Latest News

Out on the Town, Student Life

Halloweekend unmasked: How McGill students celebrated

by Jeanne Le Roux, Simona Culotta on

More in Out on the Town:

This year, Halloween fell on a Thursday, which set the tone for a thrilling and festive weekend to follow. For McGill students—especially those recovering from midterms—Halloweekend served as a reward, with festivities ranging between frat events, parties, club outings, and other fun gatherings. With the large range of options to celebrate, and Montreal’s vivacious nightlife, students ended up with packed schedules for the holiday, making the most of their weekend. 

The Tribune compared and contrasted students from different years’ plans for the weekend. When we asked a group of first-years to give us the rundown, it seemed that they were leaving the weekend open to many different possibilities. For example, Nava Menon, U0 Music, shared her indecisiveness.

“There’s a couple things floating around—maybe we’re going to try to get into one of the frats because we know one of the people, but we don’t know if they’ll let us in because we don’t have tickets—so maybe we’ll stand in line for a club, or just end up at a bar,” she said.  

On a similar note, Emma Edwards, U0 Arts, who had Halloweekend plans with Menon, expressed how easy it would be to find something to do. 

“It’s such a clubbing area—there’s not much else to do,” Edwards stressed. “We always end up going to Café Campus anyway.”

Yet, Halloweekend also seemed to be a series of events difficult to coordinate, especially for those living in dorm residences, unable to throw their own party. However, while the first years may not have their own places to host a house party or something else for the holiday, Montreal doesn’t make it difficult to find other exciting activities. With Boul. Saint-Laurent expected to be packed with Halloween revellers, the celebration extends far beyond McGill’s campus.

While going to clubs or bars is a first-year rite of passage, for upper-year students, hosting or attending house parties is an integral aspect of Halloween festivities. Dylan Jacques, U3 Desautels, said he and his friends are “hosting a party on Friday and going to a friend’s party on Saturday.” 

As most students live in their own apartments, more casual and homely functions seem to have a bigger appeal. Dania Corbeil, U4 Arts, expressed that feeling in an interview with The Tribune. 

“House parties allow you not to worry about how much effort to put into costumes or what you are supposed to look like, since they create an environment where everyone feels comfortable,” she said.

Even though some upper-year McGillians still enjoy clubbing as it is a considerable part of Montreal’s vibrant nightlife, the consensus remains that house parties are the best way to celebrate this spooky season. Others, such as Charlotte Sovka, U1 Arts, decided that getting the best out of both worlds was also an option.

“[I plan on going] clubbing on Thursday since it’s the actual Halloween day and attending a house party on Friday and Saturday,” she noted. 

In addition to going out, students also enjoy partaking in the Halloween tradition of giving out candy to the trick-or-treaters of their neighbourhood. Corbeil mentioned how she bought candy but is “not sure that kids are going to stop by.” Although student neighbourhoods like Milton Parc or the Plateau may not be ideally suited for welcoming younger children—since they are mostly populated by university students—McGillians still take pleasure in being ready for the possibility.  

Each year, as housing situations, friend groups, and personal preferences change, Halloweekend plans look a little different for every student. From freshmen going to bars, clubs, or frats, to upper-year students organizing personal Halloween house parties, this year’s Halloween was characterized by diversity in options. Regardless of your Halloweekend itinerary, nothing compares to Montreal during the spooky season.

Laughing Matters, Opinion

Café Campus ticket scalping and the real cost of FOMO

by Ellen Lurie on

More in Laughing Matters:

It’s Halloween day, 2024. You and all your friends are in pursuit of what may be the pinnacle of McGill first-year social life: Halloween Thirsty Thursday at Café Campus. 

The tickets are bound to sell out as soon as they drop, and to make matters worse, sales are only going live at noon. However, your plan is foolproof. You and your friends will all log on to the Café Campus website and simultaneously attempt to buy the tickets in bulk. That way, even if the online queue is disgustingly long, someone is bound to secure the highly sought-after tickets. The clock strikes 12. Across the McGill residences, first-years and upperclassmen alike are refreshing their browsers. A 504 error later and your place in the queue is being calculated. Your heart drops. You are number 2,381 in line. 

This Halloween, Café Campus’ tickets sold out almost immediately, making attendance at this coveted location incredibly exclusive. But, how much would //you// pay in the face of FOMO? Tickets for Halloween Night One were already valued at a higher price than the usual club entry fee, with tickets being sold for $30 CAD at the door instead of the $20 CAD online ticket. Yet, clearly—and perhaps unsurprisingly—thousands of students were prepared to spend these inflated amounts. 

What //is// surprising are the prices students were offering in McGill residence group chats. Within an hour of Café tickets selling out, students were reselling theirs at extreme prices ranging from roughly $50 CAD to over $200 CAD. Of course, the unrealistically expensive tickets were likely not purchased at the prices proposed by their sellers, but a broader truth still remains: McGill students are practicing extreme, unethical ticket scalping.

Although it may sound silly in writing, Café Campus is a space many McGill first-years flock to when seeking to make friends and experience Montréal nightlife for the first time. When tickets are increasingly financially difficult to obtain, economic barriers fracture the student body between those who can afford the steep resale prices and those who cannot. Ticket scalpers capitalize on this reality; it’s Café Campus’s status as a popular social space that enables exorbitant markups.

What McGill students may not know, however, is that a ticket-scalping side hustle can be illegal in Quebec. While most Canadian provinces require ticket scalpers to file a T2125 tax form for profits from ticket reselling, Quebec has stricter regulations. The Office of Consumer Protection in Quebec has prohibited the resale of tickets at prices above their face value since 2012, as per Bill 25. Those who violate the law will face fines between $1,000 CAD to $2,000 CAD for first-time offences and up to $200,000 CAD for repeated violations. For students who have been making a habit of ticket scalping, this legislation should serve as a terrifying deterrent.

So, will McGill students be attacked with lawsuits and charged with fines? It depends. Café Campus ticket scalpers are dancing along an interesting loophole. Currently, the resale of tickets at inflated prices is not punishable by law if the transaction occurs between two consumers. Many websites like StubHub take advantage of this legal loophole, describing their website as a platform for inter-consumer ticket sales, much like AirBnB is a platform for inter-consumer house or apartment rentals. In this way, sites manage to serve as vendors for illegally price-gouged tickets without facing fines. The question of whether a residence hall Instagram group chat violates the concept of the two-consumer rule is unclear. It will likely come as no shock that there is no Canadian legal precedent for a Café Campus Halloween ticket scalping frenzy. 

Still, regardless of the potential legal repercussions that ticket scalpers may face, McGill students should feel a social—or even moral—responsibility to avoid the harmful practice. 

And yes, I am bitter that I didn’t get a Café Campus ticket.

McGill, News

McGill and other Quebec universities call for exemption from potential cap on international students

by Daniel Miksha on

More in McGill:

On Nov. 5, McGill President and Vice-Chancellor Deep Saini, accompanied by the heads of other major Quebec universities and CEGEPs, spoke at a public consultation at the National Assembly of Quebec regarding the province’s proposed Bill 74. If passed, the bill would allow the provincial government to put a cap on the number of international students that can be admitted to Quebec universities and CEGEPs. 

McGill, alongside Université de Montréal, Université de Sherbrooke, and Université Laval, called to be exempted from the proposed cap. They argued it would hurt Quebec’s competitiveness as a centre for research, and restrict universities’ autonomy by granting the government control over the number of international students admitted, and the programs they could enroll in.

In the past decade, the number of international students in Quebec has risen from 50,000 to nearly 120,000, which the government says has contributed to a strain on public services and real estate. In response, the Quebec government proposed Bill 74, titled ‘An Act mainly to improve the regulatory scheme governing international students.’

The bill would amend the Québec Immigration Act, allowing the government to enforce a cap on the number of international students admitted to higher education institutions. The bill would also allow the government to determine the number of international students at any given institution, and even accept students based on their program and mandate certain courses.

The National Assembly of Quebec held a public consultation regarding the bill on Nov. 5, in which Saini and other university leaders argued that certain universities ought to be exempted from the cap.

“At McGill, the percentage and actual number of international students has remained more or less constant over the past 10 years,” Saini said at the consultation. “We’re not responsible for the huge increase [in the number] of international students here in Quebec.”*

In a joint statement presented at the consultation, the universities argued that placing a cap on the number of international students accepted would stifle research output and jeopardize institutions’ ability to retain student talent. 

“In its current form, Bill 74 jeopardizes our universities’ ability to attract highly talented international students, further reducing our capacity to attract high-calibre professors and researchers,” the statement read. “The autonomy of universities enables them to be the place where disciplines and discoveries emerge, with measurable long-term benefits [….] The introduction of a bill whose regulations could limit or constrain universities threatens this autonomy, which has proved highly beneficial to Quebec in the past.”*

The universities acknowledged that some higher-education institutions may have accepted more international students than their communities could absorb. However, they urged the government to pass more nuanced legislation to prevent harming research institutions through a generalized cap.

“The problem is there are some bad actors in our system,” Saini said in the consultation. “The government has all the tools that it can possibly need to solve that problem. We just have to be surgical. We don’t give medicine that will have a whole bunch of side effects.”*

Jennifer Elrick, Associate Professor of Sociology at McGill and Chair of Multiculturalism in the department, told The Tribune that she believes that Quebec’s attempt to regulate international student numbers is a logical extension of the control the government already has over permanent economic immigration. 

“[Temporary immigration] numbers have been going up against the backdrop of domestic policy areas like housing, and healthcare infrastructure, all sort of being retooled and starved for funding since the 90s,” Elrick said. “No one really had their eye on what it meant to be bringing in more people while neglecting healthcare, education, infrastructure, and other areas of society.” 

However, Elrick does not believe that international students are the primary source of strain on Quebec’s public services and housing market. 

