Historicist: "The city that nobody loves"
Elsewhere in the Ist-a-Verse
The Star's Rosie DiManno has been covering the first of what will be many trials related to Jane Creba's sad death, and we've been dutifully avoiding reading her coverage so as to preserve our sanity. But DiManno, who usually only breaks laws of good taste and good writing, may have gone against the spirit if not the letter of the...uh, actual law, in yesterday's column. DiManno, writing about one witness—one of the co-accused who will likely be tried later—said that "Because he was only 17 at the time of the Yonge St. shootout, purportedly between two groups of males, the witness can't be identified. Even the sweet-sticky street name by which he was more familiarly known is covered by a publication ban." Tricky! Publication bans under the federal Youth Criminal Justice Act, the Ministry of the Attorney General's website notes, are there to prevent "the name of the young person or any other information that could or would identify the young person as having been dealt with under the Act" from being published—"sweet-sticky street name"s, you'd think, included.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebookTIP US OFF
Most Popular
Rocket Talk: Can Sunday Subway Service Start Sooner? (39)
This Shit is Steel Bananas (34)
Googling Toronto (28)
TTC Approves Fare Hikes, Extends Student Discount (26)
Polling Booth: The TTC Fare Increase (25)
Looking for Leonids (18)
Gender Studies Coming to a High School Near You (17)- Sound Tracks: “I Wish I Knew Natalie Portman” by k-os (16)
- Newsstand: November 19, 2009 (16)
Edgewater Hotel Sign Comes Down (15)
his street name's "Sugar Toffee"?
Saccharine Glue! Was it Saccharine Glue?
Tootsie Roll?
Her faux outrage is just so annoying.
And reprinting all of the information here would *not* violate the publication how, exactly?
Cherry Street?
@ bt1 good point.
nevertheless, dimannowatch was one of my favourite online features. you guys have broken the seal by posting this mini-article. time to bring it back.
What kind of street name is Lollipop?
sugarglue?
Crystal Lite-UHUstick?
Honey Velcro?
Carbohydrate Leech?
Raisin Flypaper?
I agree, bring back DiMannoWatch.
You write that you have been avoiding reading her coverage and then go on to comment about a DiManno article you read.
Next, you appear to suggest that DiManno is walking a fine line regarding the publication ban only to quote her, suggesting that Torontoist is walking a fine line regarding the publication ban.
What was the point of this article? Was it a slow news day?
Say what you want about DiManno (no, seriously, do) but no journalist worth their salt should be in support of publication bans.
Also, his street name is obviously Honeydip Dizzoughnut.
Topping's hoo-hah about DiManno's writing was silly (and, well, ironic). Topping's eager trumpeting of his legal analysis, on the other hand, is just sad.
Skippy - Related: How do you feel about media organizations around the world agreeing not to publish stories about the CBC's Mellissa Fung being kidnapped and held in Afghanistan for a month? Should they have published it and put her safety at risk to prove their sodium content?
rek, when someone's safety is at risk, of course it takes precedence over freedom of speech. I could even justify a publication ban in the name of the YCJA once in a while (although I have mixed feelings on it).
What's unseemly to me is one publication playing the role of "tattletale" with another, ostensibly out of personal dislike for the columnist. I'm sure that The Star's lawyers have scrutinized DiManno's column and decided it's relatively safe. With that in mind, one gets the impression that Torontoist is merely promoting censorship.
If you don't care for faux outrage, this is not the website for you.
you said it, friend68.
I think you guys are confusing the articles with the comments sections.