The Daily Griddle

My Planned Deputation for Toronto Budget 2012 Public Hearings Dec. 7

2011-12-05T14:01:00.011-05:00

To the Budget Committee:

Before you make any budget recommendations on this matter, I encourage—I beg—all the committee members to join our community this Saturday morning at Fairmount Park Community Centre and the surrounding park, which are always filled with children and families.

I want to stress that our community centre is not made of numbers, it’s made of people. And looking at charts of numbers enrolled in registered programs will not give you the full information you need to responsibly make this decision. Ask any parent in our community and they’ll tell you that we’re all hungry for more programs at Fairmount. Build us more programs, and we’ll come. So cutting programs is the exact wrong thing for our community.

But you couldn’t know that, looking only at registration numbers. Those numbers alone will not tell you what you need to know about the incalculable benefits of our community centre to the children and families in our neighbourhood, who treasure not only the community centre and pool as vital community assets, but also the dynamic Fairmount Park that surrounds it.

Visit us next Saturday morning, and you’ll see preschoolers in ballet costumes fluttering through the front door, and kids in their martial arts gear with their proudly coloured belts, and people of all ages with backpacks stuffed full of swim gear. All ages, all cultural backgrounds, all economic circumstances. Then come and sit in the pool gallery and watch eight swim classes happening—all at the same time—in our relatively modest-sized pool. It’s always crowded, always in demand. You’ll see fat little babies in the arms of their parents, you’ll see skinny awkward preteens developing the swim skills that may well someday save their lives and will go far in keeping them healthy, fighting obesity with a lifelong love of athletics. And here I’m talking about kids from all cultural and economic backgrounds, all in the same facility and sharing the benefit of our vital and much-loved community asset.

But then come outside. On any given day, year-round, you’ll see kids and families zipping between the park and the community centre, using the bathrooms, sitting at tables to work on homework, meeting up with family members and friends. None of this will be in your charts of registration numbers, but it’s all vital to the health of our community, and our city at large.

In the park surrounding Fairmount at any time, you’ll see families enjoying the park, you’ll see permitted baseball teams playing games, you’ll see the tennis courts hopping, and the wading pool filled to the brim with kids. In the winter a volunteer-run skating rink bustles with activity and the hillside is thick with tobogganers. But your data in front of you doesn’t capture that. Your data won’t tell you that this is an extremely heavily-used city park, and that all of our families rely on the community centre to make it work. Perhaps most importantly, our children know when they’re playing in the park that the community centre is a safe place to turn if they’re harassed, hurt, or threatened in some way. It provides safety, and refuge, and eyes on the park in a neighbourhood that has seen some troubles, as most neighbourhoods have, from time to time.

We all want our city to be fiscally careful. So even in the name of fiscal caution, please don’t close our community centre. We have an active community that is willing to roll up our sleeves and find efficiencies and ways to engage our community to limit waste. But you can’t responsibly make this decision without weighing the deep value of all that is not tracked by your registration numbers in front of you.

We love our park and the community hub that Fairmount provides. It’s working. It’s great. Don’t destroy this, because in the long run, it will cost all our citizens far more if we have to rebuild what has taken generations to create.

Why I'll never again buy bottled water... a fun watchable!

2011-03-07T16:10:00.003-05:00

2010-01-29T17:37:00.004-05:00

Why is this so funny? Because it's true.

Never underestimate the power of a group of moms with cupcakes

2010-01-25T21:57:00.005-05:00

My headline today comes from today's Toronto Star editorial by Brandie Weikle. And it's absolutely true, though I know some dads baked, too. Our household contributed (what seemed like) a bajillion lemon-coconut cupcakes for Haiti, baked by me and rigorously tested by the kids, with Brian tackling the Herculean clean up (me + KitchenAid + bag of icing sugar = big white kaboom).

I'm very proud of the achievements of our little school community this weekend: Thanks to the incredible vision, energy and organization of our fearless leaders Susana Molinolo and Nancy Botelho, we raised $9,800 which will be matched dollar-for-dollar by CIDA, meaning that Medecins sans Frontieres has nearly $20,000 more to do its vital work in Haiti.