“Tinkering with immigration levels, be they international students, temporary foreign workers, [or] permanent residents, is not going to solve deeply-rooted and complicated domestic policy issues like housing, education, climate change, [or] the economy,” she said.
*These quotes were translated from French.

News, SSMU

Fall referendum CKUT fee increase passes, SSMU Base Fee increase fails for fifth time

by Amelia H. Clark, Olivia Ardito on

More in News:

The Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) closed the Fall 2024 Referendum polls on Nov. 8. Just 17.2 per cent of downtown campus undergraduate students cast a vote, two percent less than that of the Winter 2024 referendum. Six out of eight of the referendum’s ticket motions passed with a majority vote, including fee increases for CKUT, the Quebec Public Interest Research Group at McGill (QPIRG-McGill), the Ambassador Fund, alongside renewals for the SSMU Legal Essential Fee, Community Engagement Fee, and the Equity Fund. Students rejected the request for a Creation of a Contribution to Support Francophone Affairs along with the SSMU Base Fee increase, which has been denied five times since 2019.

The SSMU Base Fee increase was rejected with 58.1 per cent of voters casting a “No” vote. The motion sought to raise the semesterly fee that students pay for SSMU services by $14.68 CAD for full-time students to a total of $85.81 CAD and an increase of $7.22 CAD for part-time students to a total of $41.66 CAD. SSMU claimed the increase in funds would allow the organization to eliminate its current deficit of between $400,000 to  $1.3 million CAD, and increase SSMUnion members’ salaries to reflect inflation. Without the added increase, SSMU stated that the organization will have to cut staff as well as funding for clubs, initiatives, programs, and student financial assistance. 

In a written statement to The Tribune, SSMU President Dymetri Taylor explained that he believes the referendum question was rejected due to waning interest in the student union. 

“Frankly, I’m neutral about the results,” Taylor wrote. “I hope that this serves as a waking-up call that perhaps the SSMU needs to work on improving its relationship with the student population and showcase why it is a vital part of our university’s culture, which has been degraded in recent years.”

Voters also rejected the Creation of a Contribution to Support Francophone Affairs. A vote in favour would have support creating an opt-outable fee of $1.00 CAD per semester to support francophone clubs and translation services. The measure failed with 59.7 per cent of voters selecting “No.” Maëla Dube, the SSMU Francophone Affairs Commissioner, explained to The Tribune that current francophone groups receive little to no funding from SSMU. 

“I think [it] is a reflection of the experience of being francophone at an anglophone university in Quebec while also being a consequence of current governmental politics that make advocating for francophone rights and promoting the French language difficult,” Dube wrote.

While SSMU did not get some of the results it hoped for, many other organizations were successful in the referendum. CKUT, a campus and community radio station based at McGill, received its first fee increase since 2012, with 60 per cent of participating students voting “Yes.”

In a written statement to The Tribune, Madeline Lines, a representative for the radio station, relayed that CKUT staff, volunteers, and community members are “elated and relieved” with the result. 

“CKUT’s deficit will be eliminated, staff will receive a more livable wage, and the workshops, student jobs, and overall offerings the station will be able to offer will be expanded,” Lines wrote. “CKUT will be able to go from surviving to thriving with this result.” 

Voters also approved the Committee Engagement Fee Renewal with a 67.9 per cent “Yes” vote. The $0.72 CAD per semester opt-outable fee funds students and clubs at McGill, and seeks to give students autonomy to create events. 

SSMU Community Engagement Commissioner Nika Rovensky highlighted that the fee increase will help establish new initiatives, such as the creation of a free food pantry that seeks to address food insecurity on campus.

The QPIRG fee increase from $5.00 CAD to $6.75 CAD passed, with a 53.8 per cent “Yes” vote. The increased funding will help QPIRG maintain programs like its free textbook loan program, upkeeping its alternative library, and supporting independent research projects over the summer. 

“Passing this referendum ensures that we can strengthen the communities around us, and that we can support activists who fight for social change for the years to come,” the QPIRG team wrote to The Tribune.

The group also noted how significant this favourable vote is for them, especially considering students’ financial limitations.

“We don’t take it for granted that students have voted to increase our funding at a time of unprecedented inflation, when their own finances may be severely constrained,” QPIRG wrote. “We aim to give them back greater value than what they contributed to us.”

McGill, News, PGSS, SSMU

McGill governance meeting highlights: Week of Nov. 4-8

by Malika Logossou, Titouan Le Ster, Eliza Lee on

More in McGill:

Post-Graduate Students’ Society (PGSS) Nov. 6 Fall General Meeting

PGSS’s Fall General Meeting included key discussion points such as an update from the Quebec Student Union (QSU), a motion to share an Expression of Concern (EoC) on Palestine, and concerns from a Macdonald Campus student about parking and childcare services.

