Saturday, August 8, 2009

The Role of Media in Developing Communities

*****TRANSFORMING CLIENTS INTO CITIZENS******

Informed Citizens Necessary in a Free Society
Every form of media needs to play a meaningful role in empowering citizens to participate effectively in the enlightened governance of society. They perform this function by ensuring citizens are informed about issues, consider alternative viewpoints and have access to information about what government and private groups are planning, doing and/or not doing in our communities.
The communities in Shelburne County rely heavily on local and provincial newspapers and other published sources, as well as radio and television. Since the only truly local media outlet in Shelburne County is the weekly newspaper, the Coast Guard, ..... I believe ..... they have a special burden to keep informed and share news and information with the citizens of Shelburne County. Other traditional media sources that are not based in Shelburne County provide little coverage of news from Shelburne County and provide precious little analysis of news-worthy items effecting local residents in the County.
I conclude from my own review that the Coast Guard has failed in its responsibilities to our communities in Shelburne County and local citizens. That conclusion is supported in my view by their failure to publish a recent letter I'd sent to the editor. Their decision not to publish or act upon my note to them confirms my assessment of their failure to meet the obligation bestowed upon thme by their privileged position in our community. Below is a copy of the email sent to the Editor of the Coast Guard a couple of weeks ago.... you draw your own conclusions about their reasons for not publishing the letter or the Deputy Minister's letter.......

"
Adelard Cayer
Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 11:47 AM
To: Greg Bennett

Dear Mr.
Editor:

I've read with some interest the Coast Guard's recent
stories respecting SWSDA and the review being conducted by
municipalities of their relationship with SWSDA. In my view, it would have
been helpful to your readers if you had followed the old journalists' maxim that
a good story answers six questions - who, what, when, where,why and how. Had
your reporters done so, they would have referred to the recent letter
from the Deputy Minister of Economic Development to SWSDA, its
management and its Board of Directors. In my view, his letter has prompted the
present reviews. In that correspondence the Deputy Minister made a number of
points that are germane to your articles.

First, the Deputy's
letter advises SWSDA that, if it wishes to continue to receive core funding
as an RDA, it will have to incorporate under the RDA Act before the end of
March. Second, the Deputy points out in his letter that the RDA Act provides for
the creation of RDAs at the request of a municipality or group of
municipalities. For some time now, politicians and bureaucrats have advised
folks in Shelburne that, notwithstanding the provisions of the Act, the Province
would never approve an independent RDA for municipalities of Shelburne County.
The Deputy Minister's letter dismisses this misinformation and invites requests
for the creation of RDAs. Third, the Deputy points out that, in keeping
with the intent of the Act, he is looking for proposals that would ensure the
Board provides representation from the community at large and local businesses,
pointing out that the new RDA's Board should not be composed solely of
politicians.

While there is much more that could have been
reflected in your articles to date respecting this dramatic change in the
structures that will guide our local development in the future, your reporters'
failure to even mention this correspondence or provide details about
this background information seriously reduces the completeness of your
articles on this subject.

With these points in mind I hope you
will consider providing a more complete review and report dealing
with the issues associated with these upcoming changes. This is too
important an opportunity to bring about transformative change to be left in
the hands of politicians alone without the benefit of public consultations.

Yours very truly

-- A. A. "Ed" CayerPO Box 995, # 109
Water Street Shelburne, Nova Scotia B0T 1W0Tel 902-875-3870, Cell 902-512-0052Fax
Toll Free 1-877-786-4704email:
aacayer@gmail.com"

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

What a great way to challenge OUR WEEKLY NEWSPAPER'S STAFF for improvement with reporting outstanding facts about SWSDA .....

Keep them informed as they ,like most readers, are getting buried in information of such importance...that much is lost in summarizing....

Anonymous said...

