This is correspondence with
Mrs. Kate Williams (Director of the McGill University Relations Office) and the
editor of “The Reporter” Ms. M.Haldane.
We can see here documents confirming very low qualifications of some
functionaries at McGill who try to compensate these missing values by their
aggressively manifested arrogance. It
is also interesting to know if Mrs. K.W. is really stepping down from her
position (as announced by the principal) or she is just simply being
fired? Now it is done more nicely to
avoid a similar development as in the case of Mrs. Peggy Sheppard who is suing
McGill for 1.4 million $ and reveals a lot of dirty things after being brutally
fired from a high position.
- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - -
- - -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - --
Mrs. Kate Williams letter with the attached “credentials” was:
August 21, 2003
Mr. Slawomir Poplawski
Fax: 4492
Mr.Poplawski,
With the permission of Maeve Haldane and in response to your enquiry
about her qualifications as editor of the McGill Reporter, I am pleased
to attach a short biographical description of her experience. Like Daniel McCabe, who in point of fact
hired her originally, Ms. Haldane began her training in this office as a
freelancer, and then as associate editor.
I was therefore very pleased that when Daniel was promoted and joined
the DAR communications staff, we were able to persuade Ms.Haldane to put her
experience to use in the role of fulltime editor.
Sincerely,
Kate Williams
Copy: Daniel McCabe, Senior communication officer
Maeve Haldane,
Editor, McGill Reporter
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
“Qualifications” of the editor for The McGill Reporter as
described by her direct supervisor:
Maeve Haldane has been working her way with words as an
editor and writer for over a decade. Before entering the freelance world of
advertising, marketing and newspaper writing, she received an MSc in
anthropology at the Universite de Montreal and BFA in theatre from Concordia
University. She has lived and studied
in France and Mexico, and traveled extensively through Europe and Asia. Her writing has appeared in the weekly Hour
Magazine for three years, as their restaurant reviewer. She was hired as
associate editor of the McGill Reporter in 2001, and became editor a year
later.
Maeve
Haldane
Editor
McGill
Reporter
Phone:
398-6693
Fax:
398-7364
-- - - --- - - -- - - - -- - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The answer was:
August
31, 2003
Att:
Mrs. Kate Williams - Director of the McGill University Relations Office (fax:
398-7364)
Dear
Mrs. Williams,
Thank
you very much for your letter of August 21, 2003 “in response to (my)
enquiry about Ms. M. Haldane qualifications as editor of the McGill Reporter.”(enc.1)
In
fact I had asked Ms. Haldane herself for this information, and am somewhat
perplexed as to why she seems incapable of responding. I was following up her formal statement
given to the Press Council in February 2003, wherein she questioned my
intentions in not contacting her directly: “Concerning Mr. Poplawski’s opinions about my being
hired, he has never asked to see my (perfectly fine) qualifications.”
It
is thus quite odd to see you, Ms. Williams, answering my letter to Ms. Haldane
of August 7th, 2003. The
second sentence, wherein you safely distance yourself by saying that “Daniel
McCabe […]in point of fact hired [Ms. Haldane]originally,” seems even more fishy. What is wrong now or was before with Ms.
Haldane that you feel forced to state today: “we were able to persuade
Ms.Haldane to put her experience to use in the role of fulltime editor?”
Now
I have a better understanding of your reputation as “Mother McGill” (the
principal’s expression) who has an encyclopedic knowledge of the way things
work here. This is clear from your cannily pointing out that Mr. McCabe was
only responsible for hiring a “journalist” who was able to present only one
sentence directly related to her working experience before being hired by the
Reporter: “Her writing has appeared in the weekly Hour Magazine for three
years, as their restaurant reviewer.”
But
this peculiar magazine oriented to promoting previously marginalized
alternative sex orientations and other life pleasures, including good
restaurants, is quite exotic and remote from the McGill workers’
expectations. Anyway, surely hiring an
editor would require an open public meeting to discuss the criteria for
choosing the best editor. The question now is why did you, as Director, not
organize an open competition for this position, as we have many talented people
– even within McGill! – out of work in the journalistic field?
In
these circumstances, why did you put yourself in the position of trying “to
persuade Ms.Haldane” to agree to be “full time editor?” Did you have to offer her extra money or
fewer duties, like the right not to answer the readers or the editorial freedom
to ignore critics?
It
seems that these questions go a long way toward explaining my latest problems
in getting a fair hearing for my critical remarks about questionable policies
introduced at McGill by the previous and recent principals. I think that it is in the public interest to
change this situation and for these reasons I am attaching this and previous
correspondence to the Press Council file: 2003-01-044.
Sincerely,
Slawomir
Poplawski
Cc:
The Press Council
This is a correspondence with Ms.
