Reporter Online | Editorial

'Real Beauty' Isn't Physical

Fri, 26 Apr 2013 00:00:00 -0400

Editor's Note

by Amber Wilson-Daeschlein

“You are more beautiful than you think” was the message presented by Dove’s Real Beauty Sketches campaign. For those who haven’t seen it, the video shows female participants describing themselves to a sketch artist from behind a curtain. The artist draws a portrait of them from the descriptions and sends the women on their way. The same participants are also described by strangers that they had met that day. The resulting sketches are placed side by side, showing that all of the participants described themselves as less attractive than the strangers had perceived.

With over 16 million YouTube views and thousands of Facebook likes, the Real Beauty video has gotten quite a bit of attention. “First commercial I ever saw that made me cry,” read one of the comments, “every woman should watch this and help their daughters see their ‘real selves’,” stated another.

While the video’s message is important, the focus on society’s very narrow perception of beauty is hidden by sentimental music and emotive testimonials. In fact, until I read a blog post by self-proclaimed writer, blogger and sassy-pants Jazz Brice, I didn’t see anything wrong with Dove’s advertisement.

”Out of 6:36 minutes of footage, people of color are onscreen for less than ten seconds,” she pointed out. In addition, most of the positive descriptions by strangers include phrases such as “thin face,” “nice thin chin,” “short and cute nose” and “nice blue eyes” and many of the participants were under 40 years old. These attributes coincide with the widely accepted standard for beauty: young and skinny.

The video also fails to mention anything about inner beauty and the many other qualities - intelligence, personality and the like - that should be valued above physical appearance. It instead reinforces the unfortunate belief that our natural beauty “impacts the choices and the friends we make, the jobs we go out for, they way we treat our children, it impacts everything,” and goes so far as to say “it couldn’t be more critical to your happiness.”

The message about realizing one’s natural beauty is worthwhile; however, the subtle indication that this beauty is measured in terms of size and age contradicts the campaign’s positivity. The hidden subliminal messages in this video are a strong indication of the apparent importance placed on a specific type of physical beauty, deeply rooted in society today. Even as someone who tries to think critically about the media, I missed what Brice pointed out: the video is really only saying that “you’re actually not quite as far off from the narrow definition of beauty as you might think that you are.”

Though spoken in the context of physical beauty, one of the quotes from the video seemed to make a lot more sense than the overall message. “We spend a lot of time ... trying to fix the things that aren’t quite right and we should spend more time trying to appreciate the things we do like.” It is unfortunate that we have to wade through stereotypes and over-looked discrimination to find such insight. While I can appreciate what the Dove campaign is trying to accomplish, I only hope that the message of self empowerment is not accompanied by that of society’s fixation on purely physical beauty.

Exercising Independence Through Choice

Fri, 19 Apr 2013 00:00:00 -0400

Editor's Note

by Amber Wilson-Daeschlein

You can choose two; a social life, good grades, or sleep. Do you try to “work hard, play hard” by sleep deprivation? Do you subscribe to the “C’s get degrees” motto that some of my more socially inclined, sleep-conscious friends have chosen? Or do you, like me, try to do a bit of all three? For instance, I started writing this at a house party. My friend’s roommates are gone so we decided to partake in a game called “beer ball.” I, as a responsible designated driver, was playing with water.

Choosing what we spend our time on - whether it is on Reddit, doing homework or otherwise - will impact a college career more than the negative effects of procrastination or a late night partying. Through the actions we take, we are defining our behavior in an uncontrolled environment. If I want to stay up until 4 a.m. playing Euchre with my friends, there is no one who will wonder where I am or tell me to “drive safe” when I come home. How we were raised and taught as children has hopefully given us the tools to make informed decisions, but at this stage in life we are on our own.

In some circumstances, the freedom is refreshing. Each year, I stretch my wings a little bit farther and get a little bit more used to answering only to myself. In parallel, the safety net of parental guidance is gone. Going to a party and trying to write an editor’s note that will be seen by whoever doesn’t want to look lame eating lunch alone and - more importantly - my parents, doesn’t seem like a smart idea. But I’m trying it anyway. In this instance, my unusual work-place setting experiment is providing mixed results. On one hand, everyone around me thinks I’m a huge nerd for writing this at a house party. In contrast, I’m sure my parents are a bit skeptical of my work ethic.

My friend is yelling at me to join the party. “Close it, close it!” she yells, referring to my laptop. Shaking her beer bottle at me in disappointment, she gives me a friendly eye-roll and turns around, distracted by an invitation to play MarioKart. At this time, I have a few more articles to edit and am bound by an early deadline. That and the fact that I suck at MarioKart prompt me to continue my work. But, there are trade-offs for everything. I might regret passing up the opportunity to get bested in a video game or I might be glad I crossed another thing off my to-do list.

As we continue to further exercise our independence throughout our time at RIT, there are many benefits and consequences to consider. Each person must find his or her own balance between friends, academics and sleep. No matter which choice we make, it is important to remember what these decisions imply about us as individuals, solely responsible for the outcome.

Censorship, Insensitivity, and Individual Opinion

Fri, 12 Apr 2013 00:00:00 -0400

Editor's Note

by Amber Wilson-Daeschlein

Because of the recent controversy surrounding the blog post entitled “Censorship, Environmentalism and Steubenville” by University of Rochester economics professor Steve Landsburg, many organizations and individuals have taken a stand against what is believed to be the promotion of rape. His blog post posed three questions, the last stated: “Let’s suppose that you, or I, or someone we love ... is raped while unconscious in a way that causes no direct physical harm ... Despite the lack of physical damage, we are shocked, appalled and horrified at the thought of being treated in this way, and suffer deep trauma as a result. Ought the law discourage such acts of rape? Should they be illegal?” Landsburg goes on to ask how this is different from the first two questions which asked if the psychic harm that someone may hypothetically endure from the thought of others viewing pornography or harming the environment is cause for legal action, either through regulation or taxes. He also compared the situation to a neighbor turning on a porch light, causing “trillions of photons to penetrate my body” and stating that “even if those trillions of tiny penetrations caused me deep psychic distress, the law would continue to ignore them”. Many people thought that his point was to promote non-physically damaging rape. However, in a recent addition to his blog post Landsburg clarified that he was only posing the question to encourage discussion about what should and should not be considered when making public policy. He stated that when “looking for a rule about what should be legal,” a logical conclusion would be that “you can do anything you want as long as you’re not causing anybody direct physical harm” and pointed out that that would allow for the rape of an unconscious victim, thus rendering this school of thought invalid. “It was a post about where to draw lines between purely psychic harm that should receive policy weight and purely psychic harm that shouldn’t,” the professor stated in a follow-up blog post on April 3.

“In response to Landsburg’s horrifying comments and the University’s lack of meaningful action, WORD Women Organized to Resist and Defend issued a Call to Action ... demanding that he be fired” stated a press release issued April 3. Additionally, according to the Huffington Post, an online student petition to censure the professor had over 500 signatures by April 4. These movements were highlighted by both the Huffington Post and Gawker in recent articles that show bias against the professor and his controversial statements.

In my opinion, Landsburg’s presentation of the question of public policy was sophomoric. By comparing the very real trauma of the Steubenville rape victim to the fictitious trauma sustained by pornography antagonist “Farnsworth McCrankypants” and environmentalist “Granola McMustardseed,” he belittled the deep psychic harm that rape causes. I also find it hard to believe that someone who defended Rush Limbaugh’s assessment of Sandra Fluke as a “slut” is truly an advocate for laws that protect women. However, the political correctness and morality of his statements should be judged by each individual, not by the source of information.

As the leader of a news organization it is not only my goal but also my responsibility to promote free speech and meaningful conversation. This responsibility extends past college magazines to professional publications - such as the Huffington Post and Gawker - and in this instance, has not been upheld. Reading the title of an article published on Gawker: “Rochester Professor Wonders Why Rapists Shouldn’t Be Allowed to ‘Reap the Benefits’ of Passed Out Girls,” one would assume that Landsburg is encouraging the rape of an unconscious victim. Though the title is technically accurate, it creates bias against the professor’s question of public policy and the blog’s creation of important discussion. Any reputable news source would take many precautions to state the facts and to let the readers make their own opinions. Because these precautions are lacking, it is up to the individuals to seek out primary sources and form their own beliefs on the subject at hand while ignoring the bias inserted by some news organizations.

Bridging the Gap: It's Easier Than You Think

Fri, 05 Apr 2013 00:00:00 -0400

Editor's Note

by Amber Wilson-Daeschlein

When I applied to RIT, I hadn’t heard very much about it - living eight hours away and all - so when it came time to choose where I was going to spend the next four years, I made a pretty uninformed decision. The majority of my freshman year was spent debating whether or not I had made the right choice and it wasn’t until last year that I became confident that RIT was the college for me. One of the main reasons for my assurance was the many types of diversity RIT has to offer, more specifically, being home to the National Technical Institute for the Deaf.

As a child growing up in a small town that boasted a large collection of antique shops and a pretty homogeneous mix of old people and middle-class families, I experienced hardly any communication barriers. During my first year at RIT, I learned to fingerspell my first name and once played intramural volleyball against a team with a deaf member. It wasn’t until I joined a sorority and met three members of my pledge class who were deaf that I had to learn to communicate efficiently with deaf students.

Our initial meeting on bid day was a little awkward but we exchanged phone numbers, planned a shopping date for the next day and communicated mostly by writing notes on our phones. Throughout the quarter, I learned how to sign things like “your shirt is cute” and “bitch, please” but more importantly, I learned that communicating with deaf people isn’t that hard. It was actually, surprisingly easy.

I couldn’t believe that I had spent my whole first year at RIT missing out on an entirely new culture that I had never before had the chance to experience. I was so worried that my inability to sign would prove too difficult to overcome or slow down the conversation to the point of exasperation. I had never thought to simply grab a small notebook and go bridge the gap to make some new friends. I’m so glad that I learned how easy it was to communicate, even without using sign language.

Any time I didn’t know how to sign something, I could write it down or fingerspell it and my sisters would be more than happy to teach me or help me out. One time, I went out to lunch with a deaf friend and even though I only knew about half of the signs she was using, I still understood her almost perfectly because of her expressiveness when storytelling. She was patient enough to help me communicate and I was willing to learn.

Almost two years after joining my sorority and meeting my deaf pledge sisters, I still suck at signing. But that hasn’t stopped us from having tons of fun together, making memories that I will never forget. I only wish that I had had the courage to walk up to someone with a sticky note that said “Hi, I’m Amber” and start a conversation, no matter how unconventional the method was.

How to Run a Magazine

Mon, 01 Apr 2013 11:04:34 -0400

by Miss Bossypants

1. Hold productive and engaging weekly staff meetings.

2. Collectively and creatively brainstorm article ideas.

3. Assign stories to writers and effectively enforce deadlines.

4. Coordinate immagery in advance for each section.

5. Meticulously edit every article.

6. Promptly deliver articles to the design team.

7. Send the final copy to Margie’s Cottage for production.

8. Gleefully distribute the magazine to readers like you!

Innovation is Old News

Fri, 22 Mar 2013 00:00:00 -0400

Editor's Note

by Amber Wilson-Daeschlein

According to the RIT website, one of the values of the university is “Innovation and Flexibility,” meaning that RIT “Provides and/or encourages new ideas that could make the department, college, or division an even better organization.” As a higher-education institution, RIT has an obligation to facilitate such innovation and flexibility and in my opinion, has done a pretty decent job.

