I give up. I just can't watch the CBC News Network anymore. Not for a while at least. Not until all of this Rob Ford stuff has blown over.
For the last little while, CBC News Network has been doing its best job to imitate CNN with its extensive, in depth, overblown, overdone coverage of what is going on in Toronto, also known in some Canadian circles as the centre of the Universe.
Having lived outside of Canada I can safely say it isn't. In fact, the place I used to call home was way bigger, more beautiful, and a far more interesting place than boring Toronto ever could be.
I guess News Network figures it is giving its audience what it believes it wants.
I love how big of a deal it is because it is getting recognized and reported outside of Canada on networks like CNN, and on programs like The Daily Show.
It's almost as if foreign coverage, in particular American foreign coverage seems to give the story more validity or relevance.
Well I've had it.
I started watching the news a lot this year because as a journalism student I feel it is very important to keep up to date with what is going on in the world.
I do have to write current event quizzes so this does provide a bit of the inspiration for my sudden interest in news, but seeing as I don't have to take another current events' news quiz until next semester (watch the class get a current events' news quiz tomorrow - if we do it's my fault and I want to apologize to the rest of the class) I think I'm going to skip watching the news, and in particular, CBC News Network for the next little while.
Hopefully when I start watching again in the new year all of this stupidity will be off the air.
cheers
rymr
Monday, 18 November 2013
Monday, 11 November 2013
The Jets Get it Right
Last night's Winnipeg Jets' game was a little bit special. It wasn't because the Jets were able to win the game in a shootout, but because the team and the organization took the time before the game to honour a veteran of World War Two, a season ticket holder and a fixture at most Jets' home games.
During the national anthem at the MTS Centre the fans get loud when they emphasize the True North part of the song. Another tradition tied to the national anthem before the game is to show Len Kopiaski saluting up on the jumbotron scoreboard.
During last night's game they brought him out onto the ice surface. He needed his walker to stand up some of the time, but most of the time he was using one of his hands to prop up his usual salute.
At the end of the song he was again shown on the scoreboard and given a louder than usual round of applause from the appreciative fans.
Last year I actually sat just a few seats over from where he sits. During one of the period breaks a few of the fans came up to him and shook his hand. They even asked for a picture and he was kind enough to oblige them.
Usually at the MTS Centre, the fans are cheering on their sports' heroes. Although that was the case last night, at least for some time the sports' heroes had to share the applause.
It wasn't just for Len Kopiaski, but for all soldiers who have served.
I'll stand for that any time.
cheers
rymr
During the national anthem at the MTS Centre the fans get loud when they emphasize the True North part of the song. Another tradition tied to the national anthem before the game is to show Len Kopiaski saluting up on the jumbotron scoreboard.
During last night's game they brought him out onto the ice surface. He needed his walker to stand up some of the time, but most of the time he was using one of his hands to prop up his usual salute.
At the end of the song he was again shown on the scoreboard and given a louder than usual round of applause from the appreciative fans.
Last year I actually sat just a few seats over from where he sits. During one of the period breaks a few of the fans came up to him and shook his hand. They even asked for a picture and he was kind enough to oblige them.
Usually at the MTS Centre, the fans are cheering on their sports' heroes. Although that was the case last night, at least for some time the sports' heroes had to share the applause.
It wasn't just for Len Kopiaski, but for all soldiers who have served.
I'll stand for that any time.
cheers
rymr
Monday, 4 November 2013
Winnipeg's Great War
Ever since I read the book "All Quiet on the Western Front" I have been facinated by the history of World War One. This passion was furthered after watching the great series on the Canadian HIstory Channel, For King and Empire, hosted by Norm Christie. The book, Winnipeg's Great War, is not about military history. Jim Blanchard, author of the book told our class that he didn't want readers looking for a book on military history to be dissapointed. This book is about the social history of Winnipeg.
The title of the book draws inspiration from the name originally given to the First World War. It was called 'The Great War".
As a Canadian who is of Mennonite decent I was very interested to read about how my ancestors were affected by the First World War.
In case you don't know Mennonites are a pacifist group that came to Canada because we were kicked out of every other country because we didn't want to fight in any wars.
We also wanted to be able to preserve our language and our culture. The book deals with the culture of Winnipeg at the time and how this affected the school system.
Winnipeg was a very different place during this period in history. It wasn't the multicultural society that we have today. It was a society that considered itself British first and then Canadian. This would change after the war.
One comment Blanchard made as he spoke to our class stuck out at me. He felt that the Canadians who had fought in the war had done 'the right thing'.
There's no questioning the bravery that the soldiers fighting in the first war, or any war for that matter, have inside them.
But I do question whether or not what they did was 'the right thing'.
World War One was wholesale slaughter such that the world had never seen before. It was new technology such as the machine gun, combined with barbed wire to create killing zones where nothing could survive.
Earlier tactics were now useless to the commanders who had been put in place, not because of ability but because of birth, status or patronage.
Things would have to change but before they were, countless numbers of people were senslessly slaughtered. Territorial gains were measured in meters.
But this wasn't a book about military history, so perhaps I was a little disapointed by that.
It did seem to go on tangents a lot and lacked focus. Chapters seemed to go everywhere and it was hard to follow at times. Characters came in and out of the book. Some received a sentence, other paragraphs and pages.
If anything, for me it lacked a heart - something to tie it all together.
As part of this assignment I went and shot some video footage of places mentioned in the book.
I went to the Manitoba Legislature where there is a statue to commemorate all those who died in the war.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8WebcKjmCM
The next stop was City hall. The new city hall was erected on the same sight as the old one which was designed by Charles and Earl Barber. For more information on them and the old building check out this link: http://timemachine.siamandas.com/PAGES/winnipeg_stories/CITYHALL1.htm
The old city hall is gone, but I did have a chance to take some video across the street at two of the buildings designed by the same architects which are now a part of the downtown campus of Red
River College.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U0faGvtHHA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFZtmo5rhbM&feature=youtu.be
After visiting city hall I decided to take a stop at Valour Road. On Portage avenue there is a nice sign with a First World War soldier on it. On the street itself is a gold light post with a plaque and a reef to commemorate the three soldiers who were born on this street, had enlisted together and all won the Victoria Cross. Sadly, two of these soldiers died during the war.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gcs0GgIGXPc
Click on any of the links to see some of the video I shot of these sights in Winnipeg.
cheers
rymr
The title of the book draws inspiration from the name originally given to the First World War. It was called 'The Great War".
As a Canadian who is of Mennonite decent I was very interested to read about how my ancestors were affected by the First World War.
In case you don't know Mennonites are a pacifist group that came to Canada because we were kicked out of every other country because we didn't want to fight in any wars.
We also wanted to be able to preserve our language and our culture. The book deals with the culture of Winnipeg at the time and how this affected the school system.
Winnipeg was a very different place during this period in history. It wasn't the multicultural society that we have today. It was a society that considered itself British first and then Canadian. This would change after the war.
One comment Blanchard made as he spoke to our class stuck out at me. He felt that the Canadians who had fought in the war had done 'the right thing'.
There's no questioning the bravery that the soldiers fighting in the first war, or any war for that matter, have inside them.
But I do question whether or not what they did was 'the right thing'.
World War One was wholesale slaughter such that the world had never seen before. It was new technology such as the machine gun, combined with barbed wire to create killing zones where nothing could survive.
Earlier tactics were now useless to the commanders who had been put in place, not because of ability but because of birth, status or patronage.
Things would have to change but before they were, countless numbers of people were senslessly slaughtered. Territorial gains were measured in meters.
But this wasn't a book about military history, so perhaps I was a little disapointed by that.
It did seem to go on tangents a lot and lacked focus. Chapters seemed to go everywhere and it was hard to follow at times. Characters came in and out of the book. Some received a sentence, other paragraphs and pages.
If anything, for me it lacked a heart - something to tie it all together.
As part of this assignment I went and shot some video footage of places mentioned in the book.
