There was an excellent letter in The Chatham Daily News on March 19th refuting an outrageous opinion letter submitted by a regular contributor of gloomy editorial page bluster. It's surprising that they permitted a response at all, since this individual is usually protected from such rebuttals by an editor seemingly unconcerned with journalistic ethics. But even more surprising is the astute social comment posted in response.
These "fair comments on matters of public interest" apparently go through Canoe and don't get censored first by the biased thought police in the local Sun Media detachment, (although the editor will delete things later that are discovered to contradict his preferred distorted position).
This is the kind of material missing from the newsprint edition since Mayor Hope was elected. Their crack reporters have consistently neglected to investigate anything for themselves or ask tough questions, and they usually refuse to publish submissions that even mention protected individuals like the mayor and his cabal of unelected advisors. Check the link here before the abuse function is abused to censor public comments again.
Another timely article about Mayor Hope's stance on the Sydenham Hospital, dated March 21, is reproduced here. Between the two, there's some good reading that is unlikely to appear in their heavily-filtered print edition.
An op-ed article published in Chatham This Week recently prompted Mayor Hope to sic his pitbull on somebody who dared to question his lack of accomplishments. This viscious unprovoked attack was published on March 24thhere. It's quite defamatory as published. The editor said Cryderman's original article was even worse. The print edition carried a heavily censored rebuttal, which appears to be intact in the online edition.