A Thousand Farewells

Our Journalism class was assigned to read Nahlah Ayed's A Thousand Farewells for an assignment. 

She's very knowledgeable of the Arab language and culture. Her parents decided to move back to Amman, Jordan because they wanted their children to understand the culture and language. At six years old, she had to learn a new culture.

These two paragraphs stood out for me the most:

If there's one thing that journalists could learn from this book, it was the second paragraph. People are always the story. They're not quotes. It's a good reminder for aspiring and professional journalists that people are human too. Humans who should be treated as humans. They are people who has a history and culture. 

In the first paragraph above Ayed mentioned understanding a country's history to understand the transpired events. In the second paragraph she talked of speaking the same language. And she's right. It's not just the language. It's understanding the cultures and backgrounds of different people that can transcend language. When you're familiar with a culture, you can understand that person's world views. Even better when you lived in that culture.

I eventually liked it as I continued reading. But the first two chapters didn't work for me. I didn't like how she introduced her relatives. It would've been better if she quoted her parents or grandparents so that readers can feel or sympathize with them. They seemed distant to me because Nahlah was telling the story of her family. It took me three chapters (almost two) to invest in the book. When she returned to the Middle East, that's when the book became exciting. 

I loved the quotes from the people she interviewed because these people seemed alive.

These quotes were exactly what Ayed meant. In order for one to understand the Arab Spring, one must understand the people behind the revolution. There was a reason why they did it, and this book showed the reasons, from the Arab people themselves. 

The book showed me a new perspective of the Arab Spring and its people. When I watched or read news about the Arab Spring, I didn't connect with the news because it was far away from my comfortable home here in Canada. But after reading the book, I understood them. 

I saw a new perspective of the Columbine High School Massacre after I watched Michael Moore's documentary film "Bowling for Columbine" in 2008. I didn't know too much about the massacre because I was in the Philippines in 1999. I was 11, I was young, and I was ignorant of the world. The film made me aware of the world and the things I could learn. Moore didn't just show Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold's stories; he connected the shooting into a larger, social context. A context that's still an ongoing issue in U.S.A. today. Of course, Moore was biased, but as a documentary film, it worked. I learned more from it after watching it.

Just like reading the book. I learned more from it after reading it. So for anyone who's interested in finding more about the Arab Spring, this book is for you. 

Documentary: The Waiting Room

I saw The Waiting Room documentary film Sunday night at the Cinematheque Theater for a Journalism assignment. It was my first time to go there, and what better way to watch it than with CreComm classmates (who were watching it anyway)? So off we went.

Set in the waiting room in Highland Hospital, Oakland, California, the film portrayed the U.S. health care system. Even if it wasn't part of the assignment, I couldn't help but compare the Canadian health care system to the U.S. system while watching the documentary.

Patients at the emergency room had to wait for hours. There was one patient who waited for seven hours for a Tylenol. They had no appointments, so they had to wait the whole day because "there's just no place for everybody," (said by the nurse in the waiting room). They all had to wait. The patient who had a bullet in his leg. The young girl with tonsillitis. The patient who had a stroke.

I felt bad for those who had to wait. But then, it's the same case here in Canada too. I had to wait an average of three to four hours with my GP (that's why I rarely visit my doctor unless I'm really, really sick.). When I went to the emergency room summer last year, I waited for two hours (or maybe two and a half? I forget.). I was surprised that I only waited for less than three hours because I thought I had to wait long. It was Thursday afternoon, and there weren't many people in the waiting room. There was even a screen on the wall that indicated the number of patients in the room and the least and most wait times that day.

According to a report from the Canadian Institute for Health Information, 1 person in 10 waits for eight hours or more. While the "average length of stay is longer than four hours." The report was released November 29, 2012.(1) So I guess I was lucky that day...? (Even though I was unlucky because I was at the emergency room. Oh well.)

The Government of Canada have been improving this flaw in the system, when Health Canada established the "Patient Wait Times Guarantee" where there patients have access to a clinical or medical service with "a defined timeframe", and "access to alternate options of care (recourse) should that timeframe be exceeded."(2) However, this initiative doesn't apply to emergency rooms. 

But I guess it works? Bacchus Barua and Nadeem Esmail conducted a research study called "Waiting Your Turn: Wait Times for Health Care in Canada, 2012 Report", where medical or clinical treatment wait times have decreased between 2011-2012.(3) Their research reported "a total waiting time of 17.7 weeks between referral from a general practitioner and receipt of elective treatment." 

The biggest issue that stood out for me in the documentary was that most patients didn't have insurance to pay for their medical bills. Patients had to pay at the end of their treatment. The hospital staff mentioned that Highland Hospital has two options for patients who couldn't afford the bill: Charity Care Program and Patient Pay discount. If the patient qualifies for the Charity Care program, the hospital covers 60% of the payment and the patient pays the rest. The bill is split between hospital and patient for the Patient Pay Discount. Even though they have these programs, I don't think a person with very low (or no) income should pay for hospital fees.

I felt really bad that they had to pay for their hospital fees because when I went to the emergency room last year, I didn't pay at all (because the doctor just observed me and asked me questions. Hahaha). My dad didn't spend anything either when he had a foot surgery (except for medications and prescriptions, but they're covered by insurance at work anyway.).

