Editorials - April 19, 2024

For years, theatres have been able to shrink their marketing budgets and bolster coveted word-of-mouth promotion with the magic of social media. The advent of “like and share” enabled cash-strapped theatres to forgo traditional but expensive advertising in favour of navigating the mysterious, but free, avenues of Facebook, Twitter and Instagram algorithms in the perpetual search for new patrons.

 

This gradual shift away from traditional media came at the same time that these same theatres lamented the loss of knowledgeable and professional theatre reviewers. Unfortunately, most of the marketing personnel failed to connect the two until it was too late. With only two salaried theatre critics left in Canada (the Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star), theatre coverage is a mish-mash of bloggers with varying degrees of expertise and writing skill. Now, enter the world of AI-generated reporting, leaving Canadian theatre companies with review quotes that may or may not have come from an actual person who has experienced the play. Major Toronto theatres such as Soulpepper and Theatre Passe Muraille have unwittingly picked up AI-generated reviews in their promotions. It goes without saying that the public wants reviews from actual people who have attended the performances. 

 

Advertising revenue is what pays for journalists, including theatre reviewers, and theatres that turned to “free” or low-cost online promotion have contributed to the demise of real theatre coverage which, in turn, opened the door for it to be replaced by AI software. – DS

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith was pretty pleased with herself last week as she proposed the “Stay Out Of My Backyard Bill”, her latest attempt to stifle Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at the expense of her own citizens who, it should be said, by and large hate Trudeau. The bill would require provincial bodies like universities, school boards, housing agencies and health authorities to have provincial consent before entering into any kind of agreement with Trudeau’s government.

 

Alberta’s municipal leaders and big-city mayors alike don’t care for the bill, citing red tape, delays and putting federal funding at risk.

 

This paper largely covers politicians in some of Ontario’s smallest municipalities which are struggling to provide services while keeping taxes reasonable, and it goes without saying that all funding dollars are the same shade of green to them. For a premier to jeopardize that, all because she can’t play in the same sandbox as the prime minister, surely will rub lower-tier municipalities the wrong way. The bill also serves as contradictory. First, conservative politicians are well known for lamenting red tape, so, to create some out of thin air is questionable and the second reason would be that the bill sounds suspiciously like an upper-tier government meddling in a lower-tier government’s affairs, the exact accusation Smith has levelled at Trudeau’s Liberals.

A conservative province potentially turning its back on federal dollars, in a time of such need, is sure to hurt its residents. – SL 

In a recent essay published by the London Free Press, Postmedia columnist Robin Baranyai highlights Canada’s lack of a comprehensive national school food program. She begins by shining a light on success stories from France, Japan and India, where such programs have improved nutrition and contributed greatly to educational outcomes.

 

Baranyai’s piece rightly criticizes the current state of affairs in Canada, where one in four children faces food insecurity. The proposed national school food program, a $1 billion initiative promised by the Prime Minister, could be a step in the right direction. However, the editorial raises valid concerns about Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre’s opposition to such initiatives. Poilievre’s dismissal of the program as a “federal food bureaucracy” is short-sighted and fails to address the urgent need for action. While accountability and efficiency are important, they should not be used as excuses to neglect the well-being of children facing food insecurity. 

 

Poilievre’s lack of a concrete alternative or a plan to address food insecurity among children is concerning, albeit on-brand for the Conservative politician with a penchant for sloganeering. Criticism without constructive solutions does little to solve real-world problems. It’s easy to condemn bureaucracy, but it’s harder to propose viable alternatives that can make a tangible difference. The editorial emphasizes the importance of school-based interventions in promoting childhood health. Providing nutritious meals at school addresses hunger and eliminates stigma, ensuring all students have equal access to food.

 

Poilievre’s Grinchian position on school food programs appears to be more about rhetoric than substance. It’s time for politicians to move beyond slogans and prioritize concrete actions that benefit the well-being of children. A national school food program is not just about feeding hungry kids; it’s an investment in the future of our nation. – SBS