COMM 170 Public Communication: Op-

eds
Sample Op-Ed 1

Sample Op-Ed 2

Sample Op-Ed 1
Anonymous. Used with Permission.

Gun violence in Toronto is now a serious issue. Wait, let’s rephrase that: Gun violence in
Toronto is now a widely publicized serious issue.
And it only took record breaking numbers to do so.
428 separate incidents in 2018. 613 victims in total. It’s alarming, disturbing, but most
importantly, frightening.
So why the rising numbers? Where are these guns coming from? How do we prevent future
incidents? These are just some of the questions on the minds of every Torontonian nowadays.
And every time another shooting happens, there seems to be more questions than answers.
The first key component of every shooting, is a gun. In Canada, there are three classes of
firearms: restricted, non-restricted, and prohibited. In a very broad and general statement, people
who require it for their profession, or people who collect firearms should be the only ones with
guns in their possession. It’s hard to believe that there are a rising number of gun collectors who
suddenly have violent urges, so the only other logical explanation is that there is a growing
number of illegal guns flooding the streets.
But here’s another scary reality, Canada can’t seem to pinpoint exactly where these illegal guns
are coming from. It’s unlikely that people are just buying guns off Amazon, so the government
really needs to figure out a way to properly trace these guns. According to the investigations of
Conservative MP Larry Maguire, the “Canadian Firearms Information System does not collect
this type of information”. Now that’s a disturbing thought.
How do you stop the growing number of shootings, when you don’t even know where the guns
are coming from? It’s basically trying to stop a flooded basement without knowing where the
broken pipe is. This issue definitely needs to be addressed as soon as possible.
The second key component of every shooting, is the perpetrator. In each of these 428 incidents,
someone decided to pull the trigger on a gun that they probably acquired in an illegal fashion.
There’s also a good chance that these offenders are part of gangs, which are more than likely
comprised of underprivileged urban youths. While some of these shootings are premeditated, it’s
fair to say that not very many people wake up planning to shoot someone.
So how does a person come to the point where they feel that they have to shoot someone?
Chances are, it’s somehow related to money…one way or another.
Whether it’s shooting someone to rob them, to get revenge, or to gain ranks in a gang, it’s safe to
bet that there is some sort of monetary motivation behind most of these shootings. Gangs
typically make money through illegal activities, with drug trafficking being the most likely
source. So, what does one do when rival gang member tries to sell drugs in their “turf”? Well,
according to these criminals, pull out a gun and shoot them. It’s the sad truth.
The follow up question is: If money is the root of all this nonsense, why aren’t these young
people getting normal jobs like the rest of the non-violent population of Toronto? Well, the
answer is equally as sad as hearing another shooting in the city. It’s because racism is alive and
very much rampant in Toronto.
A study conducted by a U of T graduate where she created a fictional set of job-seekers found
that applicants with “Black sounding names” who sent in applications to entry level jobs or retail
jobs, only had a callback rate of 18.8% vs their white counterparts who had a rate of 31.3%.
That’s quite a significant gap.
From the looks of it, the underprivileged youth of Toronto, with certain racial backgrounds, find
it easier to make money on the streets selling drugs or performing robberies compared to
working at a fast food joint. Why work at the Gap when “the corner” is always hiring. Why
spend all the time and effort getting an education just to be discriminated just because of your
birth name? It’s shameful really. In the great diversified city of Toronto, someone’s chance of
getting a job still depends on something quite trivial like their name.
Unfortunately, solving gun violence is equivalent to curing a chronic disease. It’s near
impossible, but by addressing the true roots of the issue, it can be managed. There is no easy
solution, but it has to start somewhere. Stop the flow of guns into the city and stop the racism
hiding in the workplace and maybe, just maybe, the city can set a new record for lowest gun
shootings in a year.
Now that’s a statistic worth shooting for.

Sample Op-Ed 2
By Cindy W., used with permission
Imagine this: a room full of self-identified pro-choice young women who have all volunteered to
provide peer support and accurate information to women with unplanned pregnancies. I put on a
video. It’s a short training video for physicians on how to conduct an early term abortion
produced in the 1980s by Dr. Henry Morgentaler that I had used in training sessions for almost a
decade. And every year, the same thing happened when the video ended - the room would fall
silent and someone would inevitably ask “That’s it?”. The killing of doctors, the threatening of
women, the posters of fetuses, the protests…it’s all over this? The volunteers were more put off
by the fact that the patient had full, totally unshaven pubic hair than by the abortion procedure
itself.

I am not minimizing what abortion can represent for women. I worked in an abortion clinic for
long enough to know that for some women, it can be a life-altering, agonizing decision. I also
fully support women who feel that abortion isn’t a choice they themselves can make. I tell this
story to illustrate how little people know about the actual abortion procedure. About how it is
actually done. And therein lies the problem with Jonathan Kay’s argument in his article “Why
progressives desperately stifle any dissent on abortion even from Elizabeth May”, that the
abortion debate in Canada - in spite of what the politicians say - should be reopened. How is it
possible to have a debate when so few people actually know what it is that we’re talking about?

This profound lack of knowledge among Canadians about the abortion procedure itself is
accompanied by another total gap in understanding: how abortion is regulated and the reality of
securing access to one across the country. In his article, Kay equates the lack of abortion laws in
Canada with an “unfettered access to abortion, at any stage of gestation, for any reason
whatsoever”. Seriously? Have you ever tried to get an abortion in rural Canada? Read here to
find out what it’s actually like to find abortion services if you live beyond the borders of
Canada’s cities. What about those late-term abortions that Kay mentions, and which are
endlessly mentioned by the anti-choice movement? You know, that whopping 0.6% of all
abortions in Canada, usually performed in cases of medical emergency?

Kay is not alone in his ignorance about how abortion works in Canada, far from it. For almost a
decade, I worked in a clinic that provides reproductive care, including abortions. I saw countless
women and couples who were facing an unplanned pregnancy. Many were shocked to find out
that in Ontario, it is covered by OHIP as long as you have an OHIP card. Many were mistakenly
scared that they would have to ask their mom or dad for permission or that their family doctor
would be able to tell. They were shocked that you didn’t have to take days off of work or school
to recover. They were surprised to find out that outside of the clinic, no one would have to know
unless they chose to tell them. No one could believe how simple, brief and low-risk the
procedure is once it was actually explained to them. All of them were relieved to know that the
decision was theirs and theirs alone and that they could change their mind at any time right up
until the moment of the procedure. In the end, maybe these women decided to have an abortion,
maybe they didn’t. But that appointment represented the first time in their lives that those women
received accurate information, in many cases any information, about abortion.

Kay argues that the way we talk about abortion in Canada is strange. It is indeed strange – but
not for the reasons he suggests. It’s strange because when we talk about abortion, we never
actually talk about abortion. That’s what makes reopening the abortion debate so dangerous. Kay
maintains throughout his article that having this debate in Canada poses no risk to abortion
rights. Only someone who has never had, or will never need to have, an abortion could be so
glib. Reopening a debate on something about which so little, accurate information is known by
so many is dangerous indeed. Maybe, just maybe, the real reason politicians don’t want to reopen
the debate about abortion is because it isn’t a debate; it is a discussion that should be between a
woman and her doctor - where it belongs.