When I had my relationships column in the Ego section of the Hamilton Spectator in the mid-1990s, one of the editors of the section told me that their most popular feature was "What's Your Beef?" -- clearly a pre-social media feature where readers could call in, gripe about whatever they wished, and the paper would print it as is.
It was cheap and easy filler. No research, no work, no verification, no paying an employee to write up something.
When the Internet took off, you didn't need that kind of section anymore, because Troll Scroll took care of it.
But now we have media outlets who still rely on tantrums being presented as news, except now they have bylines to go along with, trying to present them as news.
The temper tantrum from BlogTo is amusing enough: Toronto should secede from the rest of Ontario to make their own province!
Good. It's about time junior got his own place.
Toronto has serious infrastructure problems. They have a serious violence problem. They have a homeless crisis. They have a green space problem. They have a corruption problem. They have an immigration dilemma. They are too expensive to upkeep, and they are draining resources from the rest of the province.
There is no reason why Ontario shouldn't spin off Toronto so it can depend on its own resources.
The rest of the province is not dependent on Toronto. There are many cities that have actual wealth and people with serious disposable income, and they are not big cities: Ancaster, Burlington, Grimsby, Niagara-on-the-Lake, London, Guelph, Kitchener-Waterloo, Kingston, and the like.
There are highways and tourist attractions. There are plenty of universities and factories outside of Toronto, and as someone who taught art classes over the years, people from Toronto had the least money to spend, while people in Burlington had by far the most. As someone who also has a serious addiction to Re-Stores, and have been to them all in the Golden Horseshoe, Burlington has seriously impressive and expensive furniture, while Toronto's is nowhere near the level of class or quality in their offerings.
Ontario is a big province. It can afford to be annexed. Toronto is expendable. It is not as if the province would fall apart without Toronto, but Toronto is dependent on the goodwill of the other regions, but if they wish to leave, they know where the exit is. Life goes on without them.
But this is not an actual article: it is a temper tantrum directly squarely at Doug Ford who won a majority government without Hogtown, and now the city knows all of the graft they reaped from the Grits for years is about to be yanked away to be given to the regions who voted for the Tories.
That the NDP are frightened and stooping to calling Ford a "dictator" is not surprising, especially as many NDP candidates get a boost with name recognition and connections by first running for city council of big cities because they do not have other means to do so (they don't run established businesses or are employed in broadcasting, for instance). It's their signature hack that they coast on, and now it is being taken away in a single swoop.
The NDP are having a meltdown because a rig they counted on is under attack in a political game -- and in the world of political games, you need to keep changing your strategies because you are not entitled to them in a democracy, or anywhere else for that matter -- and now their dependence on a single gambit is backfiring on them.
But for an article to thump its chest is unprofessional. In life, you do not always get your own way because other people have rights just like you do, and the answer is not to scream that you are going to take all your toys and go home, especially when those aren't your toys to take. It is a temper tantrum disguised as an article, and worse, fear-mongering propaganda.
But it is not just a little blog that plays those gambits; so too does the New York Times, with this whiny Op Ed piece how horrible it is for mothers to be expected to look after their children and not let them out of their sights.
And when their benign neglect is not applauded, but criticized, then comes the howls how judgemental people are.
The phrase "free range" does not manage to put a sunny spin on rot. You free range live stock, and if you see your children as стока, you really are not getting this whole parenting thing.
But it is an interesting filter the author of this tantrum piece uses: it is much safer for white, upper middle class children to go to the gated park with their nannies without mommy having to worry about things such as gun violence, abductions, molestation, and murder, but not everyone has that luxury.
I grew up in the 1980s in a new middle class area, and we got multiple letters from our schools over the grade school years to give to our parents because there was more than one child molester luring kids on their walk home.
It really isn't safe for kids out there, upper middle class white women! Who do you expect to look after your children? Some group called They?
I have known people who boasted about having "independent" kids who went out to who knows where, and then years later, have a meltdown because every single kid was molested multiple times by multiple people.
Hello! Children have targets right on their foreheads because they are society's most vulnerable demographic.
For too many kids, childhood is hell.
You do have to raise kids. They do not raise themselves, no matter how "smart" they are because they do not have fully developed brains and bodies, are weaker and less experienced than adult predators who have practice, and do not have ways of defending themselves because they have a more optimistic worldview and cannot imagine someone and something can exist to cause them harm. They drown in pools, get hit by cars and trains frequently, fall off balconies, and get lured by evil adults who need new fodder for their child porn business. How many times I went for a walk near parks where there were children, and skulking in the bushes were grown men taking pictures of them is too numerous to count.
I have taken down their license plate numbers and called police with a description, but unless that perv nabs a kid and traumatizes him or her for life, the police will not step in.
Kids get abducted from their bedrooms, let alone bus stops, backyards, and department stores.
Code Adams and Amber Alerts weren't suggestions of some hysterical overprotective mom.
Some kid had to get tortured and killed for people to think of it. Oh yeah, kids get hurt easier than an adult, maybe we should do something about it...
Sometimes when someone tells you something negative, there is a reason for it.
Because perhaps they were the recipient of harm as a child and are doing what they know how to prevent it from happening to someone else.
Did you ever consider that, your majesty?
No, because it didn't involve your selfie.
Again, not an Op Ed piece. It is a Op Ed piece written by someone with blinders on puking stupid.
It is not a feminist issue. We have a very violent society -- one where kids can get shot and killed on the streets, in the parks, and in their own schools. Maybe not in your tony neighbourhood, but not everyone lives the same way you do.
The What's Your Beef? filler is alive and well. Whining tantrums are being reimagined as articles and opinion pieces.
They are neither. Just people throwing a hissy because not everyone is praising and applauding their selfish theories that are rigged to benefit them -- and no one else...