I went to the Manitoba Legislature where there is a statue to commemorate all those who died in the war.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8WebcKjmCM
The next stop was City hall. The new city hall was erected on the same sight as the old one which was designed by Charles and Earl Barber. For more information on them and the old building check out this link: http://timemachine.siamandas.com/PAGES/winnipeg_stories/CITYHALL1.htm
The old city hall is gone, but I did have a chance to take some video across the street at two of the buildings designed by the same architects which are now a part of the downtown campus of Red
River College.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U0faGvtHHA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFZtmo5rhbM&feature=youtu.be
After visiting city hall I decided to take a stop at Valour Road. On Portage avenue there is a nice sign with a First World War soldier on it. On the street itself is a gold light post with a plaque and a reef to commemorate the three soldiers who were born on this street, had enlisted together and all won the Victoria Cross. Sadly, two of these soldiers died during the war.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gcs0GgIGXPc
Click on any of the links to see some of the video I shot of these sights in Winnipeg.
cheers
rymr
Monday, 28 October 2013
The Good and the Bad
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harold-pollack/no-vaccines-arent-behind-_b_89305.html
Harold Pollack was mentioned by name by Trudy Lieberman during her speech. It was in reference to the coverage in the media about "Obama Care". According to Lieberman, Pollack has said somewhere that the coverage for Obama Care was 'the best ever'.
Her response to this was that we need to be 'careful of what we mean by good coverage'.
As an example of what I would consider good coverage of health care in the media, I would like to refer to a blog written by Pollack for the Huffington Post dealing with the belief that there is a link between vaccinations and Autism.
"Harold Pollack is Helen Ross Professor of Social Service Administration, and Faculty Chair of the Center for Health Administration Studies at the University of Chicago."
I like how early on he mentions how there are four million children born in America each year and that most of them will benefit from vacines. I also like that he mentions right after this that for some, vaccines are a problem.
He talks about the imperfect science behind vaccines, as well as warning of the dangers of spreading false information.
I also like that he posts links to reliable scientific data on the problem.
In his blog he talks about how there is no scientific data to support the link between autism and vaccines.
Later in the blog he shows evidence of a very real link between outbreaks of meazels amongst children who have not been vaccinated.
The numbers provided in this example are given in context, making them meaningful.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/18/jeremy-hunt-elderly-care-asia
For my example of what I think isn't very good coverage of a health care issue I am citing this article from the Guardian which talks about the care of the elderly.
This article was written by Hans Schattle and it discusses how Jeremy Hunt is trying to encourage England to adopt a system for treating the elderly that is more like the system in Asia.
Having lived in one of the countries he mentions I have to admit there is some truth when he says that fewer and fewer people in Korea are tolerating living with their elderly relatives and that these elderly relatives are in trouble because many of them didn't have a pension, or had an insufficient pension. (the idea of a pension is a relatively new concept in this country - many elder people are forced to retire and then they work for themselves selling vegetables in the street)
The big problem with this is he doesn't give it any context and therefore it's hard to judge how much weight there is to this side of the argument.
The same is true when he says how there are three times as many elderly people who live in poverty. What does this mean? The way he puts it, it sounds like a lot, but since there are no numbers to back it up, it doesn't have a lot of weight.
He says that in Asia the younger generations are less willing to take care of the elderly. My question to him would be, less willing than what?
Since I don't know what it is being compared to, its hard for me to draw a conclusion as to what type of change has occurred, and truly how significant it is.
Harold Pollack was mentioned by name by Trudy Lieberman during her speech. It was in reference to the coverage in the media about "Obama Care". According to Lieberman, Pollack has said somewhere that the coverage for Obama Care was 'the best ever'.
Her response to this was that we need to be 'careful of what we mean by good coverage'.
As an example of what I would consider good coverage of health care in the media, I would like to refer to a blog written by Pollack for the Huffington Post dealing with the belief that there is a link between vaccinations and Autism.
"Harold Pollack is Helen Ross Professor of Social Service Administration, and Faculty Chair of the Center for Health Administration Studies at the University of Chicago."
I like how early on he mentions how there are four million children born in America each year and that most of them will benefit from vacines. I also like that he mentions right after this that for some, vaccines are a problem.
He talks about the imperfect science behind vaccines, as well as warning of the dangers of spreading false information.
I also like that he posts links to reliable scientific data on the problem.
In his blog he talks about how there is no scientific data to support the link between autism and vaccines.
Later in the blog he shows evidence of a very real link between outbreaks of meazels amongst children who have not been vaccinated.
The numbers provided in this example are given in context, making them meaningful.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/18/jeremy-hunt-elderly-care-asia
For my example of what I think isn't very good coverage of a health care issue I am citing this article from the Guardian which talks about the care of the elderly.
This article was written by Hans Schattle and it discusses how Jeremy Hunt is trying to encourage England to adopt a system for treating the elderly that is more like the system in Asia.
Having lived in one of the countries he mentions I have to admit there is some truth when he says that fewer and fewer people in Korea are tolerating living with their elderly relatives and that these elderly relatives are in trouble because many of them didn't have a pension, or had an insufficient pension. (the idea of a pension is a relatively new concept in this country - many elder people are forced to retire and then they work for themselves selling vegetables in the street)
The big problem with this is he doesn't give it any context and therefore it's hard to judge how much weight there is to this side of the argument.
The same is true when he says how there are three times as many elderly people who live in poverty. What does this mean? The way he puts it, it sounds like a lot, but since there are no numbers to back it up, it doesn't have a lot of weight.
He says that in Asia the younger generations are less willing to take care of the elderly. My question to him would be, less willing than what?
Since I don't know what it is being compared to, its hard for me to draw a conclusion as to what type of change has occurred, and truly how significant it is.
Trudy Lieberman and the Affordable Care Act
Going in to see and hear Trudy Lieberman speak I didn't know very much about the American Health Care System, even with the constant coverage in the media over the U.S. government shutdown over the debt ceiling and what the Affordable Care Act, which has been given the name, Obama Care.
"Trudy Lieberman is a past president of the Association of Health Care Journalists in the U.S and she is visiting four Canadian cities this fall as a Fulbright Scholar and guest of the Evidence Network.".
During her speech she explained some of the differences between the Canadian and American systems.
She also specifically outlined some of the problems inherent in this system and how it has been making it harder for individuals without full time employment, who aren't receiving government support, to get health insurance.
She mentioned how there are people in America who may have health conditions like asthma (I have asthma), and how their policies will not cover these health conditions.
She also spoke about how these people often have to pay high insurance rates along with a high deductible.
The reason for this is that they don't have anyone to 'share the risk' when they go it alone with their health insurance.
The more people there are in a health plan, the more people there are to share the risk with.
With universal health care, Canadians share the risk with all other Canadians.
People in the U.S. who receive health coverage as a benefit of full time employment, share the risk with all of their fellow employees.
Much of her speech focused on how the media covers health care.
She was not happy with the press coverage of the Affordable Care Act. Her biggest complaint with it was that it didn't do enough to explain what it was to the public.
Another complaint she had was that she saw the press as a follower, when before, they used to go out and 'find the news'.
Balance was also a major subject she addressed. She was openly critical of what she referred to as 'he said, she said' journalism.
She did not feel every side or opinion deserved equal weight. The weight something was to be given was to be based on its validity.
A final major topic she discussed was 'the source', and she was very critical of every press agency relying on the same few, selected experts, especially when she wasn't sure of the authority that some of these so called experts had in their field.
She also spoke about not letting one person's story speak for everyone, especially if that person's story is not the typical story of everyone.
In such cases it was very important to remember that evidence should always be presented in the proper contexts in order to give it weight.
(more to come)
"Trudy Lieberman is a past president of the Association of Health Care Journalists in the U.S and she is visiting four Canadian cities this fall as a Fulbright Scholar and guest of the Evidence Network.".
During her speech she explained some of the differences between the Canadian and American systems.
She also specifically outlined some of the problems inherent in this system and how it has been making it harder for individuals without full time employment, who aren't receiving government support, to get health insurance.
She mentioned how there are people in America who may have health conditions like asthma (I have asthma), and how their policies will not cover these health conditions.
She also spoke about how these people often have to pay high insurance rates along with a high deductible.
The reason for this is that they don't have anyone to 'share the risk' when they go it alone with their health insurance.
The more people there are in a health plan, the more people there are to share the risk with.
With universal health care, Canadians share the risk with all other Canadians.
People in the U.S. who receive health coverage as a benefit of full time employment, share the risk with all of their fellow employees.
Much of her speech focused on how the media covers health care.
She was not happy with the press coverage of the Affordable Care Act. Her biggest complaint with it was that it didn't do enough to explain what it was to the public.
Another complaint she had was that she saw the press as a follower, when before, they used to go out and 'find the news'.
Balance was also a major subject she addressed. She was openly critical of what she referred to as 'he said, she said' journalism.
She did not feel every side or opinion deserved equal weight. The weight something was to be given was to be based on its validity.
A final major topic she discussed was 'the source', and she was very critical of every press agency relying on the same few, selected experts, especially when she wasn't sure of the authority that some of these so called experts had in their field.
She also spoke about not letting one person's story speak for everyone, especially if that person's story is not the typical story of everyone.
In such cases it was very important to remember that evidence should always be presented in the proper contexts in order to give it weight.
(more to come)
Monday, 21 October 2013
My Day in Court
It was the first time I had ever been to the Manitoba provincial court. We were supposed to be there for 9:15 to meet up with the rest of the class, but we also had to get through security. Not knowing what to expect I showed up a half an hour early at 8:45.
I guess I was expecting it to be just like the airport and I didn't want to miss my flight.
After getting through security I made a left and headed towards the spot where all of the court cases for the day had been posted. In vain I tried to make sense of them, or to find something useful, but I wasn't able to find anything.
I sat down and spotted my journalism instructor as he looked over the court schedule. As he did a woman came up to him and gave him a big hug. As I went over to say hello I overheard that she was there to testify.
Soon after our instructor took us on a brief tour of where some of the court rooms were, as well as the spot on the main floor where they post information about cases for the media.
At 9:30 we met with James Turner from the Winnipeg Free Press. He gave us the low down and some tips as to where we might be able to find a good story.
For lunch we walked to Portage Place. It was cold out and I didn't have a hat. I had been worried about getting in trouble in the court room after our instructor advised us not to wear one. Two people tried to wear hats in court rooms I was in today. They were both told to take them off.
Apparently Brendan was hoping this was going to happen. He was hoping I would get in trouble. It would have given him a great story to write about, he would say during the break.
The deadline for the story was 6 pm and as time got closer, the pressure seemed to get stronger and stronger.
Lately I've discovered that deadlines stress me out. I guess I'm going to have to find a healthy way to deal with them. (are deadlines important for journalists?)
After I don't know how many revisions, I was finally able to hand my story in. I guess that means I'm going to have to apologize for killing so many trees.
Sorry trees.
rymr
I guess I was expecting it to be just like the airport and I didn't want to miss my flight.
After getting through security I made a left and headed towards the spot where all of the court cases for the day had been posted. In vain I tried to make sense of them, or to find something useful, but I wasn't able to find anything.
I sat down and spotted my journalism instructor as he looked over the court schedule. As he did a woman came up to him and gave him a big hug. As I went over to say hello I overheard that she was there to testify.
Soon after our instructor took us on a brief tour of where some of the court rooms were, as well as the spot on the main floor where they post information about cases for the media.
At 9:30 we met with James Turner from the Winnipeg Free Press. He gave us the low down and some tips as to where we might be able to find a good story.
For lunch we walked to Portage Place. It was cold out and I didn't have a hat. I had been worried about getting in trouble in the court room after our instructor advised us not to wear one. Two people tried to wear hats in court rooms I was in today. They were both told to take them off.
Apparently Brendan was hoping this was going to happen. He was hoping I would get in trouble. It would have given him a great story to write about, he would say during the break.
The deadline for the story was 6 pm and as time got closer, the pressure seemed to get stronger and stronger.
Lately I've discovered that deadlines stress me out. I guess I'm going to have to find a healthy way to deal with them. (are deadlines important for journalists?)
After I don't know how many revisions, I was finally able to hand my story in. I guess that means I'm going to have to apologize for killing so many trees.
Sorry trees.
rymr
Monday, 14 October 2013
The Future of Journalism Revisited
Engagement.
I was watching an interview with Arianna Huffington, who founded the Huffington post on the Lang and O'Leary Exchange on CBC Newsworld and this word kept coming up. She was talking about the future of journalism.
At the beginning of the year all of the Journalism Majors at Red River College this year were asked to blog about what they felt the future of journalism was. Watching this interview reminded me and caused me to want to take a look back at what some of us had written.
I missed the point a little, and now, having given the matter some further thought, I would like to expand on what I said.
I focused on how some believe the rise of the citizen journalist and free internet content spells the imminent end of the profession of journalism.
Now I feel like my answer is incomplete.
Arianna Huffington said on the program that she wasn't sure exactly what the 'platform' would be to deliver journalism in the future. She even suggested that there could be many platforms.
The one common denominator she felt was engagement. She feels that the days of the journalist providing the news from up on high are over. Now it's all about the interaction between the journalist and the reader.
I have a little bit of first hand experience with this. For the last seven years or so I have had an online correspondence with Dave Molinari, who covers the Pittsburgh Penguins for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
I have to admit that as a journalist and a student of communications that I struggle with the social media. In 2007 I reluctantly signed up for Facebook, and that was only because I had just moved to Korea and didn't know anyone in the country.
As a journalist of the future I am going to have to do a lot more.
In terms of content this means being able to write, provide video, audio, and still pictures.
In terms of interaction, it means going on social web sites like Twitter, Facebook and others, not just
to write, but also to read.
Often as a journalist we are warned not to read the comments in the comment section of an article that they have published. I now think this is wrong, and the last thing we should do.
We need to read what the readers are writing. This means the good and the bad.
Huffington also spoke about the comments section and how the Huffington Post pre-screens their comments and no longer allows anonymous comments.
I'm not sure if I agree with not allowing anonymous comments because in some ways I think that is the only free speech that still truly exists.
I was watching an interview with Arianna Huffington, who founded the Huffington post on the Lang and O'Leary Exchange on CBC Newsworld and this word kept coming up. She was talking about the future of journalism.
At the beginning of the year all of the Journalism Majors at Red River College this year were asked to blog about what they felt the future of journalism was. Watching this interview reminded me and caused me to want to take a look back at what some of us had written.
I missed the point a little, and now, having given the matter some further thought, I would like to expand on what I said.
I focused on how some believe the rise of the citizen journalist and free internet content spells the imminent end of the profession of journalism.
Now I feel like my answer is incomplete.
Arianna Huffington said on the program that she wasn't sure exactly what the 'platform' would be to deliver journalism in the future. She even suggested that there could be many platforms.
The one common denominator she felt was engagement. She feels that the days of the journalist providing the news from up on high are over. Now it's all about the interaction between the journalist and the reader.
I have a little bit of first hand experience with this. For the last seven years or so I have had an online correspondence with Dave Molinari, who covers the Pittsburgh Penguins for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
I have to admit that as a journalist and a student of communications that I struggle with the social media. In 2007 I reluctantly signed up for Facebook, and that was only because I had just moved to Korea and didn't know anyone in the country.
As a journalist of the future I am going to have to do a lot more.
In terms of content this means being able to write, provide video, audio, and still pictures.
In terms of interaction, it means going on social web sites like Twitter, Facebook and others, not just
to write, but also to read.
Often as a journalist we are warned not to read the comments in the comment section of an article that they have published. I now think this is wrong, and the last thing we should do.
We need to read what the readers are writing. This means the good and the bad.
Huffington also spoke about the comments section and how the Huffington Post pre-screens their comments and no longer allows anonymous comments.
I'm not sure if I agree with not allowing anonymous comments because in some ways I think that is the only free speech that still truly exists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)