You might be wondering how and why. In terms of the how, I narrowed it down to five key questions that I think will provide a good gauge of how things are going. You will find these five questions along the right side of this blog page, represented as a series of polls. Simply answer each question in the polls. You can also add comments to this post, to further elaborate on your poll scores.
Why? Well, I believe in accountability to the taxpayers. Here is a chance to express your assessment of how our local politicians are doing.
As long as we keep it fair, it should be a good exercise. This should not be a stone throwing exercise but it also needn't be a tea party. Fair and honest answers and commentary are encouraged.
I plan to record and store the poll results and once again repeat this poll in several months, and also, just before the next election. In this way, we can get a sense if the ratings have improved or worsened.
I know that this is not scientific polling, but nonetheless, it should result in interesting information.
I usually email all of council and the Mayor, with a summary of topics found on The Hamiltonian. So, I assume they will be reading this report.
Rrrrriiiinnngggg That's the accountability bell ringing; not the recess bell. ;-)
P.S.: To make this poll as meaningful as possible, please advise your friends and networks of its existence and encourage them to visit the site and vote. Let's see how much participation we can get. Citizen empowerment is a wonderful thing.
Great topic. You rock!
ReplyDeletechris
Interesting exercise, Cal. You keep this site worth visiting regularly. In some ways, I only wish I could have scored this council higher, but could not do that and be truthful. There are serious problems with this bunch collectively - if only they could police themselves, publicly challenge, and censure those who get out of line and really start to think of the good of the city as whole, then the scoring would improve.
ReplyDeleteRegarding City Council......there getting stale...time to elect new people....experience or no experience...its the interest, the accountability, the determination, the honesty and the ability to want to work hard towards making our City a better place. You do not need the experience...just new people,fresh ideas and willingness to listen.
ReplyDeleteJC.
Ouch.. The results aren't looking pretty for city council so far. Maybe this will turn into a tea party afterall.... of the Boston variety. ;)
ReplyDeleteLook at the bright side Jeff, we could get Cal elected as Mayor if we all did the spade work. The suburbs are up for grabs, unlike the last time.
ReplyDeleteMAW. I heard Mr. Difalco on the talk radio and then i googled him. I liked what he said aboiut getting more women on the counsel so i decided to find out more abbout him. I would vote for him Sylvia, Mrs. Hockey!!!!!
ReplyDeleteIt is pretty save to say the given the results so far, that people are dissatisfied.
ReplyDeleteNo matter what side of the political spectrum one is, I think it is great to define things in terms of accountability, honesty, transparency and that all the voices within the city are given equal consideration.
If this were the real world, theyd be fired. The people have spoken.
ReplyDeleteElvis P.
This is an interesting exercise and one I feel would
ReplyDeletebe more appropriately applied to our local media.
Let me explain by first quoting Quest for the truth:
"No matter what side of the political spectrum one is,
I think it is great to define things in terms of account-
ability, honesty, transparency and that all the voices wit-
hin the city are given equal consideration."
I will build the crescendo with these words from
Drew Edwards of The Cat's Scratching Post blog:
"I got a call last night from digitally banished columnist
Steve Milton... I've received a lot of feedback and quest-
ions regarding the Spec's decision to restrict online access
to Milton's columns. The decision was made not to post the
work of any of the columnists
(though Radley seems oddly excluded)
so writers like Susan Clairmont and Andrew Dreschel
can now only be found in the dead tree version of the Spec."
http://thescratchingpost.thespec.com/
Therefore, unless we're willing and able to pay for high
quality investigative journalism and witty editorials,
which is seldom found in theSpec anyways, the "voices
within the city are (not) given equal consideration."
More dead trees = Widespread freedom of information
As an example of poor quality investigative journalism,
the closest the Hamilton Spectator will ever get to
reporting the facts about an unjust war-for-oil
in Afghanistan, veiled in a humanitarian pretext,
is this piece, loaded with dead tree irony:
"... but this is nothing like as much we would spend
chasing the last dribbles of oil into warzones,
and defending ourselves as the planet goes into meltdown."
