During Orientation Week, the University Students’ Council rents the entire campus from Western. This lets them decide who comes and goes. On the VIP list are frosh, sophs, students, staff, and one other party: advertisers. Anyone who can’t foot the sponsorship bill is denied access to promote themselves, including clubs and sports teams.

Like any sponsorship, money from advertisers gets routed through the USC to create bigger and more prominent events. Sponsors cover about 20-40 per cent of the bill, making Down With Webster and Sex With Sue likely impossible without them.

Whether O-Week advertising is appropriate depends on what you think O-Week is for. Some would argue a true orientation week welcomes frosh to Western and “orients” them with information. Clubs would recruit, varsity teams would publicize and off-campus promoters would promote.

Running that kind of O-Week wouldn’t need the same level of sponsorship to round out the expenses. After all, students buy O-Week kits to help fund the week of events. Clubs and sports teams would promote themselves for free and even provide entertainment in some cases.

The truth is, O-Week doesn’t have to be about all that. Some would argue it’s about one thing: fun.

When you think back to O-Week, you don’t remember any sponsorships, banner ads or junk mail in your O-Week kit. What you remember is breaking the ice at Sex With Sue. You remember jamming with friends at the Talbot Bowl concert. You remember that hypnotized guy who was terrified of his belt buckle.

O-Week is a glitzy festival filled with Western pomp. It’s a time when the impending gloom and doom of university is put on hold — even if it’s just for a little while.

Clubs get Clubs Week. Varsity teams have the rest of the year to recruit. The USC now has “Purple Week,” which is supposed to showcase USC services once O-Week ends. Summer Academic Orientation covers almost everything else.

If sponsorships can help make our O-Week a real spectacle, there’s no real harm in doing so.

But the USC has to be careful about how far it goes with sponsorships. Making the “biggest O-Week in Canada” a reality is one thing, but what about allowing the USC’s Speaker Series to be “brought to you by Rogers”?

Advertising can be a slippery slope. Bringing advertising into normal USC projects would turn sponsorships into a revenue stream they would soon come rely on. Once you go down that road, it’s hard to crawl back. While sponsoring a festival-type event is appropriate, sponsoring regular USC services is another. The USC already tried — and failed — with the HYPE Team, which was once sponsored by Hype Energy Drinks.

As a student government, the USC needs to look at advertising on a student-centric basis. O-Week sponsors help bring us things we’ll remember that would otherwise be impossible. And if sponsorships elsewhere can provide this kind of value, the USC should seek them out and use them responsibly. Kind of like a nice, cold, refreshing bottle of Bud Light Lime.

See the related article about O-Week sponsorships.

As much as I appreciate my ability to use two eyes to accurately gauge relative distances, sometimes I just want to be able to witness the world in two dimensions.

While many of the movies being released in three dimensions right now are obvious attempts to sell tickets based only on the use of this new technology, what I don’t enjoy is most high-profile animated films are intended to be seen while wearing large, plastic glasses that make certain things on the screen jump out as you’re trying to take in the story.

There are only two things that 3D glasses are useful for. The first thing is hiding the tears threatening to escape over your eyelids as you’re hit by a combination of extreme nostalgia and the seemingly inevitable death of your favourite group of animated playthings while watching Toy Story 3. The second is standing in front of a mirror and experimenting with the awesome effects of polarized light. What they are not useful for is opening the door to the future of film making—and whatever the key to that door is, I hope it doesn’t involve looking like the world’s least successful Buddy Holly impersonator.

In order to avoid seeming like a crotchety old man violently resisting change and progress as the youth of today stand around confused at what I’ve chosen to focus my complaints on, I am not saying that 3D films and television have no place in entertainment. Rather, I’m choosing to complain about being in the unfortunate position of being subjected to a new technology which has been far from mastered. I feel like I wouldn’t have appreciated colour television either if I’d been forced to wear special goggles in order to experience the colours of the rainbow—sometimes I like to itch my eyes, or not picture myself being laughed at by people living 50 years in the future for the lengths we traveled to experience this “cool, futuristic technology.”

I look forward to one day being immersed into a holographic and realistic three-dimensional environment when I sit down to watch a movie. I also look forward to not paying 130 per cent of a regular price ticket only to be subjected to gimmicky screen manipulations and a mandatory accessory less attractive than Tila Tequila’s last public appearance.

With any sort of luck, Hollywood’s equivalent of Auto-Tune will either let up in the near future, or quickly evolve into being a legitimate form of entertainment. Until that time comes, I will continue to vehemently avoid any movie that proudly announces it’s in 3D.

