Skip to main content

Day: 10 December 2015

£300k paid back to UCL students for ‘unacceptable’ accommodation

Written by Georgie Hines on . Posted in News.

Former residents of Hawkridge House, located in Kentish Town, were awarded £1,200 each last week after a long drawn out dispute over accommodation described as “a construction site.” One of the claimants, Freddy MacKee, said: “It was really difficult. You couldn’t study in your own room if you wanted to because of noise. I wasted a lot of time because I’ve had to go somewhere else to study and spend time complaining.”

Like MacKee, many complained over the inability to study and even sleep. Some reported noise from building work before 9am, outside of working hours. The proximity of the site was also of concern, with many fearing they were being watched by workers close to their rooms.

The complaint, submitted by 48 students, said they had suffered “mistreatment, indifference and general disregard” by UCL. It seemed the university’s complaints panel agreed. In a statement they noted that the accommodation “failed to give sufficient detail of the building works to enable students to understand the full extent of the nature of these works prior to moving in.”

UCL Union’s Halls and Accommodation Representative, Angus O’Brien, said that “the residents were ignored for months, treated merely as consumers with no real control of their own homes, but their actions have forced a change in dynamic between resident and university.”

He said the university were “demonstrating a lack of empathy towards the students’ circumstances” but at least the victory showed “the strength of student organising.”

This is the second time in a month that UCL have been forced to pay compensation to former residents of their student accommodation. Students from Campbell House, near Euston, were paid £120,000 for the “unbearable” living conditions. Current residents have received a 25 per cent cut in rent fees as a result.

Now protesters are campaigning to get immediate 40 per cent rent cuts across UCL accommodation. A supporter of the campaign says that these recent successes “show the potential for an increasing number of students to take an effective stand against their university.”

The Competition and Markets Authority has said that the university might have breached consumer law by inflicting academic sanctions on those involved in the protest.

UCL are not the only university that have been in trouble in recent months over sub-par student accommodation. Durham University has come under fire for rising accommodation prices—fees have risen by nearly 20 per cent, to £7,000, in the past three years.

A protest leaflet being handed out across the campus says that “with maximum maintenance loans only £5,500, this causes major problems for students who are not from wealthy backgrounds.” It also argues that student housing at nearby York and Newcastle universities is £2,000 less a year compared to Durham.

Durham’s Students’ Union firmly disagrees with this decision, suspecting that increasing housing costs is to raise money for refurbishments. “We do not believe students should continue to pay for maintenance backlogs solely through college accommodation costs,” they said.

The University of Manchester isn’t exempt from complaints about poor living standards. Former resident of the infamously run-down Oak House, Emily Deaner, says the halls were “fun but disgusting” and “the fact that the walls are green breeze blocks kind of sum up the whole thing really.”

This has led many students to look outside the university toward private rents. International student Anne Eikland says she “chose private accommodation because the standard of the university flats were shocking. I looked at the pictures online and even looked around when I visited before I started here. I told my mom I would rather go to university in Norway than live there.”

But for many other universities rising accommodation costs and no actual improvement in living standards remains a problem. Anabel Bennett López, an activist from UCL’s Cut the Rent campaign believes this most recent win is the start of change for the student housing movement.

“This victory comes just as pressure is ramping up on UCL to drop rents across the board. This shows that they are capable of doing it and that mass rent strike action is the effective and democratic way that we can force down the cost of living in London.”

Tabloid terrorism: The unreported menace

Written by Luke Williams on . Posted in Opinion.

The aftermath of the terrorist attacks on 13th November have seen the so-called Islamic State, and current issues in the Middle East, dominate the media. Many news outlets worldwide have condemned the attacks, though some have used the atrocity to bare its teeth towards Islam in Britain. The Sun’s headline on the 23rd of November claimed “1 in 5 Brit Muslims’ sympathy for jihadis”. Other headlines weren’t so explicit, yet still possessed an unhealthy influence.

