issue 22 // vol 44 opinions // no. 15 Douglas College shouldn't support multi-level marketing > Preying on students seems widely accepted yet is totally unacceptable Greg Waldock Staff Writer f you've been to a Douglas College campus during job fairs or booth days, you might have seen flashy, stylish- looking companies offering “immediate income,” “money from home,” or “tiered advancement opportunities.” They show up from time to time, seemingly authorized by the college to be there. They are known as “multi- level marketing,” “network marketing,” or, to some, as pyramid schemes. I think they are completely amoral, almost never result in monetary gain for those who are sucked into them, and yet they seem to be supported by the school by being allowed to advertise to the young and vulnerable. I believe that Douglas College and other institutions should not support them and should work to educate students better on the dangers they present. Multi-level marketing companies can be distinguished by their payment model. In most cases, nobody is salaried or has a steady wage—everyone makes straight commission and pays into the company. The more you sell, the more you make. You ascend the ranks in the company by recruiting new people for you to supply with your own products. The higher up you are, the more product you're allowed to sell or give to those under you. This means that everyone on the bottom makes pennies and are strongly encouraged to recruit aggressively, while those on top make almost all the money. The result is a company that encourages its employees to exploit friends and family to get higher in the company, with those at the top being able to leave at any time. These companies skirt the justice system and often barely avoid legal action, despite the fact that the majority of the “employees” involved end up losing money. They often show up on college campuses in Vancouver. Students are desperate and broke—essentially vulnerable, which is why scammers target the elderly as well. Students also tend to have large social circles of equally desperate and broke people, making us uniquely perfect targets for this kind of scam. These scams are identifiable, though, if you know what youre looking for. They sound too good to be true— offering thousands of dollars with minimal effort, but never unbelievably so. Their spokespeople are lower-level employees still optimistic about their opportunities and looking to move up from their own position in the company. Their posters and advertising generally have bright and simple colours with big, impactful fonts and almost no description of what the company actually does to make money. Trust your instincts. There is no such thing as a miracle job, and anyone who promises a miracle job is preying on you, whether they know it or not. Social experiment viral videos need to stop > Why not work on the issues instead of making videos about them? Jessica Berget Opinions Editor hey’re the equivalent of the “just a prank” viral videos that currently haunt YouTube. Now these viral vloggers are pretending to be activists, operating under the guise of altruism by claiming that these social experiment videos are made to “raise awareness” about sociological issues, but they do nothing of the sort. In one such “experiment” video made by TrollStation, a female and male actor are hired to re-enact a sexual assault on the London Underground to see if people would react. As the female actress claimed in the video, “We're trying to raise awareness about sexual assault on trains because a lot of the times, people see it happening and no one says anything.” Passengers started to act aggressively towards the male actor, until the cameramen stepped in and revealed to everyone that they were actors conducting a social experiment. I find it ironic that by trying to illustrate human indifference in their videos, they end up showing their own indifference to people's feelings. I believe that these videos don’t serve any purpose except to shock and record peoples’ reactions for entertainment and viewership. People are treated as puppets in these experiments, rather than as human beings. That is why I think these videos can barely be considered “social experiments.” Social experiments are usually carried out by psychological and sociological experts, not by a couple of people with a camera. Proper experiments will also have a large sample size, rather than a few people who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Furthermore, social experiments seek to answer questions about sociology and psychology, not to cause public disturbances for the sake of entertainment. They also usually require informed consent with the participants and are formulated for the purpose of collecting data. They have a hypothesis, structure, and protocol, a conclusive discussion, and give compensation for participation, among many other factors. In short, social experiments usually yield some insight and knowledge, and I think these videos show a critical absence of both. These experiments are unethical and have serious consequences. Most include recreating shocking and upsetting events, and most of the time participants don’t realize they are part of the experiment. For example, YouTuber Cody Persin filmed a social experiment video about the dangers of social media Anxiety on Italian herbs and cheese > The clash of self-consciousness and poor customer service Mercedes Deutscher Social Media Coordinator went to Subway last week. I’m typically not a fan of the sandwich goliath, but it was convenient at the time, | had a gift card, and I was hungry. Having recently gone vegetarian and not being a fan of packaged, un-fresh vegetables, | opted for a triple cheese panini. They were out of panini bread. Whatever, I’m okay with a different bread. I’ve worked in food service since 2013, so I get that stuff like that happens. The sandwich artist asked if] wanted any vegetables on my panini before she grilled it. I asked for tomato and mushrooms. When she asked what else, I declined. I’m not a fan of super-loaded paninis. In a very condescending voice, she said, “No more vegetables?” She rolled her eyes when I quietly said “No, thank you.” I know what I look like. I’m over 200 pounds and a size 16. ] sometimes use food as a coping mechanism. Most days, I’m still confident about how I look and who I am. I typically eat healthy and exercise. On that day, though, I felt judged for going to Subway by the very people employed there. I ate the sandwich, but I didn’t feel good about it. When I worked at Starbucks, I’d get people who would order complicated or unhealthy drinks on a daily basis. While it may seem fun to joke about that, I had no business trying to make my customers feel bad. Maybe that frappuccino is a treat for a day of work well done. Maybe that sandwich with weird toppings is because of a dietary restriction.... or maybe it’s none of your damn business, just make the sandwich and don’t judge your customers based on what they order. It’s a problem I see extend outside of fast food joints. It’s getting eyes rolled at me by the server when I have to track her down after sitting at a table for 20 minutes without service and I end up interrupting her whiles she’s texting. It’s by catfishing young girls. When he met with the girls, their parents came out to surprise them and scream at them for meeting with a stranger from the internet. Persin even pretended to kidnap one girl with her parents playing along as kidnappers, traumatizing the girl in the process. In the video, after they reveal that it’s an experiment they talk to her about her behaviour on the internet, apparently teaching her a lesson about the dangers of social media. This girl will probably be terrified of strangers for the rest of her life and never trust her parents again, but it’s okay because it was a social experiment and it taught her a lesson? I don’t think so. There are other ways to confront issues; faking scenarios and filming people’s reactions is not one of them. These YouTubers don’t really care about the issues, only the views. the exasperated sigh when I can finally catch up to the Sephora employee. I know these jobs suck. They don’t pay well and are overall unrewarding, nothing more than a paycheque until you can find something better. However, customers are more than just customers, they are people—maybe having a great day or a terrible day—and are just looking for a service. Unless the customer is being really rude or awful, there’s no reason to treat them badly. It doesn’t hurt to smile, or at the very least to not obviously treat them like a burden. A little positivity (or negativity) goes a long way.