A month later, fellow narcissist and Minnesota Vikings quarterback Brett Favre decided to retire for the third time in his career. Incredibly, nobody believed he would stay retired past the opening game of the 2010 National Football League season. Probably because he pulled the exact same crap the last two years. And wouldn’t you know it, Favre returned to the Vikings last week.

When it comes to North American professional sports, athletes’ egos and desire to be in the spotlight has become embarrassing. When coverage of these players starts to rival reality shows on MTV – I think about the same drama seen on “The Hills” and even more idiocy than the “Jersey Shore” – then we have a problem.

Central to this issue is the ludicrous salaries these players earn. This trend has really started in the past 15 years when player salaries started to skyrocket. When you are paid like royalty, you are going to get a little full of yourself– especially if, in the case of LeBron, you’re known as “King James.”

Shockingly, these guys actually have the audacity to say they aren’t making enough money. The NFL training camp has begun and, as usual, several players are ‘holding out’ on their contracts. In effect, players are threatening not to play this season unless they get paid more.

The big headline is New York Jets star Darrelle Revis’ hold out. He is considered the best cornerback in the NFL, so he feels like he should be paid like the best cornerback, which is reasonable. What isn’t reasonable is how he feels about his salary of roughly two million a year. He thinks 16 million a year, for 10 years, is his actual value. Doctors working to cure cancer don’t make that much.

Perhaps we should fault the owners and agents for this. These guys refer to the players like they are God’s gift to earth and sign them for stupidly large salaries.

If you saw the Vikings play last year, you witnessed Favre skirt team rules and try to run the team himself. He disobeyed his coach, by going back into a game that he was pulled out of.

Not to mention they allowed him to skip all of training camp before signing him. There has to be a few people in the Vikings dressing room that aren’t happy about having to work their tail off for months while Favre waltzes in whenever he damn well pleases.

Perhaps it is the fans that are responsible. Anyone who loves sports has at least one idol they adore. If I ever got the chance to meet Jerry Rice, I would probably squeal like a 13 year-old girl at a Justin Bieber concert.

But a lot of fans have started worshipping these players. If you have a big ego when you are treated like a king, imagine what it would be like when you are considered a god among men.

However, as much fault as there is for the agents, the teams and the fans, it all goes back to the individual. For every LeBron James, there are several like Steve Nash. For every Brett Favre, there are even more like Drew Brees. These are the guys who work hard at their craft, don’t complain about their salary, use their fame for good and stay the hell out of the spotlight.

For you egotists out there in the sporting world, it’s time to get your head straight. You may be physically impressive, but nothing about you is all that special.

LeBron, Brett and Darrelle, I think it is about time you each received a well earned reality check.

Look, I get it. After an exhausting and stressful day at work, waiting in a long line at the grocery store is the last place you want to be. Believe me, if I had my way I would be on a beach somewhere in Southern California—instead, I am the cashier who is about to serve you.

So let’s get this out of the way first. I know you’re mad the price of milk has gone up—I’m sorry, but I didn’t invent inflation. I’m not a scientist, but there’s a hole in the Ozone layer and I assume the only way it can be filled is by charging you five cents per plastic bag. I know you think it’s aggravating to have the half-blind 102-year-old woman in front of you to take 17 years to count her change— and yeah, I think it’s annoying too.

The point is, despite the fact I happen to be near you as you experience these daily aggravations, none of these are my fault. I’m just the innocent middle-man between your office chair and your couch; there is no need to take out all your days’ frustrations on me.

As you may have guessed, I recently returned to my old stomping ground — the local grocery store where I resumed my post as a part-time cashier. Maybe it was the eight months away at school, but I had forgotten all about the daily verbal thrashing my ego takes from unsatisfied customers.

This experience is probably not unique to me. I would be willing to bet anyone who has worked in either the retail or service industry has had at least one unpleasant encounter with a customer. I don’t resent my job—in fact I think I have learned more valuable lessons working in retail than any class could ever teach me. So rather than take this opportunity to unleash four summers’ worth of pent–up rage, instead I would like to offer advice to customers and employees alike.

As fellow employees know, summer jobs can be a drag—especially when your pay cheque comes with a weekly bonus of abuse. But there are always positives you can take away from your job. For example, it is almost a fact of life that as you pursue a career you will encounter difficult people to work with. Learning how to effectively communicate with all kinds of people is essential. Although in the heat of the moment it’s tempting to tell someone how you really feel, it is much more satisfying in the long run knowing that you handled a situation calmly and had always remained the bigger person.

As a customer, though, you’re not always right. In fact, sometimes you’re completely wrong. Regardless of the outcome, there is no need to be rude. Most issues you have are most likely not the fault of the employee you’re dealing with. Even if it is, it was probably just an innocent mistake. I don’t come to your work and call your prices outrageous and throw money at your face or tell you you’re incompetent at your job. You could try to return the favour.

