Raise the Hammer

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win - Mahatma Gandhi.

Thanks for fighting the good fight - although to be fair, it's not as if Ms. Chapman is getting her marching orders from anybody other than Mr. B himself. He has demonstrated his animosity to the Media on countless occasions, so any attempt to limit the Media in general, should come as a surprise to no one.

Let's see if our duly elected Mayor is capable of seeing beyond his own ego and self interest, and doing the right thing.

"It is actually good when the enemy fights us – not bad: In my opinion, whether as individuals, political parties, soldiers, or as students it is a bad sign if the enemy has not already formed a front against us. It shows that we are hidden under the same cover as them. There is nothing wrong when the enemy attacks us, it is proof that a clear distinction has been made between ourselves and the enemy. It is much better having an enemy that confronts us, devalues us or attempts to paint us in the darkest possible colours. It is proof that a clear dividing line has been drawn with the enemy – in fact it shows that our struggle is scoring splendid results already." – Mao Tse Tung

it's not as if Ms. Chapman is getting her marching orders from anybody other than Mr. B himself

What does he care? He doesn't even read these blogsites.

I was sad to see that Bob's Blogsite was not a signator...

The thought crossed my mind.

One thing that strikes me about Chapman's statement is how passive she sees her relationship with media.

"I would hope in media your first priority is the information to the public too. But that's not my responsibility. My responsibility is information coming from City Hall, to the public. And how do we get that?"

She implies the information comes from City Hall and is transcribed by the press with no critical analysis. I suppose that speaks volumes about the state of journalism where MSM outlets are more than willing to publish press releases as news stories. Control is the driving factor with this regime, but real journalism is a two-way street.

Fear of an increasingly engaged citizenry is causing a circling of the wagons at the Mayor's office.

The MSM only has so much time and limited resources to cover everything.

I, a member of the MSM, fully support independent reporting because it compliments my work and adds to public understanding.

Her political reporting knowledge comes from being a staffer in the Mike Harris gov.

Her thoughts on how the MSM works are not reflective of the hard work members of the press put in every day.

My statement wasn't meant as a blanket condemnation of MSM, as I understand the financial pressures that most news services are under. But when politicians and corporations take advantage of the situation to craft and release their message as third party vetted "news" stories it drags down the legitimacy of the press.

I know there are excellent reporters working in MSM. I read them every day.

Once again SO impressed by the efforts of the editors of this website, as well as Matt Jelly & Martinus Gelensye. Whenever I am tempted to give up on this city (and it happens), I am freshly inspired by your efforts to give a voice to the many progressive residents of this city who believe in representative, good governance. The lack of good governance has held back the incredible potential of this city for generations, and people like you, the watchdogs, will ensure that our representative start to actually represent. Good work!

Agreed. Matt Jelly really stepped up in the discussions which lead to this statement.

This is outrageous. Good luck!

Again, like many Hamiltonians, I too will be watching this issue raise itself and see what the answers from City Hall will be....and what they won't be too!

As a blogger with a wide Canadian readership, I wonder sometimes about the ability of elected officials and their staff in their thinking about what it is they "will" want to release and what it is they "want" to hide...

This is an issue I believe that will not just go away....and judging by the signors of the letter above, I'd think that the ball is now in City Hall's court....lets see what develops, shall we?

:-|

Jim Rudnick www.canuckseo.com jrudnick@kkti.com

What are they so afraid of? It's not bloggers who are making them look foolish, they're doing a good enough job on their own. By going on CHML and making a statement like that, all they're doing is reinforcing why we despirately need independent/citizen journalists, bloggers and the like. Drawing a line in the sand like this just makes the issue even bigger. They will inevitably have to face the public on this one and they will quickly find that the public gets really cranky when they think their rightful access to information is being stepped on.

Thanks to all of those who are standing up for us on this. It's greatly appreciated.

with these new rules, will CHML still be allowed to have all of the host blogs on their website?? Are bloggers allowed into city hall if they work for outlets who will be sure to slant and taint the info the public receives? Will the Spec still be allowed to use twitter and blogs??

Yes. Because they have bosses to whom Pegs can complain, and deep pockets should she wish to sue. I mean what's the point of suing a penniless citizen journalist unless it's just to spread fear and intimidation? Oh wait...

Let me tell you the wave of power coming from so called "new" media is something more raw and more powerful than anything else the old gaurd can imagine. OpenFile is pegged (pun intended) to outstrip the print media sooner than you can imagine.

Chapman said it best herself; "If you don't have that, it's, you know- how do we control, um, the information?" That's the real answer, it's all about control with these people, even when they follow their gaffe by saying "my first priority is the public."

Peggy Chapman and Bob Bratina have just proven themselves to be media dinosaurs. If Peggy isn't happy about what you've just published about Bob Bratina she wants to have the power to threaten your lively-hood. Citizen Journalists drive control freaks like Peggy and Bob absolutely nuts, people who write for free have no fear and can't be controlled through force. Gaining control of information access through fear is what Peggy is trying to achieve. Everyone who has ever written for this site please band together to fight Peggy Chapman's fear based media control.

For what it's worth I've e-mailed my name and information to the initiative, I hope others do to.

Comment edited by mrjanitor on 2011-05-31 14:59:16

While I might be accused of wearing my skinny jeans with the following comment, out of fear I might be flip-flopping on the issue...I'm merely seeking some clarity on the issue, and I appreciate your patience in educating me :)

Perhaps where I am confused is what constitutes "media" as it relates to the issue of access to items earmarked for the "press" (as in the "press gallery" that Ms. Chapman refers to in her comment). The undersigned letter to City Hall includes signatures from bloggers. While I too am a blogger (more of a hobby than a career), I have never considered myself as "media". If there are issues that I want to blog about, I go a huntin' for the information just like any other citizen. I don't use my website as a status seat above those who do not.

Now for the tear in my skinny jeans: I find it incomprehensible that the City would issue any information to the "press", which wasn't as easily available to the general public. (Navigating the City's Website is not exactly an easy task). The perception (real or implied) that City Hall is creating a hierarchy with respects to access to information is insulting to all Hamiltonians. Also, respect must be given to those Hamiltonians who give of their time (read: volunteer) to educate and inform others via either personal blog sites or interest-group sites. To harbour indifference based on whether one has a boss or not, is insulting.

The City has the resources to challenge bloggers and journalists alike in situations when questionable reporting occurs. Whether it be through legal or direct contact, misrepresentation of facts can be fixed. The question comes down to whether the City trusts it's decisions, and can be open to criticism. The City also needs to trust those who utilize social media to educate others...and again, take action if something is posted inaccurately.

Peggy should resign immediately.

It will be interesting to see if the The Spectator reports on this and if they do what spin it will be given.

Here is the answer

Date: Wed May 25 2011.

An interesting question about what constitutes media. I think we're all media - The Spec to CFMU to RTH to person in basement with no readership beyond his/her friends.

At the same time, I don't think any of us have any illusions. My stations doesn't have hundreds of thousands of listeners like some do. Most blogs don't have hundreds of thousands of readers like some newspapers do. Hell, you'd think City Hall would consider some of us completely irrelevant but because our audience is a/ small and b/ largely consists of the choir we're preaching to.

However...when the like-minded have outlets like blogs and indie newspapers and indie stations...the truth can come spilling into the mainstream eventually. Is that what they're afraid of?

(which reminds me, what's next, insisting the Spec shut down its comments section?)

Jamie @ CFMU

I find all of this fascinating. This period of time...where social media and the means to both 'broadcast' it as well as receive it are expanding into some truly awesome areas...will be looked back upon as a watershed interlude.

When you inform the political process with all this, you don't just get open data and the such...I believe you're going to get a slow paradigm shift towards an entirely different way of 'doing business'.

I'm also a bit dismayed that many of those who have chosen to serve the public just don't seem to 'get' how the workaday world has changed. And although I'm loath to say it, from my personal experience with politicians, it is very much a generational thing.