After Speaker Vibhuti Dikshit opened the meeting, Vice-President of the QSU Tania Michaud provided updates on the union’s campaigns to address food insecurity, student mental health, and financial aid. The QSU is an association that represents its member associations, such as PGSS, to the provincial government for improvements in student conditions. Michaud emphasized the need for more funding through the Quebec Research Fund. She also encouraged students to fill out the Quebec Provincial Survey on Student Mental Health in Higher Education and its Determinants.

Most of the meeting’s discussion centred around Motion 7.1: “Motion for the PGSS to share the recent Expression of Concern submitted by the McGill community.” This EoC, submitted by the McGill Graduate Students for Palestine, urges McGill to divest from companies complicit in Israel’s occupation of Palestine.

Andrew Carkner, a PhD candidate in chemical engineering, introduced the motion, stressing that divestment has been an effective tool for social change at McGill, citing South African apartheid as a historical precedent. Following a petition that gathered over 600 signatures, the EoC was submitted to McGill’s Committee on Sustainability and Social Responsibility for review. Through Motion 7.1, Carkner argued that PGSS members ought to know the content of this EoC.

During the discussion, Jonathan Hubermann and Eleane Hamburger, two Master’s students in experimental surgery, expressed concerns about the clarity and consistency of the motion. They argued that the document was vague in its terms, lacked proofs and definitions, and had spelling mistakes. The two advocated for the vote to be delayed to the next meeting so that people would have time to reexamine the motion.    

Nick Vieira, a PhD candidate in astrophysics, proposed amendments to the motion for it to reflect what he alleged should have been the version on the agenda. This included having “Palestine” in the motion’s title. He also raised concerns that PGSS had altered the language to “share the context” rather than directly distributing the EoC, which he viewed as diluting the motion’s intent. Eventually, the assembly voted to approve the amended motion put forth by Vieira, with 73 in favour and 10 against.

The meeting concluded with Macdonald Campus graduate student in Food Science Ekua Manful raising concerns about parking availability for students with dependents and the lack of childcare services on the satellite campus. PGSS executives said they would work with the Macdonald Campus Graduate Students’ Society to address these issues and invited Manful to contact the PGSS External Affairs Officer and Mac Campus Commissioner.

Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Nov. 7 Legislative Council meeting

The council’s fourth meeting of the semester began with reports presented by committees, executives, and councillors. Vice President (VP) Operations and Sustainability Meg Baltes announced her resignation, effective at the end of the semester. She noted that bi-elections for hers and the position of VP Student Life—vacant since Chloé Muñoz’s resignation on Oct. 29—are open.

The council moved on to debate four motions; the first was the Motion Regarding the SSMU Policy Against Antisemitism, presented by VP External Affairs Hugo-Victor Solomon. The motion aims to provide specific cultural, ethnic, and religiously sensitive measures to combat antisemitism for students. It also seeks to improve advocacy, communication, education, and trust between the SSMU, the McGill administration, and Jewish student groups. Solomon explained that consultation for the policy involved many actors including various Jewish student groups on campus. During the Q&A period of the meeting, he explained that he did not consult Israel on Campus (IOC) as the group had been deemed inactive by Muñoz per the SSMU’s Internal Regulations of Student Groups. Further, he explained that student groups involved in the consultations were strictly those who self identify as Jewish student organizations.  

Later on in the Q&A session, several council members expressed dissatisfaction with the proposed definition of antisemitism in the motion. It defined antisemitism as the discrimination against Jewish people or Jewish institutions, as well as conditions that marginalize Jews, hindering their ability to participate as equals in political, religious, cultural, economic, or social life.

Multiple executives disagreed that the definition was unsatisfactory. VP Internal Affairs Zeena Zahidah expressed that the policy was broad in order to encapsulate various Jewish student experiences and to provide swift action against antisemitism. 

In response, Music Senator Seraphina Crema Black put forth a motion to create a working group to amend the proposed policy which would include SSMU External Affairs and representatives from all interested McGill Jewish student groups. Her proposal sparked intense debates, with some believing the working group was necessary to come to a consensus while others saw it as a measure to shut down the conversation and leave the council without a working policy to address antisemitism. Some councillors pointed out that since no concrete amendments had been proposed, the motion should be passed. Ultimately, the council tabled the motion until the next meeting, cancelling Black’s motion. 

The council then moved on to the Motion Concernant la Politique des Affaires Francophones de l’AÉUM introduced by Solomon. The motion aims to promote the growth and endurance of the Francophone Affairs Committee (CAF). It also strives to provide funding to help cover the salary of the Commission des affaires francophones and part-time translators, and enhance accessibility to services for francophone students. Arts Councillor Rishi Kalaga asked to postpone the motion, saying he couldn’t understand it because it was in French, despite receiving it two weeks earlier. During the debate, some councillors expressed frustration that others had not taken the time to read the policy in advance of the meeting. Ultimately, the motion was approved.

