Darts and Letters

That was a bit of a 180°, wasn’t it? The COVID-19 lab leak theory went from being dismissed as mere misinformation, to now a credible matter of debate amongst media, scientific, and intelligence organizations. What’s changed, and what does this teach us about science journalism and science communication? Is it time to let go of our obsession over “misinformation”? First, Jacobin staff writer Branko Marcetic lays out the political problems with the idea of misinformation. Later, Nicole M. Krause, a PhD candidate focussing on science communication, looks at conceptual problems in the research itself. What’s “True,” and who gets to decide?

Further reading: From Marcetic, his latest in the Nation is on the Twitter files. If you want to dig into Krause’s research ideas in science communication, a couple of things we’d recommend: on public pathologies in the public understanding of science, on misinformation and the infodemic (open access), and on the ethics of misinformation (open access). The Steven Shapin article we read about science communication with “warts-and-all” is worth checking out.

This is part of a series looking at medical controversies and the politics of medicine. It received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Dr. Maya Goldenberg and Dr. Maxwell J. Smith are scholarly advisors to the project, with research from Yoshiyuki Miyasaka. For a full list of credits of Cited Media staff, visit our about page.

Online masculinity is getting weirder and weirder. We’re way past mere misogyny and sexual predation (though, that’s still certainly there). Now, we’ve also got bro science, ball tanning, ball eatin,’ piss drinkin,’ and who knows what’s next. Eat your hearts out, Hugh Hefner and the old kings of male revolt–in fact, these kings of this new manosphere will literally eat hearts.

However, perhaps these mockable male influencers are onto something, in a roundabout way. There is just something broken in the hearts of men, as Barbara Ehrenreich once put it. If there wasn’t, male influencers wouldn’t be as popular as they are. This new mansophere offers a simple remedy for whatever ails: yearning for old gendered hierarchies, obsessing over self-improvement and dieting, and ceaselessly grinding under capitalism. In response, we ask: what’s really wrong with men, and how might we fix it?

More: On our Youtube, you’ll find bonus, extended versions of our interviews with Annie Kelly and with Vaush. You might also want to check out Southpaw podcast, and Men at Work, which we mention in the podcast.

This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It’s part of our new mini-series that we are producing which looks at the radical imagination, in all its hopeful and its sometimes troubling manifestations. The scholarly leads are Professors Alex Khasnabish at Mount Saint Vincent University and Max Haiven at Lakehead University. They are providing research support and consulting to this series. For a full list of credits of Cited Media staff, visit our about page.

The story of the Fountain of Youth is as old as history itself. Herodatus, the father of ancient Greek history, wrote of a mythical spring that extended the life of its bathers. Today, entrepreneurs, scientists, and health influencers are still searching for that mythical spring.

Longevity and anti-aging research has recently blossomed, with a number of tantalizing discoveries. Still, this research hasn’t delivered any magic bullets. Yet, that hasn’t stopped a cottage industry of folks hawking a plethora of dubious supplements and bizarre health regimens.

Guest host Jay Cockburn tries to makes sense of what’s real, what’s hype, who could benefit, and who would pay. Do we even want to live in the world the longevity researchers are looking for? Should we keep looking for that fountain? We’ll hear from: CEO of BioViva, Liz Parish, who has stepped outside of the regular drug approval process and experimented on herself; Dr. Charles Brenner, a scientist and vocal critic of the claims of life extension; and Dr. Keisha S. Ray, a bioethicist who reminds us that while the rich look for fanciful new ways to live longer, the poor lack access to basic health care.

This is part of a series looking at medical controversies and the politics of medicine. It received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Dr. Maya Goldenberg and Dr. Maxwell J. Smith are scholarly advisors to the project, with research from Yoshiyuki Miyasaka. For a full list of credits of Cited Media staff, visit our about page.

For seven years, from 1968 to 1975, one eighteen story high-rise was the heart of Canada’s counterculture. Rochdale College in Toronto, ON, was jammed full with leftist organizers, hippies, draft dodgers, students, artists, and others just looking for a good time. Although, Rochdale wasn’t really a “college.” It was something much bigger: a political, educational, communal, artistic, and psychedelic experiment. During its time, it was endlessly lambasted by conservatives and leftists alike–until it reached its inglorious end.

Today, like much of the counterculture, it’s often remembered for its problems: its ideological contradictions, drug-addled hedonism, bourgeois individualism, sexism, suicide, and more. However, is that the whole story? Were the kids in the hippie highrise onto something, …or was it indeed just one giant waste of time? We investigate with a special documentary presentation, produced by Marc Apollonio.

This is a production of Cited Media. This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It is part of a series of episodes on the relationship between activism and academia. Our scholarly advisors on this series are Professors Lesley Wood at York University, Sigrid Schmalzer at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, as well as Sharmeen Khan, Sami McBryer, and Susannah Mulvale. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

The Darts team is working on another big episode! In the meantime, we’re sharing this one from our friends at PlasticPills – Philosophy & Critical Theory Podcast. They do a great discussion of OpenAI and its implications in academia.

