Loading...
The Rural Voice, 1998-04, Page 12at w } oc a W 1 • W �ox CHRYSLER DODGE HOME OF QUALITY USED VEHICLES 1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo - 4.0L, 6 cyl. auto, selec, trac 4 x 4, fully equipped, only 65 km. Sold & Serviced by us. Sharp. 1996 Ford Explorer XLS 4 x 4 - Fully equipped, only 35,000 km. Balance of warranty, local - one owner, LIKE NEW. YOUR CHOICE 525,900. "We only sell the best for less and wholesale the rest" CHRYSLER DODGE JEEP DODGE TRUCKS If you don't see what you want, ask us, we'll find it for you. Sunset Strip, Owen Sound Ontario, N4K 5W9 (519) 371 -JEEP (5337) 1-800-263-9579 Fax: (519) 371-5559 • 1111 m • _ 7v m 7v • m m () 7070 • m m 0 _ 7v N 70 8 THE RURAL VOICE Keith Roulston The heavy burden of responsibility So Oprah Winfrey has won her battle with the Texas cattle producers and proclaimed a victory for freedom of speech — but I wonder if the lawsuit against her made her stop, even for a moment, to ponder the responsibility that goes with her freedom. By now just about everybody knows that Oprah, in a 1996 talk show about the potential dangers of Mad Cow Disease, flippantly said "I'm never eating ham- burger again". Now for you or me to make such a statement is just as she said — freedom of speech. Our statements, made in our own home, in the coffee shop or even in a room full of people, have limited power to influence the course of history or the lives of others. But Oprah wields such incredible power that, frankly, I wouldn't change places with her even for her salary that makes her one of the richest women in the world. An endorsement from Oprah, for instance, made her dietician's cook book an instant best seller. Seeing that, Oprah started a book club. If she recommends a book, the writer can figure on instant success. But if she has that sort of power to influence her viewers, isn't it also likely that she can adversely influence the lives of people. The cattlemen felt it did and an instantaneous drop in cattle prices seemed to show them right. The cattlemen probably did a huge amount of damage to their industry even pursuing the case and made the Texas food disparagement law, (a law some have wanted to see copied in Canada), look stupid. But hopefully Oprah will come to think about the huge responsibility she bears. It's all a matter of scale — the more power you have, the greater burden of responsibility you have, even if you'd like to pretend you Scale brings greater responsibility don't. Don Cherry, for instance, in his silly remarks about "some French guy" (Jean Luc Brassard) being sorry he carried the Canadian flag at the Olympics, may have played a small role in the future of this country because he gave the separatists in Quebec a platform. Nobody, from kids to talk show hosts or scientists, wants to have their freedom circumscribed by responsibility. That Scottish scientist who cloned a sheep for the first time, got quite indignant when people began to question him about the ramifications of his actions. All he had done, he said, was carry out an experiment, as every scientist is allowed to do. It was up to others to make sure this new technology wasn't misused. Nice work if you can get The difference is this experiment was on a scale far bigger than, say, an attempt to find a cure for the common cold. Greater scale brings greater responsibility. Scale brings responsibility in farming too, even if farmers don't want it. If a wild pig poops in a field it's no big deal. If 4,000 pigs poop in one place, it becomes a potential environmental disaster. Many farmers understand this but others, while they pay lipservice to the importance of safeguarding the environment, still think of themselves as farmers have in the past — little guys minding their own business with little ability to influence the world. But technology has increased the scale of farming and the respon- sibility that goes with iL A farmer can feed more people than ever before — that's the good side of scale. But the bad side is that with huge liquid manure tanks, with tanks of pesticides and truckloads of chemical fertilizers, farmers have more potential to harm the environment and the lives of their neighbours. Thus, like Oprah, they have a greater responsibility. It may not be the way Oprah wants it, it may not be the way farmers want it, but it's reality.° Keith Roulston is editor and publisher of The Rural Voice. He lives near Blyth, ON.