It’s that time of year again, when the folks are jolly and the malls are a nightmare. For many years, it has been an American tradition for parents to scour the stores frantically for every little thing on their children’s lists, trampling the elderly in the process. As I watched endless commercials these past few days advertising the absolute best deals on the most up-to-date trendy electronics, a few items stuck out to me which dampened my holiday cheer.

The first humbug item: the Yoostar. This brand spanking new device comes with a green screen that allows you and your friends to put yourselves in scenes from popular movies. When you’re done making your best Arnold impersonation, you can upload the scene to YouTube to annoy — I mean, share with the whole world. The best part: you only have to shell out $169.95. Whatever happened to good ol’ fashioned charades? As far as I know, it’s free, and when combined with a few holiday “spirits” it can provide hours of belly-aching entertainment.

The e-reader is not new this holiday season, but it has become increasingly more popular with the release of the Amazon Kindle ($259). The device has gotten rave reviews so far, and is apparently the height of e-book technology. Granted, buying and storing books instantaneously on one small device is extremely easy and convenient, and of course, no paper cuts. However, it takes away from the age-old tradition of curling up with a great book that has you turning the pages frantically. Some of my fondest childhood memories are of straining to read the last few chapters of a book by flashlight hours after my bedtime. Somehow it just wouldn’t be the same to shine my flashlight on an electronic screen.

The Kindle poses other problems. You cannot share or resell your purchases, unless you want to pass around the device to your friends. Personally, I love recommending a good book to a friend, and letting them borrow it — as long as they don’t bend the spine, of course. I think I’d have more of a problem lending my $259 Kindle to all my buddies.

Also, the publishing industry and bookstores will suffer, as if they don’t already have enough on their plates, competing with video games. Amazon will monopolize the industry. If the e-book trend catches on too much, the joy of perusing a bookstore, leafing through random titles and sipping coffee in a big leather armchair will be forever lost. This seems like a cultural sacrifice to me.

On to the kiddies. When I saw the commercial for this one, I knew all hope was lost. The VTech Ride and Learn Giraffe Bike, for $54.99. Youngsters pedal maniacally on a cutesy giraffe while staring at a small screen that attempts to educate them the faster they pedal. I hope it comes with an extra dose of Ritalin. This concept of a stationary, indoor bike for children confuses me. Shouldn’t we save those for when we’re 40, overweight and want to pedal in front of the TV? Whatever happened to letting your kids play outside and ride real bicycles? I have a feeling this generation of tikes will all be a little too sheltered and glued to all kinds of screens: on their bikes, when they read a book, when they play a game.

So this holiday season, think twice before you spend your entire paycheck on one of these or similar electronics. Decide if it’s really worth your money, and what you may be giving up in the process. Having a good time does not have to be confined to battery power.

Sony Pictures released its new blockbuster hopeful “2012” Friday, Nov. 13. An appropriate choice for a release date, is it not? I’m sure all superstitious people were “quaking” in their boots.

The movie is based on the predictions made by both the Mayans and Nostradamus that the end of the world will occur on Dec. 21, 2012. That seems awfully specific.

It presents an apocalyptic disaster complete with a biblical flood and arks. Plus you get to see John Cusack evade imminent danger by a split second nearly 20 times. He can apparently outrun a volcano, earthquake, flood and any other conceivable natural disaster combined — not to mention he gets to drive a Bentley.

My close group of friends and I crammed into the Jeep and headed to Nashville for the midnight showing, as is our tradition for many major releases. The woman at the counter, clearly not worried about the end of the world, casually asked us if we would like to watch the prediction of our future on the IMAX screen. We kept our extra $2.

The theater was surprisingly empty for a movie that could possibly change our lives. I suppose the majority of moviegoers are not cheapskates and opted for the big screen. They must have known saving money is obviously fruitless, since the end of the world is inevitable.

As the lights went down and we watched what seemed like an hour of commercials and previews, I began to contemplate the meaning of this movie. Would I survive an apocalyptic occurrence? No. Would I have enough money to buy my way into some sort of secret government safe harbor? No.

I began to think I’d like to know whether or not it will happen, so I can enjoy my remaining time on our not-so-green Earth.

Then it hit me like a fireball from the sky. The world is not going to end in 2012, silly. Once again, the world is falling into another Y2K-style trap. It just so happens the movie industry is cashing in on it this time.

Although I do not believe we are facing the end of days, I think this 2012 paranoia can still cause problems. There is a scene in the movie in which people are rioting in the streets as the date draws near, causing chaos and confusion. I can definitely see this happening in a realistic sense. People tend to take matters like this to heart, and government conspiracies are an American favorite. I’d rather not have to witness people becoming animals.

