RHD Owners on Island wanted for an Inteview

[elbosque]

A reporter at the Nanaimo Daily is looking for RHD owners on the Island to tell their side of the story regarding the domestic car industry's push to ban RHDs. IMO, it would also be good if they also heard from local small business regarding the benefits to local small business from the import of JDMs. We really would like to see something other than the typical negative RHD image come out on an article. I know its hard to get them to build a balanced story when so much of their advertising comes from dealerships. But I think if we can show that it supports local Island small businesses and meets the needs of Islanders in an economical and environmentally sensitive manner, then we have a chance. Here's the reporter's fishing post on IVOAC.CA.
http://forum.ivoac.ca/showpost.php?p=25649&postcount=61

Feel free to contact the reporter directly. If you take on the interview, the IVOAC National Committee would appreciate to know people's impression of the interview. Shoot me a PM if you do it. Thx

John

[mararmeisto]

That person fished on Delica.ca a while back, and wouldn't answer the phone when we called. Why such interest now?

[elbosque]

He interest is because he knows there's something up because of the CADA press release which went out over the wire. I would not be surprised if the CADA members - their big advertisers - are pushing for a story. We need media but we should be careful. A case in point was the Vancouver Province interview and story which didn't even start to cover what the interview covered.

[Profister]

I'm working on a story about RHD vehicles, focusing on the possibility of a ban on these vehicles in B.C.

I do not like this. If anyone is going to bite the bait please make a plan and record the event to present an evidence in a case of a setup. I would request and analyze the questionnaire first and then fight back. One silly post in The Province is enough. These guys are pro's: sneaky and venal. Keep this in mind please.
John: why do I need to PM you in case I want to attend? BTW I am coming to the island on the long weekend.

[after oil]

i do not trust the nanaimo daily or any other corporate/mainstream paper for that matter

[Profister]

I have sent Darrell a 'hello, I would like to screw you' as a balance with your attempts.

[elbosque]

John: why do I need to PM you in case I want to attend? BTW I am coming to the island on the long weekend.

Only reason we (IVOAC National Committee) would want a PM is to hear from the interviewee's presepective how the interview was handled by the journalist and what was covered before any story goes to print. Having this information with the Province story allowed us to immediatley protest the story's lack of ntegrity to the actual interview and to document the journalist's/papers bias. If you don't want to PM me, that's your choice. If you do an interview, it's your interview.

The reality is that not all media is going to be against us. We have had some excellent press over the years. Japanoid was very good at getting good media for JDMs (and especially for his business). People just have to be prepared and realize that even though the media likes to say it is objective it isn't when advertiser interests may hinge heavy. In the newspapers, dealerships provide a big chunk of their advertising revenue. On the otherhand, for many magazines (except auto mags) they aren't that important. If you suspect that other infuences might be at play, then lay it out on the table to the reporter or just tell the reporter you will be recording the interview.

[Profister]

Here is an excerpt from the reporter's reply to me:

As to my experience with right-hand-drive vehicles, I spent a week driving one in Europe several years ago, that’s about the extent of it. I’m a reporter, and therefore have a curiosity about the world around me, especially issues with potential for conflict. This story is interesting from three angles: the state (i.e. ICBC, the province of Quebec) is trying to balance its obligation to protect public safety and the public’s right to private ownership by using caution in allowing RHD vehicles. Vehicle owners, not surprisingly, are concerned about their freedom to choose and own the vehicles they feel best suit their needs. There is also the public’s right to be assured public roads are safe.
This story has basic, core news values that need no further explaining. The story will be reported whether you contribute your side or not. Media savvy people understand that using their opportunity to give their side, through the media, can influence public opinion and sometimes effect change.
I’m offering RHD owners the same opportunity to comment in this story that I would give any other source. You’re not obliged to respond, but the offer is there for anyone willing to take it. I’m especially interested in speaking to a spokesman for the entire group of B.C. RHD owners, if such a person exists. I hope this explanation helps.
Cheers,
--
Darrell Bellaart, reporter
Nanaimo Daily News

So if I understand the situation correctly his logic is simple: the public wants safe roads (and is scared with RHD vehicles I guess), the government takes responsibility and brings up an RHD issue as a threat and RHD minority is unhappy about this which leads to the conflict. So, it is a story about our government protecting their citizens from unsafe RHD fanatics. Where is CADA and others lobbying the ban? Where are real road hazards like the increasing number of bad LHD drivers, cell phones, meals etc. compromising the roads safety? This story smells like another replica of Susan Lazaruk's publication to me already.
I thought that a professional reporter does a homework digging the real facts and documents out and analyzing them to find more that an average person can see. Sorry, I was wrong.
I do not mind to waste my time talking to the reporter but I do not want to see another brainwashing story as a result.
What should we do about it?

[elbosque]

The story was done and published today:

http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews ... 6c&k=58883

[loki]

The story was done and published today:

http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews ... 6c&k=58883

I commented on that story, it wasn't as bad as the last couple I saw but still not great.

KIM MORTON, I was tempted to make a play on words with your last name but don't think I should stoop to that level. Please think and maybe find out some facts before spouting off garbage like "importing old higher polluting vehicles", can you really think that these 15 year old vehicles would be worth the cost to import from japan if they ran worse that 15 year old NA vehicles? They generally have safety features and other amenities years ahead of the NA counterparts. If you really want to make our roads safer and get polluting cars off the roads we should start doing like the japanese and have mandatory inspections (very strict ones at that) every 2 years (they start after 3 years) that would get countless rusted out unsafe smoke belching oil leaking accidents looking for a place to happen off the road REALLY FAST!

Darrell Bellaart, saying "Only vehicles older than 15 years can be imported, because newer vehicles must meet Transport Canada safety requirements" is not true, all the vehicles imported have to meet the standards of year they where built, the vehicles have to be 15 years old or older simply due to a transport Canada rule stating that any vehicle not originally sold in the NA market can't be imported until 15 years old or older.