Opinion
Words are not violence – Why Will Smith was wrong to strike Chris Rock.
This article submitted by Levi Kump
It is news to exactly no one, that Sunday night, Will Smith responded to a contentious, and arguably tasteless joke, by walking on stage at the Acadamy Awards and slapping the the offending party, one Chris Rock, across the face. Much has been made already about whether or not the incident was staged, though the ensuing furor has rendered that debate largely moot. Many people have chimed in on the issue, some saying the Smith was unequivocally wrong, and some, including no less than The National Post’s Barbara Kay, coming down on the the side of a face slap being fair play.
Let it be known, I believe Smith and Kay, are both wrong. First and foremost, because one of the tenets of civilization in general, is the old adage that, “ones right to get angry, stops at the next fellow’s nose”. Nothing new here. Setting aside for a moment that the slap was to the cheek/jaw area, I believe that notion still holds water. Genuine or not, this incident implies that there are some statements for which the only possible rebuttal, is the fist. The challenges with this way of thinking are legion, and until only a few years ago, seemed to have already been worked out in western society. Not the least of said problems is this: if words are violence itself, and answerable as such, then we no longer have any reason to use words. When one equates the verbal with the somatic, it is a very quick descent indeed, to using violence in any given situation. Why struggle for the ‘mot juste’, when one can move stright to a head kick?
Following this line of reasoning, we end up back, hundreds of years, to the time of, “might makes right”; which again, our civilization had once worked out, but now seems to be forgetting. One of the more common lines of reasoning for the “speech as violence” crowd, is that disparities in power give far more weight to some people’s words, than others. In the Smith/Rock debacle, this is hardly worth a mention, as both men are of the same demographic, read: multi-millionaires of the same skin tone. Though there are those who will point out, as did Barbera Kay, that the target of Rock’s joke, was not Will Smith himself, but rather his wife, Jada, who does in fact suffer from an auto immune disease, and whose hair loss is by no means her own fault. A powerful comedian making jokes about a/an (equally powerful?) woman’s physical condition should be off limits, or so goes the argument. The easy reply here is that there are
those, myself among them, who do not believe that anything should be off limits in speech.
Noting here that, not unlike our separation of words and action, society did away with the idea of ‘lese majest’ some time back. There are yet some who do not believe in this, and who think that the relative power of two parties (and exactly how do we quantify this?) matter to a verbal exchange. That the words of the more powerful party are in fact so weighty, that again, the only fair response, is a physical one. This begs the question, that if the words of the powerful are
unfairly weighted, how much more so are thier blows? It is to me, an untenable position. Slapping a man for speech only ends badly for everyone. Until very recently, we all seem to have understood this.
There was once a common convention, that words, for all their power, are clearly not violence. The fact that this is now somehow considered up for debate, does not bode well for society writ large. Any reasonable person will admit that words can be incredibly hurtful, damaging, and cruel. To deny this is foolish. Physical violence however, has all those dangers, along with a side order of split lips, contusions, and concussions. Indeed, whatever “damage” one suffers from words, one is still left with the ability to speak in rebuttal. A solid blow of any kind can not only dissuade retort, but neuter it completely. Perhaps this is what the proponents of violent response are after in the first place? If so, its disappointing. As I said, i thought we had worked this out.
Levi Kump is a former competitive international Muay Thai champion.
Censorship Industrial Complex
Quebec City faces lawsuit after cancelling Christian event over “controversial” artist
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that lawyers have filed a claim in Quebec Superior Court against Quebec City (City) on behalf of Burn 24/7 Canada Worship Ministries, a Christian organization whose worship event was abruptly cancelled by the City this past summer.
The claim seeks reimbursement of rent, punitive damages, and judicial declarations that the City violated Burn 24/7 Canada’s fundamental freedoms protected under both the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Quebec’s Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms.
Based in British Columbia, Burn 24/7 Canada is a non-profit Christian ministry that organizes musical worship and prayer events across the country. Its July 2025 Canadian tour featured American singer-songwriter Sean Feucht, known for his contemporary Christian music. Mr. Feucht had been portrayed negatively in some Canadian media outlets for his opposition to abortion, his support for traditional marriage, and his public support of U.S. President Donald Trump.