Collapse or survive: The stark choice facing our species
http://thespec.com/News/article/639568
The articles goes on to mention:
"...it would cost about 10 years' worth of oil purchases,
with none of the wars, tyrannies, or blowback Islamism."
Why don't we ever read what these things really mean?
This Is A Call to Action
http://www.youtube.com/v/6-3X5hIFXYU&
So there you have IT! An Independent writer admits chasing
oil into warzones, yet even our beloved Cal DiFalco is
promoting an event (TEDxHamilton) where one of the spe-
akers is Mary-Jo Land, who is a co-creator of
The Afghanistan Children’s Peace Project.
She specializes in child trauma and attachment...
with the help of puppets...
WAR IS HELL, DAMMIT PUNCH AND JUDY!
I did not vote overly negative with the five poll questions
because I truly believe we are never given enough information
through our local media to form honest opinions about anything.
Truth is, our media and our leaders have lost their saltiness.
There is no fire in their veins for the truth, which ultimately
leads to good works. All we're given are the smoldering ashes
of contempt for the common man in the usual urns of remembrance.
If only I could shut-up and be more like Elvis P.
There is a very interesting study called:
ReplyDelete"Influencing Agendas: Untangling The Reciprocal Effects of Polling Data and News
Coverage on the Topics of Public Discourse"
by Scott L. Althaus and Jennifer Oats-Sargent, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
This paper analyzes the reciprocal impact of the polling agenda and the news agenda for a broad range of issues across an entire decade to clarify the causal influences of these two agendas.
"A thorough analysis of the potential Research on the nature of mass opinion has focused almost exclusively on assessing the results of survey questions without investigating the more fundamental issue of why some questions rather than others come to be posed to citizens in the first place. As a consequence, despite much speculation, very little is known for certain about how news discourse and other factors influence the selection of topics causal connections between the news agenda and the polling agenda is needed to determine whether opinion surveys provide the mass public with a distinctive and independent voice in policy debates appearing in opinion polls, or about how the results of opinion polls conducted by news organizations influence subsequent reporting about the surveyed topics.
These findings have implications for the long-standing debate about the democratic
potential of polls. If, as Gallup and others have argued, polls are an important channel for inserting the public’s voice into policy debates, then the practice of polling could potentially have some strong effects on news content, including affecting what gets talked about when. Our analysis suggests that surveys are more likely to be influenced by news coverage than to shape that coverage independently of other factors. Some democratic theorists will breathe a sigh of
relief at these results, but in the absence of strong effects on the part of polls, questions remain about how exactly the public’s voice does affect the news agenda, which can be seen as a reflection, albeit an imperfect one, of the public’s own concerns. In general, polls appear not to fulfill the hopes of some who expect them to serve as a viable, strong vehicle for the public voice
in modern mass democracy."
http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/6/0/8/4/pages60843/p60843-1.php
--------------------------
Danger of Wrong Survey Design and the Interpretation of the Results
http://home.ubalt.edu/ntsbarsh/stat-data/Surveys.htm#rssss
"One of the first things that learners of survey design and sampling must recognize is that statistical results can very easily be interpreted wrongly. Saying such as “You can prove anything with figure” have gained widespread circulation because they embody the bitter experience of people who have found themselves misled by incorrect deductions drawn from basically correct data."
Better to be lame-duck now than DOA at the ballot box next year. The Province is broke, deficits are huge, will Hamilton get another $12 million freebie from Dalton next year?
ReplyDeleteI wonder why it's taking so long to appoint an Integrity commissioner, maybe the top ten isn't topped up enough to cut this guy loose on Councillors at the publics request, for a filing fee of course?
Hello Cal. Great site you have here. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteMartin
DOA?....Does that mean "Dead On Arrival?"
ReplyDeleteRick Cordeiro
www.rickcordeiro.actorsite.com
You got it Rick. Thanks for the reminder of the "TapeGate" affair, what a mess, that still hasen't been cleaned up. I love this town, never a dull moment.
ReplyDelete"Tapegate?" Hahahahahaha...good one MAW....OK, I'm getting hungry now. Gotta go feed the tapeworm.
ReplyDeleteRick Cordeiro
www.rickcordeiro.actorsite.com