Not long ago, The Moncton Times editorial and reporting staff were dumping all over the superintendent and the district education council for the dilapidation of school buildings in general, and the catastrophic state of Moncton High in particular. When some one percent of angry parents gathered to protest the closing of the dangerous school, the news media all covered it as the major story of the day. In fact, a demonstration by one percent of the parent is no story at all. And no news service worthy of the hame would have paid any attention to it. But they were all out for educational blood.
The Moncton Times has since had to back off as is has been shown that the blame for neglect lay with the provincial governments. But it did so in its usual classless way, not expressing any apology for its false accusations - and not explaining why its reporting staff had not been asking questions about the obvious neglect years ago.
Today, the editorial writer seemed to come full circle, demanding the government find the money to maintain the schools properly. The editorial calls on Alward to take immediate action.
I found it puzzling. It's a sensible editorial. That's rare.
Then I read the last paragraph.
"Public-private partnerships for every school would work."
Of course. We should contract out school maintenance to private business. Why, then it wouldn't cost anything, would it?
Only somebody dumb enough to read The Moncton Times editorials (I plead guilty) could believe that. If you privatize you have to pay the repair costs ---PLUS a profit. It's not cheaper. It's more expensive.
As usual, The Moncton Times is taking its lead from AIMS and corporate New Brunswick. They all want corporate New Brusnwick to get its greedy fingers into our education budget. They don't give a damn about the chldren - except as items on the open market.
Oh, Norbert Cunningham had a good column about books and reading. But I suggest he get a good book about World War One. The British did win the Battle of Jutland. It took heavier casuaties than the Germans did. But it was the German navy that fled back to harbour - and stayed there. The British fleet remained in control of the sea. That's how a winner is decided in battle. You don't count the dead on each side. You look to see who retreated and who stayed.
Oh - yeah. The German fleet was not interned at a port in the Orkneys. Not until the war ended in 1918 was the German fleet ordered to sail to the Orkneys as a war prize for the British. It was on that final sortie that the Germans scuttled their ships.
But, hey, I'm being picky. It was a good column. I prefer books to e readers, too.
Friday, January 7, 2011
Thursday, January 6, 2011
How to Read a Newspaper
Reading a newspaper takes a little bit of thinking -- but it can pay off. In The Moncton Times and Transcript of Jan. 6, for example, there is a cheerful story about a New Brunswick public school principal being named the best in Canada. (I don't question she may be a very fine principal, indeed. That is not the point here.) The point is that the newspaper ran the story.
But isn't running the story what a newspaper should do? Yes. But the New Brunswick papers are very careful about which stories they care to run; and they have usually either ignored good news about the New Brunswick public schools, and have even presented it as a disgusting sign of the failure of the schools.
Just in the past few months, for example, New Brunswick public schools were named as the tops in Canada for the high school completion rate of their students. That, incidentally, might well make them tops in the world. But the Moncton Times editorialist treated it with a vitriolic fury that said this was proof of the failure of our schools. It berated the teachers and administrators for what was surely an outstanding achievement. Then, in a bizarre statement that seemed to have no connection at all with the news story - or any other reality - it thundered, "Teachers should teach all the students."
About the same time, the superintendent of public schools in District Two was named one of the hundred most important women in Canada. That was not bad, one should think, for a small city that so far had achieved its only fame as a location for call centres. However, the editorial that accompanied that story was the most contemptible rant I have ever seen in a newspaper. It accused her, with no evidence whatever, of gallivanting to parties all over Canada, neglecting her work; and simply gadding about to get personal fame.
That has been typical of The Moncton Times in its reporting on education for some years. Why has it done that? Well, hint no. 1 - it might have something to do with a North American campaign to denigrate public schools in order to turn over much of the control of them to private business - for private profit. It's a campaign which has been a very successful one for private business in the US. It has racked up huge profits. Unfortunately, American education has, in the same time, dropped into the toilet of the industrial world.
Hint no. 2 - The major device used by private business to get into the schools has been the "think tank", a front for their propaganda.
Hint no. 3 - The "think tank" in this region is the Atlantic Institute of Marketing Studies.
