The optics couldn’t have been worse. Seemingly drowned by the rain and drowned out by the New Labour anthem of 1997, Rishi Sunak finally answered the question – he finally set the date. In turn, he has united his MPs more effectively than at any point during his tenure in Number 10. They are almost universally asking: Why now, why today?
The shock of this announcement should not be overestimated. For a political class that has been gripped by this question for months, no one other than eight or so trusted advisors had any idea what was to come until Wednesday morning. That was when rumours started to build and by the time ministers had been summoned at 16:15, the world’s press were already reporting the date.
So, onto that question of why. It seems that Sunak and his team (particularly Deputy PM Oliver Dowden) believe that they do have a story to tell. The previously held consensus that something might come up to disrupt Labour’s vast 20-point polling lead before the autumn seems to have run out of road.
It is no coincidence that this announcement came the day that inflation numbers dropped to 2.3%, their lowest levels in two years. As of this month, the energy price cap is also starting to come down. Likewise, legal migration is falling with visa applications across key routes falling 25% from the start of the year. Most importantly perhaps, there is no longer any fiscal headroom for a potential pre-election tax cut come the autumn. On the surface then, Sunak might not be totally wrong. The real question is whether he, having just hit a personal low in favourability polling, is the person to tell that story.
In a similar vein, just a little digging into those numbers gives a much fuller picture of where the country is at. Economically, yesterday’s numbers were actually a disappointment to many economists as inflation fell slightly less than expected. Underlying numbers, not taking into account falls in energy prices, show that services inflation is still at 5.9%. By all accounts, this makes any June inflation rate cuts by the Bank of England unlikely. Chancellor Jeremy Hunt conceded himself yesterday on the Today Programme that British people felt “battered and bruised”.
Potentially worse for Sunak is that Thursday, the first day of campaigning, is set to be marked by figures on illegal migration. So far this year, small boat crossings in the Channel are up by nearly a quarter on last year and that is expected to get worse going into the summer. Even if you do believe that ‘stopping the boats’ is a viable policy on which to fight an election, it is another point on which Sunak is currently failing. If he wants to run this election on security, as he has intimated in recent days, his opponent simply isn’t as daunting as Jeremy Corbyn.
These signs point towards another line of reasoning from the Prime Minister. As opposed to waiting for things to get better, he has clearly made the calculation that they can only get worse.
To his credit, Sunak has made a somewhat bold decision and it would be foolish to claim at this point that any result was certain. There is almost no doubt that the current poll lead for Labour will narrow, possibly significantly come July. The challenge for Starmer to overcome the result of 2017 should not be underestimated. Labour still has policy to sort out, and there is little excitement so far from the electorate, despite its “First Steps” event last week.
Unfortunately for Sunak, though, if he had wanted to look bold and in control, his team let him down. From speaking in the briefing room inside Number 10 to the simple use of an umbrella, there were countless ways to avoid the catastrophic optics of his announcement on Wednesday afternoon. Instead, he stepped out to announce an election looking like a man already defeated, cutting and running.
The Conservative Party will tell you until they’re blue in the face that there is “no enthusiasm for Keir Starmer” and that he is “no Tony Blair”. That might be true – the Labour leader is polling nowhere near to his 1997 comparison. The reality, though, is that Starmer doesn’t need to beat Tony Blair: he needs to beat Rishi Sunak.
16 students were arrested during a sit-in staged by Oxford Action for Palestine (OA4P) at the University Offices in Wellington square. Protesters aimed to remain until they could speak to the Vice-Chancellor. The arrests were made after police arrived and locked down the building with 16 students still inside according to OA4P’s head of press.
According to the version of events provided by protesters, the participants of the sit-in agreed to leave after police arrived but they were not allowed to when the building was locked-down. Police officers could not confirm the events or numbers when approached by Cherwell on multiple occasions.
As soon as police arrived at Wellington Square, OA4P began to mobilise wider support from the community and crowds outside demonstrated loudly and provided a human barrier for the protesters inside.
Around 150 protesters gathered outside the offices trying to block the main entrance to the building and stop police vans from getting through. The crowd chanted “let them go” on a loudspeaker and began to bang cutlery and pans to further disrupt police action.
Police created their own line right outside the gate to stop any more protesters entering. Some police officers were also seen recording videos of the people chanting and showing support for those participating in the sit-in inside. Dozens of police cars and vans lined the nearby blocks.
OA4P expressed that the sit-in comes with a “renewed sense of urgency”, as they shared that “late last night, our encampment in front of the Pitt Rivers Museum was attacked yet again by a hostile actor armed with a knife.” The attack was attributed to the “Prime Minister, irresponsible media, and the University Administration” for making them targets through their “fear mongering.”
OA4P also stated that “the Administration has preemptively classified acts of nonviolent protest within the University sphere as threats equivalent to terrorist actions,” punishing protesters rather than negotiating with them.
In a subsequent update this afternoon, OA4P said that 16 student demonstrators have been arrested. They also stated that the Vice-Chancellor was inside the University building and spoke with the student-protesters. The police also removed protesters blocking the police van.
Around 2pm, the protest advanced to outside of Keble College, where a meeting of the Conference of Colleges, attended by all heads of Oxford colleges, took place. The students occupied the reception area and security evacuated the café. Police arrived at Keble College and filmed protesters
A student from Keble College told Cherwell the protesters in the H.B. Allen Centre (HBAC) were attempting to force doors open and pull the fire alarm, while police evacuated residents of the building through a back door. Other protesters outside were chanting “stay outside” to the inside protesters.
Keble College sent an email to students warning those inside the H. B. Allen Centre to “not move from your rooms or any area inside.”
