in terrible circumstances. While violence is not limited to women, it does have a much larger effect on women and children. Before laughing at “satirical” editorials or stories, think about how many women do not have the ability to laugh at such things because for them it is reality.
Sexual harassment is a disturbing reality at the LSE So maybe you’re thinking, I’m at university and I want to meet someone and have some fun. Perhaps you’ve just ended things with your boy/girlfriend back home seeing as you’ve moved to LSE, or you want to just see who’s out there. University is the perfect place for all this, right? Of course it is – go out, dress up (or down), have some drinks, get chatting to someone at the bar, maybe give your friends the slip as you head back early... But while all this is happening, please remember that isn’t always how the story goes. For some women going out at university means being sexually harassed. And just because we’re all at LSE and supposedly smart, doesn’t mean that it does happen at our university. For me, this how my first few nights at LSE went. Crush, was of course rammed during Freshers and queuing for drinks was a nightmare, so much so that I asked the guy next to me (who’d already been served and was talking to his mate)
if he didn’t mind moving so I could get to the bar. His response was “shut up, minge”. Classy, right? Just putting me in my place as a vulnerable woman in a city I don’t know. I was outraged, and drunken outraged, so told him to fuck right off. To which he told me to suck his dick. Nobody should have to take that kind of aggressive, sexualized rudeness on their first night at university, right? Well I didn’t – I grabbed his (gloriously dark coloured) pint and tipped it down his (brilliantly pristine white) t-shirt. He definitely wasn’t expecting that – I guess he was hoping that I was a woman who’d been bought up to laugh off misogynist slurs. He then shouted at me that he was going to “fucking punch” me. At which point I ran outside and burst into tears. At least for the rest of the night when people asked what happened I hope he had to explain what a prick he was. On another night that week, a new-found friend and I both managed to get groped. In her case, under bra groped. I say managed, because often the atmosphere of Freshers week makes it feel like it is your responsibility to stay safe, and yet be sexually available. It can feel like you are there to be baited, preyed upon, or taken advantage of. Fortunately in this case the bouncers were sympathetic (“nah mate, what if it that had happened to your mum?”) and kicked the guy out.
As you might have guessed, the sexual harassment I experienced during Freshers really impacted on my opinion of LSE and how comfortable I felt. When I spoke to friends to compare Freshers’ weeks mine definitely lost. I’d had two nights where I went home early, crying, because unsurprisingly it’s a bit difficult to have a great time and make new friends when you’ve just had your personal space violated and self-worth attacked. The joy of university is meant to be the freedom and opportunities on offer, not nights out where you feel threatened and vulnerable. No one, however drunk, short-skirted or on the pull deserves to feel harassed or uncomfortable. If anything that makes you feel like that does happen, go to SU staff/sabbs, bouncers, your Women’s Officer, friends, strangers, anyone who will listen. Sexual harassment must not be tolerated. Oh, and join Feminist Society – change the sexist attitudes that still pervade campus.
14% of female students have experienced assault or violence
16
Advertisement
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
HOUR
WEEKLY SCHEDULE
BY HOUR
TIME
MONDAY
TUESDAY
WEDNESDAY
THURSDAY
FRIDAY
11:00
Delivery
Gender Agenda
Soapbox
Foreign News Hour
Al-ja-Pulse
12:00
Quarter-Life Crisis
Borderline Heroes
Judith & Dan
London Calling
Yesterday Today
13:00
Emmio & Bellio
Roll Sound...Action
Blazin’ Quad
Menaga A Trois
Sammy Sultan Show
Late Lunch with El- liot & Pippa
Desi Hour
BabbaG And The Wasabi Pea
Rachel + Anne = Ranne
Get The Blues Out Of Your Soul
Club 511
Kate & Katie
Better Than Going To The Gym
The Dog House
Mike & Xtina Show
Can You Live With Josh?
If You’re Feeling Sinister
Some Girls Don’t Know Dey Alpha- bets, Some Girls Do
Hard On
Hillary Donnell
17:00
Catherine’s Horse
Hugh With Ricketts
Asian Pop
Guilty Pleasures FM
Kwame Army
18:00
The Smell of Napalm
Season Affective Disorder
Mega Bytes
Modern Electric
19:00
Ziko Thompson
Piratefunk
Oo-er, Zutter
Cutler’s Choice
14:00
15:00
16:00
LISTEN LIVE OR ON DEMAND WWW.PULSE.DJ
1RYHPEHU
7KUHH 'D\V LQ 0D\ _ 5HDO (VWDWH _ 0DUN 5RWKNR _ +XPDQ &HQWLSHGH ,, _ 6KRUHGLWFK 0DUNHWV _ $ %ULWLVK 6XEMHFW _ /6([ _ 3ULYDWH %
7KHDWUH 3DUW% (GLWRUV "BNFFS 1BUFM ,FSSZ 3PTF 0 %POOFMM QBSUC!UIFCFBWFSPOMJOF DP VL
)DVKLRQ (GLWRU &NNB #FBVNPOU QBSUC GBTIJPO!UIFCFBWFSPOMJOF DP VL
)LOP (GLWRU "BNFFS 1BUFM QBSUC m MN!UIFCFBWFSPOMJOF DP VL
)RRG (GLWRU .BY +FOLJOT QBSUC GPPE!UIFCFBWFSPOMJOF DP VL
/LWHUDWXUH (GLWRU Rachel Holmes
partb-literature@thebeaveronline.co.uk
/6([ (GLWRU Susie Winchester
partb@thebeaveronline.co.uk
0XVLF (GLWRU "OLVS 7PSB QBSUC NVTJD!UIFCFBWFSPOMJOF DP VL
3ULYDWH % (GLWRU +BDL 5JOEBMF QBSUC!UIFCFBWFSPOMJOF DP VL
7KHDWUH (GLWRUV 3PSZ $SFFEPO )BOOBI 1BZOF QBSUC UIFBUSF!UIFCFBWFSPOMJOF DP VL
79 (GLWRU 3BTIB "M %BCBHI
7KUHH 'D\V LQ 0D\ 7UDIDOJDU 6WXGLRV %JSFDUPS "MBO 4USBDIBO 1MBZXSJHIU #FO #SPXO ,FZ DBTU 8BSSFO $MBSLF 3PCFSU %FNFHFS +FSFNZ $MZEF "U 5SBGBMHBS 4UVEJPT VOUJM .BSDI
6
OMJLF UIF DVSSFOU 5PSZ -JCFSBM DPBMJUJPO UIBU NPSF PS MFTT PQFOMZ CJDLFST 8JOTUPO $IVSDIJMM BT UIF OFX MFBEFS PG UIF $POTFSWBUJWF -BCPVS DPBMJUJPO PG TUSPWF UJSFMFTTMZ UP QSFTFOU B VOJUFE GSPOU UP UIF XBS UPSO #SJUJTI QVCMJD 8IFO GBDFE JO .BZ PG UIBU TBNF ZFBS XJUI BO JNNJOFOU 'SFODI DBQJUVMB UJPO BOE B DSVTIJOH EFGFBU GPS #SJUBJO BU %VOLJSL UIF EFDJTJPO UP DPOUJOVF UIF XBS BQQFBSFE UIF POMZ PQUJPO TFSJPVTMZ DPOTJEFSFE CZ B XBS DBCJOFU BMM JO BHSFFNFOU UIBU UIF CFTU XBZ UP QSFTFSWF UIF #SJUJTI XBZ PG MJGF XBT UP m HIU :FU JO SFBMJUZ UIFSF XBT B EFFQ EJWJTJPO TFSJPVT DPOTJEFSBUJPO XBT HJWFO UP B 'SFODI JOJUJBUJWF UP BQQSPBDI )JUMFS GPS UFSNT PG B QFBDF TFUUMFNFOU BOE XIJMF $IVSDIJMM XBT JOJUJBMMZ JO TVQQPSU PG UIF QSPQPTBM IF FWFOUVBMMZ DBNF UP TFF JU BT BU CFTU GVUJMF BOE BU XPSTU TFMG EFTUSVDUJWF 5IJT DSFBUFE B SJGU CFUXFFO IJT 5PSZ XBS DBCJOFU DPMMFBHVFT -PSE )BMJGBY BOE /FWJMMF $IBNCFSMBJO XIP BSHVFE GPS QFBDF BOE IJT -BCPVS NJOJTUFST $MFNFOU "UUMFF BOE "SUIVS (SFFOXPPE XIP TVQQPSUFE $IVSDIJMM T CFMMJHFSFODF #FO #SPXO T 5ISFF %BZT JO .BZ UBLFT VT JOTJEF /P %PXOJOH 4USFFU BOE JOUP UIF 8BS $BCJOFU NFFUJOHT PWFS UIF UISFF EBZT JO XIJDI UIF IJTUPSJD EFDJTJPO UP TUBOE PS TVSSFOEFS XBT UBLFO 5IF TDSJQU JUTFMG JT NBHOJm DFOU *U DPOWFZT CSJMMJBOUMZ UIF NPPE PG UIF EBZ BOE JT MPBEFE CPUI XJUI UIF CPME QPMJUJDBM SIFUPSJD PG UIF UJNF BOE UIF TVCUMFUJFT JOWPMWFE JO QPMJUJDBM NBDIJOBUJPOT BOE NBOJQVMBUJPOT "T TVDI BOZ QSPEVDUJPO XJMM MJWF PS EJF CZ UIF BDUPST UIBU QMBZ UIFTF LFZ m H VSFT JO #SJUJTI IJTUPSZ BOE QBSUJDVMBSMZ $IVSDIJMM *O UIJT SFHBSE 8BSSFO $MBSLF EPFT OPU EJTBQQPJOU *NQPSUBOUMZ UIF QFSGPSNBODF JT NPSF UIBO NFSF DBSJ DBUVSF PS JNQSFTTJPO PG $IVSDIJMM o JU JT B DIBSBDUFS TUVEZ 3PVHI CMVOU BOE UFNQFSBNFOUBM XF NFFU B NBO EJGGFS FOU GSPN UIF QPJTFE SIFUPSJDBM NBTUFS
.(,7+ 3$77,1621
&RQWDFW
5VFTEBZ /PWFNCFS _ 1BSU#
5REHUW 'HPHJHU DV 1HYLOOH &KDPEHUODLQ -HUHP\ +\GH DV /RUG +DOLID[ DQG :DUUHQ &ODUNH DV :LQVWRQ &KXUFKLOO UIBU XF TFF JO UIF QVCMJD BQQFBSBODFT MFE UIF DPVOUSZ UP UIF QPJOU PG EFGFBU JNNFOTJUZ PG UIJT NPNFOU BOE UIF SF UIBU IBWF TVSWJWFE $MBSLF JT XSBDLFE *OJUJBMMZ IF TVQQPSUT UIF QMBO GPS QFBDF MJFG UIBU TIPVME IBWF BDDPNQBOJFE IJT XJUI JOEFDJTJPO XFJHIFE EPXO BOE BEWPDBUFE CZ UIF HMJC BOE TMJHIUMZ TVQQPSU GPS XBS XBT MPTU TPNFIPX JO PQQSFTTFE CZ UIF HSBWJUZ PG UIF EFDJ TMJNZ -PSE )BMJGBY +FSFNZ $MZEF CVU B XBZ UIBU DBOOPU CF BUUSJCVUFE TPMFMZ TJPOT IF NVTU UBLF 8F NPWF XJUI IJN $IVSDIJMM PVUNBOPFVWSFT )BMJGBY BOE UP UIF BVEJFODF BMSFBEZ LOPXJOH UIF BOE PCTFSWF IJT SFTPMWF TUSFOHUIFOJOH UISPVHI FJUIFS QFSTVBTJPO PS NBOJQV PVUDPNF VOUJM m OBMMZ PO EBZ UISFF IF FNFSHFT MBUJPO UBMLT $IBNCFSMBJO JOUP XBS 5IF QSPEVDUJPO CZ EJSFDUPS "MBO DPOm EFOU BOE BU QFBDF XJUI IJT BH %FTQJUF TUSPOH JOEJWJEVBM QFSGPSN 4USBDIBO JT DPNQFUFOU TQBSTF CVU OPU HSFTTJWF TUBODF SFBEZ UP QSFTFOU UP UIF BODFT UIF FOTFNCMF BU UJNFT XBT VO IVHFMZ FYDJUJOH /FWFSUIFMFTT UIJT QVCMJD IJT QMBO GPS DPOUJOVFE XBS EFSXIFMNJOH JO DPOWFZJOH UIF QPXFS JT B NVTU TFF QSPEVDUJPO GPS BOZPOF 3PCFSU %FNFHFS EFMJWFST B GBO PG UIF TJUVBUJPO *O QBSU B QSPCMFN PG JOUFSFTUFE JO TFFJOH B QJWPUBM NPNFOU UBTUJD QFSGPSNBODF BT B $IBNCFSMBJO UJNJOH CFUXFFO UIF BDUPST JU TFFNFE PG IJTUPSZ CSPVHIU UP MJGF CZ B UFBN PG XIP DPOUSBTUT TUBSLMZ XJUI $MBSLF T UIBU UIFZ XFSF EFMJWFSJOH UIFJS PXO TLJMMFE BDUPST 'PS TPNFPOF TVDI BT $IVSDIJMM IF JT TPMJEMZ VQSJHIU UP JOUFSQSFUBUJPOT XJUIPVU RVJUF FOHBHJOH UIJT SFWJFXFS OPU BT XFMM TUFFQFE JO $IVSDIJMM T TMPVDI SFNBJOJOH RVJFU XJUI UIPTF PG UIF PUIFST TIBSJOH UIF UIF EFUBJMT PG UIJT QFSJPE PG IJTUPSZ JU BOE DBMN UP $IVSDIJMM T JSBTDJCJM TUBHF 5IFSF XBT B HPPE EFHSFF PG XBT B GBTDJOBUJOH BOE SJWFUJOH FEVDB JUZ %FNFHFS BDUT XJUI IJT FZFT TVDI UFOTJPO CFUXFFO $MBSLF BOE $MZEF UJPO %FTQJUF CFJOH OPSNBMMZ DMBTTFE UIBU POF HFUT UIF JNQSFTTJPO UIBU CVU UIBU UFOTJPO EJE OPU TQSFBE BMM BT XIBU NJHIU CF UFSNFE B OBUJPOBMJTN $IBNCFSMBJO T QIZTJDBM DPNQPTVSF JT BSPVOE UIF DBCJOFU UBCMF "U UIF QPJOU TDFQUJD * GFMU TVSQSJTJOHMZ QSPVE UP CF B DPWFS GPS B NBO XIP JT MPTU BOE UFS XIFO $IBNCFSMBJO NVTU SFWFBM IJT #SJUJTI SJm FE UIBU IJT PODF QPQVMBS OPX NVDI TVQQPSU FJUIFS GPS XBS PS QFBDF IF JT _ 3PSZ $SFFEPO NBMJHOFE QPMJDZ PG BQQFBTFNFOU IBT UIF MZODIQJO UIF DSJUJDBM WPUFS :FU UIF
QBSUC UW!UIFCFBWFSPOMJOF DP VL
partb@thebeaveronline.co.uk
9LVXDO $UWV (GLWRU 3PCFSUB $VDDIJBSP QBSUC WJTVBMBSUT!UIFCFBWFSPOMJOF DP VL
:HE (GLWRU "OHJF +VEF .POFLF QBSUC!UIFCFBWFSPOMJOF DP VL
&RYHU ;PF
CZ +PBOJF -BN PG UIF -4& 46 7JTVBM "SUT 4PDJFUZ
1BSU# VTFT QJDUVSFT GSPN 'MJDLS XIJDI IBWF CFFO JTTVFE VOEFS B $SFBUJWF $PNNPOT MJDFOTF
$ %ULWLVK 6XEMHFW $UWV 7KHDWUH %JSFDUPS )BOOBI &JEJOPX 1MBZXSJHIU /JDIPMB .D"VMJGGF ,FZ DBTU 4IJW (SFXBM ,VMWJOEFS ,IJS /JDIPMB .D"VMJGGF %BWJE 3JOUPVM "U "SUT 5IFBUSF VOUJM /PWFNCFS
"
#SJUJTI 4VCKFDU JT B m STU IBOE BDDPVOU PG UIF TUSVHHMF UP NBLF POF NBO T TUPSZ IFBSE 5IF NBO JO RVFTUJPO JT .JS[B 5BIJS )VTTFJO ,VMWJOEFS (IJS PG -FFET VOKVTUMZ JNQSJTPOFE JO 1BLJTUBO GPS ZFBST VOEFS TFOUFODF PG EFBUI 0VS BDDPVOU JT UIBU PG BDUSFTT /JDIPMB .D"VMJGGF CPUI UIF QMBZXSJHIU BOE BQQFBSJOH BT IFSTFMG XIPTF IVTCBOE %PO .BD,BZ %BWJE 3JOUPVM PG UIF %BJMZ .JSSPS VODPWFST 5BIJS T TUPSZ XIJDI UIFZ UPHFUIFS m HIU UP DIBOHF *U JT BMTP B DPNNFOU PO GBJUI SJHIUT BOE JOKVTUJDF BOE EFTQJUF UIF TFSJPVT OFTT PG CPUI UIF JOEJWJEVBM TJUVBUJPO BOE UIF XJEFS TVCKFDU NBUUFS JT OPU XJUIPVU JUT MJHIUFS NPNFOUT 8F CFHJO JO -POEPO XJUI /JDIPMB BOE %PO T EJTDVTTJPOT PG XPSL BOE BSHVNFOUT PWFS QBSLJOH UJDLFUT XIJMF IF QBDLT UP MFBWF 5IF DPNFEJD WBMVF PG UIJT TDFOF JT VOEFOJBCMF XJUI UIF BVEJFODF MBVHIJOH BT UIF FYDIBOHF JT QFSGFDUMZ UJNFE XJUI B DPNCJOBUJPO PG QFSTPOBM CBOUFS CFUXFFO UIF UXP BOE HFOUMF EJHT BU UIF QSFTT JO HFOFSBM 'PMMPXJOH %PO BOE UIF FWFS QPTJUJWF CSPUIFS PG 5BIJS "NKBE XIP KPJOFE IJN JO *TMBNBCBE XF NPWF TXJGUMZ CFUXFFO TDFOFT GSPN UIF BJSQPSU UP UIF CVTUMJOH TUSFFUT UP UIF VOTZNQB UIFUJD #SJUJTI )JHI $PNNJTTJPO UP UIF DSPXET PG PUIFST USZJOH UP FOUFS
5$/3+ 5,3/(<
9LGHR *DPHV (GLWRU Hassan Dar
.XOYLQGLU .KLU DV 0LU]D 7DKLU +XVVHLQ UIF QSJTPO BOE UIF n Z SJEEFO IFMM PG 5BIJS T DSPXEFE DFMM 8JUI MJUUMF TFU UP TQFBL PG UIF USBOTQPSUBUJPO PG UIF BVEJFODF JT EPXO UP JOUSJDBUFMZ EF TDSJQUJWF NPOPMPHVFT NVMUJ SPMF QMBZ BOE BO BUNPTQIFSF DSFBUFE CZ VTF PG TPVOE UIBU QMBDFT VT WJWJEMZ JO FBDI TJUVBUJPO XJUI B QBDF UIBU SFn FDUT UIF VSHFODZ PG UIF DBTF 5IJT JT UFTUBNFOU CPUI UP UIF XSJUJOH PG .D"VMJGGF BOE
EJSFDUJPO PG )BOOBI &JEJOPX 5IF JOUFOTJUZ PG UIF QMBZ SFBDIFT JUT QFBL EVSJOH UIF m STU JOUFSWJFX XJUI 5BIJS )F TIVGn FT GPSXBSE GSPN UIF CBST CFIJOE XIJDI IF IBT SFNBJOFE UISPVHIPVU DMVUDIJOH B CVDLFU UP IJT DIFTU MJLF B DIJME NJHIU EP JU XJUI UIFJS GBWPVSJUF UPZ 5IF SFTJHOBUJPO UP IJT GBUF IBT TFFNJOHMZ MFGU IJN B CSP LFO NBO CVU JU JT IJT GBJUI VOEFSTUBOE
JOH BOE CFMJFG JO GBJS QMBZ UIBU TIJOF UISPVHI NPTU PG BMM TIPXJOH XJTEPN CFZPOE IJT ZFBST BOE FOEFBSJOH IJN UP UIF BVEJFODF )JT GBJUI IPXFWFS JT B GSVTUSBUJPO UP %PO BOE B WFJO UIBU SVOT UISPVHIPVU UIF QMBZ BT QBSBMMFMT BSF ESBXO XJUI /JDIPMB T PXO BWJE 3PNBO $BUIPMJDJTN BT TIF SFNBJOT BU IPNF QSBZJOH UP 4BJOU +VEF GPS IFMQ 'SPN UIJT QPJOU POXBSET JU GFFMT MJLF B EPXOIJMM TMPQF UP UIF FOE XIFO VMUJNBUFMZ BGUFS OVNFSPVT QIPOF DBMMT BOE UIF iQPMJUF JOEJGGFSFODFw PG NBOZ DPOUBDUT UIF JOWPMWFNFOU PG 1SJODF $IBSMFT MFBET UP UIF SFUVSO PG 5BIJS UP IJT GBNJMZ JO UIF 6, 5IF QMBZ JT OPUBCMZ XFMM QFS GPSNFE CZ BMM JOWPMWFE QBSUJDVMBSMZ CZ ,VMWJOEFS (IJS XIPTF QPSUSBZBM PG 5BIJS JT CPUI NPWJOH BOE UIPVHIU QSP WPLJOH 'VSUIFSNPSF %BWJE 3JOUPVM BQQFBST CPUI BT CMVTUFSJOH %PO .DLBZ BOE CSJFn Z BT BO BNVTJOH 1SJODF $IBSMFT " #SJUJTI 4VCKFDU JT VMUJNBUFMZ B QMBZ BCPVU KVTUJDF BOE JOKVTUJDF ZFU XIJMF UIF TVCKFDU NBUUFS JT JOUFOTF BOE UIF TFSJPVTOFTT PG UIF TJUVBUJPO JT HSBWF UIF IVNPVS SVOOJOH UISPVHI PVU QSPWJEFT SFTQJUF UP UIF RVFTUJPOT PG GBJUI SJHIUT BOE BDUJWJTN UIBU BSF UISPXO VQ XJUIPVU UBLJOH BXBZ GSPN UIFJS JNQPSUBODF 8JUI 5BIJS T m OBM XPSET XF BSF SFNJOEFE PG BMM UIF PUIFST UIBU OP POF XJMM TUBOE VQ GPS BOE IPX XF TP FBTJMZ QVTI UIFN UP UIF CBDL PG PVS NJOET 5IF NFTTBHF JT DMFBS BOE JT VOEPVCUFEMZ POF XF PVHIU UP SFNJOE PVSTFMWFT PG _ )BOOBI 1BZOF
0XVLF
1BSU# _ 5VFTEBZ /PWFNCFS
1HZ $OEXP 'D\V ² 5HDO (VWDWH 3 FBM &TUBUF T TFMG UJUMFE EFCVU XBT SFNBSLBCMZ DPIFSFOU FTQFDJBMMZ DPOTJEFSJOH UIBU JU XBT B DPMMFDUJPO PG TPOHT DSBGUFE PWFS B OVNCFS PG ZFBST JO WBSZJOH DPOUFYUT 5IFJS GPMMPX VQ JT UIF SFTVMU PG B EFEJDBUFE BOE TMPX QSPDFTT 3FBM &TUBUF IBWF OFWFS CFFO BTTPDJ BUFE XJUI IBTUF BOE UIFTF TPOHT WFSZ NVDI SFn FDU UIF MBOHVJE BOE NFMMPX DPOUFYU JO XIJDI UIFZ XFSF DSFBUFE 5IF /FX +FSTFZ CBOE T NVTJD FWPLFT NFNPSJFT PG DIJMEIPPE JOOPDFODF XIFO MJGF JT GSFF PG UIF CVSEFOT PG BEVMU SFTQPOTJCJMJUZ *O UIJT WFJO UIF BMCVN PQFOFS JT DBMMFE i&BTZw BOE JU T HPU UIBU TBNF CSFF[Z GFFMJOH UIBU BMM PG UIF CFTU 3FBM &TUBUF TPOHT IBWF XIFSF JU GFFMT MJLF UIJT TUVGG QPVST PVU PG UIFN XJUI NJOJNBM FYFSUJPO &WFSZUIJOH PO UIF OFX BMCVN JT B MJUUMF DMFBOFS UIBO CFGPSF UIF HVJUBST DIJNF BOE TQBSLMF
SJOHJOH PVU XJUI B TUJDLZ HMJOU UIF ESVNT BSF OFBU BOE DSJTQ BOE UIF WPDBMT XIJMTU TUJMM ESFODIFE JO SFWFSC EPO U GFFM TVGGPDBUFE CZ UIF FGGFDU 5IPVHI UIF BMCVN NJHIU GFFM VO USPVCMFE XJUI SFGFSFODFT UP DBSFGSFF TJNQMJDJUZ UISPVHIPVU JU DFSUBJOMZ JTO U NJOJNBM 5IF HVJUBS SJGGT UVNCMF PGG POF BOPUIFS BUPQ SPMMJOH ESVN QBUUFSOT BOE FDIPJOH DIPSVTFT PG CBDLJOH WPDBMT :FU JU OFWFS GFFMT FYDFTTJWF OP OPUF GFFMT XBTUFE BOE OPUIJOH IBQQFOT JO UIF XSPOH QMBDF PS UIF XSPOH UJNF *U T EFEJDBUFE UP VOEFSTUBUFNFOU BOE NPSF DPODFSOFE XJUI DPOWFZJOH GFFMJOH SBUIFS UIBO TIPXJOH PGG -ZSJDBMMZ %BZT DBQUVSFT UIF FT TFODF PG OPODIBMBODF i(SFFO "JTMFTw UBMLT PG iBMM UIPTF XBTUFE NJMFT BMM UIPTF BJNMFTT ESJWFTw ZFU OPUFT UIBU iPVS DBSFMFTT MJGFTUZMF JU XBT OPU TP VOXJTF w 5IF NFMPEJFT BSF XJTUGVM
CVU UIF MZSJDT BSF DBMN BOE MBJE CBDL FWPLJOH UIF TPVOE BOE UPOF PG FBSMZ 3 & . PS UIF KBOHMZ IPPLT PG 5IF #ZSET 5IFTF USBDLT BSF JOTUBOUMZ GBNJMJBS QSPWJEJOH B XBSNUI UIBU JT BT DPNGPSUJOH ZFU n FFUJOH BT UIF TVNNFS UIBU JOTQJSFT JU 5IFJS TJNQMJDJUZ JT JOUFOUJPOBM BOE XIJMTU TPNF IBWF MBCFMMFE JU VOJOTQJSJOH JU JO GBDU TIPXT B LOBDL GPS NBLJOH UIF NVOEBOF BOE GBNJMJBS TFFN OFX VOGBJMJOHMZ FNPUJPOBM BOE BDIJOHMZ SPNBOUJD 3FBM &TUBUF NBLF NVTJD UIBU TPVOET DPOUFOUFE *U XBTO U NBEF XJUI UIF NJOE TFU PG EFMWJOH EFFQ EPXO JOUP UIF SFDFTTFT PG DBUIBSTJT CVU JOTUFBE XJUI UIF BJN PG DBQUVS JOH TPNFUIJOH OPTUBMHJD QSFUUZ BOE DBSFGSFF 5IJT NJHIU TPVOE MJLF BO JOTVMU CVU XF OFFE NVTJD GPS XIFO MJGF T HPJOH SFBTPOBCMZ XFMM _ "CV 4IBSNVUB
,PDJLQH« \RXUVHOI DW D &KHU /OR\G JLJ
:
FT EFBS SFBEFST * IBWF EPOF UIF JOFWJUBCMF * IBWF GBMMFO JO MPWF XJUI $IFS -MPZE )FS NVTJD JT TP QPXFSGVM BOE FOJHNBUJD -JTUFOJOH UP JU USBOTQPSUT ZPV UP BOPUIFS EJNFOTJPO XIFSF UIF POMZ FNPUJPO ZPV DBO FYQFSJFODF JT UIBU PG UIF NVTJD 4IF PQFOT XJUI IFS TVQFS MBUJWF JOEVDJOH DPWFS PG 4IBLFTQFBSF T 4JTUFS T i4UBZ 8JUI .F w * N DSZJOH *U T KVTU UPP HPPE #Z UIF UJNF TIF SFBDIFT UIF FODPSF XF BMM LOPX XIBU T DPNJOH 5IF NPPE PG UIF BVEJFODF JT SFNJOJT DFOU PG UIF DSPXE BU B m HIU CFUXFFO
3PNBO HMBEJBUPST 8F LOPX XIBU XF XBOU 8F WF CFFO UISPVHI UIF VQT UIF EPXOT UIF HBNF PG MJGF BOE EFBUI /PX BT XF SFBDI UIF EFOPVFNFOU JU T UJNF GPS UIF NBJO FWFOU :FT JU T UJNF GPS i4XBHHFS +BHHFS w "T UIF m STU OPUFT SJOH PVU BDSPTT UIF WBTU BSFOB FBDI NFNCFS PG UIF BVEJFODF NP NFOUBSJMZ GBMMT TJMFOU *U T B QPXFSGVM DFMFCSBUJPO PG $IFS T NVTJD BOE NFT TBHF 5IF NPNFOU JT CSJFG UIPVHI BOE BT TIF PQFOT IFS NPVUI UP HJWF VT POF m OBM CMBTU PG UIPTF QFSGFDU BOE QPXFSGVM WPDBM DIPSET UIF SPBS PG BQQSPWBM JT VOCFMJFWBCMF
7KH DUW RI D ´VRXQGµ SOD\OLVW
8JUI UIF m OBM OPUF TUJMM MJOHFS JOH BSPVOE UIF WFOVF $IFS UBLFT IFS MFBWF FWFS UIF EJWB * WF CFFO MFGU TUVOOFE CZ B QFSGPSNBODF PG QPJTF QSFDJTJPO BOE CFBVUZ * LOFX UP FYQFDU HSFBU UIJOHT CFGPSF * DBNF UPOJHIU CVU GFX DPVME IBWF FYQFDUFE HFOVJOF HSFBUOFTT 5IJT JT 8PPETUPDL 2VFFO UIF #FBUMFT BOE FWFO UIF 4UFQT GBSFXFMM UPVS SPMMFE JO UP POF *G UIFSF T POF HPBM GPS ZPVS MJGF NBLF JU TFF UIF OB UJPO T OFX TXFFUIFBSU $IFS -MPZE _ %BWJE +POFT
'PS UIPTF PG VT XIP XJMM OFWFS QFO PVS PXO TPOHT DSBGUJOH UIF QFSGFDU QMBZMJTU NBZ CF UIF DMPTFTU XF XJMM FWFS HFU UP UIF DSFBUJWF NVTJD QSPD FTT 1FSGFDUMZ DPSSFMBUJOH HFOSFT TPOH MFOHUI DFMFCSJUZ BOE PCTDVSJUZ XF XBOU B QMBZMJTU UP USBOTDFOE JUT DPO TUJUVFOU TPOHT BOE DBQUVSF B [FJUHFJTU PG PVS DIPJDF 4FMFDUJOH BO BQQSPQSJBUF UIFNF EPFT OPU FRVBM CMJOEMZ TFMFDUJOH ZPVS GBWPVSJUF TPOHT *OEFFE UIFSF JT B NVM UJQMJDJUZ PG GBDUPST XIJDI OFFE UP DPNF JOUP QMBZ 0OF OFFET UP DPOTJEFS UIF NPPE CFJOH DPOWFZFE JT UIJT B 4VOEBZ BGUFSOPPO QMBZMJTU BQQFBMJOH UP NFMBO DIPMZ MPTU NPNFOUT BOE ESFBNT 0S
EPFT UIJT QMBZMJTU UBSHFU UIF DBVTBMMZ DSFBUJWF QSPDFTT PG NBLJOH TVQQFS " QMBZMJTU JT UIF CBDLESPQ UP UIF NP NFOU TVDDFTTGVMMZ KVEHJOH UIF NPPE XJMM TFHVF OJDFMZ JO UP m OEJOH BO BQ QSPQSJBUF UJUMF *U TIPVME CF TVDDJODU BOE FOJHNBUJD NVDI MJLF UIF UJUMF PG B TPOH 'JOBMMZ UIF QMBZMJTU TIPVME BJN UP FEVDBUF *U TIPVME ESBX QVOEJUT JO XJUI OFPO DMBTTJDT UP UIF TIZ VOGBNJM JBS 0OF TIPVME IPQF UIBU UIF QMBZMJTU FWPLFT NBSWFM VQ UIF HBSEFO QBUI *U TIPVME QVMM CBDL VTFE XJOUFS DPBUT UP SFWFBM B TFDSFU EPPS JO UIF CBDL PG ZPVS DMPTFU _ "MJDJB $VOOJOHIBN
3DUW%HDW 7KH RIILFH SOD\OLVW WKLV ZHHN« $PNNPO #VSO .B[[Z 4UBS $PNNPO #VSO
3FNJOE 6<&2
7KLV ZHHN·V OLYH KLJKOLJKWV /PW (JSMT o &MFDUSJD #BMMSPPN
3FBM &TUBUF %BZT
$FMFTUJBM 5FSSFTUSJBM $PNNVUFST .BIBWJTIOV 0SDIFTUSB #JSET PG 'JSF
'SBOL 0DFBO /PTUBMHJB 6MUSB
:PVMPHZ 4IBCB[[ 1BMBDFT #MBDL 6Q
)JHIFS (SPVOE
/PW 'SBOL 0DFBO o 90:0
3FE )PU $IJMJ 1FQQFST .PUIFS T .JML
1MBDF UP #F 0$*186 $6.( %/,.(1*
/PW $BLF o 3PVOEIPVTF
*U T 3FBM
-PWFDSJNFT
/PW 5IF "OUMFST o ,0,0
/PW 3JIBOOB o 5IF 0 "SFOB
0SCJUBM 0SCJUBM
7KH $QWOHUV
/JDL %SBLF 1JOL .PPO
&MJ[BCFUI 'SBTFS $PDUFBV 5XJOT 3FXPSL
4UBS 4MJOHFS &MJ[BCFUI 'SBTFS
)ROORZ XV #SDUWEPXVLF
5VFTEBZ /PWFNCFS _ 1BSU#
5RWKNR LQ %ULWDLQ .
7KH +XPDQ &HQWLSHGH ,, )XOO 6HTXHQFH
%JSFDUPS 5PN 4JY 4DSFFOQMBZ 5PN 4JY ,FZ DBTU -BVSFODF 3 )BSWFZ "TIMZOO :FOOJF .BEEJ #MBDL :FBS 3VOUJNF NJOVUFT *O DJOFNBT OPX
79 7LSV IRU WKH ZHHN
%2817< ),/06
5
IF )VNBO $FOUJQFEF ** 'VMM 4FRVFODF JT QSFTFOUMZ DSBXMJOH JOUP DJOFNBT OFBS ZPV 5IJT JT B mMN UIF #SJUJTI #PBSE PG 'JMN $MBTTJmDBUJPO ##'$ JOJUJBMMZ CBOOFE XJUIPVU FWFO HJWJOH UIF PQUJPO PG CF JOH DVU UP BDDFQUBCJMJUZ 5IF ##'$ IBT OPX DIBOHFE UIFJS NJOE BOE HJWFO JU UIF DFSUJmDBUF PG BGUFS UXP BOE B IBMG NJOVUFT PG DVUT 5IF TUPSZ GPMMPXT .BSUJO -BVSFODF 3 )BSWFZ B CVH FZFE UVCCZ MJUUMF NBO XIP CFDPNFT TFYVBMMZ PCTFTTFE XJUI UIF PSJHJOBM )VNBO $FOUJQFEF mMN JO UIF VOJWFSTF PG UIF TFRVFM UIF PSJHJOBM XBT SFMFBTFE BT B mMN BOE UIF BOUBHPOJTU PXOT JU 4PVOET HSFBU SJHIU :PV NBZ SFNFNCFS )BSWFZ GSPN UIF QMBZ 5IF .BO 8JUI 5IF "CTVSEMZ -BSHF 1FOJT PS UIF TIPSU mMN 4FY GPS UIF %JTBCMFE VTVBMMZ OPU B HPPE TJHO *O DBTF ZPV IBWF CFFO GPSUVOBUF FOPVHI UP EPEHF UIF HFOFSBM QMPU UIF ADFOUJQFEF JT QFPQMF TFXO UPHFUIFS JO B MJOF 'PS NPSF B CFUUFS JMMVTUSBUJPO TFF BCPWF PS DPOTVMU (PPHMF 5IJT mMN JT DPNQBSBCMF UP UIF LJOE PG UIJOH UIBU JG ZPV TBX PO UIF CPUUPN PG ZPVS TIPF ZPV E TDSBQF JU PGG CFDBVTF JU TNFMU CBE 4BU JO UIF DJOFNB MFBEJOH VQ UP UIF TUBSU * IBE B TFOTBUJPO BOBMPHPVT UP UIBU PG CFJOH PO B SPMMFS DPBTUFS DIBJO MJGU BT UIF FOPSNJUZ PG UIF TJUVBUJPO EBXOFE PO NF * RVFTUJPOFE XIZ * XPVME QVU NZTFMG UISPVHI TVDI UPSUVSF 5IF CFHJOOJOH PG UIF mMN MFGU NF WFSZ QMFBTBOUMZ TVSQSJTFE 'PS UIF NPTU QBSU UIF DMJDI¸E BDUJOH PG UIF PSJHJOBM IBT CFFO SFQMBDFE XJUI GBJSMZ EFDFOU QFSGPSNBODFT 5IF EJBMPHVF JTO U IBMG CBE BOE UIF IPSSPS UFO TJPO CVJMET BU B NPSF UIBO BEFRVBUF TUBOEBSE 5IF NPPE DSFBUJPO JT BJEFE CZ TPNF WFSZ HPPE TIPPUJOH TIPXJOH PGG CMBDL BOE XIJUF IPSSPS BT XFMM BT HPPE VTF PG TPVOE *G EJSFDUPS 5PN 4JY TUPQQFE NFTTJOH BCPVU XJUI TVDI BO FYUSFNF PG UIF HFOSF BOE B CJU
9LVXDO $UWV
1BSU# _ 5VFTEBZ /PWFNCFS
0DUWLQ /DXUHQFH 5 +DUYH\ ZLWK D +XPDQ &HQWSHGH RI KLV FUHDWLRQ NPSF XJUI UIF QMPU * N TVSF IF DPVME QSPEVDF TPNFUIJOH EFDFOU "T * UIJOL * WF BMMVEFE UP UIJT MFWFM PG mMN NBLJOH JT POMZ B CJU PG B QIBTF 5IF NJEEMF BOE UIF FOE BSF PG MJUUMF NFSJU CFZPOE TFFJOH OBTUZ TUVGG 5IF DSB[JOFTT HFUT UP TVDI B MFWFM UIBU * QFSDFJWF UIJT mMN BT B CJU PG B TBUJSF PG UIF HFOSF BOE XFJSEMZ UIF
PSJHJOBM HPJOH CFZPOE BOZ SFBMN PG TFOTJCJMJUZ JOUP UIF EFQUIT PG TUVQJE JUZ BOE HSPTTOFTT * N QSFUUZ SFTJMJFOU UP HPSF CVU * IBWF OFWFS TRVJSNFE TP NVDI JO NZ TFBU JO B mMN CFGPSF 5IF SFMBUJWF DMFBOMJOFTT PG UIF TVSHFSZ QFSGPSNFE CZ %S )FJUFS JO UIF PSJHJOBM IBT CFFO SFQMBDFE CZ BO JOUFMMFDUV BMMZ DIBMMFOHFE NBO BOE TPNF %*:
1MBVTJCJMJUZ HFUT TUSFUDIFE QBTU CSFBL JOH QPJOU 5IF DPOKPJOJOH PG TBUJSF BOE IPSSPS JT B USJDLZ POF 5IFSF XFSF TPNF MBVHIT QSPEVDFE JO UIF BVEJ FODF "U QPJOUT * MBVHIFE KVTU BU UIF SFBMJTBUJPO PG IPX BXGVM UIF GPMMPX JOH BDUJPOT XFSF UP CF 4BUJSF IBT UP CF VTFE GBJSMZ MPPTFMZ JO UIJT DPOUFYU IPXFWFS *O SFBMJUZ 5IF )VNBO
$FOUJQFEF ** JT KVTU HSPTT *G UIBU T XIBU ZPV XBOU SVO PVU BOE XBUDI JU JNNFEJBUFMZ 5IF DJOFNB FYQFSJFODF XJMM TUJDL XJUI ZPV GPS B XIJMF DFS UBJOMZ UIF GPMMPXJOH KJUUFSZ NJOVUFT *G ZPV UIPVHIU UIF mSTU mMN XBT HSJN UIJT POF JT NVDI NVDI XPSTF
5HPHPEUDQFH :HHN
7KH 6LPSVRQV
%RUHG WR 'HDWK
6RURULW\ *LUOV
##$ .POEBZT
$IBOOFM 'SJEBZT
4LZ "UMBOUJD .POEBZT
& 5VFEBZT
*O UIF SVO VQ UP 3FNFNCSBODF 4VOEBZ (FUIJO +POFT USBWFMT UP "GHBOJTUBO UP IPOPVS UIF TPMEJFST XIP IBWF GPVHIU UIFSF )F BMTP DFMFCSBUFT UIF DPVSBHF PG PUIFS TFSWJDFNFO BOE XPNFO XIP IBWF QBSUJDJQBUFE JO QBTU DPOnJDUT BSPVOE UIF XPSME
*U T UIF UI TFBTPO BOE XF SF TUJMM MPWJOH UIF BDUJPO *O UIF mSTU FQJTPEF -JPOFM 3JDIJF BSSJWFT JO 4QSJOHmFME UP TFSFOBEF )PNFS GPS TBWJOH .S #VSOT GSPN ESPXOJOH 5IF IBQMFTT IFSP TPPO HFUT BO BQQFUJUF GPS MVYVSZ BOE IJSFT B MJGF DPBDI UP IFMQ IJN BDIJFWF IJT BTQJSBUJPOT
/FX TFSJFT " QPMJDFNBO IJSFT +POBUIBO UP SFUSJFWF JODSJNJOBUJOH FWJEFODF GSPN B TFY DMVC IF GSFRVFOUT (FPSHF JT IPSSJmFE XIFO IJT OFX CPTT DMBNQT EPXO PO FYQFOTFT BOE 3BZ NBLFT B EFTQFSBUF CJE UP TBMWBHF IJT SFMBUJPOTIJQ $PNFEZ TUBSSJOH +BTPO 4DIXBSU[NBO 5FE %BOTPO BOE ;BDI (BMJmBOBLJT
3FBMJUZ TIPX JO XIJDI ZPVOH XPNFO DPNQFUF GPS mWF QMBDFT JO B GFNBMF TUVEFOU TPDJFUZ CFJOH MBVODIFE JO UIF VOJWFSTJUZ DJUZ PG -FFET CZ TPSPSJUZ JOTJEFST GSPN "NFSJDB *O UIF mSTU FQJTPEF B TFSJFT PG JOUFSWJFXT XIJU UMFT EPXO IPQFGVMT UP QPUFOUJBM NFNCFST PG UIF OFX PSHBOJTBUJPO 5IFZ UIFO IBWF UP UVSO PO UIF DIBSN BU BO FWFOJOH QBSUZ
_ )BSSZ #VSEPO
BSL 3PUILP T mSTU TPMP FYIJCJUJPO PVUTJEF UIF 64" XBT IFME JO BU UIF 8IJUFDIBQFM (BMMFSZ 5IF FYIJCJUJPO XBT NPNFOUPVT JU GVOEBNFOUBMMZ BMUFSFE UIF OBUVSF PG UIF #SJUJTI BSU XPSME 5IJT TNBMM FYIJCJUJPO ZFBST PO DPNNFNPSBUFT UIF mSTU TIPXJOH PG 3PUILP T XPSL JO UIF 6, BOE DFM FCSBUFT UIF BSUJTU T SFMBUJPOTIJQ XJUI UIF DPVOUSZ 8IFO 3PUILP BSSJWFE PO UIF TIPSFT PG #SJUBJO )BSPME .BDNJMMBO T HPWFSONFOU XBT QSFTJEJOH PWFS B QPTU XBS DPVOUSZ UIBU IBE SFDFOUMZ IBFNPSSIBHFE JUT FNQJSF BOE XBT TUSVHHMJOH UP DPOUSPM JOn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iDPOTJEFSBCMZ PGG XIJUFw CBDLHSPVOE TP UIBU UIF XBMMT BSFO U imHIUJOH BHBJOTU UIF QJDUVSFT w )F XJTIFE GPS UIF QJFDFT UP CF EJTQMBZFE BT UIFZ XFSF QBJOUFE OPU iPWFS MJU PS SPNBOUJDJ[FE CZ TQPUTw BOE IVOH BT DMPTF UP UIF nPPS BT QPTTJCMF OPU NPSF UIBO TJY JODIFT IJHI JO TPNF DBTFT 4VDI B QSFDJTFMZ NBOBHFE FOWJ SPONFOU BMMPXFE UIF WJTJUPST UP CF DPNQMFUFMZ JNNFSTFE JO UIF XPSME PG FBDI QBJOUJOH 4BOESB -PVTBEB T QIPUPHSBQIT EPDVNFOU UIF SFBDUJPOT PG BO BXFTUSVDL #SJUJTI QVCMJD BT UIFZ JOUFSBDUFE XJUI UIF QJFDFT GPS UIF mSTU UJNF 5IF XPSME T HBMMFSJFT DPOUJOVF UP TIPXDBTF NPNFOUPVT XPSLT PG BSU GSPN CZHPOF FSBT CVU JU JT B SBSJUZ UP
