Congratulations on firming up the Munk initiative. I will be following your interviews with interest.
Handy little tip from the Prairies: consider talking your Munk show on the road. Canada is a big Country but voices from the hinterlands are rare in the public square of national conversation.
I dropped my Maclean's via Rogers subscription, saving a buck a month plus HST, when they morphed into House Beautiful Lite, and paid 50 bucks for a year, so roughly 4 times. I got a bargain - and not because I always agree with Wells, but because he makes me think!
I echo this sentiment. I lost interest in Maclean's when Mr. Wells left. Not that there weren't other writers who were interesting from time to time, but it was Wells who consistently drew me to check out the latest issues. I have only three subscriptions to news/opinion sources, my new subscription here being the third.
Loving the content and would love to attend any of your Munk podcasts if they have a live audience. Always thoughtful writing Paul. Keep them coming. We need more like you especially now. These are the times I miss Christie Blatchford.
Good stuff. Thank you for providing some context to your departure from Macleans. Here's what I'm seeing. It is becoming "Canada Life", a national version of "Toronto Life". I subscribe to both magazines and like them for what they are. But they are (were?) entirely different things. Toronto Life was, yes, about upward mobility and weird things to be aware of. Fine. But if Macleans becomes a national mirror of that, I'm out.
Mr. Wells, thank you again for some great journalism. I love your style and the thought-provoking ideas you put out there. I don't always agree but always wait for your next blogpost with something just short of breathless anticipation. Excellent work that is much-needed in current circumstances. By the way, you are not 'alone' in your journalistic slog. The founders/editors of 'The Line' are also producing high quality commentary as I'm sure you're aware. What a dream team Wells, Gurney and Gerson would make!
I think what I like about your articles as I'm always left with something to think about. Enjoying the work so far, and looking forward to your podcast or seeing you at the NAC.
Just to comment on the RCMP thing. The arrogant of the RCMP communications group is one of the contentious issues at the hearings. Their response to not using the warning system was it might put the RCMP in danger and they were glad they didn't use it. Very few Nova Scotians use Twitter but most people have cell phones and the new warning system works as we found out days later. The commission itself has lost credibility with the families and the rest of the public because it has gone out of its way to block cross examination of key witnesses. It's a mess. We need outside investigation of what went on that week.
I scratched my head through all the material on the woes of dealing with reporters, the preferability of putting out your own Twitter. The complaint was not that they didn't answer enough questions later, the complaint is they didn't tell people a killer was running about in an RCMP car for many hours, then when they did, they used a social media platform that lots of people ignore utterly.
We can ignore Twitter because journalists do not. God, journalists love Twitter. The Canadaland guests rarely offer any other address where they can be found.
But a 3rd party was never needed; governments have been able to put out their own preferred message since the web page was invented, or the billboard, for that matter.
I was a public servant, and absolutely, we hated how they'd take the most-scary-sounding thing in our interview and make it the whole story. But adversarial gatekeepers between the pol and the public are exactly what is needed to defend against government propaganda.
This would not all be so obvious if the RCMP were not notorious for their spin control, evasions, damned lies, and their shelving of report after report about their need for reform. They have almost no public trust to start with, on certain issues.
The Munk gig sounds tailor-made, Paul. Congratulations! Re modern media relations, as someone who has worked both sides of the street, I have a lot of sympathy for Lia Scanlon. I was surprised, after moving out of journalism and into media relations, how quickly I became frustrated by what seemed at the time some wilful stubbornness to ignore "our" side of a given story, indeed many stories. Where's the fairness? I moaned. The experience smartened me up, made me more wary and less forthcoming. Not sure that was a good thing, but I would have been destroyed otherwise. Thanks for exploring an issue not often raised.
Congratulations on firming up the Munk initiative. I will be following your interviews with interest.
Handy little tip from the Prairies: consider talking your Munk show on the road. Canada is a big Country but voices from the hinterlands are rare in the public square of national conversation.
I dropped my Maclean's via Rogers subscription, saving a buck a month plus HST, when they morphed into House Beautiful Lite, and paid 50 bucks for a year, so roughly 4 times. I got a bargain - and not because I always agree with Wells, but because he makes me think!
I echo this sentiment. I lost interest in Maclean's when Mr. Wells left. Not that there weren't other writers who were interesting from time to time, but it was Wells who consistently drew me to check out the latest issues. I have only three subscriptions to news/opinion sources, my new subscription here being the third.
Loving the content and would love to attend any of your Munk podcasts if they have a live audience. Always thoughtful writing Paul. Keep them coming. We need more like you especially now. These are the times I miss Christie Blatchford.
Good stuff. Thank you for providing some context to your departure from Macleans. Here's what I'm seeing. It is becoming "Canada Life", a national version of "Toronto Life". I subscribe to both magazines and like them for what they are. But they are (were?) entirely different things. Toronto Life was, yes, about upward mobility and weird things to be aware of. Fine. But if Macleans becomes a national mirror of that, I'm out.
“Stories about political people decorate, maybe.” One of the best lines, ever. Great column.
Mr. Wells, thank you again for some great journalism. I love your style and the thought-provoking ideas you put out there. I don't always agree but always wait for your next blogpost with something just short of breathless anticipation. Excellent work that is much-needed in current circumstances. By the way, you are not 'alone' in your journalistic slog. The founders/editors of 'The Line' are also producing high quality commentary as I'm sure you're aware. What a dream team Wells, Gurney and Gerson would make!
The Alex Kohut piece is 1001% accurate. Let’s hope some of the senior folks at 80 Wellington are subscribers and through readers.
I think what I like about your articles as I'm always left with something to think about. Enjoying the work so far, and looking forward to your podcast or seeing you at the NAC.
Just to comment on the RCMP thing. The arrogant of the RCMP communications group is one of the contentious issues at the hearings. Their response to not using the warning system was it might put the RCMP in danger and they were glad they didn't use it. Very few Nova Scotians use Twitter but most people have cell phones and the new warning system works as we found out days later. The commission itself has lost credibility with the families and the rest of the public because it has gone out of its way to block cross examination of key witnesses. It's a mess. We need outside investigation of what went on that week.
I scratched my head through all the material on the woes of dealing with reporters, the preferability of putting out your own Twitter. The complaint was not that they didn't answer enough questions later, the complaint is they didn't tell people a killer was running about in an RCMP car for many hours, then when they did, they used a social media platform that lots of people ignore utterly.
We can ignore Twitter because journalists do not. God, journalists love Twitter. The Canadaland guests rarely offer any other address where they can be found.
But a 3rd party was never needed; governments have been able to put out their own preferred message since the web page was invented, or the billboard, for that matter.
I was a public servant, and absolutely, we hated how they'd take the most-scary-sounding thing in our interview and make it the whole story. But adversarial gatekeepers between the pol and the public are exactly what is needed to defend against government propaganda.
This would not all be so obvious if the RCMP were not notorious for their spin control, evasions, damned lies, and their shelving of report after report about their need for reform. They have almost no public trust to start with, on certain issues.
Thanks for your articles. Will the dates/times of the interviews be posted here or where should I be looking?
Wow Paul, congratulations you deserve this. Well done for going out on your own. Takes courage. Am looking forward to Monk interviews.
Kathleen
The Munk gig sounds tailor-made, Paul. Congratulations! Re modern media relations, as someone who has worked both sides of the street, I have a lot of sympathy for Lia Scanlon. I was surprised, after moving out of journalism and into media relations, how quickly I became frustrated by what seemed at the time some wilful stubbornness to ignore "our" side of a given story, indeed many stories. Where's the fairness? I moaned. The experience smartened me up, made me more wary and less forthcoming. Not sure that was a good thing, but I would have been destroyed otherwise. Thanks for exploring an issue not often raised.
Congratulations. Hope you video your 'podcasts'. Very best wished to you.
Congrats on the Monk thing! Looking forward to it
I'm very glad to hear about your Munk connection and the podcasts and am looking forward to their being available!