Raj Sherman speaks his mind and outlines his short term intentions to stay as an Independent for a while. He also give insight into what is wrong with health care policy and who is to blame. Part of the fascinating times in Alberta politics.
http://watch.bnn.ca/squeezeplay/january-2011/squeezeplay-january-28-2011/#clip409154
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Sue Huff Does a Great Job for the Alberta Party
Here is a clip of an interview with Sue Huff the Interim Leader of the Alberta Party on the Business News Network. Worth a watch to get a better sense of what the Alberta Party is all about.
http://watch.bnn.ca/squeezeplay/january-2011/squeezeplay-january-28-2011/#clip409154
http://watch.bnn.ca/squeezeplay/january-2011/squeezeplay-january-28-2011/#clip409154
Bloggers AND the Media or Bloggers AS the Media
Interesting editorial in the Calgary Herald today on the recent Court ordered bar of the public from a preliminary hearing. Anonymous bloggers and citizen journalists and social media sites are said to be "rife with violations of the basic laws pertaining to the courts." The editorial also notes the widespread violations of libel and slander laws on too many sites and I might add from too many Anonymous commenters.
I agree with the observations of the Calgary Herald editorial but then it gets all uppity and defensive about the superiority of the traditional media and professional journalism. I also agree that there is a great benefit to society from professional journalism but frankly that has been eroding too. Not the legal standards but the ethical standards are not always up to snuff. There has been an erosion of analysis and depth in MSM too. This is due to the money saving move for convergence of newspapers, radio and television coverage and ownership but also the competitive pressures to get it first before getting it right.
Part of this competitive pressure is brought on by the Bloggers too because they are breaking more and more news these days. John Ibbitson of the Globe and Mail said as much in a conference we were both speaking at. He noted that in the 2008 Presidential campaign that every major story was broken by a Blogger not a reporter. Part of the problem is the reporters were ensconced on the candidate campaign buses and force fed recycled spin. The news was happening elsewhere...in the communities where the Bloggers were.
Not doubt Bloggers and social media sites have to pick up their game by learning and respecting the legal requirements that relate to what they are writing about. By the same token MSM needs to elevate their coverage too and risk being really informative and start eschewing the infotainment we see all too often - especially on television and talk radio.
The public is ill served by MSM pushing superficial shallow news coverage or self-serving pap served up as authoritative analysis. The public is also ill served by silly shocking strident and uninformed commentary by Bloggers out to pick a fight instead of informing a civil conversation.
I think the courts should insist that citizen journalists, who want to cover court proceedings, actually get proper accreditation specifically as Bloggers/Citizen Journalists. Perhaps they need to pass a test to show knowledge of basic laws relating to the administration of justice and defamation. They can't be anonymous either and they must obey the laws.
Rather than ban Bloggers the courts should make them accountable and liable for what they report. I recently got access to a confidential court file as a Blogger when I did the report on the contempt finding against a Director of Children's Services in the Alberta government. I asked and undertook not to disclose the child's name nor his caregivers in anything I wrote under penalty of Contempt of Court. It was not easy and it happened mostly because I was a lawyer too and could give a professional undertaking to the courts. That is too high a standard and banning Bloggers is too low.
Seems to me there is a better way to serve the public interest here than banning Bloggers from the courts. The larger problem to me is Tweeting from the Court room by anyone with a smartphone. They can publish and mislead the public with instant and enormous reach with retweeting. Many of those who would be tweeting in a Courtroom don't even know they are publishing. It is almost guaranteed that we will see out of context and misinformed tweets coming out of courtrooms. With with only a 140 characters per "story" it is pretty hard to be contextual never mind accurate. Perhaps a ban on cellphones in courtrooms is something we have to look at. I also think we need to allow live video feeds from the courts so the whole complex context of a case is available directly to the public. I think that coverage can be supplemented with an informed or expert commentator to explain the procedure and the context of the proceedings for people. Not reality television silliness but real world information and education for the public about the courts, the administration of justice and the law.