Innovation is important. Large corporations, small businesses and even college students are learning what it means, how to do it and why they should care. In the most simplistic terms, innovation refers to the creation of something new.

A friend’s idea to wrap taco salad in a flour tortilla, creating either an easy-to-eat meal or a redundant Mexican dish, was pretty innovative if you ask me. However, the term innovation has been used to mean many different things, blurring the lines between invention and improvement.

Though it may not be viral enough to qualify as a “fad,” innovation is becoming an increasingly used buzzword with an indistinct definition and diminished significance.

Branded as the “Innovation University,” RIT has made its commitment to innovation quite apparent. “Hello, I’m an RIT innovator!” reads one of the many t-shirts sitting in the back of my closet. From the moment I first arrived on campus I was bombarded by information stating that I was supposed to be innovative, I was surrounded by innovative people and by the time I graduated I would do innovative things. After awhile, it became a bit monotonous.

An anonymous quote found in a LinkedIn post by founder of FORTH Innovation Method Gijs van Wulfen states “innovation is anything, but business as usual.” If the overuse of the term innovation continues, it will become exactly that: business as usual. Innovation, by nature, is novel and exciting and to be innovative requires originality and inspiration.

If every product improvement or process modification is innovative, where does that leave the truly unique ideas and inventions? The term’s constant use at RIT lessens its effect and in turn, can cause apathy towards projects branded as innovative.

The Gender Revolution Needs Some Fuel

Fri, 15 Mar 2013 00:00:00 -0400

Editor's Note

by Amber Wilson-Daeschlein

The other week, I asked my boyfriend a question that not many college men like to hear: “Do you consider yourself a feminist?” He seemed a bit taken aback and after a few quiet minutes, said that he didn’t know enough about feminism to give a definitive answer. Even though my question was successfully avoided, he is not alone in this disposition.

“I, myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism is,” stated author and journalist, Rebecca West in 1913, “I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat.”

Despite some ambiguity, there has been significant progress in terms of achieving social and economic equality. In the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, women fought to attend higher-education universities, own property and vote. Even in the early seventies, my mother stubbornly defended her right to educational equality and was the first girl in middle school to take wood-shop and wear pants. Recently, however, the movement has lost some steam with many young adults seemingly indifferent towards current gender inequalities.

According to USA Today, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that women earn about 20 percent less than men with similar positions and qualifications. Furthermore, only about three percent of Fortune 500 CEOs are female. “The advancement of key women in business is stalled,” remarked CEO of women’s business newsletter, Little PINK Book, Cynthia Good.

Gender inequalities can also be found flowing through our various social and news media outlets. Reported by Ms. magazine, a study of news sources during the 2012 presidential election conducted by Fourth Estate found that “men were four to seven times more likely to be quoted in stories about women’s issues and rights.” More specifically: 67 percent of quotes about Planned Parenthood, 75 percent of quotes about birth control and 81 percent of quotes about abortion were from men. Additionally, only 31 percent of quotes about women’s rights were from women.

Although gender inequality seems more subtle now than in earlier centuries, it remains ubiquitous throughout our education system, the media and corporate America. Today’s feminists must identify and draw attention to such issues. As society evolves, it is necessary for the gender revolution to evolve with it.

Editor's Note: Looking Beyond

Fri, 08 Mar 2013 00:00:00 -0500

by Amber Wilson-Daeschlein

“Hey you! Yeah, that’s right, I saw you! Come back here and pick that up!”

I was walking to the Reporter office last week when I heard someone yelling. Though he wasn’t talking to me, I was inclined to stop texting and listen, if only to see what all the fuss was about. “You can’t do that, I’m a witness!”

The culprit? An unknown figure in a large, dusty pick-up truck. The crime? Littering. And the loud man on the street? Just a nameless passerby fighting for some eco-justice, standing up for what he believed in with enough passion to yell at a car, now halfway down the road with the windows rolled up; a man who cared about something bigger than himself and had the integrity to do something about it.

Most college students tend to be a bit selfish. “You’re twenty years old! You haven’t done anything,” ranted comedian Louis CK on “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno”. “You’ve just been sucking up resources. You’ve just been taking food and love and education and iPods ... If you’re twenty, you definitely have never done a thing for anybody.”

As a twenty-year-old myself, I reluctantly have to agree. Although some members of our generation are feeding the homeless (see Recover Rochester, page 11) or traveling to underprivileged countries to volunteer (see Filling in the Gap, page 16) many of us are pretty apathetic. Most of us live in a world focused on individual success. We strive to build up our resumes and professional networks in order to earn a socially acceptable salary and focus on our futures without thinking about the bigger picture.

In many ways, it is important to focus on oneself during college. This is the time we invest in ourselves through our academics and extracurricular activities. In many cases our top priority is, and should be, ourselves. But after two decades of “sucking up resources” - and the occasional iPod - we owe it to our parents, friends and the rest of society to realize what else is out there.

The outspoken environmentalist on the street attempted to dissuade a stranger from littering. Seemingly unsuccessful, his words caused me to throw my empty water bottle into a recycling bin instead of a trash can. If you had encountered such an activist, what might he yell at you to change? Alternatively, what would cause you to yell at a total stranger? You don’t have to volunteer your time or donate what little cash you have left after spring break, just look beyond the collegiate microcosm and educate yourself; find something to care about.

