In the Heat of the Night

We have all witnessed the scene in all forms of movies.  A natural disaster has hit a large metropolitan area.  Thousands of people are being evacuated from the city and somewhere huddled in a destroyed structure is our hero, who has along the way met a young woman in distress.  Her hair is disheveled, her blouse is torn and she has what looks like soot rubbed on her face, but her lipstick is not even smudged.  Our hero, masculine, with a chiseled chin, who goes by the name of Biff, peers out the basement window at the world coming to a swift end!  Yes he is separated from his family and his best canine friend Mitzi is lying not far away close to death!  But in all this terrible calamity, our hero formulates a plan.  It is a brilliant plan! Biff looks over to our femme fatale who is shaking in fear and says, “Hey, we may not live to see tomorrow and I don't want to die a virgin.”

Of course this is just the way it is.  It is the survival of the species under the worst conditions.  Today there is this terrible calamity creeping upon us.  Scientists from around the world have been watching for it, and as we observe nature the menace is seen around every corner.  Man-made global warming is, by all accounts, going to consume this planet by the year 2050.  According to popular culture fueled by the pulpit of the eco-evangelist, carbon dioxide will raise the overall temperature of the planet by 15 degrees. Causing the oceans to raise by melting polar caps, lands to flood, fresh water to pollute the gulf streams, creating aberrant climate events which will reverse the temperatures back to an ice age that will kill off every living critter on the earth!  Except a dude name Clem who has a log cabin and wood burning stove west in the wilderness somewhere away from the political media nonsense we are all exposed to.

Recently an Inuit hunter shot and killed a polar bear in the high arctic.  This bear looked rather odd so the hunter brought it to the attention of biologists who discovered that its genome was a combination of Polar bear and Grizzly Bear.  The Pizzly, or Grolar as it has been called, is the offspring of an 'odd couple' an anomaly of nature.  It is a bit like a cooperative Chihuahua and a St. Bernard producing a Brangelina hybrid.

The fact that these two bears mated is nothing unusual.  Both the Polar Bear and the Grizzly Bear are of the same species.  But what was reported of this union is that it was the cause of climate change due to anthropomorphic global warming that made the grizzly look passionately into the eyes of the disheveled female in distress.  As reported by Canwest News Service, “A warming climate has prompted hungry grizzly bears to increasingly move north, encroaching on Polar Bear turf, according to experts.” Yes, our hero bear must have gotten the message of the coming doom, because according to 'experts' it was man that put these two 'kids' together.

I know I promised to leave this alone, but in the wake of the exposed falsified climate data reported by the mainstream press debunking increased temperatures, and the fact that the polar caps have increased and not shrunk I was really hoping that the media would stop looking for eco-ghosts around every corner.

But no, in fact the media has been even more so pervasive on the climate change front. Even going as far as reporting that while having a “casual pub chat” Antarctic scientists concluded that whale poop may be the answer to reducing carbon dioxide levels, thus saving the planet. (Reuters)

Then coming off his Academy Award nod, the movie maker James Cameron took a shot at Alberta by announcing that the oilsands developments are a 'black eye' on Canada's environmental record.  One can say, “So who is Cameron to give scientific advise?”  But then again, science has lost a great deal of credibility in the eyes of many in light of the shift from the empirical to a spiritual discipline.

So I guess until the next headlines, whale poop is the answer. Now if only the whales could subscribe to the main street media we could scare the crap out of them so that we can re-segregate the bears and the world will be once again in harmony.

Turning the Other Cheek

It is probably safe to say that not many Canadians can quote any or all the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Many just assume that we have rights under the law, but other than a clumsy attempt at quoting an American Bill of Rights as provided by Hollywood, in a drunken stupor before a uniform holding a tube to blow in, many are ignorant of this important piece of Canadian legislation.

We all want to live in Canada and do so in the pursuit of prosperity, and freedom from fear, discrimination and loathing. In fact, not a day goes by when we step out the door and head off to work, that many subconsciously are on the vigil ready to defend ourselves from opposing viewpoints, lifestyles and opinions. For the most part, we do live in a country where we are free from judgment by our neighbours, employers and fellow workers. Yet, we still hear about fellow Canadians not enjoying the freedoms and rights that we are so blithely ignorant of.

I am a believer in the separation of church and state, however our Charter of Rights and Freedoms very much agree with principals found in biblical teachings as spelled out in the Bible. Those such as love your neighbours, feed your enemies and judge not or you shall be judged, and of course when struck, turn the other cheek. All teachings that fundamentally point to the more legal groundings found in law.