With over half of the seats still left unclaimed, the 2025 Formula 1 season is looking like it could provide one of the biggest grid shakeups yet. There are potentially new rookies on the scene, drivers who have already lost their current seats, and one or two who unfortunately still haven’t found their feet. So without further ado I present to you my 2025 grid predictions albeit sprinkled with some wishful thinking (because a girl can dream…)!
Red Bull
Max Verstappen
Daniel Ricciardo – I know what you’re thinking… But Riccardo has showed signs of improvement in the past couple of races, and it is undeniable that he would respect team orders regarding a prioritisation of Verstappen. He also has plenty of experience under his belt and has worked closely with the team in the past. However, if I were to give Ricciardo the Red Bull seat, I would likely attach a performance-based quota to the deal stating that should he underperform in the early parts of the 2025 season he will be swapped with one of the two RB drivers (most likely Tsunoda, who has been on top form this season, but potentially lacks the experience to go straight up).
Ferrari
Charles Leclerc
Lewis Hamilton
Mercedes
George Russell
Carlos Sainz – Sainz has already been offered an Audi deal but is holding out in the hopes of a Red Bull or Mercedes offer. He has been impressive in the Ferrari so far this season, so he is likely to have caught the attention of Toto Wolff. Other options for Mercedes include F2 protégé Kimi Antonelli, however rookies are expensive as they are more likely to cause damage and so Wolff might opt for a more experienced driver in Sainz.
McLaren
Lando Norris
Oscar Piastri
Aston Martin
Fernando Alonso
Lance Stroll – While Stroll isn’t officially confirmed for 2025, he has a rolling contract with the team and is pretty much guaranteed his seat for as long as Lawrence Stroll remains in charge.
Williams
Alex Albon
Kimi Antonelli – Antonelli’s performance in F2 has been promising, and he is a favourite to gain a seat in 2025. He is currently part of Mercedes’ feeder programme; however he is likely to start off in Williams first (much like George Russell). In addition, Williams have put in requests to the FIA for Antonelli to drive in a couple of FP1 sessions, thus increasing the likelihood of him signing a contract with them.
Alpine
Pierre Gasly – Alpine have struggled with driver dynamics over the past couple of years and are therefore unlikely to keep both of their French drivers. However, Gasly has frequently performed better than Ocon and is generally considered to be more popular with fans meaning that he is more likely to hold on to his seat.
Valtteri Bottas – Bottas is openly talking to other teams, suggesting that he is looking to leave the Sauber team. He is a strong racer and given he has already been linked to Alpine there is a good chance he could be racing for them in 2025.
RB
Yuki Tsunoda – Tsunoda has been particularly impressive so far this season, regularly scoring points and placing in the top 10. He definitely deserves to keep his seat in RB and could potentially drive for Red Bull as well depending on if Horner elects for experience or boldness.
Liam Lawson – On Lawson’s F1 debut in 2023 he outperformed all Red Bull and RB drivers, proving he is absolutely worthy of a seat on the grid. Whilst there is a possibility for Horner to take Lawson straight to Red Bull, as previously discussed rookies can be expensive and I would argue that Lawson would need to prove himself on a larger scale before he could be promoted above both Ricciardo and Tsunoda.
Haas
Ollie Bearman – Bearman’s debut for Ferrari earlier this year was incredibly impressive, and certainly marked him as one to watch in the coming years. Haas is generally considered to be an unofficial feeder team for Ferrari and so he is likely to be offered a seat here for his rookie season, with the potential for driving for Ferrari in the coming years.
Sergio Perez – Perez has proved time and time again that he is an experienced, reliable driver. However, his current pace is not matching that of Verstappen and so he will likely lose his seat at Red Bull. Nonetheless he is a strong talent which will undoubtedly be snapped up by the likes of Haas.
Kick Sauber (Audi in 2025)
Nico Hulkenberg
Esteban Ocon – Ocon taking this seat would mean Zhou loses his position on the grid. However, Ocon has frequently outperformed Zhou and with Audi taking over the team for 2025 it could be that they are after a complete fresh start.
A note on drivers who would not be racing in 2025 under my predictions:
Kevin Magnussen – Magnussen has acquired ten penalty points in the opening races of 2024, meaning he is only two away from receiving a race ban. A race ban hasn’t been given out since Grosjean in 2012, suggesting that Magnussen is a potentially unreliable driver who is therefore unlikely to be offered a seat next year.
Zhou Guanyu – Whilst it is very unlikely that he will stay at Sauber, Zhou has reportedly been in talks with Haas, so in the event that Perez keeps his Red Bull seat, or is offered one elsewhere, we could see Zhou racing for the American team in 2025.
Logan Sargeant – Unfortunately I don’t think Sargeant has performed at the level required to keep a seat in F1. Having only ever scored one point in the Drivers’ Championship he has already been outperformed by the likes of Lawson and Bearman and therefore there is good reason to suspect he will lose his seat to the new generation of rookies.
The competition of new rookies could certainly present a dilemma for drivers currently out of contract, however all we can do is speculate as we wait for news of driver transfers. F1 is unique in that its fans are often split between supporting a driver no matter where they drive, or a team no matter who drives for them. This adds an extra dimension to the driver market, and I for one am looking forward to watching it all unfold.
J. Smith-Cameron would like you to know that she is not Succession’s Gerri Kellman. She gently corrects me when I slip up by describing her performance as the Roy family’s legal counsel and cut-throat consigliere as her ‘biggest’ role, and she is right to do so. The broadway-mainstay turned Succession scene stealer has had a fascinating career on both stage and screen, but recently she has been making time for one particular city that has become close to her heart: Oxford.
