Story on Chief Walter Janvier split opinions from residents
Column: Gimme Some Grammar appeared in Fort McMurray Today August 11, 2006.
By MICHAEL HALL
Today staff
Our story Tuesday on the bid by a large number of Janvier residents to force out long-serving Chief Walter Janvier has attracted a lot of interest.
There are two kinds of calls:
* Those from people in the hamlet who back the chief and oppose the recall.
* Industry and government officials who want to keep in the loop on the situation.
Reporter Glenn Kauth's story did everything we can ask: it set out the situation -- the petition that is asking for the change in leadership -- and included comments from those opposed to Janvier and both the man himself and a councillor who supports him.
Whether the document is upheld is a matter that must still be determined; Janvier hinted to Kauth that he will allege that some signatures are not valid.
One man who called me said that he wanted to get his views in the paper. While he's a relative of Walter Janvier, he said that's not why he supports the job the chief is doing.
I asked him to write a letter to the editor.
The hamlet of Janvier has been a flashpoint for controversy as long as I've been on the job here. It seems that people either love the chief or hate him. I've only talked to him on one or two occasions, and he came across as both smart and cagey.
Kauth briefly talked to Janvier, but he quickly rang off and was unavailable later on. That's the pattern we've seen from him in the past.
I've received literally dozens of calls over the years complaining about Walter Janvier personally and the way he and his council runs the hamlet.
Because the callers won't let us use their names to write a story, you've seen little in these pages. We are not the New York Times; we weigh the decision to go forward with a story using anonymous sources carefully.
I should also note that we have received calls criticizing us for portraying the negative side of Janvier and not the positive. I expect this line will resurface.
Crime stories are crime stories; we report what's there. I reject any suggestion we unduly focus on Janvier or anywhere else. We cover crime that happens. It's not up to us; it's up to people who commit crimes and where the police enforces the law -- like traffic blitzes.
As for positive stories, bring 'em on! We search them out in every nook and cranny of Wood Buffalo.
People in Janvier brought the story of the petition to us. I challenge people in Janvier to bring us stories they feel are positive. We will endeavour to cover them, along with positive and negative stories from across Wood Buffalo.
Are you reading this, Walter Janvier?
- - -
I want to clear something up.
We live in a free society.
We can phone whomever we want. We can ask any question we want, no matter how impertinent.
Unlike lawyers in a courtroom, we can ask leading questions. We can ask speculative questions. We can ask "what if?"
We ask these questions for one reason. To get information to write stories. That's it.
Don't like it? Tough.
While we have a right to ask any question we want, the sources we talk to have an equal right to refuse to answer questions. They have the right to answer a different question (this is what many politicians do so successfully). They have the right to complain about questions.
The latter makes them look whiny, however.
While some may even tell us they don't think we should be investigating or writing a story about something, I'd caution against it.
Those who challenge our right to write a story on an issue raise suspicions. We ask ourselves why. It might even lead to even more questions, a more probing look at the situation.
If people don't like our questions, they can hang up (although that's rude). They can refuse to return our calls.
That's rude, too.
We're seeing this latter tactic more often in recent years, especially from government functionaries. I find that disturbing. Governments run on the tax dollars that you and I give them.
We have the right to report that they won't return calls.
It tells you, the reader, that someone might have something to hide.
The next step is up to you.
That's the way this whole thing works.
© Copyright 2006, Fort McMurray Today.
By MICHAEL HALL
Today staff
Our story Tuesday on the bid by a large number of Janvier residents to force out long-serving Chief Walter Janvier has attracted a lot of interest.
There are two kinds of calls:
* Those from people in the hamlet who back the chief and oppose the recall.
* Industry and government officials who want to keep in the loop on the situation.
Reporter Glenn Kauth's story did everything we can ask: it set out the situation -- the petition that is asking for the change in leadership -- and included comments from those opposed to Janvier and both the man himself and a councillor who supports him.
Whether the document is upheld is a matter that must still be determined; Janvier hinted to Kauth that he will allege that some signatures are not valid.
One man who called me said that he wanted to get his views in the paper. While he's a relative of Walter Janvier, he said that's not why he supports the job the chief is doing.
I asked him to write a letter to the editor.
The hamlet of Janvier has been a flashpoint for controversy as long as I've been on the job here. It seems that people either love the chief or hate him. I've only talked to him on one or two occasions, and he came across as both smart and cagey.
Kauth briefly talked to Janvier, but he quickly rang off and was unavailable later on. That's the pattern we've seen from him in the past.
I've received literally dozens of calls over the years complaining about Walter Janvier personally and the way he and his council runs the hamlet.
Because the callers won't let us use their names to write a story, you've seen little in these pages. We are not the New York Times; we weigh the decision to go forward with a story using anonymous sources carefully.
I should also note that we have received calls criticizing us for portraying the negative side of Janvier and not the positive. I expect this line will resurface.
Crime stories are crime stories; we report what's there. I reject any suggestion we unduly focus on Janvier or anywhere else. We cover crime that happens. It's not up to us; it's up to people who commit crimes and where the police enforces the law -- like traffic blitzes.
As for positive stories, bring 'em on! We search them out in every nook and cranny of Wood Buffalo.
People in Janvier brought the story of the petition to us. I challenge people in Janvier to bring us stories they feel are positive. We will endeavour to cover them, along with positive and negative stories from across Wood Buffalo.
Are you reading this, Walter Janvier?
- - -
I want to clear something up.
We live in a free society.
We can phone whomever we want. We can ask any question we want, no matter how impertinent.
Unlike lawyers in a courtroom, we can ask leading questions. We can ask speculative questions. We can ask "what if?"
We ask these questions for one reason. To get information to write stories. That's it.
Don't like it? Tough.
While we have a right to ask any question we want, the sources we talk to have an equal right to refuse to answer questions. They have the right to answer a different question (this is what many politicians do so successfully). They have the right to complain about questions.
The latter makes them look whiny, however.
While some may even tell us they don't think we should be investigating or writing a story about something, I'd caution against it.
Those who challenge our right to write a story on an issue raise suspicions. We ask ourselves why. It might even lead to even more questions, a more probing look at the situation.
If people don't like our questions, they can hang up (although that's rude). They can refuse to return our calls.
That's rude, too.
We're seeing this latter tactic more often in recent years, especially from government functionaries. I find that disturbing. Governments run on the tax dollars that you and I give them.
We have the right to report that they won't return calls.
It tells you, the reader, that someone might have something to hide.
The next step is up to you.
That's the way this whole thing works.
© Copyright 2006, Fort McMurray Today.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home