We need professional experienced journalists and responsible informed bloggers to a have access to the courts to so show us that justice is being done and explain how the public interest is being served by the processes and outcomes of various cases. We don't need them to be the keepers of the truth and gatekeeper determinants of what is important or newsworthy. We need a more informed and media literate public with a highly developed skill at critical thinking too. This will all help to keep our democracy and its institutions focued on their real job; that of serving the public interest...not just looking for scoops and sensations.
I agree with the observations of the Calgary Herald editorial but then it gets all uppity and defensive about the superiority of the traditional media and professional journalism. I also agree that there is a great benefit to society from professional journalism but frankly that has been eroding too. Not the legal standards but the ethical standards are not always up to snuff. There has been an erosion of analysis and depth in MSM too. This is due to the money saving move for convergence of newspapers, radio and television coverage and ownership but also the competitive pressures to get it first before getting it right.
Part of this competitive pressure is brought on by the Bloggers too because they are breaking more and more news these days. John Ibbitson of the Globe and Mail said as much in a conference we were both speaking at. He noted that in the 2008 Presidential campaign that every major story was broken by a Blogger not a reporter. Part of the problem is the reporters were ensconced on the candidate campaign buses and force fed recycled spin. The news was happening elsewhere...in the communities where the Bloggers were.
Not doubt Bloggers and social media sites have to pick up their game by learning and respecting the legal requirements that relate to what they are writing about. By the same token MSM needs to elevate their coverage too and risk being really informative and start eschewing the infotainment we see all too often - especially on television and talk radio.
The public is ill served by MSM pushing superficial shallow news coverage or self-serving pap served up as authoritative analysis. The public is also ill served by silly shocking strident and uninformed commentary by Bloggers out to pick a fight instead of informing a civil conversation.
I think the courts should insist that citizen journalists, who want to cover court proceedings, actually get proper accreditation specifically as Bloggers/Citizen Journalists. Perhaps they need to pass a test to show knowledge of basic laws relating to the administration of justice and defamation. They can't be anonymous either and they must obey the laws.
Rather than ban Bloggers the courts should make them accountable and liable for what they report. I recently got access to a confidential court file as a Blogger when I did the report on the contempt finding against a Director of Children's Services in the Alberta government. I asked and undertook not to disclose the child's name nor his caregivers in anything I wrote under penalty of Contempt of Court. It was not easy and it happened mostly because I was a lawyer too and could give a professional undertaking to the courts. That is too high a standard and banning Bloggers is too low.
Seems to me there is a better way to serve the public interest here than banning Bloggers from the courts. The larger problem to me is Tweeting from the Court room by anyone with a smartphone. They can publish and mislead the public with instant and enormous reach with retweeting. Many of those who would be tweeting in a Courtroom don't even know they are publishing. It is almost guaranteed that we will see out of context and misinformed tweets coming out of courtrooms. With with only a 140 characters per "story" it is pretty hard to be contextual never mind accurate. Perhaps a ban on cellphones in courtrooms is something we have to look at. I also think we need to allow live video feeds from the courts so the whole complex context of a case is available directly to the public. I think that coverage can be supplemented with an informed or expert commentator to explain the procedure and the context of the proceedings for people. Not reality television silliness but real world information and education for the public about the courts, the administration of justice and the law.
We need professional experienced journalists and responsible informed bloggers to a have access to the courts to so show us that justice is being done and explain how the public interest is being served by the processes and outcomes of various cases. We don't need them to be the keepers of the truth and gatekeeper determinants of what is important or newsworthy. We need a more informed and media literate public with a highly developed skill at critical thinking too. This will all help to keep our democracy and its institutions focued on their real job; that of serving the public interest...not just looking for scoops and sensations.
The Future of Alberta Politics is Collaboration Not Competition
Dave King has penned a thoughtful blog post on collaboration being a better governing model than the tired and distrusted competition model of politics we are stuck in these days. Dave applies us usual wisdom and wit to the world as he sees it.
In the outmoded adversarial model of politics and governing we short change our society because we seek competition for power trumping good governance. If a good idea emerges from the opposition, the old-style politics will reject it because they don't want to be seen as giving the opposition any credit. There are exceptions but they are rare.
