[Quick note off the top: this mostly abandoned blog is not at all associated with my work life and shouldn't be taken as such, but I've got no other quick outlet so I'm going to post this here for now.]
So the federal NDP released their new membership numbers today and it was widely reported that they received a solid 13% boost in membership, from 83,800 members in October to 95,000 members in November.
This bump is exaggerated for a few reasons. In reality it's probably about half that amount.
First off, the NDP previously had a separate category for 'federal' members that weren't tied to any province, which totaled just over 3,000 people.
This category was dissolved when they decided to allocate each federal member to their respective province. Fair enough. But when the chart was released today there was no mention of this. Instead it just showed the October breakdown by province and the November breakdown, and let reporters do the math. Reporters weren't told that a separate category of 3,000 members had been quietly re-allocated.
So that alone brings "new" memberships down from around 11,000 people to around 8,000, or 9%.
But there's more. The new numbers show NDP memberships doubled in Nova Scotia from 1,300 to 2,600. That's a pretty impressive leap, considering the provincial party is coming off of years of minority government that concluded in a sweeping NDP majority (memberships are shared amongst the provincial and federal parties).
When I checked on the numbers back in September I was given the 1,300 figure federally and then a number of around 2,500 provincially. After asking about the discrepancy I was told provincial staff keep closer track and the gap was likely due to the federal ranks not being updated yet.
So now we're in the midst of an NDP leadership race and all eyes are on the membership numbers because we all want to see how big the Quebec surge turns out to be (Quebec has no provincial wing so it's starting from damn near scratch). Lo and behold, there's a healthy boost across the country!
But is there really? Did Newfoundland's ranks really jump from just 200 to 1,184 last month? Did they not get the memo that the populist uprising was six months ago? Maybe it's a time zone thing. My guess is that, like Nova Scotia, the numbers hadn't been updated in a while and many months of growth were only now being factored in.
Add the Newfoundland discrepancy to Nova Scotia to the federal book cooking and your 13% growth is already close to cut in half before we even get to the big provinces. So were the numbers today really an accurate reflection of the party's growth? I report. You decide.
...Ok, I'll decide too. It's kind of bullshit. Look I get that the NDP has had a tough few months. They have an interim leader who isn't exactly setting the world on kindle, let alone fire. They no more look like a government in waiting today than they did the day after the election. They'd really like some momentum and a strong membership turnout in the midst of a leadership campaign would certainly help.
And to be fair, they didn't capital-L Lie at any point. The NDP never claimed to have 13% growth, they just put the stats out and let journalists do the math. Also when I asked questions I was given a prompt and honest response.
But this isn't quite good enough. News stories didn't report "The NDP claim to have 13% growth," they reported it as fact. There is a certain element of trust when we report what a federal party tells us is going on internally, if just because we don't see the numbers first-hand.
I think the chart released today was a breach of that trust. Maybe it was all an accident. Maybe the news organizations that reported the 13% figure have been privately corrected. But when we take a party at its word there's an expectation that 3,000 members (at least) aren't being coyly added in.
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
God is Dead: An Introduction
Even before the Darkness came, Nova Scotians viewed the weather at best as a sort of ex-con neighbour. At times it could be warm, friendly, even welcoming - but you would never turn your back on it.
Our worst suspicions were confirmed during the month of May when the sun disappeared, not to be seen for weeks. The first cracks in the public psyche were subtle. People started to listen to Elliot Smith instead of the Beatles. Normal everyday interactions became fraught with tension ("Would you like fries with that, motherfucker?")
By week two meteorologists were hunted down like dogs and publicly executed. By week three sacrificing virgins was openly contemplated. Weddings were cancelled, for who could love at a time such as this?
Last week the Halifax Stanfield International Airport was razed when citizens vacationing down south were deemed too insufferable to be allowed to return. "Maybe some day we can rebuild," Premier Darrell Dexter whispered softly as he lowered the detonator.
Occassionally the sun would peak out and citizens would run into the streets, forgeting that vitamin-D withdrawal had made their skin dangerously fragile. "My eyes!" they would scream as blinded drivers smashed their cars into storefronts. "It burns!"
The sunlight would linger just long enough for acclimatization, then inevitably disappear the next morning. The suicide rate hit 20%. "I just don't know how many of us will live to see June," said Nova Scotia's haggard and unshaven public health officer clutching a handgun at a press conference.
This is all to say that I think we can safely agree there is no god.
Now that it's June, religion has been beaten out of us, and the sun is returning, I invite you to check back here later in the week for a riviting debate/argument/blood feud between myself and my friend Dan Logan on the topic of religion.
Rather than the usual "Is there a God?" stuff we're just going to skip past that part, assume there's not, and bicker over the question of: should athiests fight for athiesm or accept and respect religious practices?
To be continued, as soon as I come back form outside.
Our worst suspicions were confirmed during the month of May when the sun disappeared, not to be seen for weeks. The first cracks in the public psyche were subtle. People started to listen to Elliot Smith instead of the Beatles. Normal everyday interactions became fraught with tension ("Would you like fries with that, motherfucker?")
By week two meteorologists were hunted down like dogs and publicly executed. By week three sacrificing virgins was openly contemplated. Weddings were cancelled, for who could love at a time such as this?
Last week the Halifax Stanfield International Airport was razed when citizens vacationing down south were deemed too insufferable to be allowed to return. "Maybe some day we can rebuild," Premier Darrell Dexter whispered softly as he lowered the detonator.
Occassionally the sun would peak out and citizens would run into the streets, forgeting that vitamin-D withdrawal had made their skin dangerously fragile. "My eyes!" they would scream as blinded drivers smashed their cars into storefronts. "It burns!"
The sunlight would linger just long enough for acclimatization, then inevitably disappear the next morning. The suicide rate hit 20%. "I just don't know how many of us will live to see June," said Nova Scotia's haggard and unshaven public health officer clutching a handgun at a press conference.
This is all to say that I think we can safely agree there is no god.
Now that it's June, religion has been beaten out of us, and the sun is returning, I invite you to check back here later in the week for a riviting debate/argument/blood feud between myself and my friend Dan Logan on the topic of religion.
Rather than the usual "Is there a God?" stuff we're just going to skip past that part, assume there's not, and bicker over the question of: should athiests fight for athiesm or accept and respect religious practices?
To be continued, as soon as I come back form outside.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Election Update: Ah, crap
[Writer's note - Usually while writing these posts I sip some whiskey for inspiration but recently I acquired a miserable bastard of a bacterial infection in my foot so today is different. Half of this post was written under the influence of a powerful and legal-but-not-technically-prescribed-to-me-per-se painkiller medication so I really can't speak to any typos and/or general weirdness.]
Dear friends,
Well, it's been over two weeks now since MC Loud's All Night Dance Party kicked off its campaign, and suffice to say it has so far been an unmitigated disaster.
First it was revealed our candidate in Oshawa was actually just a fake name made up by some punk kid. Then our candidate in Fredericton had to withdraw when it became pretty clear he was dead, with our candidate in Fundy Royal serving a life sentence for his murder.
Our guy in Brampton turned out to be a seperatist, which we probably should have asked beforehand but, you know, it was Brampton, while our candidate in Vancouver Centre fell pray to illicit cooking substances and was busted as part of a cumin smuggling ring.
I myself became mired in controversy when that damned Steve Maher stole my tape recorder and published several embarrassingly candid conversations.
I said some unforgiveable things about left-handed people and for that I whole-heartedly apologize. And anyway, in some circles "sub-human" is used as a term of endearment.
Seeking traction, we trotted out a series of promises we thought would grab headlines - annexing Greenland, changing the title of 'Prime Minister' to 'Optimus Prime Minister', naked tuesdays. But research shows that most voters are still unaware that we exist.
It hasn't been all bad. We still have the coolest party name and polls show we're tied with the Bloc in nine of ten provinces. But still, it's clear we needed a wedge issue. Well now we've got one: Democracy.
Basically, we're against it. You maybe thinking, 'but that's not a wedge position at all. Every party is kind of anti-democracy.
And that's true. Every election begins witht the parties wildly alleging that this unfortunate turn of events is the other side's fault with such unsettling vigour that you kind of feel like our 308 MPs were all sealed in an elevator and tasked with figuring out who farted.
It's all but consensus that a multi-party government that represents a majority of voters is not only less democratic than a single-party government that represents a minority, it's a heresy akin to spitting on the queen.
And thanks to our first-past-the-post-fuck-second system, only voters in swing ridings really have the power to determine government (and then, only some swing ridings. A Bloc-NDP race is important and all but has no bearing on who will be PM [or at least it never did until this election turned a wonky shade of mustachioed orange.])
But despite all of this, the other parties still go on and on praising democracy, which, frankly, is a little irresponsible. Half the world is turning itself inside out fighting for the right to vote long after us Westerners have learned that democracy is just like any shiny new toy - flat-out bitchin at first but once you've had it for a while you get bored with it and eventually don't even want to bother.
We know that 40% or so of citizens agree with us, we just need to win them over. Admittedly, getting the anti-voting demographic to vote to reaffirm their anti-voting bias is one dilly of a pickle. But luckily we've got our Edmonton candidate Seymour Butts on the job of figuring it out.
Dear friends,
Well, it's been over two weeks now since MC Loud's All Night Dance Party kicked off its campaign, and suffice to say it has so far been an unmitigated disaster.
First it was revealed our candidate in Oshawa was actually just a fake name made up by some punk kid. Then our candidate in Fredericton had to withdraw when it became pretty clear he was dead, with our candidate in Fundy Royal serving a life sentence for his murder.
Our guy in Brampton turned out to be a seperatist, which we probably should have asked beforehand but, you know, it was Brampton, while our candidate in Vancouver Centre fell pray to illicit cooking substances and was busted as part of a cumin smuggling ring.
I myself became mired in controversy when that damned Steve Maher stole my tape recorder and published several embarrassingly candid conversations.
I said some unforgiveable things about left-handed people and for that I whole-heartedly apologize. And anyway, in some circles "sub-human" is used as a term of endearment.
Seeking traction, we trotted out a series of promises we thought would grab headlines - annexing Greenland, changing the title of 'Prime Minister' to 'Optimus Prime Minister', naked tuesdays. But research shows that most voters are still unaware that we exist.
It hasn't been all bad. We still have the coolest party name and polls show we're tied with the Bloc in nine of ten provinces. But still, it's clear we needed a wedge issue. Well now we've got one: Democracy.
Basically, we're against it. You maybe thinking, 'but that's not a wedge position at all. Every party is kind of anti-democracy.
And that's true. Every election begins witht the parties wildly alleging that this unfortunate turn of events is the other side's fault with such unsettling vigour that you kind of feel like our 308 MPs were all sealed in an elevator and tasked with figuring out who farted.
It's all but consensus that a multi-party government that represents a majority of voters is not only less democratic than a single-party government that represents a minority, it's a heresy akin to spitting on the queen.
And thanks to our first-past-the-post-fuck-second system, only voters in swing ridings really have the power to determine government (and then, only some swing ridings. A Bloc-NDP race is important and all but has no bearing on who will be PM [or at least it never did until this election turned a wonky shade of mustachioed orange.])
But despite all of this, the other parties still go on and on praising democracy, which, frankly, is a little irresponsible. Half the world is turning itself inside out fighting for the right to vote long after us Westerners have learned that democracy is just like any shiny new toy - flat-out bitchin at first but once you've had it for a while you get bored with it and eventually don't even want to bother.
We know that 40% or so of citizens agree with us, we just need to win them over. Admittedly, getting the anti-voting demographic to vote to reaffirm their anti-voting bias is one dilly of a pickle. But luckily we've got our Edmonton candidate Seymour Butts on the job of figuring it out.
Friday, April 8, 2011
Canadians: I'm Your Man
Can you smell it? That strange scent in the air? That's the smell of excitement. Normally excitement isn't something that can be detected by your olfactory system, but today is different.
Today all the rules are broken.
When I say "Canadian politics" what do you think of? If you're like most Canadians, you think of killing yourself. But what if there was a way to genuinely enjoy politics without having to be one of those douchebags you see on Newsworld?
Well now there's a way to damn the status quo. What do we need? One word: Metamorphosis! ("Change" was taken.)