On July 4, 2025, Burn 24/7 Canada signed a lease with the City to hold a worship and prayer event at ExpoCité. The organization paid the full rental fee of $2,609.93 on July 14. However, without notice, the City cancelled the lease on July 23—just one day before the scheduled event—claiming the presence of a “controversial” artist had not been disclosed. Officials stated publicly that ExpoCité had terminated the contract after determining an “artist who generates significant controversy has consequences for ExpoCité’s reputation.”
The City cited sections of the lease related to “illegal solicitation” and “use of premises,” arguing these clauses gave it authority to terminate the agreement. Lawyers representing Burn 24/7 argue this claim is absurd, made in bad faith, and reflective of clear discrimination on the basis of religion and political opinion.
Constitutional lawyer Olivier Séguin said, “In this era of cancel culture, it’s easy to see why some private citizens might yield to public pressure. But when government officials do the same, it crosses a line. The City’s conduct is inexcusable and must be punished.”
The lawsuit comes amid a wave of cancellations that swept across Canada in July 2025, after Parks Canada and several municipalities—including Halifax, Charlottetown, and Moncton—revoked permissions for Mr. Feucht’s scheduled events, citing “security” concerns following threats of protest.
In this brief video, constitutional lawyer Mr. Séguin summarizes the details of this matter.
Bruce Dowbiggin
Sports 50/50 Draws: Make Sure You Read The Small Print
Throughout the recent World Series baseball fans were regaled with the exploding total in the Blue Jays World Series 50/50 draw. When the L.A.Dodgers finally subdued the Jays in the seventh game the total had skyrocketed to a whopping $50,020,115— half of which was won by a fan from Oshawa, Ont.
That means that $25,010,055 was donated to Jays Care Foundation which then sends money to worthy charities and causes supported by the Blue Jays. A number of those charities are identified by the team in its publicity. Win/ win, right?
Should be. But how much of the $25,010,055 devoted to charities and sports organizations goes to administer the draw? We examined the rules printed online and the financial records to see the distribution of those funds. “At Jays Care, every dollar of net revenue, after prize payouts and raffle-related expenses are deducted, goes directly to supporting kids in Jays Care programming.”
To the unwashed public that says that $25,010,055 is going completely to the charities;. Wait, they said “net revenue” and “raffle-related expenses” Okay, what constitutes net revenue? What are raffle-related expenses? In the 2024 statements for Jays Care Foundation, general and administration total is $324,321 after raising $21,234,364 . Seems like to might be worth noting.
This is not to suggest that the Jays Care lotteries are not what they seem on the surface. Or they do not have a charitable component. We have been unable to find any reporting on the draw that implies or states something shady. Or any reporting from Toronto’s vast media mob into just how these draws work. Still, the public should know how much of the prize money they’re donating goes to the charity. Because you won’t get it from listening to the team games on TV which marvel at the 50/50 amounts.
The Jays’ draw is worth noting, because there have been questions raised about other large sports 50/50 draws. The charity in charge of the Edmonton Oilers 50/50 raffles paid more than $81 million in lottery funds over four years to Win50, a sports betting and gaming company controlled by the Oilers Entertainment Group, according to audited financial statements obtained by the Investigative Journalism Foundation.

The IJF found that only 19.6 percent of the 50/50 raffle proceeds went to charity in 2024. The Oilers did not deny the claim, but did say that the charitable aspect of the draws and the publicity they generate far outweighs the costs in running the draws. “By focusing on expense ratios and purposely ignoring the millions of dollars in legitimate operational costs covered by WIN50, the IJF misleads readers about our how our 50/50 operates and our overall charitable impact.” Weak sauce, no?
Sources who spoke to us said that, in one case a capture of $550K returned just 10 percent— $55K— to their charity. The rest disappeared to pay bills and distribute funds as the organizers saw fit. Oh, and the charities must sign NDAs to keep their status as Oilers’ charities. There may be some legitimate reasons for the silence so far on the draws. But that was not communicated by the Oilers to their fans up front or in their response to the IJF.
It is reminiscent of stories we wrote for the Calgary Herald in the early 2000s about shady practices surrounding NHL oldtimers versus cops or fireman hockey promotions. Until we made it public the companies running the ticket sales oversold the arenas, created fictional handicapped children for donations, returned as little as five percent to charities and more— while never telling the NHL stars about the deception.
The other telling aspect of this Oilers Care story is that it was generated by an independent journalism source— not the main Edmonton media. The IJF is not likely to be getting seats on press row at the Rogers Centre any time soon with this kind of aggressive reporting.
With sports teams now partnering with broadcast and print partners, doing this kind of investigative work will not advance your career. We should know after enduring years of the cold shoulder for our reporting corruption in the NHL under Alan Eagleson and the league (Eagleson went to jail briefly for his fraudulent use of NHL Players Association and Hockey Canada funds.)

Rogers now has its name on numerous arenas and stadia across Canada. It controls MLSE, owners of the Maple Leafs, Raptors, Toronto FC and the Argonauts. Former journalists work for team owners. The government sends “support” money to so-called private broadcasters and newspapers to toe the line. As we wrote in October the PR pitch for Elbows Up has been everywhere in Canadian sport.
“Rogers Media is running commercials during the Blue Jays AL Divisional Series boasting in Liberal red and white “Proud owners of Canada’s national team”. (What team owner has ever put itself above the title on a sports team?) If you haven’t caught that ad there are others Rogers’ ads extolling its magnificence in giving Canada the highest telephone bills this side of Botswana. Oh wait… They say, Go Jays Go, Canada’s national team. Sorry about that.
The team’s announcers are also reading verbatim prefab slugs about the story of the Blue Jays “not being written yet.” (We counted three doing the hype before Gm. 1 of the World Series) Watching the proud-as-punch onslaught from the team’s owner one would think this has to be more than Vlad Guerrero uber alles.”
Watching the willful denial of Canada’s legacy-media death throes is reminiscent of when the big automobile companies were challenged by smaller, more efficient Asian imports in the early 1970s. The Detroit big shots tried ignoring them, then actively enlisted government to stop them. Then, with bankruptcies impending, they copied them. The car market finally became a freer market in North America.
The media elites are at the stage where they’re begging government to excuse their inefficiencies and corruption versus “uncouth” independent media. The protectionist racket won’t work any better than it did for the car makers. The question now is will they accept the ultimate solution of sharing the field with social media and doing that kind of reporting again? Because, without that reckoning they won’t be here to greet the 2030s.
As Mark Hebscher concludes in his new book Madness, “In the end it’s not so much the stories being covered as the stories being missed.”
Bruce Dowbiggin @dowbboy is the editor of Not The Public Broadcaster A two-time winner of the Gemini Award as Canada’s top television sports broadcaster, his new book Deal With It: The Trades That Stunned The NHL And Changed hockey is now available on Amazon. Inexact Science: The Six Most Compelling Draft Years In NHL History, his previous book with his son Evan, was voted the seventh-best professional hockey book of all time by bookauthority.org . His 2004 book Money Players was voted sixth best on the same list, and is available via brucedowbigginbooks.ca.
-
Artificial Intelligence2 days agoAI Faces Energy Problem With Only One Solution, Oil and Gas
-
Health2 days agoLack of adequate health care pushing Canadians toward assisted suicide
-
National2 days agoWatchdog Demands Answers as MP Chris d’Entremont Crosses Floor
-
Business1 day agoLiberal’s green spending putting Canada on a road to ruin
-
Media2 days agoBreaking News: the public actually expects journalists to determine the truth of statements they report
-
Artificial Intelligence2 days agoAI seems fairly impressed by Pierre Poilievre’s ability to communicate
-
Alberta2 days agoATA Collect $72 Million in Dues But Couldn’t Pay Striking Teachers a Dime
-
Alberta9 hours agoAlberta Offers Enormous Advantages for AI Data Centres