Yet, last week in Vancouver the Little Flower Academy, a Catholic High School for Girls, found themselves in a position where they asked a music teacher to stay home and complete her assignments away from the school, effectively dismissing the teacher. Lisa Reimer, who hadn't disclosed to the school prior to her commencing employment that she is a homosexual agreed to respect the Catholic schools faith. It was reported that Lisa was granted three weeks leave as a result of her partner giving birth to a child. While on leave, the school decided to address the situation and have Lisa stay home in fear that she would share her experiences with the students. “Its not like a mob of people showed up demanding things be done. We're just conducting ourselves within the tenets of the Catholic faith,” was the comment from the chairman of the school boards directors.

Our Charter clearly spells out that every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination. Our fundamental freedoms state that we have freedom of conscience and religion; freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression; freedom of peaceful assembly; and freedom of association.

Freedoms are wonderful when they are protecting you but when we have opposing beliefs and lifestyles the Charter can be conflicting. In the schools position they can claim that they are acting in accordance with the freedom of religious beliefs. Those beliefs being that the Catholic church does not condone homosexuality so they are enforcing their stance on Reimer. In Reimer's case, her lifestyle is also protected under the Charter, and it can be effectively argued that her personal choices are not privy to the policies of her employer, and as long as she separates the two, no conflict should arise.

The real interesting development in this matter is that Reimer has chosen to turn the other cheek, and has stated that she will “let this unfold” and not launch a humans rights complaint against the school.

The situation Lisa Reimer finds herself in is one good example of what our Charter of Rights and Freedoms was designed to prevent in Canada. The persecution from an employer where the lifestyle of the employee is in opposition with the lifestyle choices of the employer. The real question would be, is whether the employee is doing a good and proper job, or was there a performance reason for dismissing the teacher. Because if that was the reason for this action, one would expect the school to show cause for dismissal.

Similar occurrences outside of Canada in relation to homosexuals on the school systems have also occurred in the last year. In Mississippi a Ceara Sturgis' photograph was excluded from the school year book because she wanted her grad picture taken in a tuxedo.  In the same state, a school district called off the senior prom when it was learned that two lesbian students were planning to come to the dance escorting each other.

For the majority, homosexuality is a hard pill to swallow and in the cases where a perception arises that their lifestyle will adversely influence others around them, those in authority such as managers, and administrators need to understand the fundamental rights afforded each person living in this country. In the case of the Little Flower Academy in Vancouver, I believe the proper action would have been to allow her to return after her leave and teach. Because nowhere in the school responses was their any indication that Reimer could not teach music or was not doing her job. It will be interesting to watch this institution’s response to Reimer ‘turning the other cheek.’  

Doe, Roe Poe: Oh Know!

How are these for names, John Doe, Jane Roe, Richard Poe and Sally Yoe? Pick one that peaks your fancy, that is if you are one of over a million Canadians who are interactive on the Internet. Interactive here refers to those, like me, who converse on the Internet with people on many topics. It could be discussing a horrid movie on the Internet Movie Database website (IMDB.com) that you spent good money renting, or it could be responding to a story posted on CBC's website. Or you could be posting your opinion in a health care news forum responding to a new snake-oil product that just does not work.

Yes, many Canadians log onto these types of websites and use anonymous monikers like BigTrucker49 or SweetSixteen72. This anonymity tends to allow someone to express themselves freely, and for many get a sense that they can say anything without getting their face slapped or knuckles rapped. Many are lulled into a false sense of security when responding to a news story from a well known television station or newspaper. After-all, they are agreeing with something that has been published by the media, who should have the professionalism to be careful and not defame anyone.

The names John Doe, Jane Roe, Richard Poe and Sally Yoe are common names attributed to ‘yet to be identified’ defendants on a Writ of Summon when one files a lawsuit.

In Canada, there are two interesting cases that have been brought to our attention this month which could set a new precedent in law. In each one, additional defendants have been drawn in from those who leave seemingly innocent comments on blogs, news articles and opinion pieces.

The first one comes to us from Nova Scotia where a judge has ordered a newspaper and Google Inc. to provide details on the identity of people who posted anonymous comments about Halifax's top firefighters. Sally Roe in this instance posted critical comments about these firefighters while responding to news stories on a discussion forum over issues of racism. It would be fair to say that the newspaper who published the stories may be in court in the future and those who responded to the stories may not be able to hide behind a name something like FireStalker22.

Then in Vancouver a lawsuit was filed in the British Columbia Supreme Court against a national newspaper from Toronto, where a reporter wrote four opinion pieces and allegedly made libelous comments defaming a well-known and respected Canadian climatologist. The court document claims that the reporter attributed statements to the scientist that was “grossly irresponsible falsehoods.” In this case, not only is the newspaper reporter, editor and publisher named as defendants, but the Writ makes room for a John Doe, Jane Roe, Richard Poe and Sally Yoe. Four anonymous comment-posters that responded to the reporter's stories.

