Controversy is great, but that’s just my opinion

Posted By COREY LAROCQUE

 

It’s important that newspaper readers don’t confuse opinion columnists with Moses.

Writing a column isn’t exactly coming down from the mountain with stone tablets. It’s often the ramblings of someone who knows a little about a lot of things.

Last week’s column about the risks of the province’s plan to hold a competitive bid to run Niagara River boat tours touched a nerve with a lot of readers. Reaction ranged from “common sense” to “rubbish,” with an equal number on each side.

Some critics went straight to the boss, Review publisher Dave Martineau, to plead their case – “How dare he write that! Dave, you’ve got to rein him in.”

They grossly underestimated how much Martineau likes to stir things up.

As a veteran newspaperman, he understands the value of a little bit of controversy.

Last year, he suggested I write a column on reasons not to visit St. Catharines. It was a parody of a news story about Australia putting Canada on a list of countries where Aussies should exercise caution.

It irked St. Catharines Mayor Brian McMullan enough to lash out during a council meeting.

Martineau treated me to dinner at the posh St. Catharines Club, in the heart of enemy territory, as a reward.

Some suggested the boat-tour column took a “pro-Glynn” (the family that owns the Maid of the Mist company) or “pro-Niagara Parks Commission” stance, an idea that is simply laughable.

For those who divide the world, like Karl Marx, “into two great classes directly facing each other,” it’s an easy, closed-minded conclusion. A closer read shows it was critical of Premier Dalton McGuinty’s government for ordering a bidding process that could lead to a new company replacing the storied Maid of the Mist.

If the government screws it up, it could put Niagara’s tourism industry in jeopardy.

(A letter to the editor suggested it was so supportive of the Maid of the Mist I must have taken a job in their public relations department. Fear not -like Mark Twain, rumours of my demise are greatly exaggerated.)

Readers don’t have to agree with a newspaper columnist. In fact, it’s better when they don’t. An opinion column is supposed to stimulate debate about public issues.

The city’s chief librarian, Monika Seymour, said she agrees with about 75 per cent of what she reads in this space. That’s a pretty good batting average.

How boring would life be if everyone always agreed? Thank goodness, there’s room for dissent.

My column began about five years ago when The Review changed both its appearance and its content. Overall, reader response has been fantastic.

In 2004, a local opinion columnist was something The Review was missing.

Lou Clancy, then a vice-president of Osprey Media, the company that owned the paper at the time, suggested we add one.

A highly regarded veteran of Toronto’s newspaper wars, he advised writing it would be like wearing two different hats. One day, it would be a reporter’s hat. The next, a columnist’s.

It’s kind of like a lawyer who gets a client out on bail, writes a will and closes a real estate deal in the afternoon. It’s all legal work. Just different aspects of the profession.

Same thing with news writing and column writing.

When Martineau became publisher, he increased the frequency to twice a week and gave the green light to be controversial. To press readers’ buttons. To occasionally piss them off.

There are different types of columns. Opinion writing is a well-established part of Canadian journalism. Tony Ricciuto writes a column, too, where he tries to fix problems readers have. Advocacy journalism is another tradition in newspapers.

The Review has a stable of columnists. Some are staff writers. Others are freelancers like historian Sherman Zavtiz, or Rev. John James, who writes a religion column, Nancy Reynolds a retired reporter who writes her own observations about people in the community, or financial adviser John Beyer who writes about financial issues.

Our editors differentiate columns from news stories by using the writer’s picture. It symbolizes the fact the writers are bringing something personal to what you’re about to read, like when Zavitz draws on his own knowledge of the city’s past or Beyer applies his professional experience to a subject.

Because a column is a more personal type of writing, there are going to be people who disagree with it. But as long as it’s an opinion a reasonable person could reach based on the facts available, everything’s good. Disagreement comes with the territory. After all, it’s just one guy’s point of view.