I’m also nearly positive that come December of that year, I will have no groceries. With widespread panic comes an obsessive need to stock up on milk and bread. You know, because if you don’t have electricity at the end of the world, your milk will somehow stay cold.

Oh wait, I forgot, there will be another ice age, so of course it will.

People will spend thousands of dollars on souped-up bomb shelters that will someday serve only to house their troublesome adolescent children. Hard hats will become the latest fashion accessory, and no one will dare leave home without their brand new earthquake-resistant Hummers and end-of-the-world survival kits.

I think this is a terrible time for the film industry to make a movie like this. I can’t help but wonder what’s next.
We’re in an economic recession and two wars, on top of tons of other problems we can’t seem to fix. Why encourage the crazies? We’ll be paying for it later when we receive loads of educational and religious material in the mail and on every street corner, and eventually when we are trampled in a riot on our way to get coffee.

Last week’s issue featured an article that was incorrect. The TVs on display in the food court area are actually free, according to an e-mail from Charlie Partain, marketing manager for Chartwells Dining Services at APSU.

Both the screens and the programming featured on them are provided by AKOO International.

Partain said the screens will be paid for through advertisements that will pop up on the screens. The advertisements will likely begin next semester.

APSU will also be able to make use of eight 15-second spots every hour so that university groups and departments can advertise or make announcements. This will greatly benefit APSU and will help students become more informed.

Partain said AKOO covers all costs, including installation, shipping, marketing collateral and maintenance.

AKOO will hire one student on campus to help with the cleaning of the screens, maintaining table tents and other responsibilities.

The content played on the TVs is determined by students via text message to the APSU music server that came with the AKOO package. Students can also vote online for their choices at www.myakoo.com.

If no one votes for a music video, a random loop is played, according to Partain.

Partain said the audio level of the televisions is supposed to adjust according to the noise level of the room.

For example, the louder the noise, the louder the televisions should adjust, and vice versa. He said the perfect sound level has yet to be achieved, but that AKOO is currently working on the project.

The TV screens near the microwave have had electrical issues when the microwaves are turned on, so AKOO will cover the costs to install a new outlet for the screens that have trouble.

The students, faculty and staff and the university as a whole have not been negatively impacted by these screens as far as costs are concerned.

The students, faculty and staff of APSU did not have to contribute to the costs or maintenance of these TV screens.

By Nicole June | Perspectives Editor

Editorial

Everyone must travel through the UC at some point or another, and typically every day while on campus. Everyone also must eat, and therefore make a trip to the delicious food court. Everyone in the food court must watch 12 televisions while they eat.

No, that last one definitely isn’t necessary. This semester, I noticed when walking into the UC 12 shiny new flat screens had been added. That’s right, 12. They hang in side-by-side pairs in one approximately 40 foot section of space. Convenient, isn’t it?

Wrong. These TVs are completely unnecessary. If you were to survey the room you would see no one is even watching them. Even if you had some desire to watch the same music videos over and over, it wouldn’t matter because you can’t hear them anyway.

Nothing educational or pertinent to students is played on these flat screens.

Not everything must be academic, but if they aren’t serving a good purpose, they seem like a waste of time and one other very important thing: money.

I Googled around for awhile and eventually landed on www.toptenreviews.com. It gave a listing of 10 of the top brands and their average prices.

I didn’t measure the TVs because for once in my life I wasn’t tall enough. So I’m emphasizing that this is just an estimate.

Back to business. The most expensive brand listed costs $4,299. That’s a little hefty. The cheapest brand was $829. Better, but still not cheap. I got out my handy-dandy calculator and figured out the average cost for the listed televisions is $2,443.90.

Let’s assume (yes, I know what they say) APSU went in for the mediocre. That means 12 of them would cost $29,326.

I don’t think I know any college students have $29,326 in pocket change.

I also don’t know many college students with even one flat screen TV, not including the one at their parents’ house.

I do, however, know plenty who struggle to pay their tuition, especially now the prices have gone up. I also know many students who work two jobs on top of school to survive.

My question is this: how does the appropriation of funds work?

It seems odd that a university would spend so much money on lunchtime “entertainment.” There are far more important and useful things that kind of money can be spent on.

Perhaps more potted plants to block off stoops in designated smoking areas would be a good investment.

Speaking of which, if I get one more e-mail about designated smoking areas, I may have to — well, go smoke, I guess.

– Nicole June, Perspectives Editor

CORRECTION: This editorial contains inaccurate information. The TV’s were actually free. APSU received the television screens along with the programming free from AKOO International in exchange for the attention of our students according to Charlie Partain, marketing manager for Chartwell’s at APSU.