Council also approved a motion on the Legislative Council Statement on Campus Emergency Measures 2024-2025, presented by VP University Affairs Abe Berglas. Additionally, Baltes introduced a motion to allow the VP Operations and Sustainability and President to fulfill the VP Student Life’s responsibility of leading the club committee until someone assumes the role. The motion passed unanimously.

McGill Senate and Board of Governors (BoG) Nov. 7 joint meeting

The Senate and BoG came together in the Faculty Club for the annual joint meeting of the governing bodies. The group focused on financial challenges the university faces arising from a number of pressures from the provincial government, including the tuition increases for out-of-province students, efforts to impose a cap on international students through Bill 74, and limits on funding for university capital projects. 

McGill President and Vice-Chancellor Deep Saini noted in his opening remarks that there is a perception that measures to adapt to these financial pressures are the responsibility of the senior administration team alone. 

“We need to shed that fallacy,” Saini said. “It’s our collective responsibility.” 

Addressing members of the Senate and BoG, Associate Provost (Teaching and Academic Planning) Christopher Buddle explored ways that the university could cut costs by reviewing the academic programs it offers. While some study areas are growing in enrollment—such as bioengineering and psychology—others are decreasing. Buddle drew attention to the fact that McGill currently offers roughly 415 degree programs, yet in Fall 2023, 73 programs had no students enrolled in them. He did not specify which programs. As Buddle emphasized, changing the university’s offering of programs would not necessarily mean slashing them. It could, however, mean retiring, restructuring, and even developing new programs.

In his presentation, Vice-President (Administration and Finance) Fabrice Labeau discussed how the university can begin to “transform” its delivery of services. Labeau stressed the need to increase efficiencies, such as through eliminating red tape—bureaucratic formalities that waste time—and to ensure that all members of the university community are working together to integrate changes. He also pointed to the imperative in increasing space efficiency on campus, especially since more McGill staff have begun to work from home since the pandemic. 

Then, Provost and Executive Vice-President (Academic) Christopher Manfredi gave a presentation on how McGill hopes to change its budget model to respond to financial challenges. Manfredi explained that McGill has an incremental budgetary model wherein all revenue flows to the Provost, who distributes the funds to different units. This stands in contrast to the Responsibility Centre Management or Activity-Based Budgeting models, wherein each unit controls its own budget and revenue. According to Manfredi, McGill will seek to move to a hybrid model, which may help incentivize faculties to develop new programs to attract more students and revenue. 

Following presentations from various members of the senior administration, there was a discussion period in which Senators and BoG members brought questions and concerns to the administrative team.

In his closing remarks, Saini highlighted the need to engage all members of the McGill community in addressing the university’s financial situation, including students. He also addressed the “trust deficit” between faculty and administration at the university and acknowledged the need for the latter “to restore it.” 

A previous version of this article stated that SSMU did not consult Israel on Campus (IOC) in its drafting of the SSMU Policy Against Antisemitism because of its previous inactivity. In fact, consultation did not occur because IOC had already been deemed inactive by former VP Student Life Chloé Muñoz before she left her role per the SSMU’s Internal Regulations of Student Groups. Further, IOC was not consulted because they are not a self-identified Jewish group. The Tribune regrets this error.

Behind the Bench, Soccer, Sports

Champion Reform: If it wasn’t broken, why’d they fix it?

by Reuben Noam on

More in Behind the Bench:

The 2024-2025 Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) Champions League (UCL) season saw the first dramatic change to the league’s format since the second group stage—introduced in 1999—was dropped in 2003. The UCL is an annual, elite showcase for Europe’s most storied clubs. Since its inaugural edition in 1955, the tournament has symbolized the pinnacle of club competition in the continent; it often achieves viewership numbers that events like the Super Bowl could only dream of. 

Traditionally, the UCL’s group-then-knockout-stage format offered a clear and competitive pathway for champions and top contenders across Europe, balancing a sense of exclusivity and inclusivity for top teams across nations. However, the 2024-2025 season brings a new chapter, to the chagrin of many. The UEFA Executive Committee’s is making a fundamental change to the UCL’s structure via the “Swiss model” league phase that will replace the classic group stage. In this rendition of the Swiss, 36 (up from 32) clubs will compete, facing eight opponents each. Subsequently, the total number of games will increase from 125 to 189, allowing for thousands of minutes of additional viewing time. The expansion raises an intriguing question: If the UCL is the “competition of champions,” what is the rationale behind adding more teams?

After these league-phase matches, the top eight teams will automatically qualify for the round of 16. Teams placing ninth to 24th will compete in a play-off round for a chance to reach the knockouts.

Effectively, the new format increases the number of games played by four in the pre-knockout phase. Clubs will now face more opponents, providing fans with marquee matchups earlier on. Meanwhile, the seeding system, wherein teams play two opponents from each “pot,” takes away features like home and away fixtures of the same matchup. However, it attempts to retain the essence of that idea by hosting four, an equal number, of both games. The Swiss model’s intention is clear: T1o generate a more varied and exciting group of matches, even if it means altering the established rhythm of qualification and impacting players’ ability to rest.

