Monday 30th June 2025
Blog Page 381

Read, Listen, Learn: The Everchanging World of Books

0

Flash forward 100 years. Surprise! People still read — just not in the same way as we do now, and we can be pretty certain that books will be around for a long time yet. The future of reading, however, is shrouded in the mysteries of new inventions and technological advancements. The way people are reading is changing. Books are not only printed on paper but available on devices as eBooks and recorded as audiobooks. Almost every book is available in various forms. Reading has never been more accessible but does that mean that people are reading more? 

Audiobooks and eBooks continue to rise in popularity, but is reading from a screen or listening to a podcast en route to the library really as beneficial as old-fashioned reading? Not only do we read books for enjoyment and escapism, but reading also improves cognitive and language skills, increases concentration and affects our emotional intelligence. In 2019, only 54% of UK adults had read a book in the past year. Despite this, eBooks and audiobooks have expanded the world of reading. eBooks fulfil the 21st century desire for instantaneous everything, with practically any book ever published just a tap away (oh, the dangers of Amazon’s ‘just one click’!). Beyond the obvious convenience, audiobooks have also captured people with engaging voices and a return to childhood ‘storytime’.  

Over the past two decades, with the emergence of eBooks and audiobooks, print has become a changing industry. While eBooks, once heralded as the future of reading, are popular, print is still king. In 2017, a survey found that 35% of respondents preferred reading from physical books, while only 5% prefer to read from digital books only. However, like many aspects of life, the pandemic caused a detrimental hit to the print market and sales plunged in the first half of 2020 by £55 million. The Guardian reported that after six straight years of a decline in eBook sales, the pandemic has resulted “with sales home and abroad up 17% to £144m in the first half.” The convenience of eBooks acted as a temporary substitute for printed books while confined within the walls of our homes, as well as a reprieve for the Amazon delivery drivers; however, for many avid readers, eBooks are not a permanent replacement. Merely Halls, managing director of the Booksellers’ Association UK, believes that this is partly due to marketing techniques. “I think the e-book bubble has burst somewhat,”, she told CNBC in 2019, “sales are flattening off, I think the physical object is very appealing. Publishers are producing incredibly gorgeous books, so the cover designs are often gorgeous, they’re beautiful objects.”

The first eBook was created when the US Declaration of Independence was digitized by Project Gutenberg in 1971, the same year that the first email was ever sent. Almost fifty years later, there are over 6 million digital books available on the Amazon Kindle Store alone. A click and a swipe provide instant access, but that enchanting smell of paper, a pleasing blend of coffee, wood and vanilla is irreplaceable — at least for those of us who have bought into the sentimentality of paper. While statistics show that the majority of readers have not been lured entirely into the world of electronic books, younger generations may well develop a similar attachment to eBooks. Their convenience is undeniable; portability, immediacy and interactive features such as highlighting, font size and note taking. eBooks are generally cheaper than their physical counterparts and can often be easier to read, since print publishers often reduce font sizes to cut costs. According to Planet Blue at the University of Michigan, 8,333 sheets of paper can be produced from one tree, sparking the question of whether the environmental cost of traditional publishing is worth our love for paper books.

Audiobooks are another emerging strand of publishing, beginning in the 1930s when an American foundation for the blind designed programs for blind readers termed ‘talking books.’ The word ‘audiobook’ came into use in the 1970s when records were largely replaced by cassettes. Within the hecticness of modern life, finding an opportunity to read can prove difficult, so audiobooks provide an accessible alternative. Listening to an audiobook and reading a physical book are entirely different modes of consuming information, but the benefits of both are substantial. Of course, his difference is not an exact science and as a Forbes article found “Those who prefer one medium or the other simply like the feel of a physical book or the spoken kind.” Beth Rogowsky, associate professor of education at Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania, wrote in Time Magazine that she always “viewed [audiobooks] as cheating,” a view shared by some readers who see audiobooks as a ‘shortcut’. However, after testing these assumptions in a 2016 study, “no significant differences in comprehension between reading, listening, or reading and listening simultaneously” was found. In a New York Times Opinion Piece, Daniel T. Willingham, a cognitive scientist, also came to the conclusion that listening to an audiobook is not “cheating” but wrote that “Our richest experiences will come not from treating print and audio interchangeably, but from understanding the differences between them and figuring out how to use them to our advantage.”