Ladies and gentlemen, I come here today to offer you this metamorphosis.
We currently suffer the choice between a Russian-sounding guy trying to act Canadian, a Canadian-sounding guy trying to act Russian, and a bald guy trying to act like he can win.
But now you have a real option. Today I present to you the newest political party to enter the scene:
MC Loud's All-Night Dance Party
MC Loud's All Night Dance Party is brimming with new ideas, while also harkening back to the old-school days when Conservatives were conservative, Liberals were liberal and New Democrats were new.
My opponents, when they're not too busy littering or torturing cats, will tell you that that there are only two choices in this election. But we here at MC Loud's All-Night Dance Party think you'll spit on anyone who tells you that after you get a load of our platform.
On National Unity
We believe that Quebec should have the power to decide its own destiny and form a distinct country if its people so choose. That said, Canada also has a right to maintain its cool province to uncool province ratio.
If elected, we will reform the constitution so that in the event of separation Quebec will have to take one of the lame provinces, like New Brunswick, with it. MC Loud's All-Night Dance Party realizes that while this may seem kind of tempting, it is on the whole undesirable. Thus we will undertake a series of unity-building exercises. Birch trees will be bulldozed and replaced with maples. Molson Canadian will be forced to taste better or change its name.
On Debates
Green Party Leader Elizabeth May must have been popular in high school as she sure is bad at being unpopular. There's nothing more pathetic than begging others to pay attention to you, so we here at MC Loud's All-Night Dance Party have rejected taking part in any leaders debate even before receiving an offer. We've got plans that day.
That said, I'd like to formally challenge my opponents to a leaders knife fight at their earliest convenience.
On the Environment
Remember the environment? Remember, like, one election ago when it was actually a big deal? Well we plan to bring it back to the forefront. Now, the last guy who did this got massacred on election day so we can't go too crazy here, but suffice to say we pledge to do something. Something that will make the environment better. It will likely involve carbon.
And while our slate of candidates may not exactly be full of doctors or scientists or people who can read, I think even our opponents would have to admit it's not going to take much to lead on this issue.
On Profiling People and then Banning Them From Your Rallies
We promise to always do the decent thing and friend you on Facebook before we creep your profile and add you to our database of enemies.
Stay tuned, voters. We'll continue to roll out our platformas we come up with it over the coming days. In the meantime, remember to vote MC Loud's All-Night Dance Party - for metamorphosis we can believe in.
Today all the rules are broken.
When I say "Canadian politics" what do you think of? If you're like most Canadians, you think of killing yourself. But what if there was a way to genuinely enjoy politics without having to be one of those douchebags you see on Newsworld?
Well now there's a way to damn the status quo. What do we need? One word: Metamorphosis! ("Change" was taken.)
Ladies and gentlemen, I come here today to offer you this metamorphosis.
We currently suffer the choice between a Russian-sounding guy trying to act Canadian, a Canadian-sounding guy trying to act Russian, and a bald guy trying to act like he can win.
But now you have a real option. Today I present to you the newest political party to enter the scene:
MC Loud's All-Night Dance Party
MC Loud's All Night Dance Party is brimming with new ideas, while also harkening back to the old-school days when Conservatives were conservative, Liberals were liberal and New Democrats were new.
My opponents, when they're not too busy littering or torturing cats, will tell you that that there are only two choices in this election. But we here at MC Loud's All-Night Dance Party think you'll spit on anyone who tells you that after you get a load of our platform.
On National Unity
We believe that Quebec should have the power to decide its own destiny and form a distinct country if its people so choose. That said, Canada also has a right to maintain its cool province to uncool province ratio.
If elected, we will reform the constitution so that in the event of separation Quebec will have to take one of the lame provinces, like New Brunswick, with it. MC Loud's All-Night Dance Party realizes that while this may seem kind of tempting, it is on the whole undesirable. Thus we will undertake a series of unity-building exercises. Birch trees will be bulldozed and replaced with maples. Molson Canadian will be forced to taste better or change its name.
On Debates
Green Party Leader Elizabeth May must have been popular in high school as she sure is bad at being unpopular. There's nothing more pathetic than begging others to pay attention to you, so we here at MC Loud's All-Night Dance Party have rejected taking part in any leaders debate even before receiving an offer. We've got plans that day.
That said, I'd like to formally challenge my opponents to a leaders knife fight at their earliest convenience.
On the Environment
Remember the environment? Remember, like, one election ago when it was actually a big deal? Well we plan to bring it back to the forefront. Now, the last guy who did this got massacred on election day so we can't go too crazy here, but suffice to say we pledge to do something. Something that will make the environment better. It will likely involve carbon.
And while our slate of candidates may not exactly be full of doctors or scientists or people who can read, I think even our opponents would have to admit it's not going to take much to lead on this issue.
On Profiling People and then Banning Them From Your Rallies
We promise to always do the decent thing and friend you on Facebook before we creep your profile and add you to our database of enemies.
Stay tuned, voters. We'll continue to roll out our platform
Monday, February 7, 2011
Fear and Loathing in Hants County
As a rival reporter to Halifax's Chronicle Herald, I've long had a Sharks/Jets-style rivalry with the paper, complete with stabbings and finger snaps.
But I couldn't help but feel sympathy for the Herald after they released their discreetly-titled video and print feature Nova Scotia Burning!!! (exclamation marks inferred by them but added by me).
Despite exclusive interviews and top level production value around a national story, reaction was overwhelmingly negative. Pushed onto the defensive, the Herald began a spirited defence of the importance of the feature.
I decided to write a thoughtful analysis of the situation to illuminate the difficulties in reporting on racial issues. Then I changed my mind and decided to write a one-act play instead. I hereby present to you - The People vs. The Chronicle Herald; Requiem.
Scene: The Chronicle Herald and Joe Public meet in some sort of dramatic setting.
Chronicle Herald: Hey, what's wrong with you? Why won't you watch my new feature, Nova Scotia Burning?
Joe Public: Well I already followed the whole thing when the story was actually happening. I'm kind of sick of hearing about it.
CH: Spoken like a true racist! Don't you realize that prejudice thrives in silence and procreates in apathy? If we don't shed light on this important issue then it'll just breed more hatred.
JP: But, the story was covered to death. Everyone reported on it. Everyone!
CH: Well, our coverage proves that racism still exists in Nova Scotia.
JP: Yeah, but everyone knows there's still racism. Everyone! Even the racists!
CH: Yes, but Nova Scotia Burning shows how racism permeates every seam of our society.
JP: Really? Because it seems like a very specific, personal feud between relatives? Where's the universality in that?
CH: Look, you pansy, hide from it all you want but we're bringing you a big blast of truth. People in this province have to live with racism every day.
JP: So why not do a feature on that?
CH: ...come again?
JP: If you're going to do a big tell-all on a major story, then fine. If you're going to do an in-depth examination of large-scale race relations, then fine. But don't do one and then claim you're doing the other.
CH: Look, we're the newspaper of record. With great circulation comes great responsibility, and it's incumbent on us to delve into the tough issues. We're not going to just give you that shallow, ambulance-chasing daily hackery. We stand back and provide a mature appreciation of nuanced real world issues.
JP: I see. And what's it called again?
CH: Nova Scotia Burning.
JP: Ah, right.
CH: And be sure to stay tuned for our next racism exposés: Schindler's Bluenose...
JP: Oh sweet Jesus.
CH: The Green Kilometre...
JP: This is embarrassing.
CH: To Disproportionately Pull Over a Mocking Bird...
JP: Please stop.
CH: Africville History X...
JP: Look, I'm tired of being talked down to and told I need to learn every detail of a stupid action by a couple of hicks in order to confront racism. I'm tired of being accused of burying my head in the sand or told I "fear stirring up old resentments" when I say I'm not interested. I'm sick of hearing about the goddamn cross burning. I don't care if you try to dress it up with a reference to The Believer. I'm just sick of it.
CH: Was that the one with Ryan Gosling?
JP: Yeah, it's really good.
CH: You know, I saw that on Showcase a while back. That is an underrated movie.
JP: A great performance.
CH: Oh, absolutely stellar.
