Of Chrome and Thunder...

Credit Due

Fri, 02 Mar 2012 16:00:59 -0800

Recently I logged on to the website of a local weekly media organization and discovered a review of a band that had one of my photos attached. I was surprised I was not contacted by the organization for permission of my photos to be published, nor was there any credit attached to the photo. I was not concerned with receiving financial compensation for the image, merely credit. I sent the editor a quick email stating my name, my connection to the photo, and a simple request, that my name be attached as a photo credit. It seems however that this request was not so simple, it was easier to just remove the photo from the website, which angered me more than the initial rub. Why should the band, or myself be punished?

Again I sent them an E-mail, stating that I wasn’t asking them to remove the photo, just to add a photo credit. After all if it was one of their photos being published on another website, or by another media organization they would expect the same, or even ask for financial compensation. I was told that by policy they do not do this, that they don’t add a credit to album artwork, and that I should contact the band since it was their website where they pulled the image. This seems problematic to me not only as a photographer and artist, but also someone who tries to be supportive of the local arts community. As a media organization, I explained to them, they are responsible for fact finding, and accuracy. I simply found it unprofessional that they would attempt to place the blame for lack of credit on the band. I’m assuming they didn’t ask the band, because anyone in the band would have told them who took the photo.

Furthermore the outright removal of the photo does nothing to help the band or myself as a photographer, and while I understand that the organization has not made any claims to support the local arts community, it’s also an image they like to cultivate, and it seems that they could throw back a little something to the local artists and photographers whose work they use to accompany articles. After all many of us are looking for nothing more than a little respect and a little acknowledgement of our work, much of our work comes at a cost to us, for a media organization that operates for profit, what are a few characters on a screen, or on a page, but a negligible cost. To us this little bit of exposure could be mean better gigs, or even make the difference in getting paid work.

I find it funny that while they like to position themselves as an alternative to the mainstream media, this lack of respect for those who often times unwillingly or unknowingly contribute to the content of their online or offline publications, seems contradictory. After all the mainstream media publications not only give credit but will often compensate financially for work published in their pages. It’s a disrespect that artists would expect from the mainstream publications, but instead comes from the “alternative”, and that is a Straight shot to the core of any artist.

Occupy This

Thu, 08 Dec 2011 16:09:40 -0800

When the orders began in the past couple of weeks that tents and structures were to come down from Occupy encampments across North America many people were rightfully upset. They saw a system that was infringing upon their rights to protest, and while laws exist to prevent such encampments, the form this protest took was in many ways dependent upon the tents. The Occupy movement received very little media attention for the first few weeks of the protests, and was initially spun off as a joke by mainstream media, and the social elite they were protesting.

These same occupy opponents praised law enforcement and local governments for finally doing it’s job by destroying these encampments and shutting down protests without permits. Many said it was okay to protest but not to break the law, overlooking one simple fact. The United States as a country was created through acts of dissent and civil disobedience. The Boston Tea Party, the civil rights movement, and the anti-war protest, which were all examples of iconic moments in America’s history that employed these tactics.

With the application for permits often being subject to political ideology, and camps being illegal, the movement faces an uphill battle. They face law enforcement tactics that are becoming increasingly confrontational and violent. With the potential of the erosion over freedoms and liberties these confrontations may lead to an escalating cycle of violence on both sides of the issue.

While the occupy movement has understandably come under fire for lack of focus, it has remained largely peaceful, however the comments and actions by it’s opponents have become increasingly aggressive, and outline why people have been protesting and setting up encampments across North America for the last two months. The American system and arguably much of the political system of the developed world has ceased to be about the people. Democracies, which were founded to give their people the best opportunity and to give individuals a voice, have become co-opted by large corporations. On one hand these groups push for less government regulation, as was the case with the banking industry, yet when through their own actions, and mistakes found themselves in financial crisis, were among the first to ask for government money to help them survive.

