Pick Your Spot

Your Working Girl loves newspapers.  The more the merrier she cheerfully proclaims when given the opportunity.  In print or online, she loves them all the same. In particular, she likes investigative journalism. It may come as a bit of a surprise to some Gentle Readers that, as a young woman, Your Working Girl herself wanted to be a part of that noble profession.  In her high school year book, she confidently announced ‘foreign correspondent’ as her future profession. (Sadly for Your Working Girl, Christianne Amanpour got the job.)  So sitting down at her dining room table on Saturday in front of a high protein, working-out working girl breakfast, she eagerly opened the Globe and Mail to feast (as it were) upon their much-anticipated series on philanthropy.  She was not disappointed.  She devoured (as it were) – page after page of comprehensive reportage. Here was the Fourth Estate at its best providing information and analysis on Your Working Girl’s very own sector, a sector once Canadian MP, Albina Guarnieri (she of Bill C470 fame) once referred to as ‘impenetrable’. 

To Your Working Girl’s weather eye, the charitable sector’s reluctance to answer questions about itself has ceased to be charming.  The coquettish communications strategy of not wanting to be perceived as blowing one’s own horn or appearing self-interested has grown both tired and is tilting to the alarming side.  Your Working Girl has said this before and will say it again:   transparency and accountability go so far beyond the simplistic analysis of cost to raise a dollar, it hurts. 

Because of her steadfast belief in the power of print and her own realization that her abilities to influence are finite, she knew it would be helpful to have the assistance of a major news outlet such as the Globe and Mail, relieve her from her own task of providing “commentary on the charitable sector.”

Then, while savouring a sense of relief and a lifting delicate forkful of her egg-white omelet to her lips, she read  Paul Waldie’s piece, A time of crisis, a moment of opportunity:

“The situation is so pressing that Imagine Canada, an umbrella organization for the nations’ non-profit sector has called its first ever emergency summit.  A month from today hundreds of delegates from across the country will gather in Ottawa to discuss everything from how to attract volunteers, recruit professional managers and engage more Canadians. The summit’s three days of debate will feature addressed by Governor-General David Johnston and Calgary Mayour, Naheed Nenshi, but the focus will be on the need to adapt to structural shifts in the charitable universe.”

What’s this? asked Your Working Girl.  An ‘emergency summit’ in Ottawa a month from today. My land! Today being October 29^th,  Your Working Girl then did something she has not done in a very long time. She checked her calendar to count out the days.  What she saw did not re-assure her. A month from today is November 29^th, the very date Canada’s largest gathering of fundraisers opens the AFP Congress, Fundraising Ideas worth sharing in Toronto and, coincidentally on the very day (!) Your Working Girl is delivering her much-anticipated lecture, “How we’ve shot ourselves in the foot.”

The country’s two largest philanthropic organizations meeting with two different agendas in two different cities over the three same days?  How could that happen? And what did it mean? 

Was Your Working Girl into the breach once more?

She immediately dashed off emails to Marcel Lauzière, CEO of Imagine Canada and Susan Horvath, President of AFP Toronto Chapter.

Your Working Girl and her Gentle Readers need to know.  Do you find it troublesome that the two events are happening at the same time?  Was AFP was consulted on this date? Does the timing decision by Imagine Canada indicate it does not want the input of professional fundraisers? Have you had any discussion with AFP staff or board about this ‘emergency summit’? 

Marcel Lauzière, Imagine Canada CEO, responded within the hour.  “This is not an emergency Summit,” he wrote, “This is how Paul Waldie characterized it for some reason. It is part of our National Engagement Strategy that has been ongoing for over two years now.  Unfortunately miscommunication between our two organizations has left in us in the very unfortunate and embarrassing position of having our two meetings coincide exactly.  [It’s] hard to believe that this would happen given our close links but it did.  Both AFP and Imagine Canada have made a commitment that this will never happen again.”

Susan Horvath, President of AFP Toronto, checked in on Sunday saying that AFP has worked more closely with Imagine Canada in the past year than ever before.   “We did endeavor to not have that occur but mis-communications took place and then neither organization was able to change the dates,” she offered.

Maria Dyck, this year’s Congress chair faults logistics at the AFP end, “It turned out that our Congress schedule changed slightly based on availability of space at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre and this resulted in us both having the same dates . . . Next year, we'll work harder to avoid any overlap.”

“Oh tomayto, tomahto said the side of Your Working Girl’s brain that governs letting it all hang loose.  What’s the big fuss? 

Well for better or for worse, Imagine Canada and AFP are ours.  They represent the sector and the fundraisers who work in it.   When the media comes looking for context and information, this is who gets called. (With the notable exception of Charity Intelligence to whom Your Working Girl will soon devote an entire blog).  And please believe Your Working Girl when she says that the charitable sector has just begun to see the scrutiny it will be subjected to over the next two or three years.   

And as the sector is scrutinized, so will its leadership.  And we have to do better than this.  It’s not acceptable.  Your Working Girl is sad to report that many charities measure their success in how much money they raise as opposed to positive impact on people’s lives.  And AFP conducted itself in a way that puts the event before what’s most beneficial for the delegates and the debate.  Imagine Canada, for its part, scheduled their summit very close to when the AFP traditionally holds Congress.  There are so many tails wagging so many dogs, we’ve lost sight of what we’re here to do.   Thumbs down says Your Working Girl.  People in the sector should not have to choose between an important national discussion on community engagement or hearing from some of the most interesting practitioners in the business. 

Even still, Your Working Girl’s teacup is raised to Marcel Lauzière, Susan Horvath and Maria Dyck who answered her questions when asked.  Now we know what happened and have a commitment that it won’t happen again.  Your Working Girl and her Gentle Readers are paying attention, and paying attention is a good thing.  The door is opening and the light coming in will shine on everyone.  Guaranteed. 

Get Your Working Girl’s blogs straight in your inbox.  Just type your email in the box in the upper right hand corner

Scouts Honour? No-comment-beyond-what’s-in-the-statement

Like Gil Grissom, who played a forensic expert on TV, Your Working Girl has three crimes[1] that really get her goat.  And abuse of children is one of those crimes.  So when Your Working Girl tuned into the fifth estate last night to watch Scouts Honour and one of the first shots was an insistent Diana Swain chasing Scouts Canada CEO, Janet Yale, through a parking lot in the rain, she knew it couldn’t be good.  “For heaven’s sakes Janet!” my inside voice cried. “Turn around and speak to the woman.  Invite her up to your office for a proper interview. She’s talking about decades of abuse in the Scouting movement.  You are the CEO of Scouts Canada.  This is national TV.  Surely you understand now is not the time to turn your back.”

Your Working Girl’s outside voice speaks a little louder.  Why is it, she asks you, her Gentle Readers, that when charities are asked for explanations, they refuse to talk to the media?  Does being on the charitable side of righteousness mean that the need to be transparent does not apply?  Do charitable institutions somehow operate under different standards than government or business interests where the demand for transparency and accountability has people marching in the street.

By-and-large (and I say by-and-large because there are one or two exceptions[2]), when a charity is questioned about their actions or activities, the use of statements seems to be the only tool in the media relations tool box.  There is no Q & A for the charitable sector.  We don’t take questions.  And boo-hoo if anyone queries our motives.   We’re a charity for goodness sake.  Have you no pity?

Shame says Your Working Girl.  Shame.  Perhaps it’s BS fatigue, not donor fatigue, we’re looking at in the charitable sector she thinks (admittedly rather uncharitably).    

Scouts Canada is not the only charity that fits the no-comment-beyond-what’s-in-the-statement school of thought.  When cancer researchers set up an information booth at a Relay for Life event in Ancaster, Ontario this summer in an effort to let people know the percentage of the funding the Canadian Cancer Society designates to research had been declining and the story received national attention, the Society chose to issue an email statement as opposed to respond in person. 

And when the fundraising profession faced unprecedented federal legislation to impose a salary cap last year, a subject Your Working Girl has written about extensively, the Association of Fundraising Professionals did . . .  three guesses . . . issue a statement.[3] 

But Scouts Canada has an even more sacred responsibility. This is not about them.  It’s about the boys and young men who were violated under their watch.  And the pain expressed by those now angry, disillusioned and disturbed men who railed against those who looked the other way as they were repeatedly raped when they were children. If grown-up’s preying on vulnerable children is an anathema, what level of transgression is the grown-up who turns a blind eye  guilty of.  Is it the same? Worse?  Is it no crime at all?

This story is not going away.

CBC News reported this morning that “Scouts Canada has signed out-of-court confidentiality agreements with more than a dozen child sex-abuse victims in recent years, shielding the incidents from further media attention. In many of the agreements, a confidentiality clause prevents victims from revealing the amount paid or even the fact that there was a settlement. At least one bars a former boy scout from publicly divulging that the abuse took place.”

As John Cleese said in Fawlty Towers:  Just don’t talk about the war.

Diana Swain did eventually catch up with Janet Yale, CEO of Scouts Canada, just as she prepared to enter Scouts headquarters.  Janet turned around, spoke to Diana and referred her to what had been issued in the Scouts statement. 

It’s tough being a CEO.  It’s hard work.  And these are the kind of days that make it hard.  The days when you have to choose to do what’s right and what’s easy.   The facts are there.  Children were abused under Scouts leadership.  Scouts settled in more than a dozen cases making confidentiality a part of the settlement.  There is no question of this.  But for all that is good and holy about Scouts (and there is much to praise) the strategy going forward has to be based what is best for those children who were betrayed, not what’s best for the Scouts brand.   Answer the questions that are being asked of you – in person.  Put the children first.  And that’s not just a message for Scouts.  The message is for all charities serving the vulnerable and marginalized:  it’s not all about you. 

[1] Violence against women, abuse of children, drug dealing

[2] One exception is the redoubtable Rebecca Davies of MSF/DWB who called Matt Galoway, CBC radio Toronto morning show on his use of the term “chuggers” (charity muggers), to describe MSF face-to-face workers.  She was, and MSF often is, great at being upfront.  Rebecca is also speaking at AFP this year and should not be missed.

[3](Your Working Girl has been invited by AFP to speak at the AFP Congress on 2:00 on November 28^th.   on “How We’ve Shot Ourselves in the Foot”.  She’d love to see you there to chat more about this).

---

Battle Beyond the Blades

After sharing a bountiful Thanksgiving with family and friends, Your Working Girl was walking to a working girl work-out when a high-definition vision of Don Cherry dressed like a Christmas tree skirt appeared before her like a caterwauling demon who refused to be batted away. Her heart raced.  What was this vision?  Why now? 

Because hockey is treated more like a holy sacrament than a sport in Canada and the National Hockey League can be as transparent as a monastery, Your Working Girl is has been mildly encouraged  that mental illness, suicide, addiction and depression have seen the light of day in the context of the NHL.  The death of three players over the summer, two from suicide, has hockey is doing its version of soul searching.   How can this be a bad thing for people suffering mental illness?

The pain spilling out onto the ice of this opening season is without precedent.  When Rick Rypien’s mother, Shelley Crawford, dropped the ceremonial puck for the Winnipeg Jets opener on Sunday night alongside co-owners Dave Thomson and Mark Chipman, and NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman, the crowd rose up in a deafening ovation, chanting Rypien’s name. 

When former Toronto Maple Leaf and Nashville Predator Wade Belak took his own life days before his appearance on Battle of the Blades, former Leaf Russ Courtnall jumped in to replace him.  On Monday night when Russ and his skating partner, Kim Navarro, performed their last duet on the show, Kim broke into tears saying she’s thought of Wade every day since his death.   