JP: So, if it's all cool with you, I'm just going to go on living my life exactly the same as before I saw your feature.
CH: YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
JP: See, that's exactly what I'm talking about.
CH: Sorry. That's just a line from our upcoming news feature, A Few Good Maritimers.
Paul Haggis: Excuse me is this the Chronicle Herald? I saw your piece and I'd like to drop off a resume.
Fin.
OK, so it's easy to make fun of the Herald for their occassional tendency to slip into pompousness, but they do deserve some praise.
While the headline was over the top, the stories themselves were done in a thorough, respectful tone. They provided an exclusive look at the Rehbergs, and it really did look professional. (Director Jayson Taylor jumped to the Herald last fall from the Globe and Mail, where he was highly acclaimed. Dude's won one or two Emmy Awards. He clearly knows his stuff.) The people involved in the feature have every right to be proud of their work.
The reason some of us rolled our eyes is the context. There are a lot of issues that deserved as much or more attention but didn't get it. It was hard not to be frustrated that this is where the Herald chose to flex its muscle and splurge on a level of detail and production value normally reserved for whenever Sidney Crosby burps.
But while it seems egregious as a stand-alone, as part of a bigger series of in-depth think pieces it could fit in nicely. That's exactly what the Herald has promised it is going to do.
So, fellow scoffers, I propose we give the Herald the benefit of the doubt. Nova Scotia Burning may go down as a leap into enterprise reporting and the first step in the Herald upping its game.
And if not, at least we'll have the inevitable motion picture adaption directed by Paul Haggis.
But I couldn't help but feel sympathy for the Herald after they released their discreetly-titled video and print feature Nova Scotia Burning!!! (exclamation marks inferred by them but added by me).
Despite exclusive interviews and top level production value around a national story, reaction was overwhelmingly negative. Pushed onto the defensive, the Herald began a spirited defence of the importance of the feature.
I decided to write a thoughtful analysis of the situation to illuminate the difficulties in reporting on racial issues. Then I changed my mind and decided to write a one-act play instead. I hereby present to you - The People vs. The Chronicle Herald; Requiem.
Scene: The Chronicle Herald and Joe Public meet in some sort of dramatic setting.
Chronicle Herald: Hey, what's wrong with you? Why won't you watch my new feature, Nova Scotia Burning?
Joe Public: Well I already followed the whole thing when the story was actually happening. I'm kind of sick of hearing about it.
CH: Spoken like a true racist! Don't you realize that prejudice thrives in silence and procreates in apathy? If we don't shed light on this important issue then it'll just breed more hatred.
JP: But, the story was covered to death. Everyone reported on it. Everyone!
CH: Well, our coverage proves that racism still exists in Nova Scotia.
JP: Yeah, but everyone knows there's still racism. Everyone! Even the racists!
CH: Yes, but Nova Scotia Burning shows how racism permeates every seam of our society.
JP: Really? Because it seems like a very specific, personal feud between relatives? Where's the universality in that?
CH: Look, you pansy, hide from it all you want but we're bringing you a big blast of truth. People in this province have to live with racism every day.
JP: So why not do a feature on that?
CH: ...come again?
JP: If you're going to do a big tell-all on a major story, then fine. If you're going to do an in-depth examination of large-scale race relations, then fine. But don't do one and then claim you're doing the other.
CH: Look, we're the newspaper of record. With great circulation comes great responsibility, and it's incumbent on us to delve into the tough issues. We're not going to just give you that shallow, ambulance-chasing daily hackery. We stand back and provide a mature appreciation of nuanced real world issues.
JP: I see. And what's it called again?
CH: Nova Scotia Burning.
JP: Ah, right.
CH: And be sure to stay tuned for our next racism exposés: Schindler's Bluenose...
JP: Oh sweet Jesus.
CH: The Green Kilometre...
JP: This is embarrassing.
CH: To Disproportionately Pull Over a Mocking Bird...
JP: Please stop.
CH: Africville History X...
JP: Look, I'm tired of being talked down to and told I need to learn every detail of a stupid action by a couple of hicks in order to confront racism. I'm tired of being accused of burying my head in the sand or told I "fear stirring up old resentments" when I say I'm not interested. I'm sick of hearing about the goddamn cross burning. I don't care if you try to dress it up with a reference to The Believer. I'm just sick of it.