Audiobooks are a performance for the ear and pair well with autobiographies. Listening to autobiographies narrated by the author can feel like a very intimate experience, and give the impression that the story being told has been written just for you, a different kind of intimacy than physically holding a book in your hands. Words themselves have the power to create such intimacy, but when they are read to you by the author themselves, describing their own life, the connection can be even more profound. Michelle Obama’s Becoming is an exceptional read in its own right, but listening to Obama narrating her own story is truly an extraordinary way to experience the book. The narrator is an important feature of audiobooks: Audible’s sampling of audiobooks allows the listener to pick and choose their preferred reader. One popular Audible narrator is Stephen Fry, whose calm, soothing voice is the perfect bedtime storyteller. However, books like Bernadine Evaristo’s Girl, Woman, Other do not lend themselves to audio. Evaristo dispenses of some of the conventions of punctuation, creating a flow which may be difficult to appreciate through the medium of sound alone. Many writers including James Frey and Ben Foster pitch themselves as their novels’ narrator. “There’s no denying that reading one’s own work can carry with it certain advantages,” stated Basil Sands, a self-published writer and actor stated in an Audible article, adding that “If it works, it is truly rewarding.” Book design is an art in itself, and for many writers page space, punctuation, and fonts are essential creative tools; for publishers, these print details are important marketing devices.

In such a hectic world, it is not surprising that some people favour a passive form of entertainment rather than reading in their downtime. For students, who spend as much time reading as they do breathing, the pleasure of reading can often be masked by heavy workloads consisting of reams of textbook notes and academic journals. Streaming services and social media are integral parts of daily life. Reading has never offered us more; an escape from the chaos and noise of the modern world. After years of leisure reading reaching all-time lows, there has been a surge in reading since the pandemic began with 35% of the world saying they were reading more. The availability of eBooks and audiobooks have made reading one of the unexpected silver linings of the pandemic. The benefits of books, whether read or listened to, cannot be underestimated, and now, we have more choice than ever of where and how we consume literature.

Image Credit: Maximilian Schönherr from Wikimedia Commons, licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported2.5 Generic2.0 Generic and 1.0 Generic license.

One Thing the Trump administration got right: U.S. foreign policy on CCP

0

CW: discussion of torture, genocide.

On his final day in the job as Trump’s Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo announced the findings of the US State Department’s ‘Determination on Atrocities in Xinjiang’. The key lines of Pompeo’s accompanying press release read thus:

I have determined that the PRC [People’s Republic of China], under the direction and control of the CCP [Chinese Communist Party], has committed genocide against the predominantly Muslim Uyghurs and other ethnic and religious minority groups in Xinjiang. I believe this genocide is ongoing, and that we are witnessing the systematic attempt to destroy Uyghurs by the Chinese party-state.’

The Xinjiang report came as the second punch in a diplomatic one-two, the first of which sailed in on the 9th of January when Pompeo lifted the ‘self-imposed restrictions’ on contact between US and Taiwanese officials, to a predictably incandescent Chinese response. These actions, conducted in the final weeks of the Trump era, underscored that administration’s commitment to a tough stance against the most powerful of tyrannical regimes: The CCP.

Notably, in a rare display of bi-partisan agreement, Biden’s nomination for Pompeo’s role, former Obama Deputy Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, has said that he agrees with Pompeo’s conclusions on the Xinxiang atrocities.

And atrocities they are. Over a million people are now thought to be interned in hundreds of camps across the western Chinese province. The outstanding reporting of journalists like the BBC’s John Sudworth has revealed how these institutions, in which people are held without trial, sometimes for years, are designed to strip ethnic minorities of their own heritage and replace it with party approved Han culture. The relatives of those imprisoned are given no idea of when their family members will return. Perhaps most shockingly, systematic cultural annihilation is coupled with the forced sterilisation of ethnic minority women (a programme which the Chinese embassy in the US has been brazen enough to promote on its twitter account).

The US’s response has been clear and decisive. 2020 saw Trump sign the ‘Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act’, which increased the scope for sanctions against those Chinese officials suspected of involvement in the genocide. In fact, the tenure of the Trump presidency witnessed an increasingly aggressive CCP regime attempt to assert its agenda on a global scale. From international trade, to Hong Kong and the South China Sea, the no-nonsense US response has been just what the doctor ordered.

2018 saw Trump confront the theft of intellectual property and the use of ‘forced technology transfer’ (where foreign companies are only allowed access to Chinese markets on the condition that they divulge commercial secrets) by the Chinese government, believed to cost the US between $225 billion and $600 billion annually. The hundreds of billions of dollars of trade tariffs employed by Trump in retaliation, while not beneficial to the US economy, showed here an American commitment to just trade practices, a principle the CCP has long ignored.

In reply to the CCP’s campaign to strangle democracy in Hong Kong (the latest development of which saw 53 pro-democracy activists arrested in morning raids earlier this month), the US passed the ‘Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act’ (2019), opening sanctions against those government officials involved in the crackdown. In the South China Sea, where China continues to illegally construct military bases on reefs in international waters, the US has ramped up its Freedom of Navigation Patrols (FONOPs), conducting a record number in 2019, and so denying the CCP de facto ownership of a sea lane which sees 40% of the world’s trade travel through it each year.

And then there’s the CCP’s delayed reaction to COVID. Having discovered a novel coronavirus in Wuhan, instead of alerting the international community, the CCP embarked on a cover-up operation. To this day official government outlets continue to blame anyone but themselves for the international catastrophe. Ultimately, the Chinese government played a strategic blinder in 2020, achieving stunning economic and propaganda coups. China was the only major economy to report economic growth for last year, a 2.3% expansion, and while much of the rest of the world world remains locked away, the government has invited foreign journalists to gawk at busy streets and bustling markets. In one fell swoop, whether intentional or not, the CCP has stolen an economic march on its rivals, and exported the martial law it holds so dear to the rest of the world. Trump cannot be creddited for his response here, which consisted purely of diversionary and reckless racism, rhetoric that has no place in the white house or anywhere else. However, this further example of the CCP’s politiking again makes it essential that Biden continue the work of his predecessor in holding this dangerous regime to account.

By taking a firm line, the Trump administration helped expose the true nature of the Chinese government: An authoritarian-capitalist organisation which ruthlessly pursues political dissidents and exterminates ethnic minorities; complete with a president, Xi Jinping, who has demolished executive term limits and is in the foothills of what I’m sure he intends to be a multi-decade reign.

Trump’s legacy on China is to have ended all the wretched cosying up to the CCP that seemed to be creeping in before he became President. All the talk of a ‘golden era’ in Sino-British relations has been ditched, thank goodness. No more will we be subjected to nauseating images of the British PM sipping beer in his local with Xi Jinping (as David Cameron did in 2015). Now we know where we stand.

The West has a responsibility, not least to the Chinese people themselves, who have been subjected to this regime for so long, to uphold rights like individual liberty, protection from torture, a right to privacy and freedom of religion. The CCP have different values, and if the last five years have shown us anything, it should be that they are attempting to impose them on the world. We must affirm our values in response. This requires the unity of all democratic nations, and crucially, the resolve of the leader of the free world. Trump held the line. Over to you Joe.

Image credit: Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office

COVID-19 immunity passports: a fair policy?

A recent study of healthcare workers by the University of Oxford has shown that a past coronavirus infection gives immunity against later reinfection to most people for at least six months. This has raised the question of whether ‘immunity passports’ should be introduced to give more lenient restrictions to those that have recently been infected, thereby reflecting the reduced transmission risk these individuals pose. 

Indeed, some countries have already taken this idea on board and have created looser restrictions for those with some developed immunity.  Hungary allows people to enter the country if they can provide evidence of COVID-19 recovery. Iceland also plans to allow mask mandate exemptions for those with a doctor’s letter confirming their recovery status.

To some, such a policy is unfair, as it gives different freedoms to people based on whether they have been infected. It could also lead to people attempting to self-diagnose themselves as immune, or fraudulently producing passports. Potentially this problem could be overcome with a suitably secure passport system, and a requirement for a confirmed government PCR test.

There is also the possibility that some might seek out coronavirus infection in order to have looser restrictions after their recovery. But this seems fairly unlikely due to the risks of having an infection and the currently ongoing roll-out of the vaccine, which would give immunity in a safer way.  Although for young people who tend to have asymptomatic infections, the risk may seem acceptable, so this could be a concern.

The policy may also make it harder to enforce national level restrictions.  The more people who have exemptions from restrictions, the more isolated those still locked down would feel, which may lead to reduced compliance. 

The most important and critical flaw with this proposition is the current stance of the World Health Organisation, who say there is insufficient evidence that a previous coronavirus infection significantly reduces risk of subsequent infection. Their stance may change in light of this new study from Oxford, but for the present it has not.

Yet ultimately, the government restrictions upon people’s freedoms due to coronavirus must also be kept proportionate to the risk that people pose. It is a substantial infringement of people’s liberties to keep them at home, and an immunity passport could make a fair representation of the reduced risk level for certain individuals. 

The justification for strict lockdown restrictions is that they are necessary to prevent people who may be infected from spreading the virus.  But if the risk of them doing this is significantly lower due to immunity, then it would be reasonable for these restrictions to reflect that.  If we have sufficient evidence to support the hypothesis of developed immunity, then the policy of immunity passports should be seriously considered. 

Image credit: Spencer Davis

It is the light

It is the light

That engulfs me 

Its fingers of dust waltzing ever so softly 

Treading air and falling, falling, falling to the sound of 

Footsteps

It is my grandma’s smile

And her laugh

And her light

It wraps around me 

Sheltering me from a reality that melts away 

With the leaded pace of these summer days

There is a place on earth at the end of time 

Which seems to be all mine

Not a home

But a place

Where I can hear my mother’s voice 

Still travelling, crossing spatial barriers, carried by light beams

Tracing the timeline of her ephemeral youth

It is a place where I can breathe

And with every watercolour landscape I tread through

Past and present converge 

But they do not clash 

They are two temporal tones, dashing and clasping

Waves in a precarious confrontation

Instead, the two linger in the air 

Those there feel their honey-soaked stare

Carried by the smell of salt and warmth

Their hearts are filled somewhere in the North

It is a place where I clutch at the lucid light

Where remnants of my own voice

Will soon be trapped between wooden beams 

Fixing in place a time 

It is within these realms that I exist boundlessly 

Image Credit: Katie Kirkpatrick.

Oxford sport versus lockdown

0

2021 has unfortunately kicked off with another lockdown. With Iffley Sports Ground, pubs and Park End closed for the time being, athletes, socialisers and clubbers alike are having to battle through the Covid circumstances, trying to keep fitness levels and morale at a high- albeit from home. Oxford University’s sports clubs are actively finding ways to keep up involvement in the hope they will be able to compete in a Varsity fixture against Cambridge and shoe the tabs in this academic year. 

Oxford University Sport are bringing the ‘Blues Performance Scheme’ Facebook group back to life in lockdown 3.0. The group provides Blues teams with different stretching and body-weight exercises, as well as provides athletes with advice on how to eat healthily. Some sports clubs, such as Oxford University Rugby Football League Club, are also holding small Zoom sessions on nutritional eating and on maintaining strength through the lockdown. 

Some sports clubs’ training plans have not been as heavily impacted by the pandemic. As exercise is still able to occur outdoors with a member from another household, the university’s cycling club has been able to find a way to keep its club members active. Toby Adkins, the men’s captain for Oxford University Cycling Club, told Cherwell that they are planning to “implement a ‘buddy-system’ to allow two person rides to occur in a Covid-19 safe manner”, as they prepare to hopefully compete in the Varsity 25-mile Individual Time Trial as early as April. 

Other clubs’ Varsity plans have also been severely affected by the current circumstances. Most of the sports clubs’ Varsity fixtures would have been occurring in this term, so Oxford’s sports clubs are having to postpone their long-awaited Varsity matches, as Oxford’s swimming club have done. Clubs are also likely to have to hold those fixtures “behind closed doors”. Students from Oxford and Cambridge will have been disappointed to learn a month ago that The Boat Race would be a ‘closed’ event, and that it will be held on the Great Ouse at Ely in Cambridgeshire instead of the River Thames in London, due to safety concerns regarding Hammersmith Bridge. The Boat Race is a televised event every year, letting students and alumni enjoy the world-famous race from home. In fact, the university’s football club, as they closely work with Cambridge’s football club to arrange a fixture for June, is using this strange year as a chance to build upon the way in which their Varsity match normally works. Erin Robinson, president of OUAFC, exclusively told Cherwell: “For the first time in our history, we will also provide a high-quality live stream with commentary- which will ensure that all our fans can enjoy the games safely from the comfort of their own homes.” 

