|
By: Alexandria Goodman '25
During the peak of the Covid-19 pandemic, there was one phrase I was guaranteed to hear: “Have you done the Wordle?”. I would step into class, locker rooms, or even the dining hall and see the 5x6 black grid on everyone's phones. And it wasn’t just popular at Westminster. People around the globe seemed to be infected with Wordle hysteria. Whenever I scrolled on TikTok and browsed YouTube, I would see videos detailing the best strategies and users analyzing previous games to find the best plan for a successful Wordle run. In a society where differences often tear people apart, it felt like Wordle brought the world together. Sure, part of this can be attributed to everyone being forced to spend their days lounging inside, but Wordle also collectively gave us something to do together. Each day, it was something new to look forward to and brought a sense of adventure in an otherwise dreary time. Would you figure out the Wordle answer was XVIII, or would you leave the website as a loser? Families, once cohesive units, turned against each other in group chats in a battle for the best Wordle streak. Friends turned down their brightness screens on laptops and phones, worried those closest to them would betray them for Wordle glory. But as the saying goes: “all good things must come to end”. Covid restrictions lifted, and people found themselves pulled away from Wordle by the hustle of everyday life. All at once, the world seemed to grow distant again. Instead of logging onto Wordle during their free time, people went doomscrolling on their respective Instagram/Twitter/TikTok feeds. Some continued to do the daily Wordle, but the commodity of the activity was gone. If you were to ask “Have you Wordled?” to a random passerby in the hallway, the response would be “Who even does that anymore?” instead of a resounding “Yes”. There have been games that have tried to rise up to Wordle’s popularity – 2048, Hayday, Connections – but none has successfully taken the crown for themselves. The decline of a central pop culture has been lingering at the forefront of my mind for a while now. I’m reminded of it whenever I make an Instagram reel or movie reference, only to be met with confused faces and vice versa. The increase of choice, at least in my opinion, has made creating a central culture difficult and made the landing of cultural jokes difficult. Back in the late 20th century, when decades could be described by one thing, people did not have this much say in what they consumed. Back when the internet wasn’t a thing, people were only exposed to the top movies, artists, and bands: Spotify and Apple Music weren’t around, so people mostly heard new music on the radio, which only played popular songs. Streaming services weren’t a thing, so people had to haul themselves to a movie theater and watch whatever the theater decided to put on – usually a popular movie. The lack of choice forced people into a specific bubble, and if they wanted to get out of it, they had to intentionally find new things to do. You may be thinking, “Alex, isn’t that basically what social media’s algorithm does?” Social media indeed allows people to exist inside a bubble, but I would argue that these bubbles are way more personalized due to the increase in options. It is so much more accessible to create films, songs, and artwork now than it was in the late 20th century. This increase allows social media algorithms to create ultra-personalized bubbles for people instead of the general bubble that most were in back then. Sure, you may have a pop culture in your bubble, but there is absolutely no way it is reaching the same amount of people or having the same impact as pop culture back then. I’m not sure if the lack of pop culture is a good or bad thing. I like the fact that I can find ultra-specific genres of music or write a description of an art piece and find something that nearly matches it identically. However, I wish that a joke made about the Bear or the Oscars would land with everyone I meet. Perhaps, those Wordle glory days are over.
