The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Opinion
 Wednesday, February 2, 2022 — 9

I

f you’re like me, you’ll agree 
that winter semester did not 
begin Jan. 5, at least not in 

spirit. With both students and 
professors adjusting to hybrid and 
in-person classes as well as spend-
ing a majority of the first two lec-
tures going over syllabi and basic 
course structure, the semester 
started off slow. When did things 
really begin? Jan. 18, the day after 
the Martin Luther King Jr. long 
weekend. My start was similarly 
sluggish. For instance, I decid-
ed to spend that long weekend 
rewatching my favorite TV show 
from 2021, “Ted Lasso.” During 
my two-day long binge, I came 
across what is probably one of my 
favorite quotes ever:

“You just listen to your gut, okay? 

And on your way down to your gut, 
check in with your heart. Between 
those two things, they’ll let you know 
what’s what.”

For as long as I can remember, be 

it the biggest Bollywood stars from 
back home, the cream of the Holly-
wood crop, or the most awe-inspiring 
storybook heroes, all of their portray-
als had one trait in common: brav-
ery. From Hermione and Frodo to 
Jack Traven from “Speed,” I idolized 
characters who were able to defy the 
odds and do what they thought was 
right, even when everyone was tell-
ing them not to. I looked up to them 
because they had the uncanny ability 
to, time and again, do as Ted Lasso so 
eloquently said: trust their guts and 

follow their hearts. As I grew older, 
however, and was confronted by the 
prospect of making life-changing 
decisions, I realized that it is easier 
said than done. Case in point: my 
decision to attend the University of 
Michigan. 

With this year’s early action deci-

sions right around the corner, I can’t 
help but be reminded about how 
stressful April 2020 was for me. 
With the Indian government send-
ing everybody into a total lockdown 
on March 23 following the outbreak 
of COVID-19, I decided to try and 
make the best of my circumstances. 
I resolved to finalize which college I 
would be attending and made quick 
and early progress by narrowing 
down to two choices at the begin-
ning of the month. Thirty days later, 
after multiple spreadsheets with 
rubrics that considered everything 
from weather to alumni network and 
phone calls with every distant cousin 
that had any connection to either uni-
versity, I had made no progress. Yes, 
it was frustrating, but a part of me 
saw it coming, because I knew inde-
cisiveness ran in my family. It wasn’t 
the first time I had second guessed 
myself, and it wasn’t the first time I 
had lacked conviction. Feeling lost 
and disappointed, I remember calling 
my best friend and telling her about 
my dilemma. All she had to say was, 

“ 
After a point you have to stop 

making lists and just go with your 
gut.” 

The next day I paid my deposit for 

the University of Michigan and have 
not looked back since. 

To all those currently contemplat-

ing their next steps in life, be it your 

college decision, asking someone out 
to the homecoming dance or pick-
ing between two ice cream flavors at 
Ben and Jerry’s, I only have one thing 
to say: have faith in yourself. Lists, 
rubrics and spreadsheets are good 
and I will always affirm that the solu-
tions to many of our problems can be 
found through simple and logical 
reasoning. In truth, deciding which 
criteria I was going to consider for my 
university rubric and what weight I 
would assign to them gave me a clear 
idea of what I wanted from my college 
experience and helped me immense-
ly. Nevertheless, once I realized that, 
even after a month, I was no closer 
to knowing where I would be in Fall 
2020, I learned that even reason has 
its limitations. Only intuition could 
fill the gap. 

I am hardly an expert, but when-

ever I’ve found myself stuck without 
any apparent rational next step, I did 
what I felt was right. That, I think, 
makes all the difference in the world. 
It doesn’t always work. In fact, it 
blew up in my face on a couple of 
occasions. After all, even Frodo, the 
usually unshakeable hero, hesitated 
at the end of the “Lord of the Rings” 
movie and was consequently subject 
to some bodily harm. But there is no 
better way to prove to yourself that 
you are in control of your life than 
to follow your instincts, because 
they’re one of the only things that 
are 100% you. They are the purest, 
most organic choices that you can 
make, and as Ted Lasso so brilliantly 
recalled, 

“It is our choices that make us who 

we truly are, far more than our abili-
ties.”

PAIGE HODDER

Managing Editor

Stanford Lipsey Student Publications Building

420 Maynard St. 

Ann Arbor, MI 48109

 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.