The survey in question by The Sun was conducted by telephone, questioning ‘1,500 Muslim surnames’, with 1,003 agreeing to respond. Those contacted were asked “How do you feel about young Muslims who leave the UK to join fighters in Syria?” The results claimed to show how 21 per cent of UK Muslims showed sympathy with jihadis, with 5 per cent showing “a lot of sympathy”. It then described those who had “no sympathy” as possessing “moderate” views, suggesting other views were radical. Since the results of the poll have been published, reaction has been critical to say the least. Many took to Twitter to voice their frustration before the newspaper had even hit the shelves through ‘Tomorrow’s papers today’ and the hashtag #1in5Muslims mocked the results of the poll, listing other things ‘1 in 5 Muslims’ believe.

The wording of the question in the poll has been the focus of a lot of criticism. Respondents were asked whether they have “sympathy” with young Muslims who leave the UK for Syria. This does not mean that they agree with the motives of those who go to Syria to fight. I can have sympathy for somebody but not share their emotions and motivations. I am sure many people have pity for people that have been misled and who have followed the wrong path. Along with this, the question didn’t mention the word ‘jihadi’ or have any mention of IS. It should also be noted that young Muslims have gone to Syria to fight against IS in the Middle East, such as those who have joined Kurdish forces. The response to the question is open to manipulation, as proved. The Sun has taken the poll and distorted the interpretation to form a sensationalist headline.

The analysis of the results also drew criticism, with the fact that such an exact conclusion of the attitudes of British Muslims was produced. The poll does not highlight the flipside of the argument—almost 71.5% had no sympathy for ‘fighters’ who go to Syria. A Sky News poll in March found a similar result from non-Muslims too, with 14% agreeing that they had some sympathy. A similarly explicit headline did not follow.

The Sun did express an apology on the issue, albeit through The Times‘s Corrections and Clarifications section, three days later. Unfortunately, the damage had already been done, and for an apology to appear hidden away 36 pages into a newspaper with an entirely different readership is appalling. If the apology were to be printed in the exact same space as the original article, then it would perhaps be more suitable. Sadly, the perceptions of many readers of The Sun will have already been influenced and a correction will not be seen.

The production of such headlines by tabloids is an example of a camouflaged radicality within our own borders. Terrorism is defined as “the unofficial or unauthorised use of (violence and) intimidation in the pursuit of political aims…Terrorist groups seek to cause widespread disruption, fear and intimidation.” The tabloids form generalisations and sweeping statements about minority groups to try to scare the public to back up their political position. The threat of Islam, in this case, is suggested. This is the same type of reporting used to alienate other minorities from the rest of society, rather than forming solutions to the problem. UK tabloids must not stoop to the standards of news outlets such as Fox News in the USA. Such reporting inhibits healthy debate and creates a vast division between either sides of the argument. Not to mention that it has created an outcry and continues to weaken the integrity of journalism.

The Guardian reported in August how research had suggested that sensationalist coverage of terrorist attacks can result in an increase in such attacks. “Terrorists need media coverage to spread their message, create fear and recruit followers.” Sensationalist coverage provides terrorists with a free media platform. IS aim to create division within the West between Muslims and non-Muslims. These sorts of headlines add to fuel to IS’s claims that Islam is not welcome in the Western world. Britain and other Western nations need to unite across religious boundaries and heal any breach within society. IS will otherwise benefit from a break in unity between Muslims and non-Muslims and continue to perform such attacks.

The headlines seen in the aftermath have been dangerous and do not help British Muslims to fit into British society. Headlines are mocked by some but to others will be a source of genuine influence. The reports will create a backlash aimed at Islam and other faith groups. Groups like Britain First continue to use it as propaganda and influence their 1.1 million followers on social media. An increase in hate crimes against Muslims has been seen in Scotland—more than 60 since the Paris attacks. This included an arson attack on a mosque just three days after Paris. A London mosque was the victim of an attempted arson attack on 27th November, too. I am not one to say that the two are directly linked, but it possesses parallels. The Sun, with the highest readership of the tabloid newspapers, should have more integrity and should share more responsibility for creating a healthier attitude. It has a significant accountability for aiming to form a more welcoming society rather than to alienate minorities. The newspaper has done little to separate Islam and the terror organisation that is IS. Muslims are victims of IS attacks. A reminder is needed that British Muslims are British people, working in ‘our’ hospitals, schools and contributing to vital services. 1.6 billion Muslims exist across the globe, with 2.7 million Muslims in the UK, and their name has been tarnished by a terrorist minority claiming to be Muslim. Islam does not teach the behaviours of this terrorist group. The Sun cannot claim to support community cohesion when it continues to publish such sensationalist headlines.

Similar sweeping headlines are seen by tabloids on other issues: The Daily Mail with an alarmist claim of the ‘Risk of having a weekend baby’. The study in question found that an average of one extra death per 1000 babies born on a weekend occurred, something that the Daily Mail considered a ‘significant’ risk. It did not care to mention that the highest likelihood of death was on a Thursday, or mention a similar study in Scotland that found that between 2000 and 2013 the risk during a weekend was lower. Neither of these two headlines would push Jeremy Hunt’s agenda for a 7 day NHS, though. Such headlines have been found to be the reason that some patients are not attending hospitals at weekends, for fear that their level of care will be inadequate, putting their lives at risk. This is another example of a dangerous and irresponsible headline by a tabloid newspaper.

The response to the article by The Sun by other areas of journalism and on social media has done something to show how Britain actually feels about faiths like Islam. This will not provide British Muslims with a full feeling of security, though. The Sun’s irresponsible journalism has made it more difficult for sensible debate to occur with regard to the issues surrounding IS. Explicit reporting has created fear and added to the growing hostility within the UK. Right now we need unity, not division.

Of course, I am sure all those reading this will remember the aftermath of the attack on the Charlie Hebdo headquarters and the response that followed. The consensus was that freedom of speech should be protected and that journalists should be able to publish their own opinions. I agree with this, too, though I think that there is a difference between what is deemed to be fact and what is opinion. I do not think that press needs to be regulated, but an improved approach and basic decency towards such issues is required. Journalists should be able to report stories without fear, so by the same token, the public should be able to read stories without unnecessary fear.

R.I.P. NME

Written by Mark Holland on . Posted in Music.

For a long time, NME was really the only place to find alternative music in the mainstream and its role in many of the UK’s music scenes were pivotal. Writers such as Julie Burchill and Tony Parsons helped shape the punk movement in the late 70s and helped to cement its influence in British culture. This was also the era of Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd—a time when rock music was fresh, invigorating and NME remained to be a fanatic’s only gateway into this exciting world of rock n’ roll.

This continued throughout the 1980s; with the birth of indie, the magazine, for better or worse, the magazine helped shape alternative culture with articles and covers featuring bands like The Smiths, The Cure and Echo & The Bunnymen. At this time, the acts covered had real cultural importance and NME was always there at every step of the way, with the sharpest writers hunting down the most exciting new music, presenting them to the masses every Wednesday.

In many ways, they helped to write the mythology of these scenes, through wild debauched Madchester tales of Happy Mondays tour buses; through to the iconic imagery that would come to define them; such as the infamous, paint-splattered Stone Roses cover. NME created much of the symbolism we have begun to associate with British music. Would Britpop really have had the same scale of importance if it wasn’t for the magazine’s 1995 battle of Britpop cover pitting Oasis against Blur?

As the magazine entered the new millennium, it was gifted with a resurgence of guitar bands such as The Strokes and The Libertines, allowing them to continue their tried and tested NME formula by hailing them as new, cool and exciting. During the 00s, the magazine helped write the folklore of these bands, and, in turn, created an entire generation of indie kids that kept alternative music in the mainstream.

I fondly remember buying my first issue of NME. It was around 2010 and I’m pretty sure The Courteeners were on the cover. While this wasn’t a time where the magazine itself had much relevance or cultural importance, it completely opened up a new world to me. As with many young music fans around at that time, I was completely hooked with the world it had created and bought every single issue until it’s untimely demise five years later. As well as informing me about new music, it educated me on older bands, organised NME tours every year around the country and really ignited the passion for music that I will always be grateful for.

But the NME’s failure to adapt or cover anything that wasn’t a group of skinny white lads with guitars meant that when these scenes began to die down, the magazine began to look somewhat desperate. There were only so many times they could put Arctic Monkeys or Noel Gallagher on the cover, or so many times bands such as Palma Violets and Wolf Alice not turning out to be ‘the new Libertines’ the magazine had hoped they’d be.

The magazine turning free gave NME one final chance to reinvent itself—to become a legitimate source of credible music journalism once again and help define the future generations of music as it had done so many times in the past. Tragically, when the magazine relaunched back in September with it’s Chris Moyles cover, it’s feature on why being transgender is cool or it’s double-page spread on why The Big Bang Theory is the new Friends, it put the final nail in its own coffin. Meaning nothing to anyone, completely selling out, and losing any morsel of dignity the paper once had. RIP NME.

Fashion in your favourite festive films

Written by Sarah Kilcourse on . Posted in Fashion & Beauty.

Every year magazines and websites are eager to advise us on the best way to dress for the upcoming holiday season. However, holiday dressing never varies too greatly, as exemplified in some of our most beloved Christmas films.

Lets start with Love Actually, a film with just enough Christmas to be able to watch in June without feeling guilty. Keira Knightley wears some fabulously noughties outfits, as always. Her wedding hairstyle is a great example of her elegance—with two strands of hair framing face, but it still does not distract from the beauty of her lace dress. Perfection. The crop tops for parties and the cosy sweaters when she’s lounging are failsafe Christmas outfits. Keira, we salute your winter style.

White Christmas gave us more than the eponymous Christmas song; it also gave us the stereotypical Father Christmas outfits. The entire film is a fantastically fifties extravaganza, but the styling is impeccable. The nipped-in waists, the off-the-shoulder dresses, and the waved hair remind viewers that if there is any time of year to do full on glam, it’s Christmas.

Another fabulous reminder of the importance of hair and beauty during the festive season is The Grinch. Back before Taylor Momsen was strutting about in a corset and fishnets, she was melting our hearts as little Cindy Lou—she had a great hairdresser. Admittedly, it can be said that her hair was a tad avant-garde, but if you’re going to commit to a look, which Cindy Lou and all the inhabitants of Whoville do, it’s important to remember that hair and beauty finish off the style.

There are so many other great festive outfits commemorated in film; Buddy’s green and yellow Elf outfit, Kevin McCallister’s love of the sweatshirt through three Home Alone movies, and best of all the classic dress worn in It’s A Wonderful Life—my favourite Christmas film by far. So this festive season if you can’t decide what to wear, sit down, watch a Christmas film, and perhaps it could inspire your dream outfit. Or just cuddle up and watch them all!

NME’s court case

Written by Pierre Flasse on . Posted in Music.

The accused: NME

The accusation: Swapping integrity for $$$, artistic bankruptcy, and a total abandonment of prior virtues.

The crimes: Turning from just music to accommodate film and style, choosing gossip over news, trying far too hard, and marketing Justin Bieber as “actually kinda cool.”

The case: NME has destroyed the soul of what it once was. In its new rebranding as a free magazine, it has lost any edge that it might have once had. Its initial problem is moving away from music and broadening to film, style and general entertainment. In a delirious turn, two out of the last five issues have had a feature on an actor—most recently specialising on “Daniel Radcliffe’s wanking routine.” On top of the music section, each issue now has a dedicated film, TV and fashion section, too, turning into a genre-destroying crowd-pleasing shitheap. When it does actually cover music news, it’s more a range of intra-personal gossip, such as Adele’s stage fright; Tyler, The Creator being a playable character in Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater; and Chris Moyles being hit with a pint glass at a gig. Any artistic licence this magazine used to have seems to have disappeared.

By changing to a free magazine and online site, there seems to be a shift in their target audience and marketing strategy. A general push towards the free material makes one question the morals behind the change. Now an expansive view into general entertainment with less controversial writing, no profanity and less “news”, the editors may have been forced to change tact. If it is a free issue, the funding must surely be coming primarily from advertisement, in print and online. It is often that advertisers won’t want their products to be associated with swearing or controversial views, and so this limits the artistic direction of the writers. Overall, the magazine has become another tame entertainment gossip column for the masses to read, without challenging any ideals or morals. It’s another slave to a higher purpose—money.