People here and elsewhere often go on about 'the old boys' network'. Well, from my point-of-view, the network we're witnessing here, the one that will find itself as useful as a buggy-whip sooner than they think, is perhaps an equally frustrating one.

Hats off to all those who are striving to make the most of what we currently have...while understanding that we're capable of having -and doing- much, much better.

'Illegitimi non carborundum'

Well, I do know that Ms Chapman is with the Bay Observer, which is basically an on-line blog of sorts.

She seems to hob nob with the status quo, however, the questions people fail to ask, are the really hard questions, which the answers cannot not be scripted.

Why do people have trouble even going through Freedom of Information, and get blacked out items, if we are trully a democratic society, which I do not really believe we are.

Why should this Ms Chapman being setting anything? What makes her an expert? Can anybody answer that?

One would have to check under the surface to find the real truth but in doing that, one could ran up against a gaunlet, if you know what I mean.

Will there be any organized event, action or opportunity to show support for the 15th meeting? I for one, would definitely attend/lend a hand. This one is too asinine to let slide.

I get my local news from a variety of sources, both indy and MSM. The indy stuff often proves to be 1) more relevant to the issues of citizenship and community that I care about; 2) better researched and more analytical/critical in its approach. I value that greatly, and I'm willing to fight to protect and enhance it.

On the brightside, I predict the fallout from this will further legitimize and entrench indy media in the Hammer.

We're going to await a response from the city before taking our next steps.

There are plans to take more action if needed.

This speaks VOLUMES about that state of affairs at City Hall. I can completely understand the need to control the message as there is no vision from our local government at the moment. Think about what has happened in the last six months. The Pam Am opportunity lost, LRT is effectively "on the shelf", new GO trains are some distant goal, Gore Park funding axed, City employees are about to strike. Progress has come to a grinding halt. The biggest issue is whether to build a sewage incinerator! And now this. God forbid we have actual issues to debate. Instead we get plans to close down the avenues for debate. I guess this is what Bratina meant when he said "Platform Smatform".

CITY OF HAMILTON VISION

1. To be the best place in Canada to infantilize public discourse.
2. To be the best place in Canada to proscribe information.
3. To be the best place in Canada to enrage citizens.
4. To be the best place in Canada to divide reduced economic opportunities.

May I suggest an amendment?

CITY OF HAMILTON VISION

1. To be the best place in Canada to infantilize public discourse.
2. To be the best place in Canada to proscribe information.
3. To be the best place in Canada to enrage citizens.
4. To be the best place in Canada to provide reduced democratic opportunities.

I don't understand Peggy's logic. If she is concerned solely about the citizens getting the correct information, why does it matter if she tells the information to someone who doesn't have a boss? People with or without bosses can make things up, tell lies etc whether they are given the correct information or not. To me, it would seem logical, that if someone wants the public to know the correct information, they should tell that information to as many people as possible who are willing to hear it. If someone wants to spread a lie about something at city hall, they can do that with or without the correct information. I just don't get it.

http://youtu.be/4KoKWf6pLs8

Insert plug for open data - no need for bloggers, journalists, or anyone else when people can get the information for themselves.

Ryan and Joey,

What about hiring each other to be each other's bosses? You can pay each other the same salary, thus negating the cost. Of course, you'd agree to both be the most relaxed bosses imaginable, and allow your employee to do what ever they want. Maybe that would work?

Comment edited by SpaceMonkey on 2011-05-31 19:05:16

hmm I basically agree with the request for council to look at this and define the semantics. I found the article struggling with language. Professional, independent media, etc. Exolain your language so that others may know what they plan on doing fits or doesn't fit.


What I am reading from Chapman is a request for accountability from media sources. Who may she complain to if she disagrees with how the blog, etc. has written. Dave and Martinus should be able to step forward with their process for accountability. What structure exists within the Raise the Hammer structure for her to complain to? Now,in Matt's case, I would like to hear him reply about accountability but it seems to me that both Dave and Martinus have a lot of personal control on what is published.

