Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2020

The Current Transcript for July 30, 2020

Host: Mark Kelley

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

U.S. lawmakers grill the Big Tech CEO

Guests: Zane Schwartz, Taylor Owen

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: If Amazon didn't have monopoly power over these sellers, do you think they would choose to stay in a relationship that is characterised by bullying, fear and panic?

VOICE 2: With all respect for the human eye, I do not accept the premise of your question. That is not how we operate the business. In fact, we work very hard to...

Thank you. Thank you for that.

[Cross talking]

MARK KELLEY: Jeff Bezos responding to Democratic Representative Mary Gay Scanlon yesterday at the hearings for a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee in Washington. The goal of the hearings was to look at whether Amazon, Google, Apple and Facebook have become too big and too powerful and whether lawmakers should try to kerb that. And naturally, things got a little heated. Here's Democrat Val Demings facing off with and Google CEO Sundar Pichai.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: In 2019, Google made over 80 percent of its total revenue through selling ad placement. Is that correct Mr. Pichai?

VOICE 2: The majority of the business...

VOICE 1: Yes. Okay. And because Google sells behavioural ads, ads targeted to each of us as individuals, the more user data that Google collects, the more money Google can make. More user data means more money. Is that correct?

VOICE 2: In general, that's not true. For example...

VOICE 1: More use of data, not the more money Google collects?

VOICE 2: The data we....

VOICE 1: I'm sorry, please. So you're saying that the more use the data does not mean the more money that Google can collect?

VOICE 2: Congresswoman, most of the data today we collect is to help users unpolite personalised experiences back....

VOICE 1: Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much. Mr. Pichai. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

MK: Zane Schwartz is a tech journalist with The Logic who's been following the hearings. Good morning, Zane.

ZANE SCHWARTZ: Good morning.

MK: Listening to this and especially that comment off the top with Jeff Bezos talking about, you know, trust us more than anything. This was an anti-trust suit. But these guys are saying, no, no, no, no. It's you can trust me. Did they sell that message very well, in your opinion?

ZANE SCHWARTZ: So there were sort of facing two lines of questioning. One were the antitrust questions, which were primarily from the Democratic lawmakers and the other were questions about perceived anti conservative bias from the Republican lawmakers. And the CEOs resorted to talking about the way that the public trust them, especially in response to the questions about perceived anti conservative bias. And I think that's sort of coloured the whole hearing, but it's sort of an interesting strategy that they took. And it was certainly a theme across the testimony of all four. It was the first time all four had ever testified in front of Congress together and the first time Jeff Bezos has ever testified.

MK: So, yes, I mean, getting these four there together at all? I mean, they were there virtually, of course, which seemed sort of fitting. But to what was the goal of the other antitrust hearing?

ZANE SCHWARTZ: So this is a congressional subcommittee that's looking at whether or not to rewrite the antitrust laws in the United States officially. But what they're really looking at is, are these firms too big? Should they be broken up? Should they be barred from buying smaller firms? And at the end of the hearing, the Democratic chairman, it's very clear, he said those companies, as they exist today, have monopoly power suddenly to be broken up. So the conclusion and there will be a written report that's delivered as a result of this in September. But the Democratic conclusion is that they're too big. But, the Republican side is a lot less clear and really almost all of the questions weren't about antitrust. So we'll see what, if any, legislative changes are possible, given that the Republicans control the Senate and, of course, the presidency.

MK: And, of course, as we're seeing here, as you mentioned, it's an election year. And there seem to be a lot of this was about scoring political points. I want to play a clip for you. This is Republican Jim Jordan, and he used his question time to claim Google tried to help Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential race. Democrat Mary Gay Scanlon replied.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: The chair now recognises his general lady from Pennsylvania, Miss Scanlon.

VOICE 2: Thank you, gentlemen. I'd like to redirect your attention to antitrust law rather than fringe conspiracy theories. Mr. Bezos our investigation...

VOICE 3: Mr. Chairman, we have the e-mail. There is no...

VOICE 1: Excuse me. It's not your time. You do not have the time. Please be respectful of your colleague. She controls. [Cross talk] Pu mask on. Put your mask on. Mr. Jordan Raskin. Mr. Jordan. Want to talk about. Mr. Jordan. Ms. Scanlon.

[Cross talk]

VOICE 3: And why would the Devil's Secretary Rajouri unmask Michael Flynn's name?

VOICE 1: Mr. Scanlon.

VOICE 3: And what I want to know is, am I someone comes out for my motives for asking questions I get a chance to respond.

VOICE 1: The gentle lady is recognised.

VOICE 2: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MK: Wow. When I listen to the Zane, I wonder, okay, what is it really going to be accomplished at the end of the day when it just sort of descends into a shouting match and a partisan shouting match?

ZANE SCHWARTZ: Yes, No. One, the tech CEOs have appeared individually before, there's always been some, let's call them, gentler questions. Senators and congresspeople will ask her, you know, tech support, that kind of thing. There was none of that here. The tone was really aggressive from both sides. And I do think, though, that regardless of sort of the partisan back and forth, this congressional subcommittee collected one point three million internal documents from these companies. And throughout the hearing, they were releasing them. And the backdrop to all of this is there's an ongoing federal investigation into Google for antitrust. Facebook and Amazon are being investigated by dozens of states attorney general. There's European investigations. So these internal documents speak to some of the key issues about the alleged to these companies being allegedly too large. So even if there's deadlock here and I think that clip that you played speaks to how much deadlock there is, there's still the potential for the documents that were released today and that will be continually released up until September to play a role in those enforcement actions that are currently underway.

MK: I remember a few years ago when Mark Zuckerberg was appearing in Washington before one of these committees and in the Congress, the politicians seemed woefully ill equipped to be able to talk about big tech. But there was a different tone this time. And you mentioned those documents. They've been spending a lot of time. They've been doing their homework, and they've been really trying to make a case that they are too big, too powerful both for democracy and for competition in capitalism. So when we talk about breaking them up, what does that actually mean? I mean, let's take something like Google or Amazon. What does it mean if you say break it up? How would that happen?

ZANE SCHWARTZ: In theory, they could be divided along the lines of the subsidiaries. So let's say Google, which owns YouTube, in theory, those you know, they could be broken up. There was more conversation around stopping subsequent acquisitions. So trying to make it harder for these companies to buy rivals. Mark Zuckerberg faced a lot of questions about having purchased Instagram for a billion dollars in 2012. They trotted out internal emails. There's one where he writes to his dad and chief financial officer, quote, We can always we can likely always just buy any competitive start-ups, which some of the lawmakers felt was, you know, him saying, oh, we'll never face any competition because we can just buy anybody that would want to come up against us. So there's a lot of conversation about trying to rewrite the laws in the United States to make it harder for these already very large and powerful companies to purchase firms that are trying to compete with them.

MK: But where do the consumers fall on this? Because, I mean, they are as big as they are, because they have been fuelled by the consumers who are using them. Amazon, for example, which, you know, their sales have exploded during the pandemic, is more and more people are shopping online. Are the consumers saying and we hear the politicians saying, you guys are too big, we need to break you up? Is that what the consumers are saying?

ZANE SCHWARTZ: Consumers and how much consumers like these firms were consistent through line through it all the CEO's testimony. So Google CEO S. Pichai said accomplished ads has driven down prices by 40 percent. Apple CEO Tim Cook talked a lot about how many free apps there are on the App Store. And a number of them, like you said at the top of the show, cited public opinion and how they're very popular and in many cases much more popular than, let's say, Congress, and that the people grilling them. Whether or not that has an effect, I don't know. In some sense, there are no ongoing investigations. And the question of whether or not Facebook will take broke the law when it acquired Instagram is a legal question. The question of whether or not Facebook is popular enough to beat back, let's say, someone running for office on a platform to regulate them. Yes, I think that is important. I mean, I think the public opinion and the lowered prices that these companies have delivered for consumers will help them.