Having first set foot in OX1 on a daytrip when filming the first season of Succession, Smith-Cameron was back in town for a talk at the Oxford Union to follow up on her headline appearance at Brasenose Arts Week last May. Her husband, Academy Award winning director and screenwriter Kenneth Lonergan “just loves it here. This is his idea of having a great time.”
The two of them make up a certified showbiz power-couple, and have collaborated on screen multiple times, most notably in the 2011 epic movie Margaret, in which Smith-Cameron plays Joan, a veteran off-broadway actress. Smith-Cameron chuckles as she admits that “there’s a lot of similarities between the Joan character and me”. She maintains that Lonergan, or just Kenny to her, “tends to cast a lot of the same actors, but he doesn’t really write the parts for them.” She tells me that working with her spouse has its unique challenges: “he kind of took me for granted, but in a good way, you know?” The familiarity between the husband and wife duo meant that once the part was written, Lonergan put full trust in Smith-Cameron to take control of and develop the character, resulting in an incredible and highly acclaimed performance.
J. Smith-Cameron’s ability to own her roles and flesh them out was pivotal to crafting Gerri Kellman into a fan-favourite character. “I don’t feel like I’m anything like [Gerri], but I did kind of make her up.” It’s impossible to think of Gerri without her iconically sharp glasses or the even sharper shoulder-pads of her power suits, both elements that Smith-Cameron personally brought to the role. Gerri’s no-nonsense personality was inspired by “two friends, both mothers of kids that went to school with my daughter, both in finance. They just have this very sarcastic and also very steely demeanour, and I just thought it was refreshing to see middle-aged women brooking no-one ever.”
In real life, Smith-Cameron is far from the stone-cold killer she portrays on screen, but she has thought out the psyche of Gerri Kellman to the tiniest nuance. “There’s a quality that Gerri has that any confidence man has. I have to do two pitches: be saying one thing and rapidly thinking two steps ahead the whole time, and also trying to do that with a veneer of harmlessness.” When I ask her about Gerri’s role as godmother to Shiv Roy, Smith-Cameron replies that she “always found that as an interesting little aside, that [Gerri] is sort of actually part of the Roy family. It’s a family drama.” Reflecting on the series as a whole though, she reminds me that this fact“was sort of in the very first season and then forgotten, but that seems suitable, because it was as if none of those kids would care who the godparents were, or really even knew.I had sort of created that backstory that linked it all together”.
However, Smith-Cameron was not the sole arbiter of what Gerri could and would do. When asked about her initial thoughts on the ill-fated love affair with Roman Roy, the actress told showrunner Jesse Armstrong that she believed that Gerri would “run a hundred miles an hour in the other direction”. Few viewers can forget Gerri calling the sleaziest Roy sibling a “slime puppy”, and Smith-Cameron offers me another damning assessment by saying that she “just can’t imagine anyone with [Gerri’s] gravitas being so swept off her feet by the likes of Roman Roy. He’s such a flibbertigibbet.” Fortunately for fans, she chose to put her trust in the writers who had proven their ability to create grippingly toxic and pyschosexual dynamics by enshrining TomGreg in the halls of Western canon. Smith-Cameron’s aversion to the idea was further reduced by the palpable on-screen chemistry she shared with co-star Kieran Culkin. She is almost indistinguishable from any other Succession fan, as she gleefully picks apart their relationship: “I don’t think she thinks of him as a sexual creature at all. But as time passed, I felt that Roman kind of got under her skin a little bit in spite of everything.”
It comes as no surprise, then, that Smith-Cameron’s favourite scene to shoot was the last big interaction between her and Culkin’s characters. Roman’s attempted firing of Gerri finally allowed Smith-Cameron to let loose from Gerri’s typically reserved and measured temperament: “the thing I remember was being very dangerous and very very angry.” In one take, she even threw a bottle at Culkin, a creative liberty only afforded by the yearslong rapport she had built with the actor, having first met him on the set of her husband’s 2003 play This is Our Youth.
Over the course of filming four award-winning seasons, Smith-Cameron tells me the whole cast and crew became “very attached to each other”. She describes Sarah Snook’s recent one-woman West End debut in The Picture of Dorian Gray as “dazzling, a real tour de force”, and tells me that she also has plans to see Jeremy Strong’s Tony-nominated performance in An Enemy of the People, but only after she catches Brian Cox in a Long Day’s Journey Into Night. Aside from the original cast, Smith-Cameron has grown particularly close to Zoe Winters, who plays Kerry in the final two seasons of the show, describing Winters as her “Succession bestie”.
Beyond her fellow actors, Smith-Cameron has heaps of praise for the showrunners. She agrees that the writing of Succession landed somewhere between stage and screen, with “language [that] was so heightened in scenes with real back and forth, whereas oftentimes in film and TV, you just have these little snippets, or sometimes there’s no words at all. People really had scenes and debates and they really used words, which is kind of refreshing.” Given the challenging task of mastering such fast-paced, quick-witted dialogue, Smith-Cameron notes that “it’s not by accident that a lot of the cast, really all the cast, had their roots in theatre.”
Her favourite line in the show? The effortlessly chilling “but it doesn’t serve my interests” she delivers in the season 3 finale as she crushes the Roy siblings’ plans. Credit for that piece of dialogue goes, of course, to Jesse Armstrong, but the show’s creator isn’t entirely in Smith-Cameron’s good books: “that son of a bitch is never going to write a sequel to Succession.”
With my personal dreams of a Gerri-centred spin-off left in tatters, the question remains just what is next for J. Smith-Cameron. The answer is that she has no time for resting on her laurels, preferring to move on to the next project, as is the way of her industry. “You kind of have to keep starting over, you don’t get a job and stay there for years and decades. You have to keep going out and hunting for food: that’s perseverance.”