Editor's Note

Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:24:34 -0500

by Alex Rogala

Sometimes the news hits way too close to home.

Last Friday, students, faculty and staff in the School of Media Sciences (SMS) learned of Professor Edline Chun’s passing. A friend and mentor to many, her death left an indelible mark on the RIT community.

After learning of the incident, Reporter quickly worked to develop a story on the matter, which we published online later that evening. As a student in the SMS, it’s an incredibly emotional story to watch develop: The subjects involved were all my professors and peers.

Covering a death is one of a writer’s most challenging tasks. It’s an emotionally challenging time to conduct interviews, and reporters must take extra care to address the bereaved’s special needs.

These sort of interviews may be fraught with ethical conundrums - but they are also essential. This is journalism in its purest form.

First and foremost, Reporter’s job is to disseminate information. Especially in such a situation where rumors may spread, it’s important to ensure information is verified.

But especially in a situation like this, Reporter has the opportunity to capture the zeitgeist and help the RIT community as a whole unite in the honor of the dearly departed. While the Institute’s official emails do express their heartfelt sympathies, these sorts of stories allow the people they lived, socialized and worked with to pay their final tribute.

At its core, Reporter is community focused. We’re there on the sidelines of every major event, reporting RIT’s happenings, raising important questions and, in cases like this, memorializing those who have left a powerful impact on Brick City. To Benjamin and Edline: May you rest in peace.

Editor's Note: Bounced Checks

Fri, 08 Feb 2013 03:01:17 -0500

by Alex Rogala

Deep within the Student Life Center basement, the doorway hides a tall, narrow staircase. Dimly lit and decidedly nondescript, it leads to an equally plain running track suspended above the center’s basketball courts.

At each of the starcase’s landings, there’s a small, framed orange plaque listing the names of various faculty, staff and students. Each commemorates RIT Running Club members who have reached a certain milestone. As these awards spans from the “100 Mile Club” to the “1,000 Mile Club,” the list of names rapidly shrinks. At the very top of the stairs, only a scarce few are listed. Diligent both in body and mind, these devoted few are recognized for their truly impressive drive and discipline.

Totaled, it’s surprising how few names are there; less than 100 of RIT’s 17,000 students grace those walls. And it’s not for lack of effort - RIT offers plenty of exercise opportunities - but rather student apathy towards health.

College is a highly formative experience; with no parental safety net, students must develop work, social and personal habits that will shape their futures. Overwhelmed with projects, alcohol and newfound social pressures, exercise gets unduly relegated to the wayside. After all, it’s easy to feel immortal at 2.

Despite RIT’s already substantive efforts, it must develop incentives to encourage an active and healthy student lifestyle. The Institute’s wellness department can help by increasing its programming; the two-course wellness is simply insufficient. With the more relaxed schedule semesters will bring, the Institute has an even more wonderful opportunity to bring wellness where it should be: front and center. Considering America’s obesity epidemic, additional wellness requirements would only benefit the RIT population. It’s not what students want; it’s what they need.

While the university offers and endless number of wellness events and seminars, they’re not reaching anywhere near the audience they could. RIT certainly has the resources; just last weekend, the Institute hosted Freezefest. Rather than simply devoting that money to get students out of their dorms, it should be focused on getting them moving. A lot of this comes down to promotion and awareness. The programming is there; students just need to be made better aware of it.

In the meantime, Reporter has devoted this special issue to exploring wellness. It presents advice on getting started and chronicles those dedicated to helping students improve both body and mind.

Editor's Note: Beige Boxes

Fri, 01 Feb 2013 00:53:00 -0500

by Alex Rogala

Last week Provost Emeritus Stanley McKenzie donated 300,000 to RIT’s College of Liberal Arts (See “COLA Recieves 300,000 Donation” on page 5.). Among other projects, this money will fund a collaborative social space and lecture series.

It’s high time COLA received some attention. Within the confines of a technical university, it occasionally seems starved for funding and resources. Its equipment and space demands are certainly considerably lower than other, more technical majors. However, additional funding, programming and learning space improvements will provide students a better-rounded education, increase campus diversity and perhaps fix some of the Institute’s retention issues.

There’s nothing wrong with the current COLA; sometimes, though, it seems a bit unloved. Liberal Arts Hall seems largely unchanged since its construction.

Despite its modest home, COLA plays a crucial role in each RIT education; all students must complete a liberal arts core and minor before graduation. Arguably, especially for uninterested students, it can be an uphill battle.

With increased support, the college can offer a wider range of classes tailored to better fit these students’ needs. While an engineering student might argue she wouldn’t reap any benefits from a literature class, for example, additional public speaking, writing and critical thinking courses may help her differentiate herself from the crowd. Combined with the intellectual salon McKenzie visions, an overhaul could encourage rich cross-disciplinary collaboration, exposing students to other learning styles and encouraging innovative projects.

As RIT grows and expands its campus, a greater emphasis on liberal arts will improve RIT’s diversity by drawing in a wider range of students. Furthermore, bolstering such programs may counter some of RIT’s retention issues. Some among the many students who switch may find their home in COLA. Ensuring that the liberal arts college seems properly prepared and has might convince even more that it’s a worthwhile investment.

There couldn’t be a better time. Last winter, an anonymous alumnus donated 3 million to establish a critical thinking chair in honor of former College of Business professor Dr. Eugene Fram. In Reporter’s December 2011 article on the subject, the donor praised Fram’s s incredible impact on his career. While this chair is admittedly cross-disciplinary in nature, it has clear roots in RIT’s philosophy program. Likewise, McKenzie’s donation speaks volumes about his experience at RIT. Together, these two donations will foster an atmosphere that seems quite in touch with President Destler’s vision of innovation and creativity. COLA lies right at this vision’s foundation.

