Opinion
Imprint, Friday, June 13, 2008 opinion@imprint.uwaterloo.ca
Measuring bias Friday, June 13, 2008 Vol. 31, No. 4 Student Life Centre, Room 1116 University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1 P: 519.888.4048 F: 519.884.7800 http://imprint.uwaterloo.ca Editor-in-chief, Maggie Clark editor@imprint.uwaterloo.ca Advertising & Production Manager, Laurie Tigert-Dumas ads@imprint.uwaterloo.ca General Manager, Catherine Bolger cbolger@imprint.uwaterloo.ca Sales Associate, Laura McQuinn Systems Admin. vacant Distribution, Mitch Sanker, Christy Ogley Intern, Dylan Cawker Board of Directors board@imprint.uwaterloo.ca President, Jacqueline McKoy president@imprint.uwaterloo.ca Vice-president, Sherif Soliman vp@imprint.uwaterloo.ca Treasurer, Lu Jiang treasurer@imprint.uwaterloo.ca Secretary, vacant secretary@imprint.uwaterloo.ca Staff liaison, Peter Trinh liaison@imprint.uwaterloo.ca Editorial Staff Assistant Editor, Dinh Nguyen Lead Proofreader, Ashley Csanady Cover Editor, Michael Gregory News Editor, Andrew Abela News Assistant, Jamie Damaskinos Opinion Editor, Guy Halpern Features Editor, Tina Ironstone Arts & Entertainment Editor, Emma Tarswell Science & Tech Editor, Adrienne Raw Sports & Living Editor, vacant Photo Editor, vacant Graphics Editor, Joyce Hsu Web Administrator, Sonia Lee Systems Administrator, vacant Production Staff Mohammad Jangda, Andrew Dodds, Ryan Lee, Paul Collier, Samantha, Cait Davidson, Kaitlan Huckabone Rosalind Gunn, Peter Trinh Imprint is the official student newspaper of the University of Waterloo. It is an editorially independent newspaper published by Imprint Publications, Waterloo, a corporation without share capital. Imprint is a member of the Ontario Community Newspaper Association (OCNA). Editorial submissions may be considered for publication in any edition of Imprint. Imprint may also reproduce the material commercially in any format or medium as part of the newspaper database, Web site or any other product derived from the newspaper. Those submitting editorial content, including articles, letters, photos and graphics, will grant Imprint first publication rights of their submitted material, and as such, agree not to submit the same work to any other publication or group until such time as the material has been distributed in an issue of Imprint, or Imprint declares their intent not to publish the material. The full text of this agreement is available upon request. Imprint does not guarantee to publish articles, photographs, letters or advertising. Material may not be published, at the discretion of Imprint, if that material is deemed to be libelous or in contravention with Imprint’s policies with reference to our code of ethics and journalistic standards. Imprint is published every Friday during fall and winter terms, and every second Friday during the spring term. Imprint reserves the right to screen, edit and refuse advertising. One copy per customer. Imprint ISSN 0706-7380. Imprint CDN Pub Mail Product Sales Agreement no. 40065122. Next staff meeting: Monday, June 16 12:30 p.m. Next board of directors meeting: Wednesday, June 18 10:15 a.m.
When the time is right to recognize your own
U
ltimately, the measure of any media organization lies in its capacity to rise above conflicts of interest. Forget being a political watchdog; forget creating forums for community discourse: if a newspaper, radio station, or TV network can’t convince its audience it knows how to deal with bias, that audience is less likely to trust any of its related reports. This is especially true when those conflicts of interest arise from within — for instance, an inability to criticize other commercial holdings of a media organization’s parent company, or the acceptance of direct government influence and propaganda, permitted because the organization’s owner wants to push a particular political agenda. Welcome to the reality of contemporary media. And though there are plenty of specific cases that draw attention to the problems of internal bias, often the unspoken is enough to isolate an audience. The immense number of media take-overs by entertainment and telecommunications giants alone sends a clear underlying message to the audience at large: news is a profit-oriented business. The fall-out of such a message is just as clear: news organizations likely aren’t going to portray themselves, or their parent companies, in a negative light. So when these same organizations have positive news to report about themselves, how can readers really trust its relative worth and importance? Of course, you don’t need to be a giant mainstream publication in order to suffer from this kind of distrust. Here at Imprint, dissenting readers regularly refer to the “presumption” of students here who think themselves “real journalists” and maintain a “higher than thou” attitude in relation to the rest of campus. There is an immediate distrust, in other words, for students who dare to adopt the immense power afforded to the practice of journalism. (And I do truly find some measure of distrust healthy from the student body — it certainly keeps us on our toes!) However, while I hope I’ve been quick to hold myself and my paper accountable for failings as they arise, I’ve let that same accountability blind me to reporting on our successes, which we do have — and for which outside journalistic organizations have in fact praised us. I’m talking about the Canadian
Community Newspaper Awards (CCNA) and the Ontario Community Newspaper Awards (OCNA). I’m talking in particular about Mohammad Jangda and Andrew Abela, two long-time Imprint volunteers who represent just how down-to-earth student journalism at UW can be. Mohammad Jangda (pictured below) received third place for Best Campus Photo in the CCNA. The photo in question caught then-VPED Jeff Henry discussing with VPAF Renjie Butalid the extra load they would have to shoulder with the resignation of VPIN Sai Kit Lo. A very opportune shot, taken with the right balance of lighting to convey the gravity of the situation — heck, don’t just take my word for it: you can find the photo in our online archives as the cover shot for the February 9, 2007 issue.
