Writer widow: Too Much Whine

Writer widow: Too Much Whine: We all have access to The News globally, if we care to indulge. What we have to remember is that reporters and their editors are not all wit...

Writer widow: Writer widow: Give It A Rest!

Writer widow: Writer widow: Give It A Rest!: Writer widow: Give It A Rest! : The minute a politician is elected by the people in a fair vote, the rats come out. They are those who delve...

Writer widow: Give It A Rest!

Writer widow: Give It A Rest!: The minute a politician is elected by the people in a fair vote, the rats come out. They are those who delve into any corner for a morsel of...

Give It A Rest!

The minute a politician is elected by the people in a fair vote, the rats come out. They are those who delve into any corner for a morsel of edible dirt to run to press. Rather than supporting the newly elected in banding together to help make the changes that the platform proposed, these disgusting so-called reporters, love to chew them away before they are enacted. While it provides solace for the party or person who was defeated, it does nothing to help anyone else who just wants matters to be taken care of peaceably and rapidly. The whole organisation of political bi-partisan politics is based on this principal. You run, you win or lose. That's it. And if you win, the whole mess of people in the area covered,  should leave the dirty tactics behind and get on with supporting the person and party that won. This is fair politics. If this doesn't happen, to sensible people,  it makes the losing bunch seem like a pack of teeth gnashing soreheads. Whole front page newspapers are often fraught with unproven or undocumented charges based on classically bad reporting. To take a small matter and headline it as though there is an iota of proof, and blow it into two or three words taken out of context, sells, no doubt but it isn't just or credible journalism. Sure, if there is an actual situation that has been backed up on what a political body has done or not, can  and should be exposed. If the facts are there and the reporting group can substantiate their viewpoints, fine. If they can't, editors should quell, and that doesn't mean over-using the term "alleged". As an apolitical party citizen who simply wants to see the government elected get busy and do its work, I am disgusted at the railing and posing, the nasty photographs displayed for emotional kick to an article and the dirt digging that has nothing to do with reality but only rank sensationalism. Give those of us who are tired of the mud slinging and want to hear and read and see, facts something to believe in.  Print news about our country, run by our elected officials, and credit for doing things right. As to the constant, unremitting complainers who are interested in nothing but dredging up gossip and innuendo, give it a rest!

Writer widow: Doth Protest Too Much

Writer widow: Doth Protest Too Much: It seems that almost every government funded or sponsored event sees a group of protesters protesting against their pet issue. I hasten to s...

Doth Protest Too Much

It seems that almost every government funded or sponsored event sees a group of protesters protesting against their pet issue. I hasten to say that while protesting is a right and in its way has impact, I am finding it less and less impressive since it is no longer a group of every day folks gathering to express their problems. Protest is now prepped by hired professionals. They make their money doing it.  They organize the use of doo dads that must cost something: caps, tee shirts, signs and so on. The police departments have to use up more tax payer's funds than what the event requires, to see that protesters  don't get out of hand and cause serious damage. How would you like your policeperson husband, mother, father, daughter or son facing a yelling, fierce-looking, sign and stick crowd? Protest Pros of course hold meetings to indoctrinate their clients on the correct how-tos, thus making protest all the more ridiculously artificial. I am weary of protests frankly. Surely there must be some other way to get  complaints across without raining on everyone else's parade? Most of us just want to enjoy a time to see and celebrate an event planned, one not meant to offend, but to enjoy. Surely, there are other ways to get a protest point put forward. Why not spend the money on hiring a hall with speakers and forums, or putting on your own planned party to tell us about your cause. Don't come around and make your business, destroying what a lot of other people's efforts, those who have spent time and energy to create a worthwhile event.  Our country recently  had what was supposed to be a once-in-a-lifetime party to celebrate its age and accomplishments. Some, who had other issues to present, did it informing organizers of their intent. That kind of  ideal "protest" was recognized for its honour because it was done with careful thought and dignity and welcomed as such. But not all others have that kind of insight. Fortunately at this event that sort of thing didn't happen but the post complaints now roll in. Naturally, whole hoards of citizens wanted to be present at the country's huge bash. Naturally, there are overwhelming numbers of those wanting to join in but, of course, there are limits. Naturally, there are only so many folks that can be accommodated. It's a big country. The post celebration belly-achings begin and the media is right there to pick up on the negatives. It sells, as always, and unfortunately, far more widely than positives. This is a large and growing country, one of the finest, and still we hear such silliness as: "we had to wait in line", "I came all this way" and "there wasn't enough ... for me". Me? How about looking at the larger picture.

Writer widow: Word Power

Writer widow: Word Power: We've all said and written words we regret. We may not have meant them as they were decoded by others, but the truth is, that communicat...

Word Power

We've all said and written words we regret. We may not have meant them as they were decoded by others, but the truth is, that communication is a two-way street. When you get into the wrong "lane" watch out. Reactions can be lethal and misleading in one way or another. People in high places have to be very careful about what words they use. The media is "the message" these days and a headline, while the business of selling media to its customers is their game, it may only be understood fully on digesting the whole piece. Media's job, being a commercial enterprise, is to get your attention. It sells.  The minute you latch onto your personal interpretation without some filtering genre of your own, you're hooked. A housekeeper of mine some time ago, who persisted in reading headlines only, when we met each day, would have some world shattering news event such as earth ending, the government collapsing or the roof falling in, which she outlined to me as she took off her coat. All was accomplished in headlines, according to dear Irene. The woman was in a constant state of consternation and semi-hysterics, but she was certainly someone with whom to open your morning if not broadly, your eyes. I didn't have the heart to ruin her day. It included excitable speaker phone conversations with her friends, like-headline-readers. I chanced, on occasion, to buy one of the sensationalist papers that she had for their outre stories, and read a few whole articles. Out of context, in the way she understood them, and how the editors permitted them, the headlines were true, in their way. When it said "Ninety Year Old Has A Baby", the true meaning was that the ninety year old, had a baby, but the baby was an animal. Irene, my housekeeper now long gone, didn't care to read the whole story and perhaps for her daily entertainment value, didn't want to. The headline alone was fodder for much chat among her friends who discussed all of the implications around their interpretations. It was entertainment, and relatively harmless. Today's readers are far more discriminating out of necessity, and do delve into what's in a headline. Furthermore they go on-line for greater detail. Of course, what we read as "information" on-line doesn't have to be accurate or reliable or even completely factual. Finding sites that one can trust is much like the "old days" of picking newsprint for its authority. Schools do have programs in teaching students how to assess what media pounds out. That, hopefully, provides a readers' system to give order and good sense to the usefulness of what we consume. Good night! Irene.