Re: Canada’s objectivity obsession, March 31
In her article, Kathryn Carlson has missed the real reasons leading to her perception that our major daily newspapers lack a diverse, consistent range of journalistic viewpoints.
She is, in fact, correct in her conclusion regarding the dailies, but the reasons have nothing to do with a lack of journalistic backbone.
Rather, unlike Britain, it’s because our major dailies are owned by a small handful of mega-corporations and its only getting worse
Conglomeration of businesses and takeover bids are some of the real culprits here, as such tactical shifts do anything but support diversity.
Another problem has to do with the fact that it’s more difficult for major newspapers to risk coming off as either too left, centrist, or right-wing where advertising is concerned. Some advertisers may take back valuable business should they consider a paper as being too extreme in its viewpoints.
I also think that Ms. Carlson’s suggested solution to demand greater diversity and consistency in our major dailies, due to the nature of conglomeration and corporate domination, is both naive and misguided.
There are, in fact, many alternatives to the major news media should someone with even a pittance more energy and enthusiasm than the average bus rider reading the daily Ottawa Sun want to read regular news consistently bending one way or another within the political spectrum.
To find diverse and consistent sources of journalism, one should seek out the small press, community newspapers, go to the library, scan Internet-based news websites, buy a variety of magazines, or do a combination of the above. Canada has a significant home-based supply of news sources other than the major dailies. It provides a healthy venue for knowledge and self-empowerment through their endless diversity and political viewpoints.
On the other hand, if one lazily prefers to stay misinformed and narrow minded in their opinions, then they should continue to limit their daily digestion of news to the Globe and Mail and/or the National Post.

Colin Hollingworth,
Gloucester Street

Re: Canada’s objectivity obsession, March 31
Insight writer Kathryn Carlson fails to distinguish between objectivity and fairness in reporting.
Of course, journalists can’t be objective. Writing is an art, it’s not a math or science. However, journalists can strive to be fair in their reporting by presenting as many sides to an argument or a story as they can fit into their articles.
As a reader, I want to learn enough about an issue to make my own judgment. I don’t want journalists to be advocates for a particular cause.
Opinions are a dime a dozen. Judging by the number of columnists, editorials and letters to the editor we find in newspapers, there’s no shortage of them in print. The huge number of bloggers has brought it to another level entirely online.
Journalists should use their special privilege and access to sources to gather information the public needs and present it as fairly as is humanly possible. It might be “watered-down pablum” in Carlson’s opinion, but much like that maligned cereal, it provides essential minerals and vitamins for a growing democracy.

Will Stos,
Somerset Street. W.

Re: Canada’s objectivity obsession, March 31
I want to commend Kathryn Carlson for her insightful and thought-provoking commentary about media objectivity. It should be required reading for every Canadian and journalist.
For far too long, journalists have been too accepting of the status quo. A debate about many of observations Carlson makes is clearly needed. I begin here.
Today, many older journalists in Canada lament the time when advocacy journalism, or at least the possibility of it, existed. My husband and I are two of them.
In my view, objectivity has a role to play in journalism, but it should never have been considered fundamental to good journalism. It was first introduced to placate advertisers rather than to guarantee quality journalism. The truth is that a preoccupation with objectivity often diminishes the relevancy of stories.
Today we live in a global village where nobody wins when journalists are censured and/or compromised. To put it all into perspective, think of this: journalists die on battlefields, yet aren’t even allowed to use a word such as “terrorist” in their reports. Does this make sense?
Journalists, and indeed journalism schools, need to review the past with a view to improving journalism in the future. In a free and democratic society, shouldn’t journalists be encouraged to be the very best that they can be? Many journalists today are highly educated and highly trained, and the public and news organizations should trust them to tell their stories to the best of their ability.
Journalists rarely take stands on issues in public because for the most part they’re trained not to. This problem can easily be traced back to the schools where they are formally trained.
I left journalism out of frustration at the very things Carlson talks about and because, as journalists, we could be so much better. Maybe Carlson’s commentary heralds a new beginning for journalism. Wouldn’t that be something.

Hollander Layte,
Cobourg Street

Centretown residents should not be fooled by Coun. Diane Holmes’s recent Councillor’s Report on street prostitution.
It gives the impression that the councillor is doing something, but the fact is, that it took six months for Coun. Holmes to call a meeting.
In the meantime, residents in my neighbourhood were exchanging telephone numbers and calling the police to report street prostitutes.
It is important that concerned citizens notify the police at 236-1222 ext. 7500 to give the location and brief description of the prostitute as soon as possible. You do not have to give your name if you do not want to.
Street prostitution has prospered over the past 10 years. On a recent Sunday afternoon, there were prostitutes along Gladstone Avenue at the corners of Bay Street, Bronson Avenue and LeBreton Street.
While Coun. Holmes established a committee, Reports and Safety Audits, community activists were busy convincing the Crown attorney and police to establish an Ottawa Drug Court — as addiction is the real enemy here.
Here’s hoping that the paper pushing includes a monthly report by the police stating how many street prostitutes were picked up in our area and actually appear at the Drug Court .
It is sad to watch the same prostitutes year after year, physically deteriorate under the public eye due to drug addiction and our paid public officials cannot resolve the situation.

Peter Harris,
Ottawa

The concept of the Bank Street Promenade initially was good, but what has transpired since the city decided that maintaining the infrastructure of a city is just too expensive — the Promenade stinks. There is garbage and cracking pavement and other obstacles on the street especially from Laurier Avenue W. to Albert Street.
The city should get its ass in gear, get out there and repair the sidewalks. Remove all obstacles especially around the bus stops. We pedestrians have to manoeuvre around garbage cans, ad dispensers, cracked sidewalks and garbage bags — regularly. The merchants should be required to put the garbage out only the day of collection.
Why is it that every other major city allows garbage collection of merchants during the night? What makes Ottawa special? Ottawa needs to get off its butt and start cleaning up the city. That is part of what the tax- payers expect.
This is the capital city of Canada — make it look like a Capital City of the World.

Helen Gibson,
Queen Street

Editor’s note: A major redevelopment of Bank Street will begin later this year.

Bank Street businesses took out two pages of advertising in your last issue touting themselves as a “Promenade.”
The punch line to this joke? Instead of photos of their grim and dreary streetscape, we see artistic-concept drawings. Not a rusted newspaper box, bit of graffiti, treeless block, or filthy sidewalk in sight. Free parking on weekends? Who cares?

Bill Brown,
Argyle Avenue