The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Why Is This War So Deadly To Cover?

Episode Date: November 14, 2023

The Israel-Hamas war is in its fortieth day and new information from the Committee To Protect Journalists says 44 journalists have been killed during that time period.  Why is this war so dangerous for journalists?  We'll touch on that plus a series of other wide-ranging issues from climate change to artificial intelligence. 

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You are just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. In the 40 days since the Israel-Hamas war began, 42 journalists have been killed. Why is this war so deadly to cover? That's coming up. And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. The war in Gaza, the war between Israel and Hamas, has now entered its 40th day. The latest numbers from the Committee to Protect Journalists says 42 journalists have been killed. 42.

Nine are reported missing. Another nine are reported injured. 13 journalists have been arrested. The numbers break down this way. Of the 42 dead, 37 are Palestinian, 4 Israeli, 1 Lebanese. Now, I know in the bigger picture, the number of dead is extremely high. The generally accepted figure in this war so far is 12,000, mostly Palestinian. A war that started when Hamas brutally murdered up to 1,200 Israelis.

Now, 42 out of 12,000 seems odd to focus on. But in this moment, it's worth remembering those who are trying to tell the story to the world under extremely difficult conditions. This is not easy, covering conflict of any kind. But covering this conflict is very different and very difficult. And getting in to try to cover the story is almost impossible. Many of the journalists who work inside Gaza are trapped as the people, the population of Gaza is trapped. But the journalists are trying to do a job. They're trying to explain to the people what exactly is happening.

And it's not easy. They're trying to work out an arrangement between Israel and Egypt to allow journalists to go into Gaza. And 11 different news organizations from different parts of the world have appealed to Israel and Egypt to allow them in. So far, that hasn't happened. Those 11 different news organizations, CNN, BBC, the New York Times,

the Washington Post, the LA Times, Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, CBS, ABC, ITV, Sky News, they signed a letter together asking the leaders of Israel and Egypt to grant access for international journalists to enter the Gaza Strip to cover the ongoing war. So far, no definitive response from those governments.

I, you know, I have some friends who are covering this conflict from different organizations around the world. I have some who I admire, CNN's Nick Robertson, who's somebody I've watched over the years, has a vast experience in covering conflicts. I think it's like 30 years at least he's been covering wars. And he said the other day during a live report on CNN, or like 30 years at least, he's been covering wars. And he said the other day during a live report on CNN,

I have never seen the scale and level of destruction in more than 30 years of war reporting. Now, without journalists on the scene, it is sometimes awfully hard to verify the information that's coming out. Now, it seems like a job nobody would want, but journalists are lined up, experienced journalists, veteran correspondents who covered conflicts over the years, are lined up wanting to go in to cover this story and to go in independently. There has been some access into Gaza, but that's when you basically sign up with the Israeli Defense Force.

There are certain things that you're not allowed to show or tell when you make those kind of arrangements. And I use the term sign up. You know what I mean by that. They're not fighting. They're covering the story, but they are restricted as to access and where they can go and in some cases what they can say. So if you can, the next time you're watching reports,

listening to discussions, keep that in mind, how dangerous it is and how difficult it is. It's always been difficult to cover the Middle East, always. And there were some brave journalists who've done it for years. And you listen to them talk about just how difficult it is. Well, this is another one of those cases. All right. Today's program is, well, it's kind of an in-bit show i've got lots of different things here uh to talk about and to kind of catch up to date um i've been over in the uk for the last few

weeks uk rocking today with news that a former prime minister has been elevated the house of lords and then to the House of Lords and then into the cabinet of Rishi Sunak, and that's David Cameron, somebody I interviewed, I think just once, when he was prime minister of the UK. It's a very controversial decision. Cameron was the prime minister who allowed the referendum on the Brexit, convinced that they would win easily.

They lost and he resigned like almost immediately. So he's back. Will that make any difference to the British Conservative Party who are getting thumped in the polls by Labour? But there's not an election tomorrow. It's kind of like Canada in that sense. It's going to be a while there's not an election tomorrow. It's kind of like Canada in that sense. It's going to be a while before there's an election here. Will David Cameron make a difference? We'll see.

