Finalists for both the 2011 National and Western Magazine Awards have been announced, and Alberta Views is thrilled to see a selection of its writers and stories recognized. The 34th annual National Magazine Awards will be presented on Friday, June 7, and the Western Magazine Awards on Saturday June 15.

“Paradigm Shift” by author and freelance writer Chris Turner, which appeared in our July/August, environment-themed issue, is nominated for best essay by the NMA and best environmental article by the WMA. Addressing the then-future 14^th premier of Alberta, Turner outlines a bold vision for the province, rejecting fossil fuel dependence in favour of sustainable energy practices.

“The Urge to Purge” by novelist and Alberta Views associate editor Naomi K. Lewis was published in our November, healthcare-themed issue and is nominated for best article in the NMA category “Health & Medicine.” This humourous, comprehensive analysis of the science and practice of detox diets generated more letters from readers than any other article in 2011. We even received letters about letters about “The Urge to Purge.”

“Lobbyists and Lip Service” by longtime Alberta Views contributor Jeff Gailus was published in our March, government-themed issue, and is nominated for best “Investigative Reporting” feature by the NMA. Gailus explores the dark art of lobbying, and discovers who really pulls the strings in Alberta.

“The Rule of Law” by author and Edmonton Journal feature writer Sheila Pratt was published in our June, justice-themed issue, and is nominated for best article in the NMA’s “Politics & Public Interest” category. Pratt tells the story of the Edmonton lawyers Dennis Edney and Nate Whitling defending Omar Khadr—and the rights of all Canadians—when our government would not.

“Oil Sands for Sale” by Globe and Mail national correspondent David Ebner was published in our October issue and is up for two WMAs—a gold award for best overall article and best business article. Ebner unearths a variety of perspectives on existing and potential foreign ownership of Alberta’s oil sands.

Novelist and non-fiction writer Fred Stenson has contributed a column to every issue of Alberta Views since the magazine’s inception 15 years ago. This year, Stenson is nominated in the category of “Regular Column” by the WMA. Read a selection of Stenson’s “Wit” column from last year:

- “The Majority: Harper’s performance bonus,” published June 2011.
- “Sovereignesia: A nation forgotten,” published March 2011.
- “Social Media: So much better than being there,” published July/Aug 2011.

It feels a bit odd to be “revisiting” a current issue of Alberta Views. The Jan/Feb issue is the first one I’m writing about that I also saw go to press. I remember sitting at preliminary meetings, discussing the articles and watching as the AV team analyzed every angle of each aspect of the issue.  

Thinking of how Jan/Feb came together reminds me of how much I have learned since September. When I started, I didn’t know that magazines worked months ahead, that there were multiple layout options for every article, or that there were hours of discussion and collaboration. When I was browsing the newsstands for something to read, I had never really thought much about all that behind-the-scenes work. Now it’s nearly all I see.

What I have realized, through this process of revisiting past issues, is the diversity of topics that relate back to life in Alberta. I often felt that Alberta was a rather uniform place to live, where everyone had similar feelings on issues. I was unaware of the plurality of opinions and how those opinions related to me. I was disconnected from other Albertans who cared about penmanship, or the use of language, or the health of the human spirit. It seems like a ridiculous notion to pigeonhole an entire province, but AV brought my province’s personality to light. The quality of the magazine’s writing also speaks for itself. It makes me very happy to be from a province where there is so much deep thought about important and relevant issues.

But getting back to the Jan/Feb issue. University of Calgary associate professor Harry Vandervlist wrote “Citizen Taxpayer,” which discusses the use of political language in Alberta. The deck reads “What would George Orwell say about political language in Alberta?” I was drawn into this article by how poignantly it addresses the issue of muddled language.

Nearly everyone is guilty of vague or imprecise language. We often use short phrases and idioms to summarize larger ideas. I do it every day. It has become so ingrained in our speech patterns that it can become hard to distinguish what is clear from what is unclear. I think knowing another language can help. For example, if it were raining profusely we would say “it’s raining cats and dogs.” If a person were to translate this to French and say the same thing (“il pleut des chats et des chiens”) the speaker would be looked at with utter befuddlement because the expression does not translate. Expressions and idioms allow us to communicate using shortened language, permitting us to “say more with less,” but information can get lost in translation.

One example of muddled language cited by Vandervlist is “false equivalency.” To demonstrate this concept, he uses the example of bookstores and libraries. He retells a conversation he had with a “private-sector representative” about the differences between the two book providers. The private-sector representative could not understand why libraries were funded and bookstores were not. As a result he saw them as equivalent. I found this example to be very effective; in fact, a tangent started in my head as I was reading. Libraries are so fundamentally different from bookstores in their purpose. A bookstore has to move product and entice people into material consumption. A library is meant to be a public record of literature and be universally accessible. It was infuriating to see them portrayed as equals. Through false equivalency they are both defined as book providers. When the distinction is lost it can become hard to justify their co-existence, especially when one is publicly funded and the other is not. The power of language lies in the ability to define the differences between two similar entities and as a result provide the means to distinguish them from each other. Ignoring the differences can make two fundamentally different concepts seem equal when they aren’t. The difference is the defining factor.

When Vandervlist writes about the necessity for clear language he turns to throne speeches to illustrate the deterioration of political language. He discovers that between 1978 and 2011, “citizens” have become “taxpayers”. This subtle shift in terminology demonstrates how political language in Alberta has been corrupted. Vandervlist says this is evidence of how we are encouraged by politicians to think of the government as a business. When a corporation goes bankrupt people don’t normally grieve its demise. In the corporate world, we believe that it is the survival of the fittest. If you can’t compete, get out of the game. The idioms can go on forever. These types of ideas distort reality by simplifying it. They allow politicians to hide what they’re saying, diluting their meaning and creating a wall between the people and the government’s decisions. Confusing language removes any transparency. Comparing a government to a business is yet another case of false equivalency. The government’s number one priority should be to provide services to its people, not to make a profit or meet the bottom line like a business.

At risk of creating my own false equivalency, governments and businesses are like the library/bookstore comparison. It would be wonderful if a library made a profit, but that is not its primary purpose. The government falls under the same category. It is important for a government to be in financial order—it would be wonderful if there were no deficit—but the primary purpose of a government is to provide services to its people, its citizens. A business does not have that responsibility. The sole factor in measuring a business’s success is if it makes a profit, because then it can reinvest and make more money. There are business-like aspects to a government, of course, but the government has a larger purpose and therefore they cannot and should not be compared or equated.

But Vandervlist seems to think 2012 is a year for change in political language. Is it possible that politicians may actually start to say what they mean and mean what they say? With politicians like Naheed Nenshi and Alison Redford who promise more transparency, it seems as though there may be hope once again.

Whether or not 2012 becomes the year when leaders start to actively communicate with their constituents, awareness is the first step to recovery. So it’s comforting to know with articles like Vandervlist’s that we are at least on the right path.

AV is a magazine that publishes articles and thoughts that provoke serious contemplation. An article like Vandervlist’s makes me question what I value as an Albertan and how the province as a whole can be made better.

As a whole this experience of digging through AV’s past has given me an opportunity to identify with my home in a way I had not previously conceived. AV is a magazine that has a mandate. Like a library, it has the ability to chronicle the evolution of political and social-minded Albertans. It can also be a beacon for those, like me, who didn’t know they were looking for deeper thought and intellectual involvement in this province.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

Click here to read “Citizen Taxpayer” by Harry Vandervlist.

The 2011 July/Aug issue was my first exposure to Alberta Views ever. I picked it up to do a little research and prepare for the possibility of interning with the magazine that Fall. I had never heard of it but was eager to learn. It seems only fitting that the issue I choose from 2011 is the one that brought me here.

On the cover is k. d. lang, hand on head, elbow shielding her eyes from the prairie sun. It is one of the few covers with a celebrity on the front.

The piece that caught my attention was “Paradigm Shift” by Chris Turner. It struck me as bold—an open letter to the future Premier of Alberta. I had never read anything like that before. In a province like Alberta, where the same party has been in power for 40 years, I rarely hear open criticism about it. So I read the article once, twice, then a third time for good measure. What kept pulling me back was the humour and lightness given to such a serious topic.

Turner writes about renewable energy in a way that makes it seem like a no-brainer. “Energy is your government’s biggest power source, its job creation engine and revenue pump, its claim to fame and its biggest headache. Alberta will define itself on the world map of the 21st century by how it handles its energy situation. The tarsands, in particular.”

And yet, it is still blatantly obvious that any progress towards what Turner suggests would be a miracle. Even with the persuasive arguments that he makes, it seems unlikely the current Conservative government will act on his suggestions.

Our current government is minimally interventionist. Some people would argue that this is a good thing because it allows people to fend for themselves, it’s survival of the fittest. But what if the weaker “person” in this case is the environment? The environment cannot scream and protest the way people can when defending themselves. It remains silent and suffers quietly.

One key distinction that Turner makes is that the oil sands don’t have to be evil. If used correctly they can be a source of energy and wealth without eradicating everything in its path. It can be a source of stability as opposed to a cherry on top. At the moment, Alberta is riding a wave of prosperity. Eventually that wave will crest and reach shore. We have a brief moment to act before the wave breaks and leaves us with nothing. Turner says we must act quickly and find ways to make the wave sustainable.

Alberta has been a place where people can be footloose and fancy-free. That won’t always be the case. The time for readjusting our expectations should be when we have the ability to be mobile and adaptive—not when we’re left with no other option. Turner is saying that time is now. We have an opportunity with new leadership. Alberta needs a visionary who isn’t just concerned with the present. With the potential of a province like Alberta, we need a leader who can make tough choices—without taking more resources away from programs and services that need it.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

Click here to read “Paradigm Shift” by Chris Turner.

On the cover of the November 2010 issue is an illustration by Byron Eggenschwiler depicting a baby cradling an elderly man. Perhaps I was read Robert Munsch’s I Love You Forever too many times as a child, but this seemed to be a very fitting idea for the healthcare issue. It always made sense to me that one day the young will take care of the old. This issue of Alberta Views addresses this exact topic.

In a feature article entitled “No Place To Age”, freelance writer Hope Smith reacts to the challenges facing our long-term healthcare facilities. Bed shortages for those who need them is one of the clear driving points in her article. Having full-time care is essential to long-term care, regardless if it is from a facility or from you giving up your job to take care of an elderly parent.

The difference between homecare and long-term care all comes down to money, time and energy. Smith writes that long-term care provided by a facility is very restricted in Alberta: not enough beds for those who need them. As a result people are forced into homecare arrangements—which means relatives pay for someone to make house calls 4-6 times a day or they quit your job and do it themselves. None of these options are ideal.

The striking part of this problem is that aging is something we all face, so the fact our long-term health system is in shambles is disturbing.

From personal experience, I know how frustrating it can be. A few years ago, my grandfather sold his home of 50 years to move into an adult living building. He could no longer mow his lawn and the housework was too much for him. It seemed like the moment he moved out, his once vivid memory started to become muddled. Soon he needed assistance, which, luckily, was available in his current building. Eventually, the building staff called my mother and told her my grandfather needed more care than they could provide and that we should start looking for a new home.

The waiting lists were horrendous: most places with a year waiting list—minimum. But my grandfather needed the care now, so my mother and uncle paid the exorbitant fees to have someone look after him. As time passed my grandfather became unhappier. He was eventually moved to a short term full-care facility where someone could watch him at all times. He loved it there but he was not allowed to stay because it was only meant to be a transition-care facility. After six months in a place he loved he was forced to move. He resented having to move and even though the new and final place was closer to us (he was less than 10 minutes away), he was unhappy—until he couldn’t even remember what he was unhappy about anymore.

My concerns are about stability. When dealing with a person who needs a constant and stable atmosphere it is not in their best interest to move them around all the time. Unfortunately, this is how our system works. There is always a waiting list. Then the family is put in the position of hoping the wait is less than expected—knowing full well this means that some other family has to lose someone in order for you to get their room.

My family was also lucky that private care was an option. Without the money from my grandfather’s house, the care he needed would have been impossible to provide. So what happens to families that can’t afford the care they need? Who will take care of them? My grandfather used to joke, “Nobody gets outta this world alive!”, but the sad fact is we don’t have the amenities in place to make the inevitable manageable. People are scrambling for stability when they should be spending time with those they love.

Smith writes, “If those of us who are edging toward old age don’t get involved, we will have no control over what could be a rather bleak future.” And a bleak future it will be, if there is no roof over our heads.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

In the face of the digital age, book publishers are facing an identity crisis. Questions about how they should publish complicate their choices of whom they publish.

With a Blackberry poised in the hand of political blogger Dave Cournoyer on the cover, the June 2009 issue of Alberta Views focuses on all things media: from internet upstarts to the shape of book publishing in the province. Author George Melnyk’s feature report “The Tomes, They Are A-Changing” examines how some publishers are managing to adapt to the digital age while others don’t make the cut.

One of the largest draws to books, personally, has always been the physical object. As a self-proclaimed bibliophile there is something magical and awe-inspiring about a physically bound book—its smell, its texture, its inability to escape time or aging. But temporality aside the new wave of e-reading has affected more than just how people read and relate to writing. With the emergence of e-reading comes a whole new on slot of conundrums forcing publishing houses to reinvent themselves.

The fact is Alberta book publishers are trusted to provide a quality product that is culturally relevant in our province. Without taking the leap into e-publishing they risk losing readers who have “gone digital.” Add to this the pressure of our current economy and its no wonder smaller houses (and even larger ones) are starting to fold. It was just a few weeks ago when Canadian publisher McClellan & Stewart was bought out by international conglomerate Random House. Together they will face new publishers such as Amazon and Kobo, both rumoured to be starting publishing divisions.

Small publishers that manage to stick out this industry renovation will likely have the support of small independent bookstores. Local stores are more likely to stock the regional work of their writers and stay away from more mainstream titles. Independent bookstores provide a solid venue for readers to browse content from trusted sources and still know that what they will read will be significant to their regional identity.

But where e-reading is concerned, does it really matter where you buy your virtual product? When buying something online it is hard to visualize whom you are supporting, be it a small company or a behemoth. Most people have limited brand loyalty and shop only for the best deal. What worries me is that if the printed book should truly become extinct, what will happen to the independent bookstores dedicated to selling relevant cultural materials? Some may argue that if those stores cannot foster enough business they shouldn’t be in business, but the cultural importance of their merchandise should be protected from the wrath of supply and demand.

This is where government support should intervene. According to Melnyk, unlike BC and Ontario, Alberta does not offer tax credits to publishers. Alberta publishers do receive larger grant blocks from the Book Publishing Industry Development Program (BPIDP) but only because there are less publishers in the province. It is unfortunate that external funding for book publishers in Alberta is minimal when our cultural identity should be a priority for the government (seeing as it is continually marred by bad press from the oilsands.)

Overall, Melnyk leaves me with the impression that the publishing industry will survive this latest incarnation of the written word by adapting. If the world decides books are useless and digital media is where it’s at, then publishing houses will change. They will follow the course of evolution and maybe one day someone will think it’s interesting to actually have a hardcopy of something and books will make a comeback. I just hope it never comes to either extreme: people should be able to read the stories and histories about their cultural community and choose how they read them. Local publishers should have support from the government so that they don’t have to be bought by larger companies just to survive.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

The cover of the May 2008 issue of Alberta Views reads “Our Unique Culture” with a conceptual cover image representing the dichotomy between urban and rural.

In one of the May issue’s features, past president of the Alberta Legislature Press Gallery Darcy Henton writes about political apathy during our last provincial election in 2008. In “The Year Alberta Stayed Home” Henton discusses the momentum that Liberal party leader Kevin Taft felt going into the election and the disappointment that followed when only 41% of eligible voters actually voted (down from 45.12% in 2004). It was the election that saw the Progressive Conservatives gain 12 seats and the opposition shrink to 11 MLAs across 2 parties: 9 Liberals and 2 NDPs.

So what happened?

According to Henton the leadership shift from Ralph Klein to Ed Stelmach was a key factor in the renewal of enthusiasm for the PCs. People who had been fed up with the Tories under Klein were willing to give Stelmach a chance. Conservatives wanted a change in leadership, not party, and so steady-Eddy was elected. Lasting only one term, Stelmach stepped down late last year.

With new leader Alison Redford at the helm of the PCs, it is safe to say that unless more than 41% of voters turn out, the 2012 election may just be a repeat of what happened in 2008. But the PCs aren’t the only party with a new leader this time around. The Liberals have Raj Sherman, the Wildrose Alliance has Danielle Smith and the Alberta Party has Glenn Taylor. The NDP leader Brian Mason remains the only veteran of the 2008 election.

With all these new fish in the pond, this coming election should be interesting and hopefully surprising. At the same time, if you look at historical evidence, voter turnout spikes every second PC leader. Having dropped to a 30-year low in the 2008 elections (as well as a national record for lowest turnout), it feels safe to say the only way to go from here is up.

I did a little digging of my own because the question “When was the last time Alberta had a decent voter turnout?” would not leave me alone. Apparently the answer was 1993 when Ralph Klein first ran for the PCs. That year, there was a 60.21% voter turnout. Before that it was in 1982 with 66%, when Peter Lougheed was in office and running for re-election.

But even with a massive turnout, it is unlikely the seats will be distributed any differently. Henton talked with former Liberal MLA Ed Gibbons, who told him he believed voters in Edmonton had decided “it was better to sit at ‘Ed’s table’ than elect the opposition.” Edmonton had gained 10 new conservative seats, putting the Tories in 13 of the city’s 18 ridings. It seemed to Gibbons that Edmonton suffered from “winner’s mentality,” meaning it was more important to vote for the party with the most seats as opposed to the party they were the most sympathetic to.

Henton’s article ends with a question posed by Alberta Federation of Labour president Gil McGowan. “Once all the big projects are built, what will be left?” he asks. This makes me wonder about the efficiency of a political party too long in power, because at some point they will run out of ideas and have no opposition to fall back on to maintain any semblance of ingenuity. Now that is a scary thought.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

The September issue of Alberta Views from 2007 looks near identical to our current 2012 issue, with the exception of a few font changes. The cover photo portrays a female student at a desk with pen in hand.

Inside is an article on penmanship in elementary schools. I must confess that I have been looking forward to this article since I first started planning my blog entries. I have always been interested in the subject. Even now the irony of me writing an electronic blog doesn’t escape me.

I am perhaps one of few “young people” that still considers penmanship an essential part of education. I started learning cursive early, at the age of six, because my older sister would come home with cursive homework and I instantly wanted to learn it as well. For this reason an article like the one written by former Alberta Views staffer Amber Bowerman easily caught my attention amidst the featured articles in this issue like David King’s essay “School Principles” about the condition of our schools or Connie Howard’s report “Ill Wind Blowing” on multiple sclerosis in Alberta.

In “The Quill is Gone” Bowerman talks to students, teachers and administrators alike about the pros and cons of the digital medium and its impact on good ol’ fashioned penmanship.

Writing by hand is a stressful venture for many young people. From a very young age my classmates and I were encouraged to type up our assignments (I remember it started as early as grade 4). I remember classmates trying to write papers in text lingo. That pretty much guaranteed them a fail. In my mind I compare it to shorthand. Shorthand is useful for notes but if you are writing something to be taken seriously it is not the appropriate language to use. Even though the content of what my classmate wrote might have been acceptable, the mode in which she tried to communicate it was not correct. Her failing that assignment was a hard way to learn something so simple.

Bowerman discovers that the positives of handwriting seem to have greater influence than the positives of typing. “Handwriting remediation specialist Jeanette Farmer asserts that the act of handwriting helps develop children’s neural pathways, improves self-control and may even help combat attention deficit disorder.” I have never heard of someone developing self-control through typing.

“Handwriting is all-encompassing. It requires a visual, a physical, a cognitive. It uses the whole child.” Says occupational therapist Jan Olsen in an interview with Bowerman.

In contrast, digital media such as instant messaging, email and texting has created a generation that is more textual than verbal. I doubt I am the only one to notice that tweens and teens, when out in public, are generally quiet because their heads are down and they are texting each other instead of chatting. The transition from verbal to textual communication could be attributed to the proliferation of mainstream cellphones in the early 2000s. With the introduction of texting, abbreviated communication became the standard unless you wanted to pay an arm and a leg. Thus text lingo was born. Teachers say one clear pro technology argument is that students are writing more. However I think there is an important distinction to be made: these abbreviations, though useful, can cloud clarity and make simple concepts confusing to understand.

I have many friends in their twenties who still do not understand the difference between “to” and “too” because when they text they avoid the conundrum by typing “2” instead. This trickles back to elementary school: what were these kids being taught instead of their homonyms? Typing, computer peripherals, internet usage. Sure, those computer skills have become invaluable but ground level grammar and language skills have taken a hit. Though odd to most, I text in complete sentences—making me a radical for my generation. However I am not alone in my attitudes. I have friends who are as equally picky, believing texter abbreviations make you sound ridiculous.

Needless to say, Alberta, like the rest of the world, is migrating toward a digital world. It didn’t surprise me that a magazine like Alberta Views would publish an article on this subject. In fact, I was looking for it from the moment I started looking into Alberta View’s history. I am surprised it took me until a 2007 issue of the magazine, because it seems fitting that a print magazine should write about the impacts of the digital world. Even so there are still reasons to teach the old methods, like handwriting. Whether for personal, social or economical purposes there are many advantages to penmanship. We just can’t let ourselves forget it.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

The cover of the April 2006 issue is almost identical to the cover we have come to recognize as Alberta Views today. The cover photo takes up about two-thirds of the page with the magazine’s logo sitting just above it. Above the logo are three “sky boxes” with teasers to what lies within the pages of the magazine. The only colour on the cover of the April 2006 issue is the red in the Alberta Views logo, the cover photo is black and white and shows two young children standing somber-faced and hand-in-hand before a larger photo of a face recognizable as Vladimir Lenin.

One of the articles published in Alberta Views’ April issue was written by award-winning journalist Darcy Henton. He writes about the conditions in Alberta’s prison system. In particular, he focuses on the contrast between the Maximum Security prison and the Remand Centres in both Edmonton and Calgary. What were most appalling were the conditions in the Remand Centres.

Henton talked with many people for this article including, inmates, lawyers, doctors, the Alberta Ombudsman, jail guards and the Solicitor General. All agreed that conditions were abysmal yet nothing was expected to change. With descriptions of over-crowding, mouldy food, abuse between inmates and all around neglect, I became curious as to whether anything has been done since this article was published.

Trusty Google led me to the answer. I came across the government of Alberta website and they had details about the New Edmonton Remand Centre that Henton referred to in 2006 with so much skepticism.

“Preliminary plans have been drawn up for construction of a 1,500-inmate facility in Edmonton, but [Solicitor General] Cenaiko has to get his cabinet colleagues to approve the $250-million capital plan,” writes Henton. “Even if he gets approval this spring it will be at least five years before construction is completed.”

Well, it being nearly 2012, five years have passed since Henton weighed in on the Edmonton Remand Centre. Here is an update of what has happened since.

• The New Edmonton Remand Centre began construction in 2007. It is scheduled to be completed by Fall 2012.
• It is being built next to the Edmonton Young Offender Centre at 127 St & 186 Ave, surrounded by city land, the Anthony Henday Freeway and an environmental reserve.
• The size of the centre is roughly 16 hectares, the equivalent of 27 CFL football fields.
• In can house up to 2,808 inmates in “10 different pods of units”.
• The project has cost approximately $567.6-million

The difference in the estimated numbers from Henton’s article in 2006 and the current details is astounding. Its capacity is 46.6 per cent bigger and its cost is 56.0 per cent greater. In 2006, Henton states there was a total of 2,335 prisoners in provincial custody. By that number, the new Remand Centre could house all the prisoners, province wide… and then some. The space covered by the facility is 45.7 per cent of West Edmonton Mall (which until 2004 was the largest shopping mall in the World.)

Henton mentions that the average stay in a Remand Centre was 13 days in 2006. Now that period has increased to 18 days. The number of total inmates has also increased by 22.5 per cent over the last 5 years.

Population growth aside, this seems like a behemoth project with all the funding implications associated with it, such as staffing, maintenance and tenant care. I am in no position to estimate the cost of running this facility, but I have a feeling it will be a large annual expense for the province. I would have never known about this had I not read the April 2006 issue of Alberta Views. It makes me curious about how many other people are unaware of such a large facility being built to house our province’s unruly citizens.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For  information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

As some people may have noticed in the not so recent past there was a week with no new blog post. The office has been abuzz with our Christmas promotion (which runs until December 31st!) and I have sadly had little time to write. With that said I offer a “Franken-blog” if you will. What follows is a post about two issues from two separate years of Alberta Views. If I believed in serendipity I would say I was meant to write them together as both articles share a similar idea (completely by accident!).

Graphically, these issues are vastly different. The Jan/Feb 2004 issue has an old logo that takes up the upper third of the cover. Inside there is a mix of gloss and mat paper, with differing colour patterns (some pages are black & white and others are colour). The cover image is of an artist’s studio with easels and artists painting a nude model. The September 2005 is a huge contrast, with a picture of Queen Elizabeth II and Premier Ralph Klein cutting a legislature shaped cake in celebration of Alberta’s centennial. This issue is all glossy and full colour with the new logo. It is also a smaller issue, counting only 71 pages versus the 76 pages in 2004.

Where the two issues unite is between the two articles I discuss below. Both confront the subject of sponsorship and funding in two necessary social structures: the arts and academia. Both of these structures are indicators of societal health and both are affected by funding problems. With government cut backs funding needs to come from elsewhere and corporate funding seems to fill this void, whether for good or bad.

Part 1:

Alberta Views’ Jan/Feb issue in 2004 focused on the arts and the immensity of talent in Alberta. In an article entitled “Three Views on Funding the Arts” management consultant Lori Ann Edwards, The Message Parlour owner Blair Cosgrove and Theatre Junction founder Mark Lawes shared their opinions and experience about Alberta’s art scene. Hailing from different backgrounds their perspectives differ greatly but they all manage to agree: art is important in society.

Sponsorship and funding seem like a perfect way to ensure artistic growth. Both parties benefit: corporations can improve their reputation by demonstrating community involvement (not to mention a tax write-off), while artistic ventures can gain some mobility to do what they always intended without worrying about making ends meet. But does financial support mean they have to create according to someone else’s vision?

Cosgrove says yes, he writes, “We believe that money gives us power. But art gives us a power far more potent.” As an owner of a communications and public relations agency in Calgary, he understands the influence of currency, both financial and social. “I want artists to be freer to pursue their dreams, to do what they love so the rest of us can enjoy the fruits of their work. I want artists to behave less like businesses, not more.”

In theory I support this completely, however one thing causes me to worry. Without having to worry about making ends meet, like every other citizen of this province, there is no guarantee that the funding is spent prudently. Nowadays you can write anything off as a career expense with the smallest amount of reasoning. My concern with blindly funding people (in general) is how well they will use this privilege. For this reason, I support Lori Ann Edwards position that even art organizations need to be aware of their financial situation.

“Unfortunately, many arts organizations in Alberta still see themselves as exempt from the key criteria that an organization—any organization—must meet to become a thriving business. There’s a pervasive notion that solid business practices ‘really don’t apply and wouldn’t work in our organization,’” writes Edwards explaining how art institutes and organizations have not fully grasped their ability to reach out and contact other groups with strong financial backgrounds to assist them on their boards. They are constantly keeping art in the art family instead of bringing in a ringer that could jump-start them into profitability.

As Mark Lawes explains, not all funding is bad. “The well-being of the arts in Alberta is in question, and many generous financial supporters and volunteers are attempting to address this crisis. The Alberta Arts Stabilization Fund, for example, came about because of the financial difficulties of several large arts institutions in Alberta. The focus of the APASF is to assist arts organizations in the development and the application of business principles, and reward companies for sound financial management as well as the ability to generate revenue and become self-sustainable.”

Part 2:

In 2005 Alberta Views published an article written by freelance writer Alison Azer investigating the effect of corporate sponsorship in academic research. Her main concern is academic integrity and the influence industry has over research through funding.

“If universities are shifting toward a model guided by the market’s “invisible hand,” who decides which questions get asked, and who gets to ask them, who finds out the answers, and who gets to own them?” Azer writes.

Through the example of Dr. Thomas Stachel, of the University of Alberta, and his partnership with DeBeers, the South African diamond company, Azer wades through the large sea of information that surrounds corporate funding. “German-born Stachel arrived in Edmonton in September 2001 under the splendid title of the Canada Research Chair in Diamonds. He presumed the necessary funding for his laboratory accoutrements was awaiting his expenditure. It wasn’t,” explains Azer.

The lack of funding forced Stachel to seek it elsewhere. When the then-Students’ Union president Mike Hudema (cover of June 2010 issue of Alberta Views) caught wind of the deal he protested it on ethical grounds. “Despite the romantic images of its ‘diamonds are forever’ campaign, DeBeers has a record of human rights abuses, including support for South Africa’s apartheid regime, displacement of the Kalahari bushmen, and complicity in conflict diamonds [diamonds used to buy arms in wartorn countries],” says Hudema.

This is one of the complications that Azer explains is a by-product of corporate funding in academic research. Other negative effects are result skewing. For this she turns to Dr. Nancy Olivieri and her experience with corporate funding in medical research. Oliveri had agreed to perform a clinical trial for the generic drug company Apotex. “Initially results were positive, but Olivieri claimed her later results suggested the drug was neither safe nor effective,” Azer explains. When she attempted to communicate these concerns Apotex refused to acknowledge the results as anything but positive. She was told she could not disclose the information to anyone because of a clause in the agreement. She went public anyway.

“I would guess there are thousands of researchers who are being pushed into fudging their clinical trial data,” says Olivieri. “Not a week goes by that I don’t receive e-mails from medical researchers grappling with the gag-order culture of conducting clinical trials on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry.”

Azer explains that a 12.6 per cent increase in sponsorship funding had been accepted by Canadian universities in 2003 since the previous year. Sponsorships can have immense upsides to them, providing funding for employment and research that would otherwise not be available. The power that corporations have over research puts the fundamental nature of academia at risk. “The general consensus is that if current trends continue, research that does not attract the corporate eye will get left behind,” writes Azer.

An Intern-al Conclusion:

Where artists must worry about profitability, academics have to struggle daily with relevance. To be an academic, in a way, is to think beyond your time. There is a need to see passed what is current and to find solutions to future problems. There can be intense pressure to provide answers to questions that have not even been asked. Having an outside organization or company fund research is a form of validation for the minds asking the tough questions.

As I read my way through Alberta Views history it is becoming clear how many important issues exist outside the hot topics that frequently claim all the public attention. There has been an evolution through the years of this magazine, graphically and stylistically, but what is comforting is that it’s obvious the mandate has stayed the same. It’s focus on Albertans and issues that affect them has remained constant so no matter what issue I pick up I know that it will be relevant to my life. That is such a breath of fresh air in a world where mass media is all about sensationalism and what will cause the most waves, whether it is significant to the public interest or not.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For  information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

To read the issue mentioned in this article, click here and here.

Alberta Views Magazine celebrated its fifth anniversary in 2003. Over the past five weeks of our Twitter Campaign, I have read through five years of Alberta Views history. By reading one issue a week, I have learned that the magazine has produced deep, thought provoking articles about life in Alberta. Topics ranging from politics to gender equality to physical fitness, Alberta Views has managed to tackle all these issues with a clear and concise voice Albertans can trust.

Through our Twitter Campaign we hope to reach a total of 1,500 followers to celebrate fifteen wonderful years. You can tweet along with us, about your favourite articles or writers and have a direct line to a great magazine. Help us reach our goal! And learn about the magazine as I, the newest member of the AV staff learn about it too!

This week I explored the Mar/Apr issue of Alberta Views in 2003. The cover showed a bird’s eye view of the rows upon rows of temporary housing in Fort McMurray. The rows of housing look impersonal and lifeless and its cover line says “Gold Mine or Gulag?” Having never been to Fort McMurray or seen any real pictures of the industrial, I don’t know how to answer that question. When I started my internship in September, my brother also started a new job in Fort McMurray. He now lives in temporary housing that I imagine looks quite similar to the photo on the cover of this issue. It’s remarkable how, even 8 years after its publication date, the issue is still extremely relevant to Albertans across the province, myself included.

As children we are taught it’s not polite to talk of religion, politics and money. Sometimes I feel as though, at least in Alberta, this trio is really a quartet. The oil sands are our fourth conversational taboo. Perhaps this is because everywhere we look we are inundated with “information” about the industry. This information is often wildly conflicting. It is such a hot button issue in Alberta. Ok, maybe not just in Alberta. No matter where you are it’s always awkward when someone brings up the oil industry. So many families survive in this province because of it but it is perceived as a massively destructive force with regards to the environment. How are people supposed to reconcile the two and remain civil?

Freelance journalist, Dan Rubinstein’s 2003 article entitled “Heads in the Sands” a fresh perspective on life in Fort McMurray. Sure, his article acknowledges the oil sands but Rubinstein demonstrates another way to talk about the northern Albertan city. The article is focused on everyday life. He treats Fort McMurray like a community—not an oil field or a corporate site of corruption.

“Dads let sons drive the family SUV to weekend soccer games; moms apologize when their car alarms startle strangers. But Fort McMurray is also a hyperactive anomaly—a place of mass consumption, conformity and me-first bravado, of strip malls, drive-throughs and satellite dishes, a place where businesses and officials are scrambling to supply infrastructure the population requires.”

This sounds like an Alberta community in boom, pardon me, “rapid expansion.” I find it oddly disconcerting that Fort McMurray isn’t much different than other Albertan towns. After years of bad press, I had pictured a browning city with mud and garbage everywhere because the residents were too concerned with extracting oil on rigs than taking care of their surroundings. Instead there are lakes, forests, houses and full-time residents that have lived there happily for years. The contrast between what I was expecting and what Rubinstein describes is remarkable. (Especially considering an excerpt published in “Eye on Alberta” in our Decemeber 2011 issue that feeds this stereotype and unfavorably dubs Fort Mac as Fort McMordor…)

My earlier perception of Fort McMurray was that of a rough ‘n tumble town with drug and alcohol problems instead of a town of outdoorsmen who live life fully. So, it looks like Fort McMurray has an image problem. Hopefully if they decide to do a media campaign they will use pictures actually taken in the city. Alberta can’t weather another debacle like that.

The other problems, Rubinstein explains, are housing and crime, the byproducts of the nomadic lifestyles of a large portion of the residents. Since my brother has moved there, this transitory state has become even more apparent to me. As I see him being so transient, I can’t helped but project that life style onto his co-workers as well. His shifts last two weeks and he comes home whenever he can. This coming and going of temporary workers is precisely what Rubinstein believes is causing problems in the community. For example, he writes, “Because of oil patch salaries–$70,000, for example, to work at an oil sands plant—soft drugs like marijuana have given way to a budding cocaine and crack problem.” People don’t spend long enough in one place to become attached to their environment.

Since Rubinstein’s article was written eight years ago I don’t know how things have changed. His article has helped me to see passed the bad reputation of Fort McMurray and I now see a community struggling with the same problems as the rest of the province. With a new census coming out this spring new data may corroborate the problems expressed in his article. But, who knows? Maybe the city has found a way to cope with the coming and going of guys like my brother. Hopefully the data will show improvements on housing prices, better infrastructure and lower crime rates.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For  information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

To read the issue mentioned in this article, click here.

To read the issue featured in my next blog, click here.