These days, everyone has catchphrases. For President Barack Obama, it was “Change We Can Believe In.” For former President Bill Clinton, it was “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” For singer-songwriter Chris Cornell, the catchphrase of the year has been “album-oriented album,” which he has used in nearly every interview to describe his upcoming record, Scream.

For those of you who do not know Cornell, he is one of the most prolific rock singers of the past 20 years. From his early days singing lead for grunge pioneers Soundgarden to his more recent work with Audioslave, a supergroup he formed with members of Rage Against The Machine, his voice has become iconic. In 2007, however, Cornell split with Audioslave and has since been working on a solo career. For Scream, he decided to go in a slightly different direction, collaborating with famed pop producer Timbaland to fuse his rock sensibilities with a more dance-oriented, R&B-ish beat. Hardly a surprise for a singer whose favorite artists growing up were R&B acts such as Earth, Wind, & Fire. Unfortunately, this unexpected turn in his musical style has angered some fans — with blogs such as “Save Chris Cornell” serving as evidence.

While the album is not yet released, Cornell has already started releasing singles and videos for the album, including the title track. In my opinion, many modern music videos are ineffective artistically. Most are too esoteric for viewers to understand or having nothing to do with the song. In the video for “Scream,” though, Cornell and director Alan Ferguson team up to make a great, representative clip.

The video begins with Cornell, who plays the song’s main character, and a woman, who is assumed to be Cornell’s significant other, driving home after a party. The woman is clearly irate, screaming at Cornell — who stares straight ahead and pretends not to hear her while singing the song. This leads the viewer to believe that this scene is taking place inside the main character’s head. The scene continues in a hotel room after the pair’s car breaks down, and the woman’s anger becomes more intense. This scene fits well with the lyrics, which describe a failure of communication between the main character and his lover. Calm, rational discussions regarding disagreements end up devolving into shouting matches, hence the refrain, “I said hey / why you keep screaming at the top of your head?”

The final scene takes place in an art museum. Cornell sits in between a young boy and girl making fun of each other, drawing a direct comparison with the argument in the previous scene. The atmosphere in the museum is otherwise calm, with the lyrics reflecting many of the same themes as before. Then, without warning, everyone in the museum starts arguing with each other, and the scene descends into chaos, with one woman even pushing her male companion through a glass window. Here, the video applies the principles discussed in the previous scene to a more general context, illustrating what would happen if bad communication plagued all human relationships like the character’s. The lyrics shift slightly as the song closes, with the lines, “Silence is golden / I used to think that silence was golden.” The character acknowledges his own shortcomings in effective communication.

Currently, the video is available for viewing on YouTube. If you like it, I would strongly encourage you to grab a copy of the album when it comes out March 10 and check back here for a review.

The Good

Amy Adams:
A look with star power written all over it: pitch-perfect in every way and made even better by a beautiful, statement-making necklace.

Kate Winslet:
The six-time Academy Award nominee looked Classic Hollywood in a dress perfectly displaying the curves of womanhood. (Thank God she’s not a size negative four!)

Anne Hathaway:
Intricate diagonal beading separated by interesting translucent layered circles gloriously saves her look, an otherwise ordinary silhouette.

Marisa Tomei:
With a rather understated bodice and a daringly bold geometric pleat design on the skirt, Tomei looked the part of an Oscar nominee.

Natalie Portman:
Portman rocked a simple shape pumped up with an electrifying cupcake color.

Alicia Keys:
Taking a page out of Portman’s book, Keys worked a classic toga shape in a vibrant and fresh violet hue.

Beyonce Knowles:
Wearing one of the most eye-catching designs, Beyonce looked dangerously curvy yet still perfectly elegant.

Penélope Cruz:
A dress fit for a princess’ dream wedding (and funnily enough, the skirt even resembles Belle’s ball gown).

The Bad

Viola Davis:
The first-time nominee chickened out with a safe-bet: the ubiquitous pleated halter-top.

Amanda Seyfried:
Seyfried tried desperately for bold but fell completely flat; she looks like the poorly-wrapped present you’d wait to open last on Christmas.

Melissa George:
With a super-tight bodice and overly dramatic knee poof, George was an over-sexed poodle set loose on a much classier red carpet.