TFF UIF FYBDU NPNFOU XIFO B OBUJPO NFU B NPWFNFOU 5IF QIPUPT NBZ DPOEFNO UIFJS TVCKFDUT UP BO FUFSOJUZ PG TUJMMOFTT CVU JU JT OPU B TUSFUDI UP JNBHJOF UIF WJTJ UPST JO UIF nFTI PME MBEJFT TQSBXMFE PO CFODIFT BOE HFOUMFNFO MFBOJOH PO QJMMBST TUBZJOH BOE DPOUFNQMBUJOH UIF DPMPTTBM DBOWBTTFT GPS BO BFPO $SJUJDT PG UIF UJNF XFSF TFFNJOHMZ BT TUSVDL CZ UIF PGGFSJOH BT UIF QVCMJD .BOZ DFOTVSFE UIF mSTU FYIJCJUJPO PG BCTUSBDU FYQSFTTJPOJTN JO UIF 6, BU UIF 5BUF JO OPOF NPSF WFIF NFOUMZ UIBO %BWJE 4ZMWFTUFS XIP JO EFTDSJCFE "NFSJDBO BCTUSBDU BSU BT BO JOGFSJPS JNJUBUJPO PG &VSPQFBO NPEFSO QBJOUJOH 6QPO TFFJOH UIF FYIJCJU IPXFWFS IF XSPUF JO IJT /FX 4UBUFTNBO SFWJFX UIBU UIF XPSLT XFSF iUIF DPNQMFUF GVMmMNFOU PG 7BO (PHI T OPUJPO PG VTJOH DPMPVS UP DPO WFZ NBO T QBTTJPOT w " VOJU XJSFE XJUI IFBEQIPOFT QMBZT UISPVHI PWFS BO IPVS PG BSDIJWF BVEJP NBUFSJBM 5BQFE SFWJFXT FDIP 4ZMWFTUFS T TFOUJNFOUT BCPVU UIF FMPRVFODF XJUI XIJDI IJT XPSL TQFBLT XIJMTU SFDPSEFE JOUFSWJFXT SFWFBM JO UJNBUF EFUBJMT PG 3PUILP T MJGF QBJOUFS 1BVM 'FJMFS SFDPVOUT 3PUILP T WJTJU UP $PSOXBMM UP NFFU BSUJTUT GSPN UIF 4U *WFT 4DIPPM PG "SU /BZJB :JBLPVNBLJ UIF HBMMFSZ T DVSSFOU "SDIJWF $VSBUPS TQPLF PG UIF iPWFSXIFMNJOH FGGFDUw UIBU UIF PSJHJ OBM FYIJCJUJPO IBE PO QFPQMF BT UIFZ WFOUVSFE JOUP UIF HBMMFSZ GSPN UIF TUSFFU *OEFFE UIF 5BUF T WFSZ EFmOJ UJPO PG BCTUSBDU FYQSFTTJPOJTN TUBUFT UIBU JU iFNCPEJFT JOWPMWJOH FNPUJPOBM SFBDUJPOT JO BSU CPSO GSPN UIF TVSSFBM JTU JEFB UIBU BSU TIPVME DPNF GSPN UIF VODPOTDJPVT NJOE w *O 3PUILP JOUFOEFE UP FMJDJU TVDI B SFBDUJPO XIFO IF mOJTIFE QBJOUJOH IJT 4FBHSBN NVSBMT UP GVSOJTI UIF XBMMT PG UIF 'PVS 4FBTPOT SFTUBV SBOU JO /FX :PSL 0TUFOTJCMZ IF JO UFOEFE UP TVCWFSU .BOIBUUBO T FMJUF PG UIF T i* IPQF UP SVJO UIF BQQFUJUF
PG FWFSZ TPO PG B CJUDI XIP FWFS FBUT JO UIBU SPPN w IF HMPBUFE XJUI QBJOU JOHT UIBU XJMM NBLF UIPTF SJDI CBTUBSET iGFFM UIBU UIFZ BSF USBQQFE JO B SPPN XIFSF BMM UIF EPPST BOE XJOEPXT BSF CSJDLFE VQ w 3PUILP T FYBDU JOUFOUJPOT BSF VODMFBS CVU QFSIBQT VQPO SFBMJTJOH UIBU UIF XPSLT XPVME CF OPUIJOH NPSF UIBO NFSF EFDPSBUJPOT JO UIF EJOJOH SPPN PG UIF NPEFSO BSJTUPDSBDZ UIF NPOFZ GSPN UIF DPNNJTTJPO XBT IBTU JMZ SFUVSOFE BOE UIF QBJOUJOHT EPOBUFE UP UIF 5BUF " EJTQMBZ DBTF BU UIF DVSSFOU FYIJCJUJPO SFDPSET UIF MFUUFST UIBU OFHPUJBUFE UIJT EPOBUJPO BMMPXJOH WJTJUPST UP ESBX UIFJS PXO DPODMV TJPOT BCPVU UIJT NZTUFSJPVT QPSUJPO PG 3PUILP T QBTU 5IF QBJOUJOHT BSSJWFE BU UIF 5BUF PO UIF TBNF EBZ JO UIBU 3PUILP DVU IJT BSNT UP EJF JO BO FJHIU CZ TJY GPPU QPPM PG IJT CMPPE B WJTDFSBM BOE QPJHOBOU SFNJOEFS PG UIF DPMPVST BOE UIF EJNFOTJPOT PG UIF DBOWBTFT UIBU IF XBT CFTU LOPXO GPS 5IF TJOHMF QJFDF EJTQMBZFE BU UIF 8IJUFDIBQFM -JHIU 3FE 0WFS #MBDL XBT UIF mSTU 3PUILP FWFS QVSDIBTFE GPS B #SJUJTI DPMMFDUJPO BOE JT BO BQU DIPJDF UP GPDVT UIF NJOET PG WJTJUPST PO IJT QSPXFTT BU UIF QJOOBDMF PG IJT NBUVSF TUZMF 'JGUZ ZFBST BHP +PIO 3VTTFMM DPN NFOEFE UIF PSJHJOBM FYIJCJUJPO JO IJT 4VOEBZ 5JNFT SFWJFX i.PTU SBSF NZTUFSJPVT BOE OPU UP CF NJTTFE JT UIF FYQFSJFODF XIJDI HSFFUT UIF WJTJUPS UP UIF NBSL 3PUILP FYIJCJUJPO w 5IF 8IJUFDIBQFM T DPNNFNPSBUJWF PG GFSJOH UBTUFGVMMZ PQFOT B OFX QVCMJD T FZFT UP 3PUILP T HFOJVT 3PUILP JO #SJUBJO JT BU 8IJUFDIBQFM (BMMFSZ VOUJM 'FCSVBSZ _ 4IZBN %FTBJ
.$7( 527+.2 35,=(/ &+5,6723+(5 527+.2 $56 1< $1' '$&6 /21'21
)LOP _ 79
0DUN 5RWKNR /LJKW 5HG 2YHU %ODFN
:KDW·V RQ RQH PRQWK XQWLO KROLGD\V 5IFSF JT POMZ POF NPOUI MFGU CFGPSF XF TUBSU PVS XJOUFS IPMJEBZT BOE XIFUIFS ZPV BSF HPJOH UP SFUVSO IPNF PS ZPV BSF TUBZJOH JO -POEPO UIFSF JT B MJTU PG FYIJCJUJPOT ZPV SFBMMZ XBOU UP BEE UP ZPVS DBMFOEBS
3RZHU RI 0DNLQJ DW WKH 9LFWRULD $OEHUW 0XVHXP 5IF 7 " JO QBSUOFSTIJQ XJUI $SBGUT $PVODJM JT OPX DFMFCSBUJOH UIF JNQPSUBODF PG DSBGUTNBOTIJQ BOE NBLJOH 5IFSF BSF PWFS B IVOESFE
VOJRVFMZ DSBGUFE PCKFDUT JO FYIJCJUJPO GFBUVSJOH XPSLT CZ CPUI ZPVOH BOE FTUBCMJTIFE BSUJTUT VTJOH B XJEF BSSBZ PG TLJMMT 5IF BSUJTUT DPNCJOF UIFJS JNBHJOBUJPO XJUI UIFJS TLJMMT UP DSFBUF DSBGUT UIBU DPVME CF VTFE GPS FOUFS UBJONFOU EFTJHO NFEJDBM JOOPWBUJPO PS BSF TJNQMZ BO BSUJTUJD DSFBUJPO UP BENJSF 0OF PG UIF NPTU PVUTUBOEJOH XPSLT JT .JDIBFM 3FB T 1SPTUIFUJD 4VJU GPS 4UFQIFO )BXLJOH XJUI +BQBOFTF 4UFFM " SPCPU TIBQFE TVJU NBEF PG XPPE UIF TDVMQUVSF JT EFEJDBUFE UP UIF XPSME BDDMBJNFE TDJFOUJTU 4JODF
)BXLJOH JT FGGFDUJWFMZ QBSBMZTFE CZ NPUPS OFVSPOF EJTFBTF XFBSJOH TVDI B TVJU XPVME HJWF IJN UIF QPXFS UP UBLF DPOUSPM PG IJT NPWFNFOUT BOE DPOUSPM UIF XPSME UISPVHI IJT JOUFM MJHFODF 5IF FYIJCJUJPO TUSPOHMZ BEESFTTFT PVS UJNFT XIJDI BSF DIBSBDUFSJTFE CZ DVMUVSBM USBEJUJPOT CFJOH UISFBUFOFE CZ UIF MPTT PG TLJMM BOE USBEJUJPOBM XBZT PG NBLJOH BDDVNVMBUFE PWFS UIF HFOFSBUJPOT CVU OFHMFDUFE CZ UIF ZPVOH #Z TIPXDBTJOH UIFJS XPSLT UIFTF BSUJTUT DFMFCSBUF UIF DSFBUJWJUZ PG DSBGUTNBOTIJQ BOE UIF JNQPSUBODF OPU POMZ PG UIF USBEJUJPOBM NBLJOH TLJMMT CVU BMTP UIF TJHOJmDBODF PG VTJOH OFX UFDIOPMPHJFT BOE OFX XBZT PG XPSL JOH UP DSFBUF DSBGUT UIBU LFFQ VQ XJUI NPEFSO UJNFT BOE BU UIF TBNF UJNF MFBSO GSPN UIF TLJMGVM BSUJTBOT PG UIF QBTU 5ISPVHI UIJT FYIJCJUJPO 7 " IPQFT UP JOUSPEVDF OFX DSFBUJWF JEFBT BOE FODPVSBHF WJTJUPST BMTP UP VTF UIFJS JNBHJOBUJPO UP DSFBUF CZ UIFN TFMWFT BOE CF BCMF UP TBZ QSPVEMZ UIBU i* NBEF UIBU w 1PXFS PG .BLJOH JT BU UIF 7JDUPSJB BOE "MCFSU .VTFVN VOUJM +BOVBSZ &217(0325$5< $57 086(80 9,5*,1,$ %($&+
0LFKDHO 5HD 3URVWKHWLF VXLW IRU 6WHSKHQ +DZNLQJ ZLWK -DSDQHVH 6WHHO
/HRQDUGR GD 9LQFL 0OF PG UIF NPTU JNQPSUBOU FYIJCJ UJPOT FWFS UP UBLF QMBDF JO -POEPO PQFOT UPNPSSPX -FPOBSEP EB 7JODJ 1BJOUFS BU UIF $PVSU PG .JMBO JT UIF NPTU DPNQMFUF EJTQMBZ PG -FPOBSEP T QBJOUJOHT FWFS UP CF TFFO JO -POEPO 8IJMF QSFWJPVT FYIJCJUJPOT IBWF HJWFO QSJPSJUZ UP IJT XPSLT BT BO JOWFOUPS TDJFOUJTU PS ESBVHIUTNBO UIJT FYIJCJ UJPO BU 5IF /BUJPOBM (BMMFSZ GPDVTTFT
PO IJT XPSLT BT B DPVSU QBJOUFS UP %VLF -VEPWJDP 4GPS[B JO .JMBO JO UIF MBUF T BOE T -FPOBSEP T BCJMJUZ UP DPOWFZ JEFBMT PG CFBVUZ BOE QSPGPVOE NZTUFSZ JO IJT DIPJDF PG DPMPVST JT QFSGFDUMZ QPSUSBZFE JO UIJT FYIJCJUJPO 5IJT FYIJCJUJPO GPDVTTJOH TPMFMZ PO -FPOBSEP T QBJOUJOHT JO TVDI B TQFDJmD UJNF GSBNF XIJDI JT UIF mSTU PG JUT LJOE BOE CSJOHT UPHFUIFS XPSLT EJTQMBZFE JO HBMMFSJFT BMM BSPVOE UIF XPSME 4FWFSBM PG UIF XPSLT PO EJTQMBZ JODMVEF -B #FMMF 'FSSPOJ¹SF .VT¸F EV -PVWSF 1BSJT UIF .BEPOOB -JUUB )FSNJUBHF 4BJOU 1FUFSTCVSH BOE 4BJOU +FSPNF 1JOBDPUFDB 7BUJDBOB 3PNF *U JT EFmOJUFMZ BO FYDJUJOH UJNF UP CF JO -POEPO BOE CF BCMF UP TFF TVDI B WBTU DPMMFDUJPO PG QBJOUJOHT JO UIF TBNF FYIJCJUJPO -FPOBSEP EB 7JODJ 1BJOUFS BU UIF $PVSU PG .JMBO SVOT BU 5IF /BUJPOBM (BMMFSZ GSPN /PWFNCFS UP 'FCSVBSZ
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
FOUFS UIF DPNQFUJUJPO :PV OFWFS LOPX XF NJHIU CF UBMLJOH BCPVU ZPV JO 1BSU# OFYU ZFBS 5IF 7FPMJB &OWJSPOOFNFOU 8JMEMJGF 1IPUPHSBQIFS PG UIF :FBS FYIJCJUJPO JT BU 5IF /BUVSBM )JTUPSZ .VTFVN VOUJM .BSDI
3LSLORWWL 5LVW 'PS UIF mSTU UJNF JO UIF 6, UIF )BZXBSE (BMMFSZ BU UIF 4PVUICBOL $FOUSF JT OPX FYIJCJUJOH UIF mSTU TVSWFZ PG 4XJTT BSUJTU 1JQJMPUUJ 3JTU 5IF FYIJCJUJPO GFBUVSFT JOTUBMMBUJPOT TDVMQUVSFT BT XFMM BT EB[[MJOH NVTJD BOE WJEFPT DPWFSJOH 3JTU T DSFBUJPOT GSPN UIF T UP UPEBZ 5IF WJEFPT JO QBSUJDVMBS BSF XIBU 3JTU JT NPTU GBNPVT GPS BOE UBLF VQ UIF NBKPSJUZ PG UIF FYIJCJUJPO 7JEFP QSPKFDUT SVO BDSPTT EJGGFSFOU TVSGBDFT GSPN UIF nPPS UP UIF DFJMJOH BOE TFWFSBM DVTIJPOT PO UIF nPPS BM MPX WJTJUPST UP TJU UPHFUIFS XJUI UIPTF NPWJOH JNBHFT BOE CF TVCNFSHFE CZ UIF GFFMJOHT UIFZ FWPLF 3JTU T QSPKFD UJPOT QMBZ XJUI TQBDF BOE JOUFSBDU XJUI UIF WJFXFS UISPVHI B QFDVMJBS NVTJD BOE B HBNF PG MJHIU 5ISPVHI UIJT FYIJCJUJPO UIF JNBHJOBUJPO PG UIF WJFXFS JT QVU UP UFTU BOE XIBU ZPV XJMM CF UIJOLJOH XIFO ZPV XBML PVU GSPN UIPTF FYIJCJUJPO SPPNT JT VQ UP XIBU JNBHF ZPVS CSBJO IBT DBQUVSFE BOE SFDBMMT BT UIF NPTU WJWJE 1JQJMPUUJ 3JTU &ZFCBMM .BTTBHF JT BU 5IF )BZXBSE 4PVUICBOL $FOUSF VOUJM +BOVBSZ
)DVKLRQ _ )RRG
5VFTEBZ /PWFNCFS _ 1BSU#
FMDPNF UP 4IPSFEJUDI UIF VSCBO GBJSHSPVOE " TNBMM TFDUJPO PG PVS HSFBU DJUZ JT TFFNJOHMZ EFWPUFE UP UIF QVSTVJU PG EFCBVDIFE QMFBTVSF )FBE FBTU XIFSF UIF CPZT MPPL VOEFSGFE BOE UIF HJSMT QBSBEF BSPVOE JO NVTUZ GVS DPBUT 5IPTF XIP MJWF IFSF BSF UZQJmFE CZ OPO QSFTDSJQUJPO HMBTTFT BO PWFSMPBE PG QMBJE BOE SPMMFE DJHBSFUUFT UVDLFE OPODIBMBOUMZ CFIJOE UIF FBS *OEFFE UIFTF TQFDJNFOT BSF WBTU JO OVNCFS BOE JOnVFODF +VTU MJLF QVOLT HUPUIT BOE .PET CFGPSF UIFN UIFZ XJMM OP EPVCU DPNF UP EFmOF PVS HFOFSBUJPO /PX NVDI XSBUI IBT CFFO QFMUFE BU UIFTF iTDFOFTUFST w BOE MJLF FWFSZ QIFOPNFOPO QFSIBQT UIFSF IBT CFFO BO FMFNFOU PG PWFSLJMM /POFUIFMFTT DMFBSMZ i#FJOH B %JDLIFBEw JT BDUVBMMZ DPPM JG ZPV IBWF CFFO MJWJOH VOEFS B SPDL TFBSDI GPS UIF QISBTF :PV5VCF BT DMPUIJOH DPNQBOJFT SBDF UP QSPEVDF #SFUPO UPQT BOE TQSBZ PO KFBOT 'VSUIFSNPSF GFX XPVME EJTBHSFF UIBU UIF CFTU QBSUZ UP CF GPVOE PO B 4BUVSEBZ OJHIU JO UIF DBQJUBM JT FBTU PG -JWFSQPPM 4USFFU
)/,&.5 86(5 31(9$16
$ VWXG\ RI PDUNHWV 8
6SLWDOILHOGV PDUNHW
)/,&.5 86(5 48,7( 3(&8/,$5
5HQHJDGH &UDIW )DLU DW 2OG 7UXPDQ %UHZHU\
)PXFWFS * CFMJFWF UIBU UIF NPTU GVO JT UP CF IBE UIF NPSOJOH BGUFS UIF OJHIU CFGPSF XIFO UIF BSFB SFBMMZ DPNFT BMJWF 8IJMF UIF DJUZ JT FFSJMZ RVJFU #SJDL -BOF JT CVTUMJOH 5IJOHT LJDL PGG FBSMZ BOE JU JT XPSUI USZJOH UP TIBLF PGG UIBU TMJHIUMZ OBVTFPVT GFFMJOH UP HP BOE KPJO JO UIF GVO (SBC BO VOQMFBTBOUMZ TUSPOH DPGGFF FO SPVUF BOE $JSDMF MJOF QFSNJUUJOH HFU ZPVSTFMG UP "MEHBUF &BTU XIFSF UIF BEWFOUVSF CFHJOT 'PS CFHJOOFST 0ME 4QJUBMmFMET .BSLFU JT B TBGF QVOU &ODMPTFE JO B WBTU DPNQMFY TVS SPVOEFE DPNGPSUJOHMZ CZ LJUTDI DBGFT IFSF ZPV DBO mOE B NZSJBE PG QSPEVDUT GSPN ZPVS TUBOEBSE #FBUMFT 5 TIJSUT UP FDDFOUSJD HPMEFO KFXFMMFSZ 4VSF UIF %JTOFZ TUZMF DIBSN CSBDFMFUT ZPV CPVHIU IBWF B GBJS QPTTJCJMJUZ PG MFBW JOH ZPVS GPSFBSN UJOHFE BO VOQMFBT BOU TIBEF PG HSFFO CVU JU T XPSUI UIF SJTL XIFO UIFZ BSF POMZ b GPS UXP 3FHBSEJOH NPOFZ B RVJDL BENJO QPJOU XIFSF NBSLFUT BSF JOWPMWFE JU JT DFSUBJOMZ XPSUI DPNJOH BSNFE XJUI DBTI 5IJT BSFB JO QBSUJDVMBS JT CBEMZ TUPDLFE XJUI DBTI NBDIJOFT o PO NZ MBTU WJTJU * POMZ DBNF BDSPTT B MPOF CSBODI PG #BSDMBZT XIJDI IBE B RVFVF XPSTF UIBO 8SJHIU T CBS PO B IFDUJD EBZ 8IFO * mOBMMZ DBNF UP QVSHF NZ BMSFBEZ EFDSFQJU BDDPVOU PG ZFU NPSF NPOFZ * XBT JOGPSNFE UIBU UIJT
OTDPODFE PO B DPSOFS KVTU QBTU UIF (SBOE 5FNQMF PG 'SFFNBTPOSZ UIFSF JT B IVNCMF QVCMJD IPVTF RVJUF VOBTTVNJOH TFFN JOHMZ CSJOHJOH CBDL UIF TFOTF PG UIF WJMMBHF JOUP -POEPO 8JUIJO MJFT B TOVH CSJDL XBMMFE FTUBCMJTINFOU UIBU PODF FOUFSFE UISPVHI UIF OJDFMZ XFJHIUFE EPPS ZPV FOUFS B XPSME PG NBHJDBM XPOEFS *U NBOBHFT UP CMFOE mOF XPPE nPPST XJUI DBSQFUFE TFDUJPOT UIBU IBWF TVQFSC TXJSMT BOE QBUUFSOT *G ZPV TRVJOU ZPVS FZFT UIFZ NBZ SFNJOE ZPV PG B /PSEJD DPVOUSZ T GBS SJHIU QPMJUJDBM NPWFNFOU T TZNCPM #VU JU T OPU PCWJPVT * N SFBMMZ KVTU MPPLJOH GPS TPNFUIJOH UP CMBUIFS PO BCPVU %PO U CF PGG QVU BGUFS BMM JU T KVTU B QJFDF PG DBSQFU 'PS TUBSUFST EFTQJUF UIF CBS CFJOH TNBMM BOE BMNPTU UPP VODPNGPSUBCMF JU JT SFMBUJWFMZ XFMM TUPDLFE 8IJMF UIFSF NJHIU POMZ CF UXP CJUUFST UIF POF * TBNQMFE 'MPXFST XBT TVQFSC *U IBE B XPOEFSGVM TNFMM XJUI B GSVJUZ BGUFSUBTUF BOE XBT TVQFSC *U NBEF VQ GPS UIF FNCBSSBTTNFOU UIBU XBT UIF (SFFO ,JOH *1" TBU OFYU UP JU 5IFZ EPO U CFMPOH JO UIF TBNF DMBTT CVU * TVQQPTF JU XPVME CF JOGFBTJCMF UP IBWF UIF *1" QVNQ JO UIF UPJMFU XIFSF JU CFMPOHT 5IF GBDU UIBU B CSBOEFE QJOU HMBTT XBT QSPWJEFE XBT B OJDF UPVDI TIPXJOH B MJUUMF CJU PG DBSF GPS NZ DVTUPNFS FYQFSJFODF #BS TUBGG LOFX XIBU UIFZ XFSF EPJOH BOE DMFBOFE UIF UBCMFT XJUI B TFOTF PG VSHFODZ UIBU
(:$1 08152
7KH 6XQ 'UXU\ /DQH &
7KH 6XQ 'UXU\ /DQH XBT OJDF UP TFF * HPU UIF HFOFSBM TFOTF XBT UIBU XIJMF UIJT QVC IBE DMFBSMZ CFFO SFGVSCJTIFE JNNFOTF DBSF IBE CFFO UBLFO UP SFUBJO UIF DMBTTJD GFFM 1PUT
BOE TVOESJFT PWFS UIF EPPS BOE IBOH JOH nPXFSQPUT NBEF GPS BO FOKPZBCMF WJTVBM FYQFSJFODF "U UIF UJNF * WFO UVSFE JO UIFSF XBT OP NVTJD QMBZJOH XIJDI NJHIU DIBOHF MBUFS BU OJHIU
CVU JU EJEO U EBNQFO UIF BUNPTQIFSF BU BMM * XBT TMJHIUMZ EJTBQQPJOUFE CZ UIF DSVEFMZ QMBDFE RVJ[ CPY NBDIJOF FTQFDJBMMZ DPOTJEFSJOH IPX VOPCUSV TJWFMZ UIF 4LZ 4QPSUT 57T BSF QMBDFE
IPMF JO UIF XBMM XBT POMZ EJTQFOTJOH b OPUFT "GUFS NZ JOJUJBM FDTUBTZ PG IPMEJOH UIJT HJMEFE OPUF UIF mSTU POF PG NZ MJGF JU RVJDLMZ CFDBNF BQQBSFOU UIBU OP TUBMM IPMEFST XFSF XJMMJOH UP UBLF JU PGG NZ IBOET *U JT B USBHFEZ UIBU UIPTF MFHHJOHT XJUI UIF -POEPO TLZMJOF QSJOUFE PO UIFN XJMM OFWFS CF NJOF CVU * EJHSFTT 4P 4QJUBMmFMET JT BO JOTUJUVUJPO CVU TBEMZ UIJT GBTIJPO OJSWBOB JT DPNJOH VOEFS BUUBDL (VOOFE EPXO CZ QSPQ FSUZ EFWFMPQFST XBOUJOH UP DBTI JO PO UIF ADPPM JOEFQFOEFOU SFUBJMFST BSF CFJOH QSJDFE PVU 5IF FNFSHFODF PG GB NJMJBS DIBJOT TVDI BT 8BHBNBNBT BOE -BT *HVBOBT JT EFFQMZ EJTDPODFSUJOH BT JU EFNPOTUSBUFT B TIJGU UPXBSET DSFBU JOH JEFOUJLJU TFHNFOUT PG PVS DJUZ -JLF $BNEFO CFGPSF JU BT UIF BSFB T OPUP SJFUZ HSPXT JUT DIBSBDUFS EJNJOJTIFT "UUFNQUT IBWF CFFO NBEF UP NPWF UIF TDFOF GVSUIFS FBTU CVU JU TFFNT FWFO %BMTUPO JT EFBE 8IFO ZPV BUUFNQU UP CVZ B ESJOL BOE mOE PVU UIBU POMZ HPPTFCFSSZ NPKJUPT BSF TFSWFE BOE BSF DIBSHFE BU UIF FZF XBUFSJOH QSJDF PG b JU JT UJNF UP NPWF PO )PXFWFS UIFSF JT B HMJNNFS PG IPQF 4VOEBZT JO UIF 0ME 5SVNBO #SFXFSZ IPTU BO FYDJUJOH ZPVUIGVM NBSLFU DMFWFSMZ UJUMFE i6Q .BSLFU w *O GBDU JU JT BOZUIJOH CVU TOPCCJTI 'VMM PG nFEHMJOH EFTJHOFST nPHHJOH UIFJS XBSFT JU JT B IVC PG JOOPWBUJPO DIBSBDUFSJTFE CZ POF PG B LJOE QJFDFT " MBCZSJOUI PG TUBMMT NBLFT GPS BO FY IJMBSBUJOH EBZ FWFO JG ZPV MFBWF FNQUZ IBOEFE *O GBDU UIF TQSBXMJOH WJOUBHF TFDUJPO PG UIF XBSFIPVTF JT BLJO UP UIF XPSME T CJHHFTU ESFTTJOH VQ CPY XJUI PME TMJHIUMZ GBEFE XFEEJOH ESFTTFT BM MPXJOH POF UP DIBOOFM UIFJS JOOFS .JTT )BWJTIBN 5IJT EJ[[Z MJHIU IFBSUFE CFIBWJPVS DIBSBDUFSJTFT 4IPSFEJUDI BOE NVTU OPU CF MPTU 1FSIBQT JU JT NPSF QSFDJPVT IFSF EVF UP JUT HFPHSBQIJDBM MPDBUJPO " mWF NJOVUF TUSPMM XJMM UBLF ZPV JOUP DPS QPSBUF CBE MBOET XIFSF BMUIPVHI UIF BHPOZ PG UIF XPSLJOH IPVST NJHIU CF SFXBSEFE XJUI UIF FDTUBTZ PG NPOFZ BOE TUBUVT JU T B QSFUUZ TPVMMFTT FYJTU FODF 5IF FBTU TUBOET BT B CFBDPO GPS UIPTF XIP TUJMM XBOU UP JOEVMHF JO SFW FMSZ 8IFO QSFTFOUFE XJUI UIF DIPJDF CFUXFFO B TVJU PS B QPMLB EPU QVGGCBMM TLJSU UIF DIPJDF * SFDLPO JT PCWJPVT _ &NNB #FBVNPOU
CVU * MM TVSWJWF * BMTP UIPVHIU UIF TVO NPUJG PG UIF QVC XBT TMJHIUMZ DPO USJWFE o JU JT B CJU NVDI UP IBWF B TJHO GSPTUFE XJOEPXT BOE MJHIU PSCT BMM SFNJOEJOH ZPV PG UIF GBDU * HFU UIBU ZPV OFFE UP EJGGFSFOUJBUF ZPVSTFMWFT GSPN UIF UVSHJE 0 /FJM T KVTU EPXO UIF SPBE CVU B TFOTF PG QFSTQFDUJWF XPVME CF QSFGFSBCMF 0S * DPVME KVTU CF BO VOIJOHFE OVUUFS 6OGPSUVOBUFMZ UIJT QVC JT TMJHIUMZ DMPTFS UP UIF ,JOH T DBNQVT UIBO UIF HMPSJPVTOFTT UIBU JT PVS MJUUMF QMPU XJUIJO UIJT DJUZ TP EPO U HP MPPL JOH GPS DPOWFSTBUJPO PO JOUFHSBMT PS TVQQMZ TJEF -BGGFS 7FOO EJBHSBNT * UIJOL * HPU UIBU POF SJHIU :PV MM POMZ CF EJTBQQPJOUFE 0O UIF UPQJD PG DPOWFSTBUJPO DMFBS UIPVHIU IBT HPOF JOUP UIF TJ[F OVNCFS BOE IFJHIU PG UIF UBCMFT XJUI TFWFSBM BU UIF QFSGFDU IFJHIU GPS B KBVOUZ MFBO 5IF CBS JUTFMG JT IJHI FOPVHI UP MFBO GPSXBSE BOE CF QSPQQFE VQ BGUFS B IBSE EBZ PG TUVEFOUJOH CVU OPU TP MPX UIBU POF DPVMEO U TJU BU JU DPNGPSUBCMZ %FMJDJPVT TUVGG 0WFSBMM B TPMJE FGGPSU GSPN UIF PXOFST * E HP CBDL CVU JG UIFSF T B CJH TQPSUJOH FWFOU * IBWF UIF GFFMJOH JU MM HFU NPSF DSPXEFE UIBO )PVHIUPO 4USFFU BU 0 DMPDL PO &MFDUJPO %BZ CVU XJUIPVU UIF GFFM PG EFTQFSBUJPO 8FMM QMBDFE 57T OJDF TUBGG BOE B EFDFOU BMF XIBU T OPU UP FOKPZ _ .BUUIFX 8PSCZ
)RRG _ /6([
1BSU# _ 5VFTEBZ /PWFNCFS
PNFUJNFT PO B TNBMM SPNBOUJD QFCCMFE TUSFFU IJEEFO CFUXFFO NBOZ BMMFZXBZT UIBU nPX PVU GSPN POF PG $PWFOU (BSEFO T IFBWJMZ DPOHFTUFE DFOUSF MJFT B DPTZ USBEJ UJPOBM GSFODI SFTUBVSBOU $BG¸ EFT "NJT *UT BMMVSJOH FMFHBOU MPPL EFOPUFT JUT SFMBUJWFMZ QBSBMMFM DIBSBDUFSJTUJD PG CFJOH TMJHIUMZ FYQFOTJWF "O BWFSBHF QMBUF DPTUT b BOE XJUI BO BQQFUJTFS BOE XJOF ZPV BSF MPPLJOH BU DMPTFS UP b 'PS B TJNJMBS 'SFODI FYQFSJ FODF UIBU JT B MJUUMF DIFBQFS * TVHHFTU #PVMFWBSE #SBTTFSJF XIJDI JT KVTU EPXO UIF TUSFFU 5IF SFTUBVSBOU JUTFMG JT TQBDFZ TPNFUIJOH UIBU JT SBSF UP mOE PO UIF DSPXEFE TUSFFUT PG -POEPO BOE IBT B HPPE BUNPTQIFSF PG QFPQMF BOE TFSWJDF OPU UP NFOUJPO FYDFMMFOU CBUI SPPNT CBUISPPNT XJMM BMXBZT UFMM ZPV B MPU BCPVU B QMBDF BOE UIJT SFTUBVSBOU DMFBSMZ QMBDFT B HSFBU EFBM PG JNQPS UBODF UP UIJT DIBSBDUFSJTUJD CFDBVTF UIF CBUISPPNT XFSF JNNBDVMBUF /PX PO UP UIF NPTU JNQPSUBOU
BTQFDU PG UIF SFTUBVSBOU o JUT GPPE 5IF GPPE JT EFDPSBUFE XJUI B QSJEF GVM BSUJTUJDBMMZ BMMVSJOH QSFTFODF 5IF DIFG BOE TPVT DIFG VOEPVCUFEMZ mOE B OFFE UP EFDPSBUF FMBCPSBUFMZ BOE UIFZ BSF TVDDFTTGVM BU QPSUSBZJOH B SFTQFDU GPS UIFJS GPPE JO UIF EFDPS "T ZPV CJUF JOUP UIFJS GPPE ZPV GFFM BT UIPVHI ZPV XFSF DIBPUJDBMMZ EFTUSPZJOH BO BSUJTUJD EFDMBSBUJPO PG GPPE 5P TUBSU UIF BQQFUJTFST BNB[F UIF QBMBUF BOE XBLF VQ UIF TFOTFT * PSEFSFE UIF HPBU T DIFFTF TBMBE XJUI CFFUT 5IF DPNCJOBUJPO PG UIF EFFQ SFE SPPUT TFSWFE DPME BT B TBMBE BGUFS CFJOH DPPLFE XJUI UIF SJDIOFTT PG UIF XIJUF HPBU T DIFFTF TQSFBE PWFS TNBMM QJFDFT PG TMJDFE 'SFODI CSFBE ESJ[[MFE XJUI PMJWF PJM NBLFT B EFMJDBUF DPNCJ OBUJPO PG UFYUVSF DPMPVS BOE UBTUF UIBU BQQFBMT UP TFWFSBM TFOTFT o RVJUF BO BDIJFWFNFOU "GUFS TVDI BO BQQFUJTFS UIF CBS GPS UIF NBJO DPVSTF XBT TFU IJHI 5IF FOUS¸F EJE OPU SFBDI JU "GUFS UBLJOH NZ QBMFUUF UP TFOTPSJBM IFBWFO UIF
NBJO QMBUF ESPQQFE NF CBDL UP &BSUI XJUI UIF XIJQMBTI PG EJTBQQPJOUNFOU * DIPTF UIF IBEEPDL XJUI FHH PO B 4QBOJTI UPSUJMMB XJUI B NVTUBSE TBVDF ESJ[[MFE UP UIF TJEF %FTQJUF UIF EF TDSJQUJPO UIF EJTI MBDLFE UBTUF o TBMU QFQQFS TQJDFT o UIFSF XBT WFSZ MJUUMF PG BOZUIJOH *U GBJMFE UP BXBLFO BOZ TFOTF BU BMM .PSFPWFS UIF IBEEPDL XBT EVMM UIF FHH XBT DPME BOE UIF 4QBOJTI UPSUJMMB XBT TUBMF *O GBDU * GPVOE NZTFMG FOKPZJOH NZ XJOF NPSF UIBO UIF QMBUF JUTFMG 5IF EFDPSBUJPO BOE QSFTFOUBUJPO IPXFWFS BMMVSJOH DPVME OPU NBLF VQ GPS UIF CMBOE FBUJOH FYQFSJFODF 5IF QMBUF XBT BWFSBHF BU CFTU BOE * GFMU UIBU * TIPVME IBWF TUVDL UP UIF BQQFUJTFS IBE BO FYUSB HMBTT PG XJOF BOE DBMMFE JU B OJHIU $BG¸ EFT "NJT XBT B XPOEFSGVM FYQFSJFODF JO UFSNT PG MPDBUJPO BU NPTQIFSF BOE EFDPSBUJWF GPPE CVU JO IPOFTUZ VOMFTT JU JT GPS UIF BQQFUJTFS * DBOOPU TFF NZTFMG SFUVSOJOH _ .BCF (BSDJB 3JODPO
)/,&.5 86(5 7,5(2)/21'21
&DIp GHV $PLV &RYHQW *DUGHQ 4
3XOOLQJ HWLTXHWWH i* SFBMMZ XBOU UP GVDL ZPVw JT OPU B QISBTF UIBU XJMM MFBE UP SPNBODF %JUUP iZPV SF OPU HPJOH UP HFU BOZPOF CFUUFS UPOJHIU w
$IBU VQ MJOFT DBO XPSL ,FFQ JU TJNQMF UIPVHI o iXIBU XPVME ZPV EP JG *
*G UFFUI DMBTIJOH PDDVST JU JT OPU HPJOH XFMM &JUIFS JNQSPWF PS
LJTTFE ZPV SJHIU OPXw BOE BTLJOH PVUSJHIU iDBO * IBWF B LJTTw XPSL XPOEFST * BN B TFSJBM WJDUJN PG UIJT POF
HFU PGG UIF QPPS HJSM HVZ
.VMUJQMF QBSUOFS QVMMJOH JT BDDFQUBCMF JG ZPV BSF ZPVOH BOE TJOHMF
7PNNJOH CFGPSF QVMMJOH JT OPU DPPM 6OGPSUVOBUFMZ UIJT SVMF JT PGUFO OPU PCFZFE CZ "6FST JO XIJDI DBTF TFSJPVT NPVUI SJOTJOH JT BEWJTFE "OE JG ZPV WPN JO TPNFPOF T NPVUI ZPV EFTFSWF BMM UIF BCVTF ZPV HFU
+VTU EPO U CF TVSQSJTFE JG ZPVS mSTU LJTTFF EPFTO U TFFN LFFO XIFO ZPV SFUVSO UP UIFN GPS B TFDPOE SPVOE 0S ZPV HFU HMBOEVMBS GFWFS BHBJO o * WF CFFO B WJDUJN
3FNFNCFS UIF BJN JT OPU UP TUJDL ZPVS FOUJSF UPOHVF EPXO
%P OPU JOUSPEVDF ZPVS QVMM UP BMM ZPVS GSJFOET o JU JT B CJU XFJSE BOE LFFO
:PV NBZ CF OFSWPVT CVU USZ OPU UP TIBLF * BN PGUFO PO UIF SFDFJWJOH FOE PG
UIF PUIFS QFSTPO T UISPBU BT UIJT JT CPUI VOQMFBTBOU BOE DBO MFBE UP DIPLJOH
1MVNQJOH MJQ HMPTT TIPVME CF WJFXFE MJLF CJH LOJDLFST o UIFZ
&DQ \RX EH WUDLQHG WR GR WKLV"
,PDJH 3DXO 9DUMDN DV *HRUJH 3HSSDUG DQG $XGUH\ +HSEXUQ DV +ROO\ *ROLJKWO\ LQ %UHDNIDVW DW 7LIIDQ\·V
JODSFBTF ZPVS DIBODFT PG HFUUJOH BDUJPO CVU PODF HFUUJOH BDUJPO HSFBUMZ EFDSFBTF GVSUIFS BDUJPO 'PS TPNF SFBTPO CPZT EPO U MJLF UIF TFOTBUJPO PG UIFJS DIJO CFJOH PO mSF 4JNJMBS TJUVBUJPO XJUI TUJDLZ MJQ HMPTT TUJDLZ DIJO
$POTJEFS ZPVS LJTTJOH UFDIOJRVF :PV OFFE UP BWPJE FNVMBUJOH B XBTIJOH NBDIJOF BOE BDDJEFOUBMMZ TXBMMPXJOH TPNFPOF T GBDF CVU PO UIF PUIFS IBOE JG ZPV BSF B GBO PG UIF IBMG DMPTFE NPVUI +645 #-00%: 01&/ *5 '03 (0% 4 4",&
'JOHFSJOH JT OPU BDDFQUBCMF CFIBWJPVS JO B DMVC -FBWF UIBU GPS B OJDF EBSL BMMFZ TPNFXIFSF
-FBWJOH ZPVS HSPVQ UP HP BOE QVMM JT BDDFQUBCMF BOE FODPVSBHFE CFIBWJPVS o IPQFGVMMZ ZPVS GSJFOET BSF MBET UPP "MUIPVHI IPQFGVMMZ OPU MBETZ FOPVHI UP UBLF QIPUPT BT JU JT WFSZ VOTFUUMJOH GPS UIF PUIFS QFSTPO XIFO B HSPVQ PG TUSBOHFST UBLFT B QIPUP PG ZPV HFUUJOH JU PO
*G ZPV BSF QMBOOJOH UP MFBWF XJUI TPNFPOF NFOUJPO JU UP UIFN *U JT VOOFSWJOH XIFO TPNFPOF KVTU GPMMPXT ZPV UP ZPVS CVT TUPQ BOE EPFTO U HP GPMMPXT ZPV IPNF
UIJT POF BOE JU JT WFSZ PGG QVUUJOH *G ZPV SF TIBLJOH CFDBVTF ZPV SF FYDJUFE UP HFU XJUI TPNFPOF ZPV OFFE UP HFU BSPVOE NPSF
*G ZPVS BEWBODFT BSF SFCVGGFE MFBWF HSBDJPVTMZ XJUI ZPVS EJHOJUZ JOUBDU "MMFHFEMZ ZPV DBO iUSBJOw QFPQMF UP CF CFUUFS LJTTFST 1FSTPOBMMZ * N EVCJPVT CVU * BN BTTVSFE JU DBO CF EPOF 5IJT NBZ CSJOH TPNF DPNGPSU JG JU T HPJOH CBEMZ
1H[W ZHHN %HGVLGH PDQQHUV 5RPDQWLF WH[W RI WKH ZHHN
3ULYDWH %
5VFTEBZ /PWFNCFS _ 1BSU#
35,9$7( % +HOG WKH IURQW SDJH +RQHVW SHUVRQ JLYHV PRQH\ WR /6(
-QuickComment
5
IF -4& 'JOBODF %FQBSUNFOU XBT BMMFHFE UP CF JO VQSPBS PO .POEBZ FWFOJOH XJUI UIF OFXT UIBU UIF MBUFTU EPOPS UP UIF 4DIPPM 5 ) & %BSEBOFMMFT IBE EPOF TP FOUJSFMZ MFHBMMZ XJUIPVU BOZ JOUFOUJPO PG HBJOJOH B QSJWJMFHFE QPTJUJPO XJUIJO UIF VOJWFSTJUZ BENJOJTUSBUJPO JO PSEFS GVOE B DPVQ JO #PMJWJB ESJMM GPS PJM JO UIF /PSGPML #SPBET PS HBJO TQFDJBMJTU MFHBM BEWJDF GPS BDUJWJUJFT VOEFSUBLFO XIJMTU BEWJTJOH UIF 1SJNF .JOJTUFS PG *UBMZ "GUFS m MJOH B GVMM SFQPSU XJUI UIF .FUSPQPMJUBO 1PMJDF UIF 'SBVE 4RVBE BOE UIF JOUFMMJHFODF BHFODJFT PG TJYUFFO OBUJPOT OP JOm EFMJUJFT XFSF VODPWFSFE XJUIJO .S %BSEBOFMMFT T EPOBUJPO i8F DPVMEO U CFMJFWF JU w 'JOBODF %JSFDUPS )VHI 1VHI JOGPSNFE UIF # i8F UIPVHIU UIBU XF IBWF CFFO BCMF UP TBMWBHF TPNFUIJOH XIFO XF UIPVHIU UIBU .S %BSEBOFMMFT IBE CFFO HJWFO B QFODF MJCSBSZ m OF JO CVU FWFO UIBU UVSOFE PVU UP IBWF CFFO B NJTUBLF DBVTFE CZ UIF MJCSBSJBO HFUUJOH IJN DPOGVTFE XJUI UIF NBO CFMPX IJN PO UIF MJCSBSZ T NFNCFSTIJQ MJTU w "MFY 4UPDLXFMM %BZ UIF (FOFSBM 4FDSFUBSZ PG UIF 4UVEFOUT 6OJPO BMTP FYQSFTTFE EJTNBZ BU UIF SFWFMBUJPOT OPUJOH UIBU UIF GPSUIDPNJOH i5IF 0OMZ 8BZ JT &UIJDTw BTTFNCMZ NFFUJOH XPVME OPX IBWF OPUIJOH UP EJTDVTT .T 4UPDLXFMM %BZ TUBUFE i8F XFSF CBOLJOH PO UIF NPOFZ BU MFBTU CFJOH MBVOEFSFE JO :FNFO PS TPNFUIJOH
Who do you blame for the Beaver scandal? â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Sunlightâ&#x20AC;? â&#x20AC;&#x201C;Jah Quey, 2nd year, BSc Economics â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;The Moonlightâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Teah Toh, 2nd year, BSc Economics â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Goodtimesâ&#x20AC;? â&#x20AC;&#x201C;Rahn Dhe, 2nd year, BSc Economics â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Boogieâ&#x20AC;? â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Ghe Maiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;n, 2nd year, BSc Economics â&#x20AC;&#x153;Sorry! Canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t stop, I canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t control my feet!â&#x20AC;? â&#x20AC;&#x201C;Mai Khul, 2nd year, BSc Economics 'SBOLMZ ZPV IBWF UP XPOEFS XIBU UIF XPSME JT DPNJOH UPP XIFO BO -4& BMVNOVT JT HJWJOH NPOFZ PVU PG UIF HPPEOFTT PG UIFJS IFBSU w 4UBOMFZ &OHFMCFSU )VNQFSEJOL BMTP TQPLF BHBJOTU .S %BSEBOFMMFT T EPOBUJPO TUBUJOH i5IJT TFFNT MJLF OPUIJOH NPSF UIBO B DIFBQ BUUFNQU CZ
EFQSFTTJOHMZ NPSBM QFPQMF UP EFSBJM UIF NPTU JNQPSUBOU -4&46 DBNQBJHO TJODF UIF MBTU POF XF EJE w 8IJMF .S %BSEBOFMMFT EJE UBLF MVODIFPO XJUI GPSNFS -4& %JSFDUPS 4JS )PXBSE %VWFUT MBTU ZFBS JU JT VOEFSTUPPE UIBU BTJEF GSPN UBLJOH B GFX UPP NBOZ SFm MMT UP CF QPMJUF UIF
/6( 68 6KRS ODXQFKHV QHZ ODSWRS UDQJH
iMAKHNO The revolution will not be televised, but it will be computerised! â&#x20AC;˘ Wireless compatible to co-ordinate the resistance by effortlessly leeching the internet from Starbucks â&#x20AC;˘ Draft constitutional elements in minute detail with 4GB of RAM (Random Access Marxism) â&#x20AC;˘ Comes pre-loaded with 19 Tony Benn speeches and 17 Ken Loach films â&#x20AC;˘ Free kettle with every purchase* Available colours: Black Unavailable colours: Red, White, Green Price: Currency is an oppressive bourgeois construct *Subject to innane group protest within 6 months and at the discretion of the Metropolitan Police.
UXP DPVSTF NFBM BU UIF &VTUPO PVUMFU PG /BOEPT XBT BMTP QBJE JO GVMM .S %BSEBOFMMFT XBT VOBWBJM BCMF GPS DPNNFOU PXJOH UP B #FJKJOH MVODI BQQPJOUNFOU XJUI .BINPVE "INBEJOFKBE 3VQFSU .VSEPDI BOE UIF "MHFSJBO *OUFSJPS .JOJTUFS _ 5BOOFE "MF
NEXT WEEK... What do you think of the LSE Libraryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s proposal to introduce a â&#x20AC;&#x153;Takeshiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Castleâ&#x20AC;? challenge to gain computer access?
9HUVH ZULWWHQ WR FRPPHPRUDWH WKH UHVLJQDWLRQ RI 'DYLG +HOG *UDKDP :DOODV 3URIHVVRU RI 3ROLWLFDO 6FLHQFH %\ :LOOLDP 7RSD] 0F*RQHWRWKH1RUWK
7ZDV LQ WKH \HDU WZR WKRXVDQG DQG HLJKW 7KDW ROG 'DYLG +HOG ZDV LQ D FKHHUIXO VWDWH $V KH¡G KHOSHG VXSHUYLVH D JUHDW 3K' )RU D FKDUPLQJ \RXQJ PDQ FDOOHG 6DLI *DGGDӞ $V /LE\DQV JR WKHUH ZHUH IHZ WKDW ZHUH VPDUWHU $QG *DGGDӞ ZDQWHG WR KHOS RXW KLV DOPD PDWHU 6R DV WKLQJV ZHQW E\ LQ EDUHO\ D ӿ DVK 6DLI KDQGHG DURXQG JUHDW EXQGOHV RI FDVK $V D UHVXOW WKLQJV ZHQW ZHOO IRU WKDW 3URIHVVRU RI ,5 $QG WKH SHRSOH LQ :KLWHKDOO WKRXJKW KH ZDV D VWDU <HW ZLWK WKH 5HYROXWLRQV DQG 0XDPPDU¡V 6WDVL 7KLQJV ZHQW EDG ZKHQ WKH DLU IRUFH VWDUWHG ERPELQJ %HQJKD]L )URP WKHQ RQ WKH /6( HQGHG XS OLNH 7ULSROL :LWK PHPEHUV RI VWDӽ ZKR VWDUWHG WR ӿ HH $OWKRXJK HYHQ ZKHQ HYHQ 6LU +RZDUG ZDV IHOOHG 7R SRZHU DQG SULYLOHJH ROG 'DYLG KHOG %XW \HW DV LW KDSSHQV ZLWKRXW PXFK GHOD\ /DVW PRQWK WKH JRRG DFDGHPLF GLG JR RQ KLV ZD\ <HW WKH JRRG OLWWOH VWXGHQWV FDQ VPLOH DV ZH FDQ .QRZLQJ WKDW ZH RXUVHOYHV ZRQ¡W KDYH WR JR WR 'XUKDP
Features Blog no evil The Beaver 08.11.2011
Maria Stambler reflects on the internet and censorship in Russia
A
s London hosted a two-day international cyberspace management conference in the first week of November, the Internet is a very relevant topic today. Ministers, industry leaders and Internet activists discussed topics such as tackling security threats without stifling business or freedom of speech – a task that is undoubtedly a highly complex one. But Russia (along with China, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan) proposed a simple solution to the problem: give governments the power to control the Internet. This has brought about criticisms from UK’s foreign secretary, William Hague, who believes that censorship would harm innovation and competition. Russia’s stance can be understood. Putin’s recent confirmation of his intention to seek re-election has sparked criticisms at home – people are beginning to understand that more Putin (perhaps until 2024 or even longer if the constitution is changed again) could bring more stagnation, escalation of an already unacceptable level of corruption and a tighter grip on freedom of speech. Thus whilst Western states are more concerned with intellectual property theft and hacking, authoritarian governments understand the role that the Internet and social media can play in bringing together and empowering opposition as it did for the Middle East earlier this year. At the UN Conference in September, Russia was among one of the countries that proposed global code of conduct including the principle that “policy
authority for Internet-related public issues is the sovereign right of states.” Research and statistics show that perhaps the incumbent Russian government should not be so preoccupied with Internet security. As of June 2010, only about 43% of Russia’s 140 million-strong population was connected to the Internet – a rather minute percentage compared to the majority of developed European countries. Although lagging behind its Western neighbors, the number of Internet users in Russia is growing rapidly. However, the way by which an average Russian user handles the Internet is little cause for Putin’s concern. According to the Public Opinion Foundation, about half of web surfers are interested in health and sports, while approximately only 20% use the Internet for politics related matters.
Russia proposed a simple solution to the problem: give governments the power to control the Internet Mobilizing users to become active in social causes has also proved to be rather unsuccessful: a campaign led by a prominent blogger Sergei Dolya for a national clean-up day, mobilized only 16,000 volunteers nationwide despite the support given to him by the tradi-
tional sources of media, that tend to be more popular in Russia. However, this campaign has been considered one of the most effective mobilization campaigns in Russia’s post-Soviet history. Despite the population’s apathy towards bringing about meaningful social and political change through this powerful, largely free tool of communication in an otherwise tightly controlled media landscape, the government still shows signs of restricting and controlling the Internet to some extent. A report produced in March this year by Reporters Without Borders, placed Russia in the “countries under surveillance” category in terms of Internet freedoms. Although no outright Chinese-style censorship has been employed, it is true that in recent years the Russian authorities have charged bloggers who posted critical articles with extremism. Few websites have been blocked altogether, but that in itself is not a positive generalization because in 2010 alone, Russian authorities blocked three different sites only within certain regions. YouTube, for example, was banned only in Komsomolsk-onAmur because of the far-right extremist material that could be found on the site. LiveJournal, the country’s most popular blogging site, was blocked in Ingushetia for almost three weeks until influential online media outlets wrote about it. Tulskiye Priyaniki, Tula’s independent regional news portal briefly faced a similar fate. Regional filtering such as this is more efficient than national filtering, experts argue. It attracts less media attention and is
easier to hide and if exposed, can simply be blamed on technical reasons. Regional blocking is a highly precise way of affecting only the target group, which indicates that the government prefers Internet filtering only at a local level and simple monitoring at a national one. Other sleek tactics to monitor or control the Web induce censorship disguised as prevention of crime or focus on security. Public safety has been used as an excuse to block sites during politically important moments. In 2008 Russia tightened laws requiring ISPs to deploy equipment that track users’ online activities, empowering the government to identify, track and punish dissidents. “Internet brigades” post disinformation and propaganda or threaten and intimidate opposition groups. The government has caught on to the way the Internet and social media can be used for its own propaganda machine. The Kremlin uses Internet strategies to promote its PR message, employing dozens of young, patriotic bloggers to flood chatrooms with a pro-Kremlin message, and to attack its enemies. Economist Yevgeny Gontmakhe claims that “the modern Russian propaganda machine permeates nearly every major media outlet and even extends to the blogosphere.” In July 2011, a viral started circulating on the Russian net in which young attractive women expressed their eternal love to Putin and vowed to “rip up” anyone who badmouths him. These girls are registered in Russia’s biggest social network, www.vkontakte.ru in a group
25
called “Armia Putina” (Putin’s Army). Their aim: “Putin for president.” They lure other young women with promises of them becoming Internet stars and young men are enticed to join the page because of the abundance of attractive young women. Medvedev, unlike Putin, has been very keen on being present in the blogosphere; some even call him “bloggerin-chief.” At a recent Russian Internet Forum Week, a joke began circulating that Putin did not let Medvedev run for second term because the latter spent too much time online, tweeting on his iPad. As a Russian saying goes “every joke has a bit of truth in it.” Perhaps Medvedev became the victim of his own online propaganda machine. Each of his short Twitter messages, such as a recent announcement of an upcoming televised meeting with supporters, becomes headline news and is aired several times a day on all state-controlled national television channels. Eventually, any viewer - from the simplest to the most sophisticated cannot help but become disappointed in the blogger-in-chief. Politics and the Internet are tightly intertwined in most Western countries. Their governments, however, cannot use sleek tactics to deceive users and restrict their online freedoms. Russia, on the other hand, is showing signs of stifling what is perhaps the last hope for freedom of expression and access to alternative, non-stateproduced information for the small proportion of users that use the Internet for this reason.
Flickr user: Alicakes* Image courtesy of Flickr
Journalism’s 26
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
Features
The Victim
Alex Haigh explores the worries and hopes of Mary-Ellen Field
I
n 2005, Mary-Ellen Field was accused by her client Elle Macpherson of leaking information to the press. As a result, Chiltern, Field’s employer, sacked Field as Macpherson’s Brand Manager. Field protested her innocence but “the Body” refused to believe her. She claimed that Field was an alcoholic and leaked the stories while she was drunk. Field, refuting the claims, sought the opinion of experts who stated categorically that she was not an alcoholic; she set out to find the truth. It has been 6 years since Elle Macpherson’s and Field’s phones were hacked and yet, even after private investigator Glenn Mulcaire admitted in 2006 that he hacked Macpherson’s phone, Field has not received an apology nor has her case reached the courts. Macpherson could have saved Field’s job after the admission but did not. This week, I joined Mary-Ellen Field to ask what her verdict on the scandal was, her feelings toward the media in general and what she hoped would come out of the Leveson Inquiry – the inquiry set up by David Cameron to explore the phone hacking scandal and to prevent similar activity in the future. I asked Mary-Ellen why she thinks it took so long for authorities to take notice of her plight and that of her fellow victims. “I couldn’t get anyone to listen to me and I couldn’t afford any lawyers,” she said. “All the letters I sent to the press went unanswered.” It was not until she was interviewed by the Guardian in 2009 and subsequently the New York Post in early 2010 that anyone began to notice. So startling was the unequivocal denial of the authorities - even after the press interest- Field’s lawyer, Mark Lewis, had to sue the chairman of the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) after she branded him a liar for stating that more people’s phones were hacked than was assumed when Glenn Mulcaire was jailed in 2007. Fortunately, the case was won and Lewis was given compensation for the allegation. The ball started rolling in terms of Mary-Ellen’s personal interest in the story when police opposed Sienna Miller’s requests to the courts to see her phone records in 2010. “I couldn’t understand why the police would oppose Sienna Miller getting her phone records, it just seemed really bizarre.” However, after this there was a setback in the case. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said they were closing the file because “there was no case to answer and there was no new evidence.” After a number of unhelpful correspondences with the CPS and the Police, Field decided to get in touch with the press. “I didn’t know that many journalists at that point, I had probably only met five journalists in my entire life, but I met somebody I knew at the BBC and he organised for me to do an interview with Paddy O’Connell at Broadcasting House.” Evidently, her interview with O’Connell prompted huge amounts of support. She was flooded with requests by lawyers and journalists to represent her or to
interview her. She chose Mark Lewis, with a strong history in the case, as her lawyer and decided to have her first interview with Mark Colvin of ABC in Australia, as she was born in Australia and has dual-citizenship. The choice of interview was a good one because the Australian media took a great interest in her case. “The Australian media were really interested particularly because Murdoch owns a lot more of the media over there than he does here.” Her Australian citizenship only added to the growing interest. However, she still had to contend with elements of the media determined to keep the story quiet. The Daily Mail and The Telegraph, Field claims, were determined to trash the story as a plot by the Left to rid the press of capitalism and the Murdoch press empire. Field was particularly upset by this claim as she is an avowed supporter of business and the chairman of her local Conservative association in Putney, South-West London. But despite this strong link to the party, ministers –many of whom she personally corresponded with – did not take her story seriously. It was not until the hacking of Millie Dowler’s phone that there was mainstream support as the public saw that the scandal affected ordinary people, not just
I was brought up to believe ‘the price of liberty is eternal vigilence’ [so] we need a strong press celebrities. As public support for an investigation into phone hacking intensified, David Cameron opened the Leveson Inquiry. Field, a core witness in the inquiry, protests the accusations, made by Paul Dacre and Kelvin Mackenzie, that the inquiry will damage press freedom. “This is to do with criminal behaviour, I am a victim as are the other people, celebrities and non-celebrities; we are the victims of criminal behaviour by a small number of journalists and executives,” she protests. In her view, the Leveson Inquiry is “turning out to be absolutely fantastic.” After making a speech to the third Leveson seminar, Leveson told Field to tell the other core witnesses that they should not be frightened by hostile journalists and lawyers and that he would protect them from outside influence. She has stated that she does not want the inquiry to be a pretence for reducing the freedom of the press. “I was brought up to believe ‘the price of liberty is eternal vigilance’ [so] we need a strong press,” she says. “A free press is our most precious thing and we haven’t had a free press because our politicians of the Conservatives and the Labour Party have just been sucking up to Murdoch because they thought... that they couldn’t get elected unless they did what he wanted.”
Field believes Leveson will not use the inquiry to rob the press of its freedom. “This is nothing to do with the freedom of the press. This is to do with criminal behaviour,” she said. She believes Leveson will stick to that principle. She says that this inquiry, as a judicial inquiry, is “the most important inquiry we have seen in this country for a very long time,” because it requires its witnesses give evidence under oath. I asked her what she hoped would come out of the Leveson Inquiry and the scandal as a whole. “I honestly believe Leveson will change the face of the media from a good point of view... I don’t think anyone will ever do this again.” She believes James Murdoch will be jailed, saying “the Commons Select Committee have released all the transcripts between my lawyer and Gordon Taylor’s lawyers and it shows without a doubt that James Murdoch knew about this from the beginning, was heavily involved from the beginning; he knew about this, he knew that there was more than one rogue journalist, that they lied to Parliament.” However, despite her anger, she agrees that in certain circumstance journalists do have to step over the line of the law “if it’s in the public interest. A good example of this is the politicians’ expenses. Those discs, with the information, were stolen so journalists paid for stolen goods. Now that is a crime. However, that is in the public interest.” But, in the case of phone hacking, she does not see any public interest in the stories: “You can’t just go trashing people’s lives just because you can. It’s disgusting.” She believes “people’s moral compasses should come into play,” but now does not know whether that is simply a utopian dream. She is supportive of self-regulation and would not like to see the Leveson Inquiry take it away from the press industry, nor does she believe it will. However, she says “I would like to see the Press Complaints Commission given teeth so it can punish people who behave badly... if they make it a mistake they shouldn’t be able to bury it in the back of the paper, they should have to put it at the front.” Finally, she believes people who are not British citizens should not be able to own majority stakes in the press. “I don’t think that’s acceptable because you have someone with no interest in the country; they don’t live here; they don’t pay taxes here.” “I think it’s wrong that foreigners can own our media because it’s such an important part of the country,” she continues. Mary-Ellen Field is no longer unemployed; she is working part-time for Brand Finance Plc., a company specialising in the valuation of intangible assets, but is still waiting for recognition from Macpherson that she had not wronged her former client nor has she been able to break back in to her former line of work. But at least, she is finally close to seeing justice for what cost her a six figure salary, a friend, her health and her professional reputation.
The fall
Gurdeep Chhina examines the Lev
R
evelations which brought about the News of the World phone hacking scandal culminated in an eruption of public fury and condemnation. As serious question were being asked about the British media’s practices and trust in newspapers was seriously shaken, the government had to act. In July, David Cameron announced a public government enquiry that would investigate matters further, and hopefully, recommend changes that would re-instill our faith in journalism. A difficult task, yes, but surely a necessary one? The enquiry is due to hear evidence from its first witnesses next week but many have questioned its necessity and even its effectiveness in instating reform. Ironically though, the inquiry, chaired by Lord Justice Leveson, will not be able to take a closer look at the News of the World’s misconduct as this could risk prejudicing future trials that may take place in relation to alleged phone hacking. So if the enquiry can’t take a look at specific phone hacking cases, what is its purpose? Perhaps to initiate reform and regulation of the system. Except that this is already happening anyway. The Media industry itself is putting in place stricter measures of self-regulation. There is already a regulatory body in place: The Press Complaints Commission. Granted, the PCC has been extremely inadequate in the past and has failed to act when faced with complaints. The industry now wants to dramatically strengthen and empower the body. Of course it’s natural for newspa-
per bosses to advocate self-regulation when there is a threat of state regulation. But there has been widespread criticism of MPs for being so keen to point the finger of blame considering they themselves were on such friendly
No newspaper editor or publisher is going to sanction it. Hacking is over terms with the Murdoch press in the past. Roy Greenslade, of the Evening Standard, pointed out that an inquiry wouldn’t have been announced at all if it hadn’t emerged that Cameron had hired the ex-News of the World Editor as his head of communications. When news leaked that Milly Dowler’s phone had been hacked, Greenslade argues, Cameron was forced to look like he was on top of things, hence the inquiry. Speaking at a seminar held before the start of the inquiry, Kelvin MacKenzie, the former editor of The Sun, made it clear that he felt the inquiry was a waste of time. Referring to its questions regarding accuracy of sources, Mackenzie said his policy was usually “If it sounded right, it was probably right, and therefore we should lob it in.” But taking this blasé view is not right either. Serious misgivings in the conduct of newspapers were found, but how does an inquiry go about changing such fundamental
black sheep The Beaver | 08.11.2011
Features
27
The Newspaper Man Alex Haigh interviews James Hanning
T
his week I joined James Hanning, the deputy editor of the Independent on Sunday. He is the co-author of “Cameron: The Rise of the New Conservative,” a biography of David Cameron and has followed the phone hacking scandal since its beginning.
Why do you think journalists have been so interested in phone hacking as a story? Well I would dispute that actually. Some of us were banging on for quite a while and most of the newspapers completely ignored it.
out e son Inquiry
attitudes? It seems clear that there needs to be regulation of the media to prevent practices which led to the News of the World fiasco. If people like Kelvin MacKenzie are concerned that the current opinion will lead to draconian measures that restrict freedom of speech, then maybe self-regulation is the way forward. With dwindling newspaper circulation it’s difficult to maintain ethical journalism which reflects a sense of responsibility when many are desperate to get headlines. The former Daily Star reporter, Richard Peppiatt spoke of this attitude; “This is because the story is almost pre-defined. Laid out before you is a canon of ideological and commercially driven narratives, and it’s your job to fulfil them.” Whether it is through the Leveson inquiry or self-regulatory bodies there clearly must be change in the media. But to many, the exposure of the use of phone hacking goes, in itself, does much to prevent its future occurrence. Greenslade makes a valid point when he asserts that no editor would allow the use of hacking regardless of the inquiry. “Consider the current state of play: even if a journalist were stupid or venal enough to intercept a mobile voicemail message, no newspaper editor or publisher is going to sanction it. Hacking is over, regardless of Leveson.” We must wait to see the outcomes of the Leveson Inquiry but there is no denying a need for concrete changes in the regulation of the press and it will be many months before we know what those changes will be.
Why do you think that was? It’s a difficult question to answer. Nick Davis did fantastically well in the Guardian and in the Independent on Sunday we did what we could. But otherwise that was it, for a very long time. Our sister paper, the Independent, then got interested but this was only in the last two years or so. They ignored it partly because they regarded it as a media story that was only of interest to people inside the M25 in the media but that’s a feeble argument I think. The main reason, I think is that a lot of people have guilty consciences and a lot of newspapers didn’t want to upset the status quo. The core witnesses in the Leveson inquiry give their evidence under oath for the first time in the next few weeks. What do you think will come out of the inquiry? What do you hope will come out of it? They’ve got a very impressive lawyer who seems to be abreast of all of the allegations. So if he has anything to do with it, which I imagine he would, then I imagine a lot will come out. If you ask me what I think ought to come out, it’s the fact that phone hacking was endemic, not just at News of the World but at other newspapers as well. I would have thought quite soon about other newspapers being dragged in to this and I take no delight in saying that, but News International have had a rough ride. Now, arguably they should have had a rough ride because a lot of very bad things went on but certainly they were not the only ones and the others have got questions to answer as well. There is a more general thing about Leveson, which I am inclined to agree with, that this whole issue of Cameron and Murdoch is very smelly and the whole Blair-Murdoch and Brown-Murdoch relationship was very smelly and unhealthy. The effect has slightly been to provide a smokescreen which will probably get Cameron off the hook but Cameron’s relationship with News International really doesn’t do him much credit and he has slightly muddied the water by making Leveson as far reaching as he has. Not to say a lot of good things won’t come out of it, one of which I hope will be a beefed up PCC. The idea that the PCC, and in particular Christopher Meyer, were doing their job properly is laughable.
Do you think these recent events highlight a failing of regulation, be it self-regulation or otherwise, within the newspaper industry? How should it be improved? Yes, my impression is that the people who were presiding over the PCC, either didn’t know enough about the industry they were policing or there’s some other explanation. Well, I think you have to give it proper investigative powers. I mean, I’m not an expert in self-regulation but I’m sure it can be done. A lot of colleagues have expressed a lot of misgivings about everything that’s happened around phone hacking. They wouldn’t defend phone-hacking but they say journalists have to be allowed to follow stories and occasionally they have to do something unethical.
The view by many journalists is that if it is for “the public good” it is fine to step over the line of the law. Do you think there is ever a place for this? Again, I’m not a lawyer or an expert in self-regulation but there is a very good rule I heard and I have mentioned it to a few people and they’ve said yes they think that’s good, which is if a journalist does something unethical or possibly even illegal, or do something dodge, but believe you’re
The interesting thing is that in Coulson’s resignation statement from the News of the World he did not deny knowing about phone hacking. onto a story that’s in the public interest you should ask yourself the following question: “When I come to write this story will I be willing to tell the reader what I’ve done.” Now, that seems to me to be a very good test. The problem about phone hacking is that it’s the antithesis of that; it’s sneaky, it’s not in the public interest generally. What made you, personally, interested in this story? I co-wrote a biography of David Cameron and in the course of writing a paperback edition of that I came to write about the hiring of Andy Coulson and it struck me at the time that it was very odd that Cameron had given Coulson that job as his Media Communications Chief and I went back to look to find out what I could about whether Cameron had asked him about phone hacking and what Coulson had said and the interesting thing is that in Coulson’s resignation statement from the News of the World he did not deny knowing about phone hacking. Everybody thinks he did but he didn’t so I spoke to him about 18 months after he got the job and I said to him, would you give me an on the record denial that you knew about phone hacking and he wouldn’t answer. He said “I’ve got nothing to say
about that” and that’s exactly the point of my call. So we wrote that in the book and it was subsequently that he told the Commons select committee that he didn’t know about the phone hacking. The Independent on Sunday has not been involved in this scandal, nor have you. Was there ever a time when you wondered where these stories were coming from? Yes, that’s a very good question. I sat on press award panels saying about so-and-so, how on earth did they get that story, that’s a really good story. There was a very famous case which won a press award and I probably can’t name it because I don’t think it’s been proven that phone hacking was involved but I’m sure it was and they won awards. We all admired the News of the World’s stories and thought, it’s brilliant journalism but as somebody in the police said, somebody who gets results as good as they were getting, there must be something wrong nobody can be that good. Although, again, I’m not saying they were the only ones doing it but they were very efficiently run and they knew how to make it work. Had you ever heard rumours of illegal tactics? No I didn’t but I’m not in the red-top world and I think there was a select group who did know and did it a lot and everyone else was excluded. The people who did know were trusted by the editor, trusted not to blab and, I sympathise with the police, that’s why it’s difficult to get convictions because these people are still looking after each other. So do you think Andy Coulson was instrumental in phone hacking at the News of the World? Well, the law will take its course. That has to be a strong suspicion. Do you think with more competi-
tion, i.e. the break up of the Murdoch empire, phone hacking would not have occurred? No I don’t. Well, in a way it’s a result of a competitive market. It’s difficult. I think there are two issues: one how competitive it is and I think more competition is a good thing and it means less concentration of power where you get people like Murdoch becoming too powerful and the police
It’s difficult to get convictions because these people are still looking after each other have an unhealthy relationship with them which I think people wouldn’t doubt. On the one hand, that’s a good thing. You have newspapers competing and you don’t have anybody winning an election for you. More competition would be good in that respect but more competition wouldn’t prevent people hacking people’s phones. Is there an easy way to stop these types of illegal activities in the future? I know the senior police people are very shocked by the suggestion and the presumed extent of reporters paying police for stories. When I’ve spoken to police they’ve been scandalised by this and I said ‘isn’t this how it’s always worked? Haven’t police always tipped off reporters?’ There is a bit of human nature about it and you shouldn’t be naive about the extent you can control that. Equally, if there had been a PCC with proper powers to investigate and really demand newspapers to show how they work and so on I think it could have been stopped. But if you have a determination to do it and, indeed, an insistence that it’s done, then it’s hard to stop it.
A journalist from a well known newspaper hacked the phone of a celebrity and went into the editor’s office. The editor said ‘brilliant story, well done, that’s a front page story have two days off’. So he went to the pub, got completely drunk, a reporter from another paper came in, he couldn’t help boasting about the story. This reporter went back to his boss at a rival paper, told his boss, the boss said thank you very much. It was then arranged that the same phone should be hacked. They got the same message which proved the story and the rival ran the story. The editor of the first paper went absolutely ballistic.
