HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Citizen, 2017-12-07, Page 5THE CITIZEN, THURSDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2017. PAGE 5.
Other Views
Rural Canada has become a colony
My colleagues here at The Citizen,
whose business it is to ask questions,
have spent almost as much time
answering questions in the past week as asking
them since the news broke of the great swap
between Postmedia Network and Torstar which
saw 41 community newspapers change hands,
and 36 killed off to eliminate competition.
To save them answering a few questions,
no, The Citizen is not part of either of these
organizations and yes, it will be continuing to
give strong local news coverage for as long
as we can see into the future. This week when
the local shareholders who own the company
that publishes The Citizen, The Rural Voice
and Stops Along the Way hold their annual
meeting, they will learn that the company once
again had a profitable year, belying the
perception that there is no future for local
newspapers.
Not that the profit is huge or that it was easy
to earn. Every year requires creative
management to see opportunities and take
advantage of them. This year we were helped
greatly by having the International Plowing
Match at Walton and the increased business
that brought. Next year, without such a
windfall, it will be a challenge for Publisher
Deb Sholdice and the staff to score another
profit, particularly given higher costs because
of the boost in minimum wage and higher
printing and postage costs. But the fact
remains, they are here and on the ground and
able to see new opportunities as they arise and
react to them.
The sad fact for those 36 communities that
lost their newspapers, is that decisions were
made by people sitting in offices in Toronto
who know nothing about the communities their
decisions are impacting and don't really care
about anything but what they perceive as the
-1111 Keith
Roulston
From the
cluttered desk
best way to maximize profit for their
shareholders. They have bought into the "fact"
that there is no future in small town
newspapers (or radio and television stations,
for that matter) and, worse, can never see that
they might be mistaken because they have
adopted a top-down management style that
eliminates any decision-making at the ground
level where creative minds might see
opportunities for new revenue. And so these
companies have decided to milk these
declining assets for profit for as long as they
can, then write off the newspapers, and the
communities they serve.
Rural communities, that were once self-
sufficient, have become mere colonies for large
urban corporations but rather than blame these
distant ogres, we need to look at ourselves as
ready helpers. We've done it to ourselves. Not
so much in newspapers, maybe, but in our
communities as a whole. The path of
community newspapers falling into the hands
of large corporations began 30-40 years
ago when the aging publishers of local
newspapers found they had no family or
employees who wanted to take over the
arduous job of meeting a weekly deadline.
So they sold their papers to ambitious
neighbouring publishers who built up mini -
chains which they later sold to larger chains,
concentrating ownership of more than half of
Ontario's community newspapers in the hands
of the two corporations that made the swap.
Newspaper ownership was on the leading
edge of a trend. When those newspapers were
first sold in the 1970s and 1980s, small towns
still were complete shopping centres serving
their surrounding communities with food
stores, clothing stores, hardware stores,
pharmacies, and more, all owned by local
people who served on school boards and
coached sports teams and went to church. But
little by little shoppers succumbed to a feeling
they were missing out because they weren't
shopping at big chain stores. And when the
Zehrs and the Walmarts opened nearby, people
abandoned their local merchants and flocked to
the big guys.
There seems to be a growing sense of
comfort that comes with dealing with a giant
national or international corporation. People
will complain about being a tiny fish in the
ocean of the huge corporation, but they'll put
up with it because that's where the crowd
shops and they want to be part of the crowd.
But at least the lawn mower or the hair drier
you buy at the chain store is the same as the
one you'd buy at a local store. News is
different. As a Western University professor
noted, when interviewed about the ramification
of the big newspaper swap, "You can't Google
what's not there." If there aren't reporters from
local newspapers working long hours to root
out local stories, Google or Facebook won't
have them.
So for all of you out there, particularly
younger residents who see newspapers as old-
fashioned and think all information should be
free, the challenge is yours: support your local
newspaper or give up on having local news on
your phone. You can't get news for nothing.
Only by paying people to cover the news will
there be news to read.
Do what is kind because it's right
Being a first-time father who has to
spend so much time away from his first
born isn't an easy task to take head-on,
believe you me.
There is one silver lining, however. As sad
as both of us are when my daughter Mary Jane
realizes I'm leaving, the moment I come
home to her never fails to fill my heart with
joy.
This weekend, between several different
games at local arenas, some Christmas
celebrations and a few other entertaining
events, I was going in and out of the house a
lot. It's heartbreaking to leave, but the moment
I walk back through the door to my home and
hear Mary Jane struggle to find her footing on
the hardwood floor to run to greet me, a smile
breaks across my face as wide as the Jordan
River.
When she hears the door, before she knows
who it is, she has a welcoming smile on her
face because she is always happy to greet
people entering our home.
I believe that innocent, all -welcoming love
of children is one of the chief reasons God
chose to send His son to this world as a baby.
The decision is symbolic of how unconditional
His love is.
Before we get any further here, I'll level
with everyone: My religion is something I
typically keep private. It's not that it shames
me, or that I'm part of some weird sect that
people might judge me for (actually, I
wouldn't really care if the latter were true).
No, there's no reason for me to hide my
religion, but I'm not hiding, I'm just not
shoving it down other people's throats. I'm a
loyal parishioner of the United Church of
Canada.
I could tell people about it. I mean, I'm very
happy about my family's religion. Why
happy? Well there is one big reason.