These big money lobbyists have a power that citizens do not. Through campaign donations, backroom deals, and connections they steer the direction of lawmakers to their favor, with very little consideration to the citizens that government is supposed to protect. They fight to create and protect policies which support an elitist system, full of loopholes designed to protect a massive collection of wealth and power, loopholes which are not accessible by those outside this highly connected power structure.

It would be easy to write off this growing movement if the relationship between big business, political policy and those who make it were mere conspiracy, however with corporate fraudsters stealing millions or billions serving little to no jail time, and bailouts going to corporations with little or none being received by low to middle income families who face mounting debts and home foreclosures, the evidence ads up to a system where the normal laws and rules simply do not apply to those connected to the power structure.

The Dirty Bird

Fri, 16 Jul 2010 00:27:26 -0700

“Just as naked starlets win publicity for the animal rights crowd, an image of an oil-covered bird and a few sensational statements earn headlines for the anti-oil brigade.” is the quote from an article in the Edmonton Sun. This coming from a paper who the same day had a cover that showed a tar soaked bird, and questioned who’s birds were dirtier. It’s a sad day when a newspaper wears it’s bias on the front page, it also represents misinformation from a major media outlet. While I may agree there is a lot of enviro-chaos this world over, in Alberta the government is willing to turn a blind eye to what is going on in the north of this province. With cancer rates in Native communities near the tar sands projects being much higher than anywhere else, and wildlife dying in tailings ponds not even being reported for years, the government seems to only step in when public outcry reaches a fever pitch, if at all.

San Francisco based Corporate Ethics should be applauded, for bringing this environmental catastrophe to the forefront. What is happening up north is largely ignored by the community in Alberta. We want the money but aren’t willing to face the ugly truth as to where that money is coming from, and at what expense. Reading through comments on the Edmonton Sun’s website to the Corporate Ethics ad campaign really gets a sense of the mood in this province, yet they haven’t actually taken the time to do the research. They talk about how Americans shouldn’t talk about what’s going on here, that they should clean up their own yard first, that they are part of the problem, and to a certain extent they’re right, but their arguments begin to fail when you realize how uninformed they are, the only example in the states that they are able to cite right now is the gulf spill, and by the numbers it’s pretty big. It represents 1.4 million cubic meters of oil spilled, yet thats nothing compared to just one of the tailings ponds in the tar sands projects. The Syncrude tailings pond contains 540 million cubic meters of waste, that includes ammonia, arsenic and mercury, this is held back by the second largest dam in the world, and it’s a type of dam that has had on average 2 failures per year since 1995.

The Edmonton Sun article quotes Travis Davies, a spokesman for the Canadian Association of Petroleum producers as saying “Like any industry, there is a land impact, but in Alberta, that land must be reclaimed, by law,” and says there is an $800 million bond paid by oil producers to ensure the land is returned to a natural state. Well that sounds like a good deal, especially now that we can look to the gulf of mexico. BP has said the cost to them so far has been $3.5 billion, and it’s spill is just a fraction of what is contained in the tailings pond. The notion of the land being reclaimed and returned to a natural state is laughable, the Exxon Valdez ran aground more than 20 years ago, and parts of the affected area have still not recovered, and scientists believe it may be another 30 before they do. If it was possible to deal with the waste there would be no need for tailings ponds in the first place. The true cost of clean up will be much, much higher than the $800 million, and thats if it stays contained.

I find it depressing that so many Albertans, are so misinformed, and uneducated about the process of oil extraction in their own province. They hide behind the natural splendor of Banff and Jasper, and get upset when someone brings up the ugly blight of the north. The Edmonton Sun may be able to say Michael Marx’s comments about shifting an industry away from oil, while boycotting another industry like tourism is ironic, but the author Michael Platt himself fails to realize that tourism will never be able to sustain the Alberta economy on it’s own. Right now Alberta is being driven by oil, yet there is nothing else on the horizon to take it’s place, and with not only the potential end of oil in our own lifetimes, but a major public shift happening away from our dependence on fossil fuels isn’t it time Alberta diversify to an economy based on sustainability.?