28
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
Features
The Fountain of Youth Edward Larkin examines scientists’ attempts to stop aging-forever
I
n ancient Greek mythology, Sisyphus refused to die. After Zeus demanded that he be chained in hell, the wily Sisyphus ended up escaping and chaining another god instead. When Sisyphus eventually did die, he convinced the gods of the underworld to let him go back to Earth to scold his wife, who had failed to properly bury his body. They allowed him, and once there, he refused to come back. Finally, the gods were so exasperated at the feisty mortal that they condemned him to the thankless task of pushing a boulder up a hill for
William Andregg started the company partly because he wants to live for “hundreds of billions of years” eternity, only to have it fall back every time he approached the top. While Sisyphus may have more panache than most of us, his story reveals the singular problem of human life: death. Death is the one thing that
is fundamentally irreconcilable to the human mind. Sure, we can resign ourselves to it – but only by making a conscious effort not to think about it. To rationalize death by truly staring into its eyes is unfathomable. Our religions, mythologies, culture, and medicine all claw desperately to escape its reality – they deny, lionize, ignore, and delay it, respectively. But is it possible to avoid death? At the 2006 Technology Entertainment and Design (TED) Conference, Aubrey de Grey boldly asserted that aging is a fixable problem. If enough attention is paid to it, he argued, we could reach an “escape velocity” in our lifetime – a point at which life expectancy gains increase more than a year per year (they averaged about 3 months per year from 1900-2000), thus putting off death the longer one lives. A vigorous debate followed, culminating in a challenge from the pre-eminent tech magazine “MIT Technology Review” that promised $20,000 to an aging expert who could explain why de Grey’s ideas were completely unreasonable. Although a few groups submitted proposals, the judges decided that no one adequately proved that de Grey’s ideas were unworthy of learned debate. Although they did make sure to state that de Grey’s con-
tentions were not fully scientific either. Let that sink in for a moment: it’s not completely unreasonable to discuss whether we might indefinitely postpone aging. De Grey separates aging into seven
Yet even if permanent youth is overly ambitious, the possibility of a much longer life than expected shouldn’t be immediately discounted as crazy. main types of molecular problems, all side effects of metabolism. Importantly, he claims that addressing each requires only a series of incremental scientific advances rather than conceptual breakthroughs. For example, one of the seven problems is that of cellular “senescence” – after a certain number of divisions, cells lose the ability to divide. This is thought to be an evolutionary adaption to help avoid
Flickr user: ktylerconk
the uncontrolled cell division associated with cancer. But instead of doing the physiological equivalent of sitting unobtrusively on the bench, these cells accumulate over time and release harmful substances that provoke aging. De Grey suggests that if one could force these cells to commit suicide, the problem could be avoided. And indeed, this is exactly what a team of researchers at the Mayo Clinic in the USA did. In a paper published in the prestigious journal “Nature” this past Wednesday, they found that many aging related problems were prevented when cells were genetically engineered to commit suicide when senescent. Other research findings have yielded similarly provocative results. For example, many species, including monkeys, gain about 30 per cent increased life expectancy simply from reducing caloric intake by 30 per cent. If that holds true in humans – and there are reasons to think it would – that’s 20 extra years. While maintaining a 30 per cent reduction in calories for an extended period of time is a Herculean feat, researchers are working to understand the basic mechanisms so that drugs can be developed that allow us to eat normally and simply absorb less food. Another lab manipulated roundworms to live six times longer than normal. Unfortunately, this required removal of the reproductive system, something that we may not be in the mood to give up. More recently, a paper in “Nature” from noted researcher Ronald DePinho found that genetically engineering mice to express a certain protein not only stopped aging, but actually reversed it– the scientific fountain of youth. Even the researchers themselves were surprised – they expected the protein, “telomerase”, to slow aging, but not to reverse it. It’s not hard to be seduced by the inherent desire to sensationalize the science and extrapolate based on previous trends: life expectancy in the developed world was in the high forties in 1900, and a little over a century later, it is approaching 80. Yet skepticism is still warranted. First, the exponential increase in life expectancy seen in the 20th century as compared to the previous arc of human history could be reaching its end. Most of the increases involved public health measures such as sanitation and hygiene. Gains have been made for people who survive to old age, but not nearly as dramatic. Indeed, US life expectancy has recently actually decreased slightly. But the compelling part about the current debates is that claims of radical life extension are being taken seriously in the scientific community, even if they’re not accepted. “Science” magazine recently detailed a bet between two scientists on whether the first person to live to 150 had been born. De Grey himself has been funded by venture capitalist Peter Thiel, as has the Silicon Valley biotech firm Halcyon Molecular, whose founder William Andregg started the company partly because he wants to live for “hundreds of billions of years”. Luke Nosek, another bay-area venture capitalist, has also adopted a bellicose attitude towards aging, calling it a “cop-out term.” Despite this groundswell of support, there is still skepticism in high places. Some aging researchers have dismissed de Grey’s ideas as pseudoscience, and many agree that while theoretically possible, the probability of extending the human lifespan indefinitely in our lifetime is extraordinarily unlikely. Furthermore, while de Grey’s roadmap to curing aging might indeed seem relatively straightforward, others find it to be far too simple and general-
ized. Indeed, the history of science often shows that after researchers create neat theoretical models for certain processes, they learn more and then realize that the system was much more complex than they originally thought.
How would we function in a world where we could stay alive orders of magnitude longer than we currently can? Yet even if permanent youth is overly ambitious, the possibility of a much longer life than expected shouldn’t be immediately discounted as crazy. This is especially the case for future generations. Indeed, most of the compelling laboratory results have been made possible by genetic engineering, a process that is vastly easier in an embryo than a developed human. We will conceivably have the possibility to genetically engineer our children with anti-aging mechanisms, an ethical firestorm that will surely make today’s arguments about stem-cell research look like child’s play. Yet don’t despair that you weren’t born in 2040 – progress in regenerative medicine (which uses a person’s stem cells to recreate entire organs), drug delivery, and other areas suggests that there will be some interesting new capabilities in the future for all of us. Perhaps the most provocative questions are those that relate to the fabric of society. How would we function in a world where we could stay alive orders of magnitude longer than we currently can? It would certainly test marriage vows for one thing – imagine living for 6,000 years with the same spouse. It would also profoundly shift the demographics of having children. De Grey suggests that not having children might be the price we have to pay if we truly want four digit life spans. Interestingly, despite the centrality of the idyllic immortality in religious doctrines, it turns out that the actual mechanics are a bit more unappetizing. Most people are vehemently opposed of the idea of worldly immortality, worrying about rigid, never-ending social hierarchies and having to cope with the loss of loved ones. If the myth of Sisyphus (or the modern concept of hell) proves anything, it’s that there is perhaps one thing more difficult to deal with than death: eternal suffering. This is why people reflexively dislike the notion of dramatically increasing life span. As long as it is coupled to bliss, like Heaven, immortality is fine. But inject an element of unhappiness, and resistance is swift. Perhaps even the possibility – however remote – of immortality in this life should cause us to reconsider what exactly we are looking for in the hypothetical next life. Most people don’t understand the sheer magnitude of immortality – it seems comforting from afar, but think about the unending trillions upon trillions upon trillions of years, and it gets a bit murkier. I, like many others, was initially disenchanted with the idea of truly living forever. I tended to appreciate Steve Jobs’ mantra in his Stanford commencement speech, in which he claims that “death is very likely the single best invention of life,” in that it causes an existential nakedness that allows us to live fruitful lives, guaranteeing that our petty worries – social standing, prestige, intelligence, finances – are ultimately meaningless.
The Beaver | 08.11.2011
Features
29
A constitution of Prince-ples? James Yarde examines princley power within an uncodified constitution.
B
ritain is often criticised for her appearance as not an altogether democratic nation. Whilst such accusations are not wholly accurate, it is still true that British citizens effectively swear loyalty to a sovereign who can theoretically block government legislation and seize land, among other prerogative powers, regardless of democratic consent. Even though the exercise of any of these given powers would most likely cause constitutional crisis – a gleeful proposition for Republicans – it appears that the monarchy is rather more politically bold than first thought. Not only has recently released government correspondence to Prince Charles revealed that it is constitutionally bound to consult him on certain issues, it also appears that he was able to exert a meaningful influence over policy. Reports suggest that, since 2005, ministers have had to seek his permission to pass at least a dozen government bills on issues as diverse as gambling, road safety and the Olympics.
Some would of course argue that the heir to the throne’s ability to do this is little more than a point of constitutional intrigue; an anachronism which merely reflects the nature of our convention-built un-codified constitution. Rather than Prince Charles’ apparent powers being a result of his status as heir, it is actually a result of being proprietor of the Duchy of Cornwall. If for instance a Duke/Duchess of Cornwall were to pass away without leaving any children, the Duchy would revert to the hands of the Crown. And, due to its contingent personal interest in the affairs of the Duchy of Cornwall, therefore, the monarchy possesses veto powers regarding any piece of legislation which might compromise the affairs of the Duchy. But in a world where Prince Charles supposedly enjoys the same civil status as any other given British citizen, why should he possibly exert any more power – via his hereditary status and privilege – than the rest? Clearly there is a disparity between the rights of common and “noble” landowners.
But it is not only this blatant inequality which is being made issue of here, but also the lack of transparency in the mechanism through which it operates, with both the Government and Clarence House having refused to comment on the allegations put before them. It may be inexorably true that Prince Charles has exerted influence over public policy, but why should the magnitude of his influence be kept secret from a public which is becoming ever more disinclined towards a political system riddled with blatant cronyism and nepotism? All of this under the pretence that it may harm Prince Charles’ property interests – property interests which bring him in excess of £17m in revenues every year. It is not even as if Prince Charles has not exploited his role as Kingin-waiting to gain influence in the corridors of power before. In fact, he has developed a rather impressive reputation for meddling in government business – much to the annoyance of ministers – quickly garnering a reputation for lobbying officials on issues
Flickr user: usembassylondon
close to his heart. This, in conjunction with the wide range of interests the Duchy of Cornwall supposedly has (as mentioned earlier), suggests that this constitutional intrigue has allowed Charles to step far beyond his mark. Whilst one would hope that ministers would disregard Charles’ political ideas as those of an elderly eccentric, it remains feasible that the outcomes of policy were influenced by his theoretical power to veto legislative proposals. Not only does this make policy outcomes undemocratic and unrepresentative, it also emphasises the importance of transparency in the British political system, and more widely as well. Even though the Freedom of Information Act (2000) offers wide ranging provisions, convention still dictates that any given Duke/Duchess of Cornwall has incomparable access to government, in what is effectively a confidential communication space – somewhere that Freedom of Information is yet to penetrate. Whilst one might be able to respect a right to privacy in normal circumstance, these circumstances are very much extra-normal, built only upon the historical frailties of the British constitution. Clarence House continues to insist that the royals have nothing to hide in this regard, and any correspondence between government ministers and the Prince of Wales were taken out of formality as opposed to being politically contingent. The official line is that no influence was made; no veto was used. This begs the question: how can we be so certain that Prince Charles has absolutely zero influence over government policy? Daniel Greenberg, a parliamentary lawyer at Berwin Leighton Paisner, claims that the Prince’s theoretical power of veto is much like a nuclear deterrent – quite enough to have a major influence on the government legislation of the day.
And if this is indeed the case, how can Prince Charles’ correspondence with ministers justifiably be kept out of the public eye, impenetrable from Freedom of Information? It cannot possibly be seen as a tenable constitutional position for the government to hold. In a world in which politicians profess to be the great harbingers of fairness, why has no action yet been taken to clarify the constitutional position of the Duchy of Cornwall, or at very least, to make the process of consultation far more transparent? Rather than this being an argument over the virtues of monarchy versus republicanism, it is more a matter of principle. Whilst by formality it is not necessarily the case that the Prince of Wales has to have a completely equal constitutional position, in practice it should still not put him above any other. It may well be true that it would be constitutionally difficult to define the powers of the Duchy of Cornwall, but at very least the process should be transparent. Access to ministers is a precious commodity; we should be free to know that the Prince of Wales has no more political privilege beyond that which is inevitable. If it is true that no advertent attempt was made to influence and alter government policy, then why were efforts made so to keep the correspondence hidden from the public eye? This miniature constitutional crisis has done few favours for a political system that is already perceived as being broken. It is now the responsibility of Parliament to have a deep think about how its relationship with the Crown should be managed in the future. Prince Charles must mend his ways so to avoid future crises, and to provide for the ever transforming role of the monarchy in contemporary British society.
Palestine’s bid to UNESCO
Samira Lindner looks at the necessary reopening of the ultimate Pandora’s Box If ever there was a moment to acknowledge the seemingly unsolvable character of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, then Palestine’s recent United Nations (UN) membership bid would be it. With frustration, we read about how the entry of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) into UNESCO’s membership base turned into an international political debacle – a debacle which reminded us of the realities of the conflict. Palestine’s bid for full UN membership has brought up, once again, the diplomatically unpleasant and politically sensitive nature of the question of Palestinian statehood. And while some may argue that these past few weeks have been a step back for Palestine’s prospects, I say it was a
necessary move. Naturally, this topic is very complicated and sensitive, so no one opinion will be exhaustively right. However, if we look at the details surrounding recent events, we can see what led PLO-President Abbas to go through with this bid and why this was an important step to take. The UN membership bid must be seen in context with the release of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit that was negotiated with Hamas. This was a hugely significant moment for Hamas. Not only did it ensure the release of numerous Palestinian prisoners and thus gain legitimacy and competency in the eyes of the population, but the fact that Israeli authorities agreed to negotiate with Hamas in the
Flickr user: Grant Neufeld
first place gave Hamas a somewhat official recognition. Adding this to Hamas’ advantage in its provision of infrastructural resources, it creates a dangerous situation in which the Palestinian population may find Hamas more favourable than its alternatives. Obviously, this weighed heavily on Abbas, whose Fatah and Palestinian National Authority (PNA) have been continuously losing relevance internationally and whose effectiveness is being questioned by the population. If we also consider the general standstill the peace process talks have fallen into, we can easily see why this UN membership bid has become such a pressing issue for Abbas to force through. The PLO’s “observer status” membership in the UN is one of the few advantages it has over Hamas. So to push that membership further and potentially receive the recognition (and the attention) of the international community was a strategic move. Gaining full UN membership is one of the biggest steps an aspiring new state could take. Not only would it be granted international recognition and full acceptance into the international community, it would become a member in most, if not all, of its affiliated organizations and institutions. This includes the International Criminal Court (ICC) in which Palestine could legally challenge the Israeli occupation – another huge step.
What have been the reactions to Palestine’s membership bid? Bearing in mind that it is the PalestinianIsraeli conflict, I guess we can say the reactions were no more dramatic than usual. Ever since the issue was raised in September, the US has made it clear that it will veto on any Security Council vote on the matter. While not surprising, this has nonetheless ruled out the prospects of full UN membership for the PLO. The real drama emerged after the UN vote to grant Palestine UNESCO membership, a vote that is determined without veto rights. In a way, the PLO is circumventing the foreseeable Security Council voting result and getting into the UN, one UN body at a time. Within a day of the news of the successful UNESCO vote, Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister (PM), announced that he will be speeding up the construction of Jewish settlements and freezing the PNA’s funds, claiming the bid is Palestine’s rejection of the peace process. I take issue with that statement. I believe the PLO is pushing through this bid because it wants to rekindle the peace process, which I believe Netanyahu has brought to a standstill. And we can only imagine what consequences Netanyahu’s enactments will have on the ground for even more people being evicted from homes and now unable to access PNA-funded resources. But like
Abbas, Netanyahu’s reaction can also be traced back to domestic pressures, in this case from the far-right factions of his coalition. The US reacted by announcing that it will cut its UNESCO funding. However, it appears President Obama did not have much of a choice: A US law from the 1990s bans UN funding to organizations, which admit Palestine before a peace-deal is signed. Also, the hopeful Republican presidential candidates have been causing quite a stir by accusing Obama of betraying Israel and favoring the Palestinian cause. An claim which does not appear to have much founding, but it appears to be enough to get Obama worried about losing an important electoral base. Palestine’s UN bid has once again opened a Pandora’s box that reminds us of the harsh realities facing a potential future Palestinian state. Firstly, while we should stress that Palestinian leaders in the past have also let down the peace process, the current Israeli administration is a fundamental obstacle to any progress. Secondly, international power structures are favourably inclined towards the state that already has recognition; changing this will not be easy. Thirdly, due to the extensive networks and alliances enjoyed by parties to the conflict, any decision made will have wide-ranging repercussions and reactions.
30
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
Features
An “automatic progression?” Bianca Nardi considers the state of education in Brazil
M
ario Bevilaqua, a Biophysics doctorate student, teaches biology at a state school that caters for students who live in the Complexo do Alemão, the largest favela in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The poor quality of state schools in the country act as a huge obstacle in the country’s path to development. It drowns the nonelites into a quicksand of ignorance and illiteracy and renders their class mobility almost impossible. He claims that he ‘“was never a romantic; but I still experienced an initial shock when I started working there.”
According to data from 2005, 68 per cent of Brazilians are functionally illiterate and 7 per cent are illiterate. The politicians and Ministers for Education in Brazil create a pretend theatre to please their electoral audiences – by increasing the number of children in schools, increasing the number of ethnic minorities in universities or ensuring that students in state schools pass the year regardless of their grades. These short-term, shallow measures bring some applause from the oblivious electorate, while they fail to address the core faults in the country’s educational system. Although increasing the number of children in schools seems like a reasonable policy option, it’s rendered pointless if the children don’t actually learn anything while they’re there. According to data from 2005, 68 per cent of Brazilians are functionally illiterate and 7 per cent are illiterate – making it
a staggering 75 per cent of the population that doesn’t have adequate reading and writing skills and performance of mathematical operations. In 2007, an “automatic progression”scheme was introduced in public schools in Rio de Janeiro, so that students didn’t fail regardless of the grades they achieved. Although this led to a decrease in dropout rates, it means that it is not uncommon for a student to graduate from school without knowing how to read or write well. At university-level, the system of racial “quotas’”was introduced, where a certain number of places at the competitive federal universities were reserved for ethic minorities. Although this does provide an opportunity for a greater number of the non-white population to have access to further education, it fails to address the roots of social inequality. With the automatic approval, schools would not be in grades but in cycles, and the progression within these cycles was automatic – the student would be responsible for his success. Mario believes that “this was terrible: you put the responsibility for his learning on the student but there is no demand on him – and that’s not how it works. If the student doesn’t work hard and is approved, he will learn that that’s normal, and won’t be mature enough to recognise that learning will be important. Children think about it in the short term, and study so they won’t fail the year.” There is also great neglect from the state in terms of structure and security. The latter was brought to the forefront of the news when last year a gunman walked into the Tasso da Silveira state school and shot several students in an act of terrorism. In expensive private schools in the city, there are strict security measures and visitors have to check into reception before being allowed in the building. In terms of structure, teachers deal
with lack of materials and indiscipline. Mario says that “over 50 per cent of the time in class is spent establishing order. Students have threatened me with violence – but we know who’s bluffing and who’s a criminal. The problem is that within the reality of the place that the student lives, is the idea that violence is the only way to solve a
What the poor really need is for the curtains in this facade to close down and give way to real reform.
ocrity – our politics is still based on the manipulation of the masses. This works because we have an unprepared population, incapable of independent critical thinking.” The educated elites have access to private schools and hence are unaffected by this precarious situation. The poor regard these short-term theatrical solutions as sufficient when choos-
dispute.” “There is great frustration on my part – I have so many interesting things to teach, and biology is such a fascinating subject – but I can’t teach as the lack of intellectual structure from the students is a big barrier. I can’t explain the process of photosynthesis to a student that can’t write ‘chloroplast.’ I want to teach population genetics – which is a fantastic subject – and deal with students that don’t know basic mathematics to deal with the statistical content.’ Why is there such a strong dismissal of improvements in the area of education in Brazil? Other BRIC countries, especially China, are investing greatly in education and human capital – recognizing that a specialised labour force is a key requirement for development. According to Mario, “the source of this neglect is the fact that an uneducated and ignorant population is easier to manipulate – and corruption is still a major problem in Brazil. I don’t know when we’re going to leave this culture of corruption behind and start thinking about really growing. We live in great intellectual medi-
Flickr user: World Bank Photo
Measured musings | Shoeing
E
ver since the Iraqi journalist Muntadhar al-Zaidi threw his shoe at President George Bush, a global trend has been born. Shoe throwing at politicians has become common place. It was revived again this week as a man threw his shoe at the former President of Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf. Although flinging your footwear at a political leader in rage may seem funny enough, a quick look at the use of this rather unique form of protest reveals it has come to be an iconic symbol of frustration at the political class. In protest to the invasion of Iraq, al-Zaidi threw his shoe at the then President of the Unites States. He declared that “This is for the widows and orphans and all those killed in Iraq.” Although he was later jailed for three years, al-Zaidi became globally infamous and was widely admired by the Iraqi people. The journalist’s actions also sparked a bizarre online game called “Sock and awe” whereby, as of Saturday 5th November this year, over 101,210,840 virtual shoes have been successfully thrown at a digital manifestation of George Bush. The real world phenomenon soon became global, with Ukrainian journalist Ihor Dmitriv repeating the action later on that month. This time it was in response to Oleh Soskin, a Ukrainian official in favour of membership of NATO. Soskin had declared that women were “the more intelligent” part of society as they were allegedly more likely to be in favour of joining. Dmitriv later declared “a shoe
is going to become a leading means (for common people) to influence their leaders.” Dmitiriv’s words seemed to ring true as it fast became a trend; some have dubbed “shoeing”. Although this protest has become infamous, its targets are not always accurate. The Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao has also been victim to this kind of attack. The Chinese leader was speaking at the University of Cambridge, when a protestor attempted to throw a trainer at him. This time the shoe missed. The Premier’s visit had been surrounded by protests against China’s poor human rights record. It later emerged, when the protestor, Martin Jahnke, was cleared of charges, that he had only meant to make a point and not physically harm the premier. “I didn’t want to hit the premier personally. I thought just placing the shoe on the stage would be universally understood. What it was meant to be was a symbolic protest. I didn’t intend to hurt people.” What is astounding though is that despite numerous security measures taken, many high profile politicians are targeted by this now globally understood form of defiance. The 2009 elections in India were hit by a scatter of shoe throwings as many candidates, including the current Prime Minister himself, found themselves dodging attacks. It’s not just politicians that have been targets; during a concert in Dublin, Hayley Williams, lead singer of Paramore, smartly dodged a shoe that
came her way. Perhaps this incident was not so politicised though? Although it may seem slightly strange, what is striking about this
ing which candidate to vote for when it comes to elections. During electoral campaigns, politicians will provide favelas with a cinema or a first-aid clinic in order to lure voters . What the poor really need is for the curtains in this facade to close down and give way to real reform.
trend is that by looking at the history of it, so many different protests are revealed. The injustice and anger of many people has been expressed
through this simple act. So maybe now when politicians consider standing for office, they should also secretly practice their ducking reflexes.
