g. Tory childcare plan

2. List of questions that I would want to know before writing a story on the release:

Why wasn’t it already “formalized?”

What does this mean for our citizens? What are the possible ramifications?

Is anything being cut to fill the money void for this fund? If so, why that one?

What if it wasn’t formalized? Then what would it mean? What are the ramifications in that case?

What does this mean for parents in the past? Are they reimbursed? How will damage control be put in place? Because people will challenge the bill in some way

Where are the child care institutions that yield to the Child Care Spaces Initiative?

Why is 6 years old the deadline? Is there any stat that makes the child more capable at seven years old? Why isn’t the cutoff age 16?

6. Possible interviewees:

Local daycare managers.

-Find the state of the daycare.

-How many kids are at the daycare now?

-Can they afford to give up space in their institutions? Will the kids still get the same treatment/instruction?

-What will this mean for existing students?

-Do they expect more enrollment?

-How will increased enrollment affect your practice?

Possible candidates:

YMCA @ 143 Wellington St., Brantford - 519-752-6568 ext100

Montessori House Of Children @ 85 Charlotte Street, Brantford - 519 759-7290

Three Bears Preschool @ 160 Brantwood Park Rd, Brantford - 519-759-8890

West End Y Daycare @ 30 Bell Lane, Brantford – 519-759-1701

Board of education minister:

-Ask what the ramifications of this Plan will wreak on education of the province, how it will change his job, what he’ll do because of

Any parent, past, present, or future- Get respective take

8. / 9. Note sources used / issues raised, add / change questions as more people are interviewed, have more information to base questions on.

- Jesse Ferguson

e. Bad story example

e. Bad story example

Jesse Ferguson

In my opinion, a “good story” should be easy to pick, because that is just what newspapers intend to do, report good stories.

I had a difficult time finding stories that did not abide by the basic guidelines; whether it be unspecified or improper sources; or stories that did not answer the “five Ws” (what, where, who, when, why, and sometimes how). Unquestionably, the improper sourcing will be easier to find than uninformative stories, I believe, because of a few things that prevent uninformative stories from happening: one, these are professional writers that probably have written a few stories in their life. It is their job to make sure the sources are not incorrectly supplied in the first place; and two, editors are not new at this either. It is their job to make sure that stories come without these errors, therefore he or she will not allow there to be errors in their paper. For these, errors are hereby discrete.

(However, sometimes it is intentional that not the whole story is told. Intentionally leaving out selected these words is more intriguing, as it is a direct result of intention to spin a story. Spin is utilized to cast a different light on the story.)

Also, it is important to look at the quality of sources. Is the source credible, or is “the source” just the bum on the street corner talking a bunch of trash, rambling to anyone willing to pretend to listen? How many different sources does the author use? It is important to make sure that the writer did not use a possible misquote; or either the writer or the quoted person had an off moment, and did not really mean what they said.

Journalism is supposed to complete the primary questions of what, where, who, when, how, and most importantly, why for the reader. These selected words encompass any article. These are answered so the reader has no difficulty in understanding the story. They are what allow the story to read and make sense. This also works to narrow the issues. However problems occur when one or more of these keywords are left out of the article, whether it be intentional or inadvertent. Inadvertent comes from or human errors, which do happen; or it could be just bad journalism.

In my opinion, the little blurbs on the side of the paper, like the ones in the sports section, are particularly useless because they are so uninformative. The story needs the “five ws” answered; and usually the quicker they are answered, the better. Probably the first paragraph is a good spot for this, or directly following the lead, because you want to catch the reader’s questions just as they are wondering them. Writing is funny like that, you kind of have to stay one or two steps ahead of the reader, or they will just stop reading it.

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/national/071028/n102832A.html

I think this article is not so good, just because it does not state the relevance of it to us, Canadian readers.

“Stephen Harper is hoping to forge a political as well as a personal friendship with the Dalai Lama this week…” Do they care to explain what if he doesn’t? Any repercussions? What exactly would that mean as repercussions for us Canadians? We would like to know the potential results. If this is such a big thing, then explain why.

If this is the topic, ‘how Harper will meet with the Dalai Lama,’ then it gets too off topic, way too deep into how the meeting went with George W. Bush. This story is two-in-one, and is not clear-cut.

It probably should have started addressing the five-W’s. What, Who, When are all supplied, but—with exception to which—the main question of why is just not answered for us in the nick of time necessary to keep the reader involved. Finally, at the eight paragraph of the release, we are told why this may make any relevance to us Canadians.