I'm glad that people are treated equally and fairly in the Canadian health care system. It is the primary objective after all: It is hereby declared that the primary objective of Canadian health care policy is to protect, promote, and restore the physical and mental well-being of residents of Canada and to facilitate reasonable access to health services without financial or other barriers.(4)

I understand that there are long wait times in the emergency room, but sometimes I think that I'm grateful that I don't have to pay for anything when I visit my doctor or when my friend had two complicated surgeries in her spinal cord and stomach. Because coming from the Philippines, surgeries cost a lot. And public health care there is terrible. Very unsanitary. Anyway, I'm just grateful with the Canadian health care system despite the flaws.

Now, despite the controversial and relevant topic, does the film work as a documentary?

The first 20 minutes was nice. The story began showing the patients waiting in the waiting room. It showed nurses and doctors assisting and talking to the patients. They were the narrators of the film. However, after 30 minutes of showing patients waiting, getting angry, and narrating, I've had enough. There was no story. I didn't understand what director Peter Nicks wanted to tell the audience.

(If I looked deeper into it, I think it's a metaphor--the Americans were waiting for someone (or something) to change their health care system.)

Anyway, the documentary only showed one side of the argument (i.e., the state of the U.S. health care system). For the Americans, the film offered nothing new because they already know how it is. Maybe it offered something new but little information to the non-Americans, but it wasn't controversial.

The setting was excellent; the audience got a glimpse of what it was like to be in the waiting room in a U.S. public hospital. I liked that most of the shots were close-ups because it made the people seem closer to the audience. The shaky camera showed the reality, instability, and vulnerability of the people. The rack focus was executed nicely in shots where two patients were talking and the camera would focus on one person, blur the other, and vice versa. For the editing to work, there had to be a story. And there was no story.

The background music was played three times (beginning, middle, and end) to show more sounds produced by the people to make it realistic. But sometimes were was too much talking, too much telling, and less showing (which brings me back to the editing and lack of story again).

The documentary let the people talk (but not too much) and let them narrate the story. If there was a story. If there was a story, it would've been a lot better. The patients would tell their story and show their story through their emotions (because emotions are more powerful than words). Then it's up to the production team to create an overall story through proper editing and sound.

The documentary had so much potential. It featured an interesting, controversial, and relevant topic, but it would've been so much better.




Sources (linked in post and here): 

(1) CIHI News Release. Nov. 29, 2012.
(2) Health Canada. Patient Wait Times Guarantees. Feb. 24, 2012.
(3) Barua, B., and Esmail, N. Waiting Your Turn: Wait Times for Health Care in Canada, 2012 Report. Dec. 4, 2012. Fraser Institute.
(4) Canada Health Act. Justice Laws. Jan. 30, 2013. 

Who am I?

How do you write a personal brand? This was the assignment in my Advertising class. I found it hard to write because I had to think of the audience first and at the same time be honest about myself. When I wrote my personal brand, I was honest and sincere in answering the questions. 

Everything on this blog is a glimpse of the real me. And because I started this blog in July 2009 and I have 104 posts (this is the 105th post! Yay~!), the personal brand is sort of like a summary of the real me. But this is the longer version because I had to cut some parts in the assignment. Here it is:

What are the things that make you different from others? What could be said about you that cannot be said about someone else? 

I am different because of my life experiences. I lived the first 19 years of my life in the Philippines. This was where I built relationships with my family and friends—people that shaped me to be the person I am today. The things I saw, heard, read, and touched influenced me as a person. 

The values I learned and acquired as a Filipino are stored deeply in me because they keep me grounded. They remind me to be the person I want to be. I also surround myself with people who remind me of my values and beliefs. I would never say this out loud, but my family has always been my biggest strength. I grew up in a conservative and family-oriented household, so just being around them reminds me of my roots, my dreams, and values. 

I may be far from my longtime friends, but they're the people I grew up with, and they're the people who remind me of my younger self. And when they remind me of my younger self and the old days, I think about the dreams of the younger me. Here in Canada, I met new people who helped me be a better person. 

The people I met and the experiences I had makes me different from others because they help me realize my values and dreams. 

What do I stand for? What do I value? 

"Lora Quitane" stands for loyalty, honesty, and hard work. I always believe that hard work pays off. If I don't have the strength to do something, I have faith that I can do it—either with hard work or luck. 

What is your vision? 

I don't aspire to be well known or famous. It doesn't matter to me if people don’t know me when they see me on the streets—I prefer to be anonymous and a stranger. I don’t like being in the limelight. I would rather be on the sidelines and do my job. 

I prefer to put my work on the spotlight than me. If I have a project, I will make that project well known because I believe it’s the project that should be recognized. I would rather the project be more famous than me. 

“Lora Quitane” aspires to be a brand that creates projects that ensue talk and publicity. It is the work that matters—not the brand. 

 

What is your story? 

I left my home country, the Philippines, after living there for 19 years. The country where I was born, the country where I grew up, and the country that made me the person I am today. 

I left my family, relatives, and friends for a new and better life. These people were a significant part of my life. I had to leave not because it was the only choice—I had to leave because it was the best choice. 

I left the Philippines—the place I knew well—to live in Canada—a place I am not familiar with. I had to learn a new history and culture but at the same time I had to preserve the history and culture as a Filipino. 

My life experiences shaped me to be the person I am today. The significant people in my life keep me grounded. They remind me to be the person I aspire to be. 

 

“Lora Quitane” would not be “Lora Quitane” if it weren't for the people she met and the experiences she experienced. It was because of her history and the people around her that shaped the story of “Lora Quitane”.