"Get the hell off Ton-Cat's lawn..."
Tuesday, December 15, 2009 at 11:05PM I was reading one of my favourite bloggers today, Dave Cournoyer, and was happy to see that the City has approved long-term plans for the expansion of the LRT system to the West and Millwoods. Let's face it folks, this is way overdue and no city the size of Edmonton can be truly great until it creates a transit system that can incentify people to stop building outwards, and start developing our existing communities.
Way too much has been written on the subject, and you already know I am a huge booster of the City, but particularly the development of transit friendly, pedestrian / urban environments. If I had my druthers, the Yardstick Software offices would be downtown, but if that's not possible, then you can bet that I will live in a transit friendly neighbourhood soon enough.
But what really made me piss my pants in laughter, was the excerpt from Daves blog where Councillor Tony Caterina went on a bit of a rant against some of his other Council buddies, "and Defending his decision to oppose LRT expansion, Caterina accused his fellow Councillors of":
...imposing their ideology on the city. Caterina also raised concerns that online bloggers had too much influence on the decision. “A number of bloggers — who knows where they come from — are treated as gospel,” he said.
I don't know the Councillor, have only met him in mutual meetings, but read about his steadfast opposition to the closing of the airport. He has a reputation of being a bit old fashioned, but that is not always a bad thing. I like old fashioned; but only when it's based on pragmatic defense of principals that make sense... not crazy shake your fist kind of old 'fashioned where it's progress being resisted, simply out of spite or fear of the unknown.
Concillor Caterina may have crossed that line with me, when he took an unnecessary shot at the "Bloggers" of the city. How can you take anyone seriously when they dismiss regular citizens, who have built influence by being community activists, just because the choose to use a blog as their tool of communication? What is the difference between a blog like this, and an active and outspoken person down at the community league hall?
TonCat better get with it, or as I suspect will be the case, he will go down screaming in the next election.... standing on his lawn shaking his fist at "them damn kids".
Dave Cournoyer, edmonton, tony caterina, transit in Edmonton 
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (13)
The difference between a blogger and someone who is actually at a meeting discussing an issue is that the person at the meeting can have a 2 way conversation (in real time) about the issue at hand. Thoughts, ideas, disagreements can be exchanged. A blogger (and there is nothing wrong with blogging) can be anyone, anywhere. Most "quality" bloggers that have valid opinion and contribute to the overall discussion that is presented are not "afraid" to use their real name or post actual contact info. But there are a lot of bloggers who remain anonymous. How can something said by that anonymous blogger be taken seriously. no one knows who they are or where they come from (could someone with multiple screen names trying to start some controversy). If you ask most people how they would rank communication with some one, i think... face to face > phone call > email > anonymous blog or tweet.
@Jenny - While I tend to agree with you with regard to anonymous bloggers, a dialogue can occur on a blog just as easily as with any other form of communication---the fact that you and I are able to leave comments on Chris' blog illustrates that point.
I agee with Jenny about anonymous bloggers. Kind of like "the Alberta Altruist" - nothing but a Wildrose sycophant.
@Adam - I agree that a dialogue can occur via this medium but it is not always the most efficient way to do so.
And whether you agree with Caterina (or anyone else) or not, a lot of "bloggers" hide behind that anonymity to, be quite frank, slander and batter someone's name. I know if I have a problem with City Council (whether they represent my ward or not), I call them and tell them about it. It is all too common that these "bloggers" (and not just bloggers) don't get both sides of the story. They take what one person said (ie. the media or a from a twitter post) and assume it means something else. Some one said that Caterina hates bloggers. Did he actually say that? Has anyone called him/ his office to see if that is what he meant?
I think it would be in everyone's best interest if we didn't all assume what one person writes about to be how it really is. The world is rarely black and white.
The Bloggers that are influential have identified themselves and they can be challenged through comments. I enjoy having exchanges with the Alberta Alturist - it is their ideas more than who they are. I would submit that anonymous opinions on blogs and twitter are considered in that context - they are anonymous. Also it becomes pretty clear quickly who of the anonymous posters or twitterers have ideas that are worhwhile considering and who are just crackpots. Our society already accepts anonymity in the statements or decisions of companies and government. We have no idea who the people are behind company names or government departments.
Congratulations to City Council for moving ahead on the LRT expansions. There seems to be a vision for the city coming together. It will be interesting to see who runs against Mr. Caterina in 2010 with the wards being split. He is one of my councillors right now. I never understood why the airport issue was raised. It was not an election issue with all the other serious concerns in our part of the city. When you had to fight your way through hookers and johns to get to the bus stop, the airport wasn't even on the radar.
This is too much old school politics which is thinking in terms of making Edmonton a really great town instead of making Edmonton an inclusive, liveable, international, 21st century smart city - in other words a great city. After living for a while in a small town, a great community and wonderful people that I was sorry to have to leave, I can see the same mind set operating here. Edmonton no longer revolves around its sports teams, its arena, its summer fair, its big mall, or a small cadre of local business people like small towns do. It is not saying that these are not important, it is that they no longer define what the city is. In fact they confine Edmonton's potential if they are not put into perspective. We should aim to be in the top ten most liveable cities in the world - even if we are on occassion the second coldest place on earth.
Going for Expo 2017 is also old school thinking, Expos are interesting, but they are rapidly becoming outmoded and do not have the impact or interest they use to. I would be surprised if a provincial government that prides itself on using hard-headed business models (regardless of whether they are appropriate to the situation or not) would fall for the amorphous predictions as to all the benefits that an expo would bring. Hit them up for the LRT money first. What we should be looking for is something value-added that not only pays its own way, but creates a revenue stream that allows its maintenance, development and expansion and adds to the reputation the city wants to build. And I am not thinking of casinos or brothels. ;)
Thanks Chris for another thought provoking and entertaining blog.
Jenny:
Some good points about anonymous bloggers, we would agree wholeheartedly on that front. I hate anon bloggers or comments, and completely dismiss what they say as likely disingenuous or biased. (there are some who have to due to their jobs, etc. but that's too bad for them that their thoughts will be discounted)
However I do have two points on this:
1) Blogging is an effective way for people who couldn't reach a large group of people to now do so. Blogs, social media, anything like that is simply a technical tool that puts the power of "Social Leverage", through the use of the tool and their social media network, into the hands of the people.
Of course anyone, or any organization can have a blog, and I think that's a great thing. It doesn't take away from the more genuine and interesting discussion and debate that might happen in person, but that type of interaction is not always attainable. Also, blogs or social media is more the domain of a younger or activist demographic. My point with Caterina is that it's not smart to dismiss that demographic as having too much "influence on a decision."
2) I understand that what I posted was a direct quote by Caterina, but I will confirm that. Also, I don't think that the bloggers he was referring too are anonymous. There are many great bloggers, who care greatly about this city, who frankly are providing a service to many by blogging about what's going on. It's possible he has a problem with them because they largely differed with his thoughts on the closing of the Edmonton Airport. He is correct if he meant that bloggers have more influence on decisions than before blogs, but he is wrong if he thinks they have too much.
Bloggers, like politicians or Joe Public, all have influence only if they convince people of their position. What I think he is really concerned with is that his influence as a councilor is not a 100% given, and/or that you don't have to be an elected official to be influential.
In my opinion, a perfect analogy is with traditional media. Caterina would probably not suggest that newspaper editors have "too much influence", because of course they have influence. Why would it be any different if a blogger has influence. It's not given to them without them earning it, and as we would agree, it is never given to an anonymous blogger, commenter or Twitter users without a huge grain of salt.
Chris - I totally agree. If someone wants to write a blog (whether is a business or individual) should have the right to do so. Its a great way to get a variety of thoughts and opinions. Its a fantastic way to get informed. Where the problem lies is when the ideas or thoughts about something/someone are one sided and slanderous. Take Mr. McKeen Article today. I enjoy his reading him. He can be quite humorous and entertaining. But, if an article is going to go as far as it did today (let's admit it was quite harsh), don't you think the right thing to do would be for Scott maybe sit down with the Councillor and ask a few questions before writing what he did. One sided stories lead to assumptions. And you know what they say when you assume ;). I am a firm believer in getting the entire story before forming an opinion. I dislike, very much, the ability by the media (conventional or "social") to seed a preconceived notion about someone/something. And i dislike , even more, that people allow that to happen to themselves. You know that a large portion of the population take what they read and accept it at face value. They ask no questions or try to get any explanations.
Case in point. Just look at the one one post on twitter - "Okay, why do I just feel like smacking this guy upside the head?? And I don't even *live* in #yeg!!"... do you think these comments are fair. You have someone that has absolutely no interest in this city and has no idea who this Councillor is but he/she reads what is posted and the result is Caterina must be bad. And this is not exclusive to Caterina (i use him as an example because he seems to be the hot button topic today).
Same goes for you Chris. You have written an excellent blog. Not everyone can convey their thoughts and opinions the way you do/did. But you write this blog, knowing that Caterina will most likely never read it and therefor, never able to defend himself. Have you called his office about this or for anything else you disagree with? Have you given the other party a chance to give you their perspective on things?
One last thing, The quote you gave was a direct quote. Caterina did say that in Council. But does that mean he hates bloggers or finds their opinion any less valid? Maybe he does.. I don't know. But maybe he should be asked before we point fingers and accuse.
Good post, Chris. I am enjoying the good discussion in this comments section.
Jenny: There are anonymous bloggers and I am sure that Councillors receive anonymous phone messages on a regular basis.
Functionally, writing a blog about civic issues is just another form of participating in democracy - such as writing a letter to the editor or phoning your Councillor's office - it just takes a more independent form. There are people who make dumb phone calls, write pointless (and potentially libellous) blog posts, and post idiotic things on twitter, but that shouldn't devalue the individuals who are contributing to the betterment of their city in their spare time. Demeaning them is really no different that demeaning someone who is involved in their community league or church group, these are active citizens who are participating in a new form of social engagement that many people have a difficult time comprehending.
Comments do get taken out of context, but if individuals like Councillor Caterina don't want people to write about their bizarre public comments, they should probably should think twice before saying them in front of reporters (the Edmonton Journal was the media outlet that reported the comments).
Bloggers should take Councillor Caterina's complaint as a compliment. It means he's noticed them.
"I agee with Jenny about anonymous bloggers. Kind of like "the Alberta Altruist" - nothing but a Wildrose sycophant."
You hit it dead on Horace Horn this guy is a total nutbar-don't believe anything he says. Probably a racist that wants to crumble Albertas health care,education system, and economy. What a rightwingnut.
Good post Chris
Wow, pretty good disussion here. I don't know who Jenny is, but she is dead-on in terms of what social media stuff gets specifically drawn to the attention of your senior gov bureaucrats and elected officials, and what gets passed over.
- David Sands Public Affairs Bureau, Government of Alberta
Wow, pretty good disussion here. I don't know who Jenny is, but she is dead-on in terms of what social media stuff gets specifically drawn to the attention of your senior gov bureaucrats and elected officials, and what gets passed over.
- David Sands Public Affairs Bureau, Government of Alberta
David: Just curious, what social media stuff gets specifically drawn to your attention, as the PABs Senior Blog Guy?
- dave
Dave - No Doubt that writing a blog on civic issues (or any government issue for that matter) is another way of participating in democracy. And there is no doubt in my mind that Caterina has gotten anonymous phone calls/messages or letter or emails. But the difference between the 2 forms is that the calls, letters and emails are directed at the Councillor. He is able to physically hear them or see them. A blog is directed at no one. They are written, yes, to express a view point in the hopes that someone "out there" will read it.
If you have a problem with the way Caterina (or any politician) expresses himself or what he believes in (in terms of what his civic priorities are), why not talk to him about it. you obviously know that he is not reading your blog. Its like if you are unhappy with cell phone service. I'm sure you wouldn't just sit back and blog about it. You are going to call them and see what the problem is.
Democracy starts with open dialogue between two parties and if you choose to exclude one of those parties and make it completely one sided, you have defeated the entire purpose. It is easy to sit there and type out an opinion when you know everyone is going to agree with you. It is something completely different when you have to come face to face (not literally) with some one and know that what you say might spark a debate or some controversy. (lol.. something Caterina seems to do on a regular basis).
... "but that shouldn't devalue the individuals who are contributing to the betterment of their city in their spare time. Demeaning them is really no different that demeaning someone who is involved in their community league or church group, these are active citizens who are participating in a new form of social engagement that many people have a difficult time comprehending"
- Dave... again, here you assume that Caterina is devaluing and demeaning these people that decided to post their opinion in the form a blog. Does he actually say this? has anyone asked if this is actually what he meant? Iveson's comments were he received a couple of blogs that morning from someones (he didn't mention who) who felt strongly that these LRT routes should be approved. Well, were those someones actually intelligent bloggers like yourself or were they actually some anonymous Tweet that he read. no one knows. Its like if Caterina said he received some calls that morning from someone who said not to approve the lines. Do you think Iveson or anyone else on Council would take that with much substance?