The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - The Bridge Encore Presentation - Is Print Journalism Dying Or Even Dead?

Episode Date: August 7, 2023

Today an encore presentation of an episode that originally aired on May 8th. After lots of talk on The Bridge about television journalism, today some thoughts on the struggle to keep print journalism alive.  A feature interview with Jordan Bitove the owner and CEO of TorStar, which controls the Toronto Star and 80 others newspapers in the country. 

The following is an encore presentation of The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge, originally broadcast on May 8th. And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You are just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. Is print journalism dying? Or as some say, is it already dead? That's the topic as we launch another week of the bridge and hello there peter mansbridge in stratford ontario for this day i have often said and you've heard me say that i enjoy interviews where it's clear that the person

i'm interviewing is thinking about the answers they have to give, that they're not, you know, kind of pre-canned answers that leap out right away. And one of the ways you can tell that is when you ask a question, that there's an actual pause before the answer comes, because the person is actually thinking about what it is they're going to say. They may not have an answer right away, but they're clearly thinking about the answer they want to give. Well, that's what happens today in my interview with Jordan Bitoff. And Jordan Bidoff is the CEO, President, sole owner now of Torstar, the company that owns, well, a lot of newspapers in Canada.

I think the latest number is somewhere around 80 newspapers. Interest in technology, real estate, hospitality, natural resources, distribution. He's a big player in the Canadian business world. But he has settled in these last few years on journalism. He wasn't a journalist when he grew up. I mean, he sold newspapers. He was a newspaper boy, as they used to say. But now he owns the largest newspaper in Canada

and, as I said, 80 others across the country. And he's concerned about the future for print. He has become a big believer in the value of not just journalism generally, but print journalism. And so he's trying to find ways to make it a successful business, which is tough these days. We all know the stories about how the media world has changed considerably,

not just in print, but in television, satellite radio, you name it. There have been all kinds of changes. And print has faced the brunt of these changes. And we've watched some newspapers go out of business. We've watched most newspapers cut back drastically in their staffing and their operations budgets. So where's it all leading? And how can it change?

And should governments be involved in helping to fund different news organizations? Should governments be involved in changing legislation to ensure that print journalism, especially, can make money? Those are big questions. They're some of the ones we have in a very wide-ranging interview today with Jordan Bidhoff. But I return to my opening point. Listen to the pauses.

The pauses tell you a lot. So keep that in mind as we go forward with our interview. And we're going to run it uninterrupted, as we like to do, and just let you think through what you're listening to, see where you stand on these issues. Because I know most of you, if not all of you, are concerned about the future of journalism in Canada, the questions of sustainability for journalists and organizations, and also the question of trust. So we do all that in this interview. Here we go.

Here's my conversation with Jordan Bitoff. Let me be blunt to start with. Is print journalism dead? Great question. And I think, and I'm sure a lot of people wonder if I've lost my marbles buying Torstar. But the reality is, what I've seen in a very short amount of time, Peter, is

that people will pay for good journalism. And we have seen incredible numbers in terms of the digital subscribers signing in. We have seen what I call our legacy and our loyal print subscribers, incredible numbers from them. We are one of the best, I'm told, one of the best performing print newspapers in the world. And we've been able to hang on them. And why? Because we've reinvested in journalism. We relaunched the Star Intern program, which is really creates a lot of the great journalists in Canada. We've hired Althea Raj, who we brought on from Huffington Post.

We've hired Richard Warnicka and Christine Dobby, and what we have seen for each and every one of them, and I think I'm actually in a position, you know, those that were at the start before me had one thing. It was a print reader, and their data was polling our readers over time. And the reality is I see the results in real time, and I see them at the second right now. I can see how an article is doing, how we're performing,

and we can make adjustments to that. But, you know, where this really, the opportunity really came to me. And when you ask that question, where I go back to, was early on I reached out to A.G. Salzberger, the publisher and owner of the New York Times, Marty Baron, who turned around the Washington Post. And I asked, and they said, subscriptions based on great journalism. And so we have been all in on subscriptions and great journalism. So what about the bottom line? I mean, you're, you're a business person.