JASMIN LEE

Editor in Chief

JULIAN BARNARD 

AND SHUBHUM GIROTI

Editorial Page Editors

ficial position of The Daily’s Editorial Board. 

All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

Julian Barnard
Zack Blumberg
Emily Considine
Brandon Cowit
Jess D’Agostino

Ben Davis

Andrew Gerace
Shubhum Giroti

Min Soo Kim
Jessie Mitchell

Zoe Phillips

Mary Rolfes

Nikhil Sharma

Jack Tumpowsky

Joel Weiner
Erin White

F

or more than 150 years, DTE 
Energy has generated energy 
for the state of Michigan, and 

now serves 3.5 million customers. 
DTE Energy, a private company, 
supplies energy to the people of Ann 
Arbor as well as the University of 
Michigan. However, recently DTE 
has been leaving their customers 
“in the dark,” with over 158,000 
customers left without power in 
August 2021. Michigan is the fourth-
worst state in the United States when 
it comes to average time to restore 
power to a customer after an outage. 
These paying customers are tired 
of this monopoly company with a 
lack of reliability and clean energy 
generation. While DTE has made 
promises to reduce greenhouse gas 
emissions, there is no competition 
holding them accountable. DTE has 
promised to reach net zero carbon 
emissions by 2050, but this will 
also increase rates for customers 
by $3.18 per month. Michigan also 
performs below average compared 
to the rest of the United States when 
it comes to reliability, affordability 
and environmental impacts. Due to 
these issues, many have proposed 
a 
municipalization 
of 
energy 

production in Ann Arbor to create a 
community-owned utility. 

Municipalization is the transfer 

of all the assets of a privately owned 
company to a public institution. One 
of the most pivotal benefits of such 
a change would be reliability. Such 
a switch to public ownership might 
lead to quicker response time during 
emergencies as the utility is in local 
hands. Furthermore, publicly owned 
institutions are not profit driven, 
their central focus is instead on 
catering to the citizens of Ann Arbor 
by making the utility more affordable. 
Public power also involves citizens in 
the decision making process, which 
would represent a significant step 
towards helping the people of Ann 
Arbor reach their goal of clean power 
— one that they have been crying out 
for. A switch to public power might 

also prompt long-term thinking 
regarding more sustainable forms of 
generating energy; this is something 
a private firm — under pressure to 
deliver short-term profits and keep 
shareholders happy — might not find 
the time and resources to do.

In light of this push, as well as the 

issues with DTE that precipitated it, 
the Ann Arbor City Council voted 
on Jan. 18 to begin a study into 
the effectiveness and feasibility of 
a municipal electricity program. 
Although 
the 
aforementioned 

benefits of public power would 
seem to suggest that such a study 
would simply be a delay — if public 
power is such an unalloyed good 
and so necessary to fight climate 
change, we should be willing to 
spend large sums of money on it — 
there is not a consensus on whether 
or not it would actually be the 
right thing to do. While DTE has 
unsurprisingly come out against 
the proposal, opposition, or at least 
apprehensiveness, is not limited to 
those with a direct interest in seeing 
the project fail. The City Council 
resolution to create this study had 
been debated since last September, 
with some members pushing for a 
more extensive survey given their 
concerns.

Why 
do 
some 
people 
still 

doubt the proposal? The truth is, 
municipalization is hard, with the 
last 
successful 
municipalization 

project in Michigan dating back 
to 1912. Creating a public utility is 
an extensive, difficult process that 
requires support and commitment 
from the community. Not all 
municipalities are successful, for 
reasons ranging from political 
battles to a lack of momentum 
required to complete such a long 
and arduous process. In the case of 
Ann Arbor, there is also the issue 
of having to buy out DTE’s existing 
infrastructure, 
an 
expensive 

purchase, considering the breadth 
of infrastructure and investment 
present, that will be an early 
and significant roadblock if the 
municipalization were to go ahead. 