Good to bring this forward though.

I think this whole thing is ridiculous and proves how far out of her league Chapman truly is. This looks very poorly on Bratina. If Peggy needs someone to "complain to", she is in the wrong line of work and doesn't understand the dynamics of political theatre.

Very interesting discussion - and timely. It comes as we see many of our public institutions retreating in fear from openness. We have a police chief who routinely refuses to answer questions from the media, a school board that believes elected representatives should be allowed to say nothing negative ever and that staff are the official spokesmen, and now this. However, I believe these issues are more nuanced, less absolute, than is sometimes recognized. Some of the issues raised in this joint statement arise from our public institutions' understandable inability to adjust to a swiftly changing,deeply disrupted information ecosystem (if you'll forgive the horrible phrase). Some of the concerns undoubtedly stem from the fact the policy is still not written, consultations still undone, and thus the policy can be seen to be as bad or as good as you wish, depending on how much you want to extrapolate or infer from the few public comments made so far. And some of the issues stem from assumptions about the political motivations involved. Fair enough. Reading the joint statement, however, I am concerned, not about the divide between Mainstream Media and Individual Journalists, but the divide between Media/Journalists and The Public.THAT is the most important battle, I think. Public information needs to be public for all. And available in a useful, affordable and timely manner. Period. Please take care to draw a distinction between that critical principle and the question of timely access to staff. Elected officials are free to snub you or I or CH - at their peril. They are accountable at election time and they have the freedom to be smart or stupid in choosing how available to make themselves. It is up to each one of us to convince them that it's worth it to give us their time. Public officials are a different matter,I believe. They are staff, public employees, and while it might be nice to say, "I pay taxes, you work for me, dagnabit!" I think we have to recognize that there is a public benefit in ensuring that their time is used efficiently and sensibly. (You and I are not the only ones paying taxes.) So the question of access to public officials (not public information) is not so absolutist, I believe. Should city manager Chris Murray have the right to shield himself from any specific call for his time and attention that comes from the public? (And we are all simply the public, not media and public...) I'd say the answer is yes. I can't imagine a public institution that could function otherwise. Note this about access to individuals, access to their time and acccess to their opinions - NOT access to public information. I have long argued - long before the web was built - that the media has NO special rights, should be given NO special status in the eyes of the law, as compared to the rights of the individual. I still believe that to be true. I apologize for the lengthy comment - these are issues very near and dear - and thank you for raising and hosting this discussion, it's valuable. Oh. And one small correction - Very little of the mainstream media are private companies these days. We are private sector, but public companies. That is a meaningful difference, I believe.

This is ambitious stuff. But hey, Hamilton is The Ambitious City. Perhaps this is as Hamiltonian as it's possible to be.

http://www.thehamiltonian.net/2011/05/those-pesky-media-types.html

another interesting read

This is going to sound pretty extreme, but as I read the transcript of Ms. Chapman's statement I'm reminded of the early days of the portable printing press as the technology spread across the world. In some places, these devices were illegal. Authorities would smash presses and arrest anyone found with one. Now, I'm not saying that Bratina is that kind of tyrant, but this very clumsy reaction to new media is born from the same close-minded, control-oriented sentiment that is found in some of the darker pages of our history books. All this is doing is amplifying a sense of mistrust between Bratina and the citizens he has been charged with serving. Simply put, it will backfire.

I have a blog, and on any given day (or month, heh) I might choose to post something that particular politicians may not enjoy. If I were to post something blatantly untrue, my personal credibility would take a hit, and if it were serious enough I might even be sued. If my employer caught wind, they may decide that I am an embarrassment to their company and their customers and they even may decide to fire me. Most of what I post is very obviously opinion. Some of it is very satirical in nature. In order to be effective, even the most sarcastic and unflattering things I post MUST have a strong element of truthfulness to them, otherwise I just look like a petty blowhard. It's not in my interest to mis-quote or bend the truth to make a point. Giving bloggers greater access isn't going to lead to chaos, it's going to lead to a greater variety of coverage, and more transparency. Why is that so scary?

And everyone knows I'M the petty blowhard of our family. Dan is the responsible brother.

Responsible? Stop ruining my street cred. I spent a good 15 minutes building it up.

We need to stop this constant spreading of misinformation.... by restricting access to the source of the truth.

When I look down the list of names above, I see some of the most important and influential people and organizations in Hamilton independent media. A bunch that do or have produced widely circulated print versions, and one has a radio station. This isn't just about small-time bloggers, this is about anyone but The Spec, CH and CHML.

The focus of this letter were those threatened by this new policy.

You have a Spec writer, expressing his own opinion, supporting the letter in the comments above.

This is not a Spec/CH separate from us thing.

I will recognize you and give you as much access to the mayor, as need be, or information that I have - and especially at council, if you have a boss. If you're a journalist that has a boss that I can complain to, if I think that information is incorrect. If you don't have that, it's, you know- how do we control, um, the information?

Kinda sounds like it is.

There are fundamental differences between how big corporate media outlets like the Spec operate, and small community-based publications. Chapman would rather deal with larger ones, for fairly obvious reasons.

Indpendent media has grown enormously in this town over the last decade. A very large part of this was a very conscious effort to break the one-horse-town media monopoloy presented by the Spec and others. It's grown to the point where it can't be ignored by the Mayor's office.

It's a horrible response, and not likely to make many friends anywhere. Both the established media and other councillors will no doubt side with the public on this one, winning points at the expense of Bratina and Chapman. Can't say I'm sorry for 'em, either.

Four year, two weeks ago:

"Most people probably don't realize the current code of conduct expressly forbids councillors from disclosing or releasing verbal or written confidential information.

It particularly stresses the need to protect confidentiality around personnel matters, information about suppliers, matters relating to legal affairs, items under negotiation, and prices in contract tenders.

That's pretty standard stuff for municipalities. Burlington, for instance, makes similar demands on its council members, expressly ordering them to hold in "strict confidence" all information concerning matters dealt with in camera.

But Hamilton council, of course, is notorious for leaking like a sieve. It's been that way for years, regardless of who's in the mayor's chair or sitting round the council table.

No doubt it's the result of the aggressive way politics are played in this town, with councillors manoeuvering for advantage, settling scores, or simply believing they're serving the public interest by sharing eyes-only material.

Regardless, this is one violation of the code of conduct that neither the media nor public ever gripes about.

Reporters count on these transgressions to break stories or confirm rumours. The reading public relies on them to stay ahead of the curve."

http://www.thespec.com/opinion/article/226207--are-city-hall-leaks-an-endangered-species

I would think that some of the signatories have huge conflict of interest, in the financial sense. Bill Dunphy works for the Spec and is the point reporter on alternative media/open data, so one should judge his interest accordingly. Similarly, the professor from Mac has made it his business to comment on events at city hall and uses this info as part of his bona fides in poli-sci, so he has a vested interest. Matt Jelly wants to get elected provincially or locally so it is in his interest to puff up his credentials, as for the others they are all wannabes in the political sphere. CATCH (aka Don McLean) pushes his personal agenda via cherry picking council items, The Hamiltonian just copies/rewrites Spectator articles and claims legitimacy falsely. Raise the Hammer is the forum for discontentment as well as some interesting writing, but has a closed loop of followers, and CFMU...well, it is a university broadcasting medium with the limitations that implies.

Peggy Chapman who worked for the Harris government has her own issues. Under what conditions did she leave employment? She also ran and lost for a council seat, then 'worked' at the radio station as a producer/cum partner of on air personnel; and lately as a reporter for the Bay Observer....a marginal paper with even more peripheral circulation...this is the best gig she will ever have and is loving the power and spotlight.

She does have a boss who thinks that he should lead form the middle, 'bossing/schmossing' isn't his style. Where is the parade going? Finger in air...ah blowing that way...that's where I'll be.

An interesting dynamic.

