Tag: buzzfeed

Categories
News

Concordia Food Coalition pushing for fee levy increase

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

Concordia Food Coalition seeks to make food services financially sustainable, student-run

In May 2015, Concordia University awarded Aramark Corporation the school’s food services contract, which made the company the main provider of food services on campus.

Aramark was brought on with the promise of providing more vegan and fair-trade options over five years, with the option for Concordia to renew that contract for two separate one-year extensions.

Despite three years remaining to that initial contract, the Concordia Food Coalition (CFC) is already preparing to make a bid for the contract when it expires in 2020. The CFC is a branch of the Concordia Student Union (CSU) whose mission is to “facilitate a transition to a more sustainable food system in collaboration with organizations at Concordia,” according to their website.

At the moment, the organization is campaigning to increase their fee levy from $0.08 to $0.16 per student per credit, which would more than double their annual revenue, from $55,300 to $117,263. If enough students vote in favour of the increase, it would take effect at the beginning of the 2018-19 academic year.

“The end goal of the CFC is to take over the food system at Concordia and implement student-run, sustainable, healthy [food] options,” said CSU councillor Rowan Gaudet, who is acting as the CFC’s campaign manager. “The increase in fee levy is just one of the steps towards that. […] The fees just get us more resources.”

In addition to making more of the university’s food systems student-run, the CFC wants to eventually wean some of the larger food services off of school funds and make them financially sustainable, according to Gaudet.

Gaudet and CFC volunteer Samuel Oslund both cited the Hive Cafes and the Concordia farmer’s market as examples of what student-run, financially sustainable food services on campus would look like. The Hive used to be a working group within the CFC but has since “graduated,” Gaudet explained. Initiatives such as the farmer’s market that “graduate” and become financially sustainable are still run by the CFC, he added. However, they no longer depend on funding from the university.

According to the CFC’s proposed 2018 budget plan, which is based on a successful fee levy increase, the additional capital would result in an increase in the organization’s payroll expenses from $31,200 to $76,843. The CFC will add a paid Concordia farmer’s market coordinator position as well as develop an employee health insurance plan. The fee levy would allow for the external and internal coordinators to increase their hours from 15 to 25 hours a week.

Oslund further discussed the CFC’s goal to provide students with locally grown, organic food at a more affordable price and focus on making healthy food options more accessible to students.

“The CFC is formed as the backbone of the food movement here at Concordia. It’s the behind-the-scenes push for a lot of the student-led food movements,” Gaudet said. “Voting for the CFC fee levy increase is voting for student-led food.” All undergraduate students are eligible to vote.

The budget the CFC has provided also includes a plan to decrease the organization’s deficit from $31,912 to $3,174 by the end of 2018. Without the potential increase in funds from the fee levy, the CFC’s deficit is projected to be $24,099.

Out of the $117,263 the CFC would receive in the event of the fee levy increase, they have budgeted $10,800 for project expenses in 2018, which would be a decrease from the $15,425 the group budgeted for 2017. This decrease will take effect even if the fee levy increase isn’t approved, and can be partially attributed to the fact that returning groups will receive a maximum of $1,000 from the CFC next year. In addition, the Hudson Community Farms will not be reapplying for their $3,500 in funding next year.

Students can vote on the CFC fee levy increase during the CSU by-elections on Nov. 28, 29 and 30.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

Categories
Opinions

Will cat GIFs fuel the future of journalism?

You won’t believe the answer!

Let’s be honest, BuzzFeed probably isn’t the future of journalism. They are, however, all over the web and they’re doing something interesting. They’re adapting to the publishing realities of the internet age by using the internet’s most valuable currency: cats.

Here’s how they’re doing it.

BuzzFeed gets people in the door. They do this with cats, mostly, but also serve up a potent cocktail of sharable lists and frivolous quizzes. It turns out that they’re also hoping you’ll stay for the journalism. It’s true: there’s journalism on BuzzFeed, but don’t worry if you missed it. It’s easy for a climate change headline to look like a joke when you’re scrolling through 37 unbelievable cat-fails.

This new side of BuzzFeed isn’t so new, having begun in 2012, but it still surprises many people. I first noticed serious headlines on BuzzFeed last year but, like many, assumed they weren’t worth my time. Besides, I had photobombing cats to look at. My perspective changed when I heard an interview with Anne Helen Petersen, a Ph.D. who left academia for a writing career and ended up at BuzzFeed. Unbelieveable. There is at least one Ph.D. at BuzzFeed and she does thoughtful, long-form pieces on celebrity culture. Petersen cites the huge online audience for BuzzFeed as one reason for making the move, and that makes a lot of sense.