An important aspect of university sports life are social events, and things are no different in the times of corona. Varsity fixtures are normally a key opportunity for social events, unforgettable crew dates, and forgettable club nights. Drinking at home on Zoom can be a lonely experience, so clubs are innovating new ways of keeping everyone happy and engaged. Ellie Nako Thompson, captain of the women’s lacrosse Blues team, emphasised the importance of this. She told Cherwell that “the main goal has just been to keep up the presence of lacrosse, especially as it’s such a great support network in these times.” Elsewhere, Blues captains for swimming, Matty Johnson and Zoe Faure Beaulieu, have found creative antidotes to the stress of working from home. They told Cherwell: “Whether it be through Among Us zoom socials, virtual HIIT sessions or a great OUSC bake-off, we’re ready to face the challenges that this term will bring.” 

To say that corona has brought sports to a halt would be an understatement. 2020 brought enough challenges to the Oxford sports, yet clubs fought through adverse circumstances, and found ways to keep competition levels high. The start of 2021 has levelled up the challenges sports clubs face, but a return to sports is near. Sports clubs across Oxford are also increasingly hopeful that Varsity matches will take place in the coming months. Innovation has also been needed in order to make sure sports clubs continue through the pandemic. Oxford’s athletes will be eagerly awaiting their return to the green grass of Iffley Sports Ground and the drink-spilled dance floors of Park End. But for the time being, they must carry on from home. 

Image credit: Steve Daniels via Wikimedia Commons  

Is Love Really Blind?

0

Oh, the times, they are unprecedented, and so is that ever-more-pressing desire for someone to hug, hold, and generally add a little bit of spice to our dull lives. Lockdown makes you do ridiculous things, things no self respecting person would ever dream of, surely, like texting your ex, like flirting with the guy on tills at Tesco, like matching with Oliver (21, 6’0, from West London) three times on three different dating apps. You might even, on a cold, lonely night from your childhood bedroom, sign up to a blind (Zoom!) date. Lord.

As someone who spent far too much of her Michaelmas organising Cherpse dates for the hopeless romantics of Oxford, I’m able to say I know a thing or two about the blind dating business. For those of you toying with the idea, I’m here to give you an honest account of what to expect from meeting a stranger over cocktails, coffee, or video conference. I won’t lie; it’s not always pretty.

The chit-chat will always be a little awful at the start. I’ve had a few unfortunate experiences when I was unable to leave the Zoom I’d created for the lovebirds and was forced to sit there, audio and camera off, struggling to find a way to escape hearing their shy conversation without ending the whole thing. I did figure it out eventually though, so any prospective cherspers can rest assured that this won’t happen to them. You might, however, have to cope with a bit of nervous-/awkward-ness from your match.

I have found that virtual dates tend to produce surprisingly few horror stories compared to the in-person affairs. A fair amount of the time they seem to get on pretty well, even expressing some tentative interest in a second date, and the rest of the time they mostly have a lovely chat as friends. There is the occasional dater who can’t work their camera or what-not, but I think in general meeting someone over Zoom tends to make us a bit more open and non-judgemental; you know you’re only getting half of the experience of being with them, so perhaps you give them the benefit of the doubt

IRL blind dates are another beast entirely. I’ve sent some unfortunate mates of mine on a few shockers. I won’t go into too much detail – editor’s discretion and all that – but I will say that they’ve met some highly interesting characters. Not that they all go this way, of course; I know people who’ve been married for years after meeting on a blind date (though I can’t claim credit for organising any of those).

I believe the time has now come for me to admit that I, yes I, have indeed experienced Cherwell’s matchmaking expertise. First lockdown, over Zoom, no less. I drank a whole bottle of wine and chatted for almost two hours. And then we had another one with another bottle of wine. And, would you believe it, we’ve actually ended up going out. This is not a story I give out lightly or without a tiny bit of embarrassment – but it’s one I give out to encourage any on-the-fencers to just bloody go for it. It’s Valentine’s Day, after all, and you’re probably sat at home in your childhood bedroom. The most you’ll get is true love – the least a funny story to tell and a unique experience of dating during the (hopefully) only global pandemic of your lifetime. It’s not like you’ve got anything else to do.

It’s a Sin: a sublime and sorrowful social history

0

I cannot think of a show I have enjoyed less than this show. I can also not think of one that I would recommend more highly.  This is gay epic, spanning nearly a decade across the 80s as a group of five young people start into their adult lives with different hopes and dreams, not aware that survival will soon become their primary ambition. 1981 is a liminal year for their own adulthood and self-actualisation, but also for the AIDS crisis which would go on to claim more fatalities than World War One.

Davies told Esquire, ‘I was 19 in 1981, so I’ve been wanting to tell this story for that long really.’ And indeed looking back at his career, it almost seems like he’s been honing his skills to give a treatment to the crisis that is both sensitive and emotive and deeply political. This is a writer who knows how to depict culture – although it can hardly be taken as comprehensive, the program which catapulted him to fame, Queer as Folk, did so due to its groundbreaking and honest depiction of gay life in the noughties. He plots this show with a point to prove. Davies captures the fear from lack of information about the virus as only someone who lived through the crisis would be able to. But crucially, it’s very clear that the worst sin is the homophobia which meant that resources were withheld from tackling the crisis as a generation of young men was decimated. He captures the prejudice which exacerbated the pandemic and its insidiousness – from doctors to politicians, Article 48 to internalised homophobia. Some characters are very, very kind. ‘Jill’, based on a friend of the writer, shows a world of volunteers, hotline runners and campaigners. Others are not.  In one of the cruellest of many causes a sharp inhaled breath, the sweet mother to one main character falls in this category – when her son is doubly outed as suffering from AIDS and being a gay man, her macho husband breaks down in tears, while she shouts and swears and bans the dying boy’s friends from his bed side. 

It is this absolutely heart squeezing combination of tender and terrible which is both true to life and the foundation of landmark social television; Davies understands that tragedy is awfulness plus its antithetical counterpoint. We find and lose a culture – as so we see five disparate individuals find a home and safe space together, only for it to be taken away. There’s loss of love as the ones you want to reach out to perversely become the ones who might kill you with a kiss. And above all, there is seismic loss of life, an unrelenting slog as characters are born to us only to be snatched away again. Russel T Davies is the master of dialogue for characterisation and can sketch out love stories in a matter of minutes – here he has five one hour episodes to try to convey what this must have felt like to live through.

It’s heartening to see so many cameos from older members of the LGBT community today – Stephen Fry and Neil Patrick Harris have very different roles – whilst Olly Alexander (lead singer of Years and Years) plays his history with maturity and sensitivity. There is so much more that could be said to credit the fantastic cast, or the arch and deeply witty writing, or the sheer energy which the show vibrates with.  This is a story about loss, but also a loving commemoration of what was lost. It’s Davies finest work and everyone should watch it.

Artwork by Rachel Jung

All dressed up with nowhere to go

0

From actually changing out of our pyjamas before getting back into bed again at night, to parading our best black-tie around the aisles of our local Tesco, the pandemic has cultivated an array of new approaches to what might be considered getting ‘dressed up’.

A month into Lockdown #3, however, with arguably very little else on the horizon, a bit of time spent curating and frolicking in a fun ‘fit could foster some otherwise-neglected artistic flair; a small semblance of sophistication or put-together past normality; or even just some valuable moments of mindless distraction.

I’m not suggesting that we need to don full-on party garb for Panopto, or head-to-toe taffeta for Teams (though should you feel that way inclined, be my guest by all means!), but dabbling in some indulgent dressing might just be a unmatchable minimal-effort way to restore a pinch of glam and spice to our perhaps otherwise mildly lacklustre lives.

So go on – cast those sorry sweatpants aside, turn on some trouble-free tunes, and delve into the dusty depths of your ‘drobe to discover what joys might there await…

…even if it is just to get right back into bed again.