Each year, the RIT skyline gains several buildings devoted to innovation, creativity and progress. COLA, a crucial building block towards these lofty goals, could use a serious upgrade from those cramped beige boxes RIT calls classrooms.

Editor's Note: A Show of Hands

Fri, 25 Jan 2013 00:13:00 -0500

by Alex Rogala

At last Friday’s Student Government (SG) meeting, the Senate voted on replacement Graduate and NTID Senators. While this is a fairly typical process - students occasionally leave their positions during the year - I left the meeting slightly uncomfortable about the proceedings I had just witnessed.

I later realized there had been a slight deviation from the traditional method of proceedings. Whereas the Senate typically votes by a show of hands, these particular ballots were cast on folded pieces of paper. While I am not aware of regulations barring this method of voting, it’s a decision I’m highly uncomfortable with. When SG’s chief goal is to represent and advocate for students, this sort of action reduces transparency, compromises the group’s accountability, and risks setting a dangerous precedent.

SG is, at its core, a simple representative government. Student leaders are elected (or appointed) to represent a certain constituency. Within the RIT community, they are public figures voicing the concerns and wishes of various groups of students. They vote with this in mind, rather than simply for their own benefit.

In order to ensure SG is accountable, these votes must be treated as a matter of public fact. There are mechanisms in place to facilitate this; for example, SG meeting minutes typically document the number of votes for, against or abstaining on each proposal. These records are freely available online at RIT’s Digital Media Archive. Even better, students who attend Senate meetings can observe how their representatives choose to vote. If they disagree with these decisions, they can then approach SG to ask why or offer their own suggestions.

With a significant Senate turnover this year - at least three positions have changed hands since spring elections - transparency and accountability are key. Since SG cannot afford students the luxury of a vote in short-notice situations like this, a public record is more important than usual.

There doesn’t seem to be anything in the SG bylaws prohibiting this sort of vote, only the stipulation that votes must be “open ballot,” except in very specific circumstances. This very well may fit those standards, but the official minutes will not be released until after press time for this issue.

However, just because SG can vote this way doesn’t mean it should. Getting students involved in the representative process is already a great challenge. The group constantly works to organize public rallies and services, such as the recent Dining Services town hall meeting or the Tiger East End Express, to get students involved both in campus life and decisions that affect them. Still, less than 3,000 of the Institute’s approximately 17,000 students voted in last spring’s presidential election. At times, it can be an uphill battle against apathy and the stress of the quarter system. As such, it seems contradictory to obfuscate the free flow of information to those faithful few who regularly attend the meetings.

While this is admittedly a relatively minor situation, it still risks setting an unfortunate precedent. If it is used again, newer members may become accustomed to this style of voting. As they later ascend to leadership positions, their experiences may then influence how SG votes in years to come.

From my interactions with SG over the past two quarters, I feel that this year’s Senate truly does care about engaging and representing students. But while their intentions are earnest, that folded paper ballet sends a completely different message.

Editor's Note: Tools of the Trade

Fri, 18 Jan 2013 00:00:00 -0500

Hidden deep within RIT’s web site, there’s a page called the RIT Archives Photography Collection. An online photo archive spanning the past century, it documents student life and education at RIT and its predecessors.In most of the collection’s photographs, RIT’s history as a vocational school is evident; classroom settings are shown much less frequent than images of machine shops and laboratories. Many images show students working in labs filled with complex machinery - the tools of their trades.

This week, Reporter’s subfeature discusses learning styles, or the idea that people learn in different ways. In some circles, the topic is hotly contested - and rightly so. While learning styles may have some effect on how a student absorbs information, it’s the wrong focal point. Students should be much more focused on what sort of experience they’re getting. And unfortunately, the current obsession with a traditional lecture format teaches students less than hands-on education can.

Experience is perhaps the greatest predictor of success. In his book “Outliers,” writer Malcolm Gladwell proposes the idea of a “10,000 Hour Rule.” Simply put, he states that it takes 10,000 hours for one to master a topic or skill. The idea is simple: persistence, not talent, determines achievement.

The theory has its roots in history. Traditionally, the benefit of a comprehensive formal education was limited to the upper classes. Many learned trades through some form of apprenticeship. This was partially out of necessity, as most had few job options, but it also meant that artisans got a hands-on approach early in the game.

With the current advancements in technology, many tasks that once required specialized tools can now be performed on the average computer. But even so, time in the field is essential; the more time students spend in the classroom, the few hours they’re putting in out in the field. A 10,000-hour journey is one that lasts a lifetime. In order to succeed, one must lay the foundations as early as possible.

A lecture-heavy education can impede this. Even at career-focused schools such as RIT, however, lectures are still the predominant teaching method. However, they do not fit into this 10,000-hour mold. In many cases, it is an outmoded style of learning, derived from a time when books were a luxury.

Fortunately, RIT incorporates plenty of apprenticeship in the form of lab classes and co-ops. But further integration of hands-on learning will improve students’ real-world skill This fall, RIT discussed plans to expand online learning so that more physical classes can be dedicated to teamwork and collaborative projects. It’s certainly a move in the right direction, and hopefully one with innumerable benefits.

Editor's Note: You, Inc.

Fri, 11 Jan 2013 00:00:00 -0500

by Alex Rogala

Last week, I travelled to Manhattan for a job interview. Now in the final weeks of my college career, I reflected on my time at RIT while preparing for it. Since arriving here four and a half years ago, my goals have changed drastically. For perhaps the first time, I thought about what I wanted from a career (as opposed to a job), what skills I could offer companies, and where I might like to call home.