I don’t always know that I want to read a feature-length story before I see it, and I never know that I need to read it before I actually do. For instance: I once clicked a silly BuzzFeed headline while goofing off in the library; moments later I was enthralled. I was reading the harrowing first-person account of how American journalist Gregory D. Johnsen (he’s working on his Ph.D.) escaped a kidnapping attempt in Yemen, a country he had lived in and loved for years—on BuzzFeed! The clickbait headline got me in the door but I stayed for the insightful narrative journalism. Does it matter that I was carried in on the backs 37 cats?

I don’t have a degree from JMSB but this makes sense both from a business perspective and might (maybe) be good for journalism, an industry that’s still finding its place in the age of Facebook and Twitter. All those clicks and views of silly cats pay the bills for cultural critics like Petersen and perspectives from experienced correspondents like Johnsen. I like cats and I like insight, and I bet I’m not the only one. Go find their features online; you won’t believe you’re reading BuzzFeed.

I’m intrigued by the concept, but I’m not sold on it yet. BuzzFeed can be a useless time sink, but I believe it’s trying to be more than that. Their approach is novel, but it remains to be seen if this marriage of clickbait and serious reportage will last.

No one likes to see the weak exploited, so a serious question remains: how do all those cats stand to benefit from BuzzFeed’s growth? There’s a feature story here somewhere, and I hope BuzzFeed tackles it.

Categories
Opinions

6 Reasons Why BuzzFeed is Bad For The Internet, and For You

Number 4 will absolutely shock you!

Oh, BuzzFeed. Where do I start with you? Sure, your gifs are cute, and your quizzes are good for a couple of minutes of mindless fun. Our relationship has been one of pleasant mutual indifference. But there are some things that are so delusional—so flat-out wrong—that they go beyond comprehension.

BuzzFeed released an article on its own site, written by a member of its own staff, titled “Why BuzzFeed Doesn’t Do Clickbait.” And the Internet collectively scoffed.

In summary, the writer argues that clickbait stopped working way back in 2009. He also defines clickbait as a misleading or downright untruthful headline: one example was “Paris Hilton—topless”, which would have Paris Hilton, fully dressed, in a convertible.  After reading through the piece, it was clear that they needed a brush-up on what exactly clickbait is in the modern age of the internet.

Unfortunately, there’s only one way Buzzfeed knows how to communicate: in poorly compiled lists. So, with that in mind, let’s dive in: 6 Reasons Why BuzzFeed is Bad For The Internet, and For You.

 

1.       That definition of clickbait is wrong.

What BuzzFeed is referring to is more of a bait-and-switch: you promise one thing, and deliver another. You could even call it a clickbait-and-switch. What clickbait is, specifically, is much broader and much simpler: it’s literally just baiting for clicks. You dangle out something tantalizing in order to get the click, and hence, the ad revenue.

 

2.       Internet headlines have become clickbait.

What is a headline? Yes, it’s supposed to be attention-grabbing. But it’s also supposed to inform the reader about the content of the piece. It’s like a brief, one-sentence summary. There’s a reason why “Country A declares war on Country B” is a headline, and “You won’t believe what Country A did now” is not. The latter is clickbait. It doesn’t inform. In fact, it withholds information in exchange for the click.

 

3.       BuzzFeed does clickbait.

Let’s take a look at BuzzFeed’s headlines. Even leaving out the countdown lists—“17 Facts You Won’t Believe Are Real”, as a real example—the clickbait is everywhere. What does the headline “Israelis And Palestinians Take Matters Into Their Own Hands” actually tell us about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Nothing. “This Is What Food Banks Actually Need” doesn’t tell us what food banks need, or whether or not they even speak to a food bank at all. “Whatever Happened To The White House Police Militarization Review?” doesn’t actually tell us what happened. To get the answers, you have to click.

4.       Pretend to be shocked.

In all seriousness, BuzzFeed often promises that you will be “in tears,” “in stitches,” or you “won’t believe” one of the items of their list. It’s a promise of a strong emotional reaction, and it gets you to click.

 

5.       BuzzFeed wants you to share.

BuzzFeed claims its goal isn’t to get clicks: it’s to get shares. If you think about it, every time you share an article, you’re getting BuzzFeed at least a couple of more clicks—and a little more revenue. Their headlines have been designed for shareability: the same way the headline nagged at your curiosity, it will for your friends. By making the articles silly and accessible (who doesn’t love gifs from Friends?) instead of hard-hitting and complex, you can read it through and share it quickly, and there’s a higher chance that the people you share it to will like it, too.

 

6.       It’s started a trend. And we can’t stop it.

By sharing these articles, you’re showing that the system works. That withholding information is not only a viable business model, it’s a successful one. It’s spawned sites such as Upworthy, and The Onion’s satirical site ClickHole. The webcomic xkcd asked what would have happened in famous 20th century events had been rewritten for more clicks: could you imagine if the fall of the Soviet Union was watered down to “You Won’t Believe What They Did To The Berlin Wall”?

Sites like BuzzFeed boil down real human stories, real history and real conflict into clickbait headlines and gifs. And you, the internet, and reality deserve better.

Exit mobile version