But Ann Arbor is different. The 

large public university that lies 

within it can facilitate the steps that 
need to be taken. Someone must 
“spearhead” the development of this 
utility by promoting the concept to 
the community, discussing with 
the local government and handling 
legal aspects, and the University 
of Michigan is an institution large 
enough to do so if they wished. Not 
only does the University have a 
considerable influence on the Ann 
Arbor community, they are also the 
largest consumers of power in the 
city, which would make any public 
backing of the municipalization 
on their end a game-changer. 
Over and above providing some 
much-needed resources for the 
process, they might also be able to 
play a key role in helping build the 
aforementioned sustainable power 
system. There is precedent for such 
a concept. A glance at East Lansing 
yields a prime example — Michigan 
State University’s T.B. Simon Power 
Plant. Moreover, the University of 
Michigan has already shown signs 
that it is willing to move away from 
carbon-based energy sources.In 
2019, the U-M campus consumed 
a total of 6,924,524 MMbtu, which 
was primarily generated through 
cogenerated steam and natural 
gas combustion. The University 
has switched a portion of its own 
energy usage away from DTE into 
its own production because of the 
unsustainable practices of DTE. 
Supporting a transition away from 
purchasing DTE Energy would 
illustrate to the public that the 
University views sustainability as a 
priority to combat climate change. 
In the past, the University has been 
unable to take a larger step due 
to lack of funding and incentives, 
but a partnership between Ann 
Arbor citizens and the University 
could prevent this. The University 
is a consistent and organized 
presence in the city, as opposed to 
the student body, which undergoes 
massive turnover every four years. 
They should take an active role in 
energy production and distribution 
in Ann Arbor, as that is key to the 
environmental goals it claims to 
back.

From The Daily: The potential of public power

THE MICHIGAN DAILY 

EDITORIAL BOARD

RUSHABH SHAH
Opinion Columnist

Trust your heart; it knows the way

N

o 
one 
likes 
to 
feel 

abandoned. 
This 
is 

especially true as the 

dead 
of 
winter 
approaches, 

with seasonal affective disorder 
and the current omicron surge 
combining to leave many people 
feeling increasingly isolated and 
lonely. Jan 2., or Dating Sunday, 
an unofficial holiday that sees the 
busiest activity across multiple 
dating app platforms, falls right in 
the middle of this. The explanation 
for the intense surge in dating 
app usage at this time is that the 
day falls right after holiday blues, 
when people have set New Year’s 
resolutions and are counting 
down the days until Valentine’s 
Day. This also coincides with the 
end of cuffing season, another 
impetus of online dating activity. 

Amid all of this, digital daters 

need to remember the basics of 
dating etiquette. This means to 
communicate with honesty and 
clarity with potential matches. 
Above all, commit to not ghosting 
someone if you have decided to no 
longer pursue them romantically. 
Even if you may have found 
another person or want to avoid 
the awkwardness of breaking it 
off, ghosting is something that 
should be avoided out of respect 
for the other person’s time and 
emotions.

Ghosting, while a newly-coined 

term, has been a mainstay of the 
dating scene for decades. Tropes 
of people escaping a date by 
crawling out a bathroom window 
or disappearing without warning 
are well established. The act has 
worryingly become normalized. 
Fifty percent of people in the 
dating scene have been ghosted 
and almost the same amount 
have been the one to ghost. This 
behavior once was reserved for 
the 
disrespectful. 
Nowadays, 

ghosting is common practice. 
This is alarming. What does it say 
about current dating culture when 
abrupt abandonment of one’s date 
is accepted practice? Ghosting 

is now one of those things that 
comes along with finding a 
romantic partner.

There needs to be a recalibration 

of dating culture. It’s not healthy 
for sudden loss of contact to be the 
status quo. 

Ghosting may seem innocuous. 

However, 
it 
has 
serious 

consequences for the ghosted. 
Ghosting hurts because it’s a 
whiplash 
in 
assumptions 
of 

how a person feels about you. 
To the ghosted, someone, who 
they thought cared for them, 
abandoned them. A person who 
they were building trust with 
all of a sudden disengaging from 
contact can feel like nothing 
short of betrayal. Being on the 
receiving end of ghosting can 
be painful. Studies have shown 
that social rejection activates 
the same neurological pathways 
as physical pain. Ghosting can 
trigger the grief cycle as the 
ghosted experiences an emotional 
concoction 
of 
embarrassment, 

anger, sadness and loneliness. 
While ghosting may be an easy 
way out of the relationship for 
the ghoster, it can be immensely 
hurtful to the ghosted. 

