Richard Dawkins romps through Toronto

Everyone’s favourite atheist has a new book out this fall: The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution

From an excerpt on Wikipedia:

This book is my personal summary of the evidence that the ‘theory’ of evolution is actually a fact - as incontrovertible a fact as any in science.
—Richard Dawkins, The Greatest Show on Earth, p. vii

Heavy.

As part of the literary-industrial complex’s promotion efforts, he made a whirlwind voyage through Toronto’s media scene last week. Hamutal Dotan and I decided to join in the fun and cover the Indigo-organized book reading for Torontoist.

Full house at Isabel Bader. Apparently lots of people like this guy. So for everyone who had to fork over $10 (or $100 in the case of this desperate soul) to see Dawkins, was it worth it?

Only if you enjoy listening to celebrities read. Don’t get me wrong — Richard Dawkins has a beautiful voice and an even more beautiful writing style.

But about the only thing that I learned that I couldn’t have got from his book is the fact that his wife knows how to paint neckties. He was wearing one that featured various icons of evolution and apparently it’s one of his most cherished possessions.

Other than that, it was the usual Creationist-bashing that anyone who follows the evolution “debate” is familiar with.

The Canadian twist, of course, was the abundance of self-congratulatory clapping to indicate how much saner we are than those crazy Americans. From Hamutal’s piece:

In a textbook case of preaching to the choir, Dawkins gleefully skewered the 44% of Americans who believe that “God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so,” and his listeners laughed right along with him.

If Dawkins really wants to reach this group, is such a sarcastic, aggressive tone the most effective?

Again, from Hamutal’s piece

The very last question of the evening dealt with a recent attempt to repackage atheists under the more positive-sounding name “Brights.” Dawkins, a supporter of this movement, told the audience that the term never took off because it implied that non-believers were smarter than believers. “So?” he asked rhetorically, with an arched eyebrow and a knowing smile.

But at least he wasn’t as offensive as another angry atheist I’ve covered before.

After the highly-regulated Q&A, it was off to the assembly-line style book signing. Streams of people were hustled past the sales table and given a brief moment with Dawkins to get their books signed — “No greetings! Just signatures” — and perhaps squeeze in a few moments of chit chat. Like most celebrities, Dawkins is a master at extricating himself from demanding questions (the swarms of Indigo staffers also helped on this front).

All in all, not the most memorable event. But hey, at least I wasn’t the victim of a theft like I was the last time I covered something with Hamutal.

If you want to see pictures of someone who managed to score closer seats, Michael Willems has also has some shots on his blog.

The convergence of Torontoist, beer, and patios

(and bison burgers)

Several of Toronto’s favourite things came together for the first edition of the Torontoist Patio Series. Being a fan of all of the above, I moseyed on over to the Central in Mirvish Village.

Some highlights:

• Getting to tell Jaime Bradburn that his Historicist posts are my favourite on Torontoist. Apparently, this is a pretty dangerous statement to make amongst a crowd of other contributers.
• Finally meeting Michael Chrisman whose photos I adore. Nice to meet someone else who’s obsessed with straightening verticals.
• Listening to Ken Hunt — one of three new Torontoist private investors — get philosophical about advertising, newspapers, and the universe in general.
• Getting a full pint of beer knocked into my lap. (This after an earlier hot sauce explosion that knocked another pair of pants out of commission - don’t ask)

Oh ya - some more photos:

Following the numbers

From the NYT (of course), a brutal examination of a “disability epidemic” in a railroad system:

“Virtually every career employee — as many as 97 percent in one recent year — applies for and gets disability payments soon after retirement, a computer analysis of federal records by The New York Times has found. Since 2000, those records show, about a quarter of a billion dollars in federal disability money has gone to former L.I.R.R. employees, including about 2,000 who retired during that time.

The L.I.R.R.’s disability rate suggests it is one of the nation’s most dangerous places to work. Yet in four of the last five years, the railroad has won national awards for improving worker safety. “

The legwork that went into this piece is impressive, from number crunching to pouring over obscure rules, to performing dozens of interviews. It’s a perfect example of the type of journalism that bloggers have a hard time replicating (but counterexamples are welcome).

Now if only newspaper could figure out how to make money off stuff like this in our modern age…

• Link: A Disability Epidemic Among a Railroad’s Retirees

ABC zings new age spirituality

I’m no defender of new age spirituality but this is quite the dig.

Some say Hunter, a devotee of new age spirituality, is given to exaggeration

Maybe I’m unaware of some sort of relationship between new age spirituality and a tendency to exaggeration?

• Link: ABC News: Is John Edwards Still Lying?

Crude reporting in crude reporting

A new piece from Portfolio explores the media’s coverage of the rising cost of gas and accuses it of parrotting the industry line:

…no one of any age can doubt that the industry’s star performer in the public relations battle over gasoline prices is Rex Tillerson chairman and C.E.O. of Exxon Mobil. His appearances on the Today show have become five-minute promos for price escalation, with Matt Lauer cast as the surrogate for a nation of consumers who don’t fully understand their role—helpless and sacrificial—while the company maximizes shareholder value, “our reason for being.”

Energy/economics reporting is indeed sloppier than averages and attacking this is a worthy goal. Unfortunately the piece disappointingly plunges into discussing banalities like windfall-profit tax schemes, the ANWR, and most of all how corporations are evil money grabbers. For example:

Even with Exxon Mobil making $76,000 a minute, the last thing that occurs to many assignment editors and reporters is to investigate whether a windfall-profits tax would drive Exxon Mobil, BP, and other oil companies to invest in the alternative-energy strategies they boast about in their television commercials.

At best, corporate excess is only partly responsible; there is a wide range of respectable thought on this issue and the debate is far from settled. For instance, witness the discussion about the villains du jour (which Raines ironically doesn’t seem to have got the memo about): speculators (The Spiegel’s take vs The Economists’)

Psychologically though, this article hits the spot in the same way as morning radio shows or conspiracy theories do: it makes you feel like you’re in a privileged position for knowing what’s actually going and pats you on the back for suspecting that your gut feeling about corporations screwing everyone is correct (which is only partly true, at most).

In any case, criticizing journalists for covering the issue poorly and then introducing a flimsy anti-corporate rant hardly seems like progress.

• Link: Crude Reporting