You're a successful business person. You get into this business. One assumes you got into it because you were going, you wanted to make money. You making money yet not yet but we are turning the corner and i think like a lot of print organizations there was the legacy costs of it you had we had plants we had other areas of the business that were distribution etc etc and what we have done now is just completely focused on one thing. And that is the digital aspect of it and on journalism. And so it takes a bit of time. Uh, you know, it, it, it, um, you know, as you, as you, you may have followed,

I had a bit of a battle with my former partner. Um, and this was a big part of it was just getting to really a focused news organization that delivers world-class journalism. But you can deliver world-class journalism and never make money. Right. So what you need to do. Yep. Sorry.

Go ahead. Well, I mean, how are you going mean, how are you going to get both? Well, I think this was a big part of the opportunity was the star was seven years behind our peers in terms of embracing digital. And I saw it as the opportunity to be able to go in there. We had a very loyal print subscriber base that was quite profitable and an advertising base that was quite lucrative. And to be able to go in all in on digital allows us, um, to disseminate our, our information, our stories to a larger audience before we were very focused on the GTA of Toronto. Now we can publish a story.

And as I say to the team every day, whether it's Mumbai, Dubai, London, Paris, whatever, the opportunity is sharing that great journalism story about Toronto, something interesting about Canada. And, and it's interesting because to your, to your point or to your question, um, I look at the star as being, uh, I'll call it a postcard for Canada. And, and, and I think that's the opportunity. The New York times, as we've seen is up to 7 million subscribers.

We'll never, we'll never get there. We're Canada. That's the opportunity. The New York Times, as we've seen, is up to 7 million subscribers. We'll never get there. We're Canada. But I do believe with the Star Wars position as a progressive news organization, being able to share stories about our wonderful country is an opportunity. And I do think people around the world will pay for it the way they do with The Guardian, the way they do the times the way they do at the washington post and a lot of other great news organizations but um well let me follow up in a couple of areas on that uh first of all do you have more subscribers than you had three years ago when you purchased the star 100 we are um digital A hundred percent. We are, um, digital on the print side, you know, the, you're typically losing about, uh, over 10% a year. And, uh, and those are very loyal readers have been with you 30, 40, 50 years. And sadly, a lot of it is due to the just passing on. Um, and so what we, we doubled down on that and, um, and, and made a conscious decision to re-engage with our loyal print subscribers and give them a better product. We were pulling, when I got there, we were pulling, um, syndicated, uh, we had 500 journalists across our network and

yet we were pulling from APCP, uh, uh, Reuters, et cetera. And I just sat down with our editors and just said, we have to produce original content and we need to be relevant to our readers and respect them. And so we have done that, and I think we've done exceptionally well there. On the digital side, listen, we were at zero. And now we're pushing well over 100 there on the digital side. Listen, we are at zero. And, uh, and now we're pushing well over a hundred and something thousand digital subscribers. They're not paying you quite as much as a print subscriber, but the opportunity is there that you can convince them over time that they should be paying.

Uh, and I, and I think this is part of, part of the, the, the issue with, with, uh, news organizations. part of part of the the the issue with with news organizations we've taken a model from hundreds of years ago and we think that we can keep real we should have a business section we should have a sports section and we should have the most lucrative section for the toronto star was the wheel section but people realize they can get reviews online, probably better reviews. There were other places they can get their content. And so I was told this early on, we got to relaunch the wheel section. And it didn't do particularly well.

Why? Because people had moved on. But we then started realizing that there were wheels tied in with finance, tied in with travel. And so what we've done is morph that into something that is of great interest to our readers. And so the digital side of it is a massive opportunity for us. How does it continue to be so? Or do you bank your future on it when the big tech companies basically just rip off your stuff and don't pay anything for it and run it themselves and make money on it.

Well, uh, I'm delighted that the federal government has just recently passed bill C-18. Uh, and I commend them for that. Uh, you know, you've been at the forefront of,

of journalism with Canada, Peter, and I always believe that Canada, my dad was a big fan of Lester B. Pearson, created the United Nations Peacekeepers. And Canada, we were always the first guys in, men and women in a conflict. And to me, this is one of those areas that Canada needs to lead in, and we need to take on these tech giants.

And it goes way beyond the revenue, the 80% of the revenue that they're stealing from journalism organizations, news organizations in this country. It goes to the fact that you have somebody in Silicon Valley dictating what we see online and how we see it. It goes back to the fact that where's the, the, the, uh, ethics, efficacy, the trust in all, in all of that, when we can allow one person to put something out on Twitter that is liable. If you said something on air right now or on television, you would be held to account. Your career would be over.

Yet we are allowing no regulations on these tech companies and no accountability on the providers that provide the pipeline into the country. And so my ask has really been, Canada should lead. And this is our opportunity to lead. And Bill C-11 is the opportunity for us to do that, to be a model for regulating for, and it's not about regulating freedom of speech. It's, I think back to my childhood when the CRTC like it or hate it

managed the airwaves. Why? Because part of it was you had Canadian broadcasters creating content and you had the channels sort of coming in from the US. But you also had this protecting of our culture and identity. And I would argue, you know, you look at the success that we've had in a number of different fields. A big part of that was because of us protecting our identity and our heritage. I don't think there's any, I really don't think that there is any, uh, um,

mistake confusion, any, uh, coincidence. Um, when we see what is going on, freedom convoys, so-called freedom convoys happening in Ottawa, cops getting shot in Edmonton and Barry. I think a lot of that is a spillover from American media. And we see, we know how polarizing Fox is and other news networks are. And, you know, I'm hoping that our legislators get it right and do it to protect not only us, but more importantly, the next generation. I have four young children, and I see what social media, what these devices, phones, and what they're doing to our kids,

and there's zero regulatory. Why is it that TikTok only allows, the parent company of TikTok only allows the children of the people at work. They're a half hour a day on their devices. Yet we allow our kids to be on there four or five hours. So I just, you know, to me,

I'm kind of moving around in a bunch of different areas, but the bottom line is we need to put something in place now. And Canada needs to lead the way that we did. You know, when I, when I, when I graduated from university and I traveled through Asia, you put that Canadian pin on the back on your backpack. Why? Because we were, we were respectful. We had humility.

People trusted the opinions that Canadians had. And I think this is Canada's opportunity to lead. Okay. May well be, but how far do you go with regulation? I mean, you kind of spread out your thoughts there quite a bit, everything from what's on your television channels to what's on your digital channels to what's on TikTok. I mean, how far do you take that regulation uh avenue what are you going to do you're going to stop fox from being broadcast in canada are

you going to make make kids in canada only use tiktok 30 minutes a day or what have you i mean how do you do that well in a in a society that that talks about freedom and freedom of the press and all of that? Well, I think it starts with a conversation around it and an open conversation around it and then getting the right people, legislators, the corporations that are purveying it into a room, and then putting some form of, why is it that I, you know, I look at it, the startup's been around for 130 years. If I publish one story, or when we go to publish one story, the author of that story, the journalists, the editors, the managing editors, me, the publisher, the entire company, our reputation is on stake. And, and if we're offside at all in that story,

we're one of only two North news organizations in Canada that have a public trust Senator and we're held to account. We publish a retraction and apology. We fit, we make it right. So why can't we bring that level of accountability to it? And I get it. We're talking about something, but I, I, I, what's happened is we've never really put any, um, legislation in place. The internet came in and there are zero sort of ways to be able to control

what is, is put on there. And so I think you've got to hold. So maybe you do have to shut Twitter down at some point in time if what we see is defamatory or they're just not playing by the rules. But I do think it starts with conversation and I don't have have all the answers to it but i i think that by just saying you know it's going to fix itself or uh we'll turn our heads uh and and hold our noses to it that's never going to happen and we need uh to get people into a room to have a discussion about how we fix do you have have you seen any evidence that there are people aside from yourself obviously that are prepared to sit down in a room and have that discussion?