Model: Annabel Follows

Photographer: Nina Follows

Confessions of a productivity addict

0

There’s one attitude that seems to unite all Oxford students, transcending colleges, from historians to scientists – and no, it’s not a hatred for Christ Church. Perhaps it’s something even worse than Christ Church: toxic productivity. That sense of always needing to do something inhabits the streets of Oxford (and intercepts the endless Teams calls), telling students that downtime just isn’t for us.

This article is a perfect example. Whilst I enjoy writing and often find it relaxing, I’m not sure why ticking ‘Cherwell life article’ off my to-do list is so much more satisfying than lying on the sofa and re-watching Bridgerton. After a chaotic second week filled with essays, I’ve been left with a weekend with not much to do. My third-week work hasn’t been set, so alas I cannot spend my Saturday watching 4.5 hours of economics lectures – a real tragedy, I know. Instead, I’ve been gifted a day with no looming deadlines and, because of lockdown, nowhere to go. I therefore found myself this morning at a bit of a loss. Fortunately for me, the Cherwell editors had a solution to my woes – a Life article to write? Another thing for my to-do list? Perfect.

Perhaps a to-do list perfectly embodies what I’m trying to describe. Personally, I am a massive fan of lists and would recommend them to anyone with paper and a pen. Not only do they ensure I remember what I actually need to do, but they also split it up, so that even on lazy days I can tick something off. They also make me feel productive. A day where I‘ve completed three tasks is a success, even if they were only ‘pay my battels’ or ‘send that email’.  I feel I’ve been productive, every single day, even if my productivity is really a wishful illusion.

This guilt surrounding days where you haven’t really done much is definitely the ‘toxic’ in toxic productivity. Oxford terms can be so busy, with essays, events, and extracurriculars,  that a day with nothing to do seems odd. Even worse, a day where you haven’t done anything seems like a massive error. I always feel a certain sense of guilt when I haven’t got much done in a day, considering it a day wasted. The absolute worst days, however, are when you haven’t even relaxed, you’ve just done nothing. When you’ve been writing your essay but also not really writing your essay – spending more time reading Facebook than your actual reading. It gets to the end of the day and it’s just been pretty unsatisfying. The solution to this common conundrum however can be found in the best phenomena of them all: organised fun.

Organised fun is a fundamental part of any productivity addict’s timetable. Organised fun has not quite made it to my to-do list yet, but I feel when you have a busy Oxford schedule, organised fun means that fun time is genuinely fun.  Organised fun means actually enjoying my time not working, rather than wasting it on my phone. In Michaelmas, it meant a walk around Christ Church Meadows with a friend, a quick dash to Pret, or a fake Christmas formal in my household. Hilary Rochelle’s organised fun has tragically had to take it down a notch. The woods behind my house now substitute for Christ Church Meadow, my kettle acts as a replacement Pret, and Christmas formals are a distant memory.

Lockdown hasn’t just made organised fun harder, but it’s also made productivity more toxic. Before Coronavirus it was the pressures of Oxford making productivity a nightmare, now it’s everywhere. It’s in articles detailing ways to stay busy in lockdown, on TV when people detail the incredible feats lockdown has finally given them the opportunity to do, and somehow, it’s also made its way to TikTok. Lockdown has given some people a unique chance to do something special, but for the rest of us, it’s just been pretty hard. Having nothing to do puts pressure on us to do something, even when all we want to do is watch TV without feeling guilty. In Lockdown 3.0 I’ve learnt to expect less of myself. I no longer feel like I’m wasting my time not learning French or baking more banana bread and I’ve accepted the beauty of organised fun.

So please, Dear Reader, ignore the recent Oxfess complaining that they only managed to do 10 hours of work today, and instead take a break. Watch some TV, go for a walk, do something creative, or maybe just don’t do anything at all. But most importantly: don’t feel guilty. I know I’m going to do absolutely nothing after finishing this article – once I’ve ticked it off my to-do list.

EXCLUSIVE: OxMatch breached data protection law

0

Trinity Term saw the creation of OxMatch, a matchmaking service with the tagline “remote Trinity doesn’t have to be lonely”. Cherwell has found that this service has violated GDPR laws along with their own privacy policy (shared with those who sign up at the beginning of their matchmaking form). All data regarding these infringements was obtained in the public domain. 

