Funny, everyone I know from Taichung insists that it’s all sunshine and blue skies 365 a year… 
A friend pointed out that: “by publishing the piece, the gazette is giving her ridiculous bitching a way bigger platform than it warrants, implicitly endorsing her view. this is probably the only ‘culture/travel’ piece they’ll publish about taiwan in a year or several, and it is from a woman who is more or less proudly ignorant (until the very end) of everything significant about the place.”
Anyway, the facebook protest group that went up in regard to the article has apparently either been closed or shutdown.
For anyone interested, Craig and the editor of the section of the Gazette in which the original article was published have both written responses to the overwhelming criticism they have received.
Craig’s: montrealgazette.com/sports/N … story.html
Evangeline Sadler, editor of the Life section: montrealgazette.com/sports/N … story.html
[quote]I wrote the story about my living in Taiwan because I wanted other Canadians to learn from what I endured.
[/quote]
It sounds as if she suffered somewhere in the jungle of Central Africa … as if she was on death row … 
I wonder what other ‘cultures’ she experienced … Belgian, American, French …?
[quote]I am especially mindful of the needs of new Canadians and the differences they face, since I understand what it’s like to feel so isolated.
[/quote]
… maybe this is the reason why so many Canadians or into grass … 
[quote=“citizen k”]For anyone interested, Craig and the editor of the section of the Gazette in which the original article was published have both written responses to the overwhelming criticism they have received.
Craig’s: montrealgazette.com/sports/N … story.html
Evangeline Sadler, editor of the Life section: montrealgazette.com/sports/N … story.html[/quote]
Excuses , excuses ! Just sounds like TWO frogs in a well that shouldve remained in the well.
By all means expand your consciousness but no need to lambast a country/destination the way she did. So many others find harmony where there is discord and are able to expand upon their experiences with a positive attitude. Her article reflected herself negatively as well as her host country. She did herself no favors here.
Now she is defending herself by stating she is well traveled. Oh Lordy, lets hear about all her other experiences then. Can she redeem herself or dig a bigger hole with further revelations?
Funny, everyone I know from Taichung insists that it’s all sunshine and blue skies 365 a year… [/quote]
I think you mean sunny Tainan. And that’s 363 days a year. The other two days are Typhoon Days. 
[quote=“Belgian Pie”][quote]I wrote the story about my living in Taiwan because I wanted other Canadians to learn from what I endured.
[/quote]
It sounds as if she suffered somewhere in the jungle of Central Africa … as if she was on death row …
I wonder what other ‘cultures’ she experienced … Belgian, American, French …?[/quote]
Sorry, mate. But from personal experience, I can assure you the jungles of central Africa are waaaaaaay better than anything she described in her article. Except for the huge assed bugs, maybe. 
Shame, I think she’s getting a bit of a thrashing, but I don’t think the article met her own goal either.
[quote=“citizen k”]For anyone interested, Craig and the editor of the section of the Gazette in which the original article was published have both written responses to the overwhelming criticism they have received.
Craig’s: montrealgazette.com/sports/N … story.html
Evangeline Sadler, editor of the Life section: montrealgazette.com/sports/N … story.html[/quote]
I didn’t read these as excuses at all. They were explanations.
[quote=“tommy525”]By all means expand your consciousness but no need to lambast a country/destination the way she did. So many others find harmony where there is discord and are able to expand upon their experiences with a positive attitude. Her article reflected herself negatively as well as her host country. She did herself no favors here.
Now she is defending herself by stating she is well traveled. Oh Lordy, lets hear about all her other experiences then. Can she redeem herself or dig a bigger hole with further revelations?[/quote]
I’m amazed at how many people are getting their panties in a twist over this article. So she didn’t like Taiwan. Big fucking deal. Taiwan ain’t everyone’s cup of tea. So what? All these jagoffs maligning her in the newspaper letters would be better off, likely, to write an article extolling the glories of Taiwan. By attacking her personally and attempting to discredit her perceptions, you merely illustrate how little tolerance you have for perspectives that differ from your own.
The way to refute an opinion or idea is to offer a counter opinion or idea. Personal attacks simply make the attacker look small. Of course, this is just my opinion.
Not just true of this article, but something we could all keep in mind when replying to posts on the forum, too. 
