Bonus

[Glenn Baglo]

Start planning for 2017.

Parks Canada to waive entrance fees in 2017 to celebrate Canada's 150th - Calgary - CBC News

[Gilles]

Originally Posted by Glenn Baglo

Start planning for 2017.

Parks Canada to waive entrance fees in 2017 to celebrate Canada's 150th - Calgary - CBC News

Controversial ...
From the reviews, seems unfair to .... more

[Gilles]

Originally Posted by Gilles

Controversial ...
From the reviews, seems unfair to .... more

For me the government's initiative to waive entrance fees in National Parks to celebrate the 150th Canada, is fine.

The reason I wrote "Controversial" have a lot of negative comments below this article.

In writing these words, I assumed that those who read them, had reviewed the internet connection that Glenn Baglo shared with us, which is attached to the reading of the article, as well as comments that are located below it.

[Glenn Baglo]

One should never read the comments below a news story. They are mainly posted by ignorant people to didn't actually read the article in question.

[Gilles]

Originally Posted by Glenn Baglo

One should never read the comments below a news story. They are mainly posted by ignorant people to didn't actually read the article in question.

I will remember the lesson, Glenn.

Have a good day,

[CampyTime]

Not always so Glenn. I agree that some post ignorant replies, but I am reminded of the many articles here in NY about the common core in education and teacher evaluation. Many intelligent, well read and educated people comment from a highly versed perspective to squelch the ignorance. Reading comments often gives me some hope that there are people out there who are indeed educated on the issues. As desiderata states, the ignorant too have their say.


Sent from my iPhone using Fiberglass RV

[Glenn Baglo]

Several newspapers and magazines are recently eliminating comments sections on their websites.

[CampyTime]

In addition, the sheer act of writing is explaining and sharing ones thinking and/or feeling. If the ignorant fail to communicate, then their thoughts remain concealed. Expression of any means allows the educated or learned folks who understand the scope of the issues to clear up misconceptions and hopefully plant the seeds of paradigm shift in those who merely emote for the sake of it or whose opinions are not based in fact.


Sent from my iPhone using Fiberglass RV

[Glenn Baglo]

Obviously, you should post your comment. Not sure where though.
Here is link to news story on the issue.

What happened after 7 news sites got rid of reader comments » Nieman Journalism Lab

[CampyTime]

Hi Glenn,

Thank you for putting the link to the article, which I read in full. At it's close there were links to Twitter and Facebook, neither of which I subscribe to.

In sum, the inference I deduce is that all of the publishers that have elected to eliminate comments from the public want rid of the burden of feeling the need to pay somebody on staff to "police" them. Further, I also infer they don't want to run the risk of their news reporting to be bashed, chastised or otherwise tarnished as some public commentary will complain about the "one-sidedness" of the article, that is it's right or left slant, or just bash the publisher in general.

It's just easier for them to send any potential bad press or confrontational folks elsewhere, where they don't have to deal with it.

In the end, the publishers are private entities (in many cases) and can do whatever the hell they wish. If they close off commentary from the public, that's their choice. Probably an economic one I bet, and one that's just ultimately easier for them.

However, since the Dawn of news reporting itself has been the conversation amongst ordinary folk, be it in the coffee shop, diner or now on the web. Just people, all people, including the wise and the ignorant. The difference here is their conversation is lasting and in print, and no longer greasy spoon fodder.

They don't want any part of the banter in print, and hence their recommendations for social media. People will talk one way or another, but the web has the potential to reach and influence far more people. I think it's too bad they take away that freedom of expression in the end, but that's their choice.


Sent from my iPhone using Fiberglass RV

[Glenn Baglo]

I think the difference between 'letters to the editor' and web comments sections is that one had to make some effort to put coherent thoughts on paper, buy a stamp and envelope and walk to the mailbox. Now, they just have to hit send.

[CampyTime]

True that Glenn. True that.


Sent from my iPhone using Fiberglass RV

[Jon in AZ]

Maybe we should require forum postings to be submitted by letter and reviewed by moderators before they are published online. We could eliminate the riff-raff here as well…

Hitting "Submit Reply"...

[Glenn Baglo]

Nah. The forum has unpaid moderators to deal with offensive posts. Dumb ideas are still permitted.

[CampyTime]

Ha ha! Funny Jon. Was thinking exactly the same as you, just didn't write it. Bravo!

The Internet communication highway. It is what it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Fiberglass RV

[Jim Bennett]

Originally Posted by Jon in AZ

Maybe we should require forum postings to be submitted by letter and reviewed by moderators before they are published online. We could eliminate the riff-raff here as well…

Hitting "Submit Reply"...

You looking for a job?

[Jon in AZ]

Not even for double your salary!

[Jim Bennett]

For you Jon, I will triple it.

[Raz]

.

Lovers of Canada's national parks are celebrating the country's 150th birthday a little earlier than most after purchasing park passes and realizing they don't expire until 2018

It's part of an initiative brought in by the Liberal government that will make park access free for all users in 2017 and for youth and new Canadians starting in 2018.

I read this several times and I think I've translated it. Access is free to all users in 2017 who buy a pass in 2016. So it's really not free but more like a buy one get one deal? Raz

[Jim Bennett]

Basically, it is free in 2017. So if you buy a pass in 2016, it is good for two years.

Even at roughly $100 per year, per vehicle, it is a decent price to pay to enjoy all of the great National Parks.