Hint no. 4 - The AIMS Board of Directors is made up of this region's corporation leaders. The name "Irving has not been an unfamiliar one on that board.
Hint no. 5 - Guess who owns the New Brunswick newspapers.
So why did The Moncton Times even print the story of a high school principal - the sort of person the newspaper has long spat on - getting a prestigious award? Just one hint....
Look at who gave the award. It's a non-proft organization called The Learning Partnership. (Non-profit does not necessarily indicate it's either poor or for charity. Actually, it seems to be extremely well funded. I wonder by whom.)
The "partnership", to judge from the list of directors, is composed exclusively and equally of people from education and from very big business. Well, the schools are training people for business. So, isn't it good to have business involved? Actually, there are a lot of problems with that idea.
One is that schools are not training their students exclusively for big business. In fact, they are training more for small business, for civil service at all levels, for social service, for general life. So where are the reps from small business, from civil service, from the military, from social service, from the churches and all the other areas of life?
I won't pretend to have the whole story on this. Not yet. But The Learning Partnership looks very much like yet another big business scheme to horn in on education to get more profits for big business. It's much more sophisticated than AIMS, and has a much more reasonable-sounding approach. But when I look at the board of directors, I see the same sort of gang I see at AIMS.
And that may explain why The Moncton Times ran that story.
But isn't running the story what a newspaper should do? Yes. But the New Brunswick papers are very careful about which stories they care to run; and they have usually either ignored good news about the New Brunswick public schools, and have even presented it as a disgusting sign of the failure of the schools.
Just in the past few months, for example, New Brunswick public schools were named as the tops in Canada for the high school completion rate of their students. That, incidentally, might well make them tops in the world. But the Moncton Times editorialist treated it with a vitriolic fury that said this was proof of the failure of our schools. It berated the teachers and administrators for what was surely an outstanding achievement. Then, in a bizarre statement that seemed to have no connection at all with the news story - or any other reality - it thundered, "Teachers should teach all the students."
About the same time, the superintendent of public schools in District Two was named one of the hundred most important women in Canada. That was not bad, one should think, for a small city that so far had achieved its only fame as a location for call centres. However, the editorial that accompanied that story was the most contemptible rant I have ever seen in a newspaper. It accused her, with no evidence whatever, of gallivanting to parties all over Canada, neglecting her work; and simply gadding about to get personal fame.
That has been typical of The Moncton Times in its reporting on education for some years. Why has it done that? Well, hint no. 1 - it might have something to do with a North American campaign to denigrate public schools in order to turn over much of the control of them to private business - for private profit. It's a campaign which has been a very successful one for private business in the US. It has racked up huge profits. Unfortunately, American education has, in the same time, dropped into the toilet of the industrial world.
Hint no. 2 - The major device used by private business to get into the schools has been the "think tank", a front for their propaganda.
Hint no. 3 - The "think tank" in this region is the Atlantic Institute of Marketing Studies.
Hint no. 4 - The AIMS Board of Directors is made up of this region's corporation leaders. The name "Irving has not been an unfamiliar one on that board.
Hint no. 5 - Guess who owns the New Brunswick newspapers.
So why did The Moncton Times even print the story of a high school principal - the sort of person the newspaper has long spat on - getting a prestigious award? Just one hint....
Look at who gave the award. It's a non-proft organization called The Learning Partnership. (Non-profit does not necessarily indicate it's either poor or for charity. Actually, it seems to be extremely well funded. I wonder by whom.)
The "partnership", to judge from the list of directors, is composed exclusively and equally of people from education and from very big business. Well, the schools are training people for business. So, isn't it good to have business involved? Actually, there are a lot of problems with that idea.
One is that schools are not training their students exclusively for big business. In fact, they are training more for small business, for civil service at all levels, for social service, for general life. So where are the reps from small business, from civil service, from the military, from social service, from the churches and all the other areas of life?
I won't pretend to have the whole story on this. Not yet. But The Learning Partnership looks very much like yet another big business scheme to horn in on education to get more profits for big business. It's much more sophisticated than AIMS, and has a much more reasonable-sounding approach. But when I look at the board of directors, I see the same sort of gang I see at AIMS.
