Tag: media

Categories
Opinions

An environment of Islamophobia

Graphic by @sundaemorningcoffee

Nationalism, bigotry and political apathy encourage hate rhetoric against Muslims

Following the Christchurch mosque shootings in New Zealand on March 15, people continue to mourn the 50 victims that were slain. Among the victims was Hamza Mustafa, a 16-year-old aspiring veterinarian, Arif Mohamedali Vohra, a man who wanted to see his recently born grandchild, and Abdelfattah Qassem, a pillar of the community. That day, the victims just wanted to pray in peace.

Those affected by the shooting were just people who wanted to practice their faith during Friday prayer, be with their community, and return to their loved ones afterwards. But all of that was taken from them. At the forefront of the shooting is a rhetoric of hate and dehumanization of Muslims that is pervasive in politics and in the media. A framework has been perpetuated that situates Muslims as people who need to be regulated, managed and kept at a distance from Western countries.

Images of Muslims portrayed across media depict a monolithic group, uniquely oppressive culture, and lack any history besides a nebulous idea of a universal Islamic theology. In their theorization, political pundits paint an image that discounts the vastness of Islam, opting to create a fictitious idea of a uniform ideology that all Muslims share.

Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro—who allegedly inspired the shooter before the attack on the Islamic Cultural Centre in Quebec City—argued in a PragerU video, makers of popular conservative “educational” videos, that there are more “radical Muslims” than people believe. Shapiro clearly argues that that there is a collective radical movement throughout the Muslim world, that hate America and the West.

Al Noor Mosque, the primary target of the shootings, refutes this idea; worshipers come from diverse backgrounds, like India, Pakistan, Palestine, UAE, and people born and raised in New Zealand. Each person embodies a rich history of Islam, that differs in practice, theology and lifestyle. Islam is only a part of their identity. As Muslims, we are as multifaceted as any other people; we have different interests, aspirations, dreams, and we don’t always agree with each other.

However, the media’s narrative eradicates the nuance and diversity in Muslim people’s lives.

Rhetoric, foreign policy and media coverage create a narrative that dehumanizes Muslims, enforcing an image unrepresentative of people’s lived experiences. The New York Times columnist Bret Stephens, infamous for his notion of “the disease of the Arab mind,” illustrates the unnuanced, ahistorical analysis of Muslim majority countries that is prevalent in popular discourse, a type of analysis that hinges on geopolitical strategy.

In an article published in September entitled “To Thwart Iran, Save Idlib,” Stephens sets the stakes for the battle of Idlib, a besieged city in Syria, listing ways countries will suffer from the battle of Idlib: “Europe, which could face yet another refugee crisis even as the effects of the last are felt in the resurgence of the far right.” In this strategic framework, Muslims are blamed for the rise of far right bigotry that in turn discriminates against Muslim people. With no dramatic flair, Stephens calls for the bombing of the Syrian Air Force, discounting the fact that civilians will be killed in the process. Muslim people seemingly have no agency in this worldview—we are merely a small part of a grand strategy that Western nations develop under the advisement of “experts” who have tangential knowledge of the diversity of the Muslim world.

The strategic rhetoric and analysis conducted on Muslim countries blames the rise of the far right in Europe on refugees, a supposed problem that intersects economics, culture and demographics, rather than analyzing the roots of the far right. Politicians and pundits stoke Islamophobia—as well as other forms of white supremacy—as a means to gain power. Moreover, policies are implemented as a method to gain economic and political power over Muslim countries.

The rise of hateful rhetoric revealed deep-seated forms of white supremacy. Nigel Farage, one of the champions of Brexit, and many others in the leave campaign, trafficked in anti-Muslim bigotry, using “swarm” imagery to frame refugees and migrants travelling from Muslim majority countries to the UK. Brexit emboldened bigots and brought anti-immigrant rhetoric to the forefront. The normalization of white supremacy rhetoric has tangible negative effects on Muslims living in Western countries.

In the EU-MIDIS II, a report by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights about Muslim discrimination, 27 per cent of respondents have experienced some form of harassment for being Muslim, while 39 per cent of the respondents felt some form of discrimination five years before the study. In another European report by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, it is stated that hate crimes committed against Muslims typically increase after a terrorist attack and target Friday prayers. Both reports also mention how hate crimes are underreported due to the lack of trust in the effectiveness of the policing system and lingering feelings of shame. The hate Muslims are facing is well known to government agencies, however, people are seemingly supporting or apathetic to the injustice.

We are faced with increasing hate against Muslims and it is important to remain vigilant against forms of white supremacy. This process does not stop at voting; we also need to hold politicians and public figures accountable for their words, actions and policies they implement. It is not enough for politicians to talk about immorality of discrimination—their stance should be reflected in the policies they implement.

Beyond the realm of electoral politics, there needs to be a radical shift in the way Muslims are depicted. Muslims are diverse. We span many countries, and have different ideologies. It is not on Muslims to share their stories to help white audiences understand that we are people. The power rests with people who have influence on media, academics and foreign policy.

Rest in peace to all the victims affected and condolences to their families.

