This is a piece I wrote for my political reporting class. Funnily enough, I originally thought about writing this story after reading an article in the Globe about the expert panel report on neurosurgery... and then the day after I submitted this story to my instructor, the Globe published another piece along the same lines.
******
It’s been less than two months since the Ontario ministry of health and long-term care has implemented the first phase of an expert panel’s recommendations on how to improve access to neurosurgery. Already, the number of patients being transferred to the United States for surgery has decreased from at least 15 per month to three, a decrease of more than 80 per cent.
“We feel there’s an early success there,” said ministry spokesperson Andrew Morrison.
The expert panel report, which was released publicly on February 15, made 21 recommendations for ways to improve patient care. The first phase of action required the Ontario government to provide extra funding to the University Health Network, based in Toronto, so that 100 additional neurosurgery cases could be dealt with over the current and next fiscal years.
“From the ministry standpoint, we are not doctors and we’re not medical experts, but we are excellent at funding--we hold the purse strings,” Morrison said. “So what the expert panel told us was that if you’re able to fund additional neurosurgery cases, that should help with [reducing the number of] out-of-country transfers.”
Morrison said it will take time to determine how effectively the funding improves overall service to patients, but the short-term results look promising.
The funding will help obtain access to more beds, operating rooms and extra nursing and hospital staff.
However, in some cases it’s not just a question of funding but of qualified, available neurosurgeons. Morrison said there are shortages of doctors across Ontario and the ministry is working with training colleges and universities to expand medical education.
“That’s something that we look at (on) an ongoing basis, not necessarily related to neurosurgery but as an overall approach to healthcare in Ontario, and not just medical students but nursing students and all the other disciplines and allied healthcare professionals that are part of the Ontario healthcare system,” he said.
He pointed out that neurosurgery is a highly-skilled area of medicine, and that it may be difficult to find good candidates to fill those roles.
James Rutka, one of the authors of the expert panel report, said there’s no question that part of the problem is a need for more doctors.
“We not only need these trained individuals but we need more of them, because neurosurgery is a very exacting profession and discipline, and the population is growing but the number of neurosurgeons has not grown at the same rate,” said Rutka, a surgeon and researcher at the Hospital for Sick Children and the chair of the University of Toronto’s division of neurosurgery.
Rutka said part of the solution is to convince medical students that neurosurgery is a worthwhile specialty. Hospitals have to be able to promise students that after medical school and up to 10 additional years of rigorous training, there will be jobs waiting for them, he said.
The expert panel’s recommendations for phase two include “rolling out” the changes already put in place at UHN to all 13 hospitals in Ontario that provide access to neurosurgery. In order to increase access at all of these centres, Morrison said the government will be working with external healthcare providers. This means Ontario citizens will get the benefit of publicly-funded healthcare while also using the services of private healthcare teams.
So where is the line between public and private healthcare?
Morrison emphasized that “the government is committed to offering universal, publicly-funded healthcare to Ontarians,” and that any services funded by the government are public services. He also referred to the Commitment to the Future of Medicare Act, passed in 2004, which closed the loopholes to extra billing user fees and privately-funded healthcare that were discovered in the past.
Essentially, contracting out to external businesses to take care of shortages in neurosurgery was part of the problem, not the solution, said Morrison. “That’s kind of what we were doing—we were sending emergency cases out of the country. So we were paying an external provider to do the work.”
Instead, the ministry is focusing on keeping neurosurgical procedures inside the province—even if it has to put up additional funding and bring in outside specialists to do the work.
Ontario isn’t the only jurisdiction in Canada to be making changes in the direction of two-tier health care. The Globe and Mail reported in a recent article that Quebec health minister Philippe Couillard has agreed to allow doctors to have “duo” practices in both the public and private systems. The change came as a response to a provincial healthcare report called “Getting our money’s worth” which proposed many changes, including allowing private insurance companies to cover public health services.
Couillard cautioned Quebecers about the changes, saying they “must have no impact on the public health care system and no impact on access to care by the general public.” But critics, including University of Toronto law professor Colleen Flood, have said Quebec has taken a firm step toward a two-tier system.
Rutka said incorporating the private sector into neurosurgery wouldn’t work, though it might for other areas of medicine.
“You couldn’t set up a private clinic with a building that would have everything that a neurosurgeon needs to do neurosurgery without investing millions and millions of dollars, and for a relatively small number of patients who would benefit in a private clinic setting from that kind of service,” he said.
“It just would not make any good business sense.”
Rutka said that for other specialties that are less cost-intensive than neurosurgery, it may not be a bad idea to look into privatization. But he also believes in improving the system we already have.
“I’m a firm believer and very proud of the Canadian healthcare system,” he said.
“On balance, it’s a wonderful system that we have in place here. It can be better, and we slipped behind on losing patients to the United States with these transfers because our system became full. But it’s a correctable problem.”
The expert panel will be meeting again within a week.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
This week's issue of The Reporter: more on Glen Pearson, our favorite firefighting, money-raising politician!
Well hello, loyal readers. If you read my story about Glen Pearson about a month ago, my contribution to this week's edition of 'The Reporter' is a follow-up story on an issue that came up in my original interview with him. I was still waiting on some information from CIDA, which didn't arrive by the time we printed our issue, so if I find out any new updates I'll post them here.
Lots of other interesting stories this week--take a look!
http://www.fims.uwo.ca/olr
Money promised to Darfur refugees still in limbo
MP Glen Pearson says Sudan was told aid had been approved
By Meghan Moloney
When London MP Glen Pearson was in Sudan with other aid workers in January, he discovered that the government of Canada had told a group of refugees in Darfur they may be getting $3 million in aid by March.
Yet Canadians haven't been given any information about the deal.
Canadian International Development Agency officials had contacted Sudanese leaders as early as a year ago to discuss the funds, but the government has made no public announcement about any money going to Sudan.
Pearson had been lobbying the government for money to help these refugees since the first time he made a speech in the House of Commons last February.