Anyway, while I've been here, the kind of pile of inbid possibilities has grown. And so instead of carrying them all back to Canada when I fly home this weekend, I thought I'd do some of them today because they're all interesting. But first, a couple of news, things about today. One, in Winnipeg today, they're going to unveil the new coin. Well, it's not a new coin, Canadian coin,

from the mint in Winnipeg. There are two mints. There's one in Ottawa. There's one in Winnipeg. It's not a new coin. It's still like in this, one example is the loonie, but there's a new image on the coin.

And on the loonie, but there's a new image on the coin. And on the loonie, it's still a loonie on one side. But on the other side, we'll no longer see Queen Elizabeth II. Pretty well all of us grew up with that image on one side of the coin, on the currency, on parts of our currency. But that begins the slow fade today when they unveil the new loonie with King Charles III on the side.

So we'll all be anxiously waiting to see that, right? Here's the other. I thought of this over the weekend. I mentioned it to somebody, and they sort of looked at me saying, really? Do you think that could happen? Well, sure it could happen. Lots of things can happen.

You know, you've heard me say a number of times that I don't think that either Trump or Biden will end up on the final ballot next year for the U.S. president. And Trump will either be in jail or on his way there. And Biden will make the determination that, you know, perhaps it's time. For the good of his own health and for the good of the party. It's time. So that leaves two spots open. Now, if you went by the available information today,

those spots would be filled by number one on the Democrat side, by the Vice President, Kamala Harris. Right? It's kind of like an automatic move up. You go from vice president to president. If something happened to Joe Biden today, Kamala Harris would become president. So if he decides it's time to step down, it would seem that Kamala Harris would be the first likely successor.

So let's just put that aside for a second. You have Kamala Harris running for president on the Democrat side. What about the Republican side? With Trump gone, who steps up? Well, increasingly, the person who seems to be in the number two slot in the polling on the Republican Party, it's not Ron DeSantis anymore. The person who seems to be having done the best in the debates is Nikki Haley,

the former governor of South Carolina, the former UN ambassador. So there you have it. There's my little thought for the day. If Trump and Biden are gone, you have two women fighting it out for President of the United States. Now, how long that would last, whether there would be changes within both parties in the seeking the nomination, who knows?

But in this moment, under that scenario, you don't have women just cracking the glass ceiling. You have them powering through with both parties, with the women at the top of the ticket. We'll see. A thought. Today's an important day. It's one week, one week from the release of

How Canada Works. That's the new book from the writing team of Mansbridge and Bulguch. That's Mark and my latest book. You may recall Extraordinary Canadians from a couple of years ago. How Canada works, I think it's going to be really interesting to see how this one does. Because my theory is, as much as there's a debate out there about is Canada broken, the political debate, I get it, I understand it.

I don't necessarily accept it, but I understand that discussion, and it comes from a number of corners, not just one. But my feeling has always been that Canada is made up of people. I hate the term ordinary people or everyday people, but you know what I mean? It's people who do jobs that we depend on, that make the country work. And we're not talking about the big leaders in politics or business or sports or entertainment. But people you perhaps

have never heard of. But they're the people who make Canada work and that's what this book's all about. So it's released by Simon & Schuster a week from today, November 21st. And then about a week after that, I'm off on a book tour to certain parts of the country. You can find out more. I won't

say anything more about this. I'll say two things. One, you can find out more about the book on my website, thepetermansbridge.com or on the Simon & Schuster website. You can order the book, pre-order it now from any bookstore in Canada. You can go online and do that. And next Tuesday, Mark will be on the show, and we'll talk about our new book, try and hustle up some sales. And I'd be more than happy to talk about it.

And we'll try, you know, we won't just sort of talk about the individuals in the book, but we'll talk about how we go about writing these books. Same with Extraordinary Canadians. We take a particularly, we take a different kind of path to writing these books. And I think you'll find it interesting to listen to us talk about that. So that's next week. But right now,

some of the other end bits that I've been saving up for you. Maybe we should take a quick break and come back and do exactly that. So we'll be back right after this. And welcome back. You're listening to The Bridge, the Tuesday episode, right here on SiriusXM, channel 167, Canada Talks, or on your favorite podcast platform. However you're listening, we're glad to have you with us. Okay, let's get into it with some end bits.

I saw this just the other day on inc.com, I-N-C dot com. And the headline is, Four Unimaginable Ways That AI, Artificial Intelligence, Will Change Your Life Within the next five years. And this is according to Bill Gates. And we all know who Bill Gates is. And we all know about AI. And that's one of those big things that I'm trying to keep in touch with every once in a while.

AI, climate change, airlines. My personal favorite kind of hobby, looking at the airline business. They're all in today's end bits. But let's see, what is it exactly that Bill Gates has to say? Here's a guy I interviewed a few times. I go back a few years. He's always an interesting interview. At times, he's in a bad mood when you interview him, and that's always fun. And other times, he's always an interesting interview. At times he's in a bad mood when you interview him,

and that's always fun. And other times he's fine. Anyway, obviously with Inc., Inc.com, he was ready to talk about AI and how it's going to change over the next five years and how it's going to change our life. And most of what he's talking about

is that AI is going to help you with everything from deciding where to go on vacation to managing your friendships and more. According to Inc., that's what Bill Gates says. And he's been thinking about this for over 30 years. It's basically that AI is going to be able to give you a personal agent. It's like as if there's somebody there beside you, giving you advice on personal matters. Zinc.com says, what exactly is an agent?

In a new blog post, gates defines it as a type of ai software that responds to natural language and it can accomplish many different tasks based on its knowledge of you and he makes some predictions about how we'll all be using agents five years from now that are mind-bending and completely logical at the same time. So here they are. You won't bother with software or operating systems. You know what operating systems are, whether you're using Windows or macOS or Linux or iOS or Android. Today, these seem like meaningful choices, but five years from now none of us will care about any of those because our agents will function as operating systems or platforms gates writes

today if you want to write an email you might open gmail or outlook if you want to create a document you might open microsoft word or google docs five years from now, you won't do any of that. Bill Gates says you won't have to use different apps for different tasks. You'll simply tell your device in everyday language what you want to do. And the AI agent will arrange it all for you. All of these are possibilities, says Gates, but I think the first big breakthrough in human-agent interaction will be earbuds. If your agent needs to check in with you, it will speak to you or show up on your phone.

They thought this guy was crazy 30 years ago, 40 years ago, 50 years ago. He wasn't. He saw the future, and he feels he's seeing it again now. Your agent will get involved in your personal relationships, says Bill Gates. Just as a human personal assistant might do today, in five years, an agent could remind you when a friend is about to have a birthday, come up with some suggestions about what they might like as a present, perhaps by asking your

friend's agent, and then purchase the present for you. And as with a human assistant today, the recipient of the present might perhaps value it less, knowing that the agent was the one who picked it out. It might even help you solve personal problems. One of the most intriguing predictions Gates made is that your agent could also become your therapist. In fact, this is already happening. He notes with Weissa and Youper offering chatbot therapy.

I don't know either of those. The idea might seem odd, but they have research to back up their claim that their chatbots do help lessen symptoms such as anxiety, and each has been used by more than 2 million people. Odd as it may sound, these algorithms are fulfilling a real need. Yikes. Could an AI agent really act as your travel agent, social secretary, therapist, constant companion, and more?

It seems certain that they can, at least in Bill Gates' mind. Okay, here's an airline story. I'm mixing these up. They're not in order of importance. Okay? It's just sort of mixed up. You know, like, I love airport, airplane, airline stories. Did you know there was a hidden button on most planes that lets you sit more comfortably?

I didn't know this. I worked for an airline. Apparently, this is in most airplanes. Okay. Okay. 737, 787, 767, 321, 330, and 350 Airbus. Those first ones were all Boeing. You know the armrests?