UEFA has laid out several motivations for these reforms, emphasizing a need to increase competitive diversity, boost revenue, and respond to the demands of elite clubs and fans alike. UEFA President Aleksander Čeferin has said that the changes maintain the league’s tradition of open competition by allowing more clubs to face Europe’s best. Some industry analysts suggest that investor and broadcast interests play a larger role in driving the reform than he lets on. With more games featuring top teams, UEFA and its broadcasting partners stand to see an increase in viewership and, by extension, advertising revenue. The expansion also helps satisfy elite clubs’ managements, which see the new format as both a financial incentive and a chance for their players to gain visibility in the European audience.

For fans, the Swiss model offers the chance to see their teams compete against a larger variety of European opponents. However, traditionalists may struggle to enjoy the drastically different new format. Players will certainly feel the effects of a longer, more intense competition—with the four extra games in the league phase, there is increased strain on top players, who already face packed domestic and international schedules. There’s also a heightened risk of fatigue and injuries, which could impact performance throughout the season.

UEFA’s investors and broadcasting partners, on the other hand, will benefit from the greater revenue potential that the format changes allow. The Swiss model is designed to increase viewership, and its fruition is aligned with UEFA’s goal of further solidifying the UCL as a commercial powerhouse, particularly in an era when sports broadcasting faces fierce competition from other mediums such as streaming platforms.

By expanding the number of teams and adopting a more inclusive approach, UEFA risks compromising the UCL’s identity and exclusivity as a “competition of champions.” The Swiss model undoubtedly introduces something fresh, but whether these changes ultimately enhance or dilute the League’s prestige is yet to be seen. As the upcoming season unfolds, only time will tell if the Champions League’s new format can live up to the legacy it seeks to build upon.

Commentary, Opinion

Major flaws in Montreal’s metro system leave McGill students at a loss

by Charlotte Theofanous on

More in Commentary:

Montreal’s metro system has long been the lifeline of student life, whether it’s a late night out at Café Campus or an early 8 a.m. at Leacock Building. The metro system connects many major universities: Concordia, Université de Québec à Montréal (UQÀM), Université de Montréal (UdeM), Université de Sherbrooke, and of course, McGill. It is fast, convenient, and affordable, enabling direct access to these educational institutions. In recent months, however, it has become apparent that it has many flaws, one of the more significant ones being frequent service delays. The causes of these holdups vary, from equipment failure to degrading infrastructure to leakages. Some of these delays last minutes or hours, but others are far more drastic, lasting weeks with no clear end in sight. Serious measures must be taken to enhance the functioning and reliability of Montreal’s public transportation system, for the sake of McGill students and the community at large.

A prime example of this is the ongoing shutdown of the St-Michel station on the Blue Line due to degraded concrete. Though this station is on the far end of the Blue Line, far from any downtown universities, it still affects those Montreal students living far from campus, as well as the many community members who also rely on public transportation. As a result of this station closure, Montreal is urging the province of Quebec to take action on this matter and increase funding for public transit to $560 million CAD per year, a significant jump from the current annual projected sum of $240 million CAD.  

Though there have been mixed reactions to this demand for increased funding, the overall consensus is that the metro system needs significant improvement. Denis Martin, mayor of Deux-Montagnes, agrees that the city has waited far too long for changes to be made. Geneviève Guilbault, Quebec’s Minister of Transport and Sustainable Mobility, also acknowledges that service must be improved. Despite these high-level discussions and shared concerns, the reality remains stark: Montreal’s metro system faces budget cuts rather than the vital funding it needs. Students everywhere, myself included, cannot afford to keep arriving late for lectures or missing them altogether due to circumstances out of our control.

McGill students, many of whom depend on public transit to reach campus, face increasingly unreliable commutes with few alternative transportation options. McGill must play a role in advocating for its students and pushing for better services, by collaborating with the Societé de Transport de Montréal (STM) on initiatives to ensure transportation accessibility for students. The distribution of temporary taxi or Uber vouchers in times of STM system failures could be implemented, to guarantee that students can still arrive on campus in an affordable and timely manner. Alternatively, McGill could allow for flexible class schedules in times of delay. The university should allow students to attend lectures, labs and/or exams virtually during transportation disruptions, or at the very least allow for some degree of lenience, especially for classes that have a participation or attendance grade. 

The current trajectory of budget cuts rather than increased funding that STM desperately needs threatens not just daily commutes, but the fundamental accessibility of higher education in Montreal. As students navigate the pressures of academic life, the added uncertainty of reliable transportation creates an unnecessary burden that disproportionately affects those with fewer financial resources or schedule flexibility. This transit crisis, coupled with Quebec’s recent tuition hikes for out-of-province students at Anglophone universities, suggests a troubling trend of provincial policies that create additional barriers to education rather than fostering the accessible educational environment Montreal has long been known for.