MK: But the idea and was brought up yet yesterday, specially, we were talking about Amazon because Jeff Bezos had never faced this kind of scrutiny before. You know, thank you. Your company crushes competition. And I just wonder if that's how many people, again, back to the consumer point of view on this one. It they look at the convenience side of it. But does that message now resonate with people? The message that the politicians were trying to convey yesterday, that Amazon crushes competition, you think that message will resonate with the public?

ZANE SCHWARTZ: A lot of lawmakers suddenly tried to make that message resonate. There were lawmakers that played clips of small business owners who were talking about how their lives have been destroyed by Amazon, by Amazon, yes, lowering the price for the consumer, but making the supplier pay a much higher fee and sort of trying to personalise what can at times be a sort of abstract issue. Well, we're talking about, you know, billions of consumers, billions of data points. The many of the lawmakers before the hearing spoke about that they want to do a better job of tried to explain to the public what these issues are, because in so many cases, yes, the product is free, but there is a small business on the other side or there's, you know, a different business that's paying a high cost so it can be free or can be at a reduced price. But all of the public opinion data so far shows that these companies remain very popular, doesn't mean they can't be regulated, doesn't mean they can't be broken up. But they're certainly winning the PR battle so far, according to all the available data.

MK: Yes. And they're winning the bottom of the battle of the bottom line as well when we look at the profitability that that they're doing a very good job on that. Hey, Zane, great talking to you. Thanks for breaking it down for us.

ZANE SCHWARTZ: Thank you.

MK: Zane Schwartz is a tech journalist and reporter with The Logic. Reached him in Toronto. Well, yesterday's anti-trust congressional hearings have prompted questions about whether the showdown with big tech will be the tipping point for change. Taylor Owen is the Beaverbrook chair in media ethics and communications at McGill University. Good morning, Taylor.

TAYLOR OWEN: Morning.

MK: And what did you hear as you as you were listening there? What did you hear listening to these tech titans? What did you hear that was concerning for you?

TAYLOR OWEN: Well, you know, mostly what was concerning was coming from the from the congressmen. I think they for the first time in a very long time, we had a congressional hearing that was taking a crack congressional subcommittee that was taking its role as an antitrust regulator seriously. And some of the congresspeople, for example, were incredibly well versed on issues of market power and corporate power. And I think made a pretty clear case that these companies, for all the good they provide in society, which is fast, have become too big. The market cap of the companies represented at that hearing is nearly five trillion dollars. And in different ways, each of those companies uses that size in a manner that causes consumer harm. And when that happens, traditionally throughout the past century, that is when governments have regulated and anti-trust policies have kicked in. So I think we're in a similar moment where these companies have gotten so big and the harms are becoming increasingly clear from that size that we are going to see governments not just in United States but internationally step in with a broad range of competition policies.

MK: That message was certainly repeated over and over again, that they have the power over these smaller companies. They have the power to crush competition, to pick winners and losers. Last month, some groups tried a different approach and organised an advertiser boycott of Facebook. The Stop Hate for Profit campaign saw some big name. Advertisers like Unilever, PlayStation and Lululemon agree to pull ads from the platform. And I wonder when you hear what Co-organiser Jessica Gonzalez told us about trying to recruit companies to take part.

SOUNDCLIP

In the campaign heard from and I personally heard from people pinning me on Twitter saying I'm a very small business. I support what you're doing. I simply can't pause ads on Facebook. What can I do? So what that tells me is that Facebook has too much power and that they are really lacking accountability to both their users and their advertisers, but also to society at large.

MK: And there is that word accountability. And yesterday was designed to sort of enforce that accountability. But how close, in your opinion, did these CEOs come to acknowledging that they have hurt competition?