Flickr user: Anirudh Koul
The Beaver | 08.11.2011
Advertisement
31
32
Advertisement
18.10.2011 | The Beaver
Social
33
The Beaver | 08.11.2011
Flickr user: David Locke1
Cracking Costumes
Laura Aumeer on why we never outgrow fancy dress
L
ast week, for a few days, it became relatively normal to see superheroes walking down the street, to spend time with a needle, thread, felt, lace and fake fur and to do things with make-up that wouldn’t normally be seen in even the most out-there haute couture fashion show. Forget the traditional celebration of the eve of All Saints Day or even the sweets and pumpkin pie, Halloween today is really just an excuse for everyone to dress up. Why, though, does this make Halloween such a popular holiday, especially among adults? In comparison to other holidays, there are no real commitments at Halloween to buy presents, spend time with family or reflect. What is important though, or at least has been in my recent Halloweens, is the effort spent on costumes and having a good time. Personally, I spent this Halloween as (at different times I would like to point out) a cat, Black Swan and a zombie schoolgirl. The time I spent doing my make-up - copying Natalie Portman’s from the film - was much more than I would normally spend getting ready a night out. And yes, it sort of worked, but I’m no Hollywood actress and to be honest I probably looked more like I had a serious accident in a make-up shop than the elegant swan I was aiming for. My cat costume was saved for my shift at
work on Halloween. Granted it was only a make-shift cat’s tail and ears, and some eyeliner whiskers, but it definitely made the shift different: sitting in the office in the library dressed up as a cat whilst on the phone was, well, slightly odd. Looking back at old photos of me as a child, there are quite a few of me in fancy dress for various primary school parties. There are some of me in homemade cat, skeleton and even pumpkin outfits. But for some reason, since starting university, I’ve had a new lease of life in terms of fancy dress. University has provided numerous reasons (well, excuses) to get out the scissors again: Halloween parties, themed AU nights and the AU Carol to name a few. But it’s not just immature university students who like to dress-up; one of the most striking things about Halloween is that everyone is at it. You see middle-aged men, too, wearing their spandex superhero outfits as they go out to parties. The appeal of dressing up is definitely more than just the appeal of reliving your youth. In fact, there’s a distinctly adult appeal in fancy dress. Costumes are a chance to wear what we wouldn’t normally, be someone different and in turn act differently. People may still recognise us, but it does provide a good excuse to behave in a way we wouldn’t normally. Judging by the number of people I saw on
rather gruesome walks-of-shame in the mornings the weekend before Halloween, it is indeed the prime pulling opportunity that it has been suggested it is. If you take a look in fancy-dress shops, you’ll soon see that most of the women’s outfits don’t leave much to the imagination. The skirts are bumskimming, the dresses are tight and as the make-up goes on, the inhibitions slip off. The only problem is that when you’re doing your walk-of-shame covered in fake blood the next morning, it’s a bit more obvious than after your standard night out. Just flicking through the papers, it’s hard not to notice all the articles and comments about the problems with dressing up at Halloween. There’s nothing wrong with letting go now and again, forgetting about work and the banalities of our day-to-day lives. I’m all up for fancy dress. I personally enjoyed it as a child and it seems ridiculous to stop doing something just because I’m supposed to be mature and grown up. But maybe we should remember when dressing up to keep it within acceptable limits. At the end of the day, a layer of face-paint doesn’t disguise you completely, and just because it’s the 31st of October doesn’t meant that new rules are invented and the old ones are obsolete.
Flickr user: joshparent
34
Social
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
m o r f e r ’ u o y , h “O ” ? h e , a d a n a C
Canadian Gregory Gilette on poutine, French and beavers Flickr User: rubenerd
I
t’s not obvious most of the time: if I walk down the street in a knit tie and avoid eye contact and smiling, nobody would ever guess I’m not from some suburb neatly tucked away in the fringes of zone two. The minute I speak up, however, I could flip a coin to gauge their reaction. If it lands on the head the Sex Pistols never would have been famous without, I’ll hear, “Ah, another Yank!” If, by chance, our two-dollar piece turns polar-bear-side up, my ears perk up to, “Oh hi! You’re Canadian!” Somewhat caught off-guard by this answer, I always follow such a response with an inquiry as to what gave my rather unapparent nationality away (besides the charming smile I’d been repressing). Now, not coming from Newfoundland (where resides the 1.4 per cent of the Canadian population with 99 per cent of the accent you think we have), I simply wouldn’t believe them if the answer had to do with my speech (barring a cheeky “eh”). Most times, the reasoning is derived from an uncertainty, governed by an odd belief that Canadians are more indignant if mistaken as Yanks than vice-versa. Which leads to the obvious comparison. Indeed, given that we share electrical sockets, half a measuring system and a definition for the word football (although we’ll admit it’s illogical), it’s an easy enough mistake. Not that I’m particularly offended though. I mean, going on the fact that there are about 10 times more of them (15 or 20 if you’re going on body mass, I figure) than us, it’s purely a matter of
OVERHEARD AT THE LSE We’re always listening...
odds. Besides, I’ve been slapped once or twice by a Kiwi for assuming they have a pet koala, but more often than not, the white guy from that odd little corner of the world did not not just see his country vindicated last weekend in a bastardized version of football. That said, to all the New Zealanders out there: I get it. We too in the Great White North have staked our national pride on a sport we happen to be good at, that even our fiercest competition doesn’t seem to give a hairy-green fruit about. In order to more deeply analyze how Canuckistnians (as we tolerate being called in the metropole) are actually perceived abroad, on my first night in London I engaged in an experiment in these foreign surroundings. Inspired by Robert Redford’s advice in “Spy Game,” I decided to walk around with a box of cigarettes. Taking only half of the line to heart though, I “forgot” my lighter and managed to engage in some 20-odd introductory conversations within an hour on Trafalgar Square at 11 at night. As it turns out, there aren’t really varying opinions of Canadians, just varying degrees of half-hearted subscription to amorphous ideas of what life in a snow globe might be like. When I announced gleefully that I’d be going home for Christmas to a green city where socialised insurance causes more car accidents than snow, the response was not only sceptical, but downright disbelieving. On a side note, Canadian winters would be a whole lot more tolerable if we had been more imperialist and accepted Turks and Caicos in the 80s (which is a real thing...look it up).
IR304 class: “Umm, when did the Second World War end?”
As the night progressed, though, I was largely pleased to find the world receptive of us. While we are probably just biding our time for you suckers to turn your backs while the moose sharpens his horns, they all kind of assume we’re docile and want to have a chat with us. The one exception to the latter quality though was (to my mild amusement) a group from Oxford University. Not to imply any stereotypes or anything. One gem I did hear from an otherwise affable French lady (picture the following person smoking a baguette) was: “vhere do you come fhrum agaen?” “Canada, Vancouver.” “Ah mais bien! Donc tu parles français! D’où en Québec viens-tu?” Oops... sometimes I forget I can’t assume my readers either understand French or resent the fact they come across it on their cereal box in the UK. Anyway, for those that took French instead of Latin or Greek, you might understand why, at this point in the conversation, I had absolutely no idea where to start. While most people (myself included) often enjoy taking the piss (see...I can integrate) out of Americans for barely having enough innate geographic sense to find beer in a pub (assuming they’ve been out of the 13 colonies long enough to know what beer is), it seems though they are not alone in assuming Canada resembles a Greenlandic icecap on a map. It seems a century and a half of relative docility means most people are more likely to be able to tell me how many breadcrumbs it takes to mark a path from Pistina to Tahrir than where the baby seals we depravedly slaughter for childrens’ entertainment
actually reside. The result is we are a complete blank spot in physical and cultural geography. To help you out with the above bit (either because you don’t speak Kermit or haven’t yet pulled up Wikipedia), not all Canadians who speak French come from Québec; Vancouver is on the other side of the country from Québec and assuming someone from Vancouver does speak French (while not impossible) is about equivalent to assuming a Glaswegian speaks Welsh. But alas, so hard on the rest of you we should not be? (spread the word: in Edmonton they speak like Yoda). The thing is, Canadians are practically as unsure of themselves as the rest of the world (intentionally ambiguous sentence). With more space than we could ever hope to find a use for, “all things to everyone” is practically a national pasttime. There are certain ubiquities of course; for example, I can yell “HURRY HARD!!!!” (ask a curler) just about anywhere and get a round poured, but we’re probably just drinking to drown our internal disagreements on what a true Canadian scale looks like. I would assume though that it runs from “Whiskey poutine” to “Dogsled longjohns” and is measured in “Lumberjack Shatners.” That said, at the end of the day, most Canadians wouldn’t believe that the “Festival du Bois” happens three time zones outside Québec on the West Coast, and then will be hard pressed to explain who Bob and Doug Mackenzie are (which is an absolute shame). In contrast, most will gladly combat foreign ignorance where the multiplic-
In the Quad: Girl: “I think the speakers in here are broken.” Guy: “No, they’re just playing dubstep.”
FM320 Lecturer: “If you understand this concept, you will get a First in the exam” Student (pointing at the board): “Can you explain this part again? Lecturer: “Oh, now I’m talking to the 2:2 candidates”
ity of Hollywood actors birthed from our finest black bears is concerned. Because, since the Canadarm, that’s 90 per cent of what we seem to have given the world (along with the show material we sold to the writers of “How I Met your Mother” in exchange for nuclear secrets and Ryan Gosling). Most would, however, appreciate the description one of my German friends gave: “All of my Canadian friends seem to have profile pictures on mountains.” A classic example of us displaying a patriotic affinity for natural highs. Canada is such a country of exceptions; the status quo simply never dominates. This means you’ll hear some trite drivel out of most of about a “mosaic” of multiculturalism, but really we have Hillbillies that can make the Appalachians look like a cuddle puddle and make you wish they were at least as cultured as these “chavs” I’ve hear so much about. Don’t take that to mean we aren’t multicultural, just that our ministers of propaganda have been terrible at getting the point across. If they had asked me, for example, in lieu of “mosaic” (which rhymes far too much with “prosaic” for my liking), I would have offered perhaps, “A worldwide identity-confused beaver-fest.” Which brings me to my last point- one administrative suggestion for the future: on those Freshers’ surveys where you ask what motivation brought us to the school, add “Mascot,” because your entire Canuck demographic lied when they ticked “reputation.”
Guy: I’ve got a test with Oliver Wyman next week Girl: Who is he?
35
Social
The Beaver | 08.11.2011
I’m With the Brand Shrina Poojara investigates the cult of brand loyalty
T
“
he red cups are coming…” Five words which, for the past three years, have never failed to fill me with anticipation and excitement. And, when I saw said red cups being carried around on campus last Wednesday, I dashed to Starbucks faster than you could say, “Toffee Nut Latte”. The reason? I thought initially that the sight of the red cups alone had developed the ability to subconsciously stir my Christmas spirit, that the whiff of an Eggnog Latte was instantly able to fill me with Yuletide joy. Yet, it was only as I walked home, clutching my Praline Mocha with pride, that it hit me with a mixture of longing and resentment: “Black Forest Hot Chocolate”. I wanted more than anything to toss my inferior drink away and taste what I assume must be a cup of chocolate-y, cherry heaven. There was only one problem. The board proclaiming this delightful offering was not standing outside Starbucks. It was outside a Costa. I hurried past, furious at Costa for daring to encroach upon Starbucks’ share of the Christmas hot beverage industry, and furious at myself for having even been tempted by their knock-off of Starbucks’ Dark Cherry Mocha (now a long-forgotten favourite of a Christmas gone by). It then occured to me that therein lies my problem: loyalty. When considering a competitor’s product makes you feel like you’re cheating, there’s no going back- you’re committed. My commitment to Starbucks goes long back, from the day I got my red, shiny Starbucks card to my “impulse buy” of CEO Howard Schultz’ book, ”Onward: How Starbucks Fought for its Life without Losing its Soul,” for a “light”,
pool-side read on my family vacation this year. I conciously avoid Caffe Nero and Costa, telling myself it’s because I will be in fact saving money with my Starbucks card for a superior beverage, when in reality, I have no clue what I am missing out on at coffee houses elsewhere. How did I get to this point? It is hard to pin down the exact moment amongst countless Caramel Frappuccinos and Tazo Chai Tea Lattes. However, it seems I am not the only one. Starbucks recently announced a huge jump in profits, partly due to continued consumer loyalty, the kind of loyalty that companies dream of attaining through spending millions and millions of dollars in advertising and loyalty schemes. Yet, at what point do we as consumers take brand loyalty to an extreme? Are we guilty of becoming too trusting of brands, much like new students on the first day of school, willing to trust anyone and everyone? And has brand loyalty become an excuse for laziness? As I write this on my iPad, I know that I’ve fallen victim to the same problem. Had my loyalty to Apple not have been so strong, perhaps I’d have done my research before buying a tablet instead of assuming the App Store would have a solution, allowing me to to run Flash content alongside iOS5. Sadly, thus far, it seems that has not been the case. Recent research has stated that our generation is likely to be far less brand loyal than our parents. However, it seems to me that perhaps this is too far a generalisation. In a world with increased information, with more advertising platforms and innovation, where companies can reach out to their consumers and become Facebook friends, we, perhaps, are likely to see a
split in how we consume. There are, of course, those who are becoming less brand loyal and take full advantage of our nearer to perfect information to make an informed decision. Yet, perhaps for some of us, this information overload is just that. The easiest way to deal with it? Become brand loyal, thus eliminating much of the decision process. Of course, it is ridiculous to assume that this latter group is incapable of making any informed decision. However, one only has to walk down the rows of students at the LSE library to spot those who
have begun to fall victim: yes, I’m talking about those who sit in front of a Macbook Pro, iPad in hand, listening to the music on an iPhone. Sure, for some, this is a practical combination but, I for one can say that it isn’t the case for everyone. As companies and brands work harder and harder to “befriend” their customers, it is perhaps our duty now, as consumers, to work harder than before to not to believe everything we are told and to make our informed decisions. There is, of course, nothing wrong with brand loyalty but when
it gets to such an extent that we are essentially screwing ourselves over, we definitely have a problem. So, are some of us doomed to forever fall victim to brand loyalty? That, as the world’s population sadly becomes more and more distrusting of each other, we turn only to the brands we feel personally connected to instead of truly doing our research? I don’t truly know the answer to that question, but I can tell you this: the Black Forest Hot Chocolate from Costa is absolutely awesome.
Flickr user: lilivanili
Maybe it’s because I’m a Northener...
Mancunian Kirsty Kenney on facing stereotypes of “t’north” at the LSE
I
’ve been in London for month and I’m already sick of Southerners thinking they’ve got the moral high ground over Northerners. I think it’s time to put it out there: what is it all about? “Where are you from?” A typical fresher-to-fresher question. My answer, “I’m from Manchester,” is, 9 times out of 10, met with a sense of disappointment, hostility even. It’s as if that one phrase means that I’m going to have to try a whole lot harder if I want to win your friendship. Apparently “The North” is not the vague geographical term that I once thought it was. Oh no, apparently it means a lot more than that. It’s home to pie-eating dole lovers, slack-mouthed boozers and “classay” bitches who love to get their tits out on the dancefloor on a Friday night. You’d think we’d just walked to Houghton Street off of the Shameless set. Friends at other universities had warned me about the trials of being a Northerner down south and, sure enough, it didn’t take long. First things first, we can’t speak properly because, you know, we’re “working class.” Opening your mouth is met with looks of disdain and disappointment, as well as the odd comment, “you just sound a bit common,” straight out of the mouth of one of my classmates. And, if you can even understand what we are saying, you’ll probably think that it just sounds ‘so Northern.’ Like asking
mum how the dog’s doing: I thought that was just being friendly. Then there are the stupid little jokes “Northerners aren’t allowed on Brick Lane” – a particularly crap one courtesy of one of Carr Saunders’ committee. Well, I wouldn’t want to hang around with all those pretentious hipsters anyway. It only gets worse after they’ve had a few drinks too. “Well, you have done exceptionally well to get here, considering that you come from such a poor background.” I’m not joking, someone actually said that to my friend at the freshers’ welcome party. “I don’t live in a caravan you know,” was her response. Now, maybe I’m getting a little bit carried away. After all, I’m being just as bad by bracketing all Southerners together and accusing them of mocking and patronising us. But there’s got to be a reason why there’s a Northern Society and not a Southerners’ society. Us minorities have got to stick together, you know! I do wish people would be a bit friendlier round here. Everyone pushes and shoves in the street, the only people that smile are the street fundraisers and that’s only because they want your money. And what’s with the hostile vibes? It must be something in the water; it does taste a bit funny down here. Lost in East London at 12:30am and the only person who wants to help me is a freaky drunk man and I’m pretty sure he wants to do more than
‘help’ me. What else have you got to be doing at 12:30am? It just seems that nobody’s got time for anyone else. That brings me to my own little identity crisis. When I say I’m from Manchester, I mean the posh bit, it’s Cheshire really. I grew up in Manchester’s only Conservative constituency, George Osborne hails from a few
miles away. Ladies who lunch, ferrying their children from grammar schools to lacrosse in the latest Range because, of course, Daddy needs space for his clubs. We’ve got friends with cool parents too, you know. They may not be MEP’s or CEO’s but they’re ex-United players and ageing rockers. So what
does that make me then- a wannabe southerner? I’m not sure what’s worse. I’ve never felt the need to defend my Northern roots before; Manchester ain’t half bad you know, in fact it’s bloody fantastic. Maybe you should try it some time…
Flickr user: Stuart Grout
36
Social
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
I feel educated, politicised and empowered
Kimia Pezeshki on the success of UK Black History Month at the LSE
H
Kimia Pezeshki (right) with LSE SU Anti-Racism Officer, Sherelle Davids (left) Photo: LSE Students Union
aving reached the end of black history month, I wonder how I went through most of my life without it. I found two events particularly valuable. One was the talk entitled, “What were black people doing in WW1?” The African and Caribbean countries colonised by Britain (and other European countries) frequently pressured, and often forced, black men into the British army to fight their enemies - but never against people of the white race. They feared that it would create unwanted hostility towards white people of their own country and that it may encourage them to revolt against the oppressive shackles of these imperialists. The British government hypocrisy during the turn of the 20th century was colossal because, while the international slave trade had been abolished, illegal ships transporting unwilling African people across the Atlantic ocean would be stopped by British bureaucrats and the African men found on the ship would become British property! These men would then be given a ride in a different, arguably more brutal, forced labour capacity as troops fighting for the British army. The fact that my education at school covered no black history meant that I had been ignorant to all these brutalities most of my life. Modern day racism is even more structural than I had thought, our education system seems less educational and more like propaganda. Where were all these facts during our year 9 WW1 lessons? Later in the month, two black feminists came to the LSE and spoke to a group of us about the intersectionality of race, gender and class. The Black Feminists UK set up a politi-
An African Adventure
Pho
cal group because they felt that their experiences weren’t represented in the ethnocentric feminist movement or in the male-oriented black liberation movement. In their workshop, we talked about the kinds of issues that face us in the university environment. Finally, we were asked to do a group activity on how to write an inclusive article: to ask for comments from a representative sample, to imagine women as not only white but of every ethnicity, to include photographs of the unconventional family. We were left with important messages from their “to don’t” list: do not dispute anyone’s self-identification, do not forget your privilege and never write an issue off as too narrow. When we elected Sherelle as Anti-Racism Officer, I knew we’d benefit from a rigorous Black History Month. She did not disappoint; in fact, it exceeded my expectations. With my influence in Pulse Radio, I made sure that the first week of broadcasting kept to the black history theme. After hearing the first Pulse Radio news report on LSE Black History Month on Monday morning from reporter Niamh Hayes; Gil Scott Heron’s “Train to Washington” on the Get The Blues Out Of Your Soul and a recording of Angela Davis giving a speech on Gender Agenda, I knew our efforts at Pulse had been a success. At that point I made myself a vow: wherever I have the influence to celebrate the success of black people and to educate people about black history, I will push for it every October. But more importantly, my journey of being educated is not limited to October: it’s not over and probably never will be.
tos: K
irsty
Ken n
ey
Kirsty Kenney on her 88 day culture shock
W
hen I decided to take a year out, I didn’t really know what I wanted to do. I just knew that I needed money to do it. I got a job in a call centre, which is where I became friends with Pete: a self-confessed arrogant, obnoxious, annoying little shit. (The problem is you still like him.) And so on one Wednesday when he turned to me and said, “Do you want to come to Africa with me?” I said yes. It sounded fun. We booked flights to Nairobi that Saturday. Nairobi was hot, sweaty and lively. Tents in the back and $2000 round our waists, we set off out of the city with a couple of new friends. Heading north, we stopped at Nakuru national park and joined some “all gear, no idea” American tourists for our first safari, where we saw giraffes, gazelles and even got a glimpse at a sleeping lion. Yet, it was the baboons who could’ve kept us amused all day, with their sexual antics, the horny male chasing a less-than-interested female, slowly working her down, and just as he almost gets in there, she scampers off. Just like Manchester on a Saturday night really. That was a great day. We pitched tents, barbequed and enjoyed £0.20 Coca Colas, the start of a worrying addiction. What a shame you can’t get Diet anywhere! Within two days, we had already reached the Ugandan border, where
we were greeted by children from every direction. Big toothy smiles shouting “Mzungu Mzungu” (white person) - they all had so much love, energy and happiness. We danced with locals, were approached by macheteclad children with the usual “give me pen, give me pencil, give me water” and were begged for anti-retroviral medication by Mary, a caring campsite owner and mother. By the time we made it to the Rwandan border, everything was getting a bit blurry ( your average Ugandan drinks more than the average Russian) and we’d forgotten about time. I’m sad to say that I was defiantly rocking the “gap-yah” tragedy look, my freckles were coming out and I’m not sure Pete had changed his shorts since we left Nairobi. People often refer to African culture, African food and African people, and, while I will never forgive my Year 9 history teacher for talking about “that country Africa,” you can excuse people for making such generalisations. Society talks about Africa, not African nations. People assume Africa is just one big basket case, with corrupt politicians, starving children frolicking in the mud instead of going to school, hard-working women, lazy men. And everyone has AIDS or malaria, obviously. I’m not saying that these things aren’t problems; of course they are, serious problems. But remember that like Europe or any other continent,
each African state, its regions, cities and villages are diverse in every sense of the word and different from their neighbors in so many ways. Having your head stuck out a van window for seven hours every other day, you really get to see that. During one particularly long drive, I saw a group of children and women carrying water in buckets on their heads, but something was different. From a distance one of the children looked white, and then as we got closer I saw that he was albino. It was the strangest thing I have ever seen and something that I thought about for days afterwards. You would never see a Caucasian child having to carry water for their most basic needs, and it made me feel a sense of guilt for being part of this inequitable world. So we did the Serengeti, camping beneath tall skies listening to hyenas cackling, skinny-dipped in the Indian Ocean on Zanzibar, and when we made it across to the Atlantic, we skydived over the skeleton coast. But these aren’t the things that I will remember the most, because to be a tourist all the time on that kind of trip would be to ignore so much that’s being offered. We seemed to spend a lot of time talking to people, exchanging stories and making countless new friends over a beer. Being from Manchester made me a bit of a celebrity. Everyone has heard of Manchester United, even a traditional Massai tribesman who we met in Northern Tanzania: “You
could be Wayne Rooney’s sister... we must keep in touch!” I thought it best to keep to myself that I was deeply offended. Zimbabwe was the country I’d love to go back to the most. The citizens were so humble, so happy that people wanted to visit their country. It didn’t feel dangerous as people sometimes expect and, despite the political and economic chaos that the nation is embroiled in, Zimbabwean people have such hopeful spirits and warm friendly souls. One afternoon, we hitched a lift out of Harare, the capital, and spent the
whole ride singing and boogieing in our seats to a local remix of Phil Collins’ “One More Night.” Without a care in the world, just living the life. 88 days, 10 countries, 12 border crossings, about 600 litres of Coca Cola and one epic road trip later, we made it to Cape Town! Where, by the way, much to my delight, you can get
Coke.
Diet
The Beaver | 08.11.2011
Advertisement
37
38
Sport
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
Match Report
LSE Basketball 1st team’s Premier League success Gio Graglia We did it. We bloody did. Or, in a way, Ronnie did it. Ronnie Baker, the most capped player in the history of the English national team, has been coaching the LSE basketball firsts since 2006-07. Back in the day, the team was floating in the slimy waters of Division 2. That year, Ronnie took us to a national title and a promotion. After that, the LSE firsts have been one of the best teams in the UK Division 1 for four straight seasons and are now the first team in school history to play in the Premier League. Despite not being the most talkative coach on the planet, Ronnie knows the game inside out and has driven us to our first-ever victory in Premier. The W we got against London Met wasn’t a pretty one, but it was a victory. The team played nervously in the first quarter, probably distracted by the fact that Ernest Brown, the Flying Blackman, was forced by the refs to wear a headband on his wrist ( yes, many people did find this request to be slightly odd). Down by as many as 12 in the first half, the team managed to come back thanks to impressive defense and good decisions on offense in the third quarter. That, and the fact that no kid within a 2-mile radius from Brixton Recreation Centre had any idea how to guard big man Michal Kiska. After a (very rare) missed layup, Andrew Engvall just told our centre to dunk the stupid ball. A few seconds
W
ell well well Zoogoers, where do I begin? There was so much shagging this week in Zoo that I struggled to breathe for fear of inhaling an STD. I know there was previous disappointment about the levels of frigidity but you really exceeded expectations. As it was Halloween, the risqué outfits were inevitable with men in seriously short shorts and little red riding hoods wearing even littler skirts parading around the VIP area. The night’s antics started early for our long-running on and off pseudocouple. As your fifths netball captain once again found herself rapidly embraced by the arms of the biggest man in Armenia, it seemed like déjà-vu was striking all over again. Although the couple appeared to duck out early, they were spotted canoodling once again in the main area before bidding farewell to Zoo Bar and heading out for post-Halloween antics. I cannot deny or confirm whether the girdle that accompanied her “Bridezilla” costume remained in tact. Never wanting to be outdone, your thirds Netball captain (Boffin, -B, +M, -in, + at) was seen quite literally entangled with an unidentified male. The pair appeared to lock lips for hours at a time before reappearing out of the mess of blonde hair for a rapid gasp of air. It seems not all were pleased by this sexual escapade, with eye-witnesses reporting a fuming ginger Chris erupting over the encounter. The prize for the night, though, has to go to the pair in the corner who gathered a crowd with actions that were no short of dry-humping. As the bemused onlookers stared, it seems the bouncers were less than pleased and physically lifted the man off our
later Michal was seen hanging in air with his two huge hands rocking the rim. It was all downhill from there, even because starting point guard Jon Thomasoff realized that he actually was the best shooter on the court and started to drain threes on a speechless defense. The end of the game saw Lukasz Rzeczkowski yell at the opposition “Who’s your daddy now?” (a claim that might actually be more true than most people would expect considering Rzeczkowski was born in the early 1980s). The team has come a long way since the beginning of the year, and has had to overcome an endless number of problems. Desperately looking for a stable relationship, Kazeem Afolabi has been trying to hit on every girl in the knitting society (on Wednesday he left the Quad telling the girls “same place, same time next week”. They didn’t reply). Kevin Ho Yan Luk, the only fresher on the team, has had troubles balancing his studies, basketball and a social life that has seen him going every day to a “potty” (some teammates believe Kevin actually means “party” but this theory hasn’t been proved right yet). Julian Ritter and captain Giovanni Graglia, in a desperate effort to seem cultured and mature, had to endure an entire concert by the Gewandhaus Orchestra the night before our game against London Met. There is also a serious language barrier that separates the large Italian contingent on the team from the others (usually referred to as “yanks”). Luckily, Domenico Fumagalli and Piero Leporelli get their point across thanks
seemingly dishevelled netballer. Gasps ensued as the couple were identified as Zoo Bar newbie “Silver-T”, and Netball’s own flame-headed vixen, “Flora DeBeer”. Zoo bar also seemed to be the place for the meeting of the “Ali’s,” with people reporting that the social 8th’s – “Ali Lawyer-Pistol” was caught sneaking a little more than an embrace with Football’s very own Ali. Sadly, we have no more information as to how their night progressed, but rest assured “Pistol” most certainly made her 11am lecture the next day. As ex-Zoo Bar veteran Bacon was making her mark on the AU, it seems the newfound relationship between Ms Raquel Oddity and big man Jones was leaving no impression upon the drunken revellers. The pair must be commended for the Most Platonic Couch “Chats” marathon, which gave way only to Jones’ special interpretation of Beyoncé’s Single ladies dance. Suffice to say, Ms Oddity seemed less than enthralled with the moves. Speaking of lacklustre moves, it seems Moaner tool proved too much for Malibu to handle – performing an elaborate dance routine not dissimilar from that witnessed on the video to Youtube sensation “the Walmart Song,” Moaner seemed to stun Malibu into a state of awkward shuffling and Carlton Banks hand-swings. Lastly, it seemed Netball’s wild child Mateer was left shoe-less and friend-less as her other half, Johnston, was seen dashing faster than roadrunner out of Zoo with a man firmly in her grasp. Setting off surprisingly early in the direction of Leicester Square and Soho, I just hope she absorbed the sage advice that was shouted at her before her vanishing act – use a condom. That’s your lot for this week folks!
to their talent on the court, but, most of all, thanks to incredibly emphatic hand gestures and a varied array of Italian swearwords. Over the next few weeks, the team will also have to deal with the absence of Dan Yirinec and
Zach Robinow: the two buddies are on a quest to find Carmen Sandiego and will look for her in every single European capital (yes, including Andorra la Vella). If any of you, avid readers,
doesn’t have anything better to do on Wednesday the 16th, please come and watch our game against Oxford (2 pm, Brixton Recreation Centre). The first twenty people to show up will get to touch Andrew Ben Salem’s pointlessly
Photo: Gio Graglia
PɄɑɕɄ ɄȘ ɜȣȐ \ȐȐȰ
The Beaver | 08.11.2011
Clever Cleverly Alisdair Pennycuick At the under-21 European Championship, the England juniors proved that they were well on the way to emulating the preceding ‘golden generation’. A team of lauded individuals didn’t make it out of the group stages, failing to win a game. Very few of the new breed of English footballers were to leave Denmark with much credit. Fast-forward to the present and the same may be said of such individuals, who, although better suited to the pace and physicality of the Premier League, are still technically inferior to some of their counterparts. David Silva springs immediately to mind, as well as Luca Modric, Luis Suarez and Sergio Aguero. However one other name deserves mentioning, who is not only young, English, and even technically gifted, but was a part of the England Under 21 squad in Denmark over the Summer, though consigned to the right side of midfield, if he made the pitch at all. In the absence of Jack Wilshere and the apparent return of Josh Mceachran to the reserves at Chelsea, perhaps Tom Cleverley is the most exciting young Englishman to be playing in the Premier League. It is interesting to note that both Jordan Henderson and Jack Rodwell have been linked to Manchester United, two examples of the tall, physical player that the English youth system seems to encourage-one of which commanded a £20m price tag on moving to Liverpool. Sir Alex Ferguson, however, decided to place his trust in midfield in the diminutive Cleverley. Three months into the season and The Basingstoke-born midfielder appears to be one of the key factors in his midfield. United have won every game in the League that Cleverley started, while without him have drawn with stoke and Liverpool, and were
subjected to one of the worst defeats in the club’s history, having been overrun in mifield. Moreover they have lacked an ability to keep the ball and effectively transfer play from defence to attack. But can this be explained by the absence of Cleverley? If you asked many a Manchester United fan, including this one, the simple answer is yes. He shares with Wilshere a simple desire to have the ball, and a subsequent ability to do something with it. A highlight is the assist for Danny Welbeck’s goal against Spurs, yet whenever United have looked at their flowing best this season Cleverley is always involved, far more capable of operating in small distances than many of his contempories. While he possesses neither the explosive shooting power or ‘sat-nav’ long ball capability of Paul Scholes the United faithful are certainly aware of how he is, like the ginger prince, able to pick the ball up from the defence and occupy the same space in front of two opposing banks of four, always an outlet, passing and moving, as he and those in front of him lay siege to an opposing penalty area. One thing he does have above Scholes is an ability to tackle as well; box to box he is a valuable entity in defence and attack, and can only improve when he is learning from Scholes, now in a coaching capacity at the club. Many supporters were disheartened when there was no big signing in central midfield in the summer, but if Cleverley continues to play as he is, in a burgeoning partnership with Anderson, who he appears to bring the best out of, those who question Ferguson’s judgement in trusting youth may yet wish for the benefits of hindsight, like a certain Mr Hansen. For as always the mantra at Manchester United is ‘if they are good enough, they are old enough’. And it is very hard to argue with Sir Matt Busby, especially when players such as Cleverley work so hard to prove him right.
Match Report
LSE’s Netball 1st team storms to victory
Imogen Butler-Biggs Week 5 and with 6 freshers out of a squad of ten we’re starting to see how our season will take shape. At first, rigorous physical challenges were endured as our pre-initiations warm up saw the freshers planking and pressuping their way through way too much alcohol! Wednesday nights have also seen a solid turn out from the 1sts this year and this isn’t the first time a few of us have been mentioned in these pages. Despite this, full attendance to 8am training sessions has proven that we can be fully accomplished at both sides of the netball stereotype. It is undoubted that we gained some
Photo: Imogen Butler Biggs skillful players however now we have found our rhythm we are becoming an agile and successful team. Despite a few hiccups; We had a bonus day in Hertfordshire due to a slight miscalculation of timings (sorry again) and had an interesting 5 vs 7 match against a strong Imperial team due to injury, we are top of the BUCS league and are on track to be promoted this year. It is also important to mention that even at our lowest point, 2 players down, the score for the quarter was even. All in all, we have played some well-coached sides and despite not having an unbeaten season, we have more than doubled our opponents’ score in over half our matches. Hopefully the rest of the season will be just as successful.
39
Sport
Stars of the future Miriam Mirwitch The Barclay’s Premier League plays host to some of the world’s most talented football players. It maintains a reputation for nurturing internationally recognised sportsmen from Wayne Rooney to Bobby Moore. Although it is impossible to predict who exactly its future stars might be, here is a selection of eleven up-and-coming players to look out for this season. All under the age of twenty-three, these footballers each display enormous potential and are likely to have a significant impact upon their respective clubs over the next seven months. At just twenty-three years of age, Tim Krul currently holds the position of Newcastle United’s first team goalkeeper. The Dutchman has made numerous appearances for both his club and country at senior and under-21 level. Krul is a commanding force who is particularly adept at catching high balls and has already made a number of impressive clearances this season. English left-back, Matthew Briggs, has also represented his country at under-21 level. After making his first Premiership appearance at the age of sixteen and sixty-five days (a league record,) Briggs holds a regular place in Fulham’s starting XI. Eighteen year-old right-back, Jon Flanagan, has already made a number of first team appearances for Liverpool. Flanagan’s senior debut last season was nota-
bly successful and it is likely that the defender will reprise this performance in the coming year. Arsenal right-back, Connor Jenkinson and Wigan Athletic leftback, Patrick van Aanholt have each represented their respective countries of Finland and the Netherlands at under-21 level. Both players have made repeated appearances for their senior teams and with time have the potential to become internationally recognised defenders. After two seasons on loan to Ipswich Town, Jack Colback has successfully integrated into Sunderland’s senior team. The twenty-two year-old midfielder has already made 9 league appearances for his club this season after an impressive pre-season showing. A product of Sunderland’s youth system, Colback is beginning to hold his own in the Premiership. Seventeen year-old Ross Barkley has already made three appearances for England at under-21 level. The Everton midfielder is making significant progress within the Premier League and has been recently linked with a move to Chelsea. Similarly, England under-21 midfielders Danny Rose and Josh McEchran have shown professionalism and maturity when representing their respective clubs, Tottenham Hotspur and Chelsea, at a senior level. Rubén Rochina has already scored one league goal and has had one assist on goal for Blackburn this season. The twenty year-old forward could enjoy a successful Premier League season
after leaving FC Barcelona in January of this year. Finally, Chelsea striker Daniel Sturridge has made regular appearances for his club this season after an extremely successful loan spell with Bolton during which he scored 8 goals. In a number of years time it is probable that each of these players will amass numerous caps for both club and country. They are at the very beginning of their careers and undoubtedly have a great deal of hard work ahead of them. While there is no telling what might occur in the course of this Premier League season, it is fascinating to witness their careers develop.
Correction The Beaver Sports Editors would like to apologise to Miriam Mirwitch for incorrectly crediting her article in last week’s edition. The article entitled “Mourinho’s legacies (or lack thereof)” was mistakenly credited to Amit Singh instead of Miriam. We would like to thank Miriam for accepting our apology and agreeing to cointinue writing for the Beaver Sports Section. Max & Maz
Match Report
Charge of the not so light brigade Rob Martin The mighty third rugby team have reached the heady heights of mid-table obscurity after a stellar performance against the ultimate poly aka the University of Creative Arts. Building on the hard fought win the previous week against Imperial Medics, we turned up half an hour after kick off and with just 15 men to a ready and waiting opposition. With no more than a jog from the changing room to the pitch for a warm up we got straight into battle. Within minutes the ball reached our speedster on the wing, Jake ‘Shit Hat’ Fernandez. The poor bloke turned up to spectate owing to a leg injury picked up last week; nonetheless duty called and he wore the shirt with pride for the 3 and a half minutes he was on the pitch before the ball came his way and a short sprint left him limping chronically. 14 brave souls remained. Initial exchanges were cagey; the thirds played a well executed territory game thanks to some cracking Gary Owen’s from our buccaneering fly half Seasick Schwalm. The kicks were high and the chase strong. We held of poly with some expert counter rucking from our very own feminist Simon Rickenbach ( yes the rugby club tries to be inclusive) and our now 2 man back row consisting of the druid-esque Matt ‘Jesus’ Walsh and The Chin. The scoring opened when our pack, reportedly heavier than the New Zealand 8 (for the wrong reasons) took the ball against the head on their 5 metre despite being a man down.
Our ever astute scrum half Frodo Ward nipped in for the score. An awful kick later we were defending for our lives as a spilt restart left poly with decent field position. Phase after phase we put body on the line, backs Sakya and Yichao dealing with a huge opposite 12 with gritty determination. Eventually they managed to sneak through under the posts. 7-5 down. Game on. Play continued in the second half with LSE dominating at scrum time, our hooker Azizul striking against the head with metronomic precision. A penalty midfield was cheekily wide to their exposed flanks. A tenacious juggle come offload from our lock turned wing Woody to our local lawman Joe ‘The Sheriff’ Shaner saw the Mr LSE runner up crash over in the corner for his first try for the school. Turns out the oiling up he received that fateful night last year is still helping him slip tackles. At a majestic pace we cranked up the gears, exhibiting exquisite ball handling skills; props, Jonesy and Mothership, linking seamlessly all over the pitch. Another expert chip form Seasick left the full-back exposed. A decent chase from our dashing captain forced the turnover on the try line. The seemingly ever-present captain then seized the opportunity pacing the remaining half metre, taking his try with swashbuckling class. No doubt will be one for the Shack’s mantelpiece. After the restart a rare break from poly left their runner exposed, once again captain cleared up. Putting in the tackle and coming out with the ball. From the base of the ruck on our 22 Frodo grasps the ball and goes on
a trademark foray, ducking and diving from countless would-be tacklers, effortlessly weaving his way up the pitch with pace and power, scoring under the posts. To put the icing on the cake Mothership bulldozed over from close range in the last play of the game. Final score 27 – 7. All in all a stylish win of brute force mixed with lashings of ambition and style. Two victories in a row and the possibilities seem limitless. Promotion? Silverware? Who knows? In true rugby fashion the win was celebrated in appropriately boozey circumstances. Beginning on the bus where our chief spectator and water boy, the elusive one arm bandit, had an awkward moment when the netball team sharing the coach revealed a possible previous conquest to be in their ranks. Comments have been made widely about the bandit’s political aspirations after he spent an evening with our gen sec bashing out their respective motions for the UGM. Either way there is no doubting the bandit’s prowess in seducing the female kind. Revelling continued at the Tuns and ensued at the Mecca that is Zoo for all except Shit Hat who enjoyed his evening at UCH with his broken fibula. All in all a top day for those who turned out. The thirds are always looking for players so if you fancy dusting off those old boots and getting on the pitch come find rugby in Zoo on Wednesday night or send us an email on r.a.martin@lse.ac.uk.
Sport
40
08.11.2011 | The Beaver
Inside
â&#x20AC;˘ Mourinhoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Legacies (or lack thereof) â&#x20AC;˘ I Know Who You Did Last Wedneday â&#x20AC;˘ Mario Balotelli: Why Always me?
Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s forgotten youth Amit Singh Manchester City have long boasted one of the top youth academies in the country. Since 1998 Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s have produced 10 players who currently play first team football for their clubs and 15 players who have received full international call ups for their respective countries. The 2008 FA Youth cup victory was testament to the quality within the youth set up at Eastlands. During Stuart Pearceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s time at the club we probably saw some of the best young players coming through. Micah Richards, Michael Johnson, Daniel Sturridge and Stephen Ireland were all given debuts, and Nedum Onouha, given his debut under Kevin Keegan, was given increased playing time. Things looked promising for City who, whilst struggling somewhat in the league had these bright young players as a cause for optimism. However looking at Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s side now is not reflective of the promising side under Pearce. Of those young players in Pearces squad only Micah Richards remains in the first team. Nedum Onouha looks set to move away from Eastlands with Everton, QPR and Stoke said to be interested, Daniel Sturridge has moved onto Chelsea, Ireland was sold to Villa and Michael Johnson is on loan at Leicester under former boss Sven.
The take-over of Sheikh Mansour drastically changed the philosophy of the club. Instant success became the order of the day as it did at Chelsea after Abramovich took over. The Sheikhâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s were unconcerned about youth development and wished to bring in some of the Worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s highest profile signings. Linked with a plethora of stars from Patrick Viera to Kaka there seemed little space for home-grown talent such as Johnson, Ireland or Onuoha. What this meant for Johnson and co was that first team choices were incredibly limited. Looking at what happened when Abramovich took over at Chelsea and the influx of players then it seems quite ironic that Sturridge would move from City to Chelsea to increase his chances of first team football. Micah Richards is the only player to have survived, recently signing a five year contract extension, but even in his case it seems only a matter of time before City invest in a new full back with Daniel Alves previously being linked. Stephen Ireland scored an impressive 9 goals from 35 league games in the 08-09 season but the sacking of Hughes a season later led to first team opportunities being limited and a further influx of midfield players in the form of Kompany, De Jong and Patrick Viera. Ireland was eventually used as a make weight in a deal to bring Milner to the club. Although midfield
play is about more than just goals no City midfielder since has managed 9 in the league. Michael Johnonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s fall from the lime light seems to be the most drastic, under Sven he managed 23 league appearances and 3 goals and seemed set up for a bright future with the club. His ascent to the first team was in spite of the signings of midfielders Gelson Fernandes, Giovani and Elano, demonstrating how talented Johnson was. Injuries have of course played their role in hampering the development of Johnson. Having started in the team in the 08-09 season under Hughes he was out for over a year with a recurrence of an abdominal injury in which time City continued to spend bringing in Kompany, De Jong, Barry and Viera all of whom as stated contributed to the sale of Ireland a player Johnson linked up so well with. Onuoha also, despite making over 90 appearances for the club looks set to move away, a real shame for a player who was raised in Manchester. A defender who can play right across the back four would probably in most squads be deployed as a utility man rather than being moved on but the wealth of options at Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s disposal have meant Onuoha has become surplus to requirements. It should be noted that a series of youth team players have been handed debuts by Mancini, giving debuts to ten academy players in total. But can
any of them realistically expect to break into the first team? In honesty, no. Ben Mee a member of the 2008 FA Youth cup side is on loan at Burnley, Boyata who was sent off last season against Arsenal is on loan at Southampton, both defenders, surely will not return to the club with the likes of Kompany, Toure, Lescott, Savic all standing in their way. In the short term the only opportunity for these players to remain at City is through the tightening of FIFA and UEFA regulation. Any movement to increase the number of homegrown players in squads would make these players of use to City. As things stand however Micahel Johnson or Ben Mee are unlikely to be able to challenge for places in such a star studded team and will thus probably move on permanently in order to establish themselves elsewhere. It is not just City that have been guilty of this, as previously mentioned Chelsea have developed no new youth team products under Abramovich except midfielder Josh McEachran who was at the club as a young boy prior to Abramovichâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s acquisitionoft the club. Due to the influx of World stars during the Abramovich era some of Chelseaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s young talent that had come through have moved on, Huth is now at Stoke and Hamburg have recently helped themselves to a plethora of young Chelsea players including England u21 captain Michael Mancienne.
It remains to be seen what Ireland and co could have achieved at City were it not for the take-over, but with much less competition for places they surely would have continued to develop as they did prior to the Sheikhâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s acquisition Such a shift in priority for teams like Chelsea and City make it even more laudable how sides like Arsenal are willing to give young players like Fringpong a chance in the hope that tomorrow they will be the sorts of players City and Chelsea will look to spend big money on. United as well have successfully brought through Cleverly and Wellbeck into their first team from their youth system. At a side like City this probably wouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have been possible and both stars would likely have been moved on to accommodate more high profile signings. A combination of high-profile signings and home grown players seems to have been the transfer policy at United under Ferguson and it has served them well, as the most successful team in the Premierleague era, if not English football as a whole. For Michael Johnson in particular, once such a promising young midfielder, we can only hope that he finds his feet once more under former manager Sven Goran Erikson who previously got the best out of him in that 07-8 season, in his ambitious Leicester side.
Luis Theof Good, The Bad, The Ugly? TheSuarezBattle Manchester Timothy Poole For years, Manchester United have dominated English football. The likes of Schmeichel, Cantona, Beckham, Yorke, Cole, Van Nistelrooy and Ronaldo added Premier League after Premier League to Unitedâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s trophy cabinet. Any major threats were overcome with time: Arsene Wenger, Jose Mourinho, Rafael Benitez. Yet, after 25 years of Sir Alex Fergusonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s reign, a new rival is emerging, a blue beast sweeping its foes aside, inflicting historic hurt, such as the 6-1 win at Old Trafford, Fergusonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;worst ever resultâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. This new rival lives at the Etihad and is backed by the billions of Sheikh Mansour, with all the facilities in place to challenge Unitedâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s superiority: Manchester City- the new force in English and, inevitably with time, European football. The recent result in Manchester was indescribable; Roberto Mancini brought his blue army to the Theatre of Dreams, knowing a draw would give his side serious title credentials
early on. What followed defied the laws of gravity: chance after chance, goal after goal, 6-1- arguably the most impressive Premiership result of all time. But how did it happen? And how have Manchester City, after such a short time, been able to buy their way towards glory? A common argument criticises modern football: money has changed the game; it is unfair- unlimited resources give City an undeniable advantage. This argument is fundamentally flawed. Yes, the advantage is there, but money alone will never buy you success. Look at Real Madrid and their infamous ÂŁ200 million summer. In came Kaka, Ronaldo, Xabi Alonsoâ&#x20AC;Ś the result was a long, trophy less season. What has given City their first trophy in over 30 years and an incredible start to this seasonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Premier League is good management, the acquisition of the right players and a specialist deployment of the right tactics for the right games. City are winning the battle of Manchester. The victory at Old Trafford was a tactical master class; whilst Unitedâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s wingers stuck to the flanks, Silva and Milner worked the whole
pitch. Indeed, it is the likes of Silva and Milner that demonstrate what is going so well for City: they have a huge pool of world-class players; yet, Manciniâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s team selection and man management is maximising the utility of this squad. Tevez played up- heâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s out. However, Balotelli was given a start against United, after causing his house to catch on fire only two days before- this paid off. Furthermore, key decisions such as giving the captaincy to Vincent Kompany and knowing when to play the likes of Nasri, Aguero, Dzeko, De Jong, Milner and Silva, is proving Manciniâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s accolades as a coach, something he never managed to do at Inter, winning three Italian titles only due to the relegation of his biggest rivals after match fixing scandals. So, though Unitedâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s experience may still be enough to keep them favourites for the title, their defensive frailties and Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s meteoric rise to stardom may be a sign of things to come- in Manchester, the tide may just be turning from red to blue.
Images courtesy of Flickr