The hook or “lead” of this story is good, for it in fact comes a bit of a shock that the Dalai Lama “loves him as a human being,” “him” being President George Bush, and that Prime Minister Harper can actually learn from how Bush dealt with him is a bit shocking.

I think this story could have used some shifting around. The lead is appropriate and effective, but following it should have come why it is a goal that Harper makes a good impression on the Dalai Lama. Bush made a good impression and how he did so should be considered secondary to the main topic.

The story made the news because the Dalai Lama had already met with Bush. However, then they should have separated it into sub-stories with headings. Or at the least, they could have separated it up a bit. Like so:

____

The Dalai Lama had this to say about the man he met Sunday: "I love him, really, as a human being. Very nice man.”

Who could he be speaking of?

Stephen Harper is hoping to forge a similar political as well as a personal friendship with the Dalai Lama this week. He may want to consider the example of none other than President George W. Bush.

That is just who the Dalai Lama was referring to when he said “I love him.”

Harper is hoping to begin a good relationship with him for a few reasons. The domestic controversy over Harper's own war-fighting policies in Afghanistan top the list. Harper would also like the Dalai Lama’s blessing in

1C- Neighbour Profile of Brienne Torley with ALTERNATIVE LEAD

ALTERNATIVE LEAD ;) Scene-setter

On a cold crisp January night in 1989 at Mississauga General Hospital, no one was concerned about the weather.

Not in the room delivery room of Mrs. Torley.

Nurses and doctors are running around in a frenzy. Mr. and Mrs. Torley, in a state of confusion, are fighting off tears of worry the best they can. Her mother is not successful, though, despite Mr. Torley’s valiant effort.

Mrs. Torley is heard shouting among her tears in the suddenly busy room: “What’s happening? Is my baby all right?”

Mr. Torley is in the same chaotic state, but does not want to show it, as his wife's condition is the most important and she needs the calming as it is, without his negatively-contributing to her state.

He finally decides she is calm enough hands for him to go find out what is happening.

He approaches the lead doctor outside grabs his arm, and pulls him outside the room.

“What’s happening in there, doc?”

“Sir, your daughter’s umbilical cord is wrapped around her neck. Now, we have seen this before, though it is rare. All we can do is try and shape her correctly, so she can come out in good health.”

“Okay. But she will be delivered successfully?”

“Sir, I cannot guarantee anything. I do think if I am allowed to work, she will pull through. But there is that chance.”

“She may die?”

“Yes sir. I better get in there.”

“By all means,” Mr. Torley said quickly, as he gave way to the doctor to the entrance of the room. “You first,” he instructed.

He followed the doctor in, and looked at his wife. She stared right back at him, looking for good news. All he wants to do in keep the crazed sensation he feels on the inside, and not let Mrs. Torley see the panic in his eyes, so she can remain as calm as possible and be an agonist factor in the delivery.

- By Jesse Ferguson

1B- Neighbour Profile (Brienne 300w)

Can't Please All of Them
By Jesse Ferguson

“Who cares about that kid?” Brienne Torley retorted rhetorically, speaking after-the-fact about the student who downplayed her story at birth.

Upon delivery, Brienne’s umbilical cord came wrapped awkwardly around her throat, nearly suffocating her before she took one gasp of fresh air, shocking everyone in the Mississauga delivery room, notably the doctors attempting to deliver her.

Her story did not impress this student. It is provocative enough for most, surely.

As he obliviously carried on obnoxiously, she probably wanted to reach over and deliver a backhand to him as he sat directly beside her, but instead of reacting harshly, she sat quietly beside him, not saying a word.

Apparently, she has utmost poise. Her style is contemporary and individualistic, but not so much so that it borders strange. She is a pretty girl, and uses that to rake in tips at Applebee’s restaurant in Cambridge, though her personality comes foremost ahead of looks. She seems of an intellectual breed, but she is a contemporary girl, who seems very multidimensional, making a short profile impossible.

This has not been Brienne’s only brush with death. She has had three experiences that she has narrowly escaped. “I firmly believe that I am here for a reason, that I have a purpose in life.”

This young lady with perspective goes to school at Laurier Brantford with the hopes of one day journalizing. She lives in Brantford during the school-year, but typically resides in Cambridge, Ontario.

(I imagine a cartoon at the bottom of the article, again in the delivery room, with every doctor and nurse freaking out, and the male student up front in the picture with the utmost nonchalant-ness saying, “Seen it a hundred times. Seen it all before, all too often”)

-Jesse Ferguson

d. Al Gore blog

It is unclear as to what we are supposed to write about. On the lab handout, it says just to form an opinion. However, it is on the list of assignments to be posted on our blog. I provide my notes from the lab for that day.

Does Al Gore deserve Peace Prize?

If the question is, “Does Al Gore deserve the recognition of the prize?” there is not many who would debate it, and those who did, would have a tough time in backing it up.
That is not the question though.
A “Peace” prize though?
Nobel has widened the definition of “peace” though, for the award.
However, this award is normally given to scientists and researchers, not just a spokesman.
This award makes the Nobel seem almost like a political award; or worse, a popularity award. That is not science.
However a prerequisite for the Nobel Prize is to just make a difference. Gore has undoubtedly done this, and maybe for this, he is most deserving of the award, ever.
Gore in a statement said he was "deeply honored ... We face a true planetary emergency. The climate crisis is not a political issue, it is a moral and spiritual challenge to all of humanity."


Deserves recognition:
He released a movie all about global warming, An Inconvenient Truth, which educates the public on such a relevant issue, and spoke to the masses (public spokesman).
Without a credible and recognizable figure to bring awareness to the issue of climate change all of the work done by the worlds' scientists is merely academic.
It’s well deserved recognition for having the courage to tackle a problem of this magnitude
The peace prize is appropriate considering he was the only major U.S. political figure to speak out forcefully against the Iraq war, even before it began.
Shows how to rebound, after he got “f---ed out” of the presidency
Gore’s win will likely add further fuel to a burgeoning movement in the United States for him to run for president in 2008, which he has so far said he does not plan to do. Two Gore advisers, speaking on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to share his thinking, said the award will not make it more likely that he will seek the presidency.
Gore said he would donate his share of the $1.5 million that accompanies the prize to the non-profit Alliance for Climate Protection.

http://www.thestar.com/Speakout/Voices/article/266947
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21262661/

FLAK- backlash… questioning personal motive- running again?,

f. FAULTY SOURCES

Journalism is supposed to complete the primary questions of what, where, who, when, how, and most importantly, why for the reader. These selected words encompass any article. They are answered so the reader has no difficulty in understanding the story and are what allow the story to read and make sense. This also works to narrow the issues. However problems occur when one or more of these keywords are left out of the article, whether it be intentional or inadvertent. Inadvertent comes from or human errors, which do happen, or it could be just bad journalism. However intentionally leaving out of these words is more intriguing, as it is a direct result of intention to spin a story. Sometimes, they whole story is not intentionally told. Leaving out these selected words can put a different spin on a story. Spin is just that, a device utilized by authors to cast a different light on the story. Lots of time though it is not wrong, it is just not as correct as it should be.

It is also important to look at the sources. Is the source a credible person, or is it just from the bum on the street corner talking a bunch of trash, rambling to anyone willing to pretend they are listening? How many different sources does the author use? It is important to make sure that the writer didn’t just misquote the person, either the writer or the quoted person had an off moment, or what have you.

This assignment was tough to complete. I had quite a difficult time finding stories that did not abide by these basic guidelines. Unquestionably, the improper sourcing will be easier to find than uninformative stories, but I believe they are because of two major things: one, these are professional writers that probably have written a few stories in their life, and since they want to keep their job, unintended errors are uncommon. Intentional ones aren't common either. It is the writer’s job to make sure the sources are not incorrectly supplied in the first place. Two, their editors are not new at this either. It is their job to make sure that stories come without these errors. For these two ideas, errors are discrete if there at all.

-Jesse Ferguson

TOBACCO INDUSTRY ATTEMPTS TO JUSTIFY MESSAGE TO PUBLIC

TOBACCO INDUSTRY ATTEMPTS TO JUSTIFY MESSAGE TO PUBLIC

BY JESSE FERGUSON

Brantford

The tobacco industry’s message to the public is captured in Jason Reitman’s new full-length film “Thank You For Smoking.” Aaron Eckhart stars as lead character Nick Nayler, who plays a lobbyist on behalf of the tobacco companies. The film opened its screening at The Carnegie Building on the Wilfird Laurier, Brantford campus for their students to check out.

It is a film that provokes much thought. Throughout the movie it is unclear where the bias is intended to be placed. It appears to be free of bias for nearly the duration of the film. Adding to the uncertainty of the film’s direction was the title of the film. It appears in the syllabus erroneously as “Thank You For Not Smoking” multiple times. This caused some students to wonder naively if this was just a typo, or if the teachers had correctly identified the bias.

Nevertheless, bias detection is not straightforward through the body of this piece, as the message is carefully massaged in. At the very beginning of the film, it seems the bias will be shown against the big smoking haunchos as Nayler is beat up on the talk show. This is a fairly accurate frame as smoking in the public eye has a very negative light cast on it. However, by the end of the film, it is all made clear for the viewers. It makes simple sense of the major smoking controversy. The viewfinder is in place courtesy of the tobacco industry. From the film, via Nayler, is their standpoint. It is this:

Smoking is in fact bad, but everyone knows this. Thus it should be the people allowed to make choices for themselves as to how they form an opinion on smoking.

No one is denying that it is bad for you, not even Nayler.

But is he actually correct in what he is claiming?

He is not wrong in conveying this message. However, this does not necessarily mean he is right, either. This is just his opinion. More knowledge is needed to make an informed decision.

Most directly, the film portrays the life of Nick Nayler. While being a lobbyist for the much-hated tobacco industry, Nayler understands that he is a role model for his son. He sees he should be a positive one, rather than negative. To do so, he must through responsibility. This nearly paradoxal balancing act he calls his life induces much chaos. By completing this task, the film touches all bases on the controversial issue of smoking. Less directly—though it is intended to appear discrete—it gives the above message of the tobacco industry.

Reitman uses spin by utilizing the fronting character of Nayler as a very likable man. His job, as a lobbyist on behalf of the tobacco industry, is not generally likeable though.

Nayler has the luck of any ordinary human being. This is portrayed by revealing some of his issues. They include marital problems, a complicated relationship with his son, and the showing that he has a hardass boss. Ordinary people have these types of problems. This is a good perspective for Reitman to use because it gives Nayler the humane feeling of sympathy. This character is one that for sure resonates in our world, thus his case is made appealing for the viewer. Yet this character is validated by making him appear more resonate.

More than this though, his problems shows that reality, the same kind that everyday people like you and me deal with, is apart of the lives of the people involved in the smoking industry as well. This also gives Nayler’s character validity. If Nayler seems credible, then so does their precious message. In turn, so does the industry. Reitman uses this frame of the story to precision as the viewer is molded to see the story through the eyes of Nayler, or as someone adjoined to the smoking industry.

Nayler comments on his job like so: “Every person deserves fair trial, so does every corporation.” As a lobbyist for the tobacco industry, he takes the proactive role of “defending the defenseless.”

Spin doctors intend to cast a certain ‘light’ on stories. This is Nayler’s job as a lobbyist. More appropriately, in this case, his job is to cast a certain ‘shadow’ over the light. However, it is not until the very end of the movie that the message becomes clear-cut evident. This is effective because it maximizes the effect on the viewer. By the courtroom scene at the end of the film, the viewer feels objectively neutral because they are not jabbed to be pulled either way. This is the beauty of Reitman’s piece for the smoking industry. The viewer is left agreeing with the Nayler’s testimony because of the trust that has inadvertently been built-up. This bias towards Nayler also inadvertently backs up the message of the tobacco industry.

It is likely intended for no real bias to be evident to give the film validity, to persuade the viewer to believe that Nayler, and foremost, the tobacco companies, are real.

Ultimately it doesn’t matter what a lobbyist, or anyone for that matter, has to say. Everything that culminates into a decision on the topic is dependant on the specific person’s own responsibility as to how they form an opinion on smoking. If it is from common knowledge of what they hear that their standpoint is derived from, or if they actually try it, is up to them and their own free will. If it is from what is said, it is pretty gullible. This is the ultimate message being massaged throughout this piece.

This approach is true to liberty, and Nayler lets us know this.

In spite of everything portrayed in this movie, it displays only one side of the story. Certainly, health advisers would have something different to say on this issue.

There are two sides of every story, “Thank You For Smoking” covers itself perfectly, but there is no rebuttal. Anyone can argue with themselves and win.

- Jesse Ferguson

3D- October 10th original election reflection, the night of

Personal Reflection

We phoned the Conservative riding and found out they would be at Moose Winooskis for 9:00PM

We arrived at the restaurant to find the scene very mellow as the votes rolled in. There was a section set off for the party, but not a person was inside this area.

We ordered some food and drinks to pass the time until things begun to liven up in the sectioned off room. As the time passed, we sat patiently at our seats. When we realized the TV had been turned to election coverage, the room began to see occupants.

When it livened, it had to be after 10:00PM. We found the inspiration inside us to trek on to the “Big Room.”

In my opinion, most people inside this room seemed rather unimportant, just shielding fire for the big guy whenever he would arrive. It was as if for most people, after they told their job title, I was left thinking, “And what do you do? Yeah I heard you, but what do you actually do? Canvas Chairman eh? What the hell is that?” I did my best to ask, but there is only so much I can do. After I asked one person, the bewildered expression made me think I should just not ask at all sometimes. Often, these people think since we are talking to them, we must know who they are, and exactly what their job entails. Maybe we should know.

There were some decent quotes gathered in here, but when they are from people whom you are not sure who they even are, it does not mean an awful lot. Their suit-and-ties seem nice, but when you are not sure of their job, it rubs off as somewhat like a ‘poser’.

Although there was no whining, the room was full of useless dead-end quotations from weightless sources. And with no sign of Dan McCreary or rumblings he would guaranteed show, we decided collectively that it is not much use that we stay.

We left Moose Winooskis just prior to 11:00PM. As we were leaving, we saw a few more important looking men who were dressed up walk past us and inside. “Was that him?” we all wondered in unison. “Who else could it be?” we, again collectively decided, and thought it would be well worth it if it were him.

Dan McCreary, indeed had walked in.

We followed him in, eager to hear if he was going to speak on today’s loss, or if we would have opportunity to talk to him first-hand.

To our delight, he spoke to the crowd. Through 11:30PM, he remained positive through obvious disappointment not making excuses, but rather showing optimism for the future. He did so while receiving praise from the crowd of about sixty at the Moose.

After he was finished, he had interviews and such, students waited around briefly while talking to some of the people we encountered first until my group gained a few good quotes, saw the party leader was still very occupied, and decided to leave, yet again.

We left for good at around 11:35PM.

My Observations

It was not easy. My position was awkward at best. I had questions lined up that were good questions, but clearly, not being able to verbalize them was a hinder.

I used fellow group members and other students to ask my questions for me on occasion, but primarily I used my phone to store quotations and to ask my own questions. At first—at least at first—the person who I was asking held a blank expression in awe, which is one I am not a stranger to, however do not enjoy, before they snap out of it and answer my question. They probably answer only not to be rude, and they see the validity of my question. Still, it is awkward.

I never wanted to be a reporter, obviously, but now I know for sure, this is not an apt area for me. I can still go into the field I suppose, but not to engage like so. The chaotic environment is just not a good one for me anymore.

Clearly, more research ahead of time was needed to be able to identify such people and their positions.

Jesse Ferguson

UNRELATED TO JN101

Internet Poker

Men everywhere, listen up: the inter-net is no longer just for porn.

Now, perhaps, there is an equal buzz generated by the latest dotcom craze. I guess females may be interested as well; atleast more interested than they are in porn.

Perhaps.

Probably.

For a game that was created centuries ago in Persia with other routes in Germany and France and was modified in the 1800’s on riverboats on the Mississippi; it hasn’t done too, too badly.

Not too badly at all. It has only far exceeded any group of radical optimists’ wildest expectations– spreading to the chaos we call the Internet and far beyond.

The internet is home to a game called poker for millions of people not only in North America, but throughout the world.

A game that’s played on some level by an estimated 50 million Americans, poker is the engine driving a surge in gambling from Indian casinos all the way to Vegas. Now poker has even spread to burgeoning internet gambling and gaming sites all available on your home computer.

According to pokerpulse.com, an industry-tracking site, more than $100 million US each day in bets passes through online poker sites. Now I could compare that number with something just as wild, but this number speaks for itself.

“Texas Hold’Em” is a style of poker that’s called a game of skill by its winners and a game of luck by its losers– though they both are correct. You’ll need the pro-per dose of both to hit it big I’m sure.

Despite players claiming that they’ll bet Hold’Em isn’t gambling, it has been deemed illegal to run such a corporation in the US. “Unfortunately, poker has been lumped in with all other online gambling, which is illegal in the US [and Canada]. That’s why none of these sites are physically located in the US,” said a Partypoker representative, whose operation is located in Spain. Other site operations are based in Antigua, Costa Rica and Cyprus.

These sites may primarily serve citizens of a country where playing is technically illegal; but see if that stops them or yields them.