In the outmoded adversarial model we use simplistic debates to find an answer to complex issues. To every complex problem there is a simple answer - that is wrong! Dialectic arguments are an insufficient decision model for a modern interdependent and integrated world. To "win" in a political debate like in a legal argument, you don't have to prove you are right - you merely have to prove the other side "wrong." The nurturing of good ideas to make them better never happens because some adversary says "yeah but" pointing out some flaw, real or fictitious, and the best of a good new idea is shelved for fear of uncertainty.
Uncertainty is the only certainty in the real world these days. The key question for citizens in selecting a government is to figure out who you can trust, respect and rely on to hold true to the best interests of the greater good. What is it about a candidate and a leader that makes them worthy of your vote and your consent to be governed? Who can show caring and compassion while empowering individuals to become the best they can be but in the service of that greater good is the talent for a 21st century collaborative politician. Who can do all this and enhance the environment and not just plunder it in the process.
We in the Alberta Party are striving to be collaborative first. We prefer a co-creative approach that is about design not just debate. There is a place for debate but based on curiosity and sharing of ideas, not jut defeating the opposition. The competition between good ideas must be about the ideas themselves. Ideas should be judged on their merits and not just rejected because of the sources. Give credit where credit is due is part of a new political culture we need to foster in our Alberta...and this, I believe, can all be achieved through the Alberta Party. Get Alberta Party curious and learn more. Join this citizen's movement that is based on thinking for a change. It is a place to start to be the change you want to see.
In the outmoded adversarial model of politics and governing we short change our society because we seek competition for power trumping good governance. If a good idea emerges from the opposition, the old-style politics will reject it because they don't want to be seen as giving the opposition any credit. There are exceptions but they are rare.
In the outmoded adversarial model we use simplistic debates to find an answer to complex issues. To every complex problem there is a simple answer - that is wrong! Dialectic arguments are an insufficient decision model for a modern interdependent and integrated world. To "win" in a political debate like in a legal argument, you don't have to prove you are right - you merely have to prove the other side "wrong." The nurturing of good ideas to make them better never happens because some adversary says "yeah but" pointing out some flaw, real or fictitious, and the best of a good new idea is shelved for fear of uncertainty.
Uncertainty is the only certainty in the real world these days. The key question for citizens in selecting a government is to figure out who you can trust, respect and rely on to hold true to the best interests of the greater good. What is it about a candidate and a leader that makes them worthy of your vote and your consent to be governed? Who can show caring and compassion while empowering individuals to become the best they can be but in the service of that greater good is the talent for a 21st century collaborative politician. Who can do all this and enhance the environment and not just plunder it in the process.
We in the Alberta Party are striving to be collaborative first. We prefer a co-creative approach that is about design not just debate. There is a place for debate but based on curiosity and sharing of ideas, not jut defeating the opposition. The competition between good ideas must be about the ideas themselves. Ideas should be judged on their merits and not just rejected because of the sources. Give credit where credit is due is part of a new political culture we need to foster in our Alberta...and this, I believe, can all be achieved through the Alberta Party. Get Alberta Party curious and learn more. Join this citizen's movement that is based on thinking for a change. It is a place to start to be the change you want to see.
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Alberta is Changing - But for the Better?
There is a fascinating set of op-eds in today's Edmonton Journal that I recommend highly to every Albertan who wants a real change in the political culture and direction of this province.
BLACK DAYS FOR THE SWANN
Graham Thomson chronicles (and foreshadows?) the plight of David Swann and the Alberta Liberals. They have turned into spectators not participants as the political ground shifts beneath them...and everyone else. Given the ineptness of the Stelmach PCs and the unease of the real agenda of the Alliance, the Liberals should be soaring in the polls and the natural alternative for informed engaged and progressive thinking Albertans. It has not happened. Asking why this is the case is pointless now. What to do about the rise of the right and the self-righteous is the key question now.
We have to do something about the ugly side of politics if good guys like Ed Stelmach and David Swann are politically sand-bagged and personally crucified by dark forces of self interest and personal power aspirations. Democracy needs am makeover in this province.