TAYLOR OWEN: I don't think they came very close to that at all, but I don't think it's necessarily the role of these hearings. I think the role of these hearings is to put documents into the public record, which happens to shift the narrative in the public discourse around big issues, which are really a matter of societal change. Right. We're going to regulate these companies for the first time in their existence and a different political conversation and public awareness of some of these issues. And I think it did that. I think the point there, about advertisers, though, is really central to this, that in order for a market to function, advertisers, businesses and consumers need to have choice. And it's increasingly clear that in different ways for each of these companies, that market is not functioning in the way it should. If we want to use an alternative to one of these services, they aren't there because of the market control. And so advertising can work and the market can function when advertisers can go to other places. But if they don't have significant choice or enough choice, then there's the corrective function of the market breaks down. And that's clearly when we need regulation.

MK: Taylor, you know, we're throwing around this term big tech, like big tobacco, like big tobacco, that now they sold one product, which was cigarettes. Big tech, we've got four different companies here that that are selling different products and yet we're lumping them in together. So I wonder how much interdependency is there? Do these four companies actually work lockstep? Is that the issue? Is that part of the problem that they need to be sort of split apart from each other?

TAYLOR OWEN: No, I think they are they are fairly distinct. The core common characteristic are two. One, that they all use the vast data that they collect to hold power over the market that they control. So Amazon, for example, has a control of the marketplace, the digital marketplace, and they use all the data they collect about the economic activity that exists in that marketplace to then create their own products, Amazon Basics. It compete and undercut the products that they see through the data are either moving quickly or have high margins or high volume. So they're using their control over a market like the Amazon store to undercut competition. Facebook uses the data that it collects about app usage and usage of the Internet broadly, because they collect vast amounts of data, not just to what we do on Facebook, but what we do across the Internet. They use that data to purchase competitors before they can grow. Google uses its control over search. They have 90 percent of search in the United States. They use that control to both place ads, but also to place their own products and services. So a journalistic organisation, the Mark-Up, found that half of the search results on mobile search on Google, the first page search results go to Google Properties, not to the outside Internet. So, again, they're using their control of a market and the data they collect to privilege their own services and profits and to undercut competition. And those are all clearly anti-trust or competition policy issues.

MK: Well, it was interesting listening to the points being made by the politicians, listening to the counterpoints that were coming from, that the tech titans themselves saying we've got the public on our side. So I think that to me is going to be the interesting point of intersection is how far you can get to breaking up these companies. And I think you've pointed out made the case well about, you know, violating anti-trust laws. And yet the public continues to be satisfied with the end product. So we'll be watching to see.

TAYLOR OWEN: I'm actually not sure that's the case. Look, I think the public perception of the potential harms that come from these technologies has changed radically in the last few years, ever since the 2016 U.S. election, I think the public is very clear that they want more regulation. They say that, yes, they like the services. Yes, they think there's positive benefit to these technologies, but they also increasingly see the harms and a pandemic because been a big turning point on that, the fact that health misinformation is flowing widely, [unintelligible] these platforms, that there's no defence of that and the public doesn't see a defence of it either. And they want it to stop. But to make it stop, they need choice. And right now, there's no choice.

MK: Taylor, great talking to you this morning. Thank you so much. Taylor owns the Beaverbrook chair and Media Ethics and Communications and McGill University. We reached him in Vancouver.

Back To Top »

Local spikes of COVID-19 more likely than “second wave”

Guests: Andre Picard

SOUNDCLIP

If we relax too much or too soon, the epidemic will most likely rebound with explosive growth as a distinct possibility.

MK: Canada's top doc, Teresa Tam, earlier this summer warning of explosive growth if we ease up too soon. Since the start of the pandemic, fears of a second wave wreaking havoc once restrictions begin to lift has been on many people's minds. But now the World Health Organisation is veering away from that terminology. Even as we see cases climb here in Canada. Andre Picard is the health columnist for the Globe and Mail. He's been a regular part of The Current's COVID-19 coverage. Andre, good morning.

