Getting The Word Out — Sort Of

ChamberCommerceWhen I was out for a stroll last evening in beautiful downtown Regina I came across this sign on Victoria Ave. between Hamilton and Rose St.  If you actually pause and peer into the bush you can see what the message is and who it’s being sponsored by — so props to everyone involved for the innovative marketing strategy.

As far as public events (or semi-public, anyway) tied to the upcoming referendum on the Waste Water/Sewage Treatment Plant two that I’m aware of are (i) the Regina Gyro Club is trying to organize a debate between the Yes and No sides that would be held at the Travelodge on Sept. 5 at 7:30 p.m. The event would be open to media, but not the general public outside of club members.

(ii) Then on Sept. 9 at noon Mayor Michael Fougere is speaking about the referendum at a Regina & District Chamber of Commerce luncheon at Conexus Arts Centre.

UPDATE: Regina Water Watch is hosting a public forum at the University of Regina Education Auditorium Sept. 11 at 7 p.m. Speaking will be Maude Barlow of the Council of Canadians; Marley Waiser, a retired Environment Canada Research Scientist; and Pierre J. Hamel,  a Professor of Urban Planning and Sociology at the University of Montreal.

Author: Gregory Beatty

Greg Beatty is a crime-fighting shapeshifter who hatched from a mutagenic egg many decades ago. He likes sunny days, puppies and antique shoes. His favourite colour is not visible to your puny human eyes. He refuses to write a bio for this website and if that means Whitworth writes one for him, so be it.

15 thoughts on “Getting The Word Out — Sort Of”

  1. Just experienced the most deceptive “conference call” of all time. Angry air quote warning ahead…

    It was presented as if Mayor Fougere was “taking questions” from the public.

    Great! Our household submitted 2 questions for each phone and waited.

    The “moderator” kept prompting the “audience” for questions.

    Strange, since we were waiting for our turns to come up. Why keep asking for questions when you already have people waiting?

    Then we noticed every “question” seemed to not be a question at all, but a softball way for Fougere to make certain bullship points.

    Questions like a fake “business owner” calling to find out how much extra businesses will have to pay if we vote yes, and a fake home owner asking him to remind us that the only way to get federal money is if we vote no (false).

    We noticed every “caller” would emphasize some stupid talking point in their question. Like the one who said it would be hard for economically strapped households to pay an extra $276 more in these hard times.

    Oddly every second caller was very complimentary of Mayor Fougere using this method to help interact with the citizens.

    By the time it got to the fake “citizen” was asking if there is any deadline to upgrade the plant (duh) and the one guy asking “how can the average person help get the message out there to vote no” we realized we’d been deceived and tricked by City Hall yet again.

    I had been wondering how they could possibly waste $350,000 in such a short time. Having been through this hour commercial, I’m not wondering any more.

    Whoever thinks this kind of devious stuff up should have to spend eternity in hell married to whoever approves this kind of immoral stunt.

  2. The city’s campaign is just so ham-fisted. If anything, their seeming incompetence is the best argument the “No” side has to offer.

  3. Even the “moderator” was throwing in talking points as well.

    In hindsight it was a fake as a late night infomercial. But they used real people as the actors who stumbled through their questions, and the moderator faked some “technical” trouble as it went along. I give the media company some credit for adding these details to try and lend some fake credibility to it. I guess they’re earning their $350,000 payday.

  4. Hey Reader, did you know that Chad Novak used your first comment here as his latest blog post without giving any credit?

  5. I too, received the robo call last night and I wanted to ask a question. It didn’t take long to realize that this was a pre-recorded call. The city should not be allowed to use tax payers money to push an agenda. It should only be allowed to notify residents when and where the vote is to be held.

    In the past, I have heard the wording “Fougeara. This just proves my views in the past, that we are actually in the “fool era”

  6. I among others have an audio recording of the thing. I wish we would all preserve such, especially the early minutes.

  7. Reader, how did you become involved with this call? I didn’t know the City was doing these.

    Jason, unless he updated the post, he absolutely gives credit (or at least mentions where he got the info).

  8. I wouldn’t say “someone who commented on Prairie Dog” without any other link or information is credit, especially from someone who has accused at least one writer on this site of plagiarizing his ideas.

  9. Clearly he should have put a direct link, but I think you’re just picking on him right now Jason (c’mon, you know it). Your comment here implied he posted it in its entirety without any attribution whatsoever; I was expecting he’d presented it as his own experience, but he did not. He did say where he got the information, and a dedicated reader could page through recent pd posts to find the comment. It wouldn’t pass any academic standards, but what he did isn’t as egregious as you imply. In fact, you didn’t post a link either. Oh noes.

    I don’t like defending the dude, but I also really don’t like people who can’t let it go. Don’t go to his website. Ignore him. You obviously will never agree with him.

  10. While I don’t dispute your premise, I also thought Reader would like to know if they didn’t already.

  11. For anyone that doesn’t know Mr. “Jason Doan”, he is probably one of the guiltiest of parties that currently harass me on a daily basis. Thus, he will find ANY reason to attack me. I sincerely apologize to Reader for not naming “Reader” as the contributor, I didn’t think that would make any sense that doesn’t understand anonymous commentors. That said, Collette does make a good point, and I could have put a link to this thread. I honestly did not expect anyone to care that much about it, but obviously Jason does, for whatever reason. If you don’t like me or what I say or stand for, as Collette suggested, very simply ignore me and don’t go to my website.

  12. The first clue should have been that this “event” was unscheduled and unpublished.

    If the blogger posted the comments from here as his own that is wrong, but as of now at least it appears to credit Prairiedog. Considering Prairiedog’s web site is substantially an aggregation composed of excerpts from other websites, there’s not much difference is there?

    Given the chance I’d revise the comment a bit but can’t seem to edit.

    What I know of web etiquette, posting the whole thing is pretty bad form though, usually an excerpt with link is the honorable way.

    But the bigger issue being lost is how in this specific situation the Novak website is actually providing more of a journalistic service that any of the media outlets in the province. I include Prairiedog in this as my wild guess is that Novak actually gets more hits than the comments pages of Prairiedog – please correct me if this is a wrong assumption.

    But again the key point is that nobody is reporting on the fake conference call, nobody is investigating who is behind it, nobody is taking the city to task for the false $276 narrative, the false sewage name change, or the clever misdirection that this is about fixed price building project and not about outsourcing the jobs and profits.

    Instead the media is dutifully spreading the city politicians’ false message and reinforcing their false premises.

    Commenter pc said it most concisely that the city is presenting a false dilemma regarding the billing increase. They’ve merely taken the whole $58 million and pretended they would add it on as a straight 4 year bill slam. It’s a cynical and devious tactic to threaten people’s money if they don’t vote how you tell them to.

    They don’t acknowledge that p3 will probably need tens of millions in added administration costs. Or that fixed price contracts are available with or without p3. Or that other grants are available that aren’t p3. Or that no company will do a p3 unless they are given 30 years of guaranteed gouging power. Or that if the private profit water corporation settles for “only” $15/household in profit, they will rake in far more than $216 million during this contract, and once inflation and ongoing increases are included, far more than $400 million. Is there one single major media outlet telling the public that taking $50 million now will likely cost us $400+ million extra over time?

    While I’m at it, let me add that I’m not giving permission for this post to be used anywhere else, but that I do encourage all media outlets and bloggers to independently verify my speculations and report on it as much as they wish.

Comments are closed.