At first glance one could say, “Good Luck” in locating the casual Internet user that chimed-up and supported the opinions of the defendants. Because everyone knows that if you're chatting up with a SexyGirl32 on the Internet at the other end of the keyboard you may find a sweaty, hairy, 320 lbs cigar smoking 50-something dude with a tattoo of ‘Bo loves mommy’ painted on his biceps.

However, tracking down an anonymous moniker is not really that hard, because you are NEVER ANONYMOUS on the Internet. As you travel the Internet your IP ADDRESS is recorded on every site you visit, and as you research using search engines like Google, Yahoo or Bing all your queries plus your IP Address is logged and stored for up to 18 months.

An IP Address is four sets of three digits numbers that electronically locates your computer terminal on the world wide web. In the case of WIFI, a method that many laptops connect the internet with  the IP Address is associated to your wireless router. So, if your router is not WEP coded (security locked) anyone within the range of the signal can connect to your network and browse the Internet. In those cases their activity can be traced back to the owner of the router, that being you.

So, yes, law enforcement or anyone acting under the authority of a court can get access to your activity.  In the case of this John Doe family, they can track them to their door.

All this smacks of big brother looking over your shoulder.  It is a sobering thought for people who interact on the Internet. Open discussion and free speech is what makes the Internet a revolutionary communication tool. However, just because you are not face to face with those you discuss does not give us an open door to slander.

Commenting on news items and opinion columns on the Internet should be a careful practice, as these two court cases have demonstrated. Just because the press has put it out there does not necessarily mean that the article is free of any liability.

Bottom line, on the internet, there is no such thing as Anonymity.

The Measure of a Business

Philosophers have been formulating ethics for centuries,  and for the most part, thinkers such as Plato and Socrates have provided mankind with the basis for humanistic ethical conduct.  For the religious, the code by which we are to interact and treat each other are found in sacred text such as the Bible, Torah or Quaran, where the prophets have written chapters and verses covering how we are to love our enemies and how we are to be measured as Gods creatures.

A good way of understanding ethics are to formalize a set of  societal rules, laws, regulations, and yes, business rules. When we break an ethical rule, there are consequences or punishments which come along with a violation. With ethics, there is right and there is wrong. Flip the coin and you find Integrity, which refers to the quality of one's character and a persons guiding behaviour. In other words, integrity is a choice, and when we're acting with integrity, we do the right thing, even when nobody is watching us. Simply put, we can't have ethics without integrity.

However, when it comes to business, ethics and integrity are defined more so under the circumstances of a company's vision and mission statement, where the goals of the company fold, bend and in some cases mutilate the ethical landscape.

The standard understanding of ethics, that being black and white, good over bad, right over wrong, don't always apply to some in businesses.  In a capitalistic society, the goal is to make money and the financial survival takes over the bridge steering the behaviour of a business.

Preston Townley the former Dean of the Carlson School of Management once said, "...it ought to be fairly easy to choose between right and wrong by relying on principles, but business activity often demands that we select from alternatives that are neither wholly right or wholly wrong.”

Over the past few weeks, the City of Wetaskiwin has given our publication the opportunity to service Wetaskiwin in a more vital role, by placing the legal notices in our community newspaper.  To say that this family run newspaper was elated with this blessing, is an understatement.  But what we did not fully understand was the level of vitriol politics that this decision was about to unleash.

The privilege of featuring these notices has been in the hands of other city newspapers for over 100 years.  Suffice to say that residents of Wetaskiwin have read in the other city newspaper their reaction to this decision. The articles written have been terse, and the level of anger was skillfully conveyed by the publication, even going as far as using their media as a platform to stir anger in the readership.

However, last week a reporter from a Toronto Daily Newspaper contacted our Publisher advising that he was doing a story on the City of Wetaskiwin trying out the Pipestone Flyer for one year. The results of this published story was unfortunate because the reporter from this reputable daily newspaper employed misquotes, wrong statements of facts and referred to our weekly newspaper as a shopper, which is not only untruthful, but damaging.   The article in essence attempted to reduce our publication down to a glorified business insert, stripping our community newspaper status in the eye of our readers and potential media buyers.

Combined with the references to our publication in the other city newspaper, it would be fair to say that the Flyer has been properly trounced.   All this attention for offering a service for which any community newspaper provides.  And yet, we are still very proud to be referred to as your community newspaper.  The Pipestone Flyer will not change.  We are still the newspaper that goes out of its way to provide as many people in our community with 15 minutes of fame and at the same time provide coverage of the largest geographical circulation area of nearby community newspapers.