Tilda Swinton:
This isn’t a surprise: Swinton is the queen of confusing year after year. She never seems to get her look quite right.

Jessica Biel:
Normally styled much better, Biel looked disheveled with a floppy, deconstructed bow and rumpled hair.

Vanessa Hudgens:
Four words sum up the vibe of Hudgen’s look: trying way too hard.

The So-So’s

Queen Latifah:
Latifah sported a wonderfully elegant dress with two haphazard panels of mesh attached to the sides, adding unnecessary width to her frame.

Angelina Jolie:
Jolie’s dress was simple and unexciting, but I guess when you’re the world’s most desired star, you really don’t have to try too hard.
 
Marion Cotillard:
Wearing what looked like a vintage French gothic gown, Cotillard was slightly more scary than stunning.

Evan Rachel Wood:
Wood’s dress looked more fitting for the Oscar statuette than an Oscar attendee.

Sarah Jessica Parker:
Parker, known for pulling off high-fashion looks, wore a somewhat disappointing mint green piece of froth that looked seriously torturous to her chest.

Freida Pinto:
Pinto’s dress was stunning, except for the unbalanced and elderly looking lace sleeve.

Miley Cyrus:
Cyrus wore a show-stopping beaded number that was far too mature for her, once again displaying her talent for not acting her age.

The Big Trends

Strapless or one-shouldered fitted dresses with a poof of varying sizes starting at the knee or below

Bold geometric dress patterns or colors

New spins on classic shapes

A few weeks ago, Joaquin Phoenix made a rather odd appearance on the Late Show with David Letterman. Phoenix, who recently announced that he’ll transition his career away from film and into music, appeared annoyed, barely communicable and drugged-out. After ten minutes without cracking a smile, the scruffy Phoenix had all of America talking.

Phoenix, with a full beard and sunglasses, did everything from pissing off band leader Paul Shaffer to sticking chewed gum under Letterman’s desk, all within the span of a ten-minute interview. Appearing to promote his newest film, Two Lovers, Phoenix failed to describe a promotional clip, respond with full-sentence answers or behave in a respectable manner in front of a national audience. At the end of the exchange, Letterman smirked and declared, “Joaquin, I’m sorry you couldn’t be here tonight.”

I’m convinced that this movie/hip-hop star was putting on an act. Joaquin, in need of announcing and publicizing his career move, found a free and easy way to do so at the expense of his reputation and Letterman’s show. Moreover, he successfully transitioned perceptions away from his role in Walk the Line, where he portrayed the life of Johnny Cash, and focused more on promoting the badass, don’t-give-a-(expletive) personality more frequently associated with rap stars.

Phoenix made his debut rap performance at Lavo, a Las Vegas nightclub, in mid-January. He was visibly drunk during it, slurring his words and taking a fall while exiting the stage.

Although Joaquin won’t be starring in any new films (whether he’d like it or not, at least at this point), he won’t officially be leaving the big screen just yet. Accompanying Phoenix into the rap world is a film crew and director Casey Affleck to document Joaquin’s story. Affleck, Phoenix’s good friend and brother-in-law, starred in Ocean’s Eleven and Gone Baby Gone and also directed a few independent films in the ’90s.

Another big-name player, Sean “Diddy” Combs, will produce Phoenix’s first album. He and Joaquin will work with Tim Burgess of The Charlatans and Antony Langdon of Spacehog in recording the debut; the Charlatans and Spacehog both are alternative rock bands from England, making their lead singers surprising collaborators for Phoenix’s hip-hop album.

Phoenix must be using every tool in his box to build up his new career. He is hitting the American public in more ways than one with a legendary hip-hop producer, British indie band members, an unpredictable and crazy personality, and an entire film crew.

His Oscar-worthy performance on Letterman was simply another example of the remarkable publicity job he is doing to promote himself. It was a unique and unexpected approach, but with one career ending and another just beginning, he had nothing to lose and everything to gain.

After his multi-faceted approach to attracting interested and curious fans, Joaquin likely created anticipation and excitement for the release of his upcoming album and documentary. Soon, everyone from inner-city high school students to elderly grandmothers will be interested in Joaquin Phoenix and who he has become.