Arts & Entertainment, Books

The literary world’s battles to ban and boycott Israeli literary institutions

by Siena Torres on

More in Arts & Entertainment:

Content Warning: Mentions of genocide

Reading is a political act. Whether it be the choice of what books a predominantly white industry chooses to publish, what books one has access to, or even the privilege of having time to read, literature is not neutral—especially in our current combative political climate. 

In the wake of Donald Trump’s recent re-election, readers and experts alike have voiced concerns over possible future book bans. Project 2025, the manifesto in which Trump and his allies are now clearly expressing intent to execute over the United States upon his inauguration, recommends implementing book bans in order to protect children from reading pornography. However, this is a dog whistle meant to conceal that, in effect, books with 2SLGBTQIA+ themes will be the first to go as their content is flattened by conservatives as “pornography.” This plan follows the disturbing trend of libraries and schools banning texts that deal with racism, homophobia, and sexism due to right-wing pressure which has also reached Canada. 

In another case of politicization in the literary world, PalFest and other campaign groups put forth a cultural boycott of Israeli literary institutions signed by thousands of authors and literary workers in response to the Israeli genocide of Palestinians in Gaza. The boycott follows the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement guidelines that call for the rejection of the normalization of Israeli culture to justify the occupation of Palestinians. This movement follows in the footsteps of similar boycotts of South African goods to oppose the country’s apartheid state in the 1980s. 

Specifically, this cultural boycott is targeting Israeli literary institutions that are either silent about or complicit in Palestinian oppression. The boycott’s supporters include prominent and prizewinning contemporary authors such as Percival Everett, Viet Thanh Nguyen, Annie Ernaux, Rachel Kushner, Ocean Vuong, and Sally Rooney, the Irish author who has been deemed the ‘voice of a generation’ after the boom of her novel Normal People. She has been outspoken in her support for Palestinian rights for years. This ranges from refusing to sell Hebrew translation rights to an Israeli publisher in 2021 to expressing her solidarity with the people of Palestine in a speech at the recent launch of her latest novel. Rupi Kaur also showed her support of the boycott by refusing an invitation from the White House for a Diwali event last fall on account of the Biden administration’s continued armament of the Israeli military. 

Discussions of the Israeli occupation of Palestine have never been without controversy, especially for Palestinian authors. A few days after the Oct. 7 attack, Adania Shibli, the Palestinian author of Minor Detail, which focuses on a girl murdered by IDF soldiers in 1949, had her award ceremony for the book cancelled by The Frankfurt Book Fair in Germany. This decision provoked outrage from fellow writers and activists as it seemed to be made solely based on her Palestinian origins; Shibli had never condoned Hamas’ actions or expressed any disrespect to the victims of Oct. 7. The Fair responded by declaring their continued support for Israel, which is part of a larger conversation about German institutions’ complicity in Israeli war crimes. 

As for the recent literary boycott, over a thousand industry workers signed an open letter that denounced its intention. The letter pushes against the message that book spaces should not be political, arguing that this reduces the transformative power that books and their authors have to create tangible change and stating that boycotts create more divisiveness. 

However, as readers and authors respond to the complex and often controversial calls for political action in the literary world, books remain a powerful tool to create change in the world we want to inhabit. The choice to depoliticize literature is a privilege that only a few have when books have the power to bring awareness and tangibly impact movements. By continuing the boycott, there is a clear message that we must fight against injustice by ensuring that our literature does not stay neutral.

Arts & Entertainment, Theatre

Staging Freedom: ‘Two Birds One Stone’ teaches empathetic understanding

by Adèle Contis on

More in Arts & Entertainment:

Two Birds One Stone, directed by Murdoch Schon, is a lesson in listening and a reminder that friendship must not be scoffed at when seeking a viable framework for peace. It’s the first show in Teesri Duniya Theatre’s 2024-2025 season: Staging Freedom. Playwrights Rimah Jabr, a Muslim Palestinian, and Natasha Greenblatt, a Jewish Canadian, co-wrote the piece in 2016. Eight years later, the pair felt compelled to revisit it, believing its message to be more relevant than ever in light of the ongoing genocide in Palestine.

This autofictional play intertwines stories from Jabr’s youth in Palestine and her move to Brussels after enrolling in theatre school with tales from Greenblatt’s youth in Montreal and Birthright trip to Israel. The women navigate the messiness of young adulthood while searching to make their way back to a family house in the Occupied Palestinian Territories: Jabr’s grandmother’s home that she fled during the 1948 Nakba, which Greenblatt’s great grandfather purchased soon after Israeli settlers colonized the area.   

While the two playwrights played themselves in previous runs of the play, they are now both new mothers, leaving them unavailable to fill the roles for Teesri’s remounted production. Instead, actors Dalia Charafeddine and Natasha Fagant fill in for Jabr and Greenblatt, respectively, and portray the story’s numerous supporting characters—they sing, they cry, they laugh, and get fake drunk while slipping in and out of distinct accents and physicalities that differentiate these characters. Connecting with the audience in metatheatrical comedic moments, they dispel any awkwardness. We see two friends comment on their own performance, poking fun at the tiptoeing tendency we often see when engaging with Israel’s occupation and ongoing genocide in Palestine, shaping the intimate process of understanding into resistance. 