For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

The idea of moving to Canada figures prominently in the imagination of many disaffected Americans. Most recently, it was comedian Marc Maron who said he’s on his way to Vancouver, BC. Usually, they don’t come. However, between the mid-60s and early-70s they really did–and in the 10s of thousands. Yet, when these Americans made their way, they did not always find the Canada they expected.

First, many of them were unjustly turned away at the border. We tell the story of how student journalist Bob Waller helped to expose the policy with a dastardly sleuth and legendary piece of stunt journalism.  Then, draft resister Joseph Jones tells us what it was like to assimilate into Canadian academia as the new kid in school. Jones was also cataloguer and reference librarian at the University of British Columbia from 1980-2003, and he still keeps a vast archive of materials about Vietnam War Resisters in Canada. Finally, how did the war resisters help shape radical culture and Canadian national identity? Historian Donald Maxwell surveys the flow of people and of ideas, revealing that the American radicals sparked a surge in nationalistic sentiment in some of Canada’s elite academic institutions. Maxwell is author of the forthcoming book from Rutgers University Press Unguarded Border: American Émigrés in Canada during the Vietnam War.

Darts and Letters producer Ren Bangert is guest host today. This is a production of Cited Media. This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It is part of a series of episodes on the relationship between activism and academia. Our scholarly advisors on this series are Professors Lesley Wood at York University, Sigrid Schmalzer at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, as well as Sharmeen Khan, Sami McBryer, and Susannah Mulvale. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

In this special bonus, we’re sharing the latest episode of Kino Lefter, the socialist film podcast! Our host Gordon and producer Marc join Kino Lefter host Evan MacDonald to discuss our latest episode, a retrospective on the 2004 documentary Discordia. If you liked our episode, you’ll certainly like this one. Marc, Gordon, and Evan talk much more about their experiences with campus activism, where they think things are today, and the lessons they took from the movie.

For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

Henry Kissinger once said “the reason that university politics is so vicious is because the stakes are so small.” Was he right? We investigate.

Our case study is one of the most politically-engaged campuses in Canada: Concordia University, in Montreal, QC. This marks the twentieth anniversary of their tumultuous 2002/03 year. School started with a planned speaking event from Benjamin Netanyahu, the then former (and now current) Prime Minister of Israel. Pro-Palestinian protesters clashed with police, and this event came to be know as “the Concordia Riot.” The fallout from that day defined how the school year proceeded, with heated council debates, media stunts, lawsuits, arrests, explosions, and a contentious student election. This was all captured in the extraordinary National Film Board documentary Discordia (2004), directed by Ben Addelman and Samir Mallal.

What you see in the film is indeed vicious, but were the stakes so small? We track down the people involved to find out. What did it all amount to? What did it mean personally, professionally, and politically? Where did everyone end up? Plus, you’ll hear the inside story from the directors themselves. Finally, we’ll ask a current a Concordia student activist how the events in Discordia compare with student activism today. Is student activism in the doldrums?

Forced by the courts, the Canadian government has recently instituted an expansive Medical Assistance in Dying regime (MAID). You need not be terminal to seek MAID, and in March, 2023, you might even be able to seek MAID for mental health issues.

The usual Left impulse on MAID has been to honour people’s wishes, and afford them dignity and autonomy over their own bodies. Yet, a string of cases in Canada has troubled this impulse. There have been news reports of at least 14 cases in which patients seek MAID because they lack access to proper housing, health care, or disability supports. This means that MAID is not just being used to address the suffering resulting from illness–it is being used to address the suffering from poverty.

Is MAID letting the government off the hook from providing what they should be providing? Should we respect people’s choices on harm reduction grounds, even if those choices are severely constrained by an unjust social and political context? Should we give doctors this power over the mentally ill and disabled, given the racist and ableist nature of our crumbling health care system?

We’ll debate this and more, with perspectives from either side. Professor Trudo Lemmens argues that MAID sends a disturbing message: disabled lives aren’t worth living. Next, Dr. Derryk Smith of Dying with Dignity says just the opposite: excluding certain people from this civil liberty is tantamount to stigmatization.

This is first in a series of episodes we’ll be releasing, from time to time, on medical controversies and the politics of medical expertise. This series is receiving funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Dr. Maya Goldenberg and Dr. Maxwell J. Smith are scholarly advisors, with research from Yoshiyuki Miyasaka. For a full list of credits of Cited Media staff, visit our about page.

In the creative industries, Rebecca Giblin and Cory Doctorow say there’s often a ‘chokepoint’ between creators and their fans.  Corporate behemoths — be they streaming apps, publishers, tech giants, or others — put on the squeeze, exploiting their market power to extract rents, push down wages, and push up prices.

On this episode, guest host Jay Cockburn asks Cory Doctorow how these monopolistic (and monopsonistic) corporations put on the chokehold, and how we can loosen their grips. With Rebecca Giblin, Doctorow is co-author of Chokepoint Capitalism: How Big Tech and Big Content Captured Creative Labor Markets and How We’ll Win Them Back. 

If you like this episode, you can also check out our other episode with Doctorow, the one about radical thought in science fiction writing.

Darts and Letters is a production of Cited Media. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page