Graphic by @sundaemorningcoffee

Categories
Opinions

O Canada, home of the lucky ones

Graphic by Ana Bilokin

Oh, Canada. The land we often associate with tolerance, diversity and acceptance––especially when it comes to immigration and refugees. We’ve sold ourselves as a nation that loves rather than hates, while simultaneously comparing ourselves to the U.S. in order to highlight our exceptionalism. Sure, we’re better in the sense that our leader doesn’t expend his energy and time promoting hatred and ignorance. And yes, we haven’t been in the headlines because of a recent government shutdown over the construction of a wall. But we’re way over our heads if we really believe that we’re a standing example of what a great country should be. Take immigration and refugees for example. It seems like Canada has always been leading by a few points when it comes to accepting others. But is that really true?

Recently, Canada granted asylum to an 18-year-old Saudi Arabian woman named Rahaf Mohammed, who used social media to highlight the abuse she allegedly suffered from her family. She fled her home and is now in Toronto, considering herself one of the “lucky ones” according to CTV News. We at The Concordian celebrate this success for Mohammed and are proud of Canada for accepting her. Yet, we can’t help but notice the various media headlines that are emphasizing how great Canada is, and how we’re the world-heroes of accepting refugees and immigrants.

To be frank, that’s just not true. Canadians are really divisive when it comes to the issue of immigration. A 2018 Angus Reid survey found that half of Canadians want to see the number of immigrants arriving to Canada decrease, according to CBC News. Not only are Canadian citizens tough on immigration issues, but the actual government isn’t that open-hearted either. Immigrants who choose Canada have to wait for months or years before Canada lets them in, and over the past 20 years, only about 5 million immigrants have entered Canada, according to The Atlantic.

And while we’re berating the United States for their desire to build a wall, we need to remember that Canada has border walls too. Not only are there physical borders, but there’s the big, bureaucratic one: the government. According to The Atlantic, in 2012, Canada rejected 18 per cent of the more than one million foreigners who applied for a visitor’s visa. By 2017, that number had risen to 26 per cent, and in the first three months of 2018, it’s risen to 30 per cent.

According to a World Economic Forum survey, Canada is one of the worst countries for its restrictiveness of visitor visa requirements––it is placed 120th out of 136 countries. And according to Maclean’s, Canada quietly deports “many Haitians to the most impoverished country in the Americas, where more than one in five residents suffer hunger and chronic malnutrition.” In fact, Canada seems to have a problem with its transparency when it comes to immigration and refugee processes. Specifically, it has been criticized in the past for their lack of transparency over immigration detention. According to the Toronto Star, Canada’s practices of detaining vulnerable groups, like children and those with mental health conditions, is problematic. A report by the Global Detention Project highlighted that 371 children were detained over the last two years. There have been many deaths of migrants in these detention facilities, and at least 16 people have died in immigration detention since 2000. Does this treatment sound familiar?

We can’t forget about Canada’s Safe Third Country Agreement with the United States either. Dating from 2004, the agreement claims that refugees who enter the U.S. or Canada first, must apply for refugee status in that country first. Essentially, a country can reject a refugee’s application if they’ve already been given protection by another country. We still have this agreement, even though it’s been made clear that the U.S. isn’t that safe of a country for those fleeing persecution.

A quick search on Google can prove to us that Canada isn’t the knight in shining armour we sometimes think it is. It isn’t the home of the free, and it certainly isn’t waiting with open arms for whoever chooses this country as their new home. It stings to see headlines celebrating Canada as a great nation, because it isn’t true. Our sense of exceptionalism is dangerous; it’s dangerous because it promotes false hope, false ideas and false expectations. We’re glad Rahaf Mohammed has a new home in Canada; we just can’t help but wonder about those who weren’t as lucky.

Graphic by Ana Bilokin

 

Categories
Opinions

The fine line between entertainment and reality

Graphic by Wednesday Laplante.

Florida rapper XXXTentacion had just left a motorcycle dealership on June 18 and was about to drive off when two masked men approached his car, robbing and fatally shooting him, according to CBC News. It was an incident as tragic and heart-wrenching as it was controversial.

While devoted fans mourned the loss of their favourite artist, others showed no sympathy, largely due to the rapper’s cumbersome heap of criminal charges which range from harassment to domestic violence. But this isn’t the first time a rapper has been in hot water in the eyes of the law. According to Complex Magazine, in 2016 Famous Dex was sent to jail after hotel footage was released showing him beating his girlfriend; something similar happened in a case earlier this year when NBAYoungboy was indicted on assault and kidnapping after a haunting video of him with his partner at the time surfaced on the web, according to TMZ. TMZ also revealed that rapper Tekashi69 currently faces up to three years of jail time due to sexual misconduct—and these are among the most celebrated voices in today’s rap scene. Many of these rappers came up from nothing and are riding off a wave of instant success, which is great. But this also means the spotlight can be placed on people who don’t realize the power they hold, or simply take advantage of it.

I believe the escalation of violence in the lives of rap artists is a result of the genre being too aggressive in its present state. This might seem like an absurd claim—after all, isn’t rap music supposed to be hostile from time to time? But I believe that, nowadays, rap music and culture condones (or perhaps even encourages) toxic behaviour, resulting in an escalation of violence, exposing both the artists and their listeners to danger.