The dialogue takes centre stage, with the simple costumes, set, and blocking emphasizing the words above all else. Language is itself a tool that can obscure or bring truth to light, and Two Birds One Stone implicitly discusses these intentions. The play breathes life and immediacy, gripping us to feel all that is human. In the room, when the lights turn back on, tear-dampened cheeks lean on the shoulders of loved ones. 

This is what art is about—collaborative consumption—and there is no better place to be challenged than at Teesri Duniya Theatre. Its warm and collaborative approach encourages precisely these moments of self-reflection and openness. 

Creating works by and for the BIPOC community, Teesri Duniya’s commitment to multicultural reconciliation motivates its practices and shapes the stories it platforms. The space invites collaboration through the innovative Fireworks Play Development Program, which supports and mentors a cohort of local emerging playwrights as they develop their writing. 

Beyond its collaborations with the artists of Montreal, Teesri Duniya engages audiences in open dialogue via talkbacks after almost every show, mobilizing opinions that often continue to be discussed in the outside air of Avenue des Pins. Teesri Duniya’s founders and theatre directors Rahul Varma and Rana Bose hold fast to the belief that art should shun away from elitism, expanding theatre to all. Essentially, art is about trusting the community as it is, whether sitting in the audience or pacing its feet on stage.

Schon said in a CKUT 90.3 FM interview, “A good director wants people to leave with new questions in their pockets.” I believe this is true of Two Birds One Stone. It’s on my mind; I talk about it in a grocery store and share it with my friends. May we continue to attend theatre performances and feel their transformative power. May we learn from them and perform peace in our lives.

Album Reviews, Arts & Entertainment

‘CHROMAKOPIA’ may be Tyler, the Creator’s most authentic work yet

by Lily Dodson on

More in Album Reviews:

CHROMAKOPIA, released on Oct. 28, is Tyler, the Creator’s most authentic album yet, following 2023’s CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST: The Estate Sale. Typically, Tyler adopts a new “character” for each album cycle, such as Igor for his 2019 album of the same name, or Wolf Haley on his earlier albums Wolf and Goblin. By taking on these different personas, Tyler is able to honestly explore different aspects of himself and his musical sensibilities without being overly vulnerable. In the music video for “Sorry Not Sorry,” the closing track of The Estate Sale, Tyler kills off all of the alter egos that served as the protagonists of his previous albums, a symbolic gesture that represents how he is finally accepting that he needs to be himself in his music.

However, leaving his characters behind is not an easy feat for Tyler. On the album’s cover, he is seen donning a mask of his own face, demonstrating how he cannot help but hide even when he is trying to unveil his true self through his music. This is the most prevalent theme of Tyler’s newest album: Grappling with his rise to fame while also embracing who he is. Even though he takes on the persona of St. Chroma—a masked military figure who is seemingly another protagonist—in the album’s music videos, I interpreted CHROMAKOPIA as him abandoning the use of characters to tell his story—and finally telling it himself.

Despite continuing to mask himself on this album, Tyler dives into his emotionally fraught upbringing in the song “Like Him.” Singing to his mother—whose voice is featured in interludes throughout the album—Tyler asks if she resembles his estranged father. “Like Him” is a follow-up to his 2013 song “Answer,” which deals with the resentment Tyler feels towards his father for abandoning him when he was a child, while also wondering if his father would be there for him in times of need. However, on “Like Him,” his mother admits to being the reason why Tyler didn’t have his father in his life, thus turning the page on a topic that has long haunted his work. As a longtime fan of Tyler, this song is a heartbreaking listen, and it is one of the deepest looks into Tyler’s life we’ve gotten since “Answer.” 

Though “Like Him” is the album’s biggest standout, other songs such as “St. Chroma,” “NOID,” “Take Your Mask Off,” and “Sticky” are all well done lyrically and from a production standpoint. “St. Chroma” explores Tyler’s inner confidence and his desire for success with backing vocals from Daniel Caesar, while “NOID” details his constant paranoia stemming from being a star in today’s world. “Take Your Mask Off” urges others to embrace themselves as Tyler does on this album, and “Sticky” is a fun, upbeat listen with features from Lil Wayne, Sexyy Red, and GloRilla, placed in the middle of the album amongst some of the heavier themes. The closing track, “I Hope You Find Your Way Home,” is eerie and slow, closing with chants of the album’s title that make it linger with the listener long after the final notes.

Though Tyler has often felt he has had to hide his true self away, CHROMAKOPIA lets fans see behind both the literal and metaphorical masks he has worn over the years. It’s a degree of candour we haven’t heard since 2019’s IGOR, which was largely based upon a previous heartbreak he experienced. CHROMAKOPIA is Tyler at his most vulnerable.

1 … 111 112 113 114 115 … 1,367

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue