A take is a simple black-and-white opinion on a subject that requires little to no support.
A hot take is an opinion that goes against the popular sentiment. A lukewarm or cold take goes along with the crowd.
And that’s about it. That’s all our public discourse has boiled down to nowadays.
The take is the enemy of good debate. It is shallow and lacks nuance.
Last week, I tried to make a relatively nuanced argument about Albertan tourism in B.C. ahead of the long weekend.
I returned after the long weekend to find a lot of irrational blowback to the editorial.
Angry readers and viewers thought it was an attack, and didn’t see any deeper into the argument I was trying to form.
Many in the audience had mistaken the editorial for a take — and who could blame them if that’s all they ever see on social media? It’s a cascading sea of takes.
It’s disheartening for an opinion writer – not so much that people are disagreeing with the argument. All editorialists should be able to take some disagreement.
But it’s disheartening that readers are misunderstanding the argument because they are not giving it the time and attention for a fulsome reading.
Should we give up on trying to build positions supported by other facts and conclusions and switch to nothing but takes?
Would it be more in tune with the current discourse if I came out with a series of point form opinions?
Pineapple doesn’t belong on pizza. Kamloops is superior to Kelowna. Country music is terrible.
There are some takes you can take with you. Reacting to them won’t take long; you can agree or disagree without any further thought.
What a good editorialist should do is inspire further thought, though, not give the audience shortcuts.
So in this space, I’ll continue to attempt that, and leave the takes to the social media horde.
Editor’s Note: This opinion piece reflects the views of its author, and does not necessarily represent the views of CFJC Today or the Jim Pattison Broadcast Group.
This Minnesota journalist says there's something important the media is missing about protests – CNN
Katai Leaves Galaxy After Wife’s Racial Social Media Posts… – Mount Royal Soccer
You would hope that the Katai’s weren’t looking forward to an extended stay on America’s west coast.
If they were it’s all been scuppered by some strongly-worded Instagram posts from the player’s wife, Tea in which she called for people to kill protestors, which she referred to as ‘disgusting cattle’.
Now the former Alaves and Red Star Belgrade midfielder and his club have parted ways.
The Galaxy released a statement condemning Tea’s since-deleted comments on Wednesday saying…
“Earlier today, the LA Galaxy were made aware of a series of racist and violent social media posts by Tea Katai, the wife of LA Galaxy midfielder Aleksandar Katai.
“The LA Galaxy stands firmly against racism of any kind, including that which suggests violence or seeks to demean the efforts of those in pursuit of racial equality.”
The player for his part had come out strongly following the comments, distancing himself from his spouse’s posts, although accepting full responsibility.
“These views are not ones that I share and are not tolerated in my family.
“Racism, particularly toward the black community, is not only prevalent in the United States and Europe, but across the globe. I strongly condemn white supremacy, racism and violence towards people of color. Black lives matter. This is a mistake from my family and I take full responsibility.
“I will ensure that my family and I take the necessary actions to learn, understand, listen and support the black community.
“I understand that it will take time to earn back the support of the people of Los Angeles. I am committed to putting in the necessary work to learn from these mistakes and be a better ally and advocate for equality going forward. I am sorry for the pain these posts have caused the LA Galaxy family and all allies in the fight against racism.”
It was not enough to save his LA Galaxy career with the club yesterday producing a terse and final statement confirming Katai’s departure…
“The LA Galaxy have mutually agreed to part with midfielder Aleksander Katai.”
While Tea Katai’s comments are totally and unequivocally unacceptable, you wonder if the player himself has been treated fairly by the club. He did clearly distance himself from the comments, explaining they were not representative of his own views, and in fact verbally came out in support of the ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement.
Is it right that a player’s future at a football club can be determined in this way by comments, no matter how disgusting, made by another family member, which in the days of social media he had very little, if any, control over?
Katai has ‘accepted full responsibility’, but it must be acknowledged that was part of a carefully worded statement providing apology and certainly designed to prolong his short LA career.
Or is it correct that the former Chicago Fire player is ‘found guilty by association’ and was rightly dismissed?
What do Impact fans think? Would you have expected Montreal Impact to fire a player under the same circumstances?
Are the LA Galaxy right in dispensing with the services for Aleksander Katai due to his wife’s unacceptable Instagram posts?
Yes 100%. He has to go…
Not sure. It’s a grey area. I’m on the fence and think getting rid of the player is too harsh a punishment.
100% No. Katai should not be held accountable for the social media interactions of his wife or any other family member.
7 votes total
GOLDSTEIN: Media deliberately distorted what Trump said about George Floyd – Toronto Sun
Contrary to a globally reported blunder by the media on Friday, President Donald Trump did not say a positive report on U.S. job numbers was “good news for George Floyd.”
Here’s what Trump said:
“Equal justice under the law must mean that every American receives equal treatment in every encounter with law enforcement regardless of race, color, gender, or creed. They have to receive fair treatment from law enforcement. They have to receive it. We all saw what happened last week. We can’t let that happen.
“Hopefully, George is looking down right now and saying, ‘This is a great thing that’s happening for our country.’ It’s a great day for him. It’s a great day for everybody. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality. It’s really what our Constitution requires and it’s what our country is all about.”
Clearly, Trump’s reference to Floyd was in the context of Americans agreeing everyone must be treated equally by police, not optimistic U.S. job numbers.
Despite their obvious blunder about what Trump said, which quickly went global and erupted on social media, few media organizations have corrected it.
Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden, reacting to the inaccurate media reports, said what Trump said was “despicable.”
Some are now arguing it was outrageous for Trump to invoke Floyd’s name — he died in police custody, with the four fired police officers involved now facing a slew of major criminal charges — in any context.
But that deliberately ignores the point, which is that the media got the story wrong.
In another controversy involving Trump, a widely-circulated medical study published in the Lancet claiming patients with COVID-19 were more likely to die or suffer serious side effects from taking hydroxychloroquine has been retracted.
Based on this research, Trump was widely attacked for recommending the use of hydroxychloroquine and saying he was taking it himself to ward off COVID-19.
Trump should not be freelancing medical advice and it was dangerous for him to do so.
But as James Heathers, a research scientist at Boston’s Northeastern University, writing in the Guardian, observed, the retraction of the research paper is also alarming and potentially dangerous.
As Heathers wrote:
“The Lancet is one of the oldest and most respected medical journals in the world. Recently, they published an article on Covid patients receiving hydroxychloroquine with a dire conclusion: the drug increases heartbeat irregularities and decreases hospital survival rates. This result was treated as authoritative, and major drug trials were immediately halted — because why treat anyone with an unsafe drug?
“Now, that Lancet study has been retracted, withdrawn from the literature entirely, at the request of three of its authors who ‘can no longer vouch for the veracity of the primary data sources.’
“Given the seriousness of the topic and the consequences of the paper, this is one of the most consequential retractions in modern history.
“How did a paper of such consequence get discarded like a used tissue by some of its authors only days after publication? If the authors don’t trust it now, how did it get published in the first place?”
Heathers says the root problem is with the peer review process which, “at its worst … is merely window dressing that gives the unwarranted appearance of authority, a cursory process which confers no real value, enforces orthodoxy, and overlooks both obvious analytical problems and outright fraud entirely.”
McGregor retires from fighting – TSN
Public health working to contain latest COVID-19 outbreaks – WellandTribune.ca
Small asteroid to safely fly by Earth on Saturday – SHINE
- Tech10 hours ago
New release date for Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Season 4 has been leaked – PCGamesN
- Sports18 hours ago
Donald Trump says Drew Brees shouldn't have backed off flag comments – CBC.ca
- Tech17 hours ago
iOS 14 roundup: What we know before WWDC 2020 – 9to5Mac
- Economy9 hours ago
Guardians of the World Economy Stagger From Rescue to Recovery – Yahoo Canada Finance
- Tech24 hours ago
New Redmi 9 alleged prices are ridiculously cheap for a smartphone with a quad-camera setup and 8-core MediaTek Helio G80 SoC – Notebookcheck.net
- Economy21 hours ago
Don’t Lose the Thread. The Economy Is Experiencing an Epic Collapse of Demand. – The New York Times
- Tech2 hours ago
Call of Duty Modern Warfare Season 4 release: Is this when Warzone Season 4 comes out? – Express
- Tech23 hours ago
Apple iOS 13.5.5 Can’t Come Soon Enough: Here Are 3 Reasons Why – Forbes