And that may explain why The Moncton Times ran that story.
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
sometimes, the editorial is just childish
The June 5 editorial was full of praise for the statement by a professor that, in effect, good times are just around the corner, and New Burnswick should be preparing for them.
For a start, it is not clear why the story ran at all. It is not a rarity for professors to say things; but they usually don't get reported. In this case, there are plenty of professors who have said exactly the opposite. (And they have not been reported.) When you see a professor story, and you see it accompanied by a cheering editorial, tread carefully.
For openers, a return to prosperty after a recession is not "inevitable". Nothing is inevitable. This is not just a recession. It is a collapse of the American dollar, and a dangerous slide for the US economy with implications for the military power its economy depends on; and all this occuriing in the midst of a rapid change in world pwer. It is quite possible that the US economy will never return to its old form. Indeed, it has poured money into its economy at a rate unequalled in world history; and the only result has been a sluggish recovery and, at that, often based on a return to lower wages.
As for the chances of New Brunswick finding new economic opportunities, perhaps so. But new opportunities do not mean benefits for everybody. (Remember the story about how some CEOs make more money in a few hours than their employees do in a year?) At that, it isn't the whole story. Lots of other people are taking chunks out of the profit pie long before it gets to you and me.
In fact, it is quite common that profitable business prefers a poor society to supply its work force. You can find examples of that all over Central America, Congo, Nigeria, Iraq... Haiti has been a money maker for clothing factory owners and plantation owners. But not much of that maney has ever reached the Haitians.
In short, the editorial is a shoddy piece of boosterism which, as always, ignores the fundamental problems of New Brunswick - the lack of effective democracy. the propagandist nature of most of the news media, the failure of New Brunswickers to engage themselves in the decisions that affect their daily lives and the futures of their children.
Will the US economy bounce back? I doubt that very much. With an unpayable debt, a commitment to very expensive wars, a sickening dollar, a refusal to modernize its services in health and education (in both cases because of the power of ideologues and billionaires), and its reluctance to ask rich people to pay taxes, it is difficult to see where the recovery will come from. General Motors may recover - by shifting much of its work to cheap labour countries and by cutting wages in the US. General Motors in that way may prosper. It is difficult to see a general prosperity for the American people arising from that.
If, for example, mineral wealth is discovered in New Brunswick, it will not follow that the people of New Brunswick will make much out of them. After all, we already know that a lot of wealth has been made out of this province over the past century and more - but not a whole lot of people got it.
For a start, it is not clear why the story ran at all. It is not a rarity for professors to say things; but they usually don't get reported. In this case, there are plenty of professors who have said exactly the opposite. (And they have not been reported.) When you see a professor story, and you see it accompanied by a cheering editorial, tread carefully.
For openers, a return to prosperty after a recession is not "inevitable". Nothing is inevitable. This is not just a recession. It is a collapse of the American dollar, and a dangerous slide for the US economy with implications for the military power its economy depends on; and all this occuriing in the midst of a rapid change in world pwer. It is quite possible that the US economy will never return to its old form. Indeed, it has poured money into its economy at a rate unequalled in world history; and the only result has been a sluggish recovery and, at that, often based on a return to lower wages.
As for the chances of New Brunswick finding new economic opportunities, perhaps so. But new opportunities do not mean benefits for everybody. (Remember the story about how some CEOs make more money in a few hours than their employees do in a year?) At that, it isn't the whole story. Lots of other people are taking chunks out of the profit pie long before it gets to you and me.
In fact, it is quite common that profitable business prefers a poor society to supply its work force. You can find examples of that all over Central America, Congo, Nigeria, Iraq... Haiti has been a money maker for clothing factory owners and plantation owners. But not much of that maney has ever reached the Haitians.
In short, the editorial is a shoddy piece of boosterism which, as always, ignores the fundamental problems of New Brunswick - the lack of effective democracy. the propagandist nature of most of the news media, the failure of New Brunswickers to engage themselves in the decisions that affect their daily lives and the futures of their children.
Will the US economy bounce back? I doubt that very much. With an unpayable debt, a commitment to very expensive wars, a sickening dollar, a refusal to modernize its services in health and education (in both cases because of the power of ideologues and billionaires), and its reluctance to ask rich people to pay taxes, it is difficult to see where the recovery will come from. General Motors may recover - by shifting much of its work to cheap labour countries and by cutting wages in the US. General Motors in that way may prosper. It is difficult to see a general prosperity for the American people arising from that.
If, for example, mineral wealth is discovered in New Brunswick, it will not follow that the people of New Brunswick will make much out of them. After all, we already know that a lot of wealth has been made out of this province over the past century and more - but not a whole lot of people got it.
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
apology to Moncton readers
I was wrong about the date of one of the Current Events group meeting the Moncton Library.
The evening meeting is Wednesday, Jan. 5, from 7:30 to 8:30.
The afternoon meeting is Thursday, Jan. 6, from 2 to 3.
In both meetings, we will start with a few comments about the return of fascism - then on to whatever those attending would like to discuss.
The evening meeting is Wednesday, Jan. 5, from 7:30 to 8:30.
The afternoon meeting is Thursday, Jan. 6, from 2 to 3.
In both meetings, we will start with a few comments about the return of fascism - then on to whatever those attending would like to discuss.
Monday, January 3, 2011
to plillies
I have received a comment from the name above that the unions did organize a people's economic summit. I was interested to read that. I had not known it. My point, perhaps badly worded, was that I saw no public statements in the media about union opinion of the other economic summit - thought unions were listed as being represented. Only business people seem to have been interviewed and reported on.
I was surprised (aghast) that unions attended such an obvious propaganda trick as the economic summit; and am relieved to hear that they also held, their own summit. I could still wish they had refused to attend the other one.
I was surprised (aghast) that unions attended such an obvious propaganda trick as the economic summit; and am relieved to hear that they also held, their own summit. I could still wish they had refused to attend the other one.
a bleak future for New Brunswick
The Moncton Times edition for Jan. 3 was blessedly short, with most of it obviously prepared as fillers way in advance. That may explain the top story on this third day of the new year, "Metro rings in the new year".
Even the lead editorial was pretty bland stuff. Then....
Then there came a short editorial, "Save Even More! ". This one went beyond the usual sophomoric vitriol of the editorial writer. It almost certainly set the tone for the NB economy for the next few years - as decided by the Alward government in it's "coalition" with big business.
New Brunswick has to reduce its debt. The big business members of the coalition have made it clear this must not be done at any cost to big business. The poor are going to have to bear the burden of reducing the debt (including the additions to the debt which are mainly be benefit the wealthy - such as the new hockey arena, the events centre, the CFL team....
The issue addressed by the editorial concerns guidelines given to government agencies for the coming year. The Liquor Board, for example, has been told to cut two percent of costs in the coming year. This caused the editorial writer to launch into the sort of rant usually reserved for teachers who think their schools should normally be repaired well in advance of ceilings falling during the mandatory chorus of O Canada. Why was the editor foaming at the mouth?
It was because the liquor board agreed to cut two percent of costs in the coming year. That's right. The editor chewed the board out for doing what the government told it to do. They were cutting working hours (and, so, cutting salaries), and would have the system in place within three months.
What? Why were they only cutting two percent? Why couldn't they cut more? Much more? Why wait three months? And why don't they save still more by going past cutting salaries? Why don't they fire of some staff, too?
Watch for a lot of that tone in the coming year. We're going to nail the poor while running up even bigger debts to help the rich. We're going to cut services, cut education, cut jobs, raise taxes. But all of it in ways that affect only the poor and the middle class. Fire people, cut wages...that certainly is the way to create prosperity - but not for very many of us.
What a gutless newspaper! Can you imagine that paper - or any other paper in New Brunswick - suggesting maybe corporations and the rich are not paying as much as they should? Can you see now what the "coalition" of big business and government is all about?
Get ready for the bargain sales/giveaways of crown lands and provincial parks and resources. Get ready to hear the debt is all your fault. Get ready to be told that you have to pay for it. Get ready for a Moncton Times even more contemptible than it has always been.
Even the lead editorial was pretty bland stuff. Then....