We may not have the rich history of some
other church traditions (though the traditions
that were united to create us have lengthy
ones) and we may not have the fancy buildings
to visit in foreign countries, but we do have
one thing to hang our hat on that is essential to
my belief in the United doctrine: we welcome
everyone.
That may not fly with some readers. Heck,
that may not fly with some friends, but the fact
that we welcome everyone is important to me.
I'm not dealing with any specifics here: I'm
talking about every single person seeking the
Kingdom being welcomed through the doors
of the United Church.
Like Mary Jane, every good practitioner of
United's brand of Christianity should offer a
loving smile to everyone who walks through
the door.
Unfortunately my adherence to that most
sacred tenant was tested recently, and I may
have failed.
Recently I was at a church event and there
was someone who exhibited different
behaviour.
This person may have been considered, by
those who have forgotten the spirit of being in
a church, disruptive to the service.
The glowering glances, the not -always -
whispered shared sentiments of frustration
with not being able to hear and the haughty
attitudes were pretty plain to this journalist
taking in the service so I can only assume they
were all to clear to Him.
In His house of worship, some people were
judging others of being less deserving of a
spot at His table. That incensed and stayed
with me for quite awhile.
If you think you might have been one of
those people, fret not, I'm not here to
pronounce sentence upon you, that's not the
responsibility of a mortal man.
The only person I can take to task is myself
and, in doing nothing, in letting the heartbreak
of that moment stay with me instead of
spurring me to action, I failed. I failed to
practice the love that I am accusing others of
ignoring, so I'm going to resolve to do better.
This unconscionable act happened in, of all
places, a church and, of all times, during a
month in which Christians should be putting
in every extra effort.
My original intention here was to say that
those who don't practise God's love,
especially in a church, should be shown the
door. However, it dawned on me that in that
belief I was no better than those who upset me.
Instead I'll challenge those who think on the
outbursts of a child as an interruption or the
actions of anyone behaving differently as
deserving derision to be better Christians. Be
better than you were, be better than I was and
remember to love without condition.
Don't pay lip service to this challenge either.
Don't go around treating people better because
the local big, bad journalist may have better
ears than you think. Doing what is right
because someone else is watching is useless.
Do it because being kind is right.
Not to cheapen the sentiment here by
dipping into science fiction and fantasy, but
like many great morals, the title character of
Doctor Who fame said it best: "Without hope,
without witness, without reward." Doing the
right thing and being kind is only worth doing
if you do it without hope of recognition or
recompense.
Merry Christmas.
Shawn
Loughlin
Shawn's Sense
Let the truth speak
For the most part, journalists are people
who are out to help others. Sure, there
are some bad eggs, but for the most part,
we're trying to help people by what we do.
That help may look odd to some at times,
depending on the subject of the story. Stories
in the news cycle now about figures like
Harvey Weinstein or U.S. President Donald
Trump may not be viewed as helping those
two men in particular, but what they're doing
is exposing those who do wrong and telling
those who have been wronged that they matter
too. Power, influence and dishonesty can't
drown out the rest of us.
The movie Spotlight, for example, brought
me to tears. To watch the power of journalism
take down a well-established network of
pedophile priests, vindicating thousands of
abuse survivors, made me proud. They were
armed with a pen, a note pad and the truth.
That's what gets lost sometimes. Journalists
aren't spinning stories out of thin air or
seeking to slander those they dislike and
destroy them. There are real and devastating
consequence for such actions.
We need to look only to John 8:32 to know
that "the truth will set you free."
Journalists have the truth. If they drag it out
into the light, there will be those upset by that,
and those who now know more about their
world and the people around them as a result.
That is our job and sometimes it's difficult.
But what if we don't have the truth? What if
our trust is betrayed?
That's what seems to be going on in the
upside down world of the United States right
now with James O'Keefe and his Project
Veritas. This initiative aims to discredit honest
journalists, by testing them with made-up
stories in the hopes that they'll print them. If
they do, the hope then is that the public will
point and laugh at the "incompetent" media
and, furthermore, media members will be
exposed as crooks and liars — many of whom
are on the take from the government and major
corporations. (I am constantly surprised at
how widespread this belief is. Walk through a
newspaper office's parking lot sometime and
I'll give you a quarter — which I don't have —
for every BMW or Mercedes Benz you see. If
we're all on the take, then what we are guilty
of is negotiating a terrible deal.)
The Washington Post revealed what's going
on in this shameful underbelly last week when
it published a story about a woman trying to
suck the newspaper's reporters into what
appears to be a fabricated story involving Roy
Moore, a Senate candidate from Alabama.
The woman's story checked many boxes.
She claimed that in 1992 she and Moore had a
sexual relationship when she was just 15 (he
would have been in his mid-40s at the time).
She said the relationship led to pregnancy and,
eventually, an abortion.
Post reporters felt uncomfortable with some
details of the story and later witnessed this
woman walking into the New York offices of
Project Veritas, an organization that The
Washington Post claims uses "false cover
stories and covert video recordings" to expose
what the organization feels is media bias.
Journalists are human and they want to help
others. Being told that someone was abused as
a teenager is incredibly disturbing and as a
person, you don't want to doubt anyone's
story. For this group to use a person's good
nature to hurt them is as low as it goes.
We're all just trying to do our best and do
our part in and for society. To be targeted with
falsehoods and vicious intent like this is both
disheartening and sad.