Maybe a tipping point mused Your Working Girl.

Maybe not. 

From his throne on Coaches Corner and upon whom CBC’s executives have apparently bestowed divine providence, Don Cherry, Canada’s PT Barnum of hockey, glides into this icy mist of pain with the cocky assurance of a man who has made a career of providing commentary in the language of ridicule and abuse.  Sputtering and irate, he accused three former players Stu Grimson, Chris Nilan and Jim Thomson of being “pukes”, “turncoats” and “hypocrites” for speaking out about mental health and violence in hockey.   

Appalled by the CBC’s promotion of Mr Barnum, Your Working Girl sent a stern email to Kiristine Stewart, Executive VP of English program and CBC Board Chair Hebert Lacroix telling them she found the beatification Don Cherry and his circus inexplicable.  If the CBC has determined this man is the only one who can offer hockey fans informed commentary, heaven help us.  Sure, he tells kids to keep their stick on the ice and to keep their head up but it's advice increasingly wrapped in a blanket of anger, intolerance and vanity.   With Don Cherry, you don’t get one without the other.

Your Working Girl, mind you, is under no illusion that the CBC will listen, or even read, her missive.  The CBC is not, after all, the Toronto Blue Jays.  But there’s one thing she does want to make perfectly clear to CBC television and to her Gentle Readers.  Your Working Girl has been a loyal supporter of the network since birth.  She has spoken out when the network’s funding was in jeopardy from those nasty conservatives in Ottawa who just don’t get the moral imperative of public television. 

Well . . . phooey on that.  

The CBC can continue to broadcast as many specials as they wish featuring an ernest Linden McIntyre tsk tsking about the Catholic Church condoning abuse of children. They can continue to talk about their 75 year history in the tones of a Vatican Eucharist.  But as long as they provide a chair on national television for a man who hurls insults, screams at people with mental illness and addiction problems and ridicules anyone who disagrees with him, they are to Your Working Girl’s reckoning, an unresponsive institution that puts its own interests above those of its viewers and the people of Canada who pay for their very existence.   

Hopefully, Hockey Night in Canada sponsors will see the light of day at some point soon.  Because the network itself can’t be trusted to make the decision.  CBC television is letting Canadians down.  From coast to coast to coast. 

At the very least, the CBC could, as the fab editorial in today’s Globe and Mail Men of Dignity, not Pukes suggests:

“. . . bring these three men on to Coach’s Corner to face Mr. Cherry, and let him, and all of hockey, hear what a human being feels like after 250 bare-knuckle fights.”

Get Your Working Girl’s blogs straight in your inbox.  Just type your email in the box in the upper right hand corner. 

That-which-must-not-be-named

Since the Toronto Blue Jays finished up their 2011 season with a perfect 500 record (81 – 81), Your Working Girl is now turning to a serious matter that reared its painful head as the sun shone, the lakes glistened and the wind rustled through the trees. 

And fair warning to you, Gentle Reader, the matter is like Lord Voldemort.  It is deathly and we’ve tried to keep it at bay by not speaking its name. 

The Globe and Mail reported the passing of Winnipeg Jets forward Rick Rypien on August 15, 2011 using the common code words “it was a sudden but not suspicious death.”

The omerta loosened up 15 days later when former Toronto Maple Leaf Wade Belak died of an ‘apparent suicide.’

Then 11-year-old Toronto boy Mitchell Wilson took his own life just hours after he learned he would have to testify against the 12-year-old boy who bullied him.  When his grief-stricken father spoke to the media about his loss, it became impossible not to talk about suicide. 

Aside from the cultural and religious taboos associated with suicide (let’s leave cultural and religious hero worship associated with suicide for another day), there is the widespread idea that suicide is contagious and that if it is talked about or reported on, it will turn viral and result in many more suicides among people who are already vulnerable.  