CH: Was that the one with Ryan Gosling?
JP: Yeah, it's really good.
CH: You know, I saw that on Showcase a while back. That is an underrated movie.
JP: A great performance.
CH: Oh, absolutely stellar.
JP: So, if it's all cool with you, I'm just going to go on living my life exactly the same as before I saw your feature.
CH: YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
JP: See, that's exactly what I'm talking about.
CH: Sorry. That's just a line from our upcoming news feature, A Few Good Maritimers.
Paul Haggis: Excuse me is this the Chronicle Herald? I saw your piece and I'd like to drop off a resume.
Fin.
OK, so it's easy to make fun of the Herald for their occassional tendency to slip into pompousness, but they do deserve some praise.
While the headline was over the top, the stories themselves were done in a thorough, respectful tone. They provided an exclusive look at the Rehbergs, and it really did look professional. (Director Jayson Taylor jumped to the Herald last fall from the Globe and Mail, where he was highly acclaimed. Dude's won one or two Emmy Awards. He clearly knows his stuff.) The people involved in the feature have every right to be proud of their work.
The reason some of us rolled our eyes is the context. There are a lot of issues that deserved as much or more attention but didn't get it. It was hard not to be frustrated that this is where the Herald chose to flex its muscle and splurge on a level of detail and production value normally reserved for whenever Sidney Crosby burps.
But while it seems egregious as a stand-alone, as part of a bigger series of in-depth think pieces it could fit in nicely. That's exactly what the Herald has promised it is going to do.
So, fellow scoffers, I propose we give the Herald the benefit of the doubt. Nova Scotia Burning may go down as a leap into enterprise reporting and the first step in the Herald upping its game.
And if not, at least we'll have the inevitable motion picture adaption directed by Paul Haggis.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
The oval of my ire
Following up my last blog post where I defended cynicism and criticized innovation, it seems I'm now going to attack a beloved project that has united all of Halifax, and argue for more bureaucratic red tape.
Sigh. Let's get this over with.
The way thing's are going, Halifax will have a new permanent skating oval on the central Common. People are going crazy for it, and our politicians aren't exactly bandwagon-adverse, so it's got good odds.
And there are some great reasons to have an oval (for a summary, see this Tim Bousquet editorial in The Coast.) But some huge questions haven't been resolved.
Say you're tripping out one weekend and decide to build a big fort in your living room. It turns out you love the fort and want to keep it. But alas, it means you can't really have guests over and it's impossible to see the TV or water the fern. Once the high wore off, most rational, fort-building people would consider moving it to another room where it would be less disruptive.
The oval, meant to be temporary for the Canada Games and placed with no long-term considerations whatsoever, is our acid fort.
The oval debate is wholly centered around the question of whether to keep it or not. Instead we should be asking two distinct questions: 1) should we have a permanent outdoor oval, and 2) if yes, should it stay where it is now.
Now, I'm as much of a fan as ice-skate NASCAR as the next guy, so I have no problem with question 1. My problem with question 2 is that all of the great things about the present location - it's central, it's a big park, etc. - are also downsides.
That's because for the big majority of the year where we don't have cold enough weather it'll just be wased space. A fifth of our signature park is just gone.
(I should note that some people have climbed out of their drug forts to say it could just be turned into a giant inline skating rink. Are we going to invite the 1980s? Because I don't really know anyone else who inline skates. And even if they did, we'd never normally shove the baseballers, cricketers, soccerers, frisbeers and and dog-walkers to make room for something like inline skating.)
Christ, is this really who I am now? Can I not just let people be happy? Everone loves that damn ice circle. You know, I was such a nice kid. Now look at me. I'm in my mid-20s and I've got the temperament of a 77-year-old Korean war vet.
If you google image search 'oval' you get a bunch of drawings of ovals plus this rando.
OK, gotta get through this. What about putting an oval on the Wanderers Grounds, the Garrison Grounds by Citadel Hill, or potentially even behind the new Halifax Library?