I believe that in the age of social media, an artist’s music and their personality are more prevalent in a holistic sense; rappers need to market themselves on platforms like SnapChat and Instagram as much as they need to advertise their actual tracks to gain traction.

It is a time when anybody with a laptop, a mic and a SoundCloud account has the potential to turn heads, and rappers often take a multitude of measures to ensure the spotlight stays on them. This includes changing their appearance with dyed hair or face tattoos, flexing new purchases (designer clothes, jewelry and cars, to name a few) or, of course, getting caught up in a public beef with another artist.

The latter I’ve noticed much too often in recent memory. With each new day, more rappers are livestreaming themselves and talking one another down in what feels more like a desperate publicity stunt than anything else. In a lot of cases, the talk is, well, just that: talk. But other times it gets physical, with one recent example taking place in our very own Montreal, between rappers Killy and Lil Xan after a storm of malicious tweets. Fights and in-person showdowns between rap artists are about as frequent as they are unsurprising; footage of these tussles go viral.

What scares me is that we live in a world where the fine line between entertainment and reality is becoming harder for people to distinguish. Violent behaviour makes the growing popularity of rap even more complex, as this genre has increased by 72 per cent in on-demand audio streaming in the last year, according to global information and measurement company Nielsen. This same company noted that, for the first time, rap surpassed rock as the most popular genre in the United States last year, with the vast majority of its listeners being young adults and teens.

I’m not trying to demonize rap—on the contrary, I’m trying to protect the music I love. Whether it’s the effortless tongue-in-cheek way Lil Pump approaches his bars or Kanye’s hilariously egotistical one-liners, I believe rap is an unfailing method of getting people to vibe together and providing something to talk about. But rappers should be viewed as entertainers, not idols. They have stories and motives that are unknown to us, and it is of vital importance that any rap listener, seasoned or novice, take this into consideration before putting on their headphones.

Graphic by Wednesday Laplante

 

Categories
Opinions

Refuting violent images of Arabs and Muslims

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth.

Media has perpetuated a myopic view of Arabs for years

“In newsreels or news-photos, the Arab is always shown in large numbers. No individuality, no personal characteristics or experiences. Most of the pictures represent mass rage and misery, or irrational (hence hopelessly eccentric) gestures. Lurking behind all of these images is the menace of jihad,” wrote Edward Said, an influential Arab-American intellectual, in his book Orientalism. “Consequence: a fear that the Muslims (or Arabs) will take over the world.”

This is the context in which Arabs and Muslims have been depicted for years, and are still depicted today. BBC News, one of the most popular news organizations in the world, wrote this headline on March 31 about the killing of Palestinians during a peaceful demonstration in Gaza: “Gaza-Israel border: Clashes leave 16 Palestinians dead and hundreds injured.” The word “clash” suggests the Palestinians have equivalent power in the situation, but they do not.

“I want to be shot. I don’t want this life,” Yahya Abu Assar, who participated in the demonstration, told The Washington Post. Palestinians have been living under one of the longest military occupations in recent history. Therefore, people are bound to get frustrated and exhausted living in such a precarious condition, especially those who live in Gaza, which has been described as an “open-air prison” by former U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron.

Yet, Palestinians often are portrayed as violent and irrationally angry in the media. And at the same time, some political commentators—both liberal and conservative—without fail try to justify the Israeli government’s disproportionate use of force, with only tangential mention of the historic injustices that Palestinians have faced. Every United States administration, including Obama’s progressive government, has repeated this line: “Israel has the right to defend itself.” What about the right for Palestinians to do the same?

In response to Israel’s intervention in Syria, General James Mattis, President Donald Trump’s secretary of defense, said in a press conference in Rome: “They don’t have to wait until [Israel’s] citizens are dying under attack before they actually address that issue.” On the other hand, when the killings happened in Gaza, Trump’s administration remained silent, not even issuing an official statement. Palestinians are just people, much like Israelis and Americans—curiously enough, many people forget that.

The representation of Arabs and Muslims is not only relegated to the news, but also movies, like Back to the Future where the side villains are Libyan terrorist looking for plutonium, and books from “expert sources.” In his 1996 book, Clash of Civilizations, political scientist Samuel Huntington argued that post-Cold War conflict will be cultural, pinning the western world against the Islamic world. The book paints a grim and unrepresentative image of Arabs and Islam, a picture of culture in constant opposition to the world, and Huntington diminishes the diversity within the Middle East and Islam itself. He wrote: “The fundamental problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilization whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power. The problem for Islam is not the CIA or the U.S. Department of Defence. It is the West.”

When the media portrays Arabs and Muslims as single-mindedly violent and barbaric, people forget about our humanity—the fact that we are just people. Palestinians are people. Arabs are people. Muslims are people. It bears repeating, because violent images of us are being perpetually distributed. We are people who enjoy eating great food, playing sports and having a fulfilling job. We are not irrationally more inclined to be violent and “barbaric” due to our religion and/or ethnicity.

As a person born and raised in Saudi Arabia, the images that liter the media are not representative of my life. Yes, violence exists in the Middle East. However, it’s contextual, historical and affects us the most. Before moving to Canada, I, like many Arabs and Muslims, just lived life; I went to school, hung out with my friends and enjoyed watching cartoons. I also faced discrimination and dehumanization being a Shi’ite, as marginalized people do all over the world. Shia face discrimination on a systemic level and personal basis like many minorities; certain jobs are not available us; we are stereotyped and underrepresented in society. Protests against inequalities caused fear of instability, leading to a police crackdown and checkpoints surrounding the entrances to Al-Qatif, a majority Shia area, reported The Globe and Mail.

