Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Winnipeg North speaks
Democracy works. That’s the message that rang through the Punjab Banquet Hall on Monday night during the Winnipeg North federal byelection.
Piercing wind and flying snow couldn’t keep 300 Kevin Lamoureux supporters from watching the former Liberal Party of Canada’s Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) for Inkster win Winnipeg North’s Member of Parliament (MP) seat with 46 per cent of the vote.
A sea of red and white exploded in whistles and cheers as supporters as multicultural as the riding itself jumped up and down as the newly elected Member of Parliament entered the hall.
Lamoureux addressed the crowd and greeted many constituents by their first names.
“For those of you that have been with me for years, thank you,” he said. “Politics is about engaging people and building on relationships. I couldn’t have done it with you.”
Winnipeg North has been a New Democratic Party (NDP) riding for years. In the 2008 federal election, NDP MP Jusy Wasylycia-Leis won the seat she’d held since 1997 with 62.61 per cent of the vote. Lamoureux stepped down as MLA for Inkster, a position he’d held since 1988, to run in her place when she resigned to run for Mayor of Winnipeg in 2010.
According to the Elections Canada website, NDP candidate Kevin Chief came in a close second with 41.7 per cent of the vote. The Conservative Party of Canada’s Julie Javier received 10.3 per cent of the vote, Pirate Party of Canada’s Jeff Coleman received 0.6 per cent of the vote, Green Party of Canada’s John Harvie received 0.7 per cent of the vote, Communist Party of Canada’s Frank Komarniski received 0.4 per cent of the vote, and Christian Heritage Party of Canada’s Eric Truijen got 0.3 per cent of the vote.
After tonight’s byelection, the Conservative Party of Canada has 143 seats in the House of Commons, the Liberal Party of Canada has 77 seats, the Bloc Québécois has 47 seats, and the NDP has 36 seats. Two seats belong to individuals and three remain vacant.
Jan Gabbs, 67, said it is Lamoureux’s dedication to his constituents that sets him apart.
“Every Thursday night he holds meetings at McDonald’s where any constituent can come to talk to him,” she said. “When he moves to Ottawa, he’ll come home every weekend to do the same thing.”
Vince Vasallo, 37, said Lamoureux’s leadership is hope for Canada’s future.
“If you ever need any help with government problems, even if you don’t live in his area, he’ll help you.” he said. “I hope he becomes party leader and eventually prime minister.”
Piercing wind and flying snow couldn’t keep 300 Kevin Lamoureux supporters from watching the former Liberal Party of Canada’s Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) for Inkster win Winnipeg North’s Member of Parliament (MP) seat with 46 per cent of the vote.
A sea of red and white exploded in whistles and cheers as supporters as multicultural as the riding itself jumped up and down as the newly elected Member of Parliament entered the hall.
Lamoureux addressed the crowd and greeted many constituents by their first names.
“For those of you that have been with me for years, thank you,” he said. “Politics is about engaging people and building on relationships. I couldn’t have done it with you.”
Winnipeg North has been a New Democratic Party (NDP) riding for years. In the 2008 federal election, NDP MP Jusy Wasylycia-Leis won the seat she’d held since 1997 with 62.61 per cent of the vote. Lamoureux stepped down as MLA for Inkster, a position he’d held since 1988, to run in her place when she resigned to run for Mayor of Winnipeg in 2010.
According to the Elections Canada website, NDP candidate Kevin Chief came in a close second with 41.7 per cent of the vote. The Conservative Party of Canada’s Julie Javier received 10.3 per cent of the vote, Pirate Party of Canada’s Jeff Coleman received 0.6 per cent of the vote, Green Party of Canada’s John Harvie received 0.7 per cent of the vote, Communist Party of Canada’s Frank Komarniski received 0.4 per cent of the vote, and Christian Heritage Party of Canada’s Eric Truijen got 0.3 per cent of the vote.
After tonight’s byelection, the Conservative Party of Canada has 143 seats in the House of Commons, the Liberal Party of Canada has 77 seats, the Bloc Québécois has 47 seats, and the NDP has 36 seats. Two seats belong to individuals and three remain vacant.
Jan Gabbs, 67, said it is Lamoureux’s dedication to his constituents that sets him apart.
“Every Thursday night he holds meetings at McDonald’s where any constituent can come to talk to him,” she said. “When he moves to Ottawa, he’ll come home every weekend to do the same thing.”
Vince Vasallo, 37, said Lamoureux’s leadership is hope for Canada’s future.
“If you ever need any help with government problems, even if you don’t live in his area, he’ll help you.” he said. “I hope he becomes party leader and eventually prime minister.”
Saturday, November 27, 2010
Hiroshima by John Hersey
I recently finished reading a book called Hiroshima by John Hersey.
As the title of the book implies, the book is about the use of the first atomic bomb by America on Hiroshima in 1945 where close to 100,000 people were killed.
What I enjoyed most about this book was the author’s use of real people to tell the story of Hiroshima. This added a wonderful amount of believability to the story but also gave the reader the opportunity to feel for the characters in the book, because we knew their stories were real. What I would have liked for Hersey to do differently is, I wish he had put his characters in first person. I think this would have added another level of empathy from the reader for the characters because it would have felt like we were actually experiencing the actual events from the point of view of the characters.
The other thing I felt was missing from Hiroshima was some bigger context to the atomic bomb being dropped. Although I agree that there has been much written about the American perspective of the events and tragedy, I would have liked to read a bit more about the history of conflict regarding Pearl Harbour, Hiroshima, Nagasaki etc.
From a journalist’s perspective, I think there’s a lot that I could learn from reading this book. I think the amount of work and research, time, effort, and resilience it would have taken Hersey to compile all of the information and interviews he did to write this book must have been very much. I think from Hersey, journalists can learn that interviews can be the backbone of a really good story.
I watched a BBC TV documentary on Hiroshima before called Hiroshima: The First Weapon of Mass Destruction. I found the book by Hersey and the documentary to be similar in that they both used eyewitness accounts to tell the story about what happened during that time in Japan. I did find the documentary more effective for the sole reason that the visual clips (although many were computer generated) helped give the story context.
Quite interestingly, when Hiroshima was published in The New Yorker in 1946, it filled up the entire issue. There were no other articles or cartoons and it sold out the day it was put on newsstands. Many radio stations around the world read the text out loud and the article was published into a book soon thereafter.
I really enjoyed reading Hiroshima. I found it to be a stimulating, exciting, thought provoking, and emotional read. I would definitely read it again or recommend it to anyone who wants a good history lesson.
As the title of the book implies, the book is about the use of the first atomic bomb by America on Hiroshima in 1945 where close to 100,000 people were killed.
What I enjoyed most about this book was the author’s use of real people to tell the story of Hiroshima. This added a wonderful amount of believability to the story but also gave the reader the opportunity to feel for the characters in the book, because we knew their stories were real. What I would have liked for Hersey to do differently is, I wish he had put his characters in first person. I think this would have added another level of empathy from the reader for the characters because it would have felt like we were actually experiencing the actual events from the point of view of the characters.
The other thing I felt was missing from Hiroshima was some bigger context to the atomic bomb being dropped. Although I agree that there has been much written about the American perspective of the events and tragedy, I would have liked to read a bit more about the history of conflict regarding Pearl Harbour, Hiroshima, Nagasaki etc.
From a journalist’s perspective, I think there’s a lot that I could learn from reading this book. I think the amount of work and research, time, effort, and resilience it would have taken Hersey to compile all of the information and interviews he did to write this book must have been very much. I think from Hersey, journalists can learn that interviews can be the backbone of a really good story.
I watched a BBC TV documentary on Hiroshima before called Hiroshima: The First Weapon of Mass Destruction. I found the book by Hersey and the documentary to be similar in that they both used eyewitness accounts to tell the story about what happened during that time in Japan. I did find the documentary more effective for the sole reason that the visual clips (although many were computer generated) helped give the story context.
Quite interestingly, when Hiroshima was published in The New Yorker in 1946, it filled up the entire issue. There were no other articles or cartoons and it sold out the day it was put on newsstands. Many radio stations around the world read the text out loud and the article was published into a book soon thereafter.
I really enjoyed reading Hiroshima. I found it to be a stimulating, exciting, thought provoking, and emotional read. I would definitely read it again or recommend it to anyone who wants a good history lesson.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Journalists for Human Rights
Here's an organization which pretty much sums up my journalism dreams.
http://www.jhr.ca/en/
Visit their website to learn more.
Last summer, I received an internship with the organization in Toronto. Unfortunately, I was not able to take it because of other circumstances, but I hope everyone takes the time to check out the website and get involved with the organization because it is one that I am very proud to be associated with.
Dani Finch, a first year Crecomm wants to start up a chapter of the organization here at Red River College. If you're interested, message me and I can forward you on to her!
JHR, you inspire me!
http://www.jhr.ca/en/
Visit their website to learn more.
Last summer, I received an internship with the organization in Toronto. Unfortunately, I was not able to take it because of other circumstances, but I hope everyone takes the time to check out the website and get involved with the organization because it is one that I am very proud to be associated with.
Dani Finch, a first year Crecomm wants to start up a chapter of the organization here at Red River College. If you're interested, message me and I can forward you on to her!
JHR, you inspire me!
Monday, November 15, 2010
Monday, November 8, 2010
Good interview. Great answers
Oprah Winfrey gets to interview people for a living. I wish that were my job.
Watch the interview with Portia de Rossi below (Ellen Degeneres' wife) about struggling with her eating disorders and coming out as a lesbian.
Oprah's questions are fine, but its the honesty in Portia's answers that brings true light to this interview.
I always say, it is up to the interviewer to make the subject feel so comfortable they will open up with them.....but I never forget, that an interview is only most successful, if the subject is willing to give you the truth.
Watch the interview with Portia de Rossi below (Ellen Degeneres' wife) about struggling with her eating disorders and coming out as a lesbian.
Oprah's questions are fine, but its the honesty in Portia's answers that brings true light to this interview.
I always say, it is up to the interviewer to make the subject feel so comfortable they will open up with them.....but I never forget, that an interview is only most successful, if the subject is willing to give you the truth.
Monday, November 1, 2010
So that’s what a murderer looks like in person….
Today, Red River College Creative Communications students took their second trip to the law courts and low and behold, I experienced something I’m sure I’ll never forget.
I came face to face with a murderer…or at least, he’s accused of first-degree murder (innocent until proven guilty, I know….but for the sake of argument, let’s call him Mr. Murderer.)
Our assignment was to get to the Law Courts and cover something interesting. And boy, was it ever.
Yvonne, Jessica, Kim, and I sat through the day long proceedings where we saw an accused first-degree murderer go on trial. The Crown presented three witnesses in the case, and the defence lawyers cross-examined them. The trial continues on for the next few weeks but the first day was a good indication of what was to come.
The jury sat and listened and I couldn’t help but think, wow…I am so glad I am not them.
Why? Because I found my opinion changing as the day went on. In the morning, I was sure, its first degree murder…lock him up! Then as the day went on, I became less sure…maybe its second degree murder or maybe its manslaughter.
After the day was over, all four lawyers and the judge were kind enough to hang with us journalism students in the courtroom and answer some our questions. This was the best part because we had the chance to clarify things with them (such as, why was the accused in normal people clothes? Turns out they do that so the jury members won’t catch on to the fact that he’s in jail for other charges right now….they don’t want to sway their opinion.)
I also asked the lawyers if they defended people they knew were guilty. They replied, “of course, it’s the nature of the job. The Crown has to prove the person is guilty….even if I know they are, it’s their job to prove it. If they can’t, the person goes free.” I don’t think I could do it….but the two defence lawyers just shrugged and said, “it’s the nature of the job.”
Crazy. An exciting day it was. I had never considered court reporting before, but now, I don’t think I’d mind it at all.
Except for the fact that you have to spend time around potential murderers….err. That part isn’t so great…
I came face to face with a murderer…or at least, he’s accused of first-degree murder (innocent until proven guilty, I know….but for the sake of argument, let’s call him Mr. Murderer.)
Our assignment was to get to the Law Courts and cover something interesting. And boy, was it ever.
Yvonne, Jessica, Kim, and I sat through the day long proceedings where we saw an accused first-degree murderer go on trial. The Crown presented three witnesses in the case, and the defence lawyers cross-examined them. The trial continues on for the next few weeks but the first day was a good indication of what was to come.
The jury sat and listened and I couldn’t help but think, wow…I am so glad I am not them.
Why? Because I found my opinion changing as the day went on. In the morning, I was sure, its first degree murder…lock him up! Then as the day went on, I became less sure…maybe its second degree murder or maybe its manslaughter.
After the day was over, all four lawyers and the judge were kind enough to hang with us journalism students in the courtroom and answer some our questions. This was the best part because we had the chance to clarify things with them (such as, why was the accused in normal people clothes? Turns out they do that so the jury members won’t catch on to the fact that he’s in jail for other charges right now….they don’t want to sway their opinion.)
I also asked the lawyers if they defended people they knew were guilty. They replied, “of course, it’s the nature of the job. The Crown has to prove the person is guilty….even if I know they are, it’s their job to prove it. If they can’t, the person goes free.” I don’t think I could do it….but the two defence lawyers just shrugged and said, “it’s the nature of the job.”
Crazy. An exciting day it was. I had never considered court reporting before, but now, I don’t think I’d mind it at all.
Except for the fact that you have to spend time around potential murderers….err. That part isn’t so great…
Monday, October 25, 2010
Welcome Home, Dawna Friesen!
Red River College welcomes Dawna Friesen, Global National anchor, on Tuesday, Oct. 26.
She’s the face of Canadian media. And she’ll be at Red River College tomorrow.
Rumour has it; Dawna actually asked Global National if she could stop in at her old school during her Winnipeg stop of the show’s national publicity tour.
She will be hosting a live broadcast of Global National later in the afternoon, but in the morning, she’ll be speaking to Red River College students about social media.
Those of you who know me or have read this blog, I’m sure, could guess how I feel about this. I’m super excited.
Dawna Friesen grew up in a small town in Manitoba, took CreComm, and then went on to work in Portage La Prairie, Thunder Bay, Saskatoon, and Brandon. After that, she worked nationally for CTV and CBC before becoming a NBC foreign correspondent. She held that position for the past 11 years and is now the Global National anchor and executive editor.
According to a press release from Canwest Corporation, Dawna has covered “everything from the murder of journalist Daniel Pearl in Pakistan to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to the British Royal Family. Assignments have taken her to Africa, Middle East, Russia and across Europe. Dawna was part of the Emmy® award-winning team covering Barack Obama's election and returned to Vancouver in February to report on the Winter Olympics.”
I cannot wait to ambush her tomorrow…err…congratulate her.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Passion in Journalism
This week, my blog is going to be about a segment of television from The View.
I don't really want to start talking about the content of what the discussion in the below clip is about (it sort of makes my blood boil, so I'd rather not). What I do think is relevant to this blog is the confrontation that takes place in this clip.
Take a look:
Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg get up during the interview with Bill O'Reilly and walk off stage, saying "I don't have to sit here for this." Basically, O'Reilly says, "Muslims killed us on 9/11," and the women are so offended by this, they leave the interview. They do return after O'Reilly has apologized for what he has said but, I still think this walk-off merits discussion.
Now, after the women leave the set, Barbara Walters (Queen of the Universe) says that her colleagues were wrong to leave because in today's society, people should be allowed to speak their minds and there should be an open forum for discussion, without people getting angry, violent, or storming off.
While I agree with Walters to an extent, I also see why the women walked off set (and trust me, Goldberg is my least fave of The View women, even over Hasselbeck).
I think sometimes, passion, when it comes to journalism, is necessary. I don't blame the women for walking off set to prove their point. The reason for that is this, sometimes, when you are dealing with someone who is quite set in their ways, discussion really will not change their minds. Additionally, I feel that as the interview went on, O'Reiley's comments only got more and more offensive, more ignorant, and more hurtful. It was only after the women left the set that he finally stepped back and apologized.
Now, don't get me wrong. I also see the benefits of letting an interview get more and more heated. Often, that is when the real juicy or truth of the matter comes out. Such as in this interview, O'Reilly's real feelings came out as a result of things getting heated.
But at the same time, sometimes, even as a journalist, I feel we need to take a stand. No matter how important an interview is, I do feel the journalist, if they feel offended, disrespected, or completely ignored, can get up and say, "I am done with this interview." Sometimes, integrity matters more than a good interview.
What do you think?
I don't really want to start talking about the content of what the discussion in the below clip is about (it sort of makes my blood boil, so I'd rather not). What I do think is relevant to this blog is the confrontation that takes place in this clip.
Take a look:
Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg get up during the interview with Bill O'Reilly and walk off stage, saying "I don't have to sit here for this." Basically, O'Reilly says, "Muslims killed us on 9/11," and the women are so offended by this, they leave the interview. They do return after O'Reilly has apologized for what he has said but, I still think this walk-off merits discussion.
Now, after the women leave the set, Barbara Walters (Queen of the Universe) says that her colleagues were wrong to leave because in today's society, people should be allowed to speak their minds and there should be an open forum for discussion, without people getting angry, violent, or storming off.
While I agree with Walters to an extent, I also see why the women walked off set (and trust me, Goldberg is my least fave of The View women, even over Hasselbeck).
I think sometimes, passion, when it comes to journalism, is necessary. I don't blame the women for walking off set to prove their point. The reason for that is this, sometimes, when you are dealing with someone who is quite set in their ways, discussion really will not change their minds. Additionally, I feel that as the interview went on, O'Reiley's comments only got more and more offensive, more ignorant, and more hurtful. It was only after the women left the set that he finally stepped back and apologized.
Now, don't get me wrong. I also see the benefits of letting an interview get more and more heated. Often, that is when the real juicy or truth of the matter comes out. Such as in this interview, O'Reilly's real feelings came out as a result of things getting heated.
But at the same time, sometimes, even as a journalist, I feel we need to take a stand. No matter how important an interview is, I do feel the journalist, if they feel offended, disrespected, or completely ignored, can get up and say, "I am done with this interview." Sometimes, integrity matters more than a good interview.
What do you think?
Monday, October 11, 2010
To J or not to J? That is the question.
An instructor in the Creative Communications program at Red River College, Kenton Larsen, posed a question about whether or not the program should become major-less on his blog.
Go here to read more, http://www.kentonlarsen.com/2010/10/whats-major-idea.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+KentonsInfotainmentScan+%28Kenton%27s+Infotainment+Scan%29
Anyways, after reading his blog, I got to thinking...would I enjoy CreComm as much as I do if I could not have majored in journalism and had to take advertising, PR, and media production in my second year?
The truth is, I do value the other three subjects which make up CreComm and have learned so much from each of them. That being said, I am not good at advertising. Broadcast stresses me out because I am a techno-phone...and PR, while I appreciate the work, am not always motivated by it.
So my take on the whole thing is, it is important for CreComms to be well-rounded in all four of the major areas, but at the same time, it is essential we hone our greatest skills in the second year with our major.
I'd be more open to the idea of two majors, broadcast-j and ad-pr, but to eliminate the majors all together is not something I would be crazy about. I like the extra time I get in journalism, I like the work because it interests me, challenges me, and is where my passion lies.
I think CreComm's major system is good as it is.
Go here to read more, http://www.kentonlarsen.com/2010/10/whats-major-idea.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+KentonsInfotainmentScan+%28Kenton%27s+Infotainment+Scan%29
Anyways, after reading his blog, I got to thinking...would I enjoy CreComm as much as I do if I could not have majored in journalism and had to take advertising, PR, and media production in my second year?
The truth is, I do value the other three subjects which make up CreComm and have learned so much from each of them. That being said, I am not good at advertising. Broadcast stresses me out because I am a techno-phone...and PR, while I appreciate the work, am not always motivated by it.
So my take on the whole thing is, it is important for CreComms to be well-rounded in all four of the major areas, but at the same time, it is essential we hone our greatest skills in the second year with our major.
I'd be more open to the idea of two majors, broadcast-j and ad-pr, but to eliminate the majors all together is not something I would be crazy about. I like the extra time I get in journalism, I like the work because it interests me, challenges me, and is where my passion lies.
I think CreComm's major system is good as it is.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Does gender count when it comes to votes?
This past weekend the Winnipeg Sun and the Winnipeg Free Press both wrote stories which said that if Winnipeg’s mayoral candidate Judy Wasylycia- Leis was a man, she would win the upcoming civic election.
Reading the article got me thinking. First of all, I found the articles poorly written with unsubstantiated facts. The authors and sources pretty much made the claim that Judy would win if she wasn’t a woman…but really, no one knows that for sure.
Secondly, I started to think, “Is it true? Is gender the main thing holding Judy back from being as successful as she could be?”
Don’t get me wrong, there are hundreds of successful women in the world who have not
let their gender come between them and their dreams.
Then again, to say that gender plays no role in how reputable a woman is in politics would be a mistake, in my opinion.
I feel like gender is the one minority status that doesn’t work in your favor in politics. For example, if I were to run for mayor, I’m sure the fact that I’m East-Indian would help me. Other East-Indians may vote for me just for that fact alone.
But I’m not sure people would vote for me just because I am a woman. More than
helping me, I think it may work against me.
To say people don’t have stereotypes against women in office is untrue, in my opinion.
Take a look at the Winnipeg Free Press’ articles about the issue.
I want to reiterate that I feel the articles are not well written, they are not backed up with real people, or statistics. But I do think the topic of gender in politics is a good and debatable one.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/gender-may-sink-judy-expert-104231469.html
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/Prof-says-gender-working-against-Wasylycia-Leis.html
What do you think?
Reading the article got me thinking. First of all, I found the articles poorly written with unsubstantiated facts. The authors and sources pretty much made the claim that Judy would win if she wasn’t a woman…but really, no one knows that for sure.
Secondly, I started to think, “Is it true? Is gender the main thing holding Judy back from being as successful as she could be?”
Don’t get me wrong, there are hundreds of successful women in the world who have not
let their gender come between them and their dreams.
Then again, to say that gender plays no role in how reputable a woman is in politics would be a mistake, in my opinion.
I feel like gender is the one minority status that doesn’t work in your favor in politics. For example, if I were to run for mayor, I’m sure the fact that I’m East-Indian would help me. Other East-Indians may vote for me just for that fact alone.
But I’m not sure people would vote for me just because I am a woman. More than
helping me, I think it may work against me.
To say people don’t have stereotypes against women in office is untrue, in my opinion.
Take a look at the Winnipeg Free Press’ articles about the issue.
I want to reiterate that I feel the articles are not well written, they are not backed up with real people, or statistics. But I do think the topic of gender in politics is a good and debatable one.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/gender-may-sink-judy-expert-104231469.html
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/Prof-says-gender-working-against-Wasylycia-Leis.html
What do you think?
Monday, September 27, 2010
so this is what dreams are made of
Have you ever had a moment of absolute clarity? The kind where everything makes sense and where a weight is lifted off your shoulders? A moment where you've achieved something you've wanted so desperately. Have you ever had a dream of yours come true? When you've made it?
Last year, Red River College presented Dawna Friesen with the Alumni Achievement award for her various accomplishments which include being the NBC foreign correspondent based out of London, England.
I had the priviledge of meeting Dawna while she was here accepting her award and attending a dinner in her honour. She shared a story with RRC students about how when she graduated, a news director once told her to slit the bottom of her tongue in order to get rid of her lisp. She refused and prospered anyways.
I think of the things she's achieved, the places she's visited, the things she's seen, and the people she's helped, and I wonder if this was her dream. Because it's mine.
This past Spring, it was announced that Dawna would be taking over as anchor for Global National for Kevin Newman.
So why am I writing about all of this? It's because, I wonder, how must Dawna feel at this time? Did she ever dream about being in the place she is now today? What were her hopes and dreams? When did she have her moment of clarity when she decided to be a journalist? Is she proud of herself or has she accomplished so much that she's used to her successes?
I remember getting emotional as I listened to Dawna speak when she was in Winnipeg last year. The reason is simply because she inspires me. It isn't often you see someone who has started in the exact same place that you currently are go on and achieve the things you can only dream of one day doing. She motivates me. And I'm proud of her.
Congratulations Dawna. I am so thrilled to have met you and I admire where you are and all you've done to get there. Good luck with your new job because I, for one, will be watching.
Last year, Red River College presented Dawna Friesen with the Alumni Achievement award for her various accomplishments which include being the NBC foreign correspondent based out of London, England.
I had the priviledge of meeting Dawna while she was here accepting her award and attending a dinner in her honour. She shared a story with RRC students about how when she graduated, a news director once told her to slit the bottom of her tongue in order to get rid of her lisp. She refused and prospered anyways.
I think of the things she's achieved, the places she's visited, the things she's seen, and the people she's helped, and I wonder if this was her dream. Because it's mine.
This past Spring, it was announced that Dawna would be taking over as anchor for Global National for Kevin Newman.
So why am I writing about all of this? It's because, I wonder, how must Dawna feel at this time? Did she ever dream about being in the place she is now today? What were her hopes and dreams? When did she have her moment of clarity when she decided to be a journalist? Is she proud of herself or has she accomplished so much that she's used to her successes?
I remember getting emotional as I listened to Dawna speak when she was in Winnipeg last year. The reason is simply because she inspires me. It isn't often you see someone who has started in the exact same place that you currently are go on and achieve the things you can only dream of one day doing. She motivates me. And I'm proud of her.
Congratulations Dawna. I am so thrilled to have met you and I admire where you are and all you've done to get there. Good luck with your new job because I, for one, will be watching.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Journalism or entertainment?
So, most people who know me well know that I have a soft spot in my heart for Ms.Oprah Winfrey.
I know, it’s a bit strange. But I don’t mind admitting to it.
I like the fact that her show is about real people and real stories (so maybe it’s her producers I really like...) and I respect the fact that she surpassed surmountable odds to get where she is (being raped by family members, getting pregnant as a teenager and having her child die, etc).
I remember watching an episode of the show a few years ago where Oprah read an entry from her diary on the eve of her 25th birthday about how she was restless, anxious, and waiting for something to change and happen in her life. I admire how far she’s come and I’ll miss the show.
For those who know anything about Oprah, they know she started as a broadcast journalist and then moved on to have her own show. So what I want to ask this week is whether or not Oprah’s show is a form of entertainment or a true form of journalism....or maybe a mixture of the two?
I think her show is clearly for entertainment, but I also think there’s so much journalism, reporting, interviewing, facts, and stories in her show that it’s also a form of journalism.
I, for one, am sad to see her go. Hey, Oprah, if you need a replacement, I’m sure we could work something out.
I know, it’s a bit strange. But I don’t mind admitting to it.
I like the fact that her show is about real people and real stories (so maybe it’s her producers I really like...) and I respect the fact that she surpassed surmountable odds to get where she is (being raped by family members, getting pregnant as a teenager and having her child die, etc).
I remember watching an episode of the show a few years ago where Oprah read an entry from her diary on the eve of her 25th birthday about how she was restless, anxious, and waiting for something to change and happen in her life. I admire how far she’s come and I’ll miss the show.
For those who know anything about Oprah, they know she started as a broadcast journalist and then moved on to have her own show. So what I want to ask this week is whether or not Oprah’s show is a form of entertainment or a true form of journalism....or maybe a mixture of the two?
I think her show is clearly for entertainment, but I also think there’s so much journalism, reporting, interviewing, facts, and stories in her show that it’s also a form of journalism.
I, for one, am sad to see her go. Hey, Oprah, if you need a replacement, I’m sure we could work something out.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
So I thought about it a bit more....
Last week, I wrote about what I think journalism is....and my answer was what I believe to be true, but I truly had a hard time answering that question.
How do you sum up what you think you are meant to do with your life?
Then it came to me. The below video is what journalism means to me.
When people ask me why I want to be a journalist, I always say, well...er... I want to make a difference, I want to help people, I want to be where the real world is, I want to experience the truth and then tell it.
Most of the time, I am met with blank stares.
But here, this is why I want to be a journalist. Whether the video was staged or not, for argument's sake, let's say it was not. Anderson Cooper is out there, he's making a difference, he's where it matters. And wow, do I wish I were there too.
How do you sum up what you think you are meant to do with your life?
Then it came to me. The below video is what journalism means to me.
When people ask me why I want to be a journalist, I always say, well...er... I want to make a difference, I want to help people, I want to be where the real world is, I want to experience the truth and then tell it.
Most of the time, I am met with blank stares.
But here, this is why I want to be a journalist. Whether the video was staged or not, for argument's sake, let's say it was not. Anderson Cooper is out there, he's making a difference, he's where it matters. And wow, do I wish I were there too.
Monday, September 6, 2010
What is journalism?
What is journalism?
So I’m back. After four months of what seems like an accelerated summer, I am back to blogging.
And I’m happy to be here.
Over the past year, I’d become attached to my blog. I began to feel at home with the art of writing from my heart, without worrying about being graded for my work. So I admit, I am glad to be back.
We were asked in our journalism class what exactly journalism is. And it got me thinking. I know I want to be a journalist, I know I’ve committed myself to this career and cannot wait to being working in the field. But then, when I was faced with this question, I realized, I’m not really sure exactly what journalism is.
According to the University of Western Ontario, “journalism is the timely reporting of events at the local, provincial, national and international levels. Reporting involves the gathering of information through interviewing and research, the results of which are turned into a fair and balanced story for publication or for television or radio broadcast.”
Hmm...that definition seems to make sense. Journalism does include research, information, interviews, facts, and storytelling, all things I love about it....but I’ve realized, those things, while I love them all, are not what makes me so passionate about journalism.
What is it for me? Where does my passion come from?
Simple. People.
To me, journalism is people. We have no facts, interviews, stories, research, or life to our words or broadcasts without people. I am passionate about journalism because it is a form of storytelling which enables those around us to learn about others and their experiences which may not be possible if there were no journalists to tell their stories.
What is journalism? To me, it is people. It is the mechanism which connects what is happening in the world to a person (or people) and other people around the world becoming aware of it.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Sunday, April 18, 2010
summer
Shall I Compare Thee To A Summer's Day?
by William Shakespeare (1564-1616)
Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate.
Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May,
And summer's lease hath all too short a date.
Sometime too hot the eye of heaven shines,
And often is his gold complexion dimm'd;
And every fair from fair sometime declines,
By chance or nature's changing course untrimm'd;
But thy eternal summer shall not fade
Nor lose possession of that fair thou ow'st;
Nor shall Death brag thou wander'st in his shade,
When in eternal lines to time thou grow'st:
So long as men can breathe or eyes can see,
So long lives this, and this gives life to thee
by William Shakespeare (1564-1616)
Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate.
Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May,
And summer's lease hath all too short a date.
Sometime too hot the eye of heaven shines,
And often is his gold complexion dimm'd;
And every fair from fair sometime declines,
By chance or nature's changing course untrimm'd;
But thy eternal summer shall not fade
Nor lose possession of that fair thou ow'st;
Nor shall Death brag thou wander'st in his shade,
When in eternal lines to time thou grow'st:
So long as men can breathe or eyes can see,
So long lives this, and this gives life to thee
Sunday, April 4, 2010
quotes warm the soul
"Always remind her that she's braver than she believes, stronger than she seems, and smarter than she thinks."
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Chapters in a book....
People are like books. We have different parts to our personalities and characters, different chapters to our hearts if you will. But the entire book is a holistic version of who we really are.
Remember that when you fall in love.....
If you love someone, love them completely.
And if you decide to stay in love, love the entire book, not just one experience over time you shared, one part of their personality, or one chapter of their heart.
One of my favourite love songs....
Remember that when you fall in love.....
If you love someone, love them completely.
And if you decide to stay in love, love the entire book, not just one experience over time you shared, one part of their personality, or one chapter of their heart.
One of my favourite love songs....
Monday, March 29, 2010
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Hold your head up high.
“Man, I would have hit a lot more than she did … I would have kept hitting.”
I write with a heavy heart today (and also for my Creative Writing blog!)
The words above come from Sandra Bullock and were released by an Orlando radio station which has footage of Bullock talking about Tiger Woods cheating on his wife, Elin, early this year in January.
“She was respectable. I’d get the baseball bat, I’d get everything out,” Bullock said in the interview.
Can you really blame either woman?
Now, to begin, I want to clarify something. I am no huge Bullock fan. I think she’s lovely. I enjoy watching her interviews, specifically on Ellen where the two have a dynamic friendship which always keeps me laughing. I think she’s beautiful and funny. I think she’s gracious and generous. She is one of the first celebrities I always hear about donating large amounts of money to different charities and causes. Watch some of my favourite Sandra interviews below. In the first, she dances for Ellen. In the second, she eats a full chili pepper and Ellen smashes her over the head with a bottle. Hilarious.
This one is my favourite. Bullock wins the Razzie for Worst Actress and she actually shows up to accept it, and her acceptance speech is SO witty.
I think she’s a good woman. And I feel bad for her. She does not deserve the hurt and disrespect and the humiliation she is so clearly fighting as a result of her husband’s cheating.
I’m not going to mention his mistresses. Who really cares? I’m sorry to say, but I doubt this is one isolated incident. It doesn’t matter to me WHO he cheated with because it seems there have been many women. What breaks my heart is what Jesse James has done to Bullock's dignity.
The most heartbreaking part of this whole thing is the irony. Bullock has been making movies and working in the film industry for DECADES. She FINALLY got some recognition for her work in The Blind Side. Only to find out two weeks later that her husband, who she seems to love more than anything, has been betraying her for months.
You know, to me, this seems like some kind of sick twist of fate. Weeks leading up to the Academy Awards, Bullock was quoted in major interviews talking about how much James’ support has helped her, including one with Barbara Walters. During her Oscar acceptance speech, she looked at her husband (who was cheating at the time) and you could see the love in her eyes. The next day on Oprah, she went on about how much she loves him. Tragic.
Again, I am not a huge Bullock fan. But I am a woman. I feel for her. For the humiliation she is feeling now. For how betrayed she must feel. For how stupid she must feel. For how many tears she is likely crying.
How sad and ironic that she was unable to celebrate fully the fruits of her labour over the years. He took that from her. Stole her limelight. He made a great thing for his wife into a horrible memory.
More than that, she CREDITED her winning the Oscar to him on numerous occasions saying James had her back and that her work got better after meeting him.
Call me a feminist, and maybe I am, but this man screwed over this woman. And I wonder, if the opposite was true, if it had been a man who won an Oscar and then got cheated on by his wife, would the press be so critical of him?
If Brad Pitt won an Oscar but found out Angelina Jolie was cheating on him, I’m sure the press would say, “but he still has that Oscar.”
For Bullock, it’s, “poor girl, she got her Oscar but lost her husband.”
That’s not right. Hey, Sandra. I’m on your side. Hold your head up, beautiful.
AND, I'm not sure why a woman can never seem to have her cake and eat it too. He was cheating ON her while she was away filming her Oscar winning role. How's that for being stabbed in the heart?
He doesn’t deserve you. You seem like an amazing woman, and you deserve only great things.
Don’t let him take this moment away from you. You earned it. It’s yours. Enjoy the good, and get rid of the bad.
I write with a heavy heart today (and also for my Creative Writing blog!)
The words above come from Sandra Bullock and were released by an Orlando radio station which has footage of Bullock talking about Tiger Woods cheating on his wife, Elin, early this year in January.
“She was respectable. I’d get the baseball bat, I’d get everything out,” Bullock said in the interview.
Can you really blame either woman?
Now, to begin, I want to clarify something. I am no huge Bullock fan. I think she’s lovely. I enjoy watching her interviews, specifically on Ellen where the two have a dynamic friendship which always keeps me laughing. I think she’s beautiful and funny. I think she’s gracious and generous. She is one of the first celebrities I always hear about donating large amounts of money to different charities and causes. Watch some of my favourite Sandra interviews below. In the first, she dances for Ellen. In the second, she eats a full chili pepper and Ellen smashes her over the head with a bottle. Hilarious.
This one is my favourite. Bullock wins the Razzie for Worst Actress and she actually shows up to accept it, and her acceptance speech is SO witty.
I think she’s a good woman. And I feel bad for her. She does not deserve the hurt and disrespect and the humiliation she is so clearly fighting as a result of her husband’s cheating.
I’m not going to mention his mistresses. Who really cares? I’m sorry to say, but I doubt this is one isolated incident. It doesn’t matter to me WHO he cheated with because it seems there have been many women. What breaks my heart is what Jesse James has done to Bullock's dignity.
The most heartbreaking part of this whole thing is the irony. Bullock has been making movies and working in the film industry for DECADES. She FINALLY got some recognition for her work in The Blind Side. Only to find out two weeks later that her husband, who she seems to love more than anything, has been betraying her for months.
You know, to me, this seems like some kind of sick twist of fate. Weeks leading up to the Academy Awards, Bullock was quoted in major interviews talking about how much James’ support has helped her, including one with Barbara Walters. During her Oscar acceptance speech, she looked at her husband (who was cheating at the time) and you could see the love in her eyes. The next day on Oprah, she went on about how much she loves him. Tragic.
Again, I am not a huge Bullock fan. But I am a woman. I feel for her. For the humiliation she is feeling now. For how betrayed she must feel. For how stupid she must feel. For how many tears she is likely crying.
How sad and ironic that she was unable to celebrate fully the fruits of her labour over the years. He took that from her. Stole her limelight. He made a great thing for his wife into a horrible memory.
More than that, she CREDITED her winning the Oscar to him on numerous occasions saying James had her back and that her work got better after meeting him.
Call me a feminist, and maybe I am, but this man screwed over this woman. And I wonder, if the opposite was true, if it had been a man who won an Oscar and then got cheated on by his wife, would the press be so critical of him?
If Brad Pitt won an Oscar but found out Angelina Jolie was cheating on him, I’m sure the press would say, “but he still has that Oscar.”
For Bullock, it’s, “poor girl, she got her Oscar but lost her husband.”
That’s not right. Hey, Sandra. I’m on your side. Hold your head up, beautiful.
AND, I'm not sure why a woman can never seem to have her cake and eat it too. He was cheating ON her while she was away filming her Oscar winning role. How's that for being stabbed in the heart?
He doesn’t deserve you. You seem like an amazing woman, and you deserve only great things.
Don’t let him take this moment away from you. You earned it. It’s yours. Enjoy the good, and get rid of the bad.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Words to live and love by
i carry your heart with me by E. E. Cummings
i carry your heart with me(i carry it in
my heart)i am never without it(anywhere
i go you go,my dear; and whatever is done
by only me is your doing,my darling)
i fear
no fate(for you are my fate,my sweet)i want
no world(for beautiful you are my world,my true)
and it's you are whatever a moon has always meant
and whatever a sun will always sing is you
here is the deepest secret nobody knows
(here is the root of the root and the bud of the bud
and the sky of the sky of a tree called life;which grows
higher than the soul can hope or mind can hide)
and this is the wonder that's keeping the stars apart
i carry your heart(i carry it in my heart)
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Friday, March 12, 2010
Let me count the ways
One of my favourite poems....
How do I love thee? Let me count the ways
by Elizabeth Barrett Browning
How do I love thee? Let me count the ways.
I love thee to the depth and breadth and height
My soul can reach, when feeling out of sight
For the ends of Being and ideal Grace.
I love thee to the level of every day's
Most quiet need, by sun and candle-light.
I love thee freely, as men strive for right;
I love thee purely, as they turn from praise,
I love thee with the passion put to use
In my old griefs, and with my childhood's faith.
I love thee with a love I seemed to lose
With my lost saints -I love thee with the breath,
Smiles, tears, of all my life! -and, if God choose,
I shall but love thee better after death.
Marry the man that loves you a millimeter more.
I heard this saying the other day...and I still have not decided how I feel about it.
Marry the man that loves you a millimeter more.
My interpretation of the saying is that at the end of the day, you should end up with someone who loves you a little more than you love them.
I understand. You deserve to be with someone who has unconditional respect, admiration, and love for you.
But my problem with this saying is this: let’s say for debate’s sake that you’re with someone who loves you a millimeter more than you love them, but you aren’t loving to your full capacity.
Are you settling with this person? Or is this how it SHOULD be? Is it naive to think you’re going to end up with someone you have crazy and passionate love for?
Is it a sign of maturity to accept and be grateful for the fact that you're with someone who while you may love them, they love you more than you do them?
This is one topic, I’m really not sure about. What do YOU think?
Monday, March 1, 2010
You’re perfect...but something’s missing: the ultimate insult.
So tonight marked the finale of a show I loyally follow, The Bachelor: On the Wings of Love.
The world watched as bachelor Jake picked Vienna as his final one. I know, I know...most people hate Vienna or have something negative to say about her...but honestly, he seems to really love her. And I do think he’s a smart guy. He figured out Elizabeth’s games, got rid of Michelle, let four women go in one episode because he knew they weren’t for him, and didn’t let Ali come back after she left him. I think he was there for the right reasons and I hope he found true love.
Jake
Vienna
Now...that being said...there is one other person in this equation. The woman he didn’t pick. Tenley, the beautiful girl with a heart of gold. His reason for not picking her that seemed to resonate in this episode with me was, “we just don’t have the physical chemistry I need.” (Unlike the physical connection he did have with Vienna).
Tenley
This brings me to the topic for tonight’s blog: the ultimate insult: you’re perfect...but something’s missing.
Now, Jake very clearly told Tenley many times that she was “perfect.” I’ll admit...even watching the show, she came across as quite lovely and perfect to me too. Yet something was missing. He wasn’t physically compatible with her. This is the ultimate insult in my opinion. Basically, you’re telling someone that although they have everything you think you want, you are not physically attracted to them.
This makes me wonder...what happens when you’ve found a perfect match for you in every single way...but your physical connection is off or you are not physically attracted to the person?
Do you stick with the relationship?
Do you let it go?
Can chemistry be created?
At the end of the day, what’s more important, the emotional or the physical connection with someone?
If you had to pick one of the two, ask yourself, which would it be?
I wonder how long Jake and Vienna will stay together if one of the major aspects of their relationship is only their physical compatibility. Then again, maybe they found love and lust in each other...that’s pretty special if they did.
I always say, the reason it’s so hard to be emotionally and physically connected to one person at the same time is because it’s a rare occurrence. But that’s why when you do find it, you know, that person could be the one.
I do feel bad for poor Tenley. She’s kind, wonderful, smart, and stunning...but she just wasn’t enough for Jake. She got the ultimate insult. The explanation that never really was. The confusing answer that only confused her some more.
The truth is, we all know what he really meant to say was he wasn’t as physically attracted to her as he was to Vienna. Unfortunate but true.
The world watched as bachelor Jake picked Vienna as his final one. I know, I know...most people hate Vienna or have something negative to say about her...but honestly, he seems to really love her. And I do think he’s a smart guy. He figured out Elizabeth’s games, got rid of Michelle, let four women go in one episode because he knew they weren’t for him, and didn’t let Ali come back after she left him. I think he was there for the right reasons and I hope he found true love.
Jake
Vienna
Now...that being said...there is one other person in this equation. The woman he didn’t pick. Tenley, the beautiful girl with a heart of gold. His reason for not picking her that seemed to resonate in this episode with me was, “we just don’t have the physical chemistry I need.” (Unlike the physical connection he did have with Vienna).
Tenley
This brings me to the topic for tonight’s blog: the ultimate insult: you’re perfect...but something’s missing.
Now, Jake very clearly told Tenley many times that she was “perfect.” I’ll admit...even watching the show, she came across as quite lovely and perfect to me too. Yet something was missing. He wasn’t physically compatible with her. This is the ultimate insult in my opinion. Basically, you’re telling someone that although they have everything you think you want, you are not physically attracted to them.
This makes me wonder...what happens when you’ve found a perfect match for you in every single way...but your physical connection is off or you are not physically attracted to the person?
Do you stick with the relationship?
Do you let it go?
Can chemistry be created?
At the end of the day, what’s more important, the emotional or the physical connection with someone?
If you had to pick one of the two, ask yourself, which would it be?
I wonder how long Jake and Vienna will stay together if one of the major aspects of their relationship is only their physical compatibility. Then again, maybe they found love and lust in each other...that’s pretty special if they did.
I always say, the reason it’s so hard to be emotionally and physically connected to one person at the same time is because it’s a rare occurrence. But that’s why when you do find it, you know, that person could be the one.
I do feel bad for poor Tenley. She’s kind, wonderful, smart, and stunning...but she just wasn’t enough for Jake. She got the ultimate insult. The explanation that never really was. The confusing answer that only confused her some more.
The truth is, we all know what he really meant to say was he wasn’t as physically attracted to her as he was to Vienna. Unfortunate but true.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Heartbreak numbers
As I sat today at lunch with my Cre-comm gal pals, I stopped to ask one of them how things were going with a guy I know she’s been involved with for awhile. I know they have a rocky history and things have been tough for her in the past with him. Recently, she’s confided in me that he’s confessed to her the thing she’s been waiting to hear for years; he really wants to make it work.
Now, even as she has been telling me that she’s been trying to fight his constant advances and she knows (based on his history) that he isn’t the guy for her, I can still see that glimmer of hope and excitement in her eyes every time we talk about it. I try to ask her about it as often as I can, even if it’s just to be the nagging voice in her head that reminds her how amazing she is and that she must not give in to his incessant advances.
Then again, I understand her happiness with the situation. She is finally on the winning side of this relationship. She had the upper hand. He is begging her to get back together. And although, I am, of course, advising her against it, I am still happy she is getting her closure on the issue.
Back to today at lunch. I ask her how things are going since the last time we discussed the topic earlier this week. She looks at me, frustrated and angry.
“Oh, Kiran,” she says. “It’s all gone to hell. He struck again.”
I ask her for details and it is revealed that she just found out that he is now, once again, behind her back, talking suggestively with one of her friends. Now, to give my readers some context, he had previously snuck around with a friend of hers and lied about it. Repeat the scenario now. She knows what’s coming.
My heart sinks. Again? Really? Even I was hoping this boy had finally changed and learned his lesson. Alas, do they ever?
This brings me to the topic of today’s post. The player and his numbering system.
My friend told me that she knows, in her heart, that although he recently told her she is the one he wants to be with, he is also talking to many other girls at the same time as her.
I know many other people who have experienced this same scenario. Actually, one of my close friends is a “player,” in that he is often involved with one girl he really likes, but talks/flirts/hooks up with up to three or more on the side at the same time. When I ask him why he does this, his reply is usually the same.
“I guess, Kiran, it’s because I can.”
Do I think players can be good people? Sure. Do I think they have hearts and are capable of love? Probably. Do I know a lot of them and call some my friends? Yes. Do I hate their numbering system? With a passion.
So what is this numbering system? It’s simple. The player often has one girl they are genuinely interested in. She’s his number one. Then they have a series of other girls who fall below the number one. The hot chick. The smart girl. The texter and so on. These girls get their own subsequent numbers based on what needs they fulfill for the player. In a nutshell, the player really likes his number one, but when he doesn’t get what he wants from her, he moves on to number two, or three, or four, or five.....
I told my friend to call her “player” tonight and to end things. The fact of the matter is, even if for one second we are to assume that he isn’t cheating on her with her friend, he’s done it before and her instinct is to think he’ll do it again.
She doesn’t trust him. It’s a vicious cycle, she needs to get out.
And let me say one more thing on this topic, one I’m actually very familiar with. To those players out there and to any people who are involved with them, you shouldn’t be a number on their scale or list.
It doesn’t really matter if you’re their number one.
The point is that there’s a scale in the first place. And you deserve to be with someone who ONLY wants to be with you. You deserve someone who is willing to stick by you to work on the issues you two are having. Not one that moves on to the next person who gives them what they want when things aren’t going well.
Moreover, you deserve to be with someone who is obsessed with ONLY you. Who is addicted to your smile, the sound of your voice, the thoughts in your head, and the ideas in your heart.
Someone who is in love with you through and through. And only you.
Because this is one thing I know for sure.
You shouldn’t be his number one.
You should be his only one.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
= in love?
So I got to thinking this week after talking to a few of my friends (also known as my sounding boards...thank you!), is it possible to have a relationship in which both people feel the exact same way about each other? As in, they love each other equally? Or will one person always have stronger feelings than the other?
I think that falling in love is a subjective experience. It’s different for everyone and often, why we fall, when we do, and how we do is all indicative of our personal experiences or past. It is determined by what we know about love, what we want from it, and what we’ve been through before. So it is possible that two people can meet in the middle point in a relationship and having gotten to that point by different paths and with different histories, I do believe that it is possible that they feel differently for each other and that their feelings do not “=”.
That’s where my question comes about. If one person in a relationship feels more for the other (ie, likes the other person more than they like them), is this fair? Is it possible to have people who feel EXACTLY the same for each other, ie equally for one another?
I think it is possible for people to feel exactly the same way for one another, in some instances. These people are incredibly lucky. I always say, one of the greatest gifts in life is to love....and be loved in return.
But for everyone else, I’m sure you’ve all found yourself in that position before. Either you’ve been Person A, where you’ve been head over heels for someone and that person hasn’t felt the same way for you. Or you’ve been Person B, where you’ve been with someone and although you have feelings for them, you know they like you more than you like them.
Which person would you rather be?
I would actually rather be Person A. I know this isn’t the obvious answer. Why would I want to be in love with someone who didn’t love me as much as I loved them? There are a few reasons. First, I think to feel that kind of intensity for someone, that kind of passion, and love, is a gift on its own, even if it isn’t reciprocated. At least I’ll know what I’m capable of feeling in the future and will not settle for mediocre. And secondly, if I was in love with someone who I loved more than they loved me, honestly, I don’t think that relationship would last. I have too much self-respect and dignity; some might even call it pride to stick it through that long. So I’d have my feelings, but if I felt they weren’t returned, I’d bail.....which might leave me with a broken heart, but at least I’d experience true love.
Person B....although at first glance and long term, it may seem like this is an ideal situation to be in, having someone dote all over you, I actually think it’s kind of stressful. Person B would probably be plagued with guilt over the fact that they’re with someone who cares for them so much more than they do for them. It’s overwhelming. More than that, I think Person B would also wonder..... am I settling? Why don’t I feel as strongly for this person? And I haven’t reached the same amount of intensity for this person as they have for me, am I settling? I wouldn’t want to have to ask myself those kinds of questions.
Then again, Person B could develop stronger feelings for Person A and it could all work out.
But in case it doesn’t, I know it’s not the typical answer, but I’d rather be Person A....because I know I’d get out. But If you don’t know that, maybe stick with being Person B.
Of course, the right answer to this love debacle is this:
Love= Person A = Person B= a gift.
Happy belated Valentine’s Day!
Heartbreak Warfare
I love this song.
It's about a girl who uses jealousy to hurt a man. And it's lovely!!!!
Lightning strikes
Inside, my chest to keep me up at night
Dream of ways
To make you understand my pain
Clouds of sulfur in the air
Bombs are falling everywhere
It's heartbreak warfare
Once you want it to begin,
No one really ever wins
In heartbreak warfare
If you want more love,
why don't you say so?
If you want more love,
why don't you say so?
Drop his name
Push it in and twist the knife again
Watch my face
As I pretend to feel no pain
Say what you will about ol'Johnny Mayer, he's a poet.
It's about a girl who uses jealousy to hurt a man. And it's lovely!!!!