Street Fighter IV, available for both the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, is a beautifully executed fighting game, combining a robust selection of fighters, an accessible and refined combat system and a successful marriage of gorgeous 3-D visuals and intense 2-D action.

The combat in Street Fighter IV will be familiar to just about anyone that’s played a fighting game before. Players use six attack buttons (three punches and three kicks) in addition to a joystick or directional pad to execute combos, special moves and super moves. Performing combos and specials may be difficult for a newcomer to the genre, but fighting SF IV is much easier to grasp than highly technical fighting games like Virtua Fighter or Guilty Gear. Still, once you are acquainted with the gameplay of Street Fighter IV, the combat is a joy to behold. Each character has its own stance, moves and aesthetic, with excellent animations and a vibrant color palette.

The character designs range from sensible (Ryu wears traditional karate garb, and Balrog is an obvious caricature of a younger Mike Tyson) to the completely ridiculous (Rufus is a morbidly obese American biker/kung fu master and one of the fastest characters in the game). There are an incredible number of face-faults and exaggerated reactions each character performs, making the game even more similar to a living cartoon. These characters are generally fun in nature, but might be too silly for someone who favors more realistic visuals in his or her games.

Complementing these gameplay and design elements is a standard set of gameplay modes and loads of extra features. There are both local and online multiplayer options, and both run as smoothly as one could hope. The single-player options are less impressive, with only typical arcade, survival and time trial modes present. Arcade is the game’s story-driven sequence of fights, with occasional cut-scenes in both Japanese anime and in-game 3-D styles. The stat-tracking for online multiplayer is incredibly detailed, providing detailed character use, win/loss and gameplay preferences information. Both the Japanese and English audio tracks are available to the player, with the option to customize either language to specific characters.

Street Fighter IV might not be for the player who does not like traditional fighting games. SF IV is perhaps the best game of its kind in recent years, but it won’t turn haters into enthusiasts. The cartoon-like visuals and unimpressive single-player options also could be turn-offs to some gamers. Personally, the most frustrating part of playing Street Fighter IV is the incredibly difficult computer opponents. Playing against superior human opponents is one thing, but losing repeatedly to the game’s unfair final boss gets old. The “Very Easy” difficulty setting is, in fact, not very easy. Stick with “Easiest.”

Some “hardcore” fans of fighting games might not enjoy certain aspects of Street Fighter IV as well — the game plays at a medium clip, and plays more slowly than the Turbo editions of Street Fighter II. Fans of the series might not approve of some changes made, notably the 3-D visuals, which have never been successful for the franchise, and specific character selection. No characters from Street Fighter III are playable, and the new characters might not appeal to specific fans.

Overall, Street Fighter IV is incredibly fun. I am admittedly a longtime Street Fighter fan and feel that SF IV may be the best way to enjoy the series for both veterans and neophytes. It’s probably a good idea to play before you pay, but Street Fighter IV is in a tier all its own.

Whenever director Gus Van Sant ventures into mainstream filmmaking his works get noticed. His most recent film, Milk, was nominated for eight Oscars, including Best Director and Picture. His 1997 film, Good Will Hunting, garnered similar attention from the Academy. His remake of Psycho received a considerably different response, but that shouldn’t be held against him. Despite the accolades (and insults) inspired by the previously mentioned films, it is Van Sant’s independent work that deserves the most discussion and enthusiasm. His 1991 film My Own Private Idaho is a compelling and original part of Van Sant’s diverse filmography.

Idaho follows Mike (River Phoenix), a narcoleptic hustler, and his friend, Scott (Keanu Reeves) — the wayward son of the mayor of Portland — who also turns the occasional trick though he stands to inherit a great deal of money from his wealthy father. One day the pair sets off to find Mike’s mother, who deserted him at an early age. Their travels take them across the western U.S. and Italy, where Mike and Scott encounter a host of idiosyncratic friends and “temporary employers,” including their colorful mentor, Bob Pigeon (William Richert). Throughout the film Mike struggles with his unrequited love for Scott, Scott comes to terms with the fate his father has laid out for him and both young men endure loss.