Yet, the media continues to misrepresent Arabs and Muslims—this has negative implications. Arabs are discriminated against in airports, in the streets, and in institutions in the West. On a larger scale, the advocacy of western intervention, selling weapons and military gear, and western ignorance on issues happening in Palestine, Syria, Iraq and Yemen, have wider implications that are disastrous for Arabs. While westerners are more fixated on the violence of Arabs, their own countries are helping arm and sustain war efforts in the Middle East. The Canadian government sold armoured trucks to Saudi Arabia, which the government is using against the Shia community in Al-Awamiyah, according to The Independent.

In my opinion, more people in the West should read Arab perspectives, and encourage and support Arab journalists, filmmakers, writers and academics. As Said argues, the perception of the Arab world was created through western academics’ eyes. Reshaping this myopic view of the Arab world is important, and it starts by listening to our voices, especially the marginalized voices in the Arab world.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

Categories
Opinions

The importance of inclusion in the film industry

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth.

Inclusion riders can improve the age-old problem of the lack of diversity in Hollywood

At the conclusion of the 90th Oscars on March 4, actress Frances McDormand, who won the Academy Award for Best Actress that night, ended her acceptance speech by saying: “I have two words for you: inclusion riders.”

I must admit, before her speech, I had never heard anyone use the term in relation to the film industry before. According to an article by National Public Radio (NPR), I was not the only one. Following the actress’ speech, internet searches for the term spiked overnight.

According to The New York Times, McDormand’s mention of inclusion riders was the biggest public acknowledgment of the term to date. An inclusion rider is “a stipulation that actors and actresses can ask (or demand) to have inserted into their contracts, which would require a certain level of diversity among a film’s cast and crew,” according to NPR.

These days, I believe people are more accepting of diversity in terms of race, gender, ethnicity and culture, and so inclusion in the media is a crucial aspect of progress. Yet, for something that should be an obvious movement in the film industry, it is taking far too long to achieve results.

According to a 2014 Hollywood Reporter article written by Stacy L. Smith, the founder and director of the Annenberg Inclusion Initiative at the University of Southern California (USC) Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, women are severely underrepresented in the film industry. A nine-year study conducted by USC observed that, in 2013, women represented less than a third of speaking characters among the top 100 grossing films, a ratio that has remained constant for the last 25 years. In regards to current statistics, women comprised 34 per cent of all speaking roles, 37 per cent of the major characters and 24 per cent of sole protagonists among the 100 top-grossing films in 2017, according to the website Women and Hollywood.

Racial diversity wasn’t much better last year among these top 100 films, as 68 per cent of all female characters were white. Of the remaining 32 per cent, 16 per cent were black, seven per cent were Latina, seven per cent were Asian and two per cent were another race or ethnicity.

For years, Smith has made it her personal mission to promote diversity in the film industry. Unfortunately, factors such as the biases of producers, directors or casting directors interfere with the interviewing and hiring process, which not only prevents any progress from being made, but also makes it more difficult for gifted actors to reach their full potential, according to The New York Times.

According to NPR, Smith’s findings do indicate that although not many actors pushed for an inclusion rider in the past, many have started asking for it. She also elaborates that the

benefits of inclusion riders could increase diversity in the film industry both on screen and among the crew, according to The New York Times.

Among those taking action in the last few weeks, Michael B. Jordan, who most recently played the role of Erik Killmonger in Black Panther, announced that his production company, Outlier Society Productions, will now be adding an inclusion rider into its projects, according to The New York Times. This decision marks the first time a major actor has publicly adopted a rider since McDormand’s speech.

A lot of progress has been made in the last few decades to promote diversity and equality in society. However, in my opinion, it is important to recognize that we still have a long way to go and that we must acknowledge the faults within our current system, especially in the film industry. In Smith’s words, we must make sure that “the world on-screen looks like the world in which we live.”

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

Categories
Opinions

The link between victim blaming and rape culture

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin.

Victim blaming is just one of the tools used to silence a person who has been sexually assaulted

Rape culture is culture that normalizes sexual violence and trivializes a person’s experience with it, according to the Huffington Post. This could be in the form of jokes about rape or songs that insinuate sexual violence. In my opinion, the stigma and attitude surrounding sexual assault in our society plays into rape culture. Victim blaming comes up a lot in conversations about sexual assault, and is a large part of rape culture.

I believe part of the mentality behind victim blaming is people’s need to feel safe. By asking questions like “What were you wearing?” or “How much did you drink?,” people are able to separate themselves from victims. By finding a way to make rape the fault of the victim, it is easier for people to deny that assault can happen to anyone. No one wants to believe bad things can happen to good people. But the truth is, sexual violence can happen to anyone at any time—and no one ever deserves it.

Victim blaming will not protect you. Blaming victims of sexual assault silences others who haven’t come forward about their experience. And while some may argue that society is becoming more receptive to victims looking to share their experiences, there are still far too many publicized cases of sexual violence that create a narrative where the alleged assaulter walks free and the victim is left traumatized and humiliated.