They all offer that same rush - outdoors in the heart of the city - arguably without costing such prime land. And sure, there are downsides to each, and maybe the oval wouldn't fit in any of those spots. Maybe we don't go for a full-sized oval. Maybe we have a small one somewhere central, even the common, and put a long-track in Dartmouth or wherever.
The argument has become baseball vs. skating, the Common as sacred land vs. doing something fun. But maybe we could have all of these things. Maybe we can have a great oval near downtown and preserve the Common. Maybe not. Maybe it's not feasible or is too expensive.
But why the hell wouldn't we be frantically studying to answer these questions? That's just due diligence.
Imagine if the city put a huge permanent structure on the Common with no studying or consultation. Some poor bureaucrat would be publicly crucified. But that's essentially what it now appears is going to happen.
And also, seal hunt protestors need to grow up and find a real cause! And stop freaking out about someone changing Mark Twain's words, it's not like he burned all the original copies! And Natalie Portman was only ok in Black Swan!
Jesus, how did it come to this? Well, be sure to check back next week when I'll presumably be bashing world peace and giving an impassioned defence of polio.
Sigh. Let's get this over with.
The way thing's are going, Halifax will have a new permanent skating oval on the central Common. People are going crazy for it, and our politicians aren't exactly bandwagon-adverse, so it's got good odds.
And there are some great reasons to have an oval (for a summary, see this Tim Bousquet editorial in The Coast.) But some huge questions haven't been resolved.
Say you're tripping out one weekend and decide to build a big fort in your living room. It turns out you love the fort and want to keep it. But alas, it means you can't really have guests over and it's impossible to see the TV or water the fern. Once the high wore off, most rational, fort-building people would consider moving it to another room where it would be less disruptive.
The oval, meant to be temporary for the Canada Games and placed with no long-term considerations whatsoever, is our acid fort.
The oval debate is wholly centered around the question of whether to keep it or not. Instead we should be asking two distinct questions: 1) should we have a permanent outdoor oval, and 2) if yes, should it stay where it is now.
Now, I'm as much of a fan as ice-skate NASCAR as the next guy, so I have no problem with question 1. My problem with question 2 is that all of the great things about the present location - it's central, it's a big park, etc. - are also downsides.
That's because for the big majority of the year where we don't have cold enough weather it'll just be wased space. A fifth of our signature park is just gone.
(I should note that some people have climbed out of their drug forts to say it could just be turned into a giant inline skating rink. Are we going to invite the 1980s? Because I don't really know anyone else who inline skates. And even if they did, we'd never normally shove the baseballers, cricketers, soccerers, frisbeers and and dog-walkers to make room for something like inline skating.)
Christ, is this really who I am now? Can I not just let people be happy? Everone loves that damn ice circle. You know, I was such a nice kid. Now look at me. I'm in my mid-20s and I've got the temperament of a 77-year-old Korean war vet.
If you google image search 'oval' you get a bunch of drawings of ovals plus this rando.OK, gotta get through this. What about putting an oval on the Wanderers Grounds, the Garrison Grounds by Citadel Hill, or potentially even behind the new Halifax Library?
They all offer that same rush - outdoors in the heart of the city - arguably without costing such prime land. And sure, there are downsides to each, and maybe the oval wouldn't fit in any of those spots. Maybe we don't go for a full-sized oval. Maybe we have a small one somewhere central, even the common, and put a long-track in Dartmouth or wherever.
The argument has become baseball vs. skating, the Common as sacred land vs. doing something fun. But maybe we could have all of these things. Maybe we can have a great oval near downtown and preserve the Common. Maybe not. Maybe it's not feasible or is too expensive.
But why the hell wouldn't we be frantically studying to answer these questions? That's just due diligence.
Imagine if the city put a huge permanent structure on the Common with no studying or consultation. Some poor bureaucrat would be publicly crucified. But that's essentially what it now appears is going to happen.
And also, seal hunt protestors need to grow up and find a real cause! And stop freaking out about someone changing Mark Twain's words, it's not like he burned all the original copies! And Natalie Portman was only ok in Black Swan!
Jesus, how did it come to this? Well, be sure to check back next week when I'll presumably be bashing world peace and giving an impassioned defence of polio.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)