I quickly found myself caught up in a conundrum of self-expression. How would I best sell myself - showcasing all I have to offer - while still remaining true to who I am? It surprised me that I had thought so little about personal branding until this year. But the more I did, I began to realize why.

Branding is a particularly hot topic right now. With the growing popularity of business-focused social media networks such as LinkedIn, many an aspiring professional has sought to carve out his own little niche on the internet. University News, RIT’s public relations outlet, has published stories on the topic; so has Reporter. In an effort to give its gradates a heads-up in an increasingly challenging job market, RIT has even incorporated the topic into certain classes.

It’s far too much way too soon. College is a tumultuous time for the average undergraduate. When many arrive, they are facing the world alone for the first time. During their freshman year, they encounter many social and academic pressures as they grapple with their newfound independence. Most will switch majors at least once, according to MSNBC and Fox Business.

By introducing students to the idea of a personal brand, RIT hopes to help them plan for their future. However, it is inappropriate to suggest that students develop such a professional identity at this stage. Instead, they must focus on developing the skills, vision and maturity to build a successful career. Without this strong foundation, a personal brand will mean nothing.

While RIT is more career-focused than most colleges, it is still a place for students to discover themselves. Many classroom exercises teach essential skills such as teamwork and time management. In a slightly longer- term capacity, counselors and academic advisors work hard to help students discover their career path.

While class is undoubtedly the cornerstone of an education, many of college’s best lessons occur in extracurricular settings. Clubs and sports provide a sandbox where students can experiment with various leadership roles and hobbies outside of their chosen major. These experiences help them grow, and sometimes they may impact students’ future career decisions. After working for Reporter, for example, some choose to pursue a career in journalism, rather than their original major. If they had focused solely on their selected career path, they may have unnecessarily restricted their future options.

Early on, students may be unsure what they want from life. With out a clear goal in mind yet, they have a poor grasp of their skill set. When attempting to build a brand, they may present an anemic, surface- deep portrayal of their abilities. At worst, they may misrepresent or mislead, which could lead them to an unfulfilling job that does not fit their talents.

Students are still only beginning to develop their personal goals during college. Many have yet to determine what they stand for, or what they ultimately aim to achieve. They must select personal values to guide their decision-making and career choices. Then in order to begin that career, rather than simply obtain a job, they must then craft an individual vision of what they hope to accomplish. This will allow them to rise above and truly leave a lasting impact on their chosen profession.

This careful planning and self-exploration is more crucial for Generation Y than any that has come before. Born on the threshold of the information age, today’s college students face a highly uncertain future; many are preparing for jobs that do not yet exist. Rather than develop a perfect image, these students must first focus on honing the skills that will truly set them apart.

These skills are, and always will be, key; a strong personal brand is simply icing on the cake. Employers are concerned chiefly with performance. Even the most expertly crafted brand cannot help a prospective employee who cannot produce timely, quality work.

A brand is merely a tool; it is only as strong as the talent that supports it. A well-constructed one can complement a seasoned professional’s strong skill set. However, it should be the furthest thing from a young undergraduate’s mind.

Editor's Note: Bounced Checks

Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:00:00 -0500

by Alex Rogala

Following last Friday’s tragic school shooting in Newtown, Conn., a statement allegedly issued by actor Morgan Freeman spread across Facebook. In it, Freeman criticized the media for sensationalizing and glorifying mass murderers. The message rapidly spread around Facebook, as users could relate with his sage, snappy insight.

Except Morgan Freeman hadn’t said anything regarding the incident; the statement was either falsely attributed or intentionally fabricated to deceive readers. By Friday night, the myth-busters at Snopes had already reported they could not definitively link the quote to Freeman. Last Sunday, according to Yahoo News, Freeman’s publicist debunked the rumor that the statements had originated with the actor.

In our November 30 issue, Reporter’s James Lecarpentier wrote a views piece on anti-intellectualism in America. He hit on some fantastic points about willful ignorance and distain for science. Mulling his arguments over in the weeks since, especially after reading “Freeman’s” post, I’ve come to realize a parallel problem: widespread general apathy towards factual accuracy in day-to-day life.

After four and a half years in the newsroom, I’ve become accustomed to skepticism; as a writer and editor, I’ve been trained to fact-check thoroughly. Each article Reporter publishes goes through a chain of four editors. If we can’t verify something, we don’t print it. And in the cases where we are mistaken, we hold ourselves accountable to our readership by publishing corrections.

Off-duty, I’m inclined to apply this skill to my everyday life, and I sometimes find the results alarming. For example, weeks ago, software engineer Nolan Daniels uploaded a photograph to Facebook several weeks ago of himself allegedly holding a winning Powerball ticket for 239 million jackpot. He pledged to give 1 million randomly to someone who shared the image. Despite rather crude image manipulation - and an incorrect sequence of “winning” numbers - the image has since been shared over two million times.

Our generation has a tendency to rely on false credibility. “Freeman’s” statement was a reasonably well concieved, well-argued message. Had it been posted under any other name, I wonder if it would have reached or resonated with quite as many people as it did. Would anyone have cared? Sadly, I doubt it. Morgan Freeman has quite a persona built up in the public consciousness - much of it based more around the characters he’s played, I’m sure, than his actual personality. His familiarity and popularity inevitably helped this recent statement spread.

Fortunately, much potentially inaccurate information is easy to review - a simple Google search can debunk some of the mankind’s most pervasive rumors. All you need is an open mind and a critical eye.