More than 50 women have accused Bill Cosby of sexual assault—and were faced with criticism and disbelief, according to CNN. Donald Trump has openly bragged about assaulting women, yet he was elected president of the United States. How are victims supposed to feel safe sharing their experiences when history has shown it will only cause them more pain?

According to Sexual Assault Statistics, in Canada, only six out of every 100 incidents of sexual assault are reported to the police. Someone who speaks openly about their sexual assault is usually met with disbelief, suspicion and blame. There is no guarantee the perpetrators of these crimes will be punished appropriately. When you throw the possibility of victim blaming into the mix, it becomes nearly impossible for someone to muster up the strength to talk openly about their assault.

Although many women have shared their stories of sexual assault since the Weinstein allegations, it is important to note that this doesn’t mean all victims will now come forward. In my opinion, victims coming forward after the allegations against Weinstein—and even Cosby—increases the fear surrounding the idea of reporting sexual assault. Seeing the way these victims are treated by some media can silence other victims.

Recent cases in Quebec, including a judge making victim blaming comments in court, have reinforced my feelings. Justice Jean-Paul Braun said a sexual assault victim was most likely “flattered” by the experience, and he questioned whether kissing is sexual or if consent is needed, according to CTV News.

The idea that the victim should have been flattered enforces the idea that women should be grateful for any attention men give them. The judge insinuated the kiss was not a big deal. This is dehumanizing and encourages rape culture.

As a woman, I’ve been subjected to street harassment and crude comments, among other things. The attitude that a victim must have done something to deserve their assault only makes these experiences worse, especially knowing punishments won’t be carried out. I find myself analyzing my outfit whenever I’m catcalled, fearing I did something wrong. Victim blaming affects all of us. If I were assaulted tonight, and if I chose to tell anyone, I would be terrified of what would be said about me tomorrow.

So how can we change this? We need to listen to victims. We have to understand that only one person is to blame for sexual assault—the assaulter. The victim is never at fault, and there is no reason to judge someone who has been assaulted.

No one asks to be subjected to sexual violence, and no one deserves it. We must work to change the conversation around sexual violence because we should no longer be the reason victims are silenced.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

Categories
Opinions

This is not a conflict, this is a genocide

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin.

Western media has the power to highlight the injustices in Myanmar—if they pay attention

My sister was the first to inform me about the ongoing genocide happening in Myanmar. She only found out about it through an Instagram post. This revelation left me in complete shock. The fact that this unforgivable violence has been going on for more than three years is astonishing. But most shocking is that it has barely received any coverage in Western media, until now.

According to Al Jazeera, the Rohingya people are a Muslim minority living in a state originally known as Burma. There are currently 1.1 million Rohingya people living in Myanmar, and they are considered one of the most persecuted groups in the world. The Rohingya make up five per cent of Myanmar’s 53 million citizens, and mostly live in the state of Rakhine, which is described as one of the poorest states in Myanmar, “with ghetto-like camps and a lack of basic services and opportunities,” according to the same source. In addition, the Rohingya have been denied citizenship since 1982, making them illegal residents and stateless.

The majority of the population in Myanmar is Buddhist. This is a religion that honours life and is dedicated to living humbly, while doing as little harm as possible. Yet according to The Guardian, Ashin Wirathu, a nationalist Burmese Buddhist monk and leader of the country’s anti-Muslim movement, is allegedly parading across Myanmar spewing hate messages and inspiring violence against Rohingya Muslims. Labeled the “Face of Buddhist Terror” by Time magazine, Wirathu claims he is only “warning” his people about Muslims, when he is truthfully inciting hatred against them, according to The Guardian.

The civilian leader of Myanmar is Aung San Suu Kyi. She actually has a Noble Peace Prize, and according to the Washington Post, she’s a “democracy icon.” Yet, Suu Kyi has been criticized for refusing to acknowledge the violence taking place in her country as an actual genocide. When asked in interviews about the violence, she often claims the media is “exaggerating” and refuses to criticize the country’s military, according to the Washington Post.

In my opinion, labeling violence as a genocide makes it more urgent, and it takes us back to the horrors of colonialism, the Indian Act, the Rwandan genocide and, of course, the Holocaust. Discussing any kind of ethnic cleansing as genocide makes it more real because it reminds us of history, and of how many people have been murdered for being different.

For a long time, the violence in Myanmar has been considered a conflict of ideologies, a religious dispute between Buddhist Nationalists and Rohingya Muslims, without being labeled a genocide. It also wasn’t being investigated by Western media for a long time—I suppose Western media overlooked the issue because we’re so concerned with social justice, healthcare, President Trump and climate change in our own nations.

I don’t really blame us—we’ve got our own problems to deal with. But it’s sad to realize that it wasn’t until the conversation shifted and some outlets, like Al Jazeera, started using the word genocide that we suddenly became all ears.

Human Rights Watch has released a report criticizing Suu Kyi for doing nothing about the excessive violence against Rohingya Muslims. According to the Telegraph, a recent military crackdown caused almost 90,000 Rohingya Muslims to flee to Bangladesh, where they are in desperate need of basic necessities. Not only are the Rohingya people unwanted in Myanmar, they are also unwanted in Bangladesh, according to TRT World.