I cannot write about Haiti. It hurts. There are no words. But baking... that I can do, no matter how heavy my heart. I remember a friend telling me that "baking is the sixth stage of grieving," and I believe she was right. When I grieve, or people around me grieve, I pull out my grandmother's recipes and my flour tubs and get busy. So I'm so grateful to Susana and Nancy and all the other parents for giving me a meaningful way to channel my inner sad baker.

A holiday lesson from a child

2009-12-19T23:11:00.008-05:00

"The law of love could be best understood and learned through little children." --Mahatma Gandhi

This week in his Macleans blog, Andrew Potter posed the questions "What percentage of your income do you give to charity, and why?"

He cited some figures: According to the Fraser Institute's yearly study comparing generosity in Canada and the US, 24.0 percent of Canadians give to charity each year, and we give, on aggregate, 0.73 percent of our personal income. We are much less generous than our neighbours to the south.

When I reflect on what our family gives, at 1.4 percent of our income (and since my husband and I mainly work for charities, our income is likely lower than it would be in the for-profit world), I generally feel satisfied that we are doing our part. Possibly even smugly so. But the stats out of the US are shaming-- in Utah, for example, residents give 3.66 percent of their aggregate incomes to charity. Are we really so noble?

I was recently taught an important lesson on generosity, courtesy of my eldest son Lucas, who is seven. (Yes, this is a proud mother launching into brag mode. Indulge me.) Each week we have given him $1 for discretionary spending, plus $1 for savings and $1 for "helping kids who need it," the phrase he coined when we first explained charity to him. In September we decided to increase his spending money to $3, in recognition of some new responsibilities. But he has never accepted this. Each week he resolutely puts the extra money in his "helping kids" jar, and each week I gently remind him that he is not obliged to do this, that the extra money is for him. He had trouble articulating why he wouldn't accept the extra money until last week. "I NEVER can put more money in my spending jar than in my helping kids jar," he said. "Those kids need food and medicine more than I need Hot Wheels, right?" The logic, and love, of my darling boy is impossible to refute.

So, this year, in honour of the many people we cherish, our family has substantially increased our annual gift to UNICEF to assist children affected by HIV/AIDS. To be honest, it's a dollar value that makes me gulp, and as I filled out the online form, I truly did hesitate. But then I thought about the lesson taught to me by my son's loving heart. We are blessed, and so we give.

Tolerating Twitter-lite, for the tweets that rock my world

2009-11-14T15:24:00.005-05:00

There are times I rue ever venturing into the Twitter universe. So many of the tweets are so light, so ephemeral... do I really need to know that a fellow PR-type here in Toronto really enjoyed the grilled fish at some restaurant that probably waived his bill for the mention?

But then there are flashes of brilliance, that demonstrate how rich the universe of Twitter can be. I followed the Iranian democracy protests via Twitter, and I now avidly track the tweets by Nicholas Kristof, the extraordinary foreign correspondent for the NY Times who with his wife and fellow Pulitzer-holder Sheryl WuDunn (wouldn't you love to sit at their dining room table??) wrote the stunning book/wake-up-call to the world "Half the Sky: Turning Oppression into Opportunity for Women Worldwide."

Last week Kristof's tweet read thusly: <<A Kenyan girl's question echoes in my mind: "Should I keep sleeping with the man who pays my school fees?">> That 140-characters-or-less statement hit me like a ton of bricks. Her simple question says so much about this upside-down world. I just can't shake thinking about her, and the millions of other children in the world facing equally awful dilemmas.

And now, my admission: despite my lifelong love of the NY Times, despite my interest in women's rights in the developing world, I had never heard of Kristof until Stephanie Nolen's tweet sent me to him. I now read his columns in the Times avidly, and my copy of "Half the Sky" is on order. I fully anticipate that it will rock my world.

So I'll continue to tolerate the annoyances of Twitter-lite, for these flashes of brilliance.

Beauty, eh?

2009-11-01T16:52:00.012-05:00

This Tuesday, November 3 is Art with Heart at the gorgeous Carlu. It's Casey House's biggest fundraiser, a 16-years-strong auction of contemporary art raising funds for their services to people living with HIV/AIDS in the Toronto community.

This year's collection has a fun, edgy Canadian slant we're dubbing "Contemporary Canadiana." The art is absolutely glorious, and the bidding spectacle always makes me giddy.

Want a feel for the night? The event website includes a promo video that I co-produced with the amazing Lisa Lightbourn Lay.

This just in: Pigs DO fly...

2009-04-29T00:11:00.004-04:00

Last Friday night while on our New York adventure, hubby and I snapped this photo of the Fox News pixelboard near Times Square.

Happy Birthday Strunk and White

2009-04-28T13:29:00.006-04:00

Pictured above, from the NYTimes: E.B. White’s original typewriter and manuscript are pictured with William Strunk Jr.’s original version and the 1959 edition of “The Elements of Style.”

Today's New York Times Room for Debate blog includes a tribute to Strunk and White written by five grammarians and their ilk. Fun reading, and they do tend to pooh-pooh the ongoing dedication on the part of so many English teachers through the years, mine included. It seems Messrs. Strunk and White have not aged well. To quote the hilarious entry by Patricia T. O'Connor:

"... 'six persons' is not better than 'six people.' Show me a guy who invariably says 'six persons' and I will show you a fathead. But Happy Birthday anyway, Strunk and White."

Still, I do love this admonishment from ol' Strunk & White: "Interesting. An unconvincing word; avoid it as a means of introduction. Instead of announcing that what you are about to tell is interesting, make it so."

Words to live by. (Or is that, "Words by which to live?")

No kidding.

2009-04-10T11:12:00.011-04:00

What I find troubling about polls like this is the way they artificially segment ideas that are really intertwined.

I mean, how exactly do you separate any of the other issues people spoke about ("Education," "The Environment," "Healthcare," "Gas Prices," "Deficit") from "Jobs/Economy"?

The question then becomes one of semantics, of top-of-mind word choices and categorization, rather than a measured analysis of public opinion regarding complex issues. Have we not all clued into this thanks to the disrobing of the George W strategy?

So what is one to take home from a chart like this? The words "Jobs/Economy" are our hot buttons right now. Yes. Got that.

Newspapers still capture eyeballs

2009-03-25T16:06:00.003-04:00

From today's NADbank release...

NADbank Releases 2008 Readership Study
Weekly readership has remained stable indicating that daily newspapers continue to be a relevant source of news and information for Canadians. Almost three quarters of Canadians (73%), 13.7 million adults 18+, read a printed edition of a daily newspaper each week. Canadians continue to turn to daily newspapers as a source for local news (73% of readers usually read local news) as well as other news and arts and entertainment. (more)

Abandoned boxes

2009-03-20T15:20:00.008-04:00

Photo of disused newspaper boxes in San Francisco, from the Silicon Valley Insider... I felt sad to see it at first, but then realized that I now read more news than ever.

I can see the logos of the Onion and The Oakland Tribune--both are still publishing online, and probably saving themselves a bundle not having to print and distribute the former contents of these boxes.

While I do love the visceral feel of a world-class newspaper in my hands, I have to wonder... assuming that publishers will find a way to monetize journalism in other media (and assuming the quality of the information remains good--a leap of faith, I know)... then is the loss of print newspapers really such a tragedy?

Update to Journalismism

2009-03-16T14:53:00.002-04:00

Just read the excellent blog posting by Clay Shirky entitled "Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable", reminding us that what's really valuable about journalism is not the mechanism by which it's delivered, but the knowledge and ideas it conveys.

Are the traditional media platforms dying? Shirky asserts they're already dead, but that journalism itself will survive.

(Thanks to my sweet hubby Bri for the link!)

Journalismism

2009-03-07T23:46:00.014-05:00

Today I read the thoughtful analysis by Paul Starr in The New Republic. And I read the whole thing online, paying nary a dime. The irony is of course painfully obvious. And this irony is compounded by the fact that the magazine is owned by Canada's very own floundering media empire, CanWest (for now, anyway).

Starr makes some very good points, including:

"If newspapers are no longer able to crosssubsidize public-service journalism and if the de-centralized, non-market forms of collaboration cannot provide an adequate substitute, how is that work going to be paid for? The answer, insofar as there is one, is that we are going to need much more philanthropic support for journalism than we have ever had in the United States."

Here in Canada, we have the CBC, which despite its flaws and foibles (and infuriating clannishness) has been known to produce some pretty fine news and has had a long history of (inconsistently) terrific investigative journalism. They've also managed to lead the way in using new technologies: I was reading CBC news on my Palm device ten years ago, and CBC Radio continues to lead the pack in distributing podcasts (for free, of course- there's the rub). I'm confident that CBC's attention to online journalism will continue to grow, assuming they are adequately funded of course: no guarantees there. But CBC.ca's online coverage has far to go. Right now it feels more like an aggregator or news feed, lacking the in-depth analysis that is the hallmark of print journalism at its finest.

What makes me yet more uncomfortable is a trend that all the online versions of our traditional news media participate in, without exception. They all index stories based on what is most emailed or most recommended-- shades of "Journalism Idol." I'm all for exploiting the opportunities the web offers for viewer/reader feedback, but I'm loathe to turn journalism into some kind of online popularity contest. There is some news that people don't want to hear about, but should anyway. We're talking oatmeal vs. Lucky Charms. My worry is that complex information will be bottom-shelved or dropped altogether because it can't compete with simple, cheaply produced stories about crime or consumer recalls.

*("Journalismism" is a term coined by the ever-entertaining Gawker.com)

Enthralled by Obama

2009-02-20T09:33:00.011-05:00

I spent some time on the phone yesterday afternoon trying to pitch a story to journalists-- a foolish attempt, as of course all eyes and minds were on Obama's visit to Ottawa. So I took a break and watched the coverage myself. I love this image of Obama and Michaelle Jean sharing a laugh as he got off the plane- consider the early lives of these two people, and look where they are today.

But my favourite image of all? People standing on the giant snowballs they'd rolled to get a better glimpse. We're resourceful up here in Canada. Try and do that with rain, Washingtonians!

You can't help but be mesmerized by Obama. boingboing has posted a wonderful diagram created by Garth Risk Hallberg . It's such a treat to be able to meaningfully dissect finely crafted speeches, to take a look at the anatomy of complex and well-built rhetoric. Dare we hope that Canadian speech writers are doing the same?

And today, Rick Salutin in the Globe and Mail provides an entirely different perspective on Obama, a what-if-we-could-see-through-his-eyes analysis. I think it's spot-on: "Imagine Barack Obama waking up yesterday. Already, for hours, thousands have been astir, focused on his day, making his breakfast, welding manhole covers shut in Ottawa etc. It dwarfs the Roman imperial cult." Obama has written extensively of his respect for the poor and his faith in the power of ground-level community organizing. So Salutin asks, how does he reconcile his ideology with the enforced opulence of his present-day life?

And this just in... he likely didn't even eat the beavertail that seventeen-year-old Jessica Miller sold him. Awwww...

Now back to pitching... let's see if anyone is listening today.

Holiday Greetings

2008-12-20T15:03:00.003-05:00

This year instead of buying tons of gifts, our family paid for oral rehydration treatments for over 1,450 children through UNICEF, and contributed to community programs at Casey House. Feels great, shopping was WAAAY easier, and our friends and family seem to feel relief as well.

Happy holidays to all, and may there be joy and peace in 2009.

A modern parenting dilemma

2008-12-19T13:01:00.011-05:00

As the mother of a six-year-old boy who is (verging on) obsessed with computers, I followed Brandon Crisp's story with dread and grief, my heart aching for his parents. So I was particularly glad when I got to the end of Katarina Onstad's column in Chatelaine this month, for the grace she bestowed upon worried parents everywhere with her thoughts. I was particularly struck by her insight that perhaps Brandon climbed that tree and suffered that terrible fall because he was looking for the way home. I dearly hope so, for all our sakes.

I agree with Onstad's opinion that not all online play is necessarily bad. Largely creative, many of these games allow him to build upon his skills and reason, and over time have given him the opportunity to feel fluent and capable in this incomprehensible world. He works so hard at learning--all the time, ceaselessly-- his immature handwriting improving day-by-day, while the erasers on our household pencils are rubbed to nothingness. So creating an imaginary world, a refuge in which he is master, whether racing onscreen cars really really fast or bouncing on jungle flowers with Diego... I see the value in that, and I watch my son play with my heart in my throat, loving him desperately and hoping it will all turn out okay for us all.

That being said, he is NOT getting a DS for Christmas, no matter how hard he lobbies. I'm not ready to relinquish control over screentime, not yet.

Brandon Crisp's parents have set up a memorial trust in his name. Read about it here.

Payback's a byatch

2008-12-09T13:16:00.003-05:00

I always enjoy the Massey Lectures. And I always enjoy Margaret Atwood. So it's a given that this book is on my Christmas book wishlist. (After I finish listening to it here of course.)

2008-11-26T23:43:00.002-05:00

Thanks to Toddand for this, from his social media relations slideshow:

Great tips on storytelling for not-for-profits

2008-11-26T14:30:00.005-05:00

Applying Hot Trends in Nonprofit Marketing to Planned Giving Newsletters

View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: philanthropy giving)

Scroll past the first nine intro slides, then you'll get to some great ideas delivered by Kivi Leroux Miller in a presentation to the 2008 Planned Giving Days conference of the National Capital Gift Planning Council
SlideShare Link

Doctor, read thy novel

2008-11-26T08:41:00.005-05:00

Doctors-in-training are now being required to read Virginia Woolf and Chekov? Love it!!! Makes me feel like I'm that much closer to that medical degree my parents desired for me...

From the article in the New York Times...

“We’re teaching the humanities to our residents, and it’s making them better doctors,” said Dr. Richard Panush, a rheumatologist and chairman of the department of medicine at Saint Barnabas. The idea of combining literature and medicine — or narrative medicine as it is sometimes called — has played a part in medical education for over 40 years. Studies have repeatedly shown that such literary training can strengthen and support the compassionate instincts of doctors."

Oh, dear.

2008-11-24T21:39:00.002-05:00

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/245702.php

Obama's Use of Complete Sentences Stirs Controversy

2008-11-24T17:05:00.000-05:00

I giggled at this story by Andy Borowitz in the Huffington Post-- enjoy!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-borowitz/obamas-use-of-complete-se_b_144642.html

Smash the mirrors

2008-11-24T13:51:00.002-05:00

In an economy when everyone is so stretched, when we’re all doing five jobs at once, it's far too easy to develop tunnel vision and just deal with day-to-day urgencies, without taking the time to stop and think strategically. I've felt that creeping into my worklife too, so I see this blog as an opportunity for me to write about matters-- whether esoteric, philosophical, or simply diverting-- that are part of the bigger picture of my passions and ambitions.

I’m a small business owner, a one-woman communications shop in a field that is nothing but deadlines. My clients call me when they are overstretched, generally with the “drop dead” deadline looming, with information that they urgently need me to convey, and there’s no room for futzing or delay. As much as they and I would like to have the time to plan, to conduct research and carefully zero in on the strategic approach, it all too rarely seems an option. So I’ve devised a quick triage approach to much of the work I do.

For example, my method of approaching a donor magazine story with a very tight timeline? Review the client’s goals, of course, then go straight to booking an interview, whether or not I plan to include a quote. Skip the exhaustive background reading (okay, do a little), and spend half an hour talking with someone at the heart of a story—perhaps a program user, a staff member, or a donor. This will often yield the roadmap into the story, with all the interesting sideroads and intersections clearly marked. Through equal parts experience, curiosity and intuition, I’ve gotten good at drawing people out in interviews, getting past the roadblocks of what they think they should say, until we reach the thing that really excites them about an organization. Then I go back and research that idea, placing it at the centre of my story. I can turn an article like this around in a day.

None of this can begin, of course, without a clear sense of direction coming from the client. “Who do you want to reach?” is my first question. Then, “What do you need to convince this person (or group of people) to do?” Then, taking those points into consideration, “What is the story at your organization that is most likely to convince that person to take that action?” This is where we all too often take a leap of faith, because we don't think we have enough time or money to do proper research into that question.

Too often, we approach organizational storytelling as though we’re looking in a mirror, reflecting only on our internal viewpoint. If we’re going to draw people into our organizations—whether as donors, volunteers, clients or staff—we must smash those mirrors (or save them for gazing into at the retreat), and get used to looking at our organizations from inside-out and outside-in, and that takes both formal and informal research. Sure, it’s going to require some time and money, but in this increasingly competitive charitable environment, it’s the only way to go.