Though many individual states have laws against gambling online, prosecuting is almost unheard of in the United States. Running the games is another matter, which is why these poker sites are based offshore.

It is illegal in the US and Canada partly because these governments choose not to tax these sites because of existing laws. Rhetorical question: Where would you rather start a business, somewhere that taxes or somewhere that does not?

California is one of the few states that do not view playing poker as illegal. It hasn’t for more than a century. It views poker as a game of skill; therefore not technically gambling. Their standpoint is that perhaps it is pushing your luck, but not gambling.

Despite not prosecuting, the government pressures credit-card companies to comply with the online gambling ban. All this means is players may have to jump through hoops in order to play. This may include using an out of country based “internet teller” that works with banks to set-up an online account.

People will all too gladly jump through these very minor hoops in order to get access to a game online.

“Poker requires a lot of skill; you don’t see professional slot machine players. What we offer is very similar to the stock exchange, which is another form of skilled gambling. Someone in the US government needs to take a serious look at this.”

Despite the fuzzy clarity and almost paradoxal claims, players manage to man-euver seemingly above the law.

Industry estimates are that pokerstars.com and partypoker.com (the industry leaders) will generate $10 million each in profits this year alone. That represents a 40% increase over the past year.

Boom?

I’d say.

So why has this blown up so suddenly?

Accessibility and availability for starters.

Friends too busy?

No problem. There are hundreds of sites online that can be easily accessed whenever and from wherever in the world with a standard internet connection.

Secondly, the low cost buy-in to play over the internet. For the small cost of free, you can begin a new trend in your life. That is an attractive buy-in, especially for beginners who prefer the sterile environment of no cost that the internet provides. Most online sites have free tables available intended for beginners.

The sites run these tables because they view them as a gateway in essence. After players test the waters and a bit of confidence gets stored, chances are good enough for the site that they’ll push their luck into real money tables. And needless to say, there are more people that lose than they do win.

Another reason specifically online poker has taken off is because of the vast amounts of under-aged players.

Who’s going to check ID online? Answer, favourable to all the kids out there, is nobody. So an alias is used, well, well because it’ll check out; a better option without the ramifications and trouble you can get yourself into from pulling out a fake ID in a casino. Bottom line is anonymity saves potential embarrassment.

Another reason it has taken off is be-cause you can play so much quicker and more often online than at a standard table or with your friends in your rec-room. You can easily play a game a minute online, while it may take minutes offline for that bozo friend of yours to decide if he’s going “all-in” with a pair of deuces before the flop.

Poker, especially Texas Hold’Em, has become a spectator sport on television. Example, the Travel Channel’s ever-so-popular “World Poker Tour.” It is the channel’s all-time most successful show to date. This and shows alike are helping lure in the middle-of-the-road fan; most who have never even played the game. An estimated 5 million Americans weekly watch the show. Shows alike air on ESPN and Fox Sports Net and have also blown up to help the cause online.

The success is due to the science of “lipstick cameras.” These are cameras that allow the viewer to see the hand each player is dealt. These initial two cards dealt you as the viewer are given the ability to see in Hold’Em are called the “down cards.” Players match these to the “community cards.” This gives the audience the perception– or allusion perhaps– “I could beat these guys.” Wouldn’t be too exciting never knowing what cards the players are playing, now would it?

As a viewer you are also given the ex-act odds each player will win before every turn depending on the community cards raised by the dealer. So at home, you can differentiate the smart plays from the dumb ones.

It’s a worldwide thing too, poker, all webbed together by the web itself. Don’t believe that? Look and you’ll find 839 entrants from 27 countries who are willing to pay the steep $10,000 buy-in to play in the Hold’Em main event at Binion’s Horseshoe Casino in Las Vegas. It’s the biggest of 35 events at the World Series, televised in 7 installments on ESPN.

Completing the circle, such exposure gained by the shows on television send viewers into cardrooms and especially onto to the web to experience the aura firsthand.

Thing is, anyone can play, and anyone can win. What could be some kids’ struggling image as a nerd, can be resurrected by poker and hitting it big. Antonio Esfundiari shares his story with how his third place finish at the World Poker Tour’s installment in San Jose transformed him and his status. Here he won more than just money, he won a personal rep. “I was such a dork in high school. All I ever wanted was to be popular. My dream was for someone, someday, to ask me for my autograph.”

Dreams do come true as evidence suggests. Antonio is locally known as “Kid-44”– because of the $44,000 he rightfully stole from the pros on tour bluffing all the way. This newfound status helped restore the confidence that he never had.

Everybody who’s familiar with poker on TV knows all about Chris Moneymaker. Do you? Well his name isn’t just any coincidence. Chris was only an average guy, a Tennessee accountant making $40,000 a year– which isn’t the money-making part, incase you were wondering– when he was “working” he decided to put in his measly (considering the payout) $39 entry fee into an online tournament. Prize when it was all-said-and-done was $2.5 million at the WPT. Co-workers were calling his money “dead-money.”

It wasn’t dead.

He went on to win this prize proving his co-workers wrong. Chris is a living example of what can happen. People are playing poker, online especially, sometimes solely because of Chris’ win.

It’s not rare to find Chris and other WPT players playing online– advertising essentially– because that is where it all started for them as well.

James Macmanus, a winner on tour, has made it big from not from winning, but writing about the game. Positively Fifth Street is the title of his best-selling novel which has cracked best-seller lists. In it, he states a comment which many buy in-to– “With the right cards and a cool head, any home game hotshot can win.” When people see such comments and want to try their chances for themselves to answer the questions:

Why not me? Why not now?

However people have to remember: they certainly don’t build casinos so you can go on in there and take home all the money. Same goes for these internet sites. The site views that cash as “their money” and no one just lets their money get stolen from them. These sites obviously don’t like it being rightfully won either.

The future of this industry looks anything but bleak and shouldn’t go through the struggle of adolescence.

Why should it do anything but further flourish?

The WPT is hosting another “real-money” tournament where top prize is a ridiculous 5 million dollars. That’s double what Moneymaker took home. And with the WPT comes television rights, comes more advertising to play online. That means more people coming online trying their luck– and often pushing it.

And don’t think that unless you have a flashy name like “Moneymaker” that it’s impossible. Remember, anyone can play, anyone can win. Thus, anyone can be their own “moneymaker” so to speak.

Have you ever been to a casino? If your answer is no, your days may be seriously limited.

Would you like to win 5 large? Well, for starters, I bet internet porn can’t do it for you.

2. Candidate Profile

Dave Levac, the provincial representative for Brantford and surrounding area, was recently reelected. This riding, home to approximately 120,000 people, is where Levac was born and raised. Currently, he lives in Brantford with his family of five.

Levac was first elected to the Provincial legislature from this riding in 1999 as the Liberal representative. He won in a shocking victory. All surrounding seats were won by the Progressive Conservatives in a majority government, but in his region, Levac upset Alayne Sokoloski, the PC candidate. He has won both elections since. In 2003, he did so by achieving nearly an astounding fifty-five percent of the popular vote.

In October 2003, Premier Dalton McGuinty appointed Levac Chief Government Whip and Vice-Chair of Cabinet’s Education Committee.

As MPP, Levac has two offices; one in Brantford, the other in Toronto. Levac does two jobs. In the local office, Levac helps his riding’s residents access the provincial government of available services. In Toronto, he communicates the needs of his people to the province.

Since being in office, community service has always been a priority for Levac. His work reflects this. He has taken part in many charitable events and committees, while setting up others. In 1998 he founded and chaired the Friends of the Firefighters Committee and raised $100,000, which he put towards the purchase of thermal imaging cameras for the local department. He has also aided The Heart & Stroke Foundation, Parkinson’s Association, Knights of Columbus, C.Y.O., Bids for Kids, Circle of Friends, and Riverfest.

Levac’s many contributions were recognized in 1998 when he was named Citizen of the Year by readers of The Brantford Expositor. Prior to this, he received the Canada 125 Medal in 1993, and an additional Ontario Service Award.

In 1997, he was appointed co-ordinator of Queen Elizabeth II’s royal visit to Brantford.

In the past year, he acquired life-saving defibrillators from the Heart and Stroke Foundation for Brantford, occupying the largest grant for AEDs in all of North America. “With access to this lifesaving tool, public facilities in Brantford will be safer places for all of us to gather to lead more active and healthy lives,” said Levac upon extending the grant.

Long before politics, Levac went to Wilfrid Laurier, Queens and Niagara universities.

Between university and politics, Levac was involved in the elementary and secondary schools for twelve years, as both a teacher in nearby Paris, and as a principal.

- Jesse Ferguson

3. Down in Flames, ELECTION REFLECTION STORY

Brantford, Ontario

“DISAPPOINTED.”

This quote is from Doug Martin, Canvas Chairman for Dan McCreary, the Conservative candidate for the region. It properly reflected the entire Conservative Party on October 10^th. Unfortunately for them, this was Ontario’s vote night. Disappointment was not only the mood, but could be felt right across the room at Moose Winooskis in Brantford, the riding site for the Conservatives.

Certainly, when you go down in flames, it is never a good thing. And certainly, this case is no exception.

McCreary came up on short in the Regional Election, which was won handily by the Liberals and reigning MP Dave Levac. It was also consensus in all of Ontario, where it was won rather handily by Dalton McGuinty. He too, like Levac, is entering his second term; Levac for the riding of Brant, McGuinty as premier of the province.

“I thought it’d be much closer,” Martin continued as the unfavourable results poured across of the bottom of the television screens.

Everyone’s face who appeared in the room with McCreary and the Conservative Party was of shock.

The Conservative national candidate from Brant, Phil McColeman, fielded questions about the loss. “The media chose the issues which to run with for the campaign,” he opined, speaking of provincial leader John Tory’s evident stumble with the private school funding. “The province clearly wasn’t ready for Tory’s plan for faith based schools (being under a funding umbrella).”

McColeman said he would grant promises that the Liberals have broken, specifically in the area, to keep BCI alive and in its current location.

McCreary arrived at the local riding at around eleven PM to the disappointed faces. His own face also represented the predominate look of his peers.

In admirable fashion considering the loss and obvious disappoint lurking, McCreary delivered his speech shortly after arrival.

He didn’t make excuses, like others had. He took it like a true man, a good leader and simply told it how it was. “We went down in flames. We all did,” he said speaking of his entire Conservative platform.

Despite losing to Levac, McCreary remains supportive of Levac and respects the man he lost to claiming “Dave does a good job here.”

Ron Dancey, a Conservative member in the political game for forty years says until next election in four years time, his Conservative Party “will continue to put pressure on the Liberal Party in the meantime.”

After presenting Levac with due accolades, McCreary then stated, “Tomorrow is a new day.”

Patience, as well as optimism, is a virtue. The Tories are hoping it serves them well.

- Jesse Ferguson

3A. Election Night Story

3B- Extended Election Night Reflection

Election Night Reflection

By Jesse Ferguson

BRANTFORD-

For the election night in the province of Ontario, our group attended Moose Winooskis, which was the riding for Dan McCreary, Conservative Party leader for the area.

After a large amount of uncertainty, we invaded the special area sectioned off for the Conservative riding. Before long, dignified persons in suits began engagement with several reporters, who were in many cases, fellow students There were some decent quotes gathered here, but when they are from people whom you are not sure even are, then the weight of them is not too great. For most people, after they told their job title, I was left wondering, “And what do you do exactly? Yeah I heard your title, but what do you actually do?”

“I’m the Canvas Chairman.”

Canvas Chairman, huh?

Oh yeah?

Lovely, now would you mind explaining what the hell that is?

Clearly, more research ahead of time was needed of the Local Party to be able to identify such people and their positions. The room seemed full of useless dead-end quotations from weightless sources. Surely, with more research, these ‘weightless’ sources would have some weight. The suit-and-ties seem professional, but when you are not sure of their real job exactly, it rubs off the wrong way, and it feels unimportant.

Meanwhile, Mr. McCreary’s results were being posted on nearby television monitors. His hopes of becoming the Brant area’s representative in Toronto were already all but over. Although there was no whining, most people inside this room were seemingly shielding fire for the big guy whenever he was to arrive.

When “the big guy,” as I just referred to him as, arrived, it got more exciting, fast, despite his loss. He remained a good sport and was positive through obvious disappointment. He did not make excuses, but rather he showed optimism for the future. He did so while receiving praise from the crowd of about sixty at the Moose.

My Observations

It was not easy. My position was awkward at best. I had questions lined up that were good questions, but clearly, not being able to verbalize them was a hinder.

I used fellow group members and students to ask my questions for me on occasion, but primarily I used my phone to store quotations and to ask my own questions. At first—at least at first—the person who I was asking held a blank expression in awe, which is one I am not a stranger to, however do not enjoy, before they snap out of it and answer my question. They probably answer only not to be rude, plus they see the validity of my question. Still, it is awkward.

I never wanted to be a reporter, obviously, but now I know for sure, this is not an apt area for me. I can still go into the field I suppose, fore I can still write the story of course, but not to engage like so. The chaotic environment is just not a good one for me anymore.