Rarely do Tchaikovsky and Twitter go together.But KUSC 91.5 FM — USC’s classical radio station and the country’s most listened to public radio station — is hoping to change that by working with the Integrated Media Systems Center to combine classical music with new media. On air · Alan Chapman, a host for KUSC, sits behind the control booth at the LA studio. KUSC is the most listened to public radio station. – Geo Tu | Daily TrojanKUSC and IMSC, a research facility focused on new media based in the Viterbi School of Engineering, will be letting students shape the future of music with a venture called the Music X Project.“The X means different things to different people; it’s a funny title,” said James Baker, director of IMSC. “I’m a mathematician, so to me X means ‘unknown.’ To Robert Cutietta, who’s dean of the School of Music, it means ‘Generation X.’”Through the Music X project, students will be able to submit proposals for multimedia projects that bring classical music to the digital age, and the best ideas from these proposals will be developed.“All music is becoming more accessible because of new media,” said Brenda Barnes, president of KUSC. “What we wanted to do with IMSC is to see how they might help us translate what we do more effectively into the new media world.”Barnes approached Baker over the summer wanting to find ways to move KUSC into the new media realm.“We need to be online because there are things we can do online that we can’t do on the radio,” Barnes said. “On the radio, all we can offer is one programming stream. Online we can offer multiple classical music channels — we could have a channel that’s all Mozart, that’s all opera, a study mix for people who want to listen to classical music while they’re studying.”Baker said he predicts the convergence of radio and Internet, and he was excited to be involved with KUSC’s endeavor.“This was one of the most interesting projects that had come my way,” he said. “There’s going to be a major change in the system coming in the future. We’re going to have an opportunity to influence that … We have a technical approach to go about it, at least to get started, and there’s no clear answer to where we are or where we should be going — and this is what really intrigued me.”The program Barnes and Baker decided on was the Music X Project, which will let students drive KUSC’s emergence into new media.“Where did we get the big software we use today on our personal computers?” Baker said. “We got that from a kid who was a freshman in college — Bill Gates. [New technology] comes by young people who get some really out-of-the-box ideas.”In early October, students will be able to submit essays on their ideas for the future of music and technology. The best essays will receive a cash prize and the best ideas will receive a stipend; Baker expects to eventually develop six stipend-based projects.For Barnes, the Music X project is about putting KUSC at the forefront of the radio and new media marriage movement, and not about saving classical music.“Classical music has withstood the test of time,” Barnes said. “It’s been around for hundreds of years and yet it’s still popular and still relevant for people. I think that classical music and the arts remind us of the wonderful things human beings are capable of … We need to be online because there are things we can do online that we can’t do on the radio.”Thornton Dean Robert Cutietta, agreed that classical music does not need saving. He noted, however, that integrating new media will bring classical music to new generations.“The distribution and recording of music have changed so much in the last 10 years, it’s going to be a critical part of how we go forward as musicians, and how we reach our audiences,” Cutietta said.Baker considers holding on to culture a critical aspect of new technology, which makes classical music, the hub of musical culture, a necessary base.“If we lose our aspirations of looking at great art, whether it’s music, film, visual arts or architecture, I think we’ve lost an important part of what it means to be human,” Cutietta said.
“The 19th Hole” ran Tuesdays. If you would like to comment on this story, visit DailyTrojan.com or email Joey at email@example.com. We hear so often about money in college sports. Head coaches bolt for other schools for more money. Schools build new training facilities and expand 60,000-seat stadiums to eventually earn more money. Conferences expand to add new members to increase the geographic footprint they point out, to annex television markets and, yes, to haul in more money.If the landscape of modern-day college athletics teaches us anything, it’s that administrative decisions are quite often based on money and profits. What makes the most fiscal sense for a university and its athletic department? What ensures long-term stability?Considering all that, why would USC be any different?I pose that question foremost because people remain surprised. Fans have been grappling with the strange concept of USC keeping the status quo after arguably the most disappointing season on the gridiron in school history, a 7-5 finish with back-to-back losses to hated rivals UCLA and Notre Dame (keeping the status quo, meaning retaining coach Lane Kiffin and enacting minimal changes, at least thus far).But if you really think about, is it all that surprising, really? Think green here.Despite what has happened on the field in recent months, things are going pretty well for the USC athletic department at least in terms of its finances. The school reported record athletic-related revenue for the 2011-12 academic year — $84.19 million, according to documents filed with the U.S. Department of Education in October. Senior Associate Athletic Director Steve Lopes credited an increase in donations and corporate sponsorship for the $10 million jump in revenue during an interview at the time with The Orange County Register.Average attendance per game at the Coliseum this fall also stood at 87,945, the highest average mark since 2006, and USC notched four sellout games against Hawai’i, Colorado, Oregon and Notre Dame. So there’s plenty reason to suggest the program isn’t facing any substantial drop in ticket sale revenue for the next year. Hundreds of thousands of people made it to their seats, or at least purchased a ticket.Moreover, the John McKay Center, a $70 million, 110,000-square-foot athletic facility, opened in August. And on top of this, the school announced “The Heritage Initiative,” a $300 million athletic fundraising campaign, with the school reportedly halfway toward reaching that mark.And in the wake of NCAA sanctions, levied in June 2010 for a “lack of institutional control,” the university is widely considered the nation’s leader in athletic compliance, with a staff of approximately 14 employees, among the largest of any higher education institution. Suddenly, USC’s in everyone’s good graces.Yes, financially and in terms of its national perception, USC is doing rather well.So really, why make changes, why do anything that would drastically alter the direction of the department? Why panic? Why reverse course? In a sense, everything’s peachy.Athletic directors typically enact change for the sake of finances. A bad coach might result in a bad season, a sub-.500 season. Then, nobody shows up for the games, there’s poor attendance, fewer folks make donations and there’s a drop in revenue. Eventually, the school will opt to go in a new direction, or however it wishes to phrase it in the press release. It has to, in order to maintain those finances and stay competitive.But in several respects, despite on-the-field struggles, USC stands fine. It’s got quite a bit of revenue; it’s even profiting.So though many fans have been anticipating — and even clamoring — for change for change’s sake, it doesn’t appear likely.USC Athletic Director Pat Haden has mentioned during several interviews in recent weeks that it’s his job to make “rational decisions,” in spite of the frustration and demands for change (i.e. firing Kiffin).Though USC’s football program might be a disappointment, men’s basketball is coming off a historically poor season (a program-worst of 26 losses) and baseball continues to hang around the bottom of the Pac-12, wholesale changes don’t appear in order.Kiffin will return next fall. Men’s basketball coach Kevin O’Neill and baseball coach Frank Cruz’s jobs also appear relatively safe.If USC is fiscally sound, it wouldn’t be rational to go against the status quo now.So you want change? Maybe think about how you use your wallet.