Under the Dome

Thu, 13 May 2010 14:35:44 -0700

When the Bloedel Conservatory opened in Vancouver in 1969 it must have seemed like an alien spacecraft had landed and taken up residence at one of the highest points within the city. Built with a donation from Prentice Bloedel, the conservatory represents a vision of the future, both in vision and in purpose, and after viewing the archive footage from the opening it’s easy to see how much of the park and city have evolved, the trees have grown taller, and so too have the buildings in the downtown core. Even inside many of the plants seem bigger than they once did, a sort of time capsule of plants.

40 years on and the Bloedel still exists, though for how much longer is in question. It seems that the $250 000 it would require to keep it open is just not in the budget for the city of Vancouver. This to me is a shame, and perhaps I am a little to blame. I’ve lived in Vancouver since 2004 and have just recently visited the Bloedel for my first time. I didn’t go because of guilt or a desire to save the Bloedel, I went for the reason anyone should go, I happened to be there one day, and was looking for something to do. I wish I had gone sooner.

Under the dome I discovered a world of plants, birds and fish that was completely unlike what we are used to on the outside. Vines stretch down from the trees that grow nearly to the ceiling of the glass dome. Part of me wanted to reach up and grab one, swinging through the conservatory like Tarzan swinging through the jungle. I enjoyed the birds swooping around my head as I tried to photograph others, like jealous children wondering why someone isn’t paying attention to them. The air humid, and warm was a wonderful change from the slightly cool dry air outside the dome. I felt as if I had escaped the lingering chill of winter and skipped right to the summer I had been waiting for. I hope the conservatory is around this next winter so I can escape the rain and the cold, and hopefully relieve some of the depression that affects me every year. The conservatory is a wonderful place.

It’s places like these that are so important to cities in Canada because of the escape from winter that they can provide. I am most certain that they are not built for the tourists, but for the residents. Many of us are not able to afford trips to the exotic destinations where these plants exist naturally, but why should that stop us from seeing, and learning about them. Coming from Edmonton Alberta I had many trips to the Muttart Conservatory, a structure that consists of four pyramids, each hosting it’s own separate micro-climate. I enjoyed these trips to the Muttart during my time living in Edmonton, many of which coming on school field trips, but a few on my own too. Admission to the conservatory in Edmonton was free until after the $6.3 million renovation in 2009, and now remains under ten dollars, it’s still an affordable afternoon out.

More important than getting out, conservatories are a place where we can learn about the natural environments the world over, in many cases environments that are becoming increasingly endangered, and places like the Bloedel and the Muttart I feel are also becoming increasingly rare. With Vancouver’s push to be the greenest city by 2020 the city is letting a wonderful educational resource slip through it’s fingers, we should be expanding the Bloedel, not thinking of shutting it down, perhaps creating a facility that rivals the Eden Project in the UK. With the decimation of the environments that these conservatories represent the question we should be asking isn’t about whether we can afford to operate these buildings, but can we afford not to?

Radar Love

Thu, 06 May 2010 18:28:00 -0700

Driving through the streets of Edmonton Alberta as a 16 year old youth I failed to consider the implications of my chosen mode of transportation. I was more concerned with the fact that I now had the freedom to travel into the city from the suburbs where my family lived, and my friends could come with me. Lost were many high school classes to the draw of the downtown cafes, and when old enough the bars, I loved to drive and I still do.