Up next on the agenda is to complete her conquest of the stage on both sides of the Atlantic, as she makes her West End debut as the eponymous Juno in Juno and the Paycock opposite Mark Rylance this coming October. Smith-Cameron’s excitement to take on the role is palpable, and the broad press coverage that her casting has received is testament to how much her profile has grown in recent years. Looking at a longer-term picture, Smith-Cameron tells me that she and her “Succession bestie”, Zoe Winters, are looking at getting behind the camera by writing their own project together. Smith-Cameron is tight-lipped when probed for any further detail. “I don’t think I should reveal,” she demurs, with the enigmatic rationale that “if we talk about it too much it evaporates.”
Evaporating screenplays aside, you immediately get an impression of total normalcy when talking to J. Smith-Cameron. She name drops Matthew Broderick and Mark Ruffalo in such a way that it makes it feel as if you too could be their friend. She is not one to lavish in her celebrity status; she comes across simply as someone who loves their craft, and does it exceptionally well. The ice-cold coyness of Gerri Kellman is a million miles away from Smith-Cameron’s natural affability, but the actress’ understanding of the character is down to a precise science. She can clearly be counted as one of Gerri’s biggest fans: she tells me that one of the friends who inspired the character is currently looking for a job. Her advice? “Oh, just tell them that the person who played Gerri based the character on you.”
Today, every corner of our lives seems to be filled with never-ending streams of information and vibrant entertainment. The concept of being bored has become almost extinct. Thanks to constant access to the internet and social media, fleeting moments of boredom are swiftly replaced with scrolling endlessly through feeds, binge-watching TikToks, or engaging in mindless meme sending. Amidst this abundance of stimulation, have we forgotten the art of being bored?
When I was younger, I used to spend every summer at my grandma’s house in Japan. I remember idly rolling around the mountains with no internet or anything to do other than watch dull daytime TV or dust off a comic from the 1970’s. When that got too boring, I had to get creative: toss a ball outside or rummage through my grandma’s watercolour paints, butchering a portrait of the family dog. But in all those exhausting hours that I spent stuck on the sofa, counting corners of chipped paint on the ceiling and recounting riveting scenarios in my head, I felt that I had truly understood what boredom meant.
In fact, I must have invited boredom at times, tossing my phone to the side knowing that there was nothing that I could do with it. Even just a decade ago, we had little to do on phones, particularly when your phone plan only included limited texting and no data. Feeling disconnected from the internet was certainly the norm when I was younger, making me autonomously reach for other activities such as writing ludicrous BTS fanfiction or listening to my pirated Fall Out Boy album on my iPhone 4S. It did the job of letting time pass by. I had somehow allowed myself to be entirely unstimulated. Being “offline” didn’t mean temporarily deactivating your Instagram while bingeing Netflix, it meant quite literally having no way to get back to digital civilization.
The case is starkly different now; there is simply too much to do on your phone. When I feel even a slight wave of disinterest with my current activity, I reach for my phone on autopilot. Without even realising, I’m suddenly scrolling through wholesome cat memes on Instagram or finding out about the various species of dinosaur on TikTok, letting myself rot away. Finding external sources of entertainment, especially from such a pocket-sized object, is easier than ever thanks to the development of short-form content on social media.
Enter “doomscrolling”. We’ve all done it. You open your phone and, as if by magic, your finger starts swiping down on one video after another. Doomscrolling is the idea of seeking out negative information online. Like watching a car crash, know that you could (and should) stop at any time but still somehow choose not to. I’ve certainly fallen prey to doomscrolling myself, which always started with an upsetting news article that led me down the dangerous rabbithole of true crime. When such information can be presented in bite-sized pieces, it’s easy to see how “just one more video” can easily escalate to a ten-part documentary.
Doomscrolling (even in the most harmless sense) often makes me go into a trance of viewing one video after another, oblivious to the amount of time actually passed. After several hours, I watch the vibrant flashy colours swirl around me, the same pitched-up TikTok song haunting me in all crevices of my eardrums. It is only when I suddenly look up at my laptop and realise I only have two hours left to finish my essay, I ask myself why I just wasted so much time. Was looking at all those sad edits of One Day really worth it? I don’t think so. But at least it itched the scratch of needing to watch them.
Dopamine, often referred to as the “feel-good” neurotransmitter, plays a crucial role in giving you motivation and satisfaction, controlling memory, mood, sleep, learning, and concentration, among other functions. Every notification, like, or share on social media makes us feel good and fulfilled, reinforcing the behaviour and fostering a cycle of constant engagement. It’s due to dopamine that many of us obsessively check the number of likes or comments a recent post has received.
It certainly feels rewarding to enjoy the dopamine from social media, but the relentless pursuit for more stimulation feels vapid and unhelpful. Anna Lembke, Professor of psychiatry at Stanford University of School of Medicine, states that social media has revolutionised the way in which we access dopamine. It hits the four key criteria for being dopamine gold: it’s easily accessible; there is unlimited content; content is often combined with other stimulating elements like sex, gaming, or music; and novelty, as dopamine triggers are especially sensitive to new things. Over time, our brains become desensitised to smaller rewards leading to a need for more frequent and intense stimulation to achieve the same level of satisfaction. Social media addiction is akin to other dopamine-centred addictions like drugs, sex, or gambling. Those with dopamine-related addictions suffer from restlessness and agitation, and their symptoms are associated with poor mental health, sleep issues, and in the case of social media, a decrease in attention span. Yet, while “with cocaine you run out of money, […] TikTok is indefatigable”, meaning that unless you really want to throw your phone into the sea, resisting the urge to go online is too painful.
To combat social media addiction, some have attempted a “dopamine detox”, cutting off all forms of social media in search of a simpler, less stimulating life. Some may do a dopamine “fast”, turning their phone off for a short amount of time, whereas others may commit completely to removing social media from their daily routines. By restricting addictive activities, you find a way to resist the urge to feed those impulses, opting for less overstimulating ways like reading or physical exercise.
But is there a sense in which – the compelling nature of social media stimulation aside – we are normatively averse to boredom? Boredom has long been stigmatised as a negative state of mind, heavily associated with feelings of restlessness, dissatisfaction, and unproductivity. In a society that values productivity above all else, the idea of being bored is often seen as a waste of time.
On the contrary, we probably ought to spend more time being bored. Boredom provides the necessary space for creativity, mindfulness, and self-discovery. When we allow ourselves to be bored, we open the door to new ideas, perspectives, and experiences that might otherwise pass us by in the flurry of constant stimulation. In The Burnout Society, Byung-Chul Han writes that “boredom to the mind is like sleep to the body”. We often forget to decompress and appreciate that a clear, unstimulated mind can be beneficial in sprouting our creativity, although it seems paradoxical to think so.
So how can we reclaim the art of being bored in a world that constantly bombards us with distractions? Instead of viewing boredom as something to be avoided, we can learn to embrace it and invite it as an opportunity for growth and self-exploration. Setting boundaries around our use of technology and even carving out dedicated time to just let ourselves be bored might be helpful, implementing small yet effective dopamine detoxes in our lives where we disconnect from the digital world and allow ourselves to simply be.
By ‘dopamine detoxing’, we can also allow ourselves to find activities that truly cultivate a sense of flow and engagement without the need for external stimulation. As fun (and equally embarrassing) as it might be for me to be on level 6333 on Candy Crush, I can’t say that it makes me feel truly fulfilled. Whether it’s reading a book, going for a walk in nature, or pursuing a creative hobby, these moments of unstructured time can nourish our minds and souls in ways that digital overstimulation cannot.
When we become overwhelmed with social media and the internet, rediscovering the art of being bored might just be the antidote to the pitfalls of constant stimulation. By embracing moments of stillness and allowing ourselves the freedom to be unstimulated, we can tap into inner reserves of creativity and inspiration. So maybe the next time you find yourself bored, you should just lean into it, wait a while, and see what exciting things it brings.
In a world where images of AI-generated people are becoming indistinguishable from ones of real humans, Dove’s ‘Real Beauty Pledge’ was recently launched in a bid to keep beauty real, relatable, and removed from technology, upholding it “as a source of pleasure and self-expression” for women. However, with comparison culture forever rampant, to what extent can Dove’s marketing code bridge the gap between ‘real beauty’ and, problematically, real beauty standards?
Launched in 2004, Dove’s original “Real Beauty” campaign aimed to redefine traditional beauty standards. In the aftermath of the 90’s ‘heroin chic’, their approach pioneered an important redirection that showcased a true range of body types, ages, and ethnicities. Cleverly conflating their brand’s image of clean and pared-back skincare with natural skin and nourishing ingredients, Dove proposed a commitment to care. It is an important position to have taken in a saturated skincare market that all too often overtly targets a customer’s insecurity and dissatisfaction. Recognising that consumers, especially young ones, have become increasingly desensitised to airbrushed and altered images of models and skin, Dove’s latest project “No Digital Distortion” Mark, and their decision never to use AI images, serve to be important marketing commitments that set a healthy boundary when it comes to the growing use of AI.
Dove’s 2024 campaign, “The Code”, looks towards the future of “Real Beauty” by questioning what ‘realness’ means to us in a time where AI is being constantly filtered into our consumption of the media. Their awareness of the negative impact of narrow beauty standards is demonstrated through their most recent proposition to alter the delivery of beauty marketing campaigns by completely removing the use of AI.
However, there is a risk that this proposition is short-lived given that their advert begins by showing AI-generated images of beautiful women. Despite Dove seeking to convert this narrative as part of their campaign, asking the public to “imagine a gorgeous woman according to Dove’s Real Beauty Ad”, there is still an implicit suggestion that people perceive conventional and clear-skinned digital women attractive. It is this perpetual desire for beauty, fuelled by discontent, that upholds consumerism. As such, there is also an approach to sales that must be acknowledged. According to a recent report from Unilever, Dove successfully achieved “its highest underlying sales growth in more than a decade in 2023, delivering €6 billion for Unilever”, revealing that Dove’s campaigns were highly influential in converting potential buyers into customers.
Regardless of these caveats, an important discourse still underlies the campaign – reminding us that beauty standards are taught, spread, and learnt. Just as Dove’s campaign seeks to re-teach the diversity of real beauty, so too is it aiming to encourage its consumers to re-think how beauty standards are embedded in our daily discourse and experience.
Yet, pressing further still, Dove’s “Self-Esteem Project”, a movement designed to instil body confidence in young people across the world by 2030, inadvertently recognises another factor at play when it comes to the cost of beauty: comparison culture.
Speaking to students about their response to Dove’s campaign suggests that, whilst beauty campaigns may be vehicles to incite important discussions on the nature of beauty norms, their efficacy relies on comparison and dissatisfaction:
“The entire system of beauty and makeup brands is based on comparison to prettier people, so you’d have to dismantle the entire business model to stop it being based on comparison.”
Comparison culture sneakily divides our true wants from our musts, enacting internal cycles of self-deprecation and a loss of clarity on what we actually desire, even before we realise it’s happening. Subliminally, beauty campaigns often enable a solidification of beauty norms and unrealistic standards. Yet, that whispering voice which sets out to undermine our experiences of social media and popular culture, seamlessly embedded into our daily interactions, is likely always to linger, regardless of whether marketing images are AI or real. In the last ten years, the constant array of articles aimed at understanding theories of social comparison testify to its underlying place in our daily lives and experiences.