Students who signed up received unexpected emails; OxMatch’s November Privacy Policy (used for Michaelmas matching) states: “We add you to our mailing list so that we can let you know about your match” and that “we use your email and contact information to communicate with you regarding your match.” Furthermore, Chapter 2, Article 5 of the General Data Protection Regulations notes that data must be “kept in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no longer than is necessary for the purposes for which the personal data are processed” and declares that all data must be “collected for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes and not further processed in a manner that is incompatible with those purposes”.

While the “purposes” outlined in OxMatch’s privacy policy pertained to communicating regarding their match, students also received emails about signing up to MyTutor, a new version of Oxfess and new rounds of OxMatch. Students were also identified by name in some of these emails. One email, sent on the 1 January 2021, included the name of the student emailed in the subject line, asking if they wanted to join the OxMatch team and “become the next Cupid?” Another was sent urging students to like a variation of the Oxfess page – this was not described by OxMatch as a “sponsored post”. A third, which was described as a “sponsored post” by OxMatch, sent on 13 December 2020, included the name of the student emailed in the subject and body of the email and continued: “We’re writing to let you know about MyTutor, where you can earn up to £20 an hour, all within reaching distance of the kettle”. The footer of the email read: “You are receiving this email because you signed up for OxMatch… Sponsored posts like this allow us to run OxMatch and also go towards supporting our access initiative”.

OxMatch did not respond to Cherwell’s queries regarding why such emails would be sent, especially as they appear to be “incompatible” with the purpose of communicating regarding a match and this use was not specified within the sign-up form. However, MyTutor confirmed to Cherwell that the email was sponsored – although not for a “substantial” amount. They continued: “OxMatch reached out to propose we sponsor one of their emails, and we were disappointed to learn that the message may not have been sent in line with their privacy agreement with users. As such we won’t be working with them again, and will be updating our due diligence process when sending sponsored messages via third parties in future. We note that OxMatch have updated their privacy guidelines to refer to third party marketing but that should not be taken as meaning that we endorse or have approved this update.”

OxMatch told Cherwell: “In accordance with GDPR, we process and release data only in anonymous forms for statistical analysis. All data is kept anonymous and identifiable data is not shared with any third parties.”  OxMatch refused to confirm how long data is kept or how data is stored.

In December 2020, OxMatch collaborated with student paper The Flete to release an “OxMatch Campus Report”,  running through the answers of those who signed up, including answers to a series of questions like which subjects signed up, political leanings, crushes and a diagram of kinkiness levels at each college. 

OxMatch’s own Privacy Guidelines and Data Practices, effective from November 20th 2020, were shared with each of the participants at the beginning of their form. It stated: “We also gather metadata: statistics about how the student population as a whole answered. This is just for fun posts on our Facebook: it’s always anonymised, and we’ll only use data aggregated across at least 15 people.”

While the data was anonymised and no individual student response was revealed, this “metadata” was released to an online student publication with an unclear transfer of data – not “fun posts on our Facebook”. Beyond this, OxMatch promised that “we’ll only use data aggregated across at least 15 people”. OxMatch told The Flete that they had “over 4500 signups since its inception in Trinity Term 2020” and then broke down the subject makeup for signups. The smallest groups were “Physics and Philosophy as well as Classics with Modern Languages, accounting for just 0.2% and 0.3% of sign-ups respectively”. Making the generous assumption that the full signup figure was 5000 – and that all of these were included within the RAG and standard Michaelmas versions to which the statistics pertain, rather than any being made in Trinity Term 2020 – this is equivalent to 10 Physics and Philosophy students, below the 15 promised in OxMatch’s Privacy Policy. For Classics with Modern Languages, this sums to exactly 15 students. In OxMatch’s Privacy Policy, they also wrote that: “We will not publish any information that could lead to personal identification (such as the case of small colleges/subject groups)”. The Flete confirmed to Cherwell that they were not informed this data was in breach of OxMatch’s privacy regulations.

OxMatch has now returned for another round of matchmaking with an updated privacy policy which explicitly states sponsored emails to be sent to those who sign up: “By signing up to OxMatch, you consent to us occasionally sending you sponsored emails.”

Individuals who wish to know what data any company holds on them can make a subject access request under GDPR law. This request can be made via email, social media or any other reasonable means of communication. By the same method, these individuals can request that their data is deleted.