Taking the courage to break 

off contact by sending a simple 
“I’ve decided to take a break on 
meeting new people” text does 
the potential ghoster good as well. 
It promotes character growth. 
Admitting that you no longer 
want to connect with someone 
means you are being honest 
with yourself and strengthening 
your communication skills and 
empathy. By not ghosting, it is a 
clear signal that you understand 
how your actions affect others. 
You’re acknowledging that you at 
least care enough about the person 
to not want to hurt their feelings 
more than just spurring a tad of 
disappointment. 

Yes, ghosting is the easy way out. 

In theory, all bad feelings can be 
avoided by ignoring the situation 
all together. It’s not unreasonable 
to feel guilty for wasting the 
time of the other person now 
that the match is going nowhere. 
But you’re not a bad person for 

honestly 
communicating 
your 

feelings to others. A bad person, 
though, would ghost and leave the 
other person hurt and confused. 
By giving the other person some 
sort of closure, it can help them 
process their feelings and move 
on to other people. Not ghosting 
indicates your respect for the 
other person, and it is a moment of 
character growth that will benefit 
you in future romantic ventures.

I have been in both positions. 

Unfortunately, I ghosted someone 
in my past. Looking back on it, 
now also having inhabited the 
position of the ghosted, I am not 
proud of ghosting someone. It 
might have alleviated my shame or 
nervousness, but thinking of how 
my actions may have negatively 
affected the person I was talking 
with does not feel great. I now 
realize that it is better to have 
the courage to respectfully end 
communication with a potential 
romantic 
interest 
by 
clearly 

voicing your thoughts and feelings 
rather than running away from 
the situation all together. Being 
ghosted is not a great thing to go 
through, and therefore, I’ve made 
a pledge to never ghost someone 
across a dating app again.

It’s rude to abruptly walk out 

of an in-person date with no 
warning, so why would it be any 
different over text? Netiquette 
must be maintained when we 
connect with each other across 
dating apps. This is for the 
benefit of both parties. Direct 
communication will always be 
superior to ghosting. Though 
it can be uneasy to break off 
connection 
with 
someone 

through text, it is better than 
the fallout that accompanies 
ghosting. Ghosting can cause 
the ghosted to feel lonely, hurt 
and confused. I, for one, would 
not want the fact that I caused 
someone to feel that way on my 
conscience. Vowing to not ghost 
future romantic interests forces 
one to be honest with oneself 
and to not hurt others through 
abandonment. 
Let’s 
make 

ghosting uncool again. It never 
was cool in the first place.

Let’s stop ghosting each other 

BENJAMIN DAVIS

Opinion Columnist

O

n September 23, 2021, the 
University of Michigan 
hosted the English band 

Glass Animals for a concert. The 
indie rock band, which has existed 
since 2010, combines synth-pop, 
indie, R&B and hip hop. While 
they have seen minor successes as a 
band in the last decade, nothing has 
taken mainstream media by storm 
quite like their song “Heat Waves.” 
“Heat 
Waves” 
was 
originally 

released in June 2020, and it 
subsequently experienced a slow 
rise to mainstream popularity. This 
slow rise was so slow that the song 
broke the record for the longest 
ascent to the top on Billboard’s Hot 
Rock and Alternative Songs.

The popularity built up as “Heat 

Waves” played in the second season 
of Netflix’s popular original series, 
“Never Have I Ever,” during the kiss 
between the two main characters, 
and from this a TikTok trend was 
born. The trend was TikTokers 
putting videos of important figures 
in their life to the song. The original 
sound by sevier.edits has been used 
in over 1.4 million videos, and the 
original version of the song has 
526.5k uses. Many U-M students 
who attended the concert did not 
know much about Glass Animals 
other than this singular viral song. 

Despite lasting over two hours, 

the entirety of the concert set, 
hosted at Crisler Center, was filled 
with the entire audience chanting 
“PLAY ‘HEAT WAVES,” ignoring 
the other songs. Once the song 
played, few people sang other than 
the 30 seconds featured on social 
media and the Netflix series. Once 
“Heat Waves” ended, droves of 
people left. Most people didn’t care 
about the concert outside of what 
was seen as “viral.” It led me to 
question: why didn’t they bother 
to look into this band further? 
Everyone 
knew 
they 
would 

be attending the band’s entire 
performance, so why did no one 
listen to any other songs or even the 
entirety of “Heat Waves”? Did they 
lose the capacity to listen to the 
Glass Animals with all the other 
digital media they consume?

