Monday, October 30, 2006

THE IRVINGS - I wish I could be there tonight!!!!


meeting
Originally uploaded by Oldmaison.
SAINT JOHN - Politicians and journalists are a lot alike and in some ways that is not a good thing, says Jane Purves, the Irving chair in journalism at St. Thomas University in Fredericton.

Politicians and reporters are typically good generalists, can grasp issues quickly and like working under pressure. And most, at least when they start out, are doing what they do for the right reasons, said Purves, a former newspaper editor and Nova Scotia cabinet minister.

They also share a "huge amount of power" and their relationship is "essential to a functioning democracy."

But there's something else they share and "it appears to be getting worse in many cases," said Purves, who will speak about politicians and journalists when she delivers a public lecture in Saint John tonight.

"In general, both of them are drifting into this too many photo ops and stories trying to be entertaining instead of worthy. News is becoming entertainment and politicians are stuck on the same key messages."

Purves believes the media is trying to capture the attention of increasingly disinterested readers/viewers who would rather surf the Internet or watch cable TV than pick up a newspaper or tune into the evening news.

Politicians, meanwhile, are trying to please a growing number of apathetic voters who don't bother casting ballots because they don't see any real choices.

She doubts either politicians or reporters will prove successful if they continue down the same path.

"I don't think anyone has shown trying to put fluffy stories on page one improves circulation," Purves said.

And ultimately, she contends it's what led to the political demise of former prime minister Paul Martin. "He appeared to change his tune every time someone asked him something . . . and everything was a priority.

"People didn't know where he stood."

Purves thinks news organizations and politicians have to be "as authentic as possible rather than try to change what they are to gain attention."

How to do that isn't as simple though. "If I had the answers, someone would have hired me for 40 zillion dollars," she laughed.

She suggests getting back to basics - being true to one's self and doing the job.

Purves began her post at St. Thomas in September. She spent 25 years in the newspaper business. She was managing editor of the Chronicle Herald and editor of the Halifax Daily News. She served in the cabinet of former Nova Scotia premier John Hamm, holding the portfolios of Education, Health and minister responsible for the Status of Women.

She said she is honoured to be named to her new post at the Irving chair in journalism at St. Thomas University.

And while she admits she didn't know much about the job before taking over the reins in September, she thinks it's a good idea. "It allows somebody new to come in every year and share their experience and insights - if they have any."

The best advice this self-described "at bottom, serious journalist" has to offer students includes: stay as curious at possible, try not to prejudge anyone, and show elected officials some respect "until you have reason to know it's not deserved."

The Irving chair in Journalism, a $1-million endowment by the Irving family, brings a distinguished journalist to St. Thomas University each year to teach, conduct workshops and deliver a lecture series.

The title of Purves' free public lecture in Saint John tonight is "Through the Looking Glass: How Journalism and Politics Are the Same and How They Aren't." Her lecture will be held at the New Brunswick Museum's Mary Oland Theatre at Market Square at 7 p.m. The lecture will be repeated in Moncton on Nov. 16.



Jane Purves spent 25 years in the newspaper business, working as both a reporter and managing editor.

But she's also been on the other side of the news, serving as a cabinet minister for former Nova Scotia premier John Hamm, being challenged on controversial decisions, such as closing a French immersion school, and having her past intravenous drug use exposed.

Then, after being defeated, she went back to journalism at another competing daily newspaper - ironically, as the boss of the reporter who wrote about her struggle with drug addiction during her teens and 20s, having a criminal record for possession of marijuana, losing custody of her only son for several years, and contracting Hepatitis C.

Purves brings this unique perspective to her new position as the Irving chair in journalism at St. Thomas University.

"It was an interesting crossover experience , . . I don't know about unique," she said, preferring to describe her incredible journey as "complex."

Still, she's honoured by her new post, she said.

And while she admits she didn't know much about the job before taking over the reins in September, she thinks it's a good idea. "It allows somebody new to come in every year and share their experience and insights - if they have any."

The best advice this self-described "at bottom, serious journalist" has to offer students includes: stay as curious at possible, try not to prejudge anyone, and show elected officials some respect "until you have reason to know it's not deserved."

The Irving chair in Journalism, a $1-million endowment by the Irving family, brings a distinguished journalist to St. Thomas University each year to teach, conduct workshops and deliver a lecture series.

Tonight Purves will speak in Saint John. The topic of the free public lecture is "Through the Looking Glass: How Journalism and Politics Are the Same and How They Aren't."

