A media failure? Reporter defends Ipperwash coverage

Hello Peter, I am the "axe-grinder", the person "of no particular significance", as David Lint, the previous commenter characterised me as being, presumably the same David Lint who is the chairman and CEO of CineNova associated with CTV and a TV producer. He nicely illustrates one of the points I made to you after the meeting when you said essentially the same thing to me, "who are you and how dare you criticise me?" - namely, the arrogance of media personages when it comes to relating to the general public. As you pointed out, the title and focus of the panel discussion was "The Greatest Canadian Media Failure of the Century". How was this subject to be addressed when there were only two media people from the mainstream present on the panel - i.e., members of the very institution that contributed to the 'greatest failure' - plus many mainstream media people in the audience - unless people "of no particular significance" - from outside the industry - ask pointed questions? And how many pointed questions are you likely to receive when both you and your Star colleague "blast" questioners, to use your term. I was quite willing to assume, having not previously read either of you, that you were better than most in the mainstream, but both of you spent a great deal of time offering apologias for your colleagues: (a) no one wants to read good reporting, based on the 10-most-read list on the Star website; (b) readers are "bored" with the same old stories as there is nothing new to report on native issues; (c) reporters "don't have the time" to fully understand the issues based on the limited time they are allotted to get stories. You also just wrote that your are "proud" of being "a member of the mainstream media", despite it being characterised as "the greatest Canadian media failure of the century". Both you and Smith became angry when a person "of no particular significance pointed out the apologias. I previously heard the same excuses from a a Star ex-Middle East reporter during a presentation he gave on the difficulties encountered when reporting on Israel-Palestine. He also became extremely angry when I questioned him. A friend told me, from his experience, MSM members are invariably thin-skinned when questioned in this way. I approached you after the panel discussion to offer an apology for making you angry - it was not my intent. You were offended at being seen the same way as other MSM personages. You questioned my right to question you. You seemed to be especially prone to anger. You were angry when you told me in our personal conversation that you had ruined your career when you chose to write about native issues. This is quite a different picture from what you paint when you write that you are "proud ... and grateful that the Star allowed Harold Levy and I to stay with the story for more than a dozen years." I told you this story should have been told during the panel discussion. It says more about the state of the MSM than anything else said. Native issues do not matter to MSM editors and owners. The stories are boring because you can only write about a narrow range of subjects. If you told the full story of what is taking place in Caledonia, I guarantee it would not be boring, but you no doubt feel, presumably based on past experience, it would not be printed. That is how the culture of the newsroom works I am told. Reporters hotly deny they are told what not to write about. They don't have to be told when their efforts don't see the light of day. Peter, I plan to read your book, "One Dead Indian", but would it not be better to write about live natives before they get killed if you want to make a difference? I asked you if I would see you at Caledonia. Now is the time to go there and to write about what you see, before it turns into another tragedy or a requiem for another Dudley George. Your feelings about the George family are commendable, but if you really care, you will start writing now about Caledonia rather than following the usual MSM agenda - chasing the ambulances and reporting the sensational events after the protests begin. I pay regular visits to Caledonia, visiting with the protestors. I would like to invite you to come with me and encourage you to start writing now, before lives are again put in danger. If the story is told now, I do not think your readership will be bored and, more importantly, you may stand a chance of having what you write, published in The Star. After Ipperwash, the Liberal provincial government is acting more intelligently than the Harris government did. They seem to be working hard for a peaceful solution - by buying the land under dispute and roping in the OPP - but pressure from the townspeople is incessant and there is a stalemate at the moment which will only lead to another confrontation. An informed electorate, aka readership, would certainly help to encourage the government to seek a peaceful solution. I have worked with a number of indigenous cultures and am always amazed at their patience - a quality you describe Sam as having, "able to deliver a powerful message gently", "keeping his cool", who "doesn't allow himself to be goaded into anger", not wanting to be another "angry person". I, like you, come from a European culture - Irish in my case - prone to anger and donnybrooks. I talked recently with a man who recently visited the Occupied Territories. He was struck with how the Palestinians take so much from the Israelis, not reacting to the extreme provocations. It was admirable, he said, but he wondered if it was constructive to be so 'forgiving'. He told me tensions are building up and there is talk of a third intifada. That happens with forgiving cultures. The 'Sam's' at Caledonia are committed to non-violence - the only guns on the disputed land are those the OPP carry they like to point out - but inevitably, there will be another protest unless their very real grievances and claims are addressed. Everyone I tell my stories to when I come back from Caledonia are fascinated by them. If there is "overwhelming public indifference", as Lint describes it, it is not something I have experienced. Every time I go to Caledonia, I bring people with me to see for themselves and to talk with the protestors. Everyone has been amazed at the experience. They were not prepared for what they saw by anything they had read in the media. I welcome your response, here or in private. There is much more that needs to be said. By now, you must know I don't "blast" easily, but I try to reply with reason and from personal experience. Respectfully, Austin Whitten