Lightning strikes
Inside, my chest to keep me up at night
Dream of ways
To make you understand my pain
Clouds of sulfur in the air
Bombs are falling everywhere
It's heartbreak warfare
Once you want it to begin,
No one really ever wins
In heartbreak warfare
If you want more love,
why don't you say so?
If you want more love,
why don't you say so?
Drop his name
Push it in and twist the knife again
Watch my face
As I pretend to feel no pain
Say what you will about ol'Johnny Mayer, he's a poet.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
On another note: Facebook versus Twitter
This year in Public Relations class, we were directed to get a Twitter and a Facebook account if we did not already have them. I’ve had Facebook for about three years but was just recently introduced to Twitter.
There are many differences between the two. Twitter exists for users to send out “tweets” which are basically status updates of their choosing that run between 0-140 characters long. Also, in Twitter, you can “follow” anyone you want really. The common trend on Twitter is to follow celebrities, athletes, news organizations, and designers, anything or anyone that interests you really. This way you can get updates about what’s up and coming in areas that interest you.
Facebook on the other hand is a bit more personal. In general, most of the people you become friends with on Facebook are people you know in some personal way. Facebook is more used for people to write on each other’s walls and posts photos.
Personally, I check my Facebook account at least once a day because I find that my “notifications/updates” on Facebook are more personal and often I’ve had someone send me a private message, write on my wall, or post photos. I use Facebook to stay connected to my family and friends. Morever, on Facebook, you can control what people can see and who you become friends with.
I don’t really use my Twitter account, I may check it max twice a week. Twitter is different than Facebook because you cannot control who becomes your “follower” and if you are not posting updates, it’s unlikely you may have much activity on your account. The one thing I do love about Twitter is that you can get headline information updates from news sources that interest you at any time. That’s a plus.
In terms of Public Relations, I think Twitter and Facebook both have their own benefits. For PR, Twitter is a great tool because it is the way to social network with other people and organizations that you may otherwise never connect with, post updates of what’s going on for you or your client, and also get your news out or keep up on the news in a fast and efficient manner.
For PR, I think Facebook is also valuable but in a different way. On Facebook, you can create fan groups, events, and add people as friends if you think they can help your cause. This is a great way to keep in touch with people, get information out, and promote your brand.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Regret: the worst emotion
Those that know me best know that I live my life by this philosophy: never apologize for how you feel. You can’t help your feelings. What you can control are your actions. Those you are accountable for. But feelings? No, those come from within.
With that, I often make decisions based on how I feel, on my instinct, what I believe to be right...because that way, at least I did what I felt was best, and in that way, I don’t have regrets.
No regrets. I hate having regrets. That feeling that maybe things could have been different. I think that’s why when Glenda Ollero, a girl in my class posted the following poem in response to my last blog, it resonated with me.
How articulate and beautiful, tragic and terrible, I found it. I think we've all been there, given yourself to someone or something that could not meet you half way or give you what you deserve.I think that's why I like this poem. Because it's what every person who has been hurt by a lover wants their lover to feel later. We want them to know what they missed out on, what they gave up, and to wonder what could have been...if only they'd had enough courage to recognize what they had right in front of them. We want them to feel what he says in this poem. I'm sorry." I'm sorry all the kisses I scrawled on your neck were written in disappearing ink."
My interpretation of the poem is as follows.
It is about a man who has just met up with an old flame, a past lover. It is now 13 years later and they are reminiscing about their past together and he is regretting his choices in the relationship. She is now married, “I notice the ring that's landed on your finger.”
The first thing I liked about the poem is how strong the woman is. “Thirteen years ago, you hid the hurt in your voice under a blanket and said there's two kinds of women—those you write poems about and those you don't.”
To me, that line says that 13 years ago, the woman realized that this man could not give her what she deserved, he did not consider her to be the kind of woman you write poems for. Knowing she deserved someone who thought the world of her, but also knowing she could not force him to feel this way, she left him. That’s my kind of girl. What's better? The fact that he recognizes that he did not do right by her. "It's true. I never brought you a bouquet of sonnets, or served you haiku in bed."
The next part of the poem I enjoy is when he talks about how he fulfilled a role in her life. He was that bad boy, the one without the emotions, the unromantic...which he now regrets. I think we all fulfill different roles in each other's lives. Our purposes differ, too bad his was the wrong one in her life. How agonizingly sad. “But I worked within the confines of my character, cast as the bad boy in your life, the Magellan of your dark side."
“We don't have a past so much as a bunch of electricity and liquor, power never put to good use.” Haven’t we all been there? Had so much chemistry and passion with someone that all else was lost?
“But I'm still not immune to your waterfall scent, still haven't developed antibodies for your smile.” Now that is lovely poetry. Is it true, are there people who we never get over, no matter how hard we try?
Thirteen years later, this man is still hopelessly in love with this woman who has now moved on. “I don't know how long regret existed before humans stuck a word on it.” There it is. Regret.
And finally, the end of the poem. Words written so well and articulately so, I will let them speak for themselves. What I will add is this, if you have something to say to someone, you should say it right then and there, before the moment passes you by. The point of the poem? The fact that they were too busy being sexually engulfed in each other, they never took the time to appreciate the person behind the passion.
“I wish that just once, instead of skidding off the shoulder blade's precipice and joyriding over flesh, we'd put our hands away like chocolate to be saved for later, and deciphered the calligraphy of each other's eyelashes, translated a paragraph from the volumes of what couldn't be said.”
Thanks Glenda, this is easily one of my favourite poems now.
If you have an interpretation, please share!
The Benjamin Franklin of Monogamy
by Jeffrey McDaniel
Reminiscing in the drizzle of Portland, I notice
the ring that's landed on your finger, a massive
insect of glitter, a chandelier shining at the end
of a long tunnel. Thirteen years ago, you hid the hurt
in your voice under a blanket and said there's two kinds
of women—those you write poems
about
and those you don't. It's true. I never brought you
a bouquet of sonnets, or served you haiku in bed.
My idea of courtship was tapping Jane's Addiction
lyrics in Morse code on your window at three A.M.,
whiskey doing push-ups on my breath. But I worked
within the confines of my character, cast
as the bad boy in your life, the Magellan
of your dark side. We don't have a past so much
as a bunch of electricity and liquor, power
never put to good use. What we had together
makes it sound like a virus, as if we caught
one another like colds, and desire was merely
a symptom that could be treated with soup
and lots of sex. Gliding beside you now,
I feel like the Benjamin Franklin of monogamy,
as if I invented it, but I'm still not immune
to your waterfall scent, still haven't developed
antibodies for your smile. I don't know how long
regret existed before humans stuck a word on it.
I don't know how many paper towels it would take
to wipe up the Pacific Ocean, or why the light
of a candle being blown out travels faster
than the luminescence of one that's just been lit,
but I do know that all our huffing and puffing
into each other's ears—as if the brain was a trick
birthday candle—didn't make the silence
any easier to navigate. I'm sorry all the kisses
I scrawled on your neck were written
in disappearing ink. Sometimes I thought of you
so hard one of your legs would pop out
of my ear hole, and when I was sleeping, you'd press
your face against the porthole of my submarine.
I'm sorry this poem has taken thirteen years
to reach you. I wish that just once, instead of skidding
off the shoulder blade's precipice and joyriding
over flesh, we'd put our hands away like chocolate
to be saved for later, and deciphered the calligraphy
of each other's eyelashes, translated a paragraph
from the volumes of what couldn't be said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