Again, Purves, 57, will draw on her personal experiences as managing editor of the Chronicle Herald, editor of the Halifax Daily News, minister of Education, minister of Health, minister Responsible for the Status of Women and being behind the scenes as chief of staff.

A cabinet minister trying to decipher their portfolio isn't very different from a reporter trying to figure out a subject they've never covered before, she explained.

Politicians and journalists are a lot alike and in some ways that is not a good thing, says Jane Purves, the Irving chair in journalism at St. Thomas University in Fredericton.

Politicians and reporters are typically good generalists, can grasp issues quickly and like working under pressure. And most, at least when they start out, are doing what they do for the right reasons, said Purves, a former newspaper editor and Nova Scotia cabinet minister.

They also share a "huge amount of power" and their relationship is "essential to a functioning democracy."

But there's something else they share and "it appears to be getting worse in many cases," said Purves, whose topic will be politicians and journalists when she delivers a public lecture in Saint John tonight.

"In general, both of them are drifting into this too many photo ops and stories trying to be entertaining instead of worthy. News is becoming entertainment and politicians are stuck on the same key messages."

Purves believes the media are trying to capture the attention of increasingly disinterested readers/viewers who would rather surf the Internet or watch cable TV than pick up a newspaper or tune into the evening news.

Politicians, meanwhile, are trying to please a growing number of apathetic voters who don't bother casting ballots because they don't see any real choices.

She doubts either politicians or reporters will prove successful if they continue down the same path.

"I don't think anyone has shown trying to put fluffy stories on page one improves circulation," Purves said.

And ultimately, she contends it's what led to the political demise of former prime minister Paul Martin. "He appeared to change his tune every time someone asked him something . . . and everything was a priority.

"People didn't know where he stood."

Purves thinks news organizations and politicians have to be "as authentic as possible rather than try to change what they are to gain attention."

How to do that isn't as simple though. "If I had the answers, someone would have hired me for 40 zillion dollars," she laughed.

She suggests getting back to basics - being true to one's self and doing the job.

Purves began her post at St. Thomas in September. She spent 25 years in the newspaper business. She was managing editor of the Chronicle Herald and editor of the Halifax Daily News. She served in the cabinet of former Nova Scotia premier John Hamm, holding the portfolios of Education, Health and minister responsible for the Status of Women.

She said she is honoured to be named to her new post at the Irving chair in journalism at St. Thomas University.

And while she admits she didn't know much about the job before taking over the reins in September, she thinks it's a good idea. "It allows somebody new to come in every year and share their experience and insights - if they have any."

The best advice this self-described "at bottom, serious journalist" has to offer students includes: stay as curious at possible, try not to prejudge anyone, and show elected officials some respect "until you have reason to know it's not deserved."

The Irving chair in Journalism, a $1-million endowment by the Irving family, brings a distinguished journalist to St. Thomas University each year to teach, conduct workshops and deliver a lecture series.

The title of Purves' free public lecture in Saint John tonight is "Through the Looking Glass: How Journalism and Politics Are the Same and How They Aren't."

Purves' lecture will be held at the New Brunswick Museum's Mary Oland Theatre at Market Square at 7 p.m. The lecture will be repeated in Moncton on Nov. 16.

It's how Purves conducts herself and it seems to work.

When questioned in 1999 by reporter David Rodenhiser of the Daily News about her past, she answered openly and honestly.

She shared how she experimented with so-called soft drugs in her teens, then got hooked on hard drugs. And she talked about how, with professional help and the support of her family, she got clean.

"I made up my mind and I just stopped," she said, joking that she never went to Narcotics Anonymous; she simply channeled the "disorder" into something productive, being a self-professed work-a-holic.

To this day, Purves is not convinced her addiction was terribly relevant, given that she had a 20-plus year career under her belt between kicking drugs and becoming a politician. But she doesn't feel she was treated unfairly.

Had the tables been turned and she was the reporter, she would have asked the same questions, she said.

And she actually respected Rodenhiser for having the "guts" to come out and ask the questions she knew others were talking about.

So on her first day as editor at the Daily News, when he asked her if he still had a job, she laughed.

Most people treated her better after her story broke, said Purves. She received letters of support from across North America.

"I think almost every family has something like that - an aunt or uncle or father or mother or child who did something wrong. They have things they've kept secret all their life because they thought people would reject them because of it," she said.