In my opinion, this marginalized group needs a safe zone and international intervention. But this will not happen without global acknowledgement. On Sept. 16, Concordia alumnus Majed Jam, organised a demonstration protesting the treatment of the Rohingya Muslims. This was not only a way to protest the genocide, but a way to capture the attention of the world, or at least Montreal’s attention.

The Western world’s attention is an extremely powerful tool that can shed light on this ongoing violence, and it is our responsibility to make sure people pay attention.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

Categories
Opinions

Why I value my journalism degree

Graphic by Florence Yee

My response to the large amount of hate on my program of study

I have come to the realization that having to defend journalism on a daily basis comes with the territory of studying journalism.

“Good luck getting a job” and “What do you plan on doing with that?” are things I hear regularly. I can handle that. But perhaps the comment I get the most, and the comment that irks me the most, is “You’re studying journalism? That’s kind of a useless degree.” Or even, “Just be a journalist, you don’t need a degree for that.”

Society seems increasingly distrustful of “the media.” I put “the media” in quotation marks because the term, although commonly used, doesn’t really mean anything. As senior editor for The Atlantic James Hamblin wrote last month, “the term has been weaponized.”

The Atlantic senior editor Derek Thompson writes, “‘the media,’ like ‘technology,’ is not a single, tangible object but rather an information galaxy, a vast and complex star system composed of diverse and opposing organizations, which are themselves composed of a motley group of people, each of whom are neither all good nor all bad, but mostly flawed media merchants with individual strengths, weaknesses, biases and blindspots.”

To summarize briefly, “the media” is too much of an all-encompassing term that muddles the individuality of journalists and organizations.

I believe this homogenizing of individual journalists and news organizations is toxic for the understanding of a complex industry and profession. Being a journalist is no less important than it was two decades ago—it is just easier to mimic today.

A distrust in news organizations is understandable. With the ever-increasing importance of social media and speed in people’s lives, clickbait and fake news weasel their way to the top of our newsfeeds.

But as renowned journalist Christiane Amanpour said at the 2016 meeting for the Committee to Protect Journalists, “we must fight for the truth in a post-truth world.” I am grateful for my journalism degree because I believe a good, balanced training, including lessons on ethics, law, image, sound, writing and history, is an important part of succeeding in the fight for “truth in a post-truth world.” I believe journalism schools are the light of hope for the next generation of aspiring journalists, who are being increasingly exposed to lazy publishing and public relations painted as journalism.

Concordia has one of the best journalism schools in the country. The program is known for training honest and professional journalists who have moved on to work for reputable organizations like the Montreal Gazette, the Globe and Mail, CBC, CTV and the New York Times.

The hands-on training I have been receiving since the beginning of my studies blows me away. Our teachers have us going out, conducting interviews, gathering sound and images—the same way producers or editors at CBC expect their journalists to gather a story. Professors have been throwing us into scrums, crowds, conferences, courtrooms, protests, and expect excellence from us in return.

Journalism school has consistently ranked at the top of “Most Useless Major” lists on blogs and websites like Business Insider and the Huffington Post. Its value has also been questioned in articles from The Guardian, Complex magazine and Forbes. While the hate or disdain for journalism school has been discussed over the years, there is simultaneously a common desire for more truthful, honest journalism.

CBC’s The Sunday Edition host Michael Enright once said, “citizen journalism is like citizen dentists… I’d rather not.”  So for those who complain or criticize this “useless degree,” but also complain about “sloppy journalism,” it may be time to think about the importance of proper journalistic training for the next generation of storytellers and for the future of news.

Categories
Student Life

Have we learned anything at all?

Photo by Alex Hutchins

Concordia’s German program worked with The Holocaust Education and Genocide Prevention Foundation to host a workshop on moral responsibility in today’s politics

The Holocaust served as historical background in a presentation on moral responsibility in modern-day politics organized by Concordia’s German program on Oct. 27.

Matthias Pum, an Austrian who travels abroad to conduct Holocaust memorial services, spoke to a group of about 30 people on Thursday about the context and causes of the Holocaust, and how many Austrian and German citizens were convinced the actions of the National Socialist government were right and justified.

He used examples to show how Nazi propaganda was “emotionally-based” and presented “opinion or fiction as a matter of fact.”

Photo by Alex Hutchins

He referenced the words of Hermann Goering, one of the highest-ranking Nazi officials, to illustrate how populations can be influenced into believing anything. “Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and for exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country,” Pum said.

Pum pointed out how the unwillingness from the majority of countries in the world to accept Jewish refugees during the Nazi regime is comparable to the current treatment of Syrian refugees.

He referenced the Evian Conference of 1938, where representatives from 32 countries gathered to discuss helping Jewish refugees. In the end, only the Dominican Republic increased their refugee intake.  The economic depression of the 30s made countries hesitant to take in refugees.  According to the United States Memorial Museum’s website, “all this red tape existed against the backdrop of other hardships: competition with thousands of equally desperate people, slow mail that made communication with would-be sponsors difficult, financial hardships, and oppressive measures in Germany that made even the simplest task a chore.”