Haldane Maeve – the editor in “The McGill Reporter” and the former top eating
expert and now a super-specialist for super oily interviews with the Principal:
Montreal, August 21, 2003
The McGill Reporter Fax:
398-7364
Dear Ms. Haldane,
Thank you very much for your response yesterday
to my letter of August 7th. I
appreciate your direct explanation for not providing answers personally:
because your boss "will respond to (my) request when she has time". This honesty is so overwhelming that it
comes to the point of being bizarre. I
cannot believe that educated people can humiliate themselves to this extent at
McGill. I asked you to represent
yourself as "a fully independent person who is not manipulated by
others. Formally speaking you were
the sole author of the above-quoted letter to the Council. Thus you should not
require Ms. Williams’ permission to send me the requested documents..." The question of sending the documents already raises
the issue of your seemingly odd relationship to the Public Relations office. Who or what causes you to behave in this
way?
I have compared the atmosphere around McGill
top administrators as resembling the court of Louis XIV. We are only missing the presence of a true
aristocratic class. The people from
this class would at least know a notion of honour. That explains why our cheap substitutes from McGill want so
desperately to cover this missing element in their mentality and thus to divert
our attention. They do this by seeking
exaggerated salaries and spending the university’s money on extremely expensive
seminars or inaugurations to consolidate their status. They also like to see people below them
humiliated and afraid to act freely.
Your example confirms this situation.
It also explains your disingenuous appeal to bureaucratic
rules according to which your boss (Mrs. Williams) will eventually answer to
the McGill peasants "when she has time." That stance is amazing and raises more
questions. For example, when and in
what circumstances can the people of McGill expect to receive answers from your
super-boss Dr. Monroe-Blum? Do we need
to learn a special etiquette compulsory for the “McGill court”? Surely it would
be more effective to teach us this etiquette first? Do you plan a column in The Reporter?
At the court of Louis XIV the media did not
exist as we know it. The king’s top jester (clown) played this role by
continuously assessing his boss’ mood. This was later transmitted to the lower
social spheres in a form of jokes, which told between the lines what was allowed
at present. Nevertheless, the dignity
of the jester was protected and he had a great deal of autonomy. This seems to
have been taken from you, poor Ms. Haldane, and I am willing to help you by
exposing your case. Let’s hope that it
will work this time.
My regards,
Slawomir Poplawski
- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - -
- - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -
Haldane’s previous letter was:
Dear Mr. Poplawski,
Ms Williams, just back from her holidays, will
respond to your request when she has time.
Cheers,
Maeve
---------- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - --
- - - - --
And my previous letter to her
was:
Montreal, August 7, 2003
The McGill Reporter Fax:
398-7364
Dear Ms. Haldane,
I am now appealing the latest decision of the
Quebec Press Council. In your last
letter to the Council you wrote: “Concerning Mr. Poplawski’s opinions about
my being hired, he has never asked to see my (perfectly fine) qualifications.”
I requested these qualifications by phone
last week, and your response seemed quite positive. Moreover you were very sure of the positive opinion of your
direct supervisor Ms. Kate Williams about this issue, but not quite entirely. My suggestion that in this situation a
written request would be helpful was fully accepted by you, and here it is.
Do
not take me wrong. I am not trying to
patronize you. Please, take into
account my declaration that I treat you as a worthy partner in the frank
exchange of differing opinions, and that I have nothing personal against
you. However, I would prefer to have as
an opponent a fully independent person who is not manipulated by others. Formally speaking you were the sole author
of the above-quoted letter to the Council. Thus you should not require Ms.
Williams’ permission to send me the requested documents to improve my knowledge
of you as a journalist. These will be
all the more useful since my brief studies in the Internet about you were not
very fruitful, as I did not find many of your published positions.
Ms. Williams is a politician and so far she
refuses to address any letter to me, even when directly asked, and only you,
Mr. Shapiro and Ms. Blum have done so.
As a contrast in this matter please consider the previous editor, Mr.
McCabe, who was very independent.
Maybe he now looks like a loser to you due to having “lost” his
employment as the Reporter’s editor, but I am sure that his behavior
bespeaks a fully developed personality that does not require affirmation from
outside. That personality is the most precious element in our lives. He is too proud to admit his problems after
being “palestinized”.
We all have only one short life. Our parents
and surrounding family are the ultimate authorities when we are young and
content to obey them implicitly, but we ought not let this role be taken by our
bosses in our adult life. Let’s tell
the old manipulators, like Ms. Williams or others, to mind their own lives and
to pay attention to the care of their own consciences instead of those of
others. Do not become another victim of
the “palestinization of people at McGill.” My only advice is to keep a maximum distance from the bosses as
the bible says “Never make friends or be too close with those richer or more
powerful as they will always, soon or later, take advantage of your weaker
position (people are only people and it is better not to tempt others with our
weaknesses)”.
Regards,
Slawomir Poplawski
P.S. Sorry that this is not an exact quote,
but my wife (The Bible expert) is not around!