ANDRE PICARD: Good morning.

MK: So let's get into this. This idea, what are scientists saying, the World Health Organisation saying now about how the coronavirus is likely to spread through our communities?

ANDRE PICARD: So essentially, they're saying it's one big wave that kind of ebbs and flows. So think of being on a beach and the wave comes in and out. That's what we're seeing. We're not seeing a giant tsunami and then having a break and expecting another one in the fall. So that's a really interesting and different way of looking at it, this notion of a second wave goes back to a century, to the flu pandemic where we saw a big break during the summer. There is really no transmission and then it exploded again. But with coronavirus, it doesn't seem to have any seasonal variation. It's spreading in hot places, cold places, you name it.

MK: I'm still hearing just listening to a newscast prior to our conversation that we're talking about second wave. This seems to have been almost embedded in our consciousness, this notion of a second wave. Why now change the terminology?

ANDRE PICARD: I think it's sort of a popular media term, but epidemiologists have never really use this term. It's not a scientific term. It's something easy to understand. And, you know, it's good to make that connexion to one hundred years ago to the last big pandemic. But it's not necessarily how illnesses has spread. In fact, it's very unusual. So this notion of just continuing unabated is more how infectious diseases spread.

MK: So break it down for us, Andre, because, okay, we'll change the terminology and that perhaps can change our understanding. But what difference does that make in how we change our behaviour?

ANDRE PICARD: I think practically, you know, people are saying, okay, here, we've got it under control now. And we if there's a second wave coming, it's going to be late in the fall. We have time to prepare. And I think we have to recognise now that, no, this is going to be with us continually. And this is where that the whack a mole notion comes in. You are going to control it in one area. So take Ontario is a good example. Toronto has really brought its cases down to a push down that mole. But we see a big spike in Ottawa and Windsor, so that the virus is out there everywhere. And if you put all your efforts into one, whacking one mole than the other ones are going to jump up. So it's a real challenge to do everything at once. So you have to concentrate on an area, but not exclusively.

MK: I like that. I get that, you know, the mental image, the visual image of whack a mole that you knock it down here. It pops up there. But my concern when you when you talk, when you use that terminology, is that this is going to be a perpetual game, that we will be forever whacking the mall that's going to keep up, popping up over and over and over again. Is that what we're preparing for?

ANDRE PICARD: Well, it is. It's going to be perpetual for a while and it's a game, but it's a life and death game. So we have to control it. But, of course, we're looking forward to two ways of controlling it, more learning how to embed things like mask wearing into our everyday life. A vaccine. There's a lot of hope for a vaccine. But in the interim, what we have to do is, I think, acknowledge that there's going to be spike. There's going to be these outbreaks. But the key is to rein them in quickly, to whack them down quickly. So that's you know, we have to do the testing. We have to do the tracing. And we have to isolate infected people. And that's what's going to be continual, sort of constantly making sure there's an outbreak in this community. Let's get a hold of it and control it and then it'll be okay. And then we have to work on the next community where there's an outbreak. And that's going to be our reality, I think, probably for years to come.

MK: Well, and of course, the new variable that we're now preparing for is sending kids back to school. That's what we've been talking about this week. I know you on Ontario, there's expected to be an announcement on that today, B.C. yesterday. How does that affect, you know, the likelihood that there will be spikes as millions of kids return to school?

ANDRE PICARD: Well, anytime you open up anything to ease restrictions, it creates opportunity for the virus to spread or whether it's you open bars, you open the schools or whatever, it creates an opportunity. So, again, if we send kids back to school, we know there are going to be cases. And the question becomes, how do we keep those to a minimum? How do we minimise the risk with physical distancing, with masks, etc.? So it's all about risk mitigation. And then with schools, it's enormously complicated because there's so many variables. There's the mental health of kids, their education, their parents ability to work. All these things have to be factored in and each person and each parent has a different risk profile. So we it's really difficult to get any consensus on there. So the difficulty for governments is they're going to have to make a decision and essentially no one is going to be happy. But essentially, we have to keep our eye on how can we keep kids as safe as possible and give them an education that they really need.