So, you ask, what is the solution to this blatant problem? Radical acceptance. This is the most effective means in which to pave the way towards self-growth and satisfaction. Yet, we must be cautious as the temptation to literalise Dove’s condition of ‘real’ beauty might also provoke the desire to reach an unattainable aesthetic and ineffable expression of realness in the first place.
Today, an understanding and expression of beauty is heavily distorted by cosmetic surgery, photo-editing, beauty filters, and AI. It is a product of technological advancement that is likely to continue blurring our understanding of ‘realness’ unless images are explicitly labelled to reveal how they have been altered. With this in mind, Dove’s direct commitment never to use AI images offers both an important social commentary on the use of AI in beauty (and how it is marketed), as well as highlighting an increased need for brand transparency to distinguish AI-generated ‘skin’ from the norm.
Whilst there is no doubt that Dove’s campaign is also a highly convincing commercial creation that supports their vision for obtaining natural, clean and nourished skin, it is also claiming a stance on the challenge of the impact of AI on social change. Importantly, Dove is exposing and recognising how AI is at risk of occluding our relationship to reality.
Thousands of supporters gathered on the High Street on Monday evening to celebrate Oxford United’s promotion to the Championship, confirmed after their Saturday win against Bolton Wanderers. An open-top bus parade, carrying the Oxford team and support staff, arrived at the Town Hall just before 7pm and was greeted by thousands of supporters blowing horns and waving flags in support of the team.
Supporters of all ages lined the high street from as early as 5.30pm, waving yellow and blue flags in support of the team. Excited fans let off several flares. Oxford City Council also flew the Oxford United flag over the Town Hall to celebrate the club’s promotion.
The buses set off from the Plain at 5.55pm and were expected to arrive at the Town Hall at around 6.30pm but were slightly delayed. They were accompanied by support vehicles from Thames Valley police and officers from the County Council.
Attendees included the Lord Mayor of Oxford, the leader of Oxford City Council and other invited guests and dignitaries. At the end of the parade, the players and club representatives were invited to attend a civic ceremony at the Town Hall.
There were no public speeches at the event but players engaged with the crowd, lifting the Trophy several times to great applause.
Councillor Susan Brown, leader of Oxford City Council, wrote on the Council website: “We’re delighted to welcome Oxford United to the Town Hall to celebrate their promotion to the Championship. It’s been 25 years since they last played in the second tier and there have been some very dark days along the way, which makes the victory all the sweeter,” she said.
Jim Goddard, Head of Safety and Operations at Oxford United FC wrote in advance of the parade: “We are all now looking forward to celebrating with the city of Oxford as we honour Des Buckingham and his team for their efforts. My thanks in particular go to Oxford City Council and Thames Valley police for being so supportive at such short notice.”
The event follows Oxford United’s 2-0 win over Bolton in the League One play-off final at Wembley to secure promotion into the Championship. During the parade, chants of: ‘Come on you Yellows’, ‘We are going up, we are going up’, and ‘Bolton get battered everywhere they go’ could be heard.
24.06.24: 17:51 Update: University fences off first OA4P encampment site
Oxford University fenced off the Natural History Museum lawn, where Oxford Action for Palestine (OA4P) built their first encampment, on Sunday morning. The University stated plans to reopen the lawn for public use and claimed to be in communication with the encampment, although this was denied by OA4P.
13.06.24: 09.25 Update: Exam Schools occupied: Exams in East School cancelled
Pro-Palestine protesters from an autonomous group have occupied a hall in the East School in Exam Schools before the start of some examinations. The exams, which were meant to take place this morning in the East School, have been cancelled.
06.06.24: 15.45 OA4P protest outside Oxford University Endowment Management offices
Oxford Action for Palestine (OA4P) has gathered outside the Oxford University Endowment Management (OUEM) offices to continue to press their demands to disclose and divest University funds. This demonstration follows today’s announcement that the University Administration has agreed to meet with students to discuss the demands of the OA4P encampment.
Demonstrators arranged bloodied shirts and fake bills outside the entrance of the OUEM building. These bills carried messages such as: “OUEM and Oxford University endorsers of murder”, “Oxford stop scholasticide” and “end complicity in genocide.” Similar bills were also stuffed inside the mailbox of the OUEM building.
A spokesperson at the rally addressed demonstrators and said: “While we stand here, the money in this building is flowing towards arms manufacturing companies globally that are contributing to the genocide of Palestine people in Gaza.” We are here today as members of the Oxford Action for Palestine movement to demand that the University disclose its finances.” One participant at the protest told Cherwell: “We’re here because after more than a month of protest, the University of Oxford and its subsidiary OUEM have shown no indication of actual, concrete movement towards our chief demands of the disclosure of their finances and their divestment.”
06.06.24: 09.30 Oxford University to meet with students from OA4P
Image Credit: Selina Chen
A month after the Oxford Action for Palestine encampment began, students announced that yesterday night Oxford University’s Vice-Chancellor, Irene Tracey, and other senior members of administration have responded to their email request for a meeting, and students are in the process of arranging a discussion.
01.06.24: 13.30 OA4P march through Oxford City Centre
Oxford Action for Palestine (O4AP) have organised a march from Oxford Brookes into Oxford City Centre. They have prevented the flow of the traffic and police are lining the street.
Over 400 protesters are participating in the march and chanting “Irene Tracey / Rishi Sunak / Keir Starmer / the Oxford Union you can’t hide, we’re charging you with genocide.” There were also shouts of “ceasefire now”.