photos, Daniel Lewis
Meanwhile, Andrew Abela (pictured above) reported last summer on a forum in Conrad Grebel that fell apart when guest scholar Dr. Shomali, of the Khomeini Education and Research Centre, was shouted down by cries of “Terrorist!” and
“Murderer!” by Iranian and Afghan protestors. The issue resonated on an international scale, so it’s not surprising his comprehensive article won first place for Student News Writing in the OCNA and third place in the CCNA competitions. Since Abela is Imprint’s present news editor, and since I also won an award for student news writing in the OCNA, I wasn’t comfortable printing a full article about the awards in our news section; however, writing nothing about their accomplishments was just as inappropriate — and here I have to thank the Daily Bulletin for their more timely coverage of Imprint’s successes in my stead. When I asked Jangda and Abela what they felt these wins meant to them, to Imprint, and to UW as a whole, they both shrugged. Jangda’s been here for almost four years as opinion, web, photo, and sports editor, as well as lead proofreader and (in his own words) “office jerk.” He says he isn’t in it for anything but the fun and the community — and I believe him. If volunteers didn’t find being here enjoyable, I can’t begin to imagine why they’d work so hard for Imprint with all the coursework they also have to do. As for Abela, in his two years here to date, he’s been a columnist, reviewer, assistant arts editor, arts editor, and news editor. His passion for writing trumps all else; he loves the research that goes into his articles, and the positive reinforcement that comes from seeing a tangible product at the end of every news cycle. Though he says awards like his should be a mark of pride for Imprint and UW — a “win for our team” as he puts it — he also makes it clear where his priorities lie. “I’m not here for personal recognition,” said Abela, “so much as for personal gain.” A lot of mainstream news organizations could, I think, easily learn a thing or two about humility and the importance of measuring bias from some of my volunteers. And so, it seems, could I. On the eve of Imprint’s 30th anniversary, all I can say is: congratulations, team — you’re doing great. And thank you, dear readers, for keeping us humble all the while. editor@imprint.uwaterloo.ca
Days since Kambakhsh’s arrest, as of the dateline: 230 Days since Kambakhsh’s sentencing: 143
The importance of reading past the headlines
A
t this year’s annual Synod meeting in London, Ontario, priests, lay-readers, and proxy voters of the Anglican Diocese of Huron came together to discuss and vote on a variety of issues. The vote that drew the most attention from media speculators and neighbouring diocese was the vote that resulted with 73 per cent of the clergy and lay people in favour of blessing samesex marriages. But before all you queer couples rush out to get marriage licenses and head over to the local Anglican church, and before all you self-congratulatory straight lefties pat yourselves too hard on the back, you should know exactly what this decision means and how if affects you. The diocese of Huron is the geographical area within which all Anglican churches answer to St. Paul’s Cathedral and the bishop in power. The diocese isn’t limited to the Region of Waterloo, but encompasses a sizable chunk of southwestern Ontario, including Kitchener, London, Sarnia, Chatham, Windsor, communities along Lake St Clair and Lake Erie, and everything in between. Right now, it’s presided over by Bishop Bruce Howe, a man
whom I’ve met many times in the past eight years, a friend of my parents, as well as the bishop who performed my confirmation. Despite misleading and confusing newspaper headlines such as “Anglicans say yes to same-sex,” “Vote comes out in favour of blessings,” and “HICKS NIX STICKS PIX,” the vote was not actually to pass any motion for the blessing of same-sex marriages. The vote was instead to put a motion forth to leave the decision on the desk of the bishop, allowing him to decide whether or not same sex marriages should be blessed within the diocese, and, if so, for him to develop an appropriate ritual for said blessings. An answer from Howe is expected at or before the upcoming Lambeth conference. To further the misconstrued perception of the vote that took place at Synod, the understanding of many who heard of the decision was that it condoned the performance of same sex marriages in Anglican churches across the diocese. Not so! When they talk about the blessings of same sex unions and marriages, it means quite simply to give the blessing of the church to a pre-existing same sex marriage that had been performed elsewhere.
So why is everyone so worked up about this decision? Well, the answer is two-pronged. First of all, many people could be high on the decision due to the misunderstanding and poor media coverage of the vote that I previously detailed. The second reason is that, although the change within the church is smaller than some had understood, it is still a large change in the foundation of one of Canada’s oldest denominations, and one of the oldest Christian denominations in the world. For a church that is often described as “Diet Catholic,” to even go so far as to recognize the legitimacy of city-hall same-sex marriages is a big deal. So what can we expect from Bishop Howe in his upcoming decision? Well, as he is on sabbatical right now, I doubt any media hound (even if that media hound is a family friend) will find out before it’s made, but I wouldn’t count on it being anything less than what has already been celebrated. In the meantime, though, you’ll have to put your big-gay-church-wedding scrapbook back on the shelf and wait this one out. tmyers@imprint.uwaterloo.ca