True Patriot Love... But by whom?

After reading the article "Everybody Loves Us" I couldn't help but laugh at how completely accurate the article really is. Canada is one of the most (if not the most) popular country in the world, but it is only seen that way by people who dont consider it to be their home and native land. Canada prides itself in being a country of freedom, security, beauty, and racial diversity, and these qualities is how other countries see us, but very few people pride themselves in simply being a Canadian citizen.

According to the artice, Canadians don't like our lack of independance from America's influence. As we are a very new country, of course we will have taken the influences of other countries to build what is our National Identity. While we have learned a lot from American influence, we are still our own country, with our own seperate identity. Another criticism Canadians had was the lack of integrity of our government systems. Sure there have been instances where our governments integrity has been questioned, but we are still a democratic country, which is in my opinion, a step above countries living under the rule of tyrants, and dictators. While our government has made some mistakes, they are still elected by us, and so their mistakes are also partially our mistakes. The last major criticism the article pointed out was our limited impact on world affairs. In my opinion, this is just another area that i take pride in as a Canadian citizen. Canada is a country known as a peace keeping country. We have no enemies, and have rarely participated in wars over the course of our history. The fact that we have limited impact on world affairs is not accurate in my opinion, i think that we just don't hear about Canada's impact, because it is one based on peace, and building relationships with other nations.

All of these "flaws" people of Canada are said to have seem to have no impact on the people who aspire to immagrate to Canada however, as the two main areas listed as Canada's most appealing features were our beautiful natural environment, and the quality of life here in Canada. As a Canadian citizen, I think it would be fairly accurate to say that these two areas are among the most taken advantage of aspects of our great country. There are many wonderful attributes of Canada that are ignored by her own people, but as long as there are people who continue to see her beauty, and remind us what a great country we are taking advantage of.

Taser Death at the Vancouver Airport

"The video shows an agitated Mr. Dziekanski throwing computer equipment in the airport greeting centre, a secure area, before police arrive". Is this enough justification for killing a man? Of course not. Mr. Dziekanski, a polish immigrant was tasered just seconds after being approached by the police in the Vancouver airport.

In response to the article "Video of airport Taser death released" I feel the police used unecessary force against this man, and I also feel that there were many peaceful actions the police could have chose to use before resorting to tasering the man.

The article talks about how Mr. Dziekanski "screamed and moaned in pain" and how the police did nothing about this, except for putting more force on the man keeping him to the ground. The police should have tended to their victim right away, especially if he was in such extreme pain.

When the video of the incident was discovered, police knew they were in the wrong, as they tried to withhold the video from the man who created it. He took legal action however, and had his video returned to him. I think it is good that the video be released to the public, as it shows a serious flaw in the police force, and perhaps this negative publicity with encourage change in tasering rules and regulations.

Women and the innate interest they have on other women

In response to Jaime J. Weinman's article "The tabs: no men allowed", I agree with the problem, it is statistically proven that tabloids focus on women, and rarely talk about men. I think it is unnecessary however, that this happens, and don't agree with the reasoning behind it.

There are straightforward statistics in the article, proving the inequality in tabloids of male mentions compared to female mentions. The most mentioned female in the tabloid website TMZ is Britney Spears with 791 mentions. The most mentioned male on that same website was Mel Gibson, with only 67 mentions.

This is blatant gendered inequality, and according to the article, the columnists themselves are pointing this out. The reasoning behind it is apparently because most gossip readers are women, and writers are under the (false) impression that women prefer to read about other women.



Sure, sometimes women love seeing other (especially younger, and more beautiful) women doing something wrong and getting busted for it, but at the same time these women also may enjoy seeing the perfect men as less then perfect too. Rather than ruining the fantasy of these men, I think knowing their flaws could make the men seem more realistic, and within reach to these women, so I disagree with the writers' reasoning.

The article says "women who read these magazines, at least subconsciously, imagine themselves as part of this world" and I find it kind of hard to believe that women imagine themselves in this world, but don't want to hear the dirt on the men, especially men in couples. If they are with another woman, women tend to create their own reasoning as to why they are with this other woman, and not them. If there is something wrong with them, like they have a serious drug problem, that is a fairly good reasoning. But what do I know, I like a good Lindsay Lohan bashing as much as the next woman.

Apple: Necessary, or a nuisance?

In response to the article "NBC executive slams Apple for 'killing music industry'", I would personally like to give Mathew Ingram a pat on the back for his position regarding NBC executive positions on Apple music purchases. I agree with Ingram when he says that Apple rescued the music industry from irrelevance, as the days of Napster and free downloads did rob a lot of money from them. Charging for songs online is a great way to satisfy peoples' need for convenience, as well as the ability to own one song by an artist instead of a whole album, which is potentially making the industry more money.


If a person likes just one song by an artist, they will either buy the whole album, or not. Having songs for individual sale allows the people who would not have purchased the album for the one song to have that one song, and pay specifically for it.


It is also true when Ingram points out that the industry has made far more from iTunes than it would have been able to make by itself in the online world. A partner as popular as iTunes is an excellent resource. According to answerbag.com, ipod has sold over 100 million ipods, meaning close to 100 million people must have ipods. If those 100 million people all purchase one song from iTunes, the music industry is going to get a very large amount of money.


Ingram's point comparing iTunes' refusal to pay a portion of their hardware sales to the network to TV manufacturers was absolutely brilliant. It is absolutely true that TV has sold a ton of hardware to people "eager to watch major network content" and if the industry wants a portion of hardware sales from iTunes, in the name of fairness, they would have to do the same for TV manufacturers.

In my opinion, NBC's decision to leave iTunes was not smart, and will potentially be devestating for the company. With recent developments like iTunes on cellphones as well as computers, iTUnes is even more accessible than it used to be, and its popularity is only growing.