Politicians and the people, minus the media

Certainly there are issues to be raised with many of the answers Stephen Harper gave when his YouTube video "conservation with Canadians" last night. I'm sure others will raise those issues; perhaps I will too later.

One thing that occurred to me though, as I read the Harper interview transcript, and reflect back on the online town halls that Michael Ignatieff did with Canadians earlier this year, and that's the one glaring thing that was missing from all of them.

What we got in each of those forums were questions from Canadians on a wide-range of policy issues. Foreign affairs, the role of parliament and prorogation, drug policy, climate change, child care, post secondary education, the list goes on.

What didn't we get? Questions on the horse race. On polling. On electoral gamesmanship. No "will you force an election" or political "whose is bigger" questions. To judge by nearly every press conference I've seen with Harper and Ignatieff, with nearly every pundit panel on the political talk shows, with most analysis pieces from the columnists, you'd think electoral chicken and the horse race is the issue of most concern to Canadians.

When Canadians get the chance to question their political leaders directly though, that's not what we get. We get questions on issues of policy that are important to them for a rainbow of reasons.

Both the Facebook townhall and the YouTube Q&A formats are obviously imperfect. No opportunity for follow-up, to follow a line of questioning, to really question an answer. Obviously such experiments, while well intentioned and useful, are never going to replace the role of the traditional media.

The media would be wise, though, to take a lesson from the questions that Canadians put to the leaders in these forums. After all, the Canadians asking those questions are their readers, viewers and listeners as well. And they should be just as interested in what they're concerned about as the leaders are.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

It's YouTube's fault! And other odd conclusions on drunken fighting from the Blue Jays

I'm a Blue Jays fan (their embarrassing sweep by the Athletics notwithstanding), I’ve seen three games thus far this young season and I intend to see many, many more before the fall. And I understand the problems Jays CEO Paul Godfrey is taking about here:

The chairman and chief executive officer of the major league club was reviewing the public-relations wreckage of two fight-filled nights in the stands - and tightening a zero-tolerance policy for illicit booze and brawling…

But on two occasions at the Rogers Centre in this young season, what may have started as a party in the stands degenerated into an ugly, scrappy disturbance. Each time about 100 rowdies were ejected.

"The entertainment is supposed to be on the field, not the stands," he said.

Indeed. I was at the home opener, I usually sit in the 500 level, and I saw some of this behaviour. I was also at Tuesday’s game, and saw the brawls as well, although they were on the other side of the stadium. On my side, while I had a bunch of inebriated college-types they confined themselves to really annoying taunts they thought were pretty clever. Can’t say I agreed, but no biggie.

It’s the booze though, says Godfrey. Probably. Tuesday’s game was part of the team’s Twoonie-Tuesdays promotion, where tickets in the upper bowl go for $2. Godfrey says the Jays are going to stop serving the booze in the upper bowl, and may scrap the $2 Tuesdays all together. They say they’re also going to crack down on stopping fans from bringing booze into the stadium.

The crackdown on booze smuggling makes sense, although one wonders why they weren’t doing that already? I’ll note though, despite Godfrey’s badmouthing of the fans in the cheapseats, the only time in my 50+ Jays game over three years I’ve seen fans with outside booze at a game, it was two suit-wearing Bay Street douchebags in $50 seats in the 100 level, not in the 500.

Banning alcohol sales isn’t the answer. And I say that as someone that doesn’t even drink at the ballpark. I don’t like beer, and it doesn’t seem like a wine sipping activity. But the link to the booze sales, $2 Tuesdays and rowdiness is somewhat tenuous to me. First of all, the tickets may the $2, the beers are not. Regular price on those tickets is about $10. So, you’re saving $8. That MIGHT be enough for one small beer, I haven’t checked lately. If someone can afford to get drunk on $10 beers, the ticket price isn’t a barrier for them.

The fact is, they’re probably coming drunk. So, in addition to cracking-down on booze smuggling, make like an airline and don’t admit intoxicated fans to the stadium in the first place. Most of the annoying taunters in my section Tuesday came pre-inebriated. I’m sure the rowdy fighters did too. And when it comes to alcohol sales, limit sales to one beer at a time, insist on ID and don’t sell to the underage, even if they are attractive young ladies.

Then there’s this gem from Godfrey:

The sudden surge in drunkenness and fighting in the cheap seats at Toronto Blue Jays games may be a YouTube phenomenon, with rowdy, attention-starved fans filming themselves and posting the videos on the Internet site, Paul Godfrey says.

…"Some people go, film their experiences and then call out to friends and unknowns alike to come down and join their party."

Really, its YouTube’s fault? I wonder if YouTube will be replacing video games as the source of all of society’s ills. It’s an interesting theory Paul, but drunken idiots fought at sporting events before online video sharing, that hasn’t changed.

Anyway, forget all this attention to drunken rowdy fans. Why in the hell do the Jays play great against top teams like the Yankees and Red Sox, and then tank against teams like the Athletics? That’s the question we should be wondering about.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

New Young Liberal Ads

After another round of negative attack ads from the Conservatives yesterday and a groan-inducing attempt at humour (if making fun of the French counts) with their Kyoto Dog Blog, these new viral ads launched today by the Young Liberals are a refreshing change.

The three ads borrow from the Mac vs. PC theme except, of course, it's Liberal vs. Conservative, and they're darned funny (without making fun of the French). Check them out, and consider making a donation to help get the ads on the air. You can also join the Facebook group. I hear they've already gotten free media play this morning on the CBC and Canada AM.

I've always believed that when it comes to bullying like that displayed by the Harper Conservatives, the best way to respond is with humour. And I've also always said Liberals can do humour well but Conservatives, not so much. Come to think of it, it's the same way with good governing actually...

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Chow's kitty video in poor taste

In other YouTube political video news, came across a wire piece yesterday talking about a video that NDP MP Olivia Chow has posted trying to gain support for an NDP push for stricter federal regulation of pet food, in the wake of the pet food controversy of late.

The concept is good, and since our family had dogs (and a few cats) when I lived at home I'm certainly sympathetic and supportive of the message. I wrote off the ominous music at the top...do you know what's in your pet food?...as good fun and the message from Ms. Chow was fine; her playing with her cat was cute.

But they lost me at the end, when a young lady holds up a drawing of a dead cat, Xs through the eyes, and says “If you don't want your cat ending up like this, sign a petition online...”

Maybe my partisanship is clouding my judgment here, and I'd appreciate your thoughts on that. But, to me, that seems in really poor taste. I like the rest of the vid fine, and as I said, I'm supportive of stricter regulation.

But to out and out say if you don't want your pet dead... to hold up a drawing of a dead cat...I really think that crosses the line. Particularly for a video by a Member of Parliament.

I just hate to see it detract from an important message.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers