This Is Not A Newspaper

This is not a newspaper nor is it the CBC or the BBC.  It is a place for me to express my own views (thus the name of this blog) and to pass on observances that I think are of interest.  I do exactly as much research as I choose when writing these pieces. Nothing more should be expected of me.

When I write history pieces, the research will be as exact and accurate as I can possibly make it.  But when I write political pieces or articles on art, music, food or when I write general observations, what you see is what you get — my view with absolutely no guarantee that anyone else will agree.  Everyone is welcome to do their own research, their own reading, and make up their own minds.

I would have thought this was obvious.

But clearly some with a different point of view expect something else.  The comments that my post on the anal bleaching sign attracted are a fine example.  Obviously the commenter disagreed with my position and claimed I got my facts wrong.  No, I did not: I reported accurately on what I saw (the sign), I reported accurately on what I heard on the street (“I am told that” the PAC had objected), and I gave my own opinion on the issue.   No facts were harmed in the production of that post.

As I wrote to the commenter, the comments and my email are open for anyone to state their differences of opinion, but I expect something other than just “you are wrong.”



6 Responses to This Is Not A Newspaper

  1. DDB says:

    Understood & agreed. I believe you to be a responsible and reasonable, thoughtful person with a lively sense of humour. I appreciate your take on life, whether I always agree or not!

  2. Paul Willcocks says:

    Agreed. Though it’s helpful for readers if writers are slightly more specific than “I am told.” I am told by a parent in the local school, I am told by a worker in the salon, I am told by my friend Dave who heard something from his cousin who lives in Burnaby… They are all just as easy to write, and make the post more useful.

  3. Jenni says:

    But the PAC were not ‘exercised’ by the sign. A letter was written that was mistakenly thought to come form the PAC but it wasn’t. There are many people who are concerned about the sign for many reasons.
    My main concerns are that we, and the young people who see the sign, are made to feel that there is yet another thing that is, in some way, ‘wrong’ with our bodies or that needs to be changed. In conversation with owner – when I asked why anyone would want to have their anus bleached she replied ‘if they feel insecure about it’ and that is exactly my point, why would we plant that seed in the minds of the young people walking to school every morning.
    The owner was also clear that it is a specific clientele that partakes of this service and I would argue that advertising could be directly targetted at that group, rather than the use of blanket advertising on a board in the street.
    “Anal Bleaching’ has its roots in the porn industry which also adds an element of discomfort to having it advertised blatantly on a sandwich board in the street.
    When asked ‘how is it different to ‘Brazilain Waxing’ ‘ I have to say that the issue is in the very name – ‘Brazilain Waxing’ does not conjure up an immediate image in our, or our childrens’, minds of the specifics of the act.
    It would seem good business sense to take into account the sensibilities of the community you are working in and adapt business strategies to respect that.
    I apologise for not having time to actually respond in detail to your blog,and I understand that blogging is not the same as journalism but the PAC was mentioned and that information was wrong. I do believe that even blogging comes with a responsibility to try to be accurate in ones facts.

  4. jakking says:

    Thanks for our explanation. I may not be a newspaper but I like to initiate full debate from which we can all learn something.

    I had no idea there was a letter but, from what you say, I guess I was not the only one who thought the PAC was behind the complaint; and the ones giving me the info certainly thought that was so. Once again, I used the facts at my disposal (including specifically noting that some of the facts were as told to me) and make no apologies for it.

  5. Jenni says:

    Sorry, but i do not think that you ‘initiated full debate’ – good luck with your blog

  6. A Drive flaneur says:

    600 word story in Wednesday’s 26 March 2014 Vancouver Courier paper copy. Online at:

    Details, picture of owner Jaden Stevenson and sign.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: