Contest this!

THIS POST HAS BEEN UPDATED:

Riddle me this: Is it because there aren't enough right-wingers in Canada to support Ezra Levant's Western Standard? Is it because right-wingers prefer to scream at each other on blogs? Or is it just an issue of the magazine industry here being so damn difficult? It's a financial struggle for many, including the most excellent Walrus and, most recently, Saturday Night, which went down in flames.

That's just my way of leading into the latest pitch from Levant landing in my ebox. It's a writing contest, by gum, and first prize is $1,000 and your chance at publication in the WS.

There is an entry fee of $50, and every entry receives a free one-year subscription to the magazine, valued at $75. If you've already got a magazine subscription, no problem -- you can extend your subscription, or give it as a gift!

Now I ask you ...

Speaking of which, I should ask Levant whatever happened to the money -- however much it was -- he raised to fight off that human rights lawsuit following his publication of the controversial Danish cartoons? Whatever happened to the lawsuit for that matter?

UPDATE: Unconfirmed word has it that the biweekly WS is becoming a monthly to cut costs. What's more, editor Kevin Libin is jumping ship, either to Maclean's or the National Post. Looks like there's trouble at the board level, with investors bailing on this sinking enterprise.

NOTE: Readers have informed me that this is the second year of the contest.

Comments

[sooey]

gawd, ezra levant. that's so canadian - even *i'm* embarrassed. okay. but i'm sending a nude photo of my grandma with my entry and only $5.00.

[Gazooo]

On the last of your questions, the Western Standard's Web site has most of the answer to the last of your questions. It's not a lawsuit, despite what the Western Standard says sloppily; it's an Alberta Human Rights & Citizenship Commission hearing. (The AHRCC is not a court; it is a less formal body set up by government as a way of lowering the cost of having one's complaint heard, and thereby increasing access to justice.) The actual complaint being heard is posted online here: .

Regarding "whatever happened to the money -- however much it was", I would venture to guess that it wasn't very much money. So "whatever happened" to it is probably a pretty easy question to answer. It's paying some fraction of whatever the Western Standard's legal fees are for retaining someone to deal with the AHRCC complaint.

And regarding "[w]hatever happened to the lawsuit for that matter", I think we can safely say that it has yet to be ruled on, or probably heard. Most Human Rights Commission decisions (in most provinces, not just Alberta), take a very, very long time. Looking at the AHRCC's Web site, the most recent published decision (August 1, 2006) is about a complaint filed in February, 2003.

Finally, regarding the central idea here -- that this is a big moneymaker, or at least an attempt at one -- I have to wonder. This doesn't sound like it's going to generate a lot of revenue for the magazine, especially when it comes with a free subscription. It sounds more like a way to drum up interest and get some content for the magazine's pages. Editors will do that, I hear...

[Greg Felton]

Ezra Levant is learning the same lesson that Ted Byfield learned at Alberta Report——flogging your own prejudices leads to financial ruin. Byfield's son Link flogged Jesus so much that even the rag's die-hard Christians got sick of it.

Levant has nothing to say and says it very loudly. For him, libel's just another word for nothing left to say.

Eventually the country will tune out this nasty screech owl, and the Western Substandard will join Alberta Report on the pyre on anti-Muslim bigotry.

[20/20]

Bravo!

[Paul Wells]

I offered Ezra money to defend the human-rights case. He graciously refused the offer, said he's raised enough to defend the case and more, and was (this was in the spring) turning away all offers of new money to defend the tribunal case until he exhausted the money he'd already raised. One thing we do in journalism, too often and too easily, is to assume the other guy is a twit or an ass because it saves us the trouble of telling a more complex story.

[None]

Well, this is the 2nd annual right? Obviously, this isn't exactly a new thing. You're a year too late to whine about this contest.

[Joan Tintor]

Number one: the column contest is not new. They held it last year. I (blush, blush) won third prize.
(http://joantintor.blogspot.com/2005/11/im-number-3-im-number-3.html)

As I already had a subscription, I declined the free subscription but Ezra insisted on sending me a Libranos T-shirt anyway. He also helped me with a legal issue concerning my blog. Class.

Number two: The Standard has never pretended that it would be an easy venture. Perhaps it should pursue charitable status (like the big-government-touting Walrus has), as a method of tax avoidance. Or publish romance novels on the side.

Number three: wasn't the National Post supposed to be shut down by now?

[sooey]

exactly, paul wells. so, hooray for harper's and that patrician leftist, lewis lapham, for his brilliant editorials. but how was the western standard faring financially prior to the cartoon court case?

[sheena]

Uh oh... did Company's Coming pull their ads for "Easy Gourmet Leftovers With Canned Mushroom Soup" and impact revenue?

[Greg Felton]

Paul Wells:

But Ezra IS a twit and an ass——and a libeler to boot. Just ask MP Omar Alghabra

[Maz]

There is a utility to magazines like The Western Standard: It's a one-stop shopping site for an edgy right-wing take on the direction our sociopolitical culture is taking. The first few times you pick up a copy of WS, and leaf through it - reading articles as you go - it's quite enlightening. But after a while the slant gets rather predictable, a preacher exhorting his choir, and you tend to just look for the nuggets, a letter, a paragraph here, headline there, and so on, all while browsing in the magazine aisle of the local supermarket.

For me, the literal voice of The Western Standard will always be that of the broadcaster, John Collison: The poor man's Michael Savage, who during his 03Jan05 broadcast for Western Standard Radio owed to 'feeling tsunami-ed out' and during the 10Jan05 broadcast owed to 'feeling even more tsunami-ed out'. In the latter hour-long radio-show Collison spent the bulk of his time abrasively taunting complainants who felt the content of his previous program had been either anti-Muslim or anti-Semitic to phone in and debate the matter with him and co-host Ezra Levant on air. As I recall, the open invitation to compete in a pissing contest with Collison (and his co-host) was declined.

[Antonia Z.]

I believe Felton is referring to this, and I would prefer that, in the future, he back up his statements.

http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2005/12/a_second_look_a.html

GOT THAT GREG???

That said, I am not aware that it went to court, that Levant was proven to be a libeller or any of that legal stuff. So, for the record, I want this blog to say that Levant said bad and untrue things about Omar Alghabra.

[Brian Makse]

Politics aside, the contest is itself illegal, contrary to Canadian law. You simply can't charge a fee for entry.

It's obvious this is a cash crab, but it's against the law. Good luck to them!

[sooey]

ooh. i lurve the western standard 'cause i like to know what the enemy's t'inkin'. and i bet ezra levant is fun at parties. that's gotta count for something.

[Greg Felton]

No problema!

I should have provided the link.

"Bad" and "untrue" are certainly applicable to Levant. I have no doubt that if Alghabra lost his bid for election the case would have gone to court.

I was refering to libel in the defintional sense. Should have been more specific.

Greg

[Antonia Z.]

Brian wrote:

"Politics aside, the contest is itself illegal, contrary to Canadian law. You simply can't charge a fee for entry.''

Is that true? Anybody?

[Reality Check]

If memory serves me correctly, a contest which is more in the nature of gambling cannot have a fee associated with entry, but a contest that is an actual skill based competition may have a fee. For example, I think The Star's short story writing contest has an entry fee. I'll see if I can find support for this interpretation.

[Peter Shaw]

The CBC Literary Awards also charges an entry fee.

http://tinyurl.com/qycok

Pretty sure the Mother Corpse would have run that one by legal.

[Reality Check]

This looks to be a good answer to the legality of the entry fee:

http://www.gaminglawmasters.com/jurisdictions/canada/SkillvsChanceOct2004.htm

WS is a pretty amateurish affair. Typography and layout are a half-baked hodge podge. Subscription invoices appear to be individually prepared using a regular word-processing program. There are lots of advertorials from dubious-looking mining companies of the "we spin straw into gold" variety.

There are lots of cranky columnists and a few worthwhile articles. If the magazine stands for anything, it's eluded me. Mostly, WS justs seems angry -- but it's not clear why.

My all time WS favorite was a picture of Ezra hob-nobbing with the head of Opus Dei in Canada -- at Conrad Black's house!

[Brian Makse]

Antonia Z. wrote:

"Is that true? Anybody?"

Yes, it's true. Contest are our business, scratch that, legal contests are our business.

Don't know if Ezra's contest is illegal under Canadian law.

But under Quebec law, you must deposit a bond equal to 110% of the value of the prize with the Regie des lotteries et courses. The Regie pockets 10% for its troubles and refunds the remainder if there are no complaints. If it upholds a complaint, it uses the bond to pay the damages.

That's why you so often see the disclaimer: "This contest not valid in the Province of Quebec" -- even on American contests.

I didn't notice a Quebec disclaimer on Ezra's contest. And somehow I doubt he's registered it with the Regie.

So a mischevious Quebec resident could enter the contest, then file a complaint. Not that I'm suggesting anything.

[sooey]

gosh. it would save me $5.00 and a cherished photo if it IS true...

[vinb]

Don't know about the legality, but literary journals also do this -- hold a writing contest and charge an entry fee that doubles as a subscription fee.

E.g.: http://prism.arts.ubc.ca/contests/nonfiction.htm .

A cash-grab, yes, but more important, a subscriber-grab.

[Brian Makse]

Sorry for the post tangent, but there are a lot of misconceptions about Quebec and contests. Anonymous wrote:

"But under Quebec law, you must deposit a bond equal to 110% of the value of the prize with the Regie des lotteries et courses. The Regie pockets 10% for its troubles and refunds the remainder if there are no complaints. If it upholds a complaint, it uses the bond to pay the damages."

This is not true. The Regie requires a security agreement or bond equal to 100% of the total prize value when the total prize value exceeds $5,000.00. The security agreement/bond is returned upon all prizes being awarded to the winners. The Regie charges a fee of 3% of the total prize value.

Anonymous also wrote:

"So a mischevious Quebec resident could enter the contest, then file a complaint. Not that I'm suggesting anything."

This is not true. Someone could complain to the Regie, but the Regie won't action the complaint, since the Regie is only interested in contests where the total prize value exceed $2,000.00.