You know what armrests are for? They're for resting your arm, right? But sometimes you kind of like to move the armrest because it's kind of in the way and it would give you a little more room, especially if you're in one of those jam-packed kind of three-seater areas and you're sitting in the middle. You'd like to pop the armrest up. Or if you're sitting on the sides.

You know, if you're sitting next to the window and you want, you know, the window seat's the best seat to sit in where you can actually lean up against the wall instead of your neighbor to fall asleep. But the armrest gets in the way. So this is in Newsweek. Sue Kim is the reporter who checked this out. She saw it online. It was put on there by a flight attendant from TUI Airlines in the UK.

And that flight attendant put a little video in to explain it, and half a million people viewed it very quickly. This is how she describes it. She attempts to lift the armrest up, and that fails. She later touches the bottom side of the armrest, which then releases upward. The camera then shows a closer view of the bottom of the armrest, which then releases upward. The camera then shows a closer view of the bottom of the armrest near the hinge, okay, where a button can be seen. Push the button,

the armrest comes up. Sounds simple. Sounds like, oh yeah, I knew that. I bet you didn't know that. I didn't know that. I didn't know that. Well, apparently it's there. There's your tip for a nice long sleep. You know, somebody did a study. Let me see who did this study. Studies, studies, they're all over the place, right? I don't know.

Whoever did this survey for this article asked 1,000 plane passengers age 18 and over in the U.S. and Canada. We made it into the survey. About how to behave when flying, found that travelers believe you are not allowed to claim both armrests just because you're in the middle seat. Because 57% of passengers think everybody has arms that need resting. Only 57% think that way. Anyway, you're also not allowed to grab the front seat when getting up

because 76% of travelers don't like to literally get taken aback, according to the survey. You are, however, allowed to recline your seat because 88% of the flyers surveyed believe the button is there for a reason. That's to recline. Okay. So don't tell me you haven't learned anything By listening to the bridge Because there you go You know I was making fun about studies I mean you can pick up

You can go online every day and see a new study Somewhere in the world that Tells you something about what you should eat What you should drink, how you should act Whether you should walk, run Stay idle, whatever. There's always something out there, a new study. Well, here's today's new study for you.

And it's from a website called Study Finds. So there you go. The headline is, Any activity is better for heart health than sitting. Even sleeping is better for heart health than just sitting. So reading the article, engaging in any kind of activity is more beneficial for your heart than sitting around doing nothing. Interestingly, this activity can even include sleep. A study by the British Heart Foundation, the BHF, represents the first of its kind to

examine the link between daily movement patterns and cardiovascular health. This represents the first findings to surface from the global prospective physical activity, sitting and sleep. ProPass, it's called. It's a consortium. A run, a brisk walk, or stair climbing, basically any activity that raises your heart rate and makes you breathe faster, even for a minute or two. That's good, obviously. Simple modifications, such as opting for a standing desk

over sitting can contribute to heart health over the long term. Though it may come as no surprise that becoming more active is beneficial for heart health, what's new in this study is considering a range of behaviors across the whole 24-hour day, adds the joint senior author of the study, Professor Mark Hamer. The approach will allow us to ultimately provide personalized recommendations to get people more active in ways that are appropriate for them. And it concludes this way.

Just replacing half an hour of daily sedentary behavior with moderate to vigorous exercise can lead to significant physical changes like a one-inch reduction in waist size. Okay, sorry, I've got to go. I've got to go now because I've been sitting for 20 minutes. I'm going to go walk around for half an hour. And bingo, I'm going to lose an inch around my waist.

And only will have half a dozen more inches to go. These findings come from six studies that evaluated 15,000 participants across five countries employing wearable technology to track six health indicators. Can't argue with that. Sounds pretty impressive. Still on the topic of health. You know what TB stands for, tuberculosis. TB is preventable.

It's curable. However, it has reclaimed the title of the world's leading infectious disease killer after being supplanted from its long reign by COVID-19. But worldwide, 40% of people who are living with TB are untreated and undiagnosed. That's according to the World Health Organization. The disease killed 1.36 million people last year, 2022,

according to a new WHO report released on Tuesday. This is a tough article. It's in the New York Times. to a new WHO report released on Tuesday. This is a tough article. It's in the New York Times. And it's written by Stephanie Nolan, who we've followed for years. She's a great correspondent. She spends a lot of her time in countries where there are difficulties.

And she's been studying TB for literally decades. And her piece in the New York Times is just out last week. The headline is, Ending TB is Within Reach, so why are millions still dying. Well, Stephanie Nolan says, nations have delayed cutting greenhouse gas. Sorry, wrong story. Her whole point is, Stephanie Nolan, the way to cure TB is out there. It's there. And especially in countries like Ghana, where she visited,

the numbers are horrific. Two-thirds of the people in Ghana, two-thirds of those with tuberculosis don't even know they have it. And it spreads. And it just keeps spreading. Anyway, it's an article worth reading. And, you know, the hook, obviously, is we just went through COVID. It was the worst killer in the world. It's gone.

But health concerns out there are not gone. TB is back in the number one position of a killer. And there's a cure. Okay. A little bit of climate change story. Okay. A little bit of climate change story. A couple of them. So we keep our eye on that.

For the first time in the United States, this is still New York Times. Brad Plummer writes this one from California. In the U.S. first, a commercial plant starts pulling carbon from the air. In an open warehouse in California's Central Valley, 40-foot tall racks hold hundreds of trays filled with a white powder that turns crusty as it absorbs carbon dioxide from the sky. The startup that built the factory, Heirloom Carbon Technologies, calls it the first commercial plant in the United States to use direct air capture, which involves vacuuming greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. Another plant is operating in Iceland, and some scientists say the technique could be crucial for fighting climate change.

The company's first facility in Tracy, California, just opened last Thursday, is fairly small. The plant can absorb a maximum of 1,000 tons of carbon dioxide a year, equal to the exhaust from about 200 cars. But Heirloom hopes to expand quickly. We want to get to millions of tons per year, said Shashank Samela, the company's chief executive. That means copying and pasting this basic design over and over. The idea of using technology to suck carbon dioxide from the sky has gone from science fiction to big business. Hundreds of

startups have emerged. The Biden administration in August awarded $1.2 billion to help several companies, including Heirloom, build larger direct air capture plants in Texas and Louisiana. Companies like Airbus and JPMorgan Chase are spending millions to buy carbon removal credits in order to fulfill corporate climate pledges. Critics point out that many artificial methods of removing carbon dioxide from the air are wildly expensive, in the range of $600 per ton or higher, and some fear they could distract from efforts to reduce emissions. Environmentalists are wary of oil companies investing in the technology,

fearing it could be used to prolong the use of fossil fuels. And finally, others say it's essential to try. Nations have delayed cutting greenhouse gas emissions for so long, scientists say that it is almost impossible to keep global warming at relatively tolerable levels unless countries both cut emissions sharply and also remove billions of tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by mid-century, far more than can be achieved by simply planting trees. Here's the other climate change story

related to climate change. It's about Norway. You know, I'm on the northeast coast of Scotland. If I was able to see across the 50 miles of North Sea that stretch out in front of me as I look out at the water, if I was able to see to the other side of the water, to the land on the other side, that would be Norway. That's how far north in Scotland I am.

Here's the headline. Why Norway, and this is in vox.com, V-O-X dot com. Why Norway, the poster child for electric cars, is having second thoughts. Electric cars are crucial, but not enough to solve climate climate change we can't let them crowd out car free transit options okay let's dig a little deeper in this story it's out there as i said on vox., if you want to read the whole thing. With motor vehicles generating nearly a tenth of global CO2 emissions, governments and environmentalists around the world are scrambling to mitigate the damage. In wealthy countries, strategies often revolve around electrifying cars, and for good reason.

Many are looking to Norway for inspiration. Over the last decade, Norway has emerged as the world's undisputed leader in electric vehicle adoption. With generous government incentives available, 87% of the country's new car sales are now fully electric. 87%. A share that dwarfs that of the European Union, which is only 13%, and the United States, which is only 7%. Norway's muscular EV push has garnered headlines in outlets like the New York Times and The Guardian, while drawing praise from the Environmental Defense Fund, the World Economic Forum, and Tesla CEO Elon Musk. I'd like to thank the people of Norway again for their incredible support of electric vehicles, he tweeted last December.

Norway rocks, said Musk. Well, I've been writing, and this is by David Zipper. He's a visiting fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School's Taubman Center for State and Local Government, where he examines the interplay between cities, transportation, and technology. I've been writing about transportation, he says, for the better part of a decade. So all that fawning international attention piqued my curiosity. Does Norway offer a climate strategy that other countries could copy, chapter and verse, or has the hype outpaced the reality? So I flew across the Atlantic to see what the fuss was all about. I discovered a Norwegian EV bonanza that has indeed reduced emissions, but at the expense of compromising vital societal

goals. Eye-popping EV subsidies have flowed largely to the affluent, contributing to the gap between rich and poor in a country proud of its egalitarian social policies. Worse, the EV boom has hobbled Norwegian efforts to untether themselves, the cities, from the automobile and enable residents to instead travel by transit or bicycle. Decisions that do more to reduce emissions, enhance road safety and enliven urban life than swapping a gas-powered car for an electric one. Despite the hosannas from abroad, Norway's government has begun to unwind some of its electrification subsidies in order to mitigate the downsides of no-holds-barred EV promotion.

Final part, countries should introduce EV subsidies in a way that doesn't widen inequality or stimulate car use at the expense of other transport modes. That's from the director of the Transportation Research Center in Norway. But that's what ended up happening here in Norway, he says. Okay, I'll get those EV people writing again. Where are we? I think that's probably enough for one day. We have another study. I'll save that.

I'll save that for the next time. The next time we have another in-bit program. There's lots for you to think about there from today. Lots of little NBITs of interest. And I hope you think about them. And I'm sure, as often happens with NBITs, I end up getting some letters from people,

which helps contribute, of course, to the Thursday Your Turn program. So don't be shy if you have something you'd like to say about anything you've heard on today's program or anything you've heard this week. Yesterday, Janice Stein gave us some great commentary about not only the situation in Israel, but also looking back at Afghanistan

as we await for the public release of the country's official history into the Canadian Army's role in Afghanistan during the early 2000s. So if you want to write, drop me a note at themansbridgepodcast at gmail.com. themansbridgepodcast at gmail.com. themansbridgepodcast at gmail.com. Don't confuse that with where to write for. More information on how Canada works, Mark Boguch in my new book, that's at thepetermansbridge.com, thepetermansbridge.com.

And don't confuse it with my weekly newsletter, which comes out Saturday mornings, free in your inbox, but you've got to subscribe. You do that at nationalnewswatch.com slash newsletter. There you go. The three most important email addresses that you're going to get today. Right there. In 30 or 40 seconds.

That's going to wrap it up for today. Tomorrow it is Smoke Mirrors and the Truth with Bruce Anderson. Thursday, as mentioned, your turn and the random ranter who took last week off will be back with us on Thursday. And then Friday, good talk with Bruce and Chantelle Hebert. Looking forward to all of them, as I hope you are too. Oh, the other thing that's happening this week, I haven't mentioned this.

I think it'll either be end of this week or beginning of next week. We're going to hit 10 million downloads for The Bridge, which is a remarkable number for a podcast. 10 million. Since we started with Sirius in a relationship I'm very proud of and thankful for we started with Sirius

it'll be three years ago early next year and 10 million downloads is the number we're going to hit as I said later this week or early next week and you know I checked the Apple rankings for politics podcasts in Canada. Gee, guess who's number one?

That's right, The Bridge. And the other nine podcasts in the top ten of political podcasts listened to in Canada are all American. They're all American podcasts. But it's nice to see, at least this week, that we're up on top. Number one. All right, that's it.

Enough rambling. Thanks so much for listening today. I've enjoyed it immensely, as always. I'm Peter Mansbridge. As I said, thanks for listening. Talk to you again in 24 hours.