4 The Chronicle February 13 - 19, 2018 chronicle.durhamcollege.ca PUBLISHER: Greg Murphy EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Brian Legree AD MANAGER: Dawn Salter Editorial CONTACT US NEWSROOM: firstname.lastname@example.org ADVERTISING: email@example.com Cartoon by Cassidy McMullen Accessibility creates accessibility Have you ever used an automatic door? Used a ramp instead of the stairs? Or enjoyed subtitles on your Facebook videos or Netflix? All of these features exist for accessibility reasons. They are meant to allow people with disabilities to access and participate in society. It’s said only people who think about accessibility are the people who need it: those with physical, mental, emotional and learning disabilities. But everyone can benefit from accessibility. According to Statistics Canada, as of 2012, one in seven Canadians 15 years old and older have a disability. Statistics Canada says 1,600,000 Ontarians aged 15 and older have a disability. These people are still fighting to fully participate in their community and live in a world that is accessible to them. They deserve to be able to participate in everyday society. Ontario has introduced laws to attempt to help make society not only accessible, but easily accessible. In 2005, the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act was introduced. The Act is meant to develop, implement and enforce standards for people with disabilities and protects them from discrimination and ableism. These standards include general requirements, customer service, information and communication, employment, transportation and design of public spaces. In 2017, the federal government started its first phase in developing federal accessibility- something Canada has fallen behind on. It’s about time things change. People with disabilities are still struggling to have their needs met. For example, in 2017, blogger Jacki Andre wrote in the Huffington Post that she went to see Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at one of his town hall events. Andre is hard of hearing and relies on lip reading to understand speech. The notice for the event mentioned that American Sign Language (ASL) was available. Andre does not know ASL, so she asked if the organizers could set up CART for her (communication access real-time translation) which is basically real-time captioning/subtitles. No one got back to her. According to Andre, no one knew what CART was. Andre points out CART can help hearing people too. Sometimes acoustics are bad or there’s a “cocktail effect” with too much background and someone can’t hear. CART could solve that problem. Instead of truly accommodating her, she was seated close to the Prime Minister, at an angle where it would be difficult to lip read. Andre opted to move, and was able to read his lips. But she was unable to hear the other half of the event: the questions. This is simply unacceptable. It is 2018, accessibility should not still be a problem. Making things accessible to everyone can boost business, readership and more- you’re opening the markets. According to the Inclusive Design Research Centre at the Ontario College of Art and Design University (OCAD), “The standards (AODA) will allow Ontario businesses to achieve new economies of scale possible through inclusive design (ID).” Inclusive design is design that is usable and customizable so people of all abilities can use something, whether they’re able-bodied or not. An example is readable text. A clear font makes the general task of reading easier for everyone. Contrast is also ID. No one benefits from the use of low or poor contrast. OCAD also suggests using ID in the workplace will boost employee productivity, which also positively influences business. Accessibility creates accessibility. It makes life easier for everyone: remember next time you use an automatic door or enjoy your subtitled videos. Accessibility is something that every person, regardless of ability, should advocate for because it allows everyone to participate in society and can boost the economy. If you notice something is not accessible, or a person with a disability struggling, speak up. The change could help you too. Aly Beach EDITORS: Austin Andru, Allison Beach, Cameron Black-Araujo, Michael Bromby, Alex Clelland, John Cook, Tiago De Oliveira, Shana Fillatrau, Kaatje Henrick, Kirsten Jerry, Jacob Kirby, Claudia Latino, William Mcginn, Cassidy Mcmullen, Conner Mctague, Pierre Sanz, Heather Snowdon, Shanelle Somers, Kayano Waite, Tracy Wright The Chronicle is published by the Durham College School of Media, Art and Design, 2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, Ontario L1H 7L7, 721- 2000 Ext. 3068, as a training vehicle for students enrolled in Journalism and Advertising courses and as a campus news medium. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the college administration or the board of governors. The Chronicle is a member of the Ontario Community Newspapers Association. MEDIA REPS: Madison Anger, Kevin Baybayan, Erin Bourne, Hayden Briltz, Rachel Budd, Brendan Cane, Shannon Gill, Matthew Hiscock, Nathaniel Houseley, Samuel Huard, Emily Johnston, Sawyer Kemp, Reema Khoury, Desirea Lewis, Rob Macdougall, Adam Mayhew, Kathleen Menheere, Tayler Michaelson, Thomas Pecker, Hailey Russo, Lady Supa, Jalisa Sterling-Flemmings, Tamara Talhouk, Alex Thompson, Chris Traianovski PRODUCTION ARTISTS: Swarnika Ahuja, Bailey Ashton, Elliott Bradshaw, James Critch-Heyes, Elisabeth Dugas, Melinda Ernst, Kurtis Grant, Chad Macdonald, Matthew Meraw, Kaitlyn Millard, Sofia Mingram, Mary Richardson, Singh Sandhu, Greg Varty Publisher: Greg Murphy Editor-In-Chief: Brian Legree Features editor: Teresa Goff Ad Manager: Dawn Salter Advertising Production Manager: Kevan F. Drinkwalter Photography Editor: Al Fournier Technical Production: Keir Broadfoot
chronicle.durhamcollege.ca February 13 - 19, 2018 The Chronicle 5 Opinion Spanking just doesn't work The following piece is the opinion of the Durham College journalism student whose name and picture accompanies this column. Kaatje Henrick When a child is acting up, getting angry or showing signs of aggression, some people think the best way to punish the child is to spank them. Kelly Clarkson recently released to the public that she uses spanking as a way of punishment. “My parents spanked me and I did fine in life and I feel fine about it," says Clarkson, a soon-to-be judge on The Voice. But according to the Government of Canada, under reasonable circumstances, a parent or guardian may justify using force towards a child as a form of punishment. However, according to the Canadian Child Care Federation, there are no positive outcomes from striking a child. Although there are many pros and cons to corporal punishment, the cons outweigh the pros by a landslide. Spanking a child is more harmful than helpful. Even though spanking is a form of punishment, it is not the best way to punish a child because it can lead to further problems, according to Dr. Alan Kazdin, who started the Kazdin method of parenting. On Kazdin’s website parents can learn of strategies on effective parenting. Spanking a child may get the point across the first time, but it doesn’t mean the child is not going to repeat the same action. Children are known to follow or repeat what they are taught, according to Dr. Kazdin, a professor of Psychology and Child Psychiatry at Yale University. She says repeated spanking could result in the child acting out in a way in which they were taught, such as hitting, pinching, screaming, or punching friends, classmates, even teachers. Teachers are there as guidance for students, but a teacher cannot do their job if the child has no respect. Spanking may establish respect between a child and parent, but according healthline.com, it may introduce fear but fear can Spanking a child is more harmful than helpful. also lead to the child becoming antisocial. Antisocial behaviour can lead to anxiety which can lead to depression, according to Child Care Confederation, an organization who works to protect the children. They also say another negative effect of spanking is poor academic achievement, as the child may not adapt at school because of fear. Although spanking can lead to depression, it can also lead to the child growing up and using violence as a source of problem solving, according to Healthline. The shock factor behind spanking a child will affect the child because it will scare them into not repeating the same action, but if a child is spanked, they may think it’s normal to use force in everyday life. This may result in physical abuse to others, including partners or family, according to Canadian Child Care Federation. Corporal punishment has a negative effect on children. It has been proven by many experts that the method of spanking is unsuccessful and harmful to a child’s all-around health. Ontario should rethink pitbull ban The following piece is the opinion of the Durham College journalism student whose name and picture accompanies this column. Breed specific ban legislation is ineffective. It assumes the breed rather than behaviour makes a dog dangerous. In 2005, Ontario created Bill 132, commonly known as the pit bull ban in response to high-profile dog attacks. Laws around dangerous dogs should be revisited and the pit bull ban lifted. The term pit bull isn’t a specific breed but several. According to Ontario law, a pit bull could be a pit bull terrier, Staffordshire bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier, American pit bull terrier or any dog that has an appearance or physical characteristics similar to the breeds listed. To start off with a very wide definition of what constitutes a pit Cassidy McMullen bull is bad. Under Bill 132, it’s the veterinarian’s job to determine if a dog is a pit bull by examining the dog and it’s the owner’s job to prove their dog isn’t a pit bull. A vet looking at your dog to determine if it looks enough like a pit bull is too opinion-based and shaky for a law to be put on it. Data taken from over the 13 years that the pit bull ban has been in place has shown a decrease in pit bull attacks. If the only point of the ban was to bring down the number of pit bull bites, it worked. If the point was to decrease the number of dog bites in Ontario, like it was advertised, the only data we have to track that indicates dog bites are on the rise. The data on dog bites and attacks in Ontario is useless. The data on dog bites and attacks in Ontario is useless. It’s collected by individual municipalities who use different organizations and what’s even more biting is it’s all self-reported. It’s left to the victim of the bite to report what happened, including the type of dog and which dog it was. Breed specific data on dog bites is all opinion-based. The organization that collects the complaints don’t DNA test the dog and the person who takes down the report wouldn’t see the dog that bit the person. A dog could look like a pit bull to the person who was bitten. But it could be a boxer. Or the person could report a Shih Tzu that is actually a Maltese. This skews the data making it even more useless because it isn’t a fair representation of which dogs are biting or how many bites are happening. That’s how we got the Montreal pit bull ban. A pit bull mix killed Christiane Vadnais when the dog got into her backyard. If there was a better system for reporting dog bites, authorities would have known the dog had attacked two other people. More importantly, they would have known the dog was abused by the owner. Breed specific bans wouldn’t have saved Vadnais’s life. That owner probably would have had another dog that would have been just as violent due to the treatment they received. It is not the breed but the behaviour, not of the dog but the owner. What Alberta is doing is effective. Instead of pinning the term of dangerous dogs on pit bulls, Alberta changed the language for dog behaviour. Any dog that chases, attacks, bites or injures a person or animal is deemed dangerous. As of Dec. 20, 2017, Montreal has lifted its pit bull ban for more effective legislation that focuses on bad owners rather than bad dogs. Ontario should follow suit. Some super crazy Super Bowl bets The following piece is the opinion of the Durham College journalism student whose name and picture accompanies this column. The Super Bowl may be the mecca of American football but... Cameron Black-Araujo There's one big part of the weekend that sometimes has nothing to do with football. Gambling. And not just on the game or player performances, but just about anything else you can imagine. This year, instead of choosing the Eagles or Patriots to win the Super Bowl, you could have chosen what colour shirt Patriots’ head coach, Bill Belichick, would wear or even what colour shoes Justin Timberlake would wear during his halftime performance. According to bettingsports.com, the Super Bowl is the most popular single sporting event each year. That was the case again this year. Just over $158-million was bet on this year’s Super Bowl in Las Vegas’ sportsbooks, according to ESPN. This surpassed last year’s total by $20-million, which was the previous high. Doing prop bets can be fun while also scoring you some big bucks. Sportsnet says a simple 20-dollar bill could have netted you about $235,000 if these four bets all went your way. Bill Belichick to wear a red shirt, the winning coach to have blue Gatorade dumped on his head, P!nk sporting purple hair and Timberlake performing in yellow shoes. Not one of those ended up happening. Just the chance of it is what leads to over $4-billion wagered on the game. Last year in the U.S., a record of about 4.2 billion was bet on the game while this year it is estimated it was 4.76 billion, according to ESPN. While the Super Bowl generates hundreds of millions for the NFL, the gambling industry is the next to find huge profits from the Super Bowl. The Westgate Las Vegas Super- Book had roughly 400 different prop bets heading into the beginning of Super Bowl week. Some of those 400 bets included, will P!nk be airborne at any point throughout the anthem? How many times will the “Rocky” statue in Philadelphia be shown during the broadcast? What will the total number of Donald Trump tweets be on Super Bowl Sunday? Who said you need to enjoy football to enjoy the Super Bowl?