Opinion
Journalism: Back to Basics

How cool is it that in the 21st century it isn’t just news anchors, professional investigative journalists or beat reporters that bring us news and current events? Today, average JoAnne Public contributes to a globally collective knowledge. What is less cool, however, is the vast amount of not-really journalistic style writing that permeates media with biased opinions or fake news. Sometimes it’s hard to decipher good journalistic pieces from stories rife with personal beliefs or judgements. Whether you are a reader or writer of today’s news, keeping an eye out for just a few ‘tells’ means you’ll perhaps consume or create more real news and fewer opinion pieces.
Accuracy
It’s pretty exciting to be the first to report a story, or to read the earliest account of a story. You know what is less exciting? Finding out you read misinformation after you shared it with friends, or learning you released a story before all your facts were confirmed. It is far better to be right than to be first; both as a reader and a writer. I think we can all agree that anything premature is, well…not great.
Sources
Remember back in school when you had to write a bibliography to prove where you found your information? The same basic rules apply to good news reporting too. Although citations don’t always have to be formal, there should be some mention of the source of the information. This doesn’t mean confidential contributors should be named, though. Sometimes protection of privacy is important to a story!
Naming sources not only lends credibility to a story, but doing so supports the validity of any quoted numbers or stats too. For example, I could tell you eleventy nine percent of drivers pick their noses at a stop light. If I don’t also tell you which studies prove this, shouldn’t you question the legitimacy of that statistic?
Free from Bias
Good reporting demands sharing all sides of a story. We’ve all read stories about kids constantly on their devices today and never looking up to experience the people right in front of them. Presumably, they’re on social media, playing games, and generally wasting their lives. But what about the kid texting a parent living away from the family home, or communicating with a teacher about an assignment, or talking a friend through a trying time? Do we also get to read about how those kids are experiencing real relationships, trauma, joy, or easing the loneliness of a loved one through their device? Do we get to learn about how that kid is making a difference in the life of another not sitting in that group?
It’s important for good journalism to tell all sides of the story without injecting personal views, emotional attachment to one side or the other, and to keep stereotypes out of the story. According to the Reuters Handbook of Journalism, although it’s acceptable to include other people’s opinions in a story, the writer should steer clear of expressing their own opinions. So as long as both the kid with her face in her device AND, for example, the disapproving onlooker both have a voice in a story, it all balances out!
We all know if it’s on the Internet it must be true, but keeping an eye out for legitimate journalism fosters the smartitude in all of us.
conflict
One dead, over 60 injured after Iranian missiles pierce Iron Dome

MxM News
Quick Hit:
Iran launched four waves of missile attacks Friday night, breaching Israel’s defenses and killing at least one person. Over 60 others were injured, with the IDF confirming direct strikes on civilian areas in Tel Aviv and central Israel.
Key Details:
-
The Israel Defense Forces reported four rounds of Iranian missile fire, with at least ten missiles making impact inside Israel.
-
One person was killed and 63 wounded, including several in critical condition, according to The Jerusalem Post.
-
The IDF said Iran deliberately targeted civilians, contrasting its own earlier strikes that focused on Iranian military assets.
⚠️RAW FOOTAGE: Iran launched multiple ballistic missiles toward Israel in the past hours.
The IDF cannot, and will not, allow Iran to attack our civilians. pic.twitter.com/IrDK05uErm
— Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) June 13, 2025
Diving Deeper:
Several Iranian missiles broke through Israel’s air defenses during Friday night’s attack, striking Tel Aviv and other civilian areas. According to The Jerusalem Post, at least 63 people were wounded and one person was killed after four waves of Iranian ballistic missile strikes hit cities across Israel.
The IDF reportedly said roughly 100 missiles were fired in total. While the Iron Dome intercepted many, multiple missiles made it through and exploded in densely populated areas. Dramatic video showed a missile striking near downtown Tel Aviv, sending fire and debris into the air as people ran for cover.
Army Radio confirmed that ten missiles landed inside Israel between the first two waves. By the time the third and fourth waves hit, injuries had climbed sharply, with several listed in critical condition. The one fatality was reported late Friday night.
The Israeli Home Front Command temporarily allowed civilians to exit shelters but quickly reversed that guidance, urging residents to stay near protected areas amid fears of further attacks.
The IDF emphasized the nature of the targets, calling out Iran for targeting civilians. The IDF also released maps showing where air raid sirens were triggered throughout the night. Though Israel’s Home Front Command briefly allowed civilians to exit shelters, it advised them to remain nearby in case of continued strikes. As of late Friday, Iranian officials claimed a fifth wave could follow.
With tensions still high, Israeli defense officials are preparing for potential further escalation—and weighing how to respond to a direct Iranian attack on civilians.
Fraser Institute
Long waits for health care hit Canadians in their pocketbooks