Excellent letter Ed, and I suspect the editor was not delighted when he saw this blog. The lack of reference to Thompson's letter to SWSDA is very telling isn't it - it seems they don't want to walk in SWSDA's cow patties.
How ironic that your readers have been criticizing the lack of reporting on SWSDA from The Coast Guard for months, and you end up having to post your own letter to Mr. Bennett. We'll see what he's got to say in response in next week's paper - surely he'll feel that a response is required won't he?
With the number of hits your site has received in the past 4 mos. you're doing his work for him. Thanks!

Anonymous said...

If anyone out there knows the real purpose of the Coastguard paper please speak up.They surely do not keep us informed.It certainly does not report on local issues.Maybe this blog will become our only source of information!This lack of reporting is probably one of the resons our local pols are so ineffective.Poor journalism. I suppose if you are on a sinking ship personal survival is your main concern but maybe you should attempt to fix the leak.

Anonymous said...

5:49 - Your last sentence is so true. Our weekly has really dumbed down over the past couple of years. There just isn't anybody home at The Coast Guard other than those in the Advertising Dept.
Ed's blog is a hit because it's a forum for the citizens of the area to voice their opinions, while The Coast Guard won't even publish his recent letter to the editor. That says it all!
Guess we should all start throwing our loonies in a tin can for Ed, and save ourselves the grief of reading the CG's fluff! At the rate we're going they won't have any advertisers to keep them afloat anyway.

Anonymous said...

If readers of Ed's blog wrote their own letters to the editor requesting that he improve the investigative reporting side of things, maybe Mr. Bennett would finally clue in that we aren't happy with his weekly output!
BTW I think he makes a better photographer than editor.

Anonymous said...

Fact is the Coastguard isn't interested in what we may wish to read about in the paper.In the big scheme of things the paper probably has a planned termination date already set.

Anonymous said...

Ten years ago I might have felt bad about losing our weekly, but it is no longer "our" weekly, and it no longer serves the people of the county. When the media giant took over our provincial weeklys and killed the Daily News that was the beginning of the end. My sympathies are for the journalists who have student loans to repay with the prospect of finding a job in their field being so bleak.
Your blogspot has replaced our local paper for news and views Mr. Cayer, and makes for far more interesting reading. We may not always agree with some comments, but it is good to see both sides of an issue. Thanks!

Anonymous said...

Nova Scotia needs a couple of honest journalists.

In our digital age, now all Council, Committee and Board meetings, dealing with the expenditure of tax dollars, should be recorded and placed on the municipal web site. Made public.

It is public money they are talking about and the public has a right to know what they are saying and who is saying what.

Anonymous said...

Try this site to see what municipalities can to
digitally!!! http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=municipality+of+kings+ns&meta=&rlz=1R2GPEA_en&aq=f&oq=

Anonymous said...

Maybe its is time to start a new newspaper!

Anonymous said...

10:18 At least with the investigative reporting know how of Ed or Timothy we'd have something worth reading.

Anonymous said...

The idea of new Shelburne paper in the traditional sense is ludicrous to say the lest. But what if it was a hybrid. Part digital and part printed. Digital for the computer savvy and printed for the others who do not use a computer. Inexpensively print a few, at first, and post in malls etc. If it grows more can be added. An opportunity for someone to make a difference and perhaps grow a business. Present facts concisely and to the point.

Anonymous said...

Today the Coastguard reported on Frank's failed mink ranch scheme.Talk about project poor timing: worldwide recession,public trend away from real fur and the industry does not want or need more producers.It was about as sensible as a wood tick farm!Does this news item mean that the paper has finally decided to start meaningful reporting? Probably not! More than likely an attempt to save Franks already chewed at hide.

Anonymous said...

If you read it at "shelburne county today" why is it not in the Coastguard????

Anonymous said...

If you read it at SCT and not in The Coast Guard I imagine the editor is being advised by higher powers on just what he can publish in regards to SWSDA. Imagine Hatfield in Y'mouth is in Frank's pocket and he's got more drag than Bennett. Hatfield will soon have to break down and start reporting on the hot air coming out of the SWSDA bunker.

Anonymous said...

"....the dream lives on".