Here’s the comment that I posted to Ms. Sadler’s rebuttal:
“I believe Ms. Sadler, Ms. Craig and some of the commentators below are missing the point, which is that Ms. Craig’s article described Taiwan inaccurately. She wasn’t telling the reader what her impressions were - she was making false statements about Taiwan as if they were the cold hard facts about the country. If the Gazette runs an article in which I state that Stephen Harper is a tall, thin black man, would that be ok because it was printed in the “Life” section? Would it be ok if the moral of my article is that ‘you can’t judge a book by it’s cover’? Ms. Sadler tries to justify Ms. Craig’s article by stating that the story “is as apologetic as it is critical.” Unfortunately Ms. Craig’s apology comes too late. By the time she tells us what the moral of her story is, the reader has already concluded that Taiwan is hell on earth.”
From the editor’s mouth:
[quote]
On the whole, Craig’s story is as apologetic as it is critical. She made it clear that she set out with the best intentions and felt miserable that she couldn’t bring herself to love the city she was in. The story didn’t describe someone simply bulldozing his/her way through Taiwan with nothing good to say. Craig gave an honest account of what is a tough experience for any foreign national moving to Taiwan. [color=#4000FF]I spent four and a half months in Asia including China, and I have to say I experienced a similar eye-opening experience. That doesn’t mean I didn’t appreciate my time in Asia, but it was certainly challenging[/color]. It taught me a respect for other cultures and gave me a strong appreciation for the challenges any immigrant faces. This is the overriding sentiment in Craig’s story as well. I think this is the worth of the story for readers
Read more: montrealgazette.com/life/Not … z1G9vbmDM7[/quote]
Dunno what to make of this. The ditor had a similar experience, so that was the line. On the other hand, they both say they learned from their experience. 
Still, Craig’s piece makes Taiwan sound like a battlefield, I still feel it is too slanted and exaggerated, and like the stench of open sewers, it is a distinct impression that does not fade when you leave…
I see now that Craig’s expectations were too high, thinking it would be easy, like my friend who went for a laparoscopy said as she woke up in pain: I did not expect it to be like this. Honey, it’s surgery, not filling a cavity. I do not know what kind of “research” would have helped Craig. Furthermore, one thing is helping the newbies, and another mothering them. One thing is to need assitance, the other to play the crying game.
I do agree she does not deserve cyberstalking, though.
The whole article would have been completely different if she had started and not ended here:
A little humor at her own expense would have helped too. The problem is that for most readers by the time they get to the lessons-learned part at the end are just not listening anymore. Reading just the last few paragraphs makes Craig sound like a normal person who’s learned a bit about herself. Reading the first 2/3s is like witnessing a painful exercise in self-indulgence and naivety. There’s just no pleasure in it.
Anyway, while I did not feel sorry for her painful experience in taiwan, I do now for all the gross feedback she has gotten in the form of stalking and posting of her personal data. 
She did not describe Taiwan inaccurately. She described Taiwan how she perceived Taiwan. She didn’t describe the wonderful things about Taiwan because, in her experience, she could not deal with the strangeness of taiwan, from her own perspective.
What exactly was inaccurate in her description? The smell? The traffic? The language? The food? The bugs?
I love Taiwan. I’ve been here for the better part of 26 years. But, the traffic stinks. The sewers sometimes stink. So what? There are also lots of great things about Taiwan. She didn’t give herself a chance to experience the good things. She was overwhelmed by things that she couldn’t cope with. So what?
I read lots of the comments in response to her article in the newspaper and many were from Taiwanese living in Canada. Many of them remarked that Taiwanese living in Canada encounter strange cultural differences but they would never speak impolitely about the same. Many stated that Taiwanese in Taiwan never criticize foreign cultures.
Horseshit. I hung out with Taiwanese students back home in grad school and many of them frequently criticized the US and made fun of stupid Americans. I couldn’t remain friends with any of them had I been as sensitive and easily offended as they are. And the idea that Taiwanese in Taiwan are never critical of foreign people or cultures is laughable.
Get over it, people.
How does the apology come too late? While Ms. Craig explains that she had a horrible experience, she states clearly that many people have wonderful experiences in Taiwan.
If a reader concludes, based on one person’s description of her own admitted subjective perception that a particular place is “hell on earth”, then that reader is an idiot.
She can say whatever she wants, but we reserve the right to not agree. Thats what this is about.