The film is a combination of an original story by Van Sant and a loose adaptation of Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1 about Scott (Prince Hal), Bob (Falstaff) and Scott’s father (King Henry IV). Some episodes within Idaho do stand out as particularly Shakespearean, but the film remains a cohesive whole.

Idaho strikes a balance between surreal comedy and melodrama. As befits a film in which the protagonist suffers from a sleep disorder, much of Idaho seems to take place in a dream world of Mike’s imagining. Documentary and home video style footage is inter-cut with the main action, the main characters have a conversation from their places on the covers of nudie magazines and the gang of hustlers commits a robbery in a scene straight out of Chimes at Midnight. Scenes of a heavier nature are interspersed with those that are strangely comical. Mike never achieves any of his goals. He makes a disturbing discovery about his family but his mother’s location remains a mystery. Scott doesn’t just reject Mike romantically, he marries an Italian girl and abandons Mike in Europe. Mike ends where he began — standing alone on a highway in the middle of nowhere.

Idaho isn’t just exceptional for its fantastic story, but for its performances as well. Before his untimely death in 1993, River Phoenix was considered one of the most sought-after and talented young actors in Hollywood. His performance is nuanced, three-dimensional and heartfelt. Idaho is also one of the few films in which Keanu Reeves doesn’t, well, suck. Just as in Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure and The Matrix films, Reeve’s unique oddness and relatively monotone delivery suit Scott perfectly. Scott is pretending to be a dangerous street dweller, just as Reeves is pretending to be a serious actor. It works.

My Own Private Idaho is a truly original and entertaining film. Since its release, Gus Van Sant has gone on to make ten more feature films, some better, some much, much worse, but none of them are quite like Idaho.

Stepping into the Oval Office, Barack Obama had the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression handed to him. After barely a month in office, President Obama has formulated an economic stimulus and recovery plan to attempt to save the nation’s economy from complete ruin.

This plan includes allocating billions of dollars to different projects around the country, increasing our national debt past its current ten trillion dollar status. Members of both parties in the House and Senate have criticized the plan, especially over its size and the allocation of the money.

Here at The University, many students have been following the recovery package’s progression. The following are samples of University students’ thoughts on the plan.

JOHN SWEENEY, COMMERCE 2009

Fourth-year Commerce student John Sweeney has mixed feelings about the bailout plan. While he noted that “we need something,” Sweeney explained that he wishes “there was a more immediate spending bill” because much of the funds will not go into the system until 2010.

Although many in Congress, as well as ordinary citizens, have argued that Obama’s plan should not be passed because of our already steep national debt, Sweeney does not agree with this fully.

“The national debt is only 75 percent of our Gross Domestic Product, [which is] not nearly as high as after World War II, and only about half of that in the beginning ‘90s,” he said. Sweeney feels that the United States’ debt needs to be compared in the percentage scale, not the numbers scale.

In reference to where the money has been allocated, Sweeney stated that a lot of the money has been wasted. He believes that the package would do more good if more was allocated to infrastructure and less to one-time projects.

Sweeney stated that the job market will be about the same as it has been for current Commerce School students, although he feels that the plan will help to preserve jobs that have not been lost yet.

Sweeney, a graduating Commerce student, considers himself lucky to have found a job working for J.P. Morgan Chase in New York next year.

ERIC MOSTER, COMMERCE 2009

Fourth-year Commerce student and President of the Sales and Trading Group at McIntire, Eric Moster stated, “Everything indicates it is time to take bolder, more dramatic steps.”

Moster commented that Obama’s plan will be good in the short run, but borrowing money from future generations will leave trillions of dollars for current students to pay back someday. Due to this, Moster does not believe that this plan is truly in the best interest of the country.

Although Moster does not approve of handing the debt to the University students’ generation, he believes it will help stimulate the job market, creating an economy in which employers will be willing to hire.

Regarding the allocation of the bailout money, Moster agrees with Obama in that it is beneficial to direct money toward discovering alternative energy, which will help fuel the United States in the future, while creating jobs in the present.

Moster recognized that the national debt is of concern with the package, yet acknowledged that the United States has never completely eliminated its debt.

“People talk about how the U.S. debt is huge, but to put it in perspective, in relative to GDP, it is less than 100 percent, [which is] less than other countries,” stated Moster. He continued, “In the short term, this one decision won’t bankrupt the country.”