"huge conflict of interest"

You keep using that phrase. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Bill Dunphy isn't listed as a signatory and he makes it clear at the bottom of his post that he's speaking on his own behalf, not the Spec.

Why don't you post using your own name, "Mediawatch", so we can assess your "conflict of interest" as well, if you're comfortable passing that judgement on others?

As for me, sure- I probably want to be elected to office someday. But there are no elections I'm going to be running in for years to come. Am I not allowed to have opinions until then? Am I not allowed to involve myself in issues when I see fit?

If this is a conflict of interest as you put it, it's not one that I'm making any secret of- or any direct profit from.

Voters love a fence sitter.

With apologies to Mr. Dunphy...he is not a signatory, but the comment stands nevertheless, he does have something to gain re: his employment, not that that is bad by the way. As for my identity, my real name is "Umpartial"

Let's see your birth certificate.

Matt, I don't want have a hide behind a PC verbal spat with you, I'm more of a one on one kind of guy. You wear your heart on your sleeve as do I, but why are you getting into a childish taunting match with a troll? You are taking a great article and diminishing it to the level of the Spec comment forum at times. Deep breaths, let it go.

That's fair, kendall. I know it takes away from the discussion- that's why I wish people had better things to argue than making bogus claims about me and engaging in personal attacks. As much as I don't like to engage these trolls, I do deserve the right to defend myself from baseless attacks on my character, as I see fit. I'll try to exercise more discretion in the future.

Cause that's his MO. He's going to segue on to the "oh yeah? well my dad's a cowboy" gambit next. After that, von Clausewitz's favorite tactic of yelling "I know you are but what am I?"

I said probably because the next election I would consider running in won't be until 2014- and I'm not making a decision on that until the time comes- there are many factors involved in that.

As for your cheap comment about the nature of my employment, I don't feel the need to respond to a comment that says more about you than it does about me. Thanks.

I'm sure you'd post with your real name if you weren't likely insecure about your own lack of accomplishments in the community and a laughable need to drag others down. :)

Have a nice day.

Exactly.

And if you already knew those things were there, you should have reported it to the Ministry or the City, or done something about it. That's all I did, and I'm just some shmuck.

Well bub- if there's something in the community you feel is a genuine danger, that governments have ignored for 20+ years, go run and tell an adult just like I did. Your analogy is pretty bunk though.

Don't be a jealous mofo. Go out and do your own thing and I'll do mine. I've never claimed to have done anything amazing or significant- a lot of people just seem to back me up on this stuff. I'm sorry that gets into your ass a bit.

You're not willing to put your name to your own words, I can only imagine how ashamed you must be of your own actions- or probable lack of action.

Comment edited by MattJelly on 2011-06-02 09:36:29

holy moly I cannot imagine a way that the Mayor's office could more effectively shoot themselves in the foot. In one fell swoop they have alienated and greatly enlarged the publicity received my a number of alternative media personalities - how many people have ever heard of "urbanicity" or Joey Coleman before this - forced the Spec to distance themselves, since otherwise they would be complicit in media control - and made themselves look like third grade politburo incompetents. Chapman's media landscape appears to be the Bay observer and the Bill Kelly show. Remember when Bob Bratina would post on RTH and SSP?

Hey Matt: You know lots of work, which is volunteer adds value to the community, it is too bad that many do not consider on the ground activism as real work.

Do profits add value? Considering the toxic waste they leave behind and our leaders fail to clean up.

Nice haiku.

Thank you- I just don't get it when people attack me for the nature of my employment. Am I broke? Do I make a living in unconventional ways? Sure- but that's nobody's business but my own.

Anonymous commenters on the spec's website have gone further on several occasions and claimed that I'm on social assistance, which is not the case- those services should be reserved for those who need them.

What's frustrating to me, considering I haven't cost the public a dime (I haven't even access grant funding as an artist) is that the lack of cash in my bank account has been the subject of ridicule directed towards me over the past year, instead of those same commenters arguing issues on the merits of the issues alone. I've learned over the years that it's inappropriate to attack someone personally when you have political differences- I've learned that the hard way.

Sometimes, it makes me feel like I shouldn't live the semi-public life that I do, that I shouldn't stick my neck out when I know I'm just going to get a whole boatload of insults hurled at me for speaking out. Sometimes these things seriously do get to me- as much as I like to tell myself I have a thick skin.

But if I gave into that feeling even for a second and allowed that to change who I am and what I do, the people making these statements would get what they want- to shut me down and make me not want to be outspoken on issues.

It's hard, but I have to remind myself of this time and time again.

Matt...I think that you have respect from many for what you do as a community sensitive guy. You are a bit unorthodox and we do not always agree but I respect you as do others. You place yourself publicly in a place where you are questioning views and unfortunately that places you in a position to be questioned.

Have you ever considered that by applying and getting grants for artists that is getting acknowledgment from your artistic peers? It is not all about resisting da man (power structure).

You care about your community and we know it.

Don't let'em bring you down Matt, you have demonstrated time and again your passion and love for this city.

Speak your truth, take action on what you feel is right and let the haters hate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWqB-6ANG4c&feature=related

Keep up the great work Matt. At your young age you've already done far more good than those mouthy Spec commenters will ever do. Don't let a tiny group of ignorant web trolls get you down. You've got supporters and citizens who really appreciate your dedication to our city all over the place. Cheers

Well...looky here

http://www.thehamiltonian.net/2010/05/clr-bob-bratina-on-harbourfront-stadium.html

http://www.thehamiltonian.net/2010/09/mayoral-candidate-bob-bratina.html

Don't worry Matt, you have many supporters in the community. I really appreciate the work you do.

It should not be about how much money you have in the bank, it should be about what you contribute to the community as a whole.

Well Tree, I guess RTH can count you as a reader and you haven't signed the list.

Also, let me add Grom and Mediwatch.

That's 3. Do you think there's a possibility some people read and don't post?

Do you think all 15,000 (soon to be 30,000) copies of Urbanicity were tossed without opening?

Do you think the fact that HMag has been published for several years, funded by paid advertisements, is a fluke?

Does the fact that the Hamiltonian adds new content daily somehow makes it irrelevant?

Citizen engagement is citizen engagement, whether the numbers are in the hundreds or in the tens of thousands.

But you already know that because you invest your own time reading and commenting on a site you say has no audience other than itself.

Comment edited by H+H on 2011-06-02 09:08:57

:) Graham. Sounds like some folks had yellow milk in their Corn Flakes that morning.

Yeah, finally we have two papers in this city that less that one tenth of one percent of the population can relate to. If you could find a way to make insulation out of the print copies, or maybe send them to Africa to make... I dunno .. pirate hats out of them or something, then you'd have something. "Hey N!abasi, I don't know who the f--k the Junior Boys are, but these hats sure are a riot, eh?"

In symbolically related news:


Hamilton’s business leaders say a lack of political support is hobbling efforts to revive the city’s economy.

In a meeting with The Spectator’s editorial board Wednesday, members of the business lobby complained they’re not getting the support they need from city council on crucial issues such as the light rail transit proposal, all-day GO service and efforts to attract new employers.

“We just don’t appear to have any champions,” said Doug Duke, executive officer of the Hamilton-Halton Home Builders’ Association. “We have to act like a city that deserves these things and right now we don’t have the political will to go and get them.”

Hamilton Business Leaders brings together the heads of the Chamber of Commerce, home builders, realtors’ association and airport to push a jobs and prosperity agenda for the city. They argue city councillors should use that lens in looking at every decision they make.

“There appears to be a real disconnect between the business leadership and council right now,” said Ross Godsoe, CEO of the Realtors Association of Hamilton-Burlington. “We just don’t see these issues being championed by city leadership.

“It’s a tough job for us to even get a meeting with the mayor now,” he added.

The last time the business group met with Mayor Bob Bratina was in November, just after the municipal election. They’re not scheduled to get together again until July 21.

http://www.thespec.com/news/business/article/555635--business-group-says-politicians-dropping-the-ball-on-city-growth