Edmonton is a city that is built around the automobile. It’s precise grid like structure is easy to navigate. Very few of the streets have names, it’s numbers there. The car has made it easy for people to live in the suburbs, my family were commuters, like most people in the city. Housing in the city for many many years was very affordable, and who wants to rent when you can own. People were able to follow their dreams of the two car garage and the white picket fence. I was proud to be from Edmonton. It was the city I grew up in, the city my friends lived. I have many good memories. Spending time outside in the summer sun with friends, attending the fringe festival, or heritage days. A taste of Edmonton was always a favorite. At 26 I moved away from Edmonton to pursue higher education in Vancouver. I held onto these memories, and remained proud of where I was from. It was only after graduation and several years between visits that the luster began to fade on the memories of my home.

What I discovered on my last trip was a city that was trying to be world class. However it is failing. Edmonton it seems has tried to follow a model that was instituted in the 50s, 60s and 70s in the United States. Models that those cities, particularly in the “rust belt” are now trying to change back. Driving into the city from Vancouver the first thing I noticed was the amount of construction. I was unsure where I was anymore. The borders of the city are under construction and somewhat blurred now. Hectares of forest within the city cut down, wetlands behind my family house bulldozed and filled in, all in the name of progress. The ring road being built is in my opinion one of the worst things Edmonton could be doing to reduce congestion. Through the process of making it easier for people to get from suburb to suburb, and around the city is only going to make traffic worse. More people will be moving out to the suburbs, and more people will be driving on those roads.

I don’t think that a comparison to Detroit in the 1960s is unfair. They too built a massive road system, and an exodus to the suburbs followed, fueled in part by massive racial violence in the city, and while it’s not as racially motivated, Edmonton too is a city that is plagued by violence. Open up the paper on any day, listen to the radio, turn on the television and you’ll hear reports of how many people were stabbed the night before. The moniker “Stabmonton” is not unfounded. Friday, and saturday night in Edmonton is awash with young violent drunks looking for a fight, and it’s not just drunks, lets be honest, with the oil boom in Alberta, people working away at camps for weeks at a time, they come from the north into the city, pockets full of money looking to have a good time and that means drugs too. Would you want to live in a city where violence seems to be out of control?

Some of the worst of what is going on in Edmonton is happening on it’s roads. Speaking to a cab driver one night out on the town, he told me the horror stories of what the city has contributed to his profession and the roads at night. Now in Edmonton club goers and revellers can now face a 6.50 charge upon entering a cab, but only after 10 PM thursday friday and saturday, and my driver said “people are just not taking cabs”. but they are still going out, and driving. With the police occupied trying to keep violence to a minimum they have not been watching for drunk drivers on the road. My driver even told me that last christmas season there were no checkstops on the roads. Drunk drivers have been effectively been given a pass, and with added roads, added travel time, so too is there an added risk to these drivers, and everyone else on the road.

It is my opinion that the cities plan has been an utter failure, on many levels. Sure they have been expanding their transit system too, but with the limited hours, and limited routes, it’s not going to get people out of their cars, especially on a friday and saturday night. An expansion of the light rail system seems to be only a token gesture, for critics and environmentalists, a way to contribute to the “solution”, but it’s marginal. The LRT system connects the northeast corner of the city, through downtown, and straight south, and I would estimate only serves a tenth of the population. Edmonton as a city needs to change it’s mentality, and it’s way of doing things, they should spend the money now, serve every corner of the city with a light rail solution, and worry about paying for it later, because it needs to be done eventually, but because it needs to be done now.

A ring road isn’t the answer to Edmonton’s woes. Edmonton needs to be thinking about increasing density and not contributing to urban sprawl. It needs to think not about the now but the future, and create a sustainable thriving metropolis on the prairies. It can be that world class city it so desperately wants to become, by contributing to green initiatives, create a system to get more drivers off the road, using public transportation, and human powered transportation. I get why people want to drive, why it’s desirable to commute, but is it necessary to drive yourself to work in your SUV, or pickup truck. I think not. Edmonton should be encouraging people to move into the city, not away, perhaps in the process revitalize a downtown core that has been devoid of people and culture for as long as I can remember. Even Calgary to the south has done it better. Why can’t Edmonton?