While Syrian refugees are accepted in greater numbers than the Jewish refugees were, Pum believes that wealthier countries need to do more to accommodate and assist the refugees fleeing the current civil war in the Middle East.

Pum blamed “right-wing populism” and parties such as the Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ),​ Germany’s Alternative für Deutschland​ Party and the United Kingdom Independence Party for modern anti-refugee sentiment in Europe.

Photo by Alex Hutchins

While none of the parties he mentioned are currently in power in their respective countries, the FPÖ is presently polling seven points higher than the next most popular party, and the Alternative für Deutschland Party is gaining support and slowly becoming Germany’s third most popular political party.

Pum discussed an ad by the Alternative für Deutschland, which urged citizens to have the “courage to stand by Germany.” He likened this to Goering’s aforementioned words, saying the ad implied the same denunciation and vilification of “pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.”

Pum’s overall message was about the importance of learning from history in order avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. He believes modern “right-wing populism” is all too similar to the mentality that overtook Germany and Austria before and during World War II, a mentality that led to the Holocaust. He said he believes anyone is capable of making difference in the world by learning about the historical context of past events and applying that knowledge to modern day circumstances.

Categories
Student Life

The media: broad term, broader impacts

Photo by Alex Hutchins

The Multi-faith and Spirituality Centre hosted a discussion on the media’s role in people’s lives

Rev. Paul Anyidoho, a member of Concordia’s Multi-Faith Chaplaincy, hosted a seminar to explore the benefits and disadvantages of social media in our lives on Oct. 20.

The event welcomed 12 guests and was held in a small and cozy meditation room at the Multi-faith and Spirituality Centre. The event was structured as an open discussion, where speakers and guests could express their thoughts on social media, media usage, and how it is perceived and used in people’s daily lives.

The discussion took place at Concordia’s Multi-Faith and Spirituality centre. Photo by Alex Hutchins

Throughout the afternoon discussion, guests shared personal experiences regarding their relationship with media. Some of the guests, mostly young adults, said they used and consumed technology and media so much in their daily lives that they couldn’t imagine living without it. Other guests said they either used social media sparingly, or not at all.

The crowd presented a variety of opinions and experiences in a discussion about the core issues of privacy, informational integrity, and a balance of positive thoughts and negative thoughts concerning this technology-driven world.

Anyidoho defined media as any “virtual space.”  This includes social media networks, television stations, large-scale news outlets and even something as simple as a phone call.  Media is important to most people, said Anyidoho, and so it is a topic worth knowing and exploring as much about as possible.

Anyidoho placed emphasis on the “uses and gratifications theory” of media interaction, which explores how and why people actively consume media to satisfy certain needs.  

“People don’t sit in front of the TV, read the newspaper or go on the Internet just to retrieve information,” Anyidoho said. “They are actually engaging the media in a way that will be useful and satisfy their expectations, to get gratification.”

He believes that this theory is important in the modern age in order to get the best out of what he calls the “two sides of the coin” of the media.

“[The media] has a very beneficiary, useful effect on people…now, you can just access information from anywhere in the world.”

Anyidoho said he believes social media’s strengths lie in its ability to increase global connectivity, strengthen personal relationships and ease learning.

However, the media also has a flipside, Anyidoho said, adding that he believes most forms of media can have bias when it comes to reporting on news, which leads to less focus on the truth, or even a blur of what is the truth. He said people need to be more careful and critical in the way they intake information by not being so quick to believe everything they hear or read.

Anyidoho also expressed concern over how much time younger generations commit to modern technology and social media. Studies vary, but on average, according to a 2015 Common Sense Media report, millennials spend anywhere from nine to 18 hours a day consuming media.

Anyidoho also described how incorrect or misunderstood information on social media “spreads like a spiral, a breeze,” and can cause stress in people’s lives.

Anyidoho concluded by saying using media responsibly is important, especially now that it’s a much bigger part of our lives. “We used to bring our life over to our religious places, to our doctors, to psychologists, now we bring it to the media,” he said.

As media plays a major role in entertainment, news gathering and personal connections, Anyidoho said education and discussion are important in order to make the best possible use of this innovation.

Categories
Opinions

The mighty emperor wears no clothes

Why the media focuses more on Trudeau’s image rather than politics

In the eyes of the international media, Canada has always been considered America’s dorky, progressive neighbour to the north and relegated to obscurity as a result. The image of a barren cultural wasteland, populated by hockey enthusiasts drinking Molson has dominated Canada’s foreign reputation.

Until 2015, that is. Canada went through a complete cultural makeover. Suddenly, Canadian musicians were everywhere. Artists like The Weeknd, Drake and Justin Bieber released new music and dominated the Billboard charts, pleasing their legions of loyal fans. Quebec-based director Xavier Dolan emerged as new icon in the film industry, winning the Grand Prix at the Cannes Film Festival as well as directing Adele’s spectacular Hello video.

The height of this phenomenon came with the election of Justin Trudeau in October, 2015. The young, good-looking, progressive prime minister was the antithesis of the arduous Harper Decade and breathed a sense of life and excitement into Canadian politics. Something that has not been seen since the election of his father into office some 47 years prior.

The Guardian newspaper in the UK even dubbed this moment in time as Canada’s very own “cool Britannia,” harping back to the “British Invasion” of the 1960s. By some anomaly, for once when the word ‘cool’ was used to describe Canada, it was not in reference to its climate.