They eased past Waterford in last night’s opening round game at Semple Stadium running out 2-16 to 1-7 winners.The Premier County goals coming from Jack Delahunty and sub Brendan Martin.Defending champions Kerry beat Clare by 14 points to 3 in Tralee and will now face Cork in the semi-finals. The Rebels were 2-15 to 2-7 winners over Limerick. Limerick face Waterford in Necastlewest next Wednesday, for the right to take on Clare in the second play-off with the winners of that facing Tipp in the semi-final on May 13th.
– maintains house-to-house registration reeks of desperationThe Opposition People’s Progressive Party (PPP) has once again rejected calls for house-to-house verification, which came from the governing A Partnership for National Unity/Alliance For Change (APNU/AFC), saying that it is a desperate attempt to delay or postpone the constitutionally due 2020 general elections.General Secretary of the PPP Bharrat Jagdeo has expressed fear that enumerators at the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) would deliberately not go into PPP strongholds specifically in hinterland and riverain areas and deny them the right to vote.“We believe that doing house-to-house registration at this late stage within the constitutional deadline for holding general elections could be used as a pretext forOpposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeodelaying the elections,” Jagdeo said recently.Jagdeo’s comment comes in light of the GECOM presenting a request to the Finance Ministry for funding of a national house-to-house registration exercise for a new voters’ list as part of its preparation for the 2020 general elections.Chief Election Officer (CEO) Keith Lowenfield told a recent press conference that GECOM gave approval for the Secretariat budgeting to provide for the conduct this exercise. While the CEO was reluctant to provide a cost, it was later revealed that it will cost $3 billion.“I am surprised that the Chief Election Officer has made a request for funding for an initiative that has not been decided at the level of the commission,” he said.The party’s General Secretary pointed out that after the 2015 General and Regional Elections, the PPP had requested for Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) to undertake house-to house registration, but that request was completely ignored.He recalled that in 1990 a house-to-house registration was conducted and it was used to delay the elections to 1992. Jagdeo also recalled that the list very flawed.Although GECOM has made a commitment to having the house-to-house registration completed in six months, Jagdeo said, he is doubtful that it could be completed in such a short time. “It is opening the door for a process that is potentially fraudulent,” he stated.FlawedJagdeo, a former president, also raised concerns over the current framework within which GECOM operates. He said he is fearful about the inputting of data and that the final list of voters being flawed, especially given the concerns they already have with GECOM.The last house-to-house registration was conducted in 2008. The list has since been updated through continuous registration cycles conducted by GECOM.In April 2018, the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) called for house-to-house registration to clean up the voters’ list. PNCR General Secretary Amna Ally had suggested that a registration should begin as soon as possible.The PPP said it did not support the PNCR’s call for new house-to-house registration, while stating that it preferred to contest the general elections with the existing voters’ list.However, the party has in the past expressed some level of satisfaction over the fact that GECOM update and sanitise the list of registered electors.One of the tasks undertaken by GECOM and stakeholders is to cleanse the list of deceased persons, based upon information generated by the General Registrar’s Office (GRO), which is responsible for the issuance of certificates of death.This is something the Party has repeatedly called for. During that same month, the PPP called for GECOM to exercise greater care and due diligence in sanitizing the list.Only on the basis of a certified list of persons who have died, issued by the General Register Office (GRO), can GECOM remove a person’s name.The Party therefore noted that GECOM issued five lists of persons who have died between December 2015 and March 2016. One of the lists, according to them, is of persons who have died but whose names are not on the list of registered electors.The PPP said it had conducted a review of this particular list and has discovered a significant number of names which are in fact on the list of registered electors.In March, Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo called for an audit to be done on the digitisation of records at the GRO. His comments were followed by Citizenship Minister Winston Felix, who claimed that the process is transparent and nonpartisan.