Do Not Fix Your Antennas, Radio Is Not Dead!

By Logan Schunk

________________________________________________________________________________

Do not fix your antennas, radio is not dead! UBCO just needs a station of its own! 

Through my first couple of years at UBCO, by far the one of the most common complaints has been that Kelowna’s radio sucks. The initiative to create a UBCO radio station has been an ongoing one for some time.  A radio station did exist on campus in the past, but when UBC moved into town and the construction of our new UNC began the radio station was no more.  But I believe that the students of UBCO’s vibrant, youthful campus have the capacity to change and revive radio in the place we call home. So what would a radio station on a campus of 8,000 strong look like? 

The radio station I propose will be Internet-based. Run entirely by students and a faculty of volunteers, an online station will be fast and easily accessible.  You would have the ability to listen to it from anywhere in the world. It would provide students with experience in radio, broadcasting and production. Imagine this, UBCO - having the ability to be heard not only Kelowna and the Okanagan but to be heard from the corners of the globe, with just the click of a mouse.  The rest of Canada could listen to our perspective and opinions. Kelowna would become a hub for information and knowledge.

There are certainly some who believe radio to be an old form of technology.  But if this is so, why is it that close to fifty campuses in Canada have radio stations? What makes UBCO so hesitant to obtain a radio station? Surely something as beneficial as a radio station can only help the community experience on and off our campus. 

Take, for instance, the sense of disconnect that exists on our campus, felt by many students on a daily basis. In a 2010 Maclean’s article, a former student brought the term “disconnect” to the forefront of issues at UBCO. The University has attempted to eradicate this issue through the creation of The Collegiums, as well as through on campus events like Community Day and Club Day. Aside from the Collegium space, campus wide events happen sporadically and their full effects are in doubt. Through the implementation of a radio station on campus these issues could be discussed and a conversation could be initiated. Our campus would have the ability to reach its fullest potential.  Students will have the ability to give UBCO the community feeling it lacks, collectively with faculty, as well the outside community.     

Once implemented, a radio station would provide the public with innovative and alternative radio programming directed specifically at students that would enrich both academic and cultural life at the University and the community as a whole. It will create an awareness of local issues and it will create a voice for marginalized groups within the community. Without hesitation, I believe the time is now for UBCO to break new sound in radio and obtain a radio license. 

Hurricane Sandy Hits the US Presidential Election

By Julia Faurschou

________________________________________________________________________________

Over this past week the east coast of the United States has been ravaged by Hurricane Sandy. Hospitals have been evacuated, buildings have collapsed, and mass flooding has drenched the area. Millions of Americans have been affected by the devastating storm. But what effect could Sandy pose on the upcoming American presidential election? President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney have both been forced to cancel campaign events in affected states. With the race for the White House already so tight, a false move by either candidate could be detrimental to their presidential ambitions.

As soon as the news of the hurricane broke, President Obama sprang into action. His response to the storm could make or break his run for reelection. A poor response to the devastation could prove disastrous to his public opinion ratings, as previously demonstrated by George W. Bush and his lack-luster response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005. This was Obama’s chance to show the people of the United States that he has the take-charge, decisive, yet understanding attitude needed to cement his second term as president.

Judging by the federal governments swift response this past week, this could very well prove to be the deciding factor in the final week of the election. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is, according to Vice-President Joe Biden, “working like it’s supposed to” in providing proper aid to the affected areas. The storm even had the power to change the notoriously outspoken Republican Governor of New Jersey Chris Christie, previous supporter of Mitt Romney, into the latest fan of Obama. When asked about the Presidents role in the disaster relief efforts Christie had nothing but praise for Obama, calling him “outstanding” and “incredibly supportive and helpful to our state.” 

With praise for Obama pouring in from all across the political spectrum, Mitt Romney has been washed to the sidelines. Romney's well-wishes for victims of the hurricane seem insincere, as those experiencing the most devastating effects of the storm generally fall into that “47%” category of Americans whom Romney sees as economic free-loaders. Romney now faces the challenge of staying relevant in the wake of Obamas unfaltering leadership in the storm response. 

Staying relevant is not the only challenge Romney faces this week, as another skeleton emerged from the Mitt Romney closet. During a debate in 2011 for the GOP presidential nomination Romney argued the FEMA should “absolutely” be shut down. Mitt continued on to say that “Every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that’s the right direction. And if you can go even further, and send it back to the private sector, that’s even better.” According to Romney’s preposterous logic, not only can states do a better job than the federal government in responding to a natural disaster like Sandy, but privately owned profit-making companies are even more capable of providing the best aid possible to citizens. Try selling that campaign feature to the millions of Americans who are now struggling to keep their livelihood afloat in the aftermath of the hurricane. With images of hurricane destruction and it’s victims saturating the airways this past week, Americans all across the country must find Romney’s statement difficult to justify. 

Romney already has a very poor track record of responding to natural disasters. In 2005 Greenfield, Massachusetts suffered terrible flooding due to heavy rains and the overflow of the Green River. Roads in the area had to be shut down, the water treatment plant was submerged, and many citizens lost their homes. Greenfield’s mayor at that time reported that Romney, the governor of Massachusetts during the incident, never made any attempt to contact her and aid in the recovery. This would have been the perfect opportunity for Romney to demonstrate how states could be much more effective in disaster relief efforts, but he made no attempt to seize it. If Romney did such a poor job in responding to this smaller scale disaster, it does not bode well for his role at the federal level. 

The hurricane could be just what America needs to help bring to light just what kind of candidates Barack Obama and Mitt Romney really are. Obama has made sure that the federal government is readily available to citizens who are most direly in need of help. Romney, on the other hand, advocates an increased role of states in disaster aid, or worse, handing over the role of disaster relief to private companies, thus eliminating the governments role all together. Even though most of the states affected by the hurricane are traditionally Democratic to begin with, Sandy may have the power to change the mindsets of voters all over the country.