Our world is grounded in fact. Failing to actively question our surroundings is an incredible waste of the knowledge we have. Especially as the sheer amount of information available to us grows, the need for accuracy will grow ever more critical. The internet holds endless amounts of information, but if we continue to apathetically spread rumor and hearsay, what value will that information truly retain?

Editor's Note: A Social Obsession

Fri, 14 Dec 2012 00:00:00 -0500

by Alex Rogala

It’s an oddly compelling campaign. The advertisements show a series of businessmen sharing rather inept opinions on social media, whereupon they are subjected to electric shocks, slaps or other forms of cruel and unusual torture.

These video clips are part of a bold marketing campaign for Adobe Marketing Cloud, a suite of analytics software designed to help businesses track their return on investment from social media.

According to a recent University News article, RIT’s E. Phillip Saunders College of Business was recently named one of the most social media friendly colleges with an MBA program by OnlineMBAPage.com. The site was quoted in University News as saying, “If schools want to attract Internet-savy students ... they need to share frequently and interact with their followers.”

While the Saunders College of Business Facebook has a reasonably interesting mix of content, I’m unsure whether I’d consider it a success. Despite 200 mentions and 33 new “likes” last month, the page was only viewed 20 times per its official activity listing. As of press time, it has only been viewed four times this month. While OnlineMBAPage.com’s recommendation certainly spotlights RIT’s eagerness to embrace technology, I’m unsure whether we’re aiming for the right goalpost.

Social media services thrive when they allow for the dissemination and curation of interesting or relevant information. Far too often, however, organizations’ social media pages devolve into a popularity contest. “Likes” and retweets become prized over legitimate content.

Upon their debut nearly a decade ago, blogs and early social media sites like Friendster and MySpace allowed users to connect with their friends and colleagues at an unprecedented level. Over time, these sites matured to include organizations, businesses and publications. The current breed of social media, including recent incarnations ofs Facebook and Twitter, has shifted heavily towards content curation. Users can share each others’ links, a feature designed to allow like-minded people to spread and discuss content that interests them.

In my time online, however, I’ve seen too many pages focused specifically on reaching a certain number of likes, shares or comments. These metrics, however, don’t necessarily have meaning. A “like” is ultimately a rather abstract concept, which doesn’t necessarily correlate to a real-world payoff. When analyzing over two million tweets, social media researcher Dan Zarella found no relation between clicks and retweets, according to his HubSpot blog. In his experiment, 16.12 percent of retweeted posts were shared more than they were read, with 14.64 percentlacking even a single click. Just because the message spread doesn’t mean anyone has read it.

Falling into this trap, many brands blindly seek “likes.” McDonald’s, for example, has rather-creepy Facebook timeline which narrates their growth with extensive “retro” posts introducing the first Quarter Pounders and Egg McMuffins in posts backdated as far as the 1940s. It’s a tactic that straddles the line between uselessly amusing and downright creepy.

In this blind quest for likes, many of these groups fail to adequately connect with their users. Even worse, their efforts to go viral can backfire. Last spring, for example, the social media crew behind RIT’s new Student Information System posted an image which some students criticized as condescending. Featuring a still of Gene Wilder as the titular character in 1971’s “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory,” it read, “Oh you think the new SIS is clunky? Tell us again how much you love the old SIS.” At the time, it served only to exacerbate then-widespread disdain for the system rather than impart information or facilitate meaningful discussion.

The current social media climate damages things even further. Facebook shows each fan page’s posts to only a small percentage of its followers - unless they click an obscure checkbox.

Even the value of curation can be further degraded by the sheer number of factually inaccurate posts and misinformation that circulates regularly, such as the recently widespread Facebook privacy disclaimer hoax, which has resurfaced in many forms since Facebook became publicly traded last summer. Throw in some satire mistaken for fact, some hacked together list-based articles and some outrage, and you’ve got the recipe for a social media nightmare.

Within specific confines, shares and retweets can be a powerful way for users to spread content or draw readers in. However, content is still crucial. Pages and posts must prioritize what they say. If social media managers fail to determine what they want to achieve, their messages are merely shots in the dark.

Editor's Note: Free For All

Fri, 07 Dec 2012 00:48:00 -0500

by Alex Rogala

Recently, the RIT Men’s Rugby team was suspended for one quarter after their coach reportedly consumed alcohol during a match (See “Men’s Rugby Suspended for One Quarter.”).

I have some unanswered questions of my own about the incident, such as whether anyone - fans or team - addressed the coach’s drinking at the game. Yet by and large, I can emphasize with the team’s plight. It raises the question of who is responsible for an individual’s behavior. And, comparing past incidents, I’m not sure the Institute has given a consistent answer.

I understand RIT’s choice of sanction; the team was involved in a rather severe hazing incident five years ago, giving precedent to a harsher judicial outcome. However, the 2007 incident involved a significant number of students from both Men’s and Women’s Rubgy teams, not their coaches.

What bothers me is that this sanctioning doesn’t fit the Institute’s prior history. An alleged altercation last winter resulted in Women’s Hockey Head Coach Scott McDonald being dealt a one-game suspension. While this likely had some impact on the team for that specific game, the bulk of its punitive action was limited to one person.

Team dynamic is important in any organization. A failure for any individual member is ultimately a failure for the team. It’s intended to be a lesson in responsibility, but this current reaction seems to take the old adage, “Tell me who your friends are, and I’ll tell you who you are,” to its logical extreme.

Again, it flies counter to Phil Amsler’s resignation as Student Government president in fall 2010.Granted, there are some logical problems: The incident he was involved in occurred off-campus and off-duty. Besides, it would have present a bizarre challenge: Since the student body elected Amsler, it’s unclear how such a sanction would have been carried out.

There are a few very good reasons why this specific sanction may have been dished out. However, it gives the appearance of a double standard. Is a club sport considered more culpable for its leaders actions than a student senate or Divison I sport? Given the prior record, I think it’s high time for a public discussion of these policies.

Editor's Note: Communication

Fri, 30 Nov 2012 00:00:00 -0500

by Alex Rogala

Late last year, RIT unveiled plans to develop a late-night coffee shop. This past Monday, the Institute debuted Midnight Oil, the fruit of its efforts.

Unfortunately, late isn’t quite the right word; Midnight Oil closes at midnight. That’s earlier than the Corner Store or several local restaurants that deliver to campus.

In an interview (See “Midnight Oil Opens” on page 5.), Manager Paul Maushart has stated that he’s open to change hours to later, so it’s likely these initial hours are a test run. Still, it raises a larger topic: the disconnect between students and administration.

RIT’s administration is focused on student needs. However, there is a communication breakdown. Often, the results of projects wind up feeling like crude and sanitized imitations of their intended goal.

The idea of a late-night coffee spot is fantastic; such a gathering place is sorely needed on a campus with virtually no few lounges available on the academic side. Midnight must have seemed like a reasonable time to the administration, and for any off-campus business, it would be. However, it’s common for students to stay up until two or three.

Both Park Point and Global Village have tried to add a new, town-like social experience decidedly suburban campus. But each felt too clean-cut and antiseptic.

Likewise, consider RIT’s newfound obsession with fountains. While they’re aesthetically pleasing, they don’t exactly fit the frigid Rochester climate, where they’ll only be powered on for several months each year. Also, why does RIT need so many?

These are the sort of things that look good on an admissions web site. But after four years, the novelty begins to wear thin.

College is often seen as a sort of sandbox where students discover themselves develop into professionals. But that doesn’t mean they should be sheltered from the outside world.

Let’s see some grit and grease. Break the rules a bit. Infuse some more local Rochester cuisine. At the very least, don’t organize and structure projects to the point that all their vitality vanishes. Allow for students to build some of their own culture. It may give risk management a heart attack, but it will go a long way towards quelling student discontent.

Editor's Note: Riding the Crest

Fri, 09 Nov 2012 00:00:00 -0500

by Alex Rogala

“I sound my barbaric yawp over the rooftops of the world.” — Walt Whitman

As RIT’s final fall quarter draws to a close, I can’t help but detect the distant rumble of discontent. All around me, I hear my fellow students express concerns related to class credit, graduation and co-op opportunities. Tension hangs in the air.

Concerns about semester conversion are perfectly normal; it is an uncertain time in RIT’s history. However, it’s also an exciting one. Personally, I couldn’t think of a better time to be a student. Amidst this chaos, there is also tremendous opportunity to shape the Institute’s future.

I understand students’ trepidation - the decision to switch to semesters has been fraught with controversy. When the Student Government (SG) Senate voted on a proposed conversion in early 2010, then-SG President Matt Danna chose to recommend semesters after a straw poll contradicted the official SG vote against them. Understandably, many students felt their voice was lost in the process.

These fears were exacerbated when last spring’s conversion to a new Student Information System caught many off-guard. Ultimately, however, I feel most opposition to the semester system stems from the uncertainty it brings.

This is happening. Change is coming whether you love it or hate it. After the discontent settles like dust upon a floor, your legacy will remain. Whether you feel excited, anxious or indifferent, you are the class future generations will remember. They will not remember how you felt, but they will remember what you did. I advise you to choose wisely. If you don’t like how RIT is going about this change, then do something. You may be surprised who will listen.

There is an old - and often over-quoted - curse, which states, “May you live in interesting times.” You may feel anxiety and discontent, but it’s only natural. You’re riding the crest of a wave of opportunity that will crash far too quickly upon the shore. Embrace it for what it is.

Good luck.

Editor's Note: The Plight of the TE3

Fri, 02 Nov 2012 00:00:00 -0400

by Alex Rogala

Last Friday, Student Government (SG) President Taylor Deer and Associate Vice President for Student Affairs Dr. Heath Boice-Pardee sent out a Message Center email discussing recent conduct on the Tiger East End Express (TE3). The short version: Shape up or face consequences.

The discussion was a hot topic at last week’s SG Senate meeting. As funding for the TE3’s pilot run expires in January, the Senate must request funds to continue the service. They must explore a number of options, including the potential addition of a minimal fare.

Having used the TE3 last winter, I’m only surprised such a message wasn’t sent sooner. I recall students boarding it visibly intoxicated; some even brandished beers or bottles of liquor. Stories I’ve heard from friends and at SG haven’t helped the route’s image. While I feel it’s a valuable service, students need to respect it as such.

The TE3 is inevitably tied to alcohol. Regardless, I think it is a fantastic idea. Bars are one of the greatest downtown attractions for students, and anything that prevents drunk driving is worth a shot. Besides, I disagree with RIT’s dry campus policy, which I feel contributes to dangerous drinking habits early in college.

However, the blatant disregard for the health and safety - both their own and others’ - many riders exhibit is reprehensible. With the TE3’s exact future in limbo, belligerent behavior jeopardizes its future. It’s lonely out here in Henrietta, and RIT has done a remarkable job connecting students to the greater community through this project. But if students aren’t willing respect the service, why should the Institute bother to fund it?

Save the drinks for the bars. Your ability to guzzle beer doesn’t entitle you to recreate “Animal House” on wheels. And if you think it does, enjoy it the (very short) while longer it lasts.