New Paragraph

The thirst for info should not outweigh the need for facts
November 25, 2023

A misquote from the main character in the old Dragnet television show from the late 1960s resulted in a popular phrase, “Just the facts ma’am.” Although Sgt. Joe Friday never actually said that exact string of words, the premise was and remains an important one. As a police investigator, he wanted the facts, not a bunch of speculations, rumours and exaggerations.


The mainstream media most often worked under that principle. Many outlets still do, but not all – particularly the politically connected ones. The days of verifying critical information before releasing it to the public and perhaps jeopardizing a future trial or unfairly maligning an individual or organization, are long gone to some.


In my view, the main reason for that evolution is the proliferation of social media and the ability to float outright lies and embellishments as well as the inclination to throw the proverbial shit at the wall to see what sticks. Former President U.S. Donald Trump turned it into an art form over the past decade, and sadly many of his colleagues, followers and politicized media organizations have followed suit. And that comes from faces and names that we know and recognize! Then there are the nameless, faceless trolls that never have anything nice or remotely accurate to say about anyone or anything.


This constant flow of social media misinformation on world events has put untold pressure on credible media outlets to report “something” immediately and before their news deadlines – as opposed to verifying, or they fall behind the curve. Even when they do confirm details relatively quickly, the false information is already out there, and it is then like swimming up Niagara Falls to get the facts communicated. That flow of bits of facts combined with tons of misinformation can cause unnecessary anxiety among community members and often costly over-reactions by political leaders and then unnecessary scrambling by the various government agencies they lead downstream.


Speaking of Niagara Falls, case in point: when a car crashed in a fiery ball on the U.S. side of the Rainbow Bridge there early Wednesday afternoon, all hell broke loose. Within seconds social media posts claimed terrorists with explosives from the Canadian side had attacked the port of entry on the American side. One major U.S. news outlet reported it as fact immediately. Others announced that “there were reports” of a terrorist attack. As security and law enforcement agencies on both sides of the border were trying to sort out the who, what, when, what and why of the event, some U.S. Republican politicians used it to criticize President Joe Biden and his border security policies. Many Americans truly thought that terrorists from Canada had attacked the United States. The reality that eventually emerged was that there were no explosives, there was no terrorists at all, but a NY man and his wife were killed after driving at insane speeds through the city of Niagara Falls New York and crashing at the U.S. Customs property.

Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre questioned PM Justin Trudeau in the House, as to government’s action plan to provide security for Canadians, stating: “We’ve just heard media reports of a terrorist attack…” In fairness he did not definitively say it was terrorism, but simply quoted the story as reported by several media outlets. The PM replied quite appropriately (and I seldom agree with him), but regardless 2 days of political attacks of Poilievre followed, like it only can in that world.


Nonetheless, all the swirl that resulted from initial and inaccurate media reports that emanated from social media jib jab, turned a tragic but spectacular fatal car crash – unfortunately at a high-profile location on a U.S. holiday weekend and at the same time as the Israel/Hamas war, into leading world news coverage.


I do not blame U.S. officials for treating the crash as a potential terrorist attack until proven otherwise. It’s easier to gear down and turn the federal investigation over to local authorities when you’re sure, then it is to spool up to a national security investigation a day or two later. I think they managed it quite appropriately. Social media and the resulting frantic spin took it from there.


Unfortunately, we cannot stop the silly side of social media. False flags, unfair finger-pointing, untrue allegations and slams against individuals, politicians, public officials, and organizations likely won’t lessen soon. We cannot legislate intelligence and maturity, nor can we satiate the thirst for information as opposed to facts. But do the rest of us have to believe it, further it and add to the mayhem? Should elected officials not stay out of the fray and not further dangerous falsehoods that scare the heck out of millions of people just to discredit rivals? We have enough real and desperate issues in the world to address without having to face a never-ending circus of misinformation free-for-alls.


How or why this horrific crash occurred remains unknown. We do not yet know if it was intentional or the result of impairment or a physical or mental health episode. We do know that terrible things happen on occasion. But we must rely on authorities to take control when they do; determine the reality of the threat and issue public safety advisories accordingly, with mainstream and social media platforms being credible and honest players in the process. We the consumers of the information and the political masters of the responding agencies, all need to take a deep breath, hear the facts from our experts and think logically before hitting the panic button.

The worst boss: Nightmare for some, reality for many

By Chris Lewis • June 21, 2025
Image: new-manager-training.com Imagine this scenario if you will, getting the worst boss on earth – a person who is the total antithesis of leadership. Your new “Boss” replaces a leader that wasn’t always right and was getting too old to meet the mental and physical demands of the job, but at the same time treated all those around him with respect. He tried to select people for key positions based on their experience base and his confidence that they may not always agree but the individuals picked would be honest with him, other employees and the client base. He undoubtedly made mistakes here and there and did have some flaws but would readily admit to most of them. This boss comes back to the organization having committed a list of publicly confirmed misdeeds and illegal acts – many of which would have singularly been a good reason to not hire even the lowest level of employee, and justification for imprisonment for others. However, he was chosen for the top job despite all that baggage. Conversely, he brings not one redeeming quality to the top position. From day one, it’s obvious that the new Boss is truly a “boss” and not a “leader.” He has old personal scores to settle and wreaks revenge on many employees that he doesn’t like. Not because they were dishonest, incapable or lazy, but because he perceives that they didn’t want him to return or didn’t always agree with his philosophies and rash actions during past affiliations. This activity causes panic among all employees who know they have no choice but to get aboard his out-of-control train or perish beneath it. Then – without any deep evaluation or thought, he makes tremendous cuts to many organizational programs – leaving thousands without work and lacking any strategy to provide much needed services to a vast array of client groups. He viciously cuts through the organization like a chainsaw through softwood. Why? Because he can. Some of these decisions may have had some degree of validity following a proper assessment, while others not, but that analysis never occurred. Most previous positive relationships with partner agencies and the majority of client groups are immediately scuttled by the new boss. He publicly demeans and taunts longtime allies with irrational statements and outright falsehoods. Never in the many decades of history of the organization has such broad-ranging international indignation been felt, largely as a result of his childish behavior. Very few productive relationships remain and although some new ones are developed, they are only with organizations that are poorly considered by clients and upstanding industry players. His decisions continually fly in the face of the needs of the immense client group but more align with the personal business interests of only the Boss and his business associates – some of whom are either known despots or of questionable character. Company stocks continue to plummet as a result of his silliness. That also has a significant negative impact on the fiscal picture of partner organizations around the world. Anyone that respectfully expresses disagreement or suggests alternative decisions to the Boss, are sidelined or fired, then are ridiculed and until they become unemployable. Gas-lighting, exaggerations, denials, the passing of blame and blatant lies are his norm. He seldom speaks the truth about anyone or any situation. The sycophants he has positioned to assist in his destruction of the organization, publicly praise him for his leadership and courageous decision-making, when the majority of employees and clients know it is just flagrant butt-kissing on their part. He constantly seeks and demands praise, even for things he didn’t do, then sulks and whines when he doesn’t receive it. He falsely takes credit for the few good things that do happen but quickly passes blame when things that have his fingerprints all over them, go horribly wrong. His God-complex is resounding and worsens with each passing day. His public claims of success – before and since becoming the Boss, and assertions of being the “Greatest Boss in history”, fall flat with anyone that truly knows him. He aggressively takes advantage of anyone he can but then turns on them at the flip of a switch. No one is beyond being found at the pointy end of his meanness stick. When caught making an error, he’ll blame everyone on his “team” before accepting any criticism. In fact, he’d turn on his own children if he felt it would make him look brave or heroic, or if it would prevent him from public humiliation. He states his 24/7 lies over and over so often to make his base of lemming followers believe him, that he seemingly believes them to be factual himself. Even when he is confronted with witness testimony or audio/video of his brazen lies, he blames others for being out to get him. Being accountable when things go wrong and letting the light shine on others when they go well, is beyond his comprehension. (Can you spell “narcissistic”?) Although he doesn’t understand the business, he refuses to surround himself with people that do, given that he thinks he knows more than any of them and possibly more than anybody, anywhere, ever, since the dawn of time. Public statements he makes are often completely ridiculous and childish, causing all those around him to force plastic smiles, offer him undeserved praise and nod like pre-programmed bobbleheads. People and even affiliated organizations live in such fear of his thirst for retribution that they either cow-tow to his insanity or prepare for annihilation. He is an embarrassment internally and externally, on an international scale. No past executive has even been so blatantly self-centered, mean spirited and/or inept, nor have they ever had such a negative impact on the organization and its people. It may take decades to repair all the damage he has done. Thankfully, his employment contract is only for four years, so there may be some light at the end of the tunnel. Most of those within and those reliant on the organization, as well as friends, associates, allies internationally pray that this nightmare will end at that time. If it’s not too late, that is. Just a bad dream for some or a reality for millions of us?

What did the PM’s most recent announcement on border security really mean?

By Chris Lewis • February 4, 2025
Is there any meat to this or is it more of the same?

What police don’t need during a crisis

By Chris Lewis • January 4, 2025
Police know how to conduct major investigations and find bad guys. Although several specific factors change from case to case, their general investigative playbook remains the same. Once some ungodly multi-victim attack occurs, in very simplistic terms: the scene is protected, and the health of the living victims is looked after. Forensic experts begin processing the crime scene. Witnesses are located and interviewed. Physical evidence is gathered. Area and witness video recordings are collected and analyzed. Victims are identified. An off-site reunification centre is established where there are multiple victims. Next of kin notifications begin. At any point – if a suspect or suspects become known, their background is gathered, and the hunt begins. They need to be apprehended before anyone else is hurt. Area law enforcement officers need to know suspect details ASAP. “Motive” is at top of mind as investigators are synthesizing all this information, whether the suspect is identified or not. Of course, establishing motive often leads to identifying the suspect, but at other times identifying the suspect helps fill in the blanks on motive. What was the initial basis of what became a murder? Was it a robbery? Could it have been a street fight gone bad? Was it simply a want or need to kill someone specific or maybe anyone at all? That’s for investigators to sort out. There is an onus to warn the public or at least tell them something, i.e. “ongoing threat”, “stay indoors”, or “no threat to public safety”. There are reporting protocols to follow. Senior officers need to be advised up the food chain as do their political masters, so everyone knows what is happening. None of that should detract investigators from doing what they do best – catching killers. But that’s when the ravenous “thirst for knowledge” and political grandstanding often take over and completely interfere with police work. The only knowledge the investigators are thirsty for in those early hours is evidence and then identifying, locating and capturing bad people. They do not need politics monopolizing their time or efforts. The New Years Day massacre in New Orleans was big. Fourteen innocent party goers were killed and dozens injured. The world wanted to know what happened and the community wanted to know if they were in danger. I absolutely get that. However, what sometimes comes with such tragedies is everyone wanting to know everything. We see it in most mass murder cases, but this was an exceptional example of the insanity surrounding such a high-profile incident. Whatever blanks weren’t immediately filled in by police officials and verified mainstream media reports, were filled in by social media. In such cases police totally lose control of the narrative as rumours, theories, falsities, conspiracy theories and “hey look at me” games take over. The political party and individual positioning in this case was nauseating. In any multi-agency response, having the leaders of those agencies at press conferences in a united front makes sense. The public needs to have confidence that the situation is in the best of hands. But where did these massive press conferences where police officials are flanked by numerous politicians come from? I can see some elected leaders being present when a new program is launched or government funding is being announced, but it should never be in the early hours of a mass murder. Having a bunch of partisan wonks peacocking on stage and in follow-up interviews, helps no one at the operational level. As some of them were speaking, I was responding to their dumb questions in my mind: Was it a terror attack? Maybe, but let the experts figure that out. In the meantime, it’s a mass murder. Was the killer an illegal immigrant? Let’s worry about that when the dust settles. What political party is to blame for allowing him into the country? We don’t care. Maybe he was born here. Let’s sort that out if he turns out to be an illegal immigrant. Why wasn’t the area more secure? Good question for a future debrief. We need to get the FBI and HSI leaders before a government committee right away so we can find out who failed! Shut up. We have police work to do. There are always enough social media theories, private citizens’ investigations into suspects, outright lies and misinformation being spread to the public, without silly partisan games sidetracking investigators who are fighting to stay ahead of legitimate theories and tips. In the early hours of a mass murder case investigators are probably the busiest they have ever been, and don’t need any of this interference. Controlling the social media fever is next to impossible. It would take a sudden level of maturity across the populace that may be unattainable. But politicians at all levels need to get the message that they are not welcome on stage at operational press conferences and their comments to the media – if asked for them – aside from expressing sadness, thoughts, prayers and confidence in the police, should be “Our law enforcement agencies are investigating, and we need to let them do what they do.” Adding any theories, raising questions or passing blame is totally wrong. If elected officials truly care about their electorate and feel the need to say more, they should have some prior dialogue with the police leaders or their Public Information Officers to ensure that what they say is helpful as opposed to harmful. Otherwise, be quiet.