It is important for any business leader to remember that their behaviour is a strong influence on the behaviour of employees in their organization. Inversely, you can always assess the integrity of an organization by the way their employees represent it.

In the print world, integrity is key to gaining the trust of the readership, for trust is a scale by which we are all measured.

It's No Laughing Matter

A chicken and an egg are lying in bed. The chicken is leaning against the headboard smoking a cigarette, wing tucked behind his back. The egg, looking a bit pissed off, grabs the sheet, rolls over and says, "Well, I guess we finally answered THAT question."

The whole image of a person smoking after an intimate moment seems to makes smoking cool, or at least tension relieving.  Not that the chickens in this scenario really feels tension.  But as society's experience has proven, smoking is nothing less than a health hazard, and a recent ten year study out of Toronto, Ontario has gleaned some interesting data.

Toronto is just one of many cities that implemented a non-smoking bylaw years before the Provincial Governments began passing smoking legislation that banned smoking in public places, and workplaces.  Of course much to the chagrin of restaurant and bar operators Alberta followed suit even going as far as prohibiting smoking within 5 metres of building entrances, plus removed the sale of cigarettes from pharmacies and instigated a curtain requirement hiding cigarettes from public view in convenience stores.

Suffice to say that for the past ten years smoking has been prohibited in one form or other in 90 countries worldwide.  Notable exceptions include Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, and many other countries in Central and Western Africa, where people smoke wherever they want.  This includes the strict kingdom of Saudi Arabia where their government has been silent on smoking bans.

However, this study out of Toronto has shown that smoking bans have lead to drops in hospital admissions due to cardiovascular and respiratory conditions.  The  drop was significant, and amounted to 39% fewer hospital admissions.
In the same period, statistics have shown that smoking has also decreased, with the exception of some witless teens where smoking in the age group from 15 to 19 years old have shown an increase.  Oddly the biggest increase in this age-group are among immigrants who light-up in an effort to make new friends to truly become a Canadian teenager.

The authors of this study stated that their findings were, “consistent with the evidence that exposure to second-hand smoke is detrimental to health and legitimizes legislative efforts to further reduce exposure.”

Reducing smoking further is something that many jurisdictions  have been exploring which can include such actions as prohibiting smoking in personal vehicles where children are present and legislating smoking in personal residences under the same circumstances.

This all seems extreme, and I am the first to cheer any law that protects the health of citizens where bad habits from some impose risks to the populous.  I personally have never smoked so when these bans started to come about I was the last person to feel bad seeing grown people puffing on a cigarette standing outside their workplace in -40C temperatures.

Yes, it appears that the drop in hospital admissions is a result of non-smokers getting less recycled second-hand chemical and tar infested air into their lungs.   Why it would take a ten year study to try to prove an obvious point boggles the mind since we have plenty of statistics to drive the point home.

The facts are clear, where here in Canada smoking has been proven to be responsible for one in five deaths.  Which is close to five times the number of deaths caused by car accidents, suicides, drug abuse, murder and AIDS combined.  The chance of dying from smoking for long-time smokers is one person for every two.

In Canada over 45,000 people die from illnesses directly linked to tobacco smoking, which sadly includes an average of 100 infants yearly.  Among those deaths it has been shown that over 800 non-smokers in Canada die as a result of fatal illnesses caused by second hand smoke.

Just to drive the point further, it has been proven that death by stroke is five times higher in woman who smoke.  That is if cervical cancer has not set in, a risk that doubles as a result of smoking.

In Canada heart disease kills four in ten woman.  But for woman who smoke, this statistic triples the risk of dying from heart disease.

In light of the statistics that show woman at risk the numbers show that more men die every year from smoking than do woman.

Sobering statistics, but these facts have been drilled into people in our country since the 70's, from stark messages on the side of cigarette cartons, television advertising, magazine advertisement to ultimately visiting a loved one falling into renal shutdown at the Cross Cancer Clinic in Edmonton as a result of lung or esophagus cancer.

This image has been with me for more than ten years now, when I witnessed my mother-in-law dying as a result of cancer scourging through her body.  She smoked all of her adult life and many of her children are smokers.  I saw my wife, who I have been with since 1980, deal with her mother passing slowly over a three weeks period  before her eyes.

The grief of losing your parents to old-age is one thing.  But when you see a woman die before you from cancer who did not heed to the messages from the medical community, the grief is almost unbearable.

Not a week goes by that my wife's mother is not brought up in discussion.  And for my wife, it has left a hole that not even a loving husband can fill.  So the real message here is that smoking is no laughing matter.