Overall, Moster believes Obama’s recovery package is “helping people who need it the most without letting the people who caused the problem get off free.” 

JAMES LINVILLE, COLLEGE 2011

Second-year College student James Linville has followed Obama’s recovery plan closely. He stated that the stimulus plan was necessary, but added his concern that University students, as taxpayers, “are eventually going to be paying [for the plan].”

Due to this, Linville believes that this generation of students “needs to make sure [the money] is spent with our own interest in mind and not just handed out based on government interest.”

Linville said that he feels that the government has done a good job so far in allocating the funds to companies that need it, but with the remaining $190 billion dollars left to be allocated, there needs to be increased transparency in order to avoid problems.

Many compare Obama’s recovery plan to Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. Linville said that the stimulus plan and the New Deal “have both come with unprecedented government oversight and regulation in the market.” He noted the risks of such a situation, adding, “We need to make sure [the money] is not held in the power of the few in government.”

Linville does not believe that this stimulus package will affect current University students in a positive manner, stating that this generation is “being borrowed against. We’re going to be paying back in trades and inflation.”

Linville also feels that this plan hurts our generation because it will not make it any easier for University students to find jobs in the next few years.

Although Linville has his doubts about the plan, he concluded that “if we can manage to rid the bill as much as we can of special interests, we’ll look back on it as something that had to happen and we did our best.”

LESLIE ALPERT, COMMERCE 2010

Third-year Commerce student Leslie Alpert believes that there are some promising aspects to Obama’s plan.

“This is a start,” she said. “It is by no means a cure-all answer.”

Alpert noted that the money going directly to the cities and states will help create jobs quickly, in turn stimulating the dwindling economy. The state projects to which the government is giving money, such as public works projects, must be started within six months, she said. This will give the state a timeline for creating new jobs, once again giving thousands of workers steady paychecks.

While Obama’s plan is sending money to public works projects, helping many Americans, Alpert said that she believes America is in need of a bank plan because the current proposal is unable to deal with the state of banks.

In reference to the University, Alpert stated that since the state of Virginia will be given money, many of the cuts given to the University may be reimbursed.

Despite her optimism regarding Obama’s plan, Alpert does not feel that it will necessarily help Commerce students with a financial or banking focus.

Alpert said that “internships are the key to getting a job in the finance world.” In today’s economy, many internships, especially paid internships, are hard to come by because employers have no room in their budgets to take on extra employees.

Although the recovery package may not help Alpert directly, she believes that Obama is on the correct path for saving America’s economy. She noted that Obama is smart for pursuing this plan in small steps because if he immediately asked for the trillions of dollars necessary to save the economy, there would be a backlash from both Democrats and Republicans.

Alpert also recognizes that as a new president, there is only so much Obama can accomplish in a such a short period, stating that Obama is “doing the best he can with what he’s got.”

Alpert said that Obama’s greatest accomplishment in this plan will be helping Americans regain faith in the economic system.
“People today have no faith in the economy and are saving every penny they have,” she said. Yet, she continued, if Obama’s plan succeeds, Americans will regain confidence in the economy, stimulating them to buy more and in turn fixing the retail market.

Although this plan is only a start, Alpert expressed optimism.

“Hopefully it will lead to a full blown, stimulating economy.”

Many amateur investors — including college students — have been watching the stock market plummet during the last five months with increasing dismay. For those of us looking to make quick profits (or even faster losses), however, late 2009 may be the year to buy a few shares of some well-known blue chip companies.

Before reading further, readers should know that most financial models for stock prices are no longer accurate predictors of future price trends. Furthermore, students should undertake any stock-trading strategies for 2009 with the knowledge that any broad-based recovery in equity markets will most likely not take place until 2010, at the earliest. Thus, any trading strategies should focus on buying and selling stocks within a matter of days or weeks. Classic “buy and hold” strategies are inappropriate for the current market.

After taking into account these adverse market conditions, the amateur analyst should then focus on a small basket of stocks to buy and sell during the next few months. The following are several company stocks that have exhibited very mild price swings during the last four months.