Media involves constant, rapid 

information 
being 
exchanged. 

There is always an opportunity 
to discover something new. In 
2021, we took in five times more 

information than we did in 1986. So 
how does this constant exposure to 
new information and media impact 
how we function? According to 
Microsoft’s Attention Span Research 
Report, what was an average human 
attention span of 12 seconds in the 
year 2000 dropped to eight seconds 
by 2013. In comparison, the average 
attention span of a goldfish is nine 
seconds. This decrease in attention 
span relates to everything from 
concentrating 
in 
conversations 

to focusing on schoolwork to 
engaging with content. This is due 
to the information overload of social 
media, which 73% of Americans 
report feeling. Specifically, with 
regard to the music industry, there 
are an overwhelming number of 
artists, genres, albums and songs 
that are now accessible with the 
touch of a button. With so many 
competing interests, it’s impossible 
to absorb every artist fully. 

Yet, living among a digital 

landscape, we are becoming better 
at being more alert and efficient 
with the shorter bursts of attention. 
These changes in our consumption 
explain today’s concept of “going 
viral.” The media obsesses over 
a specific trend, song or public 
figure, which they then promptly 
forget. 
Everyone 
is 
constantly 

craving something new. This is 
called novelty seeking, or a “strong 
interest in having new experiences.” 
Musicians Institute explains that 
the ability to debut songs through 
posting makes it easier to discover 
artists by eliminating the necessity 
of a label. However, there is an 
increased amount of content by 
increasing accessibility, which is 
why these viral songs often don’t 
stick. 

The extensive process of “getting 

the song out there” that many 
musicians experienced in the past 
doesn’t exist in the same capacity 
today, making these viral songs pop 
up right in front of us. On a silver 
platter, new content appeals to our 
new attention patterns. We either like 
or scroll, causing the content to pop up 
on more devices or not. There’s always 
an audience on the internet waiting 
for that next best thing. According 
to the Pew Research Center, 31% of 
American adults are online almost 
constantly and 48% go online several 
times a day. Overall, more than eight 
in 10 adults go online at least daily. 
Considering this study included adults 
from ages 18 to 64, our reliance on 

technology knows no age limits.

Before the widespread use of online 

music platforms, we mainly absorbed 
concept albums used by artists to 
produce a narrative for the listener. 
When all the songs are listened to 
together in the full album, there’s a 
storytelling experience that cannot 
be replicated. For this reason, album 
connoisseurs instruct us to sit down 
and take in the whole experience. But 
this is not a reality that today’s society 
often partakes in. Today’s lifestyle 
rarely allows us to listen for the 
meaning in music; we’ve introduced 
habits that put the soundtrack on 
the back burner. There is often a 
secondary task such as walking to 
class, getting ready or doing work. 

The quick development of social 

media is changing the way audiences, 
especially 
younger 
generations, 

consume 
digital 
and 
physical 

products. Producers must adapt to 
these preference changes to develop 
more accurate consumption models. 
There will be no advancement of 
music if we continue producing for 
the past – we need to appeal to the 
future. So, should there be a switch 
in the music industry to cater to this? 
If a two-minute song is completely 
ignored, with the exception of the 
15-second section that goes viral on 
social media, why are we still focusing 
on producing longer content? Should 
the music industry shift to create 
shorter content presenting a message 
or emotion more efficiently? Or 
continue the way we always have? 
Should we adapt or hold onto these 
traditions of the past? 

Music has been a mode of 

movement for centuries, a strong 
force of social development tackling 
issues such as racial injustice or 
gender roles. So focusing on the 
best way to intertwine this medium 
into our lives to benefit consumers 
emotionally, socially and politically 
is a key concept to analyze. Whether 
it is creating another industry solely 
focused on this shorter content 
production or releasing shorter 
versions of soundtracks for those 
who want to lightly listen, this 
shift in consumption habits must 
be recognized to keep music as a 
relevant medium for all types of 
listeners. There is still a significant 
industry for the kinds of listeners 
album creators desire, so by 
manufacturing a separate industry 
just for this “viral” content, the 
music for trends and deep listeners 
can be separate.

What music can tell us about our attention span

GABBY RIVAS
Opinion Columnist