A good friend says I'm just a kid with an ant farm, shaking it up and watching the occupants scurry in anger.
Two former colleagues, independently of each other, regularly called me "spoon," as in "you sure like to stir the pot, Neil."
If stirring the pot means getting people enraged just for my personal entertainment, that's never my intent.
If stirring the pot means challenging old and tired beliefs and ways of doing things, criticizing decisions that affect the community and standing up for what I think is right and true without fear, then I'm guilty as charged.
The two most common questions I get from readers are "do you really believe what you write?" and "how does it make you feel when people disagree with you?"
The first question is easy.
Yes.
I have never in my 25-plus years in newspapers been told by a publisher or an owner what to write, either as a story or as an opinion.
I have had stories and opinion pieces spiked (newspaper speak for "rejected for publication") by a senior editor or publisher, including my current boss, Colleen Sparrow, for a variety of reasons - the article lacked important details or balance, or the story or opinion would have been too harmful without any benefit to an individual, to a business, to the community or to the newspaper.
So, yes, my opinions are my own. That's why my name is at the bottom of my editorials.
That being said, I do try to incorporate the views of the publisher on important issues that I know she has strong opinions about.
But I'll avoid a topic, in whole or in part, before taking a stand I don't support.
It's also my job to build audience and readership for this newspaper, meaning I do try to write opinion pieces that some people feel are "required reading" each morning or get a "did you read the Citizen's editorial today? It's awesome/terrible!" reaction.
I do find that people who only know me through my editorials and then meet me in person are often surprised to find that I'm casual and easy-going, both in temperament and in my opinions. While my editorials reflect my thinking on various topics, they are often a snapshop of my thoughts.
The best written commentary takes a firm stand on an issue and adds context and variables that readers may have not thought about before.
That's what I try to do each day.
The worst written commentary waffles on the topic.
Whenever I catch myself writing "on the other hand," I stop in my tracks. While it's fine to consider alternative views in editorials and columns, the stance of the writer should be both clear and unequivocal.
Write what you mean and mean what you write.
In "real life," however, I'm more ambivalent and less strident.
As for people disagreeing with me, I'm fine with it most of the time. Usually I'm just flattered that people are reading my work and then taking the time to enter the conversation. A well-known and respected community advocate once told me "I like your editorials, Neil... about 75 per cent of the time." I'll take that. I'd take less, even, but thanks.
My favourite recent comment about an editorial I wrote came on Facebook last weekend from Jennifer Pighin. She wrote in support of my comments about the "misplaced outrage" over the renaming of Fort George Park.
Regular Citizen readers also know I wrote an editorial criticizing Jennifer's decision to sue the 2015 Canada Winter Games Society and three local auto dealerships for copyright infringement in connection with one of her works.
She ended her Facebook comment with "we need to raise awareness and education on many issues of Canadian history and not just with the indigenous population... environment... human rights.... and yes copyrights too lol."
In other words, she was pleased I agreed with her on the park renaming but still respectfully disagreed with my stance regarding her lawsuit.
Where I do get upset is when people whom I admire attack me directly, rather than engaging my arguments, or accuse me of attacking the people whose actions I criticize.
Many of Jennifer's supporters lashed out at me after my editorial, saying I attacked her and, in defence, they stressed how wonderful she is as an artist, a teacher and a leader in our community.
Not only do I agree with those sentiments, Jennifer knows I agree with those sentiments because I've told her so in person, on more than one occasion.
I have met a lot of important community people in this job and I like almost all of them all the time but my job also requires me to gently or not so gently criticize their words and/or actions from time to time.
Most of them understand most of the time and cheerfully tell me "Neil, I'll admit you're wrong when you admit I'm right."
I've written editorials changing my mind and/or apologizing before and I'm sure I'll do it again, hopefully with the same honesty and sincerity I always strive for.