My plea is really quite simple: Be nice. I go to school for eight months of the year and receive enough criticism on my essays—I don’t need it at work as well. I simply want to go to work and make enough money so that I won’t be calling my parents begging for money until October.

While many students have used the Used Book Store during their time at Western it’s unclear whether the operation was successful. Most students were able to buy the books they need at a fraction of the cost of the Western Book Store, but the profit from selling books on consignment left some students unsatisfied.

Instead, students frequently turn to selling their books directly to another student taking the same course. This, however, isn’t always possible due to new editions of textbooks being published each year, making the old ones obsolete. As an alternative, students seem to turn to the UWO Book Store and the UBS to buy and sell books because they’re unaware of any options outside of Western.

With the closing of the UBS, students may need to seek out other methods, such as using Amazon or venturing to bookstores downtown, where there are a variety of cheaper options. However, convenience will ultimately keep students using the UWO Book Store despite the high cost and minimal return.

There is some apprehension that with Western taking over the bookstore, its goal as an operation will be for profit – the opposite of the supposed mandate of USC owned facilities. It’s worth noting much of the UWO Book Store’s profits come from Western merchandise, not books.

Maybe the change in ownership will in fact have a positive effect on the business. The UBS has used the same failing business model for a number of years now and a change might mean better management and a tighter ship.

Either store could improve when it comes to selling back books. They reject books that are older editions. Any accepted textbooks are usually among dozens of the same book and risk not being resold at all. Both bookstores should accept used books as part of recycling program. Many students are looking to get books off their hands, even if they’re not paid.

Nonetheless there is a bit of a mourning period in hearing the USC will no longer play a part in used book sales.  It was comforting to know there was a bookstore that promised to help students instead of profit from them.

Political correctness is a tool to control inappropriate messages from offending certain groups. It’s often used to sideline sexist or racist messages from entering public discourse. But it’s possible for political correctness to go too far, censoring or sanitizing otherwise innocent messages. While society should be sensitive to all concerns, the AMS has overreacted by calling this event racist.

The sumo wrestling event, which required students to wear plastic fat suits and push each other in a fashion vaguely similar to actual sumo wrestling, was less about devaluing culture and more about awkwardly bashing into a fellow student wearing funny costumes. Sumo wrestling is certainly an art form and a sport. This event used none of its intricate rules and maneuvers, limiting its similarities to actual sumo wrestling to the basic rules and body size.

The AMS is likely not familiar with charges of racism, so the overreaction is somewhat understandable. However, considering some complaints were posted on Facebook, the group should have verified their legitimacy before making any decisions. Serious complaints should be made through the appropriate channels, like formal letters or face-to-face meetings with the appropriate personnel.

Society is almost at the point where people cannot even acknowledge differences between cultures without being accused of malicious intent. A few overzealous complainers will take every opportunity to protest anything vaguely controversial. While people should feel free to submit complaints, managers are responsible for ignoring or reacting to these complaints in an appropriate fashion. While a public outcry would warrant cancelling the event, the AMS did so after just a handful of complaints.

Sumo wrestling like this has existed in North America for years, so the timing of the cancellation may also be noteworthy. Queen’s was criticized as recently as two weeks ago when a student claimed in a report by the Canadian Federation of Students that “white privilege” permeates throughout the campus. The National Post also claimed Queen’s has a reputation of taking students from privileged neighbourhoods in Toronto and Ottawa, which may cause stronger racial tensions than what’s seen at other universities.

This level of scrutiny could have exaggerated AMS’ reaction, motivating a swift cancellation rather than a discussion. The reaction might ultimately be less about sumo wrestling as a racist activity and more about the university being perceived as racist.

In the end, there is a big difference between poking fun at oversized wrestlers and mocking an entire culture. While the sumo wrestling in question uses pieces of the actual sport, calling the event an exercise in oppression is an abuse of political correctness. Cancelling the event and denying the food bank from benefitting is ultimately a step too far.

Readers: Thanks for picking up the paper, reading the cutlines, skimming the articles and doing the Sudokus in class. Sure, we’ve called you apathetic, lazy slackers who would rather complain than get informed … but in the end you’re the reason we exist.

Complainers: Thanks for making our skin thicker. We admit it’s a fearsome challenge to muster the courage to make a complaint. Your input helps make us a better paper — whether it’s through a letter, a poll vote or a face-to-face conversation. Just remember: We still have editorial autonomy.

Wave/Spoke Staff: Where would we be without pad thai, beer, boring sandwiches and CLTs? Thanks for not kicking our drunk asses out of Rick nights. Jeff Armour, words cannot express our love — our bar tabs say enough.

Timmies Staff: You’re always there for us. When we need a greasy BELT for our hangovers, when we need that fifth coffee to get us through the day — or night — and especially when you give us that winning Roll Up the Rim cup.

University Students’ Council: Sure you do a lot of hard work, but what really counts is your inability to win against us in competitive sports. Thanks for sucking at athletics.

USC Presidential Candidates: We are grateful for your boundary-pushing campaigns and well-researched platforms … just kidding. Thanks for entertaining us with what students really care about — flashy ad campaigns and mascots.

London Transit Commission: Only union workers have the chutzpah to go on strike in the middle of the winter and ask for more money during a recession, in a city with one of the highest unemployment rates. Props for giving us regular news content and forcing students to get some exercise.

Rick McGhie: Words cannot explain our gratitude for the venerated Rick McGhie — who else gives us a legitimate excuse for drinking in the middle of the week? See you tonight, old friend.

Chris Sinal: Thanks for the tips, the insight and for still being on campus, despite your receding hairline and increasing years.

Mike Wagenman: Thanks for the soup and generally being a great neighbour.

Gazetters: Unknown to most of the Western population is the massive pool of individuals who put their blood, sweat and beers into this paper. Despite readers’ doubts, we’re kind of a big deal. Shout outs to everyone in advertising, composing and all of our staff writers and editors.

To the editor:

I just want to say thank you to the Gazette.

The April Fool’s Issue was incredibly entertaining, and recent issues have been incredibly relevant. The April 6th issue was especially interesting. There was intelligent discussion of the Queen’s Alma Mater Society apology letter, and I frankly agree with the editorial discussing it. A lot of debate in the Gazette lately has been about issues of political correctness, and it’s nice to see debate about PC is still alive and well, regardless of the controversy.

On top of that, the article regarding binge drinking and eating was both relevant to student life and very well written. Up till the past week I had been reading a few articles and then tossing the paper, hoping for these changes. Finally I’m seeing the Gazette we all want: relevant, intelligent and not afraid to be disagreed with. After all, how can we discuss issues without a little controversy? Thank you Gazette, keep up the good work!

—Pam-Marie Guzzo
Anthropology II

Ed note: Thank YOU, Pam-Marie!

To the editor:

The redesigned Gazette was a breath of fresh air. Journalism is all about balance [and] our society is obsessed with being politically correct. We also constantly worry if we are going to offend someone. Chances are there will always be a story, picture or whatever that may not cater to your ideals, lifestyle or likings. That’s life. So keep the hard news and continue to publish “infotainment,” because life is all about balance too.

—Celina Toenz
MIT II

To the editor:

I’d just like to take the time to voice my opinions about the Gazette’s 2009-2010 University Students’ Council board report card. It was announced that Emily Rowe, Justin Arcaro and Will Bortolin received grades that are more or less accepted as fail when compared to the grades of Dan Moulton and Sacha Kumar.

I would first like to dissect the term “face of the USC” and rebut it does not adhere solely to the president, but to the board as a whole. What negative implications did Rowe’s “passed on questions” have on the USC? Is it not her role to ensure all questions have an answer? No one ever even considered the fluent team dynamic of the board with respect to her leadership ability.

Justin Arcaro; noted as a micromanager, is much more than that. He is indeed a manager with a portfolio much larger than any other, which is the nature of the vice-president student events position. Therefore his “dealing with issues” grade is one relying on his commissioners who I personally know did all they possibly could regarding the flatbed issue that arose at this year’s Homecoming.

Furthermore, I have walked into Arcaro’s office for a chat on more than one occasion this year, so his “approachability” grade, as well as Bortolin’s is baffling to me. Perhaps it is a reflection of the people that didn’t take the time to get to know them.

People forget to look at both sides of the coin when judging others and I feel that it is both unfair to rate the board members individually, and to say that as a whole they did an “adequate” job given their circumstances. It has been widely known the Gazette and the USC have had a “buddy-buddy” relationship and I surely hope that this article was not an attempt to break free of that at the expense of six human beings.

I challenge each reader to consider these thoughts before quickly accepting the results of the article. I would like to close by thanking each board member for their integrity, their dedication to a better Western and for a phenomenal year.

—Brandon De Krieger

Outgoing Elgin Hall Council President
Science, II

Ed note: Emily Rowe, Will Bortolin and Just Arcaro received B grades overall — not fails — in comparison to Dan Moulton and Sacha Kumar who received A’s overall. The USC board report cards were largely based on consultation with and feedback from commissioners, councillors and current board members, in addition to the informed opinions of Gazette editors.