In February of this year, the Côte-des-Neiges—Notre-Dame-de-Grâce borough’s Communications division launched a new version of its municipal newsletter – Savoir faire, which had been published for four years, became Le Citoyen. The goal was simple: to update the newsletter’s look and review its editorial content so as to report more frequently on the work done and decisions made every day by the borough’s elected officials and staff. Decisions, it should be mentioned, made to meet borough residents’ expectations.

Perhaps because Editor Toula Foscolos is still reeling from the disappearance of the print edition of The Monitor, she painstakingly picks apart each issue of Le Citoyen in search of any title or photo that could be construed as showing the borough’s elected officials in a bad light. She appears to be either venting her hostility toward the current borough administration or taking a short-sighted view of the principles of modern communication. After Ms. Foscolos objected in March to photos and text that she considered too flattering, she is now complaining about a shot of the Mayor on a bicycle, because he is not wearing a helmet and because BIXIs are not yet available in our borough.

It’s hard to know whether to laugh or cry at Ms. Foscolos’ concern about the borough’s communication tools. But she is obviously still smarting from the disappearance of the print version of her own paper, The Monitor, for her first attack on Le Citoyen coincided strangely with that event. (She referred to the new publication as “salt in the wound.”) In her March column, she broadly hinted at some kind of bizarre conspiracy to replace the paper edition of The Monitor with Le Citoyen. So I feel obliged to point out that the move from Savoir faire to Le Citoyen was begun in October 2008, long before The Monitor’s financial woes came to light.

To judge by Ms. Foscolos’ comments, our communications tools should avoid any form of creativity, flavour and colour, because we are the voice of the municipal administration. Worse yet, she insinuates that the information in Le Citoyen is intentionally skewed, on the basis of her vague impressions.

What is even more disturbing, though, is that this journalist who prides herself on knowing fair reporting when she sees it is glaringly absent from media events and press conferences held by the borough’s Communications division. If the coverage offered by the borough’s communications team aggravates journalists like her, who believe they are the only ones who can accurately observe and report on the facts, why does she remain glued to her computer screen? We will never know, since Ms. Foscolos didn’t return our calls after her March column, to discuss our vision of the borough newsletter. There isn’t much point in debating an idea when one has already made up one’s mind and is determined to use it as fuel for controversy.

We have never claimed that we want to replace the local press. Our job is to provide useful information and report on our actions to our citizens. If the Editor of The Monitor feels threatened because of Le Citoyen’s tabloid look, she can talk to the Press Council. But in that she must be aware of the weakness of her arguments, we expect her to confine her complaints to the local scene, where it is easier to label something propaganda. However, she shouldn’t force her disappointment at finding herself limited to the Web onto her readers.

Whatever Ms. Foscolos thinks, by far most of the feedback we have received on Le Citoyen has been positive. We are satisfied with our product, and I am proud to endorse our municipal newsletter as a reliable source of information.

Michel Therrien

Assistant to the Borough Director

Division Chief, Communications, Protocol and Public Relations

Mr. Therrien,

I am more than happy to accord you the space to express your point of view about my reporting (or lack thereof, as you have suggested). Despite what you, and the borough administration you work for, may think, I am “not venting my hostility” towards anyone, but merely doing my job as editor of The Monitor.

My first “attack” on Le Citoyen did not coincide with the disappearance of the Monitor’s print version. It coincided with the publication of the first issue of Le Citoyen!.

I have every right (in fact, an obligation) to report and comment on Le Citoyen, a publication paid for by and distributed through taxpayers’ money. While you may claim that most of the feedback you have received on the newsletter has been positive, there have been many citizens who have been highly critical of its content and format; including The Gazette’s regional affairs columnist, Henry Aubin, who wrote a scathing column entitled “Fluff replaces substance in NDG”. Why aren’t you writing him a letter complaining about his treatment of the newsletter or is your criticism only limited to local media?

What, dare I ask, is so excessive about a local editor pointing the finger at a mayor who appears in a community newsletter promoting cycling paths and BIXI bikes NOT wearing a helmet? Need I remind you that The Monitor was not the only local publication to point out that glaring omission.

Regarding your criticism about me being absent from press conferences and media events, I am the Bureau Chief for four online publications and continue to be Editor of The Monitor, not a journalist. As such, my day consists of assessing the daily news, assigning stories, and communicating with journalists, residents and communications personnel in a variety of settings, not just the municipal world. Does the Editor of La Presse or The Gazette attend daily press conferences? Of course not! He assigns them. So do I. It is no different for a small local publication.

I also find it unfortunate that, while The Monitor makes a point of publishing every single official press release sent from the CDN-NDG borough, and therefore making the current administration’s point of view readily available to all our online readers, the minute I dare to be critical of something, I am branded as “bitter” or lazy.

Finally, with regards to your point of attempting to speak to me and never receiving a reply, one important clarification needs to be made. When The Monitor made the transition online, our contact number changed, as well. If you, Mr. Therrien, or anyone else at the CDN-NDG borough communications office had bothered to go to www.themonitor.ca and look at our contact numbers you would have seen that I can now be reached at 514-685-4690 #258. That contact number has been in place since February. My e-mail address also never changed, so, to my knowledge, readers have never had any issues trying to reach me. However, it’s extremely hard to reply to a message one has never received.

With all due respect, I know it’s an election year and it’s inevitable that every criticism of the current administration will be scrutinized and analyzed ad nauseum, but my job will continue to be to ensure that The Monitor remains a reputable online source of information for residents of the CDN-NDG area. That coverage will sometimes come in the form of criticism. As I have stated before, I do not work for the CDN-NDG public relations department and, as such, it is not my job to make the current administration look good. That, Mr. Therrien, is your job.

You are perfectly entitled to be satisfied with your coverage of the borough and am I entitled to be satisfied with mine. Residents have the advantage of being exposed to all points of view on our website (yours included) and are better informed because of it. Sounds like a win-win situation to me.



Best regards,

Toula Foscolos

Editor