MK: Yes, and you're absolutely right. There's so many competing factors. Have slogans been speaking with so many parents who've got young kids who say they've got to get back to school and we've got to get back on with our lives, you know, because they're homeschooling their kids. Their kids are around so often. I understand that the mental health aspects of that as well. But when we look, Andre and, you know, Quebec had brought some kids back to school that, before the summer break came. In European countries, we've seen them going back to school. Have we learnt the best case practises to try to minimise mitigate those risks of getting the kids back to school?

ANDRE PICARD: I think we've learnt just how difficult it is because there's seems to be no rhyme or reason. If you look at Germany, you know, there's almost no cases. You look to Israel, there's massive outbreaks and they more or less did the same thing. So it's really hard. I think that's the real challenge with this, is we just don't know what works. All we can do is use the tried and true, make sure kids wash their hands, make sure they're distancing as much as possible. There's a debate about mask wearing. Probably we're going to see some mask wearing in older kids as a debate as to whether younger kids will do it in Western countries. So is all these things. And I think what's really important is we have some rules and we'd be willing to adjust. And I think we really have to study this stuff to figure out what's working and what's working within our context. Because Canada is not Denmark at all. We have a different kind of schools or classrooms are way more crowded. Canada is not Taiwan where kids grow up wearing masks. So we have to research this and we have to adapt it to our own realities.

MK: I was listening to the Ontario premier who was making some comments yesterday when he was asked, what are you going to do about what are the kids going to go back to school or not? And he said, I'm worried. He says, I'm sure parents are worried. I'm worried, too. I mean, I take his point, but it's not actually a reassuring point, I think, for a lot of people who may be concerned about sending their kids back. But what are you expecting here? You know, we in in the country's biggest province, they're going to make an announcement today. What are you bracing for?

ANDRE PICARD: I think if we look at the trend across the country, the trend is everybody can go back. We want kids back in school actually be the political economic priority. And then secondary to that, I think we're going to see opt out clauses. So a number of parents are absolutely not going to want to send their kids back. So it's important they not be punished for that. So that's important. And then I think the really key one is how are we going to organise classrooms and schools? A lot of our schools are old. Can we have 15 kids in a class? That's probably the maximum. And in real life, in normal life, it's 30 or more. So how do we get half as many kids in twice as many classrooms? That's the real mathematical challenge in Canada. And how do you have enough teachers for them? How do you keep the teachers safe? But I think the trend is kids are going to go back and then we're going to try and do it as safely as possible.

MK: I see the trend and I agree with you that we have to do it. I understand for practical purposes. But you raise these good points and those are the questions I have. The school sizes. Schools are only so big. You know, yesterday on the programme, we were talking about taking classes outdoors, which may be a good solution for a few months. But I mean, are those measures being taken? We've only got so many teachers. You've only got so much space. So it's not really just a mathematical debate. I mean, there's the very practical considerations from what you have seen. Have we solved those challenges?

ANDRE PICARD: We haven't solved them. And I don't think we've discussed them enough. Yesterday there's a whole bunch of guidelines from different countries and they're much more elaborate and thought through than the Canadian ones. I think we have to catch up. Yes, we can have classes outdoors. But what about in community centres, in alternate facilities? Does a teacher have to be with the group all of the time? You know, we're not going to magically have twice as many teachers, but can we stream them into different rooms at the same time? I think there's all kinds of alternatives here, and we have to be a little more imaginative. My line all along has been let's stop debating whether kids are going to go back or not. Let's debate how can we get them back safely and smartly. And that that's where we have to put our energy.

MK: Okay, well, we'll be listening here and in Ontario. And I'm sure a lot of Canadians are asking themselves those same questions. Andre, