January 21, 2025

3 thoughts on “Cobourg beach fiasco: hyperlocal journalism at it should be

  1. E-Journalist Professor, Robert Washburn wrote: “Northumberland Today reporter Pete Fisher launched a maelstrom this week after reporting on the lack of bylaw enforcement along Cobourg’s waterfront over the long August Civic Holiday weekend.”
    “Launched a maelstrom” How accurate is that assertion? Is it hyperbolic hogwash or an astute description of Pete Fisher’s news article and ‘Viewpoint’? What is a maelstrom?

    The Scandanavian word was brought into English by poet Edgar Allan Poe, author of A Descent into the Maelstrom (1841). The word was also used by Jules Verne in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1869) wherein Captain Nemo’s Nautilus sub was sucked into a maelstrom.

    Wikepedia describes Maelstrom as a synonym for whirlpool. Maelstrom “appears in diverse contexts metaphorically to make reference to different subjects or objects that suggest great chaotic or sinister forces.” Homer, (not Mr Simpson, but the Greek poet) describes a maelstrom in Odyssey.

    Did Mr Fisher, figuratively speaking, launch a great chaotic or sinister force? Great writers, Poe, Verne and Homer describe maelstrom as a threatening event. Hyperbolic expression by a journalist is foolish and dangerous; such fine use of language should be left to those who know how to handle it adroitly; poets.

    It would be far more accurate to describe Mr Fisher’s ‘hyperlocal journalism’ as having stirred up a bit of dust from an unkempt parking lot. What has been the result of Mr Fisher’s reportage? This is the so-called maelstrom: five letters to the editor spread over a week and half, and two more bloated articles pumped by Mr Fisher. Compare that “maelstrom”, with the series of people-in-the-street demonstrations over health care a couple months ago. Would Mr Washburn describe that as a doubleplusmaelstrom?

    Nevertheless, Mr Washburn claimed that Mr Fisher’s article and op/ed represented “some of the best aspects of hyperlocal journalism.”

    Wikipedia defines ‘local news’ as “coverage of events in a local context which would not normally be of interest to those of other localities, or otherwise be of national or international scope.” Hyper, derived from hyperbole, is better known on the street as ‘exaggeration’ or excessive exaggeration, over-the-top exaggeration. Hyperlocal journalism is nothing more than a jargonista jerk-off phrase.

    Local news, call it local news. Name it as it is. Hyperlocal hogwash. It reminds me of testimony given by one of the Plumbers Unit at a trial during the Watergate scandal, describing how they “conducted a preliminary feasability and vulnerability study” of Daniel Ellsberg’s psychiatrist office in LA. What the hell is that? Can you picture it in your mind? Bureaucratic obfuscation, language used as a squid uses ink to conceal rather than reveal. If I tell you that it means “case the joint.” Then we have a clear image of what the Plumbers Unit had done.

    And what was the root issue that caused Mr Fisher to wallow in hyperlocal journalism? It was the “…surrounding parking, waste removal and general safety. Fisher, recorded images of the violations showing overflowing garbage cans, tents pitched on the beach, illegal use of barbeques and so forth.”

    Let’s examine the photographs that Mr Fisher took. There are 23 jpgs on the Northumberland Today site. Mr Washburn asserts that “The evidence from this perspective appears solid. Mr Washburn asserted that Mr Fisher’s images recorded ‘violations.’ Of what? Of overflowing garbage cans. This is the first time that I have heard of an overflowing garbage can being a violation of any law. There are three images of overflowing garbage cans.

    Park23.jpg displays a full recycling bin and a bit of debris on the ground around it. The image also shows an individual bagging some of the debris before the day was done. Park22.jpg shows a full garbage bin, and many green garbage bags surrounding it. One can note that the users of the park had dutifully bagged their garbage, but instead of putting it into the trunk of their car and taking it home, they left it by the garbage bin. Park14.jpg shows an overflowing garbage bin by the walkway that separates the beach from the park. It is a garbage bin for those strolling along the walk, visitors and locals alike. The debris in this bin appears to be throwaway wraps from the nearby concession stand.

    Mr Washburn next refers to Mr Fisher’s solid evidence pertaining to “tents on the beach”. Mr Fisher provided several panorama pics (Park1.jpg, Park3.jpg, Park4.jpg, Park13.jpg, Park16.jpg, Park17.jpg, Park19.jpg and Park20,jpg) of the beach. Of the eight images, only one showed a tent on the beach, and in that instance is was only one tent, and a pup tent at that. One tent, not “tents pitched on the beach” as Mr Washburn sloppily and inaccurately asserts. The other images clearly displayed tents in the park, not on the beach.