Then there came a short editorial, "Save Even More! ". This one went beyond the usual sophomoric vitriol of the editorial writer. It almost certainly set the tone for the NB economy for the next few years - as decided by the Alward government in it's "coalition" with big business.
New Brunswick has to reduce its debt. The big business members of the coalition have made it clear this must not be done at any cost to big business. The poor are going to have to bear the burden of reducing the debt (including the additions to the debt which are mainly be benefit the wealthy - such as the new hockey arena, the events centre, the CFL team....
The issue addressed by the editorial concerns guidelines given to government agencies for the coming year. The Liquor Board, for example, has been told to cut two percent of costs in the coming year. This caused the editorial writer to launch into the sort of rant usually reserved for teachers who think their schools should normally be repaired well in advance of ceilings falling during the mandatory chorus of O Canada. Why was the editor foaming at the mouth?
It was because the liquor board agreed to cut two percent of costs in the coming year. That's right. The editor chewed the board out for doing what the government told it to do. They were cutting working hours (and, so, cutting salaries), and would have the system in place within three months.
What? Why were they only cutting two percent? Why couldn't they cut more? Much more? Why wait three months? And why don't they save still more by going past cutting salaries? Why don't they fire of some staff, too?
Watch for a lot of that tone in the coming year. We're going to nail the poor while running up even bigger debts to help the rich. We're going to cut services, cut education, cut jobs, raise taxes. But all of it in ways that affect only the poor and the middle class. Fire people, cut wages...that certainly is the way to create prosperity - but not for very many of us.
What a gutless newspaper! Can you imagine that paper - or any other paper in New Brunswick - suggesting maybe corporations and the rich are not paying as much as they should? Can you see now what the "coalition" of big business and government is all about?
Get ready for the bargain sales/giveaways of crown lands and provincial parks and resources. Get ready to hear the debt is all your fault. Get ready to be told that you have to pay for it. Get ready for a Moncton Times even more contemptible than it has always been.
Sunday, January 2, 2011
The dreariness of a New Year's Day Moncton Times
The banner heading for Jan.1 Moncton Times? A piece of boosterism, of course. The News makers of the year were the volunteers of Moncton who helped with the international junior championships of something. I would certainly give them all credit for their contribution. But newsmakers of the year? What news did they make? I didn't see all that much about them even in the Moncton Times. We've had far more stories and editorials about how contemptible our teachers are, how everybody is talking about nothing but the events/hockey centre and getting a CFL team. Again the centre and buying a CFL team figured big in the editorial yet again on this day.
Without even trying hard, I can think of lots of events that made more news in The Times than a junior championship. An aged rock group at Magnetic Hill was worth over a week of headlines, plus at least one supplement. (I think this is what today's editorial referred to as "cultural" life.
Then you have the really important events that The Moncton Times gushed all over, but never gave much news on - and certainly never asked any questions.
1. The visit of a neo-conservative politician from the US to give a speech to NB businessmen on education. Jeb Bush is a man who knows nothing about education. But he demands big money for giving a speech. Who paid him? Why were businessmen at an education speech? Why didn't The Moncton Times report that the chief education organizer for his brother, George Bush, gave an interview to The Economist (perhaps the world's leading conservative journal) that the system he was talking about has proved to be a damaging failure in the US, driving American education to the lowest levels of the developing world? This is the "accountability", standardized test, school ranking horror that we are still pushing on our schools, and that Jeb Bush was here to praise. In fact, the tests do not test either schools or teachers, and they do enormous harm to schools. That word comes from Diane Ravitch, a very conservative scholar of education with a high reputation in the field. But I guess she wasn't impressive enough to make The Moncton Times.
In fairness, I see no sign anybody in New Brunswick gives a damn what is being done to their children. The provincial PTA and the Home and School are as clueless and useless a lot as I have ever encountered.
A big story of the year was that we are destroying our schools and our children. Notice you haven't heard any big speeches by education professors praising standardized testing? Well, at least they keep their mouths shut, I suppose. But I could wish they had the courage and integrity to open them.
2. The Economic Summit was a major offensive by big business to openly take over the provincial government. We don't even know who was invited, or why. Nor have we heard anything about it from any invited group except for business leaders. What? The university presidents were too shy to make a statement? The union reps had nothing to say? (In this province, probably not.)
3.And there was a much, much bigger story. The Moncton Times carred a commentary to make an announcement. But the paper lacked either the guts or the brains to follow up with questions.
Mr. Irving of you know who announced he and his friends from the summit had formed a coaltition with the provincial government.
This is the first time a coalition of a government with private business has ever occured in Canada. Indeed, I can think of no such example in any democracy in the world. A coalition means that people we did not elect are now full members of the government. Even the pretence that this is a democracy has been tossed aside.
This is an act that is unconstitutional. It's also hopelessly unworkable in a democracy. The premier has not said a word. Nor has The Times.
When some of the lowest paid people in the province (teachers' aides and school aides) decided to work to rule (that is to do their required jobs) as a means of asking for a smalll raise, The Times attacked them in a venomous editorial. Boy, The Times can be really tough with the small guys.
But it didn't say a word about Mr. Irving's annnouncement that he and his unelected friends are now in charge. There were no questions of Irving or of Alward. There was not even a statement from editor Norbert Cunningham on what the word coalition means. Lots or lip and insults for small and defenceless people. But just a greasy kiss for the boss. And, to his eternal shame, not a word from Mr. Alward.
Without even trying hard, I can think of lots of events that made more news in The Times than a junior championship. An aged rock group at Magnetic Hill was worth over a week of headlines, plus at least one supplement. (I think this is what today's editorial referred to as "cultural" life.
Then you have the really important events that The Moncton Times gushed all over, but never gave much news on - and certainly never asked any questions.
1. The visit of a neo-conservative politician from the US to give a speech to NB businessmen on education. Jeb Bush is a man who knows nothing about education. But he demands big money for giving a speech. Who paid him? Why were businessmen at an education speech? Why didn't The Moncton Times report that the chief education organizer for his brother, George Bush, gave an interview to The Economist (perhaps the world's leading conservative journal) that the system he was talking about has proved to be a damaging failure in the US, driving American education to the lowest levels of the developing world? This is the "accountability", standardized test, school ranking horror that we are still pushing on our schools, and that Jeb Bush was here to praise. In fact, the tests do not test either schools or teachers, and they do enormous harm to schools. That word comes from Diane Ravitch, a very conservative scholar of education with a high reputation in the field. But I guess she wasn't impressive enough to make The Moncton Times.
In fairness, I see no sign anybody in New Brunswick gives a damn what is being done to their children. The provincial PTA and the Home and School are as clueless and useless a lot as I have ever encountered.
A big story of the year was that we are destroying our schools and our children. Notice you haven't heard any big speeches by education professors praising standardized testing? Well, at least they keep their mouths shut, I suppose. But I could wish they had the courage and integrity to open them.
2. The Economic Summit was a major offensive by big business to openly take over the provincial government. We don't even know who was invited, or why. Nor have we heard anything about it from any invited group except for business leaders. What? The university presidents were too shy to make a statement? The union reps had nothing to say? (In this province, probably not.)
3.And there was a much, much bigger story. The Moncton Times carred a commentary to make an announcement. But the paper lacked either the guts or the brains to follow up with questions.
Mr. Irving of you know who announced he and his friends from the summit had formed a coaltition with the provincial government.
This is the first time a coalition of a government with private business has ever occured in Canada. Indeed, I can think of no such example in any democracy in the world. A coalition means that people we did not elect are now full members of the government. Even the pretence that this is a democracy has been tossed aside.
This is an act that is unconstitutional. It's also hopelessly unworkable in a democracy. The premier has not said a word. Nor has The Times.
When some of the lowest paid people in the province (teachers' aides and school aides) decided to work to rule (that is to do their required jobs) as a means of asking for a smalll raise, The Times attacked them in a venomous editorial. Boy, The Times can be really tough with the small guys.
But it didn't say a word about Mr. Irving's annnouncement that he and his unelected friends are now in charge. There were no questions of Irving or of Alward. There was not even a statement from editor Norbert Cunningham on what the word coalition means. Lots or lip and insults for small and defenceless people. But just a greasy kiss for the boss. And, to his eternal shame, not a word from Mr. Alward.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)