Glad To See This Site
Submitted by J. David Core – 3/28/00
I was recently introduced to Toronto In Focus by my good friend Mike, and have found the site informative, entertaining and attractive. The heading banner may be a little graphics intense, but overall the site is easy to use and concise, which is good for this medium that is usually overworked and confusing.
I am soon to begin on a private photography business enterprise and will be sure to use TIF as one of my primary advertising venues, and I would urge most local businesses to do the same. However, there are a few points that I feel should be brought to the fore regarding our local media.
In the good ol’ days, when The Toronto Tribune was the only local outlet for neighborhood news, the paper was a source of true pride. But today (with TIF, The River City Review and The H.S. Toronto Scene) it seems that content always has to have a bias. None has an editorial page, so all place their editorial views directly into the text. And that text is generally riddled with typos and run-on train-of-thought rambling. (Less so The Toronto Scene, but not completely).
Now for some specific “CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISMS” to quote 4th ward councilman Coppa:
The River City Review is a privately run business (Does the River City Review Have a Problem With Your City’s Web Site!) as well as a community service. Of course Ms Rochus is entitled to edit suggestions to use her competitors from the text of a letter. (Not an article as reported). Should Stacey’s IGA place the weekly specials for Sav-A-Lot on their bulletin board?
Council members who did not respond to a suggestion that minutes be posted on-line (Council Snubs Request! March 17, 2000) were perfectly within their rights. It was not (after all) a motion. Had they been told before-hand that the suggestion was going to be made in that public forum? Had they been given the opportunity to examine the legality? Did they have a specific agenda that took precedence?
4th ward Councilman Coppa’s submitted musings (2000 Council Meeting Notes) might better be suited to the designation “editorial” rather than “notes.” Heading these self-serving political back slappings as notes is a-kin to calling Casius Clay’s Butterfly Rhyme a fight report.
And finally, to most of the other submitters of letters to this site; have you ever used your spell checkers? Most of you probably also have grammar check. Why not use them? Not to mention the thesaurus function. That’s not a paleontology term. People who have left our fair gem city surely read this tome. Why give them extra ammunition to use when defending their decisions to have gone? In this day of e-mail and message boards and chat, we have gone far too far in relaxing our written word standards.
Again, let me say that I am happy to have found this fantastic site, and I only hope to see it improve.
J. David Core