Photo by Andrej Ivanov.
With the international media fawning over our sparkling new hunky PM, or ‘PMILF’ (Prime Minister I’d Like to Fuck) as he has been dubbed by social media, national media soon followed suit. According to a report by Quebec-based media monitoring firm Influence Communication, generally after a PM is elected in Canada, media coverage typically drops off. Harper’s fell off by 79 per cent and Brian Mulroney’s by 69 per cent one month after they won their election.

Since 2015 however, the coverage of Justin Trudeau in the national media has increased by 40 per cent, according to the same report. And, unlike his predecessors, the coverage has been overwhelmingly positive.

The reason for this increase in positive coverage is mainly due to “the [tabloid] magazine style reporting” of Justin Trudeau, said Jean-Francois Dumas, president of Influence Communication, as quoted in Maclean’s magazine.

Throughout Trudeau’s time in office, national news outlets including the The Toronto Star, Vice Canada, and La Presse have opted to publish an abundant amount of fluff pieces about the Prime Minister. His many summer shirtless sightings, photo-ops with pandas, and his luscious locks has reduced many of Canada’s most prestigious publications to the same level as menial celebrity gossip mags.

It would seem as though “Trudeaumania” part II has firmly rooted itself in Canadian media’s prime-ministerial commentary, baring resemblance to a communist state’s media coverage of their glorious leader.

Graphic by Thom Bell.

Many could argue that this harmless ‘fluff’ is exactly that, and I would tend to agree, so long as this ‘fluff’ does not inhibit the process of meaningful conversation in the media. Since his election, it seems as though the Trudeau administration has been covered with a cloak of invincibility and has been seemingly impervious to any scandal.

Take the 2016 “Three Amigos Summit” for example. It is the annual meeting of the heads of government of Canada, Mexico and the United States, which took place in Ottawa in June. The important issues discussed during this year’s summit included national security, human rights and the environment.

However, much of the coverage centered around a fan fiction-like narrative of the bromance between three relatively good looking leaders, with many articles—such as Vice—reporting on the awkward three-way handshake between the commanders. This is particularly shocking considering the fact that Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto was accused of ordering the execution of eight peaceful protesting teachers’ union members and that Barack Obama had criticized Canada’s involvement in NATO, according to Reuters. Both of these issues did not receive a lot of coverage on a national level.

Canadian news outlets are severely failing their audiences. The job of the media is to be critical and journalists play a crucial role in the democratic process by holding politicians accountable and keeping them honest. Recently, however, it seems that news outlets are more concerned with sharing the latest shirtless Trudeau meme than offering a meaningful, in-depth analysis of this government’s policies and actions.

While we may all be enjoying Canada’s fleeting moment in the sun, it is my hope that we don’t wake up burned because of it.

Categories
Arts

FOFA’s vernissage opening with three new exhibitions

Contemporary arts take over the Fofa gallery for the 2014 Rentrée

Concordia’s faculty of fine arts has started the year with a bang: the faculty’s FOFA Gallery, located on the ground floor of Concordia’s EV building, held a vernissage Sept. 4 to usher in the new school year and its three newest exhibitions.

Photo by Nathalie Laflamme.

Parallax: Landscapes in Translation, located in the York corridor vitrine, is the collaborative project of Cynthia Hammond, Kelly Thompson and Kathleen Vaughan. The three artists, who all work for the university, used a variety of mediums, from acrylic on canvas to woven fibres, which often represented the departments they are a part of.

“The work is really talking about landscape and the passage of time, and travel, and discovery as you’re walking through spaces,” said Jennifer Dorner, the new FOFA Gallery director. “And it’s really functioning in that way, within the space itself.”

As visitors enter the main room of the gallery, they seem to topple into a completely different world, one of sharp black and whites and thumping bass: the world of Eyelash Wars. The product of the duo Inflatable Deities, also known, individually, as Emily Pelstring and Jessica Mensch, Eyelash Wars is the story of two beauty vendors in a battle for commercial supremacy. The piece is backed by a “warped new-age rap soundtrack,” as described by the FOFA Gallery site. The display is also visible from the Ste-Catherine vitrine.

“It’s a really fun premise,” added Dorner. “It’s very playful, a little bit absurd…They’ve used a really nice range of technology, and performance and painting, and really recreated the space.”

The last exhibit, That innate and ineradicable craving for what is out of the common proves how glad we are to have the natural and tedious course of things interrupted, occupies the Black Box room of the gallery. An interactive work by Jérôme Nadeau, the exhibit is composed of light-sensitive photographic papers on a white table. Visitors are encouraged to don white gloves and move the papers around, causing them to slowly shift in colour. Every hour, a picture of the table is taken and uploaded to the FOFA website, allowing viewers to track the changes in the gallery.

“His idea is that the photographic paper becomes the document of the exhibition experience,” said Dorner. “It’s a beautiful piece, and it’s going to change as the exhibition goes on.”

The vernissage concluded with a musical performance by Inflatable Deities in the main gallery. The current exhibitions will be on display until Oct. 19. The FOFA Gallery is located on the ground floor of the EV Building in the Sir George Williams campus.

Exit mobile version