The idea of copycat suicide is referred to as the ‘Werther principle’.  Taking his inspiration from Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s novel The Sorrows of Young Werther, American sociologist David Philips coined the romanticized term in 1974.  Goethe’s wildly popular novel published 200 years earlier in 1774 features the letters of the tormented, lovelorn protagonist who ultimately takes his own life because he’ll never have the woman he loves.  One impact of Goethe’s novel was that young men across Europe adopted the blue pants, yellow jacket and white shirt favoured by the young Werther. And, as an important book in the angst filled Sturm und Drang (Storm and Stress) period of German literature, it also reportedly led to the first recorded example of what authorities thought were copycat suicides. 

Research conducted by Philips and others linked the commission of suicide and reporting of suicide.  When newspapers when on strike, suicide rates seemed to decrease or when celebrity suicides were covered prominently, suicide rates increased.  There is even research that suggests that single vehicle motor accidents increase when a suicide story is a lead news item.  Not all researchers agree on the Werther effect.  Some say the data has been selective.  They point to the fears of copycat suicides not materializing after Kurt Cobain took his own life.  Nonetheless, organizations like the Canadian Psychiatric Association issue comprehensive guidelines on reporting suicide which, to Your Working Girl’s eye, look so cumbersome they would make any responsible editor recoil from covering the issue at all. 

Your Working Girl believes the questions must be asked:    

1.      In an effort to protect potentially vulnerable people, have we have promoted a code of silence that is doing more harm than good?

2.      By focusing on the power of copycat suicides and the way news agencies report suicide are we completely missing the reasons why so many Canadians feel such despair they choose to die?

That the reportage of suicide is blamed for increasing the incidents of suicide feels a bit off to  Your Working Girl.  After all, the silence around wife assault kept it hidden – and deadly – for so long.  Responsible journalists will pretty consistently report responsibly.  News agencies that choose to sensationalize events like rape and murder will continue to do so.  Does that mean we should just not talk about it? 

If there’s anything good that can come out of the personal tragedies Canadians have become aware of in the last few months, let it be that we can break the silence on suicide.  The stats are truly alarming:

·         Today 10 Canadians will take their own lives, a per capita rate three times that of the United States’

·         Suicide is the leading cause of death in men ages 25 to 29 and 40 to 44

·         Suicide is the leading cause of death in women ages 30 to 34

·         Suicide is the second leading cause of death among adolescents

People living in Toronto might be particularly interested to know that between 1999 and 2009, 150 killed themselves by throwing themselves in front of TTC subway trains, more than one a month. 

Bob Rae said it beautifully in an article he wrote for the Globe and Mail on October 4, 2011, in which he thoughtfully advocates a national suicide strategy:

            “Lives lost, kids struggling with identity and bullying, young people suddenly feeling adrift       and abandoned, veterans returning home from duty, older people struggling with health and uncertain of the way ahead. What we now realize is a simple truth: Suicide is not just a personal tragedy, a life cut short, an existential decision that leaves disbelief and devastation behind.”

                “It is no surprise, then, that all of us have been touched by suicide, have lost friends and loved ones, and have tried to figure out why lives that seemed together and well-focused are suddenly ended. But the bewilderment of silence and pain that surrounds mental  health has to end. It is no longer just a personal question; it is now a political question.”

It’s time to break the silence on suicide.

Your Working Girl has concluded that there is virtually nothing that cannot be explicitly discussed in the media these days.  (Think Rick Santorum.) Yet suicide is still described in code.  It seems . . .  well . . .  madness, that a soul-destroying tragedy affecting thousands of families across the country,  including the family of some of Your Working Girl’s dearest friends, continues to be talked about in hushed tones. In an effort to shed some light on how we communicate issues around suicide, fundraise for suicide prevention and reduce suicide, Your Working Girl’s next few columns will focus on this topic and the people who are working on it.     

Subscribe to Your Working Girl's blog!  Just enter your email address in the upper right hand corner.