"But just because you have some screw up in your past doesn't mean you're unfit for public life or some kind of leadership role. It might make you more fit because you have more empathy for people."

Purves' direct approach has also helped repair her relationship with her son, who turns 37 next month. In fact, it was his idea for Purves to move in nextdoor to him and his wife in Halifax, enabling her to see her two granddaughters, aged three and four months, every day.

"Things are great."

As for the Hepatitis C, Purves remains symptom-free of the liver disease and tries not to dwell on it. "It's a weird kind of death sentence," she said. "It brings you closer to your mortality...It makes you a bit more humble.

"But we all are going to die."

Purves isn't sure what she'll do when her new position wraps up at the end of November. She just plans to keep the door open to "whatever might come along."

And if nothing comes along right away, she'll have time to watch cartoons with her granddaughters, read, and garden.

Retirement is "always an option.

"But I'll keep working at something - that's for sure."

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Charlies,I don't know if you are doing this on your own or you have someone else doing your work for you, but that is not only good blogging but very fine journalism. you should be payed for your work and well payed at that.

Anonymous said...

All he has done was to steal from other sources and not acknowledge the source - it used to be called plagerism. Instead of praise he deserves to be brought to task!

Anonymous said...

Stolen from The Daily Gleaner.

Anonymous said...

Yes, if you take info from other sources and don't quote it then its photocopying. It's not a bad story, but not that great and takes forever to scroll through.

A note to Charles is that he can expect trouble from the Irvings if that continues. If people just take their articles and stick them on their website (without credit) then that's clearly theft.

Either provide a link, or else write the story yourself (or get a STU student to write it). None of that is new information and is easily found out.

Anonymous said...

regarding.....


Stolen from The Daily Gleaner.
# posted by Anonymous : 5:32 PM

The article came from the telegraph journal, not the gleaner.

It is not plagerism, it is called reading an article by many people.

It would be the same thing if I passed a paper to someone to read an article.

Charles is not asking money for the articles either.

You might want to brush up on the law of journalism before you write your pitiful attempts at bashing Charles.

Anon

Anonymous said...

Oh wow, you're not even literate...(The last anonymous poster, I mean)

Little Brother said...

9:00 PM

Plagiarism is not a legal concept, and one that has nothing to do with whether one is trying to get paid. Charles should have attributed the article instead of posting it as if it were his.

Ian said...

Sorry, Charles. I'm not complaining, and I enjoy the blog as you know, but for accuracy's sake..

As the last poster said, by not attributing the article, it's plagiarism since it's implied that Charles is posting it as his own work. (We all know he's not, but still, he should have the source listed for any non-original material.)

The real concept that applies here is copyright infringement. This is not the same as having people read your copy of the newspaper. By publishing it to a website, he's making an electronic copy of a piece of intellectual property that he does not hold the rights to. "Fair Use" policies allow certain percentages of text to be quoted, but not *entire* pieces.

He may not be profiting from it but one could argue that the Irvings are suffering a financial loss since their papers are subscription-based. I wouldn't need to buy a subscription if someone reposted the articles for free on another website (not that I would buy a subscription anyway... but for the sake of argument.)

Anonymous said...

As Charles's circulation soars ,all others plunging.

Rumor is that Irving trying to lure Charles.Conrad Black says,noway offers Charles a share in his knighthood. SIR CHARLES?

Circulation Plunges at Major Newspapers


By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
Published: October 30, 2006
Circulation at the nation’s largest newspapers plunged over the last six months, according to figures released today. The decline, one of the steepest on record, adds to the woes of a mature industry beset by layoffs and the possible sale of some of its flagships.

Anonymous said...

It is clearly copyright infringement. As said above, it is not even close to purchasing a paper and giving it to somebody. The illegal act is the 'cutting and pasting'.

And there are ads at Charles website, whether he gets money from them we don't know.

However, what with the legislature and the trial, Charles is in quite enough trouble. It would be very easy for Irving to go to Google and get his site shut down for posting copyright information.

That's not Charles bashing at all, the last thing he needs is more trouble. It would have been just as useful to simply state the event. Some quotes can be added if necessary, but it really isn't needed. The story is about the talk, not about this womans life story. If he just contacted STU they probably have a whole press release done on her that they might well want printed.

It is totally irresponsible and putting the whole site at risk just for a very incidental story. What's next, cutting and pasting ALL Irving stories and posting them on his site? Anybody that thinks Irving will put up with that doesn't know Irving very well.