He "just about broke down" when he found out about the aid money, he said.
"I felt a huge sense of relief," he said. But he was also disappointed. He would have been happier if the government had indicated that it was following up on his call for action.
"I had a terrible first year in Parliament," he said. "I felt I wasn't making a difference."
An active human rights and development worker in Sudan for more than a decade, Pearson was elected MP for London North Centre in November 2006. Before beginning his duties in Parliament, he and his wife, fellow activist Jane Roy, made their annual trip to Sudan with their NGO, Canadian Aid for Southern Sudan, and a group of London-based volunteers in January 2007.
During that trip, they met a traveler coming from the northern region of Darfur who told them there were 100,000 new refugees trying to escape the violence in the area.
Pearson and his team investigated the situation, along with the International Organization for Migration.
"It was desperate," said Pearson. "In fact it was awful. There was no water, no food, no clothing."
The refugees were people who had migrated from southern Sudan to Darfur around 20 years ago to escape the violence of the civil war, said Pearson. But because of the current conflict in Darfur, they are once again trying to find a home.
Before returning to Canada, Pearson met with regional leaders working with the IOM and asked them to draw up a budget to help the new refugees. They asked for $6 million. Pearson presented the budget in the House of Commons in February 2007.
"I was listened to very respectfully," he said,. But there was no response from the government.
"I wore that (weight) all year-I felt sick about it," said Pearson.
But when he returned to Sudan three weeks ago, he found a different story. According to IOM officials, the Canadian government had contacted the organization to say that it was aware of the problem but asked the IOM to cut the budget to $3 million.
After Pearson returned to Canada for the new Parliamentary session, the IOM officials told Roy, who was still in Sudan, that they had been contacted by CIDA and had been told the new budget had been approved. The grant was conditional on sufficient funds being left over at the end of the current fiscal year, but Pearson said he's confident there will be enough and that the money will be transferred by March.
There has been no official confirmation from CIDA or other government departments about the money for Sudan. Pearson is not aware which officials had been communicating with the IOM. When contacted, a CIDA representative said the department was preparing to announce its plans for Sudan as well as other areas in need of aid, but she couldn't put a timeline on it
Pearson doesn't think the money is tied to the success of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's budget, scheduled for early March. Although he appreciates that the government is acting on his request, he's still unsure why the Conservatives waited so long to mention the transfer of money to Darfur and why officials in Sudan were notified before Canadians, he said.
"If I wanted to be partisan, I could (ask) why didn't they tell anyone until now," Pearson said. But he could understand why the government wouldn't raise false hopes before confirming any aid. "If I want to be realistic, I would say why would they tell anyone they were going to give the money before it was guaranteed."
However, Pearson said it would have been helpful if the Conservatives had made it clear that they were following up on his request.
"We need to work on communication," he said. "We're talking about money to keep people alive."
Lots of other interesting stories this week--take a look!
http://www.fims.uwo.ca/olr
Money promised to Darfur refugees still in limbo
MP Glen Pearson says Sudan was told aid had been approved
By Meghan Moloney
When London MP Glen Pearson was in Sudan with other aid workers in January, he discovered that the government of Canada had told a group of refugees in Darfur they may be getting $3 million in aid by March.
Yet Canadians haven't been given any information about the deal.
Canadian International Development Agency officials had contacted Sudanese leaders as early as a year ago to discuss the funds, but the government has made no public announcement about any money going to Sudan.
Pearson had been lobbying the government for money to help these refugees since the first time he made a speech in the House of Commons last February.
He "just about broke down" when he found out about the aid money, he said.
"I felt a huge sense of relief," he said. But he was also disappointed. He would have been happier if the government had indicated that it was following up on his call for action.
"I had a terrible first year in Parliament," he said. "I felt I wasn't making a difference."
An active human rights and development worker in Sudan for more than a decade, Pearson was elected MP for London North Centre in November 2006. Before beginning his duties in Parliament, he and his wife, fellow activist Jane Roy, made their annual trip to Sudan with their NGO, Canadian Aid for Southern Sudan, and a group of London-based volunteers in January 2007.
During that trip, they met a traveler coming from the northern region of Darfur who told them there were 100,000 new refugees trying to escape the violence in the area.
Pearson and his team investigated the situation, along with the International Organization for Migration.
"It was desperate," said Pearson. "In fact it was awful. There was no water, no food, no clothing."
The refugees were people who had migrated from southern Sudan to Darfur around 20 years ago to escape the violence of the civil war, said Pearson. But because of the current conflict in Darfur, they are once again trying to find a home.
Before returning to Canada, Pearson met with regional leaders working with the IOM and asked them to draw up a budget to help the new refugees. They asked for $6 million. Pearson presented the budget in the House of Commons in February 2007.
"I was listened to very respectfully," he said,. But there was no response from the government.
"I wore that (weight) all year-I felt sick about it," said Pearson.
But when he returned to Sudan three weeks ago, he found a different story. According to IOM officials, the Canadian government had contacted the organization to say that it was aware of the problem but asked the IOM to cut the budget to $3 million.
After Pearson returned to Canada for the new Parliamentary session, the IOM officials told Roy, who was still in Sudan, that they had been contacted by CIDA and had been told the new budget had been approved. The grant was conditional on sufficient funds being left over at the end of the current fiscal year, but Pearson said he's confident there will be enough and that the money will be transferred by March.
There has been no official confirmation from CIDA or other government departments about the money for Sudan. Pearson is not aware which officials had been communicating with the IOM. When contacted, a CIDA representative said the department was preparing to announce its plans for Sudan as well as other areas in need of aid, but she couldn't put a timeline on it
Pearson doesn't think the money is tied to the success of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's budget, scheduled for early March. Although he appreciates that the government is acting on his request, he's still unsure why the Conservatives waited so long to mention the transfer of money to Darfur and why officials in Sudan were notified before Canadians, he said.
"If I wanted to be partisan, I could (ask) why didn't they tell anyone until now," Pearson said. But he could understand why the government wouldn't raise false hopes before confirming any aid. "If I want to be realistic, I would say why would they tell anyone they were going to give the money before it was guaranteed."
However, Pearson said it would have been helpful if the Conservatives had made it clear that they were following up on his request.
"We need to work on communication," he said. "We're talking about money to keep people alive."
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Snowfest this year draws 20 sculptors to market
THE LONDON FREE PRESS
Thursday, Feb. 7, 2008
By Meghan Moloney, Special to Sun Media
The courtyard at Covent Garden Market will be transformed into a glittering wonderland this weekend for Snowfest 2008.
"I'm looking forward to it," said Ted Hayes, the event organizer and a sculptor with Frozen Impact in St. Thomas.
"It started dwindling last year with only four or five teams, but this year there will be over 20 sculptures," said Hayes, 51, who has co-ordinated Snowfest for 12 years.
This year's theme is "a magical crystal garden."
The admission-free event kicks off tomorrow as Hayes and his brother, Tyler, 41, begin creating the garden on a platform in front of the market.
The first competition will be Saturday, with 11 professional artists registered to make carvings based on the theme.
Sunday, carvers can create any piece they want for that day's contest.
Peter Lam, a London artist who has won first prize in the People's Choice competition several times, said he's excited about the event.
"This year I'm going to be carving a couple of rats," said Lam, who annually creates an animal corresponding to the current Chinese year.
"I'm looking forward to it."
The competitions are judged by the public.
While unpredictable weather has been an issue in the past, Environment Canada is predicting snow and a high of 1 Saturday and -5 Sunday.
And, Hayes said, the event no longer uses snow, partly because of weather worries but also because of the cost of transporting the snow.
This year, artists will each get two 136-kilogram blocks of ice with which to work.
Hayes said it's important to offer Londoners free events in the winter.
"This is the only thing -- you have to pay to go to everything else," he said. "You can bring your skates and have some lunch. There are going to be some beautiful things here."
IF YOU GO
- What: Snowfest 2008, an international ice carving competition.
- When: Friday to Sunday, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.
- Where: Covent Garden Market.
- Admission: Free.
Thursday, Feb. 7, 2008
By Meghan Moloney, Special to Sun Media
The courtyard at Covent Garden Market will be transformed into a glittering wonderland this weekend for Snowfest 2008.
"I'm looking forward to it," said Ted Hayes, the event organizer and a sculptor with Frozen Impact in St. Thomas.
"It started dwindling last year with only four or five teams, but this year there will be over 20 sculptures," said Hayes, 51, who has co-ordinated Snowfest for 12 years.
This year's theme is "a magical crystal garden."
The admission-free event kicks off tomorrow as Hayes and his brother, Tyler, 41, begin creating the garden on a platform in front of the market.
The first competition will be Saturday, with 11 professional artists registered to make carvings based on the theme.
Sunday, carvers can create any piece they want for that day's contest.
Peter Lam, a London artist who has won first prize in the People's Choice competition several times, said he's excited about the event.
"This year I'm going to be carving a couple of rats," said Lam, who annually creates an animal corresponding to the current Chinese year.
"I'm looking forward to it."
The competitions are judged by the public.
While unpredictable weather has been an issue in the past, Environment Canada is predicting snow and a high of 1 Saturday and -5 Sunday.
And, Hayes said, the event no longer uses snow, partly because of weather worries but also because of the cost of transporting the snow.
This year, artists will each get two 136-kilogram blocks of ice with which to work.
Hayes said it's important to offer Londoners free events in the winter.
"This is the only thing -- you have to pay to go to everything else," he said. "You can bring your skates and have some lunch. There are going to be some beautiful things here."
IF YOU GO
- What: Snowfest 2008, an international ice carving competition.
- When: Friday to Sunday, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.
- Where: Covent Garden Market.
- Admission: Free.
Report Reveals Daily Violence
My very first front-page byline!
*****
THE LONDON FREE PRESS
Thursday, Feb. 7, 2008
A study of sexual harassment, aggression and bullying at schools shows 'cause for concern.'
By MEGHAN MOLONEY, SPECIAL TO THE FREE PRESS
Sexual harassment, verbal aggression and bullying occur daily in Ontario high schools, but get less attention than more "dramatic" issues such as weapons, says the author of a report that surveyed more than 1,800 Southwestern Ontario students.
David Wolfe, principal investigator for the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto, released the report yesterday. It examines violence, sexual harassment and bullying at 23 schools.
"The cause for concern is that this is everyday violence and it doesn't get the same attention as more dramatic violence like kids carrying guns," Wolfe said. "But we do have to worry about it. We don't want kids to think it's OK to bully and harass others."
Wolfe, an honorary psychology professor at UWO, headed the research, conducted between 2003 and 2007. The study surveyed 1,819 students in Grades 9 and 11 in rural and city schools. Wolfe declined to say precisely where the surveys were conducted.
The study found:
- 29 per cent of Grade 9 girls and 33 per cent of Grade 9 boys reported feeling unsafe at school;
- 16 per cent of girls and 32 per cent of boys reported being physically harmed;
- 10 per cent of girls and 25 per cent of boys admitted they had harmed others;
- 12 per cent of boys and 14 per cent of girls reported being harassed online.
"Part of the reason we wanted to present this was because the only data that's been out there lately is from Toronto schools, which paints a pretty bad picture, and we wanted to indicate the picture can be similarly bad in other parts of the province," Wolfe said.
The important aspect of the research is change over time, Wolfe said. Results indicated Grade 9 students who experience violence are more than twice as likely to be harassed in Grade 11.
"We're looking at the pattern across time and that's a bit alarming," Wolfe said. "When you can predict by a factor of two or three times that someone will have a problem, that's significant."
The research showed students as young as Grade 9 are reporting suicidal thoughts.
"They're not happy and this is not innocuous," Wolfe said.
Grade 9 is a tough year for students, many of them being harassed by older students, he said. Some boys deal with the problem by harassing others.
Girls are more likely to spread rumours and use verbal insults as aggression, but Wolfe said name-calling can have similar consequences to physical violence.
"It's not just about a fear of safety, but a fear of emotional humiliation."
Researchers asked about students sexually pressuring or being sexually pressured by other students:
- Four per cent of Grade 11 males admitted they've tried to force someone to have sex with them;
- 10 per cent of males and 27 per cent of females were pressured into sexual acts they did not want to do;
- 15 per cent of girls said they had oral sex to avoid having intercourse;
- Girls were more likely to experience unwanted sexual comments, looks and touching, whereas boys were more likely to experience homo-phobic insults.
The study comes as Mike and Brenda Neuts mark the 10th anniversary of their son's being found hanging unconscious on a washroom stall door hook in Chatham-Kent. Ten-year-old Myles died six days later. His family continues to make anti-bullying presentations to school children and other groups. (A story is on Page C4).
Wolfe said schools have begun to add more education on healthy relationships and discrimination. He said parents and communities need to deal with harassment as well as students and schools.
"This is everyone's issue."
"The purpose of releasing this study is not just to scare people. The positive message here is we're starting to teach people that kids shouldn't have to put up with this, no more than (adults) should."
*****
THE LONDON FREE PRESS
Thursday, Feb. 7, 2008
A study of sexual harassment, aggression and bullying at schools shows 'cause for concern.'
By MEGHAN MOLONEY, SPECIAL TO THE FREE PRESS
Sexual harassment, verbal aggression and bullying occur daily in Ontario high schools, but get less attention than more "dramatic" issues such as weapons, says the author of a report that surveyed more than 1,800 Southwestern Ontario students.
David Wolfe, principal investigator for the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto, released the report yesterday. It examines violence, sexual harassment and bullying at 23 schools.
"The cause for concern is that this is everyday violence and it doesn't get the same attention as more dramatic violence like kids carrying guns," Wolfe said. "But we do have to worry about it. We don't want kids to think it's OK to bully and harass others."
Wolfe, an honorary psychology professor at UWO, headed the research, conducted between 2003 and 2007. The study surveyed 1,819 students in Grades 9 and 11 in rural and city schools. Wolfe declined to say precisely where the surveys were conducted.
The study found:
- 29 per cent of Grade 9 girls and 33 per cent of Grade 9 boys reported feeling unsafe at school;
- 16 per cent of girls and 32 per cent of boys reported being physically harmed;
- 10 per cent of girls and 25 per cent of boys admitted they had harmed others;
- 12 per cent of boys and 14 per cent of girls reported being harassed online.
"Part of the reason we wanted to present this was because the only data that's been out there lately is from Toronto schools, which paints a pretty bad picture, and we wanted to indicate the picture can be similarly bad in other parts of the province," Wolfe said.
The important aspect of the research is change over time, Wolfe said. Results indicated Grade 9 students who experience violence are more than twice as likely to be harassed in Grade 11.
"We're looking at the pattern across time and that's a bit alarming," Wolfe said. "When you can predict by a factor of two or three times that someone will have a problem, that's significant."
The research showed students as young as Grade 9 are reporting suicidal thoughts.
"They're not happy and this is not innocuous," Wolfe said.
Grade 9 is a tough year for students, many of them being harassed by older students, he said. Some boys deal with the problem by harassing others.
Girls are more likely to spread rumours and use verbal insults as aggression, but Wolfe said name-calling can have similar consequences to physical violence.
"It's not just about a fear of safety, but a fear of emotional humiliation."
Researchers asked about students sexually pressuring or being sexually pressured by other students:
- Four per cent of Grade 11 males admitted they've tried to force someone to have sex with them;
- 10 per cent of males and 27 per cent of females were pressured into sexual acts they did not want to do;
- 15 per cent of girls said they had oral sex to avoid having intercourse;
- Girls were more likely to experience unwanted sexual comments, looks and touching, whereas boys were more likely to experience homo-phobic insults.
The study comes as Mike and Brenda Neuts mark the 10th anniversary of their son's being found hanging unconscious on a washroom stall door hook in Chatham-Kent. Ten-year-old Myles died six days later. His family continues to make anti-bullying presentations to school children and other groups. (A story is on Page C4).
Wolfe said schools have begun to add more education on healthy relationships and discrimination. He said parents and communities need to deal with harassment as well as students and schools.
"This is everyone's issue."
"The purpose of releasing this study is not just to scare people. The positive message here is we're starting to teach people that kids shouldn't have to put up with this, no more than (adults) should."
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
First edition of the 2008 Reporter!
www.fims.uwo.ca/olr
My story is in the "what's new" section, "A second chance for suspended students."
Two stories in tomorrow's London city paper--one is apparently going front page!! Will post tomorrow.
My story is in the "what's new" section, "A second chance for suspended students."
Two stories in tomorrow's London city paper--one is apparently going front page!! Will post tomorrow.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Kevin Newman's back in town
The Hill Times, February 4th, 2008
What's a nice guy like you doing in a town like this?
Global National's Kevin Newman hopes to take his news show deeper into the decision-makers in Ottawa.
By Meghan Moloney
When Kevin Newman co-hosted Good Morning America in New York City, he couldn´t shop for shoes without the paparazzi following him.
These days, as Global National´s anchor, Mr. Newman has returned to Ottawa in what he calls "a homecoming," and has had "real life" back for a number of years.
After six weeks on the job as co-anchor of Good Morning America, he was pushed out because of ratings. He later worked as a correspondent for ABC´s late-night current events show, Nightline. But he eventually returned to Canada after a decade with ABC News to establish and help build Global´s evening news program in Vancouver, saying it was a creative opportunity he couldn´t pass up.
In an interview with The Hill Times at his office, he said he hopes that as anchor of the TV national news from Ottawa, it will give the program a deeper perspective and more access to the decision-makers of the country.
When did you decide to move Global National´s broadcast to Ottawa?
"We´re not moving the whole broadcast here. We´re just moving me because in the 21st Century, you´re able to put your resources where they make sense. And for us, it makes sense for us to have our editorial and technical team based in Vancouver and it makes sense to have me based here so that I can get to the scene of things a little more quickly. So what they´ve done in order to bridge this 5,000-kilometre gap, they´ve built a big, fat digital pipeline that I don´t understand, but it seems to be able to make things happen. So instead of even three years ago, two years ago, we would have had to do this by satellite. Now we can do it by what we call net-pipe. So we don´t have to use satellites, it´s a lot less expensive, it´s ours, so it´s completely reliable–you know, we don´t have to worry about solar storms, or any of that kind of stuff that you have to worry about with satellites. So we´re connected between Vancouver and Ottawa with something physical."
Why did the network decide to move you here?
"Like the other guys, I´m a travelling anchor, and I like to get to the scene of where things are happening and Vancouver is a wonderful place to live and to work, but it´s a hard place to travel from, because it´s right on the very Western Coast. The airport east shuts down at 8 p.m. So you can´t really scramble from Vancouver easily if you´re an anchor. From here, I can get to New York in an hour, I can get to Washington in an hour, I can get to Toronto in an hour, I can get to Montreal quickly. So here I´m closer to the scene of where most news happens than I was in Vancouver."
How do you think your job as an anchor will change?
"I´m hoping I´m going to get to do more field reporting, because I´m closer to it and getting out of the office–getting out from behind the desk. I mean, I just came back from Pakistan, where we did a series of broadcasts from Pakistan and that kind of stuff is good for me because my grounding is in–I was a reporter for most of my career. So when I talk about something I like to have some understanding of what the place looks like and some understanding of what the people are like. So if I can be there more often, I think that will help the broadcast. Plus, you know, the other thing this gives us, it allows us a little bit better access to decision-makers, because we´re still only a seven-year-old broadcast. I think especially on Parliament Hill, there´s an institutional belief that the CBC and the CTV news are the 50-year-old TV news institutions here. Ours is younger, but what we need to do is remind the opinion-makers and the decision-makers on the Hill that we are as competitive and as important to Canadians now as the other two guys."
Are you the only national anchor in Ottawa now?
"Yes. Peter [Mansbridge of CBC´s The National] and Lloyd [Robertson of CTV National News] are both in Toronto. This is my fourth time living in Ottawa, so if there´s any place that feels like home to me, it´s actually Ottawa. I´ve covered Parliament Hill for all three networks. So this is very much like a homecoming for me."
Before returning to Canada in 2001, you worked for ABC News in New York for seven years and you were quite the star–you co-hosted Good Morning America and were later a correspondent for ABC´s late-night current-events show, Nightline–what made you decide to go to the U.S. in the first place?
"A job offer. [He laughs.] You know, it wasn´t an easy decision because I´m a Canadian boy and I´ve never lost that. But sometimes it´s good to test yourself against the best in the world, and some of the best journalists work for the American networks in New York. So I thought, well, I´m just going to learn some stuff. There are a lot of Canadians that work down there. I really enjoyed my time there. I liked my colleagues, I loved meeting and getting to know Americans better, I loved getting rid of any of that sort of latent anti-American notions that many Canadians have, and understanding America better which I think is important. But I never felt wholly American. So I was able to hold onto my Canadian-ness and eventually knew I wanted to come home."
Did you experience any anti-Canadian sentiment while you were down there?
"No, not at all. We´re like the nice cousins."
What were the main differences between being a national news anchor in the U.S. and in Canada, besides the money?
"There are a lot of similarities. I guess what´s different is that the stakes are higher in the United States. There´s just more money on the line. You have more advertising dollars pulled in. They expect results quickly. They put a lot of money behind you when you are an anchor in the United States and that´s really good, because you have all the tools that you need, but they expect results within weeks, not years. I think in Canada we´re still more patient with our expectations of broadcast growth. I think the celebrity intensity is far greater in the United States than it is in Canada. I couldn´t shop for shoes in the United States. Here, I can pretty well have a real life. It´s a good question, because I haven´t actually compared it. I´ve never actually thought of myself as a national anchor, just sort of a guy that does work. In Canadian broadcasting, you´re always constrained by budgets, and you have to rationalize everything. In America, there was really no constraint. What they demanded was success, however, and if you weren´t successful, they were very quick to move on. And in the case of Good Morning America, in my case, we weren´t successful after six weeks and they started to move on."
How did they measure success?
"Ratings. When I took over Good Morning America, the ratings had been slumping for two years. They continued to slump in the first six weeks and that´s all it took for them to say, ´Okay, this isn´t working.´"
Why did you decide to return to Canada? Most stay.
"A creative challenge. The American networks, as were CBC and CTV, they have a style, they have a way of doing things, and what your job is, is to bring a little bit of yourself to that but to not upset the apple-cart too much. And what I wanted was the challenge to create something that felt right to me, and Global was starting up a newscast at the same time. I came back for opportunity and that surprises some Canadians, because they always think opportunity only exists in America. There is a ton of opportunity in Canada, particularly creative opportunity–if you grasp it."
You were also a Hill reporter for CBC and CTV. What are the biggest changes in Hill reporting?
"I don´t know. I haven´t done it for 15 years. This is my first time back in 15 years. I mean, when I left here, last time, I was a reporter for CBC TV´s The National. So I have no idea. I am surprised by how many people that were here 15 years ago are still here. In Washington, there´s far more reporter turnover than there seems to be in Ottawa. So many of the people who were my colleagues 15, 20 years ago will once again be my colleagues. The thing is, I´m not really here to be a Hill reporter. I´m the anchor of a national broadcast that encompasses all kinds of news. The benefit is that I will have access to a lot of very smart people and a lot of influential people to enhance the overall reporting on the broadcast."
As anchor, what do you do? What´s your average day?
"This is the easiest job in the business. It´s generally 9 to 5. It´s stressful because everything reflects on you. But as far as hard work, this is not the hardest work I´ve done. But I think I´ve earned it by hard work. It´s been hard to sort of establish a brand new national newscast. That´s hard work. But I haven´t done that alone, there´s been people in the trenches with me."
Who has been your favourite interview?
"My hardest interview was Nelson Mandela, because I didn´t know what to ask the man. I interviewed him right after he came out of prison. There was a concert for him at Wembley in London, and I was so overwhelmed and intimidated by him. As I get older, I enjoy talking about spiritual strengths, so I had a chance to interview the Dalai Lama and Bishop [Desmond] Tutu and a few others. You know, politicians generally can be frustrating to interview. The challenge is to bust through the message track. But every once in awhile, if you prepare properly and if you think about the question you want to ask, you can pierce through it. Barbara Walters actually gave me the best question to ask anybody who´s on a message track, and that´s ´How do you know that?´ Because it instantly forces the interview subject to actually justify what they´ve just said, and it decimates message track. So I´ve always kept that in a back pocket."
What do you like the most about your job?
"I like learning constantly. I like seeing something happen and saying, ´We should really tell Canadians about that.´ It sounds simple but it´s a tremendous privilege and it involves tremendous power–that if something I´m curious about, I have to assume that others might be, and I can satisfy Canadians´ curiosity about things and it´s just a fantastic place to be."
What do you find the hardest?
"I´ve been anchoring on a high-wire act now for about 15 years at some pretty prominent places. I think the hardest part is coping with the stress of being on stage five nights a week through the year. There´s a performance anxiety aspect of this that I don´t think anybody ever gets over, and if you can imagine being an actor on a Broadway stage for 15 years, five days a week, I think that takes its toll over time. Because this is the last live television–there´s no net, ever. So even though you´ve got a great team behind you, you´re always in the back of your mind conscious that one plug can suddenly not be attached and you have to respond. So you´re always in a fight or flight mode with your adrenaline and I think over time that begins to wear you down. I mean, I look at Lloyd and Peter who´ve been doing it a lot longer than I have and I have nothing but admiration for the fact that they have survived this experience as long as they have, because it´s very intense."
Of all the foreign locations where you´ve reported on or from which you´ve anchored, which were the most interesting or rewarding?
"The scariest was always Baghdad. I found my Afghanistan experience interesting last year, because it was unlike any place I´d ever visited. I got to see beyond the uniforms of our soldiers, which was gratifying. I got to look in the eyes of Afghans and try to figure out what they were thinking. And I learned a lot of shades of grey through the experience in Afghanistan, that nothing is as you think it is, and that´s a really important thing for me to know if I´m going to be reporting on this for probably the rest of my life."
What are the biggest challenges of reporting on the federal government right now for the Ottawa bureau?
"Access. There´s much less access to ideas and opinion-makers with this government than I´ve seen in previous governments. That obviously is something that is a strategy. It creates a level of fear within levels of the government and bureaucracy that makes it very difficult for a reporter to work on behalf of Canadians."
Are the Cabinet ministers and the Prime Minister´s Office accessible to your reporters on the Hill?
"I don´t know."
What do you think about the whole idea of the Prime Minister´s Office having control over the list of reporters´ questions?
"I know in Washington, for instance, there´s a protocol of who gets asked first, based on seniority. You know, I´m a journalist–I´m not happy whenever governments try to control questioning. I shouldn´t be happy about that. When I first came here, Trudeau was the prime minister. I´ve seen a lot of different governments, and things always ebb and flow over time. Messages are controlled, messages are less controlled–people attempt strategies, they measure them, if they work they stick with them, if they´re not working they´ll abandon them. Politicians are pragmatic. So I don´t know what the future brings. One of the things that an editor taught me was, never predict the future in journalism. Just measure today and look back with experience, and my experience tells me that there´s an ebb and flow to every administration. I don´t know, maybe it is [working for the Conservatives]. Maybe it brings a backlash. I don´t know what their polling says. I just know as a journalist, and on behalf of journalists, that we have a role and an obligation on behalf of Canadians to ask questions as aggressively and as often as we can."
Will the national news be doing more federal politics reporting now that it is broadcast from Ottawa?
"I don´t think so, no. The broadcast has to represent the interests of all Canadians, not only the people who are interested in politics. So I don´t expect the broadcast´s content to change much. I´m hoping that our access will improve and that our information might go a little deeper, but I wouldn´t expect this to become Don Newman´s kind of broadcast."
Should more national news shows be based in Ottawa?
"No, I think an anchor can be based anywhere now. For seven years, I was based in Vancouver and we were very successful. The reason that we´re here is because of the infrastructure of CanWest, because of the proximity to other places, and because I´m very happy in Ottawa. I really like the city and it feels like home, and I´m at that stage in my life where returning to home base is very comforting."
Any last words?
"I´m very happy to be back. My son was born here. My wife and I were here before we were married. Ottawa is a touchstone at four times in our lives–where we were engaged, where we were newlyweds, where we had our first child. It´s nice to be back in familiar territory."
What's a nice guy like you doing in a town like this?
Global National's Kevin Newman hopes to take his news show deeper into the decision-makers in Ottawa.
By Meghan Moloney
When Kevin Newman co-hosted Good Morning America in New York City, he couldn´t shop for shoes without the paparazzi following him.
These days, as Global National´s anchor, Mr. Newman has returned to Ottawa in what he calls "a homecoming," and has had "real life" back for a number of years.
After six weeks on the job as co-anchor of Good Morning America, he was pushed out because of ratings. He later worked as a correspondent for ABC´s late-night current events show, Nightline. But he eventually returned to Canada after a decade with ABC News to establish and help build Global´s evening news program in Vancouver, saying it was a creative opportunity he couldn´t pass up.
In an interview with The Hill Times at his office, he said he hopes that as anchor of the TV national news from Ottawa, it will give the program a deeper perspective and more access to the decision-makers of the country.
When did you decide to move Global National´s broadcast to Ottawa?
"We´re not moving the whole broadcast here. We´re just moving me because in the 21st Century, you´re able to put your resources where they make sense. And for us, it makes sense for us to have our editorial and technical team based in Vancouver and it makes sense to have me based here so that I can get to the scene of things a little more quickly. So what they´ve done in order to bridge this 5,000-kilometre gap, they´ve built a big, fat digital pipeline that I don´t understand, but it seems to be able to make things happen. So instead of even three years ago, two years ago, we would have had to do this by satellite. Now we can do it by what we call net-pipe. So we don´t have to use satellites, it´s a lot less expensive, it´s ours, so it´s completely reliable–you know, we don´t have to worry about solar storms, or any of that kind of stuff that you have to worry about with satellites. So we´re connected between Vancouver and Ottawa with something physical."
Why did the network decide to move you here?
"Like the other guys, I´m a travelling anchor, and I like to get to the scene of where things are happening and Vancouver is a wonderful place to live and to work, but it´s a hard place to travel from, because it´s right on the very Western Coast. The airport east shuts down at 8 p.m. So you can´t really scramble from Vancouver easily if you´re an anchor. From here, I can get to New York in an hour, I can get to Washington in an hour, I can get to Toronto in an hour, I can get to Montreal quickly. So here I´m closer to the scene of where most news happens than I was in Vancouver."
How do you think your job as an anchor will change?
"I´m hoping I´m going to get to do more field reporting, because I´m closer to it and getting out of the office–getting out from behind the desk. I mean, I just came back from Pakistan, where we did a series of broadcasts from Pakistan and that kind of stuff is good for me because my grounding is in–I was a reporter for most of my career. So when I talk about something I like to have some understanding of what the place looks like and some understanding of what the people are like. So if I can be there more often, I think that will help the broadcast. Plus, you know, the other thing this gives us, it allows us a little bit better access to decision-makers, because we´re still only a seven-year-old broadcast. I think especially on Parliament Hill, there´s an institutional belief that the CBC and the CTV news are the 50-year-old TV news institutions here. Ours is younger, but what we need to do is remind the opinion-makers and the decision-makers on the Hill that we are as competitive and as important to Canadians now as the other two guys."
Are you the only national anchor in Ottawa now?
"Yes. Peter [Mansbridge of CBC´s The National] and Lloyd [Robertson of CTV National News] are both in Toronto. This is my fourth time living in Ottawa, so if there´s any place that feels like home to me, it´s actually Ottawa. I´ve covered Parliament Hill for all three networks. So this is very much like a homecoming for me."
Before returning to Canada in 2001, you worked for ABC News in New York for seven years and you were quite the star–you co-hosted Good Morning America and were later a correspondent for ABC´s late-night current-events show, Nightline–what made you decide to go to the U.S. in the first place?
"A job offer. [He laughs.] You know, it wasn´t an easy decision because I´m a Canadian boy and I´ve never lost that. But sometimes it´s good to test yourself against the best in the world, and some of the best journalists work for the American networks in New York. So I thought, well, I´m just going to learn some stuff. There are a lot of Canadians that work down there. I really enjoyed my time there. I liked my colleagues, I loved meeting and getting to know Americans better, I loved getting rid of any of that sort of latent anti-American notions that many Canadians have, and understanding America better which I think is important. But I never felt wholly American. So I was able to hold onto my Canadian-ness and eventually knew I wanted to come home."
Did you experience any anti-Canadian sentiment while you were down there?
"No, not at all. We´re like the nice cousins."
What were the main differences between being a national news anchor in the U.S. and in Canada, besides the money?
"There are a lot of similarities. I guess what´s different is that the stakes are higher in the United States. There´s just more money on the line. You have more advertising dollars pulled in. They expect results quickly. They put a lot of money behind you when you are an anchor in the United States and that´s really good, because you have all the tools that you need, but they expect results within weeks, not years. I think in Canada we´re still more patient with our expectations of broadcast growth. I think the celebrity intensity is far greater in the United States than it is in Canada. I couldn´t shop for shoes in the United States. Here, I can pretty well have a real life. It´s a good question, because I haven´t actually compared it. I´ve never actually thought of myself as a national anchor, just sort of a guy that does work. In Canadian broadcasting, you´re always constrained by budgets, and you have to rationalize everything. In America, there was really no constraint. What they demanded was success, however, and if you weren´t successful, they were very quick to move on. And in the case of Good Morning America, in my case, we weren´t successful after six weeks and they started to move on."
How did they measure success?
"Ratings. When I took over Good Morning America, the ratings had been slumping for two years. They continued to slump in the first six weeks and that´s all it took for them to say, ´Okay, this isn´t working.´"
Why did you decide to return to Canada? Most stay.
"A creative challenge. The American networks, as were CBC and CTV, they have a style, they have a way of doing things, and what your job is, is to bring a little bit of yourself to that but to not upset the apple-cart too much. And what I wanted was the challenge to create something that felt right to me, and Global was starting up a newscast at the same time. I came back for opportunity and that surprises some Canadians, because they always think opportunity only exists in America. There is a ton of opportunity in Canada, particularly creative opportunity–if you grasp it."
You were also a Hill reporter for CBC and CTV. What are the biggest changes in Hill reporting?
"I don´t know. I haven´t done it for 15 years. This is my first time back in 15 years. I mean, when I left here, last time, I was a reporter for CBC TV´s The National. So I have no idea. I am surprised by how many people that were here 15 years ago are still here. In Washington, there´s far more reporter turnover than there seems to be in Ottawa. So many of the people who were my colleagues 15, 20 years ago will once again be my colleagues. The thing is, I´m not really here to be a Hill reporter. I´m the anchor of a national broadcast that encompasses all kinds of news. The benefit is that I will have access to a lot of very smart people and a lot of influential people to enhance the overall reporting on the broadcast."
As anchor, what do you do? What´s your average day?
"This is the easiest job in the business. It´s generally 9 to 5. It´s stressful because everything reflects on you. But as far as hard work, this is not the hardest work I´ve done. But I think I´ve earned it by hard work. It´s been hard to sort of establish a brand new national newscast. That´s hard work. But I haven´t done that alone, there´s been people in the trenches with me."
Who has been your favourite interview?
"My hardest interview was Nelson Mandela, because I didn´t know what to ask the man. I interviewed him right after he came out of prison. There was a concert for him at Wembley in London, and I was so overwhelmed and intimidated by him. As I get older, I enjoy talking about spiritual strengths, so I had a chance to interview the Dalai Lama and Bishop [Desmond] Tutu and a few others. You know, politicians generally can be frustrating to interview. The challenge is to bust through the message track. But every once in awhile, if you prepare properly and if you think about the question you want to ask, you can pierce through it. Barbara Walters actually gave me the best question to ask anybody who´s on a message track, and that´s ´How do you know that?´ Because it instantly forces the interview subject to actually justify what they´ve just said, and it decimates message track. So I´ve always kept that in a back pocket."
What do you like the most about your job?
"I like learning constantly. I like seeing something happen and saying, ´We should really tell Canadians about that.´ It sounds simple but it´s a tremendous privilege and it involves tremendous power–that if something I´m curious about, I have to assume that others might be, and I can satisfy Canadians´ curiosity about things and it´s just a fantastic place to be."
What do you find the hardest?
"I´ve been anchoring on a high-wire act now for about 15 years at some pretty prominent places. I think the hardest part is coping with the stress of being on stage five nights a week through the year. There´s a performance anxiety aspect of this that I don´t think anybody ever gets over, and if you can imagine being an actor on a Broadway stage for 15 years, five days a week, I think that takes its toll over time. Because this is the last live television–there´s no net, ever. So even though you´ve got a great team behind you, you´re always in the back of your mind conscious that one plug can suddenly not be attached and you have to respond. So you´re always in a fight or flight mode with your adrenaline and I think over time that begins to wear you down. I mean, I look at Lloyd and Peter who´ve been doing it a lot longer than I have and I have nothing but admiration for the fact that they have survived this experience as long as they have, because it´s very intense."
Of all the foreign locations where you´ve reported on or from which you´ve anchored, which were the most interesting or rewarding?
"The scariest was always Baghdad. I found my Afghanistan experience interesting last year, because it was unlike any place I´d ever visited. I got to see beyond the uniforms of our soldiers, which was gratifying. I got to look in the eyes of Afghans and try to figure out what they were thinking. And I learned a lot of shades of grey through the experience in Afghanistan, that nothing is as you think it is, and that´s a really important thing for me to know if I´m going to be reporting on this for probably the rest of my life."
What are the biggest challenges of reporting on the federal government right now for the Ottawa bureau?
"Access. There´s much less access to ideas and opinion-makers with this government than I´ve seen in previous governments. That obviously is something that is a strategy. It creates a level of fear within levels of the government and bureaucracy that makes it very difficult for a reporter to work on behalf of Canadians."
Are the Cabinet ministers and the Prime Minister´s Office accessible to your reporters on the Hill?
"I don´t know."
What do you think about the whole idea of the Prime Minister´s Office having control over the list of reporters´ questions?
"I know in Washington, for instance, there´s a protocol of who gets asked first, based on seniority. You know, I´m a journalist–I´m not happy whenever governments try to control questioning. I shouldn´t be happy about that. When I first came here, Trudeau was the prime minister. I´ve seen a lot of different governments, and things always ebb and flow over time. Messages are controlled, messages are less controlled–people attempt strategies, they measure them, if they work they stick with them, if they´re not working they´ll abandon them. Politicians are pragmatic. So I don´t know what the future brings. One of the things that an editor taught me was, never predict the future in journalism. Just measure today and look back with experience, and my experience tells me that there´s an ebb and flow to every administration. I don´t know, maybe it is [working for the Conservatives]. Maybe it brings a backlash. I don´t know what their polling says. I just know as a journalist, and on behalf of journalists, that we have a role and an obligation on behalf of Canadians to ask questions as aggressively and as often as we can."
Will the national news be doing more federal politics reporting now that it is broadcast from Ottawa?
"I don´t think so, no. The broadcast has to represent the interests of all Canadians, not only the people who are interested in politics. So I don´t expect the broadcast´s content to change much. I´m hoping that our access will improve and that our information might go a little deeper, but I wouldn´t expect this to become Don Newman´s kind of broadcast."
Should more national news shows be based in Ottawa?
"No, I think an anchor can be based anywhere now. For seven years, I was based in Vancouver and we were very successful. The reason that we´re here is because of the infrastructure of CanWest, because of the proximity to other places, and because I´m very happy in Ottawa. I really like the city and it feels like home, and I´m at that stage in my life where returning to home base is very comforting."
Any last words?
"I´m very happy to be back. My son was born here. My wife and I were here before we were married. Ottawa is a touchstone at four times in our lives–where we were engaged, where we were newlyweds, where we had our first child. It´s nice to be back in familiar territory."
Sunday, February 3, 2008
The Reporter: Coming Soon to a laptop near you!
Our first issue of The Reporter will be published this Wednesday night! It was a short week for us, we'll normally have two weeks to work on each issue, but it's shaping up pretty well so far.
I'll be posting the link to the finished issue once it's online. I'm also working a few shifts at the city newspaper again this semester, so there will be more of those articles posted here from time to time.
I'll be posting the link to the finished issue once it's online. I'm also working a few shifts at the city newspaper again this semester, so there will be more of those articles posted here from time to time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)