Well, it's happening again. You know, this is why I get a little bit, I get excited about the opportunity that Canada can play with this. and where there is a group that are leading a discussion around it that is now being picked up in other countries around the world through the Netherlands, et cetera, and through parts of Europe. And they're getting very close to adopting, but it's been really based on exactly what I said, conversation around it. I haven't seen the specifics of what and how but it's it's they're very close to doing it well

in our country we are you know we're going through a period of discussion among the leading political leaders about um certainly from the conservative side of fewer gatekeepers, not more. No matter whether that's on vaccines or whether it's on television or communications networks. Does Canada say, have you seen any evidence in government, whether in actual government or in opposition, that they want to sit down and have this discussion? Oh, absolutely.

And I think that it's happening. I'm just giving a bit of a voice to it, but these discussions are happening in Ottawa. There are groups that are getting organized and have organized and are, um, are, uh, are, are well funded that are approaching this. And, um, and I can, I can tell you this, that it's all coming from a very good place, which it is.

Um, it actually started in the UK with, um, online harassment of children, uh, sexual predators, uh predators, etc. And it has evolved now into a movement to just protect the, you know, to put some form of regulation on the internet. Okay. That's interesting. We're kind of drifting a little bit from what we were originally trying to get to. So I want to get back to that. And the issue of the future of journalism generally

and the future of print journalism in particular. One of the things that you talked about, C11 and C18, and what you're hoping for with those. The other area that you've been rather insistent on and making speeches in different parts of the country is that if journalism is going to survive in the various forms that Canadians have been used to, then there's going to have to be more input from other areas, companies and government. Now, as somebody who, you know, worked with CBC for 50 years and has watched for the last few years, the attacks on the CBC, partly based on the fact that there's government money going,

money from the public purse going into support public broadcasting. I want to try to understand how you think that can work, where you're not going to be attacked as a private enterprise accepting government funding. First of all, how desperate do you need it? And second, how prepared are you for the backlash that'll be there if you do get it? Yeah, so I think if I understand your question correctly, you know, around the funding, and I think this is a bit of a misconception on it.

We're not asking for any government funding. What we're asking for is our share of what Google and Meta take. They take 80%. So they control the highways, the off-ramps. They control the gas stations, as we all see. And so when we post a story online, they take all 80% of the revenue around that. And the facts are there. Our stories perform exceedingly well for them as a trusted news source. And so what we're asking is give us our fair share of it.

And Peter, the reality is this isn't money that's going into my pocket. This is money that I'm reinvesting into journalism. The way that I mentioned before, where the journals that we've hired, I know that every journal, we have the data. I can, I can look in real time and make a decision on whether it makes sense to hire a journalist, but not all stories are going to sell subscriptions or advertising. And so you need to sort of get the mix right and surprise and delight your audiences. And part of it is, as we understand or in terms of the money that will come through C18, it will allow us to not only reinvest in the newsrooms, but I'm hoping give us the opportunity to work with these organizations.

The way that we do with Apple News, Apple News was paying us for content and we said, hang on timeout. You're cannibalizing our stories. We'd rather work with you to figure out ways you can use your tech, et cetera, to help us disseminate and understand SEO, et cetera. And what we've seen is a dramatic impact on it. We're doing exceptionally well. When you look at Apple news, the top 10 stories, we've always got a bunch of them in there.

And that's because there's this collaborative approach to it. And that's really what I'm hoping at the end of the day is that the funding will come back to allow us to be able to disseminate our stories in a more effective way. We'll never be able to compete against Google, Meta, et cetera. They're behemoths. So what we need to do is just ask them to show us how we can be better. Let me get this right. Currently, there's a fund for media organization.

We're not talking about CBC here, outside the CBC. Yes. Private companies that the government has provided. I assume you get part of that. We do. Star benefits from some of that. You don't want more from that fund or you do? No.

So that's interesting. If we're talking about the same thing. So basically the star is, Torstar has the star and then we have six other regional dailies, Gallatin Spectator, Kitchener, Waterloo Record, et cetera. And then we have six other regional dailies, the Gallatin Spectator, Kitchener, Waterloo Record, etc. And then we have 73 community newspapers. And predominantly, that funding will go in to support

a journalist in what they would consider a news desert or an area that it's felt that their're, you know, indigenous up in Sioux lookout might be someone covering that might be an important topic. And so every year money is allocated to support journalism. We have to put our, you know, we put a list of journalists in the areas that we're going to cover. And, and then a decision is made

on whether we get funding for that. But the reality is in, I think it was the Canadian Media Council has shown that in the past two or three years, 448 news outlets have closed. And that represents 323 communities that do not have news organizations or journals in them.

And in the last two years alone, I'll use the example of Ottawa. The Ottawa Citizen is, you know, in Ottawa, our country's capital. There are only nine journalists that are working there. And we've seen what have chorus with its shutting down and all the other news organizations that have shut down in our nation's capital. We have nine, not us. I'm talking about,

uh, the citizen has nine journalists working there. And, and so what we're doing is we're, you know, I'm hoping that, um, between the funding from, uh, or, or getting our fair share from Facebook and Google

from the opportunity of the funding of news deserts that will level the playing field so that we can news organizations and, I'm speaking about one, one news organization. I'm, my hope is that this is a Canadian wide program that allows news organizations to be, to thrive again and provide journalism so that, you know, I think back to the U S and what happened on January 6th with the insurrection, one guy tweeted that. And. And I think George Santos, one local newspaper that didn't have the resources, writes about this clown but no one picks it up and this guy gets elected into U.S. government.

And it's important that we have representation. It's important that we have representation. It's important to democracy. It's important to a civil society. And that we have news that allows, you know, and good journalism that does that. So to conclude this issue of funding, you're not looking for anything different than what exists now on that front? 100%. Not looking. We are just asking for C18 and our fair share of the revenue that is taken from us.

And we are in this, like all other news organizations, we compete. And I would argue that, you know, for the SAI as being the largest news organization in the country, that we probably get the least in terms of it. And that's fine. That's fine with me because there are parts of the country that need funding for journalism to tell their constituents, the communities and, and, and, and help them. Can you put a dollar figure on what you think Google and the other big tech companies should be paying to something like the Toronto star? It's a tough one because yes uh, yes I can. Uh,

but you know, reality is it probably will, will be nowhere near, but I would argue that you, you know, if, uh, uh, and I'm, and I'm just taking a number or I'll take it in percentages to keep it maybe. Uh, but if they're taking 80% of our revenue, then perhaps they should be paying for 80% of our revenue then perhaps they should be paying for 80% of our nation. Simple as that. Which would we want? Ballpark. I'm sorry?

What would that represent? In dollar terms what would that represent? Ballpark. We're a private company but it's it's probably north of 20 odd million dollars there's any chance of you getting that I do I do uh and

I um I think that what we have seen is the federal government, the Minister of Heritage has done a great job, and the Senate now has come outside and they've passed, so we've got the buy-in on that side I think that the public is now realizing the importance of trusted journalism and the role

that it plays in civil society and so and they're seeing you know as I'm sure you saw when Google to prove a point or they, as they didn't in Australia,

Facebook starts screwing around with the algorithms and starts hiding content, moving content around. I'm hoping that this is a wake up call to everyone and, and, um, and it forces, uh, the tech giants to,

to play fair, and just to give us our fair share. Let me ask one last question, and it's based really on something you just said about the belief in trusted journalism and the need to get to that point, because you know, as well as I know, that there have been a lot of issues about trust in journalism

and trust in a lot of institutions in the last five to ten years. The numbers are on a kind of downward scale on a lot of institutions, including journalism. And that's sometimes enforced by the words of leading politicians. I mean, the leader of the Conservative Party doesn't trust journalism and encourages his followers not to trust journalism. So paint me the picture of how you can change that. And I'm not just talking about, you know, with Conservatives, but just generally.

How do you get to that point of trusted journalism? I mean, you're not a journalist. You haven't been a journalist. You kind of are now, whether you want to be or not, because you lead one of the biggest organizations in the country. But how do you get to that point of trusted journalism? It can't all be in the boardroom and in the bottom line. How do you get there?

So when I originally, uh, uh, my Sava star was a tour star was having issues back a few years ago. I reached out to John Hodrick, who was the chair and former publisher. And, uh, and I went in with this sort of speech to him about um

the digital transformation and and i'd like to um be the one to sort of assure that in for the star and as i was leaving he handed me a book uh from the stars 110th anniversary. And it was a book called humanity above all. And I took it home that night and I read it and I realized very quickly that if I were to be able to buy this, this organization, I wasn't buying a widget company. I wasn't buying a factory, whatever. I was buying a public trust. And if you looked at a copy of Humanity Above All, and then there are many other books that have been written, but you saw

110 years of what our organization has done in terms of protecting the vulnerable, in terms of holding politicians to account, in terms of protecting Canada. And these are remarkable, remarkable things. One recently came up was the Bloor-Vydok in Toronto. It was really, when it was an idea, it was the stars reporting and staying with it

that pushed for it to be two levels so that one day if a subway was to be put in, that would be put in. Food handling in the city of Toronto 20-odd years ago was on the back of our journalist, Robert Cribb, and a number of our team that wrote 19 pieces about how food should be handled. And that became the global standard.

Toronto now has set a global standard for how food handling in restaurants and hospitality is handled. And it goes way, way beyond that. So the public trust and the understanding the importance of it is what I really want to get back to. And I think what happened for many years, like all news organizations, they were looking for the magic bullet on everything and anything. And what we have realized in just over two years is produce, produce balance, independent journalism, and people will pay for it. And we are, I'm very,

I'm fortunate because the star is a progressive news organization. We sit a little bit left of center. Uh, and I think at one point in time we were moving, uh, maybe too far one way or the other way. And, um, and I've just tried to keep us in the middle, which is where the bulk of Canadians are. And, and, um, and then that whole discussion that i we had earlier around the star really being a proxy for canada on the global stage and being able to um share um the good and bad and um things that people do take interest in Canada because I do believe, uh, we are still this wonderful country that people respect us for our position on things. And realize,

I remember when my brother was living in Ireland for many years and you know, he, he, where he got his news from, uh, and he would either go to CDC in Canada or he would go to BBC. And cause he knew that sky and others were going to give him a bias approach. And it was really so that that's really what I hope we can be. We've got some work to do, but I can tell you this. The people are willing to pay for it. And I think, you know, the final thing I'll just say on it is I think that what has happened over time is, um, uh, all these news organizations, the star was a million and a half subscribers of single print copies, uh, daily, like remarkable in Toronto. Uh, and, and, you know, now we're, we're down to a quarter of that.

Our, when I got there, everyone thought we were going to be back to a million and a half. And what I tried to explain, we'll never get back to a million and a half because there's so many other choices that people have, but perhaps we can zero in on each segment. And I'll use the automotive industry as an example, where, uh, whether maybe Porsche or BMW or whatever, um, GM and,

and, uh, and Ford were, uh, were two of the largest companies in the world at one point in time and largest auto manufacturers. And then they fell off a cliff, went into bankruptcy, et cetera, bailed out.

And now they've got their segments that they are focused on. And so what I'm hoping is we take that same model. We focus on a segment of the population that wants trusted journal, that wants a, a balanced point of view and perhaps they're willing to pay a premium to have access to that. And then later in the other part of it, which is, and we're seeing it right now, and this has been a big part of what I've been talking about, ethical media supply chain. It was a term coined by one

of my colleagues and it has been become a rallying cry for our organization, for the entire industry. But when, you know, a major company in Canada who will remain nameless is spending $50 million on marketing and our share of it is 0.013% as the largest news organization and quite digital. those communities and supporting those communities and being able to, uh, support a trusted Canadian news network that allows us,

the federal government spent $140 million in marketing last year and advertising. Um, our share of it was 0.27%. That's 140 grand or 400 grand that they spent with us. And, and that we may have been one of the larger news organizations to receive that money.

Now, if these Canadian companies realize that Facebook and Google and somebody out in Silicon Valley, uh, is, is dictating what they, people read, what they see.

My hope is that Canadian companies will now realize the importance of supporting Canadian owned and operated media and operated media and journalism. And that, again, this is our opportunity as a country to shine, support our own, and do what's right for the next generation. Well, I think you get a lot of support on those final thoughts, and you certainly get it from me. I appreciate your time on this, Jordan Bidoff. The challenges are stacked up in front of you. get it from me. I appreciate your time on this Jordan bit off. The challenges are stacked up in front of you. Good luck on it. Thank you,

Peter. As I said, honored to be on here with you and, and thank you. I, I, it's just one of the things I, I talked to our team about,

you know, opportunity podcasts and, and video. And, and, and so having the opportunity, podcasts and video and so having the opportunity to speak to you today has been an honour and thank you for that. Thank you. Jordan Bidoff the President, CEO, the owner of Torstar which has an enormous influence in the country because of its extension beyond just the Toronto Star, but to 80 other newspapers across the country.

So I know some of that was inside baseball, but I think you get the idea. You get the struggle that's underway. That Bitov is trying to lead in terms of his particular company and his particular interests, his newspaper, both on the print side and the digital side. And, you know, it definitely is a struggle. Be interested to hear your thoughts about how realistic you think he is

in terms of moving forward. You can always write themansbridgepodcast at gmail.com, themansbridgepodcast at gmail.com. We've got a couple of minutes left. We've got time for one end bit. But first of all, we're going to take a quick break. And welcome back. Peter Mansbridge here.

This is The Bridge. You're listening on SiriusXM, Channel 167, Canada Talks, or on your favorite podcast platform. However you're listening, we do appreciate your time. Okay, we have time for one end bit, as we like to say on the bridge. And today's in-bit kind of relates to what we've been through in the last, well, the last few years, I guess. Remember those lineups at the passport offices? Because there was a delay in how passports were being processed. And we've had a variety of things, issues surrounding paychecks,

various other things. But let's keep things in perspective. Listen to this little story. It's from South Africa, and it comes out of Cape Talk, an online, I guess it, news and features service. Imagine this. South Africa, it's not a small country, right? It's a big country.

Guess how many offices it has that produce driver's licenses. Did I hear somebody say they must only have one or Mansbridge wouldn't be asking this question? Well, you were right. They only have one office in the whole country that produces driver's licenses. Well, since April 19th, you know, it's not that long ago, not a month yet, but enough to cause chaos. Since April 19th, they have not been able to punch out new driver's licenses.

They only have one, not only do they only have one office, they only have one machine. One machine for the whole country. And it's out for maintenance. And it's taking longer than they thought. They're hoping to have it back sometime in the next few weeks. So I don't know if you're a driver in South Africa and you're waiting for your license, either a new one or a renewed one,

you're right out of luck. I thought that was kind of funny at a time when, you know, we demand so much as a society, right? We demand instant gratification on whatever it may be. And that includes, you know, renewal of driver's licenses. I just went through a long period of waiting for a renewal on my Nexus card. Now, that's a little different. Their machines all work.

It's just the process and the security and all of that that goes between something that really is jointly done by two countries, the U.S. and Canada. But you expect these things to happen right away. Your new health card, your new driver's license, whatever it may be. I want it like now. I don't want it tomorrow. I want it now.

In South Africa, you're in for a wait for your driver's license. But can you believe that? In the whole country, one machine. Not just one office, one machine. So next time we're complaining about something, let's keep it in perspective. All right, that's it for this day. I'm Peter Mansbridge. Thanks so much for listening.

Talk to you again.