Intel Corporation (INTC): Intel Corporation is the world’s largest producer of semiconductors and microprocessors, the microchips that power the operations of personal computer systems. Intel controls nearly 80 percent of the market for microprocessors and had over $12 billion in cash and cash equivalents on hand at the end of 2008. Thus, there is little chance of the company suffering from the credit crunch. With the company’s steady source of revenue and little debt, Intel’s stock price should stay in a narrow range during the next few months. Investors should not see the value of their investment drop precipitously or increase very quickly — a fair outcome in this market environment.

Proctor & Gamble (PG): The maker of everything from Ivory Soap to Pringles chips has very stable sources of revenue. The company’s stock price continues to gradually fall, but investors have confidence in the company’s leadership. Given its blue chip status, P&G stock should be among the first to rebound into recovery. Also, the company has a very large dividend, and each investor will earn 40 cents per share invested every three months. Given the company’s long-term stability and growth, the downsides to holding Proctor & Gamble’s stock are few.

JPMorgan Chase (JPM):  JPMorgan Chase was one of the few U.S. banks to improve its market position as a result of the financial crisis. At the end of 2008, JPMorgan emerged as the number one Mergers & Acquisitions adviser in Europe for the first time. At home, the company acquired rival Bear Stearns and took over the bank deposits of Washington Mutual. In addition, it received funds from the U.S. government to help cover potential loan losses. Although many analysts forecast a difficult year for banks in 2009, JPMorgan may be among the best situated to weather the storm. Buying a few shares of this company might make a worthy investment.

Kroger Co. (KR): At a time when many food and retail companies are struggling, Kroger is working to perfect its customer loyalty program. Charlottesville’s local grocery store is in fact well positioned to expand beyond its Southern niche as rivals falter in light of slowing sales and too much debt. For those of us looking to make an investment in the local economy and in a well-run grocery store chain, Kroger seems like a perfect fit.

Students who buy and sell stocks should have a broad understanding of both economic trends and the financial make-up of the companies in which they invest. For those of us willing to take risks in 2009 or who trade stocks as a hobby, however, buying shares in companies with relatively stable cash flows such as Intel, Proctor and Gamble, JPMorgan Chase and Kroger may turn out to be a worthy investment.

Please note: the author does not own any stock in any of the companies mentioned in this article. The Cavalier Daily does not take responsibility for readers’ investment gains or losses. Please invest wisely.

Andrew’s column runs biweekly Thursdays. He can be reached at a.golden@cavalierdaily.com.

As any caffeine addict knows, morning coffee is simply not negotiable. If you ever are unlucky enough to catch me early in the morning in Alderman without a cup in hand, I suggest running the other direction. And, despite seeing at least 10 Oprah specials on saving money by making coffee at home, I still remain fairly true to my Starbucks reliance. From the line there this morning, it seems safe to assume that other college students feel similarly.

With rising concerns about future American consumption habits, Starbucks executives would be pleased to see our own Corner location full of customers. The University of Virginia demographic is exactly what Starbucks executives are anxiously trying to predict. When the economy is crashing, which Americans will still need their venti caffè mochas?

Since 2006, Starbucks stock has seen a steady decline. In 2006, at the peak of the housing market’s rise, the stock went for around $40. Today, it lingers around $10 . The peaks and troughs of the Dow on a whole seem to be anticipated well by Starbucks’ stock. During the last four years, Starbucks’ stock price has followed the market trend almost exclusively. Economists call this the “latte index,” and it tends to be a good measure of the health of our economy.

As a product, Starbucks is well designated to be a market indicator. Starbucks sales are inexorably tied to the expendable income of the middle class, and thus a large chunk of American purchasing power. Even Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz would tell you that Starbucks is not completely about the coffee. You could easily get a cup from the local convenience store or McDonalds. Instead, Starbucks sells luxury, and a specific brand of social status. It sells an experience to the consumer who spends time in its stores. This experience is known in the Starbucks business model as a “third place.” Its customers want a community meeting place, separate from work and home, which appeals to specialized sensibilities. The logic of the latte index is clear: If customers can afford $4 mochas, then the economy must be doing well.

It is hard, however, to ignore the consistent bad news of Wall Street, and the latte index has continued to be an accurate indicator. Just as the rest of the economy has suffered extreme hits in the past months, Starbucks too has experienced problems. The company already has begun making changes to its corporate strategy that served it well in better times. With less money to spend on luxury goods such as venti mochas, McDonalds and other providers of cheap caffeine are seeing a boom in their revenues. In hopes of capturing a demographic with less expendable income, Starbucks has started providing a line of instant coffee. The stores also introduced a new breakfast deal, despite Schultz’s previous fears that it would suggest a fast food chain. Starbucks claims that these business decisions were already planned well before the economic downturn, and that they are part of a larger shift toward making the coffee affordable to all.

So what does the latte index say about the economic future of 2009? It is not a promising story. Starbucks has noticed significant declines in revenue during the past few months, including around nine percent last quarter. For many, the days of frivolous spending on luxury coffee have disappeared. A January study about coffee consumption found that 60 percent of Americans have cut back on their Starbucks trips. Starbucks already has limited the amount of new stores it will open in an effort to mitigate the effects of lost revenue. It also has cut down on corporate spending, forbidding salary raises in 2009 and selling its new $45 million jet. It may be that these reactions, however, are not enough for the coffee giant. Analysts see Starbucks facing an even more significant cultural shift, which will force the company to adapt its product and philosophy as a whole.

The future of Starbucks may depend on how well the company is able to address those shifts. For Starbucks to keep the demand for luxury coffee strong, it will have to keep convincing Americans that they cannot live without their mochas, or develop a new source of attraction. But as a strong believer in the economic strength of Starbucks, I can only be excited to see what they come up with next.

Lauren’s column runs biweekly Thursdays. She can be reached at l.palmer@cavalierdaily.com.

A student taking a class in the University’s Department of Spanish, Italian and Portuguese can now rightfully blame his A- on someone else. This past October, department faculty received a memo instituting a new grading scale intended to standardize grading within the department and combat grade inflation; a student who in the past would have received an A for a 95 in a Spanish course will now receive an A- because the A+ has been eliminated entirely. If the Department of Spanish, Italian and Portuguese has in fact identified a problem of grade inflation within its undergraduate courses, the Office of the Dean of the College — not the department — should be addressing the issue so that a broader solution can be reached without disadvantaging students in any particular department.

The Department of Spanish, Italian and Portuguese implemented its new grading scale to replace a system in which two different scales were used for upper- and lower-level courses and rightly standardized the way students within the department are assessed. The new grading scale also takes a stab at curtailing grade inflation, making it harder to receive an A in any course. But the department should recognize that language classes — especially lower-level courses — provide one of the only settings in which many students legitimately can receive high grades by mastering basic material. Students should not be punished for meeting the objective standards that lower-level language courses necessarily entail.

If the department did identify a localized problem of grade inflation, though, it is right to attempt to correct the problem. The way the department sought to address the issue, however, disadvantaged Spanish, Italian and Portuguese majors relative to other students in the College. Majors in this department could now find their grades artificially lowered, while students outside of the department will see no such impact upon their GPAs. This could lead to a host of other problems impacting everything from consideration for honor societies to job searches to graduate program admissions.

Any attempt to regulate grading scales or to contend with the issue of grade inflation logically should begin at the top. If grade inflation is an issue in this particular department, it is likely to be an issue in other departments as well. The Office of the Dean of the College is well positioned to take more unified action on the grading standards for affected departments, which could better prevent inter-departmental grading discrepancies. Such an initiative should verify that the high grades within a department reflect students’ mastery of the course content and should not punish students in departments where grades are rightly high. Inconsistent grading standards could cost the University credibility and cause confusion if one department’s grading scale does not reflect the same standards held by the rest of the College.

The College also is better poised to collect global feedback about student performance and the fairness of grading within different departments. In making its grading scale change, the Department of Spanish, Italian and Portuguese made a unilateral decision based on the recommendation of its faculty. More sources of information — input from current and former students, as well as feedback from graduate programs requiring foundational knowledge acquired in undergraduate courses — could shed light on whether grade inflation actually is a problem at the University. If students’ grades do not reflect their working knowledge of a subject, the College should consider other solutions to what would then be a much larger problem. Reducing a student’s chance of getting an A in a course does not ensure the information is being presented and evaluated appropriately. What’s more important is getting to the root of the problem: establishing that all students are assessed fairly and held accountable for learning the course material.

Considering the relative indifference of students towards the spring elections, one would think that Monday’s results would please those of us who long for more student involvement in choosing the people who run Student Council, the Honor Committee, and the University Judiciary Committee. Turnout was huge for a University election: 48 percent of the College voted as opposed to 36 percent in 2008; a stunning 59 percent of first years participated, up from just 41 percent a year ago. However, there is a simple explanation as to why so many people came out to vote in this election: the honor single sanction reform amendment referendum. In fact, the turnout from previous years shows that without referenda on the University’s honor code, students don’t come out to vote in the same numbers. The fact honor referenda have such a marked effect on turnout demonstrates that while the University and its students constantly glorify student self-governance, in reality there is general indifference towards deciding who will represent students in the bureaucratic process due to the consistent disconnect between the student body and its own administration.

In the last seven elections, whenever there was no referendum that could affect the fate of the single sanction, the turnout in elections was far lower than in years with them. In 2003, University Board of Elections records show that the turnout was 27.5 percent while last year’s was 28 percent (neither counts the School of Continuing & Professional Studies). On the other hand, in 2006 and 2007, turnout was 36 percent, and in 2005 a whopping 40 percent came out to vote (the record high since UBE started recording turnout numbers). Each one of those years featured referenda dealing with the honor code, whose results altered the wording of the code’s third criteria from “seriousness” to “triviality” and shot down many efforts to change or work towards changing the single sanction. This year, turnout was 38 percent, following this trend. Naturally, this data highlights the importance of the honor code in the minds of University students.

Yet a closer look at this year’s numbers reveals how much less students care about the people who will represent them than the single sanction. Whereas 7,727 people voted on this year’s honor referendum, 6,600 voted for the Student Council presidency. Nevertheless, that being an always competitive position (particularly this year), another significant position, Vice President for Organizations, saw only 5,736 voters, nearly 2,000 less than the honor referendum. Fourth-year Engineering student Mike Stefanelli commented that he didn’t vote on many positions because he didn’t “want to be an uninformed voter.” Other students have told me similarly. While it is admirable to not want to affect an election that one doesn’t feel qualified to vote for, the fact is that students should be making an effort to become informed. It’s not hard to read up on the positions of candidates on their Web sites or Facebook; the same goes for visiting the University Judiciary Committee’s or Student Council’s Web sites to get a better grasp of what they do here at the University.

The problem is that even if apathetic students were to go check out the specifics of the Honor Committee or some individual running for College representative to Student Council, they would still feel relatively detached from the process of student self-governance. Aside from CIOs, where this does go on, the University Judiciary Committee, the Honor Committee, and Student Council exist in their own bubble in the eyes of most University students. The fact so many feel uninformed isn’t just their fault: these representatives often fail to accomplish much that affects students’ daily lives, making elections for these positions unimportant to a majority of University students. For example, does the College Readership Program really impact many students when most of them get their news from online sources, including the ones that are coming in paper form as a part of the program? These representatives also end up forming something of a mostly benign aristocracy, which we can see with the common view of the Honor Committee as this big, secretive operation. If these vital parts of student self-governance at the University, who determine funding for student groups or judge who has committed honor or criminal offenses in the school’s eyes, continue to be perceived as lacking in accountability and openness, the general malaise towards anything not related to the honor code will only grow larger, compromising one of this school’s core values.

There is more to student self-governance than the honor code. However, much of the student body only exerts itself over alterations of the honor system, exhibiting indifference towards deciding who should be our representatives on the University Judiciary Committee, the Honor Committee, and Student Council. But this is a two-way failure as the governing institutions seem incapable of transforming important parts of student life, leading to voter apathy year-in and year-out. Only serious reforms and major changes to our current system that encourage greater student involvement can counteract this disturbing trend, like more meaningful interaction between Student Council and student groups or opening up the Honor process to more public scrutiny. Hopefully, these kind of changes will come about in the near future; otherwise, there will be only further disinterest in student self-governance at the University, destroying one of its defining tenets.

Geoffrey Skelley’s column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at g.skelley@cavalierdaily.com.