30.05.24: 14:14 OA4P removes the encampmentin Wellington Square as the rally ends.
After setting up camp outside University offices, protesters packed up their tents and walked to the encampment outside the Radcliffe Camera.
30.05.24: 13.35 Update: OA4P sets up encampmentoutside Oxford University offices in Wellington Square
Oxford Action for Palestine (OA4P) is protesting outside of Oxford University offices in Wellington Square. Surrounded by a growing crowd of 300 chanting protesters, OA4P has set up five tents on the doorsteps of the offices. This comes a week after police arrests of 17 students who entered the offices.
Heavy police presence watches the protesters. An officer told Cherwell that they’re here to “facilitate peaceful protests” and another officer said that the protesters have a right to be there and set up tents. Currently, police are not intervening but are ready in case anything escalates.
28.05.24: 14.40 OA4P hold a silent protest in front of the Sheldonian Theatre
A group of around 50 gathered outside the Sheldonian Theatre this afternoon to protest the destruction of schools in the Gaza strip. The protest, organised by Oxford Action for Palestine (OA4P), involved individuals surrounding multiple entrances to the Sheldonian Theatre, where a University meeting was taking place. Protesters held up signs which said: “Israel has damaged or destroyed 429 schools in Gaza” and displayed images of the destroyed schools. The protest was a silent protest and members of Oxford University Security Services were also present.
27.05.24: 09.30 Somerville College JCR passes motion calling for Vice-Chancellor’s resignation
Somerville College Junior Common Room (JCR) passed a motion on Sunday evening to release a statement, which included a demand for the resignation of Vice-Chancellor, Professor Irene Tracey, over her response to recent pro-Palestine protests in Oxford.
23.05.24: 19.58 All seventeen arrested protesters have been released on conditional bail.
OA4P told Cherwell this was evidence “refuting the narrative that anyone was violent.” They also denied the claim that their protest included a “forcible overpowering” of a receptionist during protests, a phrase used by Oxford University in their recent statement on the protests.
23.05.24: 19.55 Update: Oxford University condemns ‘criminal’ and ‘violent action’ of OA4P in new University response
Oxford University has released a statement about the recent protests organised by Oxford Action for Palestine (OA4P) and the arrest of 16 students that took place this morning during their sit-in protest in the University’s administrative offices in Wellington square. The statement describes the “direct action tactics” used by the protestors as “violent and criminal”, instructing them that “this is not how to do it.”
23.05.24: 15.00 Protests continue outside Conference of College meeting at H. B. Allen Centre
Around 2pm, protests gathered outside of Keble College, where all heads of colleges are attending the Conference of Colleges. The students briefly occupied the reception area, and security have evacuated the café. Police have arrived at Keble College and are filming protesters.
23.05.24: 13.30 Thames Valley Police launch drone from Somerville College quad
Thames Valley Police entered Somerville College to launch a drone from one of the Quads. Police told the College this was “to maintain the safety of individuals in the nearby protests.” Somerville College told Cherwell that “police had no business to be on Somerville College grounds” and once this was decisions as reached, they were asked to leave by Principal Jan Royall. The College asserted that: “we support and respect the right of all our students to protest peacefully.”
23.05.24: 11.55 Protesters block police van leaving Little Clarendon Street
A police van van trying to leave the sit-in down Little Clarendon Street is being blocked by protesters sitting on the ground holding up peace signs.
23.05.24: 11.15 Students arrested during OA4P sit-in at University offices
OA4P protesters staged a sit-in at the University Administration offices in Wellington square with the aim to remain until they could speak to the Vice-Chancellor. Some of the protesters have since been arrested after the police arrived at the scene and locked down the building.
19.05.24 Rally breaks out at the second OA4P encampment at the Radcliffe Camera
Following the expansion of the Oxford Action for Palestine (OA4P) encampment to the Radcliffe Camera lawn this morning, over 500 people turned out to a rally in Radcliffe Square.
19.05.24 OA4P encampment expands to Radcliffe Camera lawn
Oxford Action for Palestine set up a second encampment of ten tents on the lawn of Oxford University’s iconic Radcliffe Camera library in the early morning of 19th May. Calling it “Liberated Zone #2.” The campers “will not leave until the negotiation process begins,” according to a statement.
18.05.24 Oxford graduates step over protesters during pro-Palestine ‘die-in’
Around 30 protesters staged a ‘die-in’ outside the Sheldonian Theatre and Bodleian Library Saturday morning during graduations. The demonstration comes after the University released an official statement which one activist described as “long and so incredibly empty.”
16.05.24 Pro-Palestine protests continue after Vice Chancellor’s statement
Over 600 gathered in front of the Clarendon Building on 16th May for a rally organised by healthcare workers and Oxford Action for Palestine students. Speakers discussed media co-optation of the ongoing encampment’s narratives and encouraged focusing attention on Gaza.
14.05.24 University statement on Palestine Solidarity encampment affirms right to protest, outlines investment policy
The University today released an official response to the pro-Palestine encampment organised by Oxford Action for Palestine (OA4P) in an email sent to all students and staff from Vice-Chancellor Irene Tracey.
09.05.24 Oxford Israel Society and Jewish Students For Justice release statements addressing pro-Palestine encampment
Oxford Israel Society issued a statement on Wednesday condemning the pro-Palestine encampment organised by Oxford Action for Palestine (OA4P), which was set up on Monday 6th May in front of the Pitt Rivers Museum. The Society condemned OA4P’s “failure” to mention Hamas’ role in the war in the Gaza strip and called on the University to reject the protesters’ demands.