From the Fraser Institute
Canadians continue to endure long wait times for health care. And while waiting for care can obviously be detrimental to your health and wellbeing, it can also hurt your pocketbook.
In 2024, the latest year of available data, the median wait—from referral by a family doctor to treatment by a specialist—was 30 weeks (including 15 weeks waiting for treatment after seeing a specialist). And last year, an estimated 1.5 million Canadians were waiting for care.
It’s no wonder Canadians are frustrated with the current state of health care.
Again, long waits for care adversely impact patients in many different ways including physical pain, psychological distress and worsened treatment outcomes as lengthy waits can make the treatment of some problems more difficult. There’s also a less-talked about consequence—the impact of health-care waits on the ability of patients to participate in day-to-day life, work and earn a living.
According to a recent study published by the Fraser Institute, wait times for non-emergency surgery cost Canadian patients $5.2 billion in lost wages in 2024. That’s about $3,300 for each of the 1.5 million patients waiting for care. Crucially, this estimate only considers time at work. After also accounting for free time outside of work, the cost increases to $15.9 billion or more than $10,200 per person.
Of course, some advocates of the health-care status quo argue that long waits for care remain a necessary trade-off to ensure all Canadians receive universal health-care coverage. But the experience of many high-income countries with universal health care shows the opposite.
Despite Canada ranking among the highest spenders (4th of 31 countries) on health care (as a percentage of its economy) among other developed countries with universal health care, we consistently rank among the bottom for the number of doctors, hospital beds, MRIs and CT scanners. Canada also has one of the worst records on access to timely health care.
So what do these other countries do differently than Canada? In short, they embrace the private sector as a partner in providing universal care.
Australia, for instance, spends less on health care (again, as a percentage of its economy) than Canada, yet the percentage of patients in Australia (33.1 per cent) who report waiting more than two months for non-emergency surgery was much higher in Canada (58.3 per cent). Unlike in Canada, Australian patients can choose to receive non-emergency surgery in either a private or public hospital. In 2021/22, 58.6 per cent of non-emergency surgeries in Australia were performed in private hospitals.
But we don’t need to look abroad for evidence that the private sector can help reduce wait times by delivering publicly-funded care. From 2010 to 2014, the Saskatchewan government, among other policies, contracted out publicly-funded surgeries to private clinics and lowered the province’s median wait time from one of the longest in the country (26.5 weeks in 2010) to one of the shortest (14.2 weeks in 2014). The initiative also reduced the average cost of procedures by 26 per cent.
Canadians are waiting longer than ever for health care, and the economic costs of these waits have never been higher. Until policymakers have the courage to enact genuine reform, based in part on more successful universal health-care systems, this status quo will continue to cost Canadian patients.
-
International1 day ago
Israel’s Decapitation Strike on Iran Reverberates Across Global Flashpoints
-
illegal immigration2 days ago
LA protests continue as judge pulls back CA National Guard ahead of ‘No Kings Day’
-
National2 days ago
Carney promotes MP instrumental in freezing Freedom Convoy donors’ bank accounts
-
Business2 days ago
Trump: ‘Changes are coming’ to aggressive immigration policy after business complaints
-
conflict2 days ago
Israel strikes Iran, targeting nuclear sites; U.S. not involved in attack
-
Alberta1 day ago
Punishing Alberta Oil Production: The Divisive Effect of Policies For Carney’s “Decarbonized Oil”
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith Discusses Moving Energy Forward at the Global Energy Show in Calgary
-
Energy1 day ago
Canada is no energy superpower