I don't need to know exactly what killed Jack Layton, nor should you
On the first anniversary of Jack Layton's death, some in the media are making an issue over the cause of his demise.
Today, I read an earnest article in the mainstream media, which tried to manufacture a debate over whether Canadians deserve to know what type of cancer felled the former NDP leader.
The usual arguments were bandied about: officials reveal this type of information in the United States, the public has a right to know, yadda, yadda, yadda.
Layton's widow, Olivia Chow, has maintained that there's no upside in providing more details because it would only discourage those who might be battling the same type of tumour.
This discussion really speaks to a larger issue: the nearly necrophiliac obsession with death that seems to have gripped the media industry in recent years.
Truthfully, we don't need to know which cancer killed Layton. However, some journalists and their assignment editors have become so accustomed to covering fatalities that it seems perfectly reasonable to want to demand the details in the name of accountability.
Sometimes when I watch a local TV newscast on a Sunday night, I marvel over how many of the stories revolve around death. On a few occasions, I've turned the dial on a radio talk show when I've felt a creepy sort of media necrophilia emerge in an interview.
Part of the reason we get so many of these stories is because death sells. For proof, pick up a People magazine immediately after some two-bit celebrity expires and see how much attention is lavished on someone you forgot even existed.
Another reason is that each of these stories about a person dying can be very compelling. My problem isn't with the bereaved relatives; it's with the sheer volume of fatalities in the news.
Keep in mind that deaths are relatively cheap and easy to cover, which appeals to the media in an era of diminishing news budgets.
There's lots of file footage in the case of celebrities like Layton. If it's a violent death, the police are always ready to offer comments. And for the people directly affected, it's one of the most important events in their lives.
After a while, though, it can become a little mind-numbing and depressing, particularly if all these deaths come at the expense of good public-affairs journalism.
Comments
7 Comments
Doctor of Law
Aug 23, 2012 at 9:15am
All birth/death information should be public.
Who's hiding?
Call Me Skeptical.
Aug 23, 2012 at 9:59am
Maybe Julian Assange can find out and let us know?
Arthur Vandelay
Aug 23, 2012 at 10:01am
Charlie, as usual, you have given the NDP a free pass with an issue that you surely would not have given to those with whom you politically disagree.
The issue with what felled Jack isn’t some sort of voyeuristic obsession – this issue is if we know what kind of cancer it was, then it will be known what the chances of cure were and what level of disclosure Jack should have given to the public about his condition, given that he is running for the highest office in our land. People may clearly vote differently if they know the leader’s death is imminent. Especially this party, where people voted for it almost strictly based on this leader’s appeal.
I find this non-disclosure of Jack’s imminent demise no less wrong than Gordo’s non-disclosure of the implementation of HST. This win-at-all-costs level of secrecy is the one item that takes the shine from his legacy as St. Jack and hence one that his family and the party want to silence as quickly as possible.
Again, I don’t care what killed him, but I do care that he let people vote for him knowing that his death was imminent. That’s fraud, plain and simple. If they want to prove otherwise, they will need to disclose the diagnosis, including the specific type of affliction that he had.
DavidH
Aug 23, 2012 at 11:53am
@ Vandelay: How very clinical of you. Fraud? Hilarious on one level, but very sad on another.
To use your obvious dislike for Jack Layton (whom you sarcastically describe as "St.Jack") to score a pathetic political point reminds me - once again - why I cannot and will not vote for a conservative of any type. Conservatives are truly contemptible.
Please, Please, Please
Aug 23, 2012 at 12:41pm
It really should be pointed out that Layton did not receive his diagnosis of a second cancer until AFTER the 2011 election.
For the temporally challenged - such as Mr. Vandelay - that would make it impossible for him to disclose what he did not yet know.
The only fraud here is your introduction of opinion, as fact, that you could not possibly know or verify.
Dante
Aug 23, 2012 at 1:21pm
I beleive that sharing information is important, and it should be available for the general public to access.
Jack's life was spent in the limelight; he will be remembered by many for what he accomlished and what he had set to achieve.
Cancer affects everyone and is a disease that continues to be researched, and I personally don't see this research stopping anytime soon.
Death is a part of life and sharing information on how Cancer caused his untimely death should be made available for those who wish to know.
RIP JAck
R G Carr
Aug 23, 2012 at 6:29pm
Mr Layton's cause of death should be public. He was a a very public individual. This would put to rest some of the disgusting speculations
offered up by those that reach the level of a sewer rat.