Mud swamps over grass where disintegrating cardboard and puddled tarp trace a crude footpath; wooden pallets provide the only solid ground. Upon this foundation lies Oxford’s Gaza Solidarity Encampment, a community supported by donations where students learn from teach-in lectures and look after one another. As a Cherwell journalist embedded in the camp for the first night, I didn’t scrounge for polished statements but documented the mundane details of life in the “Liberated Zone.” Here’s what I observed.
08.05.24 Pro-Palestine protesters rally in attempt to present demands to Vice-Chancellor
A group of around 150, organised by Oxford Action for Palestine (OA4P), rallied outside the Sheldonian Theatre during Vice-Chancellor’s awards on 8th May, aiming to hand their demands to Oxford University’s leaders.
07.05.24 Over 170 Oxford faculty and staff sign statement of support for students’ pro-Palestine encampment
Over 170 faculty and staff at Oxford University have signed an open letter expressing their support for the ongoing pro-Palestine encampment. The statement calls for divestment from Israeli actions in Gaza and for support for Palestinian scholars, following the destruction of all universities in Gaza.
06.05.24 Pro-Palestine protesters establish encampment demanding University action
An encampment has been constructed in Oxford in protest of Israeli action in Palestine and calling for the University to “end complicity with genocide”. Students, faculty, and staff have gathered to demand that the University reveal and divest funding into Israel and arms companies, as well as boycott all institutional connections with Israeli universities.
The Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) has recommended that the UK government retains the Graduate visa route in their highly anticipated report on the efficacy of the scheme, commissioned by Home Secretary, James Cleverly, in March of this year.
Since 2019, the Graduate visa route has allowed international undergraduate and masters students to remain and work in the UK for up to two years after graduating from a UK university, or up to three years after graduation for PhD students. These years are intended to facilitate the establishment of graduates in employment which offers Skilled Worker visa sponsorship.
The Conservative Government’s attitudes towards the Graduate visa route stem from their overall aim to reduce net migration and their speculation that the scheme acts as a backdoor for migrants with no intention of becoming skilled workers. Cleverly requested the MAC report examining the route over his concerns that study visas are “driven more by a desire for immigration rather than education.”
MAC found that the Graduate visa route was largely effective at aiding the transition of students to skilled workers, and that evidence showed very low levels of abuse. The report concluded that the “impact on public finances of Graduate visa holders on the route to be small but positive, as most appear to work, are young, and have no recourse to public funds.” MAC advised no alterations to be made to the scheme.
In April, the CEO of the Russell Group, Dr. Tim Bradshaw, urged MAC to recommend against cutting the Graduate visa route in a letter to the chair of MAC, Prof. Brian Bell. Bradshaw expressed that such a move, which would deter international students from studying in the UK, would threaten both the intellectual and creative talent of British academia and the financial stability of the UK university sector, worth £37 billion a year to the UK economy according to Consultancy London Economcics
The MAC report corroborated Bradshaw’s concerns for the sector’s financial dependence on international students, saying: “The fees that these students pay help universities to cover the losses they make in teaching British students and doing research. Without those students, many universities would need to shrink and less research would be done.” The Higher Education Statistics Agency found that in 2021-2022, international students’ fees comprised 30% of the total UK universities; income.
“Negative government rhetoric, new visa restrictions and increased visa fees are already having an impact on the attractiveness of the UK as a study destination”, Bradshaw explained, pointing to the 44% decrease in international university enrolments in January, according to a survey by Universities UK.
The MAC report affirmed that changes made to the Graduate visa route over the past year had made the UK a less attractive destination for studying for overseas applicants when compared to its rivals in Europe, America, and Australia. The Government’s decision in April to increase the income threshold for Skilled Worker visas from £26,200 to £38,700 resulted in accountancy firm KPMG withdrawing job offers to international graduates who would need Skilled Worker sponsorship to take up the role.
A government spokesperson has confirmed that they are “considering the review’s findings very closely and we will respond fully in due course”, regarding their final decision on the status of the Graduate visa route.
In just three weeks, a new temporary lecture theatre with a capacity of 250 was built in St Catherine’s College, amid continued access restrictions to key operational buildings in the College, including their permanent lecture theatre.
The discovery of RAAC (Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete) has caused many of the College’s structures to be shut down for remediation work. Building company Neptunus stated the College’s need for a “rapid high-quality temporary solution… to maintain their busy schedule of lectures, seminars and events,” according to a press release.
During construction of the theatre, Neptunus faced numerous technical challenges amidst the poor weather conditions occurring during the early half of 2024. The highly saturated and uneven ground – further compromised by St Catherine College’s location alongside the River Cherwell – required scaffolders to ensure the structures were at a uniform height by erecting part of the complex on scaffolding and external walkways.
Despite this, the lecture theatre was completed in less than a month, with a capacity of up to 250 people, and it is fitted out with amenities such as tiered seating, lighting and air conditioning. The fit-out of the facility was completed in a further three weeks, which included additional spaces such as a foyer and breakout rooms for seminars.
While the theatre is intended to be temporary, it was made to emulate “the look and feel of a permanent building,” the company’s press release states, and its main entrance is around one of the College’s treasured sculptures. The theatre is scheduled to remain on the site for at least nine months.
Neptunus also revealed St Catherine’s College contracted them following their success in previous projects with other Oxford colleges. The Northamptonshire-based company had previously built temporary multi-functional rooms for Trinity College during their renovations in 2019.
Belinda Gardner, St Catherine’s College Conference Manager, said in the statement: “Throughout the project, Neptunus demonstrated professionalism, open communication, and conduct that aligned with our own standards, finishing the works to an exceptionally high standard. We are grateful that this venue was made available in such a short amount of time, particularly given the difficult weather conditions experienced during January 2024.”