PRESTON MANNING IS WISE BUT TOO NARROW
Next up is a very well reasoned essay by former Reform leader Preston Manning saying the PCs best reinvigorate with a new leader of it is "game over." Like so many on the enthocentric far right, they tend to drink too much of their own bathwater. Manning does that in spades. He only sees the Wildrose Alliance as a viable alternative. Given his history and the pack he runs with, that narrow view is understandable, but he is a much wiser observer of the political scene to be so myopic.
Take his commentary and replace Wildrose Alliance with Alberta Party each time. Except for the name and a few other changes the story is the same one. (apologies to Neil Diamond - I stole that line from his song "I Am I Said"). The emergence and growth of the Alberta Party shows a citizen's movement morphing into a political party with spirit, energy and an attitude that the status quo nor a return to the 50s is not the preferred future for Alberta. With our gifts, talents and skills Alberta should aspire beyond the "Alberta Advantage" attitude of being the best in the world. We need a new "Alberta Aspiration" to be the best for the world.
Preston Manning has a clear understanding of the situation in Alberta but his solution lens is too narrow. There are other political options emerging to the Wildrose Alliance...like the Alberta Party. There are other forums emerging beyond his Centre for Democracy for the Citizen's Assembly to occur...like a refocused Reboot Alberta to become a think-tank to offset the Libertarian harshness of the Fraser Institute and the Fundamentalist framing of the Manning Centre.
I have a lot of time for Preston Manning but like the rest of us, he is captive of his own history and experiences. Don't be fooled by the limited options he presents...there are others. But do reflect on his analysis and ideas...that is the value he provides to the future focus of the Next Alberta.
BLACK DAYS FOR THE SWANN
Graham Thomson chronicles (and foreshadows?) the plight of David Swann and the Alberta Liberals. They have turned into spectators not participants as the political ground shifts beneath them...and everyone else. Given the ineptness of the Stelmach PCs and the unease of the real agenda of the Alliance, the Liberals should be soaring in the polls and the natural alternative for informed engaged and progressive thinking Albertans. It has not happened. Asking why this is the case is pointless now. What to do about the rise of the right and the self-righteous is the key question now.
We have to do something about the ugly side of politics if good guys like Ed Stelmach and David Swann are politically sand-bagged and personally crucified by dark forces of self interest and personal power aspirations. Democracy needs am makeover in this province.
PRESTON MANNING IS WISE BUT TOO NARROW
Next up is a very well reasoned essay by former Reform leader Preston Manning saying the PCs best reinvigorate with a new leader of it is "game over." Like so many on the enthocentric far right, they tend to drink too much of their own bathwater. Manning does that in spades. He only sees the Wildrose Alliance as a viable alternative. Given his history and the pack he runs with, that narrow view is understandable, but he is a much wiser observer of the political scene to be so myopic.
Take his commentary and replace Wildrose Alliance with Alberta Party each time. Except for the name and a few other changes the story is the same one. (apologies to Neil Diamond - I stole that line from his song "I Am I Said"). The emergence and growth of the Alberta Party shows a citizen's movement morphing into a political party with spirit, energy and an attitude that the status quo nor a return to the 50s is not the preferred future for Alberta. With our gifts, talents and skills Alberta should aspire beyond the "Alberta Advantage" attitude of being the best in the world. We need a new "Alberta Aspiration" to be the best for the world.
Preston Manning has a clear understanding of the situation in Alberta but his solution lens is too narrow. There are other political options emerging to the Wildrose Alliance...like the Alberta Party. There are other forums emerging beyond his Centre for Democracy for the Citizen's Assembly to occur...like a refocused Reboot Alberta to become a think-tank to offset the Libertarian harshness of the Fraser Institute and the Fundamentalist framing of the Manning Centre.
I have a lot of time for Preston Manning but like the rest of us, he is captive of his own history and experiences. Don't be fooled by the limited options he presents...there are others. But do reflect on his analysis and ideas...that is the value he provides to the future focus of the Next Alberta.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)