Unspecific SFU diplomas
David Ly
The end is near. After four years and 37 courses, convocation is just around the corner. Finally, I’ll get to walk the stage in recognition for the immense debt I put myself in. I’ll shake Petter’s hand, receive my diploma, and maybe even shed a tear looking at it. A tear of disappointment, that is.
Don’t get me wrong, I’ve loved getting my Bachelor of Arts. However, my diploma apparently won’t state the focuses of my studies, only the vague title of Bachelor of Arts that encompasses 23 programs, clumping the study of Sir Gawain and principles of economics under the same umbrella.
Further, some friends and I were a bit irked noticing that the diplomas don’t state majors or minors. They’re stated in the program book, but who wants to frame a page with your degree’s specificities in size 10 font, squished between hundreds of other names?
To many, my degree may appear peculiar (i.e. useless in the ‘real world’). With a major in World Literature and an English minor (no, not the same as World Literature), and creative writing courses sprinkled throughout for kicks, I’m proud of the subjects I studied.
Yes, this ‘degree in subjective bullshit,’ makes me proud. University is a time during which people create an identity, or multiple ones, to differentiate themselves from others. Our majors, minors, certificates, or focuses speak profoundly to who we are. It seems a bit ironic that when we leave, we receive recognition to who and what we are in a very vague form, placing us back in an indistinguishable sea.
As prestigious and pretty the script of Bachelor of Arts is, it doesn’t make up for the lack of specificity in what our education results in. Surely, the printers can handle the cost of extra ink . . .
Current television
Katrina Trask
These days I only watch television about three hours a week, and most of what I watch is the news or movies. The reason that I watch so little is because the majority of aired shows are reality shows.
I remember when specialty channels such as TLC and Discovery aired programs relevant to their channels, dealing with science, history, etc. I remember when television consisted mainly of scripted shows with actors and fictional storylines, before it was dumbed down to its current level.
Television executives fail to see the lack of value in these exploitative reality shows. Look at TLC’s Here Comes Honey Boo Boo: it plays on redneck stereotypes for ratings, and its ‘actors’ don’t realize they are being exploited.
Worst of all, reality shows act as a platform for people’s personal beliefs, which can promote exclusion and intolerance, like the anti-gay Christian rhetoric in Duck Dynasty.
Why are these shows still on the air? It is because of us, the viewers — those who watch whatever is on.
However, some channels, such as Netflix, AMC, HBO, and PBS, do produce quality programming, consisting of shows such as Game of Thrones, House of Cards, Mad Men, and Downton Abby. These shows, unlike reality television, have huge online fanbases, as suggested by reviews, video art, and memes; the trend of binge watching these shows is also proof of their popularity.
Fans of these types of shows, make your opinions heard to the execs by refusing to watch reality shows. Tell them that we want to watch more scripted shows. At the very least, they need to change the names of their channels to reflect the reality-based programming that they offer. Give me the chance to avoid seeing a second of a day in the life of Kim Kardashian.