She shouldnt be cyberstalked but prior poster mentioned that the newspaper took her words as if it were the truth and it simply isnt. Spreading falsehood by way of a newspaper (the written word in a newspaper tends to be seen as truth by many) isnt correct and again thats what this thread is about. Some of us are dis-satisfied by what she wrote. She shouldnt be cyber stalked though but refutes against her assertions should get equal time.
IF this were just a blog post in her own personal blog thats fine. My beef is against the newspaper more then her. She has a right to her own experiences and they certainly are allowed to be negative , even blatantly. That is as previous poster stated is HER experience and shes entitled to it. But others are allowed to react to her words as well.
Even if it were a blog , some writers may express such in her blog comment section too.
My take:
- Shes allowed to express her personal experience
- Others are allowed to critique her views
- Some of her assertions ARE patently false and deserve to be exposed as such. If she had prefaced all her negative points with a “i felt like the whole country smelled like a sewer, but thats only me as everyone else seemed fine…” or something like that, it would be more forgivable, but to state that as if it were FACT andfor the paper to lend itself to that statement. Thats MY beef.
Perhaps a newspaper and an article written by a journalist are not the best medium for the expression of subjective perception, though, and it seems like that is where a lot of the confusion regarding this piece as “reporting” seems to lie…I mean, stuff like that is usually reserved for the letters to the editor or opinion page, not a three page article in a section of the paper that does not regularly publish pieces based on subjective experience or personal opinion. Perhaps they should have published a disclaimer with it stating that the content was personal opinion and did not reflect the opinions of anyone other than the writer. Anyhow, it is all pretty clear now that she was not being malicious through all this; obtuse and close-minded perhaps, but not malicious.
It’s a badly written piece, I don’t mean grammar wise … she could have done the same story in a whole different way and mood …
Wrong. many people are targeting her because they are offended by her perception. They are not simply disagreeing with her. They are attacking her and stalking her.
One more time. READ CAREFULLY. She did not spread any falsehoods about Taiwan. She described her perceptions. It was real to her. Thus, it is not a falsehood. You may perceive things differently. Many Taiwanese people think winter in Taiwan is cold. I do not think winter in Taiwan is cold. Am I spreading a falsehood if I say it isn’t cold in Taiwan in the winter? And what idiot believes everything as absolute fact that they read in a newspaper fluff piece?
I’m not saying people shouldn’t be able to reply saying that they perceive Taiwan differently than she did. I perceive Taiwan different from the way that she did. But to get all panty-twisted about a different opinion/perception is a strange way to react, IMO.
[quote=“tommy525”]My take:
- Shes allowed to express her personal experience
- Others are allowed to critique her views
- Some of her assertions ARE patently false and deserve to be exposed as such. If she had prefaced all her negative points with a “i felt like the whole country smelled like a sewer, but thats only me as everyone else seemed fine…” or something like that, it would be more forgivable, but to state that as if it were FACT andfor the paper to lend itself to that statement. Thats MY beef.[/quote]
Tommy… her perceptions are hers and they are not false. They may not be the same as yours, but, they are not false. Why is this such a difficult concept to understand?
Heck, half of what is reported as news is actually editorial in nature. Why should we expect more from an obvious fluff piece of opinion?
Be careful about asking for disclaimers from newspaper writers. Anyway, I knew her article was subjective personal opinion from the first sentence. Dunno how anyone could mistake it for anything but that?
The article clearly implies Taiwan is part of China; the editor spent some ‘challenging’ months in China. I’m guessing the editor accepted Craig’s description of Taiwan partly because her own experiences in China were similar, not realizing there are some differences between the two places.
As for inaccurate, I can’t really see that it is.
Tommy… her perceptions are hers and they are not false. They may not be the same as yours, but, they are not false. Why is this such a difficult concept to understand?[/quote] Just because it is her perception does not mean it is not false. If I say there are 3 cars in the parking lot and and you say you there are 2; but in fact there are physically only two present then my perception is wrong. Just because someone has a perception does not mean it is right even to themselves. If I believe I will not be injured by walking in front of a speeding truck then I am wrong. Perceptions can be altered when drunk, taking drugs or being stressed. Perceptions not the same as mine maybe false as my perceptions maybe false. Well, for rational people anyway. Stress is a great distorter of perception she may think “well on second thoughts…”. Tommy also does indeed have the right to believe one person’s perception of reality is false. Yes he has that right.
Another example is stereoypes these are usually based on distorted perceptions of reality. We all have a right to disagree with another person’t perception and yes that perception can be a FALSEHOOD even to the person believing it.