    Mr Washburn next refers to Mr Fisher’s solid evidence pertaining to “illegal use of barbeques” There was no such thing. The only image that Mr Fisher produced was Park5.jpg. It shows a male cooking up some hotdogs on a small propane barbeque. There is a sign nearby which specifies that there is to be no CHARCOAL barbeques. The photo displays the propane tank which is feeding the barbeque. This is not illegal.
    It is irresponsible, sloppy journalism to make an assertion of illegality when there is no proof whatsoever of such illegality. Surely a competent journalist would know how to read a photograph and be fully informed, especially more informed about a situation than readers. In this instance, Mr Washburn again presented inaccurate information.

    Mr Washburn’s entire phrase was “illegal use of barbeques and so forth.” What is “so forth.” Why would Mr Washburn dilute his journalism lesson with such a meaningless throwaway cliché. It is a tactic of hack journalists and activists to extend a line of thought without having to produce any evidence or identifying anything to support such an extension. Using ‘so forth’ in such a manner is entirely misleading. If there is a “so forth”, identify it.

    Lets repeat Mr Washburn’s assertion about Mr Fisher’s photodocumentation: “The evidence from this perspective appears solid.”. Mr Washburn would do well to join his students and attend a few journalism refresher courses.

    Prof Washburn then comments about Mr Fisher’s op/ed piece. Unlike the Fisher article, Mr Washburn claims the op/ed piece provides “much more detail”. Washburn listed eight items. He wrote, “The tents, barbeques, coolers and other violations …

    Mr Fisher had written, “Banning all barbecues has been discussed. Although the canteen was busy this weekend, there were hundreds of coolers and barbecues throughout the park every day.”

    Mr Fisher clearly stated the specificity that “Banning all barbecues has been discussed” and note the word “all”; however, this does not seem to sink into Mr Washburn’s perception. Mr Washburn talked about “illegal use of barbeques” and again, above, refers to barbeques in the generic as a “violation” and this in spite of the fact that Fisher had clearly made no such assertion.

    Where do “coolers” fit into the narrative. Fisher only wrote that there were “hundreds of coolers … throughout the park every day”. So what? There is no prohibition against coolers on the beach or in the park, so what is the purpose of this superfluous mention? It is needless clutter to the story. Nevertheless, Mr Washburn’s sloppy read of Mr Fisher’s op/ed now inserts the non-issue of coolers into his sentence which includes it with “other violations”. How could a teacher of journalism make up facts out of nothing.

    Let us also note that Mr Washburn finishes his sentence with “and other violations”. What violations? There were none. Again this is a throwaway cliché of hack writers who want to bloat an issue with hot airy nothings.
    The easily impressed Mr Washburn, from his podium as a journalism teacher, declares Mr Fisher’s hyperlocal journalism to be “good journalism.” (I will address this in a separate analysis) .

    Mr Washburn pontificates: It is the job of every journalist to hold governments accountable. It is good hyperlocal journalism from this perspective and should be celebrated. Politicians need to be held accountable, too.
    Yes. Journalists also need to be held accountable to the public for their work. Teachers of journalism, who are salaried from the public purse, also should be held accountable for what they teach young impressionable minds and the public. Journalism that is not astutely accurate and as rigorous with itself as is constantly demanded from politicians and government, quickly loses its credibility as an accurate describer of local events and issues.

    Mr Washburn extols, “Fisher did a great job getting the bureaucratic response.” Mr Fisher interviewed Cobourg’s director of legislative services, received an email response from the Communications Branch of the Ministry of the Attorney General’s office and obtained a quote from Cobourg’s Police Chief. That sounds like Mr Fisher did his job as a journalist. There is nothing “great” about it. The reporters that dug and dug the bureaucratic response to Watergate did a “great job”. Mr Washburn is simply diluting the language in the same manner that people now refer to Avril Lavigne as a “diva”. The word no longer holds any value when it is misapplied.

    Mr Washburn laments the lack of further context to the story of Victoria Park/Beach, asserting that the “additional result is a uninformed public who are unable to formulate facts upon which they can hold a meaningful debate. Instead, misinformation drives a discourse that fails to serve the community and democracy.”

    Mr Washburn was failed to formulate the facts from a reading of a colleague’s journalism. Mr Washburn misleads his students and readers when he asserts that coolers in the park/beach is a violation of some law, when he asserts that a perfectly obvious legal barbeque is declared an illegal barbeque. How can the public hold a meaningful debate when hyperlocal journalists fail to provide accurate facts.

    One important story to the annual bash-fest of tourists to Cobourg’s Victoria Park/Beach is overlooked by all of the hyperlocal and regional news media. A Human interest story? Not a single paid journalist has ever interviewed a tourist to Cobourg. Many of these tourists come from distressed countries, struggled to get here, to raise a family, to assimilate, by coming out of their particular cultural enclaves in the world’s most diverse city to enjoy a small town’s inhospitality. THAT is a story that needs exposure.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.