0 Comments
By: Luna Yang '26
It starts innocently enough: a casual, “So where are you thinking of applying?” at a family gathering. You smile politely, rattle off a few school names that sound impressive enough, and brace for the follow-up question “That’s a great school. Very competitive, though. What’s your backup?” You laugh it off. It’s fine. Totally fine. Then, somewhere between filling out the yellow college counseling sheet and your third meeting with the school counselor, the panic hits you. Where am I going to apply? What if I don’t get in? At some point in the college application process, we all feel this. But why does this process feel so overwhelming, and even at times, suffocating? Ever since we could color within the lines and write our names in neat bubble letters, we were told that college is key to ‘the good life,’ where we would discover our passions, find our people, and secure our future careers. But somewhere along the way, colleges morphed into a measure of success. It became a reflection of who we are, or at least, who we want others to believe we are. We then categorize our schools into a hierarchy. Safety. Target. Reach. We learn the lingo before we even understand our own preferences. And, suddenly, the names on our school list say more about our intelligence than our actual interests. We type “best colleges” into any search engine, and a pool of rankings appears. Best National Universities. Top Liberal Arts Colleges. Best Pre-Med Schools. We scroll, compare, then obsess, easily forgetting to ask: What do I want for my next four years? This trap of prestige is, unfortunately, real. We chase names that we can proudly print on sweatshirts, not always because those schools are right for us, but because they sound right to everyone else. So, where does this leave us? Anxious, overworked, and increasingly preoccupied with the prospect of acceptance rather than the excitement of possibility. While there is no simple cure for the demands of the process, it doesn’t have to be soul-depleting. The first step is to reframe what we define as a “good” college. The ranking list is often driven by metrics such as notable alumni, endowment size, and computer-calculated statistics that fail to measure compatibility. While prestige may be alluring, the overall fit offers long-term fulfillment. Begin by listing your non-negotiables: Do you value class size? Are you seeking a tight-knit community or an expansive campus? Then comes the harder part: allowing yourself to pursue a path that diverges from the conventional. This might mean choosing a lesser-known school that offers the exact program you’re passionate about, or even saying “no” to a highly ranked university that doesn’t align with your learning style. And, certainly, it means embracing the discomfort of relinquishing the imagined standards of others. Additionally, managing stress is just as important throughout the college process, so take breaks from college talk when it becomes too all-consuming. Limit your exposure to Reddit threads and social media posts that reduce your future to a test score or criteria. Instead, carve out time for things that ground you, such as taking a walk or even just having a conversation unrelated to school. These small pauses can help regain what you truly value and your sense of self. If you are a student reading this, and you are just as stressed out as I am, take a deep breath and step back from the rankings. Do not allow your worth to be deduced to an acceptance letter, and it certainly should not be a final test of your value. By: Sabrina Yang '26
As application season rolls around, students and parents inevitably find themselves touring a college campus. I have, personally, found myself on many college tours in my free time, and after a few tours, I learned what to look for. So, how do you make the most of your visit to a college campus? Let’s break it down. 1. See what information is already available. There is no purpose in hyper-focusing on content in an information session that can be found on the school’s website such as majors or application information. Many schools have the same education and housing systems. Instead, take the information session as a chance to get a feel of whether admissions officers and students take the school seriously. 2. Find the right person for the right question. Unless explicitly stated, the majority of students or staff hosting college visits do not have major-specific information. Ask the admissions office. Tour guides can’t tell you exactly how to get into their college. Ask the admissions office. Of course, the admissions office is not all-knowing. Any questions about student life or campus traditions should be directed to the tour guides. 3. Choose the right student tour guide. Some colleges will split visitors among a few tour guides. This is a reminder that you don’t have to stay in a specific group. Students are what make a college; when choosing a tour guide, the priority is to select a student with a similar area of interest as you. Alternatively, you can choose the most enthusiastic tour guide because a good first impression often comes from enthusiasm. 4. It’s all about the vibe. This may be the most generic point on the list, but it remains important. Information becomes repetitive as you visit more campuses, so your best option is to evaluate each college based on its vibe. Do you like the environment? The students? How do the people walk? How do they talk? I find the best way to assess colleges is just to give a rating out of 10 based completely on how I feel. Remember to keep a record of each college to keep things organized. College visits are an essential part of both assessing candidates and gauging your own preferences. It is not about academics but rather about community. Pay attention to the small details and make the most of your time on each campus. Happy touring! By: Mathias Seber
Roughly two weeks ago, on March 21, 2025, a massive fire broke out at Heathrow airport, one of the largest travel hubs in Europe. The fire was sparked at a power substation in West London, 1.5 miles from the airport. It was later determined that the fire was from a faulty transformer with 150,000 volts running through it. The transformer contained 25,000 litres of cooling oil that helped fuel the fire. Over one hundred people were rushed to safety in the close proximity, and, luckily, nobody was injured. Although many rushed to extinguish it, the incident affected roughly 300,000 travelers. Along with this, the fire disrupted power to thousands of houses throughout London and affected over 1,000 flights, disrupting power to the airport for 18 hours. During the 18 hours it took officials to get Heathrow up and running, the delay demonstrated the vulnerability in the British's travel infrastructure. The fire begs the question, why there were not steps in place to prevent something like this from happening and if there was a greater reason behind the accident? With this question, a day after the fire, the British government launched a full-scale investigation into the disaster. This incident is not alone, however, as nearly one year ago a similar incident occurred with a ground vehicle catching on fire. The airport is said to use the same amount of energy for a small city, and many officials were deterred by having a backup energy source due to the large investment – roughly around 100 million GBP. While accidents like these occur, the airport jumped the steps of proper safety and decided not to have a proper backup solution. If Heathrow had implemented the proper precautions, planes would have had the ability to land safely. This disaster illustrates the importance of safety in a time of several aviation accidents as seen in a Korean plane crash not even a half a year ago. Going forward, governments and airlines need to be held accountable and should be deterred from cutting corners to prevent the chaos of Heathrow’s fire from occurring again. Works Cited Penn, Ivan. “A Fire Plunged Heathrow into Darkness. A Nearby Data Center Kept Humming. Why?” The New York Times, March 26, 2025. Accessed 14 Apr. 2025 www.nytimes.com/2025/03/26/world/europe/heathrow-fire-power-outage-explained.html To the only tree standing
Do you ever miss your companions? How their lush leaves intertwined with your branches, waving gently in the early fall breeze; the simmering heat, still lingering from a sun-burnt summer, sticking to every groove on your mahogany trunk & their sienna boughs before their disappearance. I remember watching your gentle whispers from inside the glass panes as I lay in meditation on the auburn floor, thinking of how the scenery will last forever as I let the mellow tunes fill up my limbs -- the same way you let the clear breeze run through your amber foliage, releasing flashes of gold dancing, descending, to eternally rest on the Earth. What were you thinking when the storm took everything from you? Torn your soul apart? How the agonizing howl of wind brutally slashes your companions in half, their sturdy trunks falter & tumble onto the forest floor? Were you silently weeping like I did when I returned the next fall to find you to be the only tree standing? Did you also believe, like humans, that everything was going to last forever, until you became the only tree in the wilderness alone? By: Chloe Zhao
Sugar-free sodas line grocery shelves, influencers rave about "clean" eating, and desserts are replaced by protein bars wrapped in wellness branding. Cutting sugar is often seen as a fairly simple step toward better health—but what’s happening beneath the surface? The sugar substitute market reached $9.1 billion in 2023 as a result of this rapidly growing sugar-free trend. Swapping sugar for aspartame or stevia may seem like a wise choice at first, as sweetness without calories appears to be a good offering; however, neuroscience suggests a twist. The commonly used artificial sweeteners, such as aspartame, trick the brain into expecting calories. Yet, when those calories are not provided, the body may crave more sugar to compensate. For years, sugar-free products were touted as weight-loss aids; however, with recent studies showing that they may contribute to the very diseases they aim to prevent, the World Health Organization now discourages the long-term use of non-sugar sweeteners. Their suspected link to metabolic disorders, particularly Type 2 diabetes, has been continuously raising public concerns. In theory, artificial sweeteners bypass the insulin response of the pancreas. Still, in reality, human trials suggest that they might still be correlated with insulin spikes, disrupting the body’s metabolic signals. Despite how skeptics argue that correlation does not equal causation, the consistency of these findings has prompted warnings that are critical, especially to those who are already prone to metabolic syndrome. The use of sugar-free diets also poses psychological risks. Nutritionists warn that rigid dietary rules can promote orthorexia, an eating disorder characterized by an obsession with "clean" eating that escalates into anxiety, social isolation, or disordered eating habits. Marketing campaigns that associate sugar consumption with moral failure have been the primary cause of this trend. Findings suggesting that restrictive diets are often accompanied by higher rates of binge eating and emotional distress further corroborate this point, showcasing how the pursuit of nutritional purity may backfire. Historically, artificial sweeteners have already experienced repeating phases of acceptance and controversy. Saccharin, discovered in 1879, was banned in the early 20th century before being accepted again during sugar shortages. Aspartame, approved nearly a century later in 1981, remains controversial due to its neurobiological impacts even today. Newer options, like stevia, are marketed as more “natural,” yet their long-term effects remain unclear. However, for diabetics, artificial sweeteners provide a lifeline, allowing them to enjoy sweetness without raising blood glucose levels. Experts claim that the most critical aspect in this debate is context: sweeteners are neither magical nor malevolent and should be treated as a tool used in moderation. The solution to this so-called dilemma may lie in readjusting one's relationship with sweetness—particularly, advocating for mindful eating, which involves savoring small amounts of natural sugars rather than focusing on elimination and substitution. The sugar-free trap reveals a larger truth: health is rarely as simple as swapping one ingredient for another. Artificial sweeteners do seem like an attractive alternative. Yet their lasting effects on the brain, body, and behavior highlight the need for careful, individualized approaches. The healthiest path may lie in balance—using these substitutes in moderation, letting go of absolutes, and focusing on overall dietary quality rather than chasing perfection. (2023, May 15). WHO advises not to use non-sugar sweeteners for weight control in newly released guideline. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/news/item/15-05-2023-who-advises-not-to-use-non-sugar-sweeteners-for-weight-control-in-newly-released-guideline (n.d.). Sugar Substitutes Market Size & Trends. Grand View Research https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/sugar-substitutes-market Gianna Monaco ‘27
It was Bleeding Blue in Tampa, Florida, on Sunday, April 6, 2025. The University of Connecticut women’s basketball team had just won the national title after routing Dawn Staley’s star-studded South Carolina team 82-59. The dynamic and dominant trio of Paige Bueckers, Azzi Fudd, and Sarah Strong led the Huskies to their 12th national title, the most in NCAA basketball history – men or women. It had taken the UConn women a long time to reach this point, after enduring a nine-year championship drought. The 2025 title wasn’t just a victory—it was a redemption story years in the making. In recent years, the program has dealt with a series of setbacks, from an unexpected pandemic to devastating injuries. The players have experienced over 12 season-ending injuries since Bueckers’ sophomore year, including ACL tears, concussions, back surgeries, and broken bones. Despite all odds, the Huskies remained resilient. Bueckers, who had yet to add a championship to her already impressive list of collegiate accolades, finally affirmed her spot among the all-time greats of women's college basketball. As the face of the UConn team in March Madness, she had faced numerous obstacles in her college career – including a tibial plateau fracture and meniscus tear during her sophomore season, followed by an ACL tear just four months later. Head Coach Geno Auriemma hit the nail on the head: "[Bueckers'] journey…has been the most incredible for any kid I've had." Bueckers rose to every challenge she faced on and off the court. Her teammates described her in one interview as compassionate, loyal, funny, and yes, childish. That unshakable bond, and their shared love for the game, gave them the motivation that all other teams lacked to win. In the final showdown in Tampa, the Huskies didn’t just show up — they dominated. Led by Final Four Most Outstanding Player Azzi Fudd, UConn closed the first half with a 10-point lead. But it was not until the third quarter that UConn truly sealed the deal, with Big East Freshman of the Year Sarah Strong and Paige “Buckets” Bueckers combining for 23 of the team’s 26 points. The Huskies, capitalizing on the Gamecocks' mistakes, were able to finish the quarter on an efficient 12-3 run. With 1:32 left in the game, Auriemma subbed out Fudd, Strong, and Bueckers, who each hugged Auriemma and the rest of the coaching staff, receiving a standing ovation from the fans in Amalie Arena. The Huskies played a phenomenal game collectively, but three players stood out: Strong, Fudd, and Bueckers. Strong’s 24-point, 15-rebound performance made her the first freshman in history to post 20+ points and 15+ rebounds in a national championship title game. Strong also racked up 114 points, a record for any freshman in the NCAA Tournament, marking another significant milestone in her very young career. Fudd showcased an impressive range of scoring and defensive abilities. Despite going just 1-for-7 beyond the arc, Fudd found her shots elsewhere. Upon making the Sweet 16, Husky Nation was pleasantly surprised when Fudd announced via social media her intent to return to Storrs, Connecticut, for the 2025-2026 season. After the game, Bueckers noted, “it’s been a story of resilience, gratitude of overcoming adversity and responding to life’s challenges…I wouldn't trade it for the world.” Bueckers, her collegiate career now complete with a little extra bling, marked her final game with 17 points, 6 rebounds, and 3 assists. It will not be her last minute on the court, nor the number of points she scored that night that defines her legacy, but the impact she leaves on her teammates, coaches, and the program after five incredible years at the University of Connecticut. Geno Auriemma is not a crier. He is neither flashy nor loud. He is, however, a winner. The all-time winningest coach in college basketball called the 2025 finale “one of the most emotional national championships I've been a part of since that very first.” He choked out the heartfelt sentiment with tears in his eyes, a rare moment, and one true basketball fans will never forget. Winning a championship was the only way he could have imagined ending his record-setting 40th season with UConn. And yet, Auriemma continues to build a dynasty shaped by legends like Diana Taurasi, Sue Bird, Breanna Stewart, and Maya Moore. This title won’t be the last. With stars like Azzi Fudd and KK Arnold returning, and incoming recruits like Kelis Fisher and Gandy Malou-Mamel on the way, the future of UConn women’s basketball is as bright as ever. Camilla Norton ‘25
Demon Copperhead tells the transformative tale of a young boy navigating the struggles of poverty, isolation, and a drug epidemic. Inspired by David Copperfield, this bildungsroman follows Demon’s life as he faces countless hardships. Growing up with a single mother battling addiction, Demon is forced to learn independence and resilience from an early age. His mother’s drug problems led to years spent moving in and out of foster care. The novel powerfully explores themes of generational trauma and the difficulty of breaking cycles of poverty and addiction. I highly recommend this book—it’s unique, full of unexpected twists, and emotionally compelling. It’s fascinating to follow the characters from birth through early adulthood, witnessing how they grow, change, and learn from their experiences. Ultimately, the story highlights the importance of family and standing by one another through tough times. Despite his many struggles, Demon can turn his life around and choose a better path for himself. The novel tackles complex subjects, offering insight into how challenging it is to break free from all you've ever known. It powerfully shows how much our environment shapes who we are—and how difficult, yet possible, it is to rise above it. Reese Lanzone '25 & Delfina Fraiberger '25
Reporting live on an airplane somewhere between Hartford, CT and Palm Beach, FL, Delfina and I are tuning in on Avon Old Farms’ students' comments about the hockey game's recent results. “I’m not happy about it,” the first blonde boy in the sweatshirt says, just half an hour after Westy’s epic comeback. The other blonde boy in the sweatshirt says he feels “bad.” They seem to be very upset about this ultimate takedown; however, they are attempting to remain poker-faced. Just a week or maybe two ago, Westy tragically lost to Avon, although having put up a valiant fight. Today, Westy has come back stronger than ever and won 4-1, and we are triumphant, as seen by the utter morale on this plane! One student said they had never been so happy in their life: “I have never been so happy in my life!” Cricket Beard remarks upon hearing the news. As avid Westy superfans, we cannot see what’s next for our Martlets on ice! Lily Meguid ‘26 How many of us recall the apprehension and anxiety around our first months at Westy? So many new faces, situations, conventions, traditions, customs, rules, etc. A year or two on, we don’t think of it often, but it was undeniably a change-intensive time for all of us. That’s especially true for our schoolmates who join after the Third Form. In my experience, lots of important relationships and patterns can be created early on, and being a year or two off cycle can make it all the more challenging an adjustment. Curiously, when I ask friends about their early months on the Hill, even many who matriculated as Third Formers say they could have benefited from more guidance. This is especially the case when it comes to understanding the rules of the road on expected behavior and the consequences of breaking them. I will confess that I would have taken advantage of a peer-only group to help me navigate my way around and perhaps accelerated my acclimation to a border’s life away from home. Adjusting to a new school is about more than just academics: social pressures, dorm life, extracurricular commitments, and the emotional challenges of being away from home all play a role in shaping our experiences. This inspired the idea for a peer support club that eases the transition for students new to Westminster by offering peer-led guidance and a forum for exchanging experiences through open dialogue. It strives to be a space where new students can ask questions, gain insight, and find support. Through group discussions, informal gatherings, and mentorship opportunities, every student will feel welcomed and supported. This club is about much more than answering logistical questions, like fostering friendships and giving new students confidence to fully embrace Westminster’s culture. The transition to a new school is never easy, but the right support system can transform uncertainty into opportunity. By weaving new students into the fabric of Westminster’s community and giving them a space to share their voices, the Westy Navigators Club ensures that no unsure Martlet navigates that journey alone. |
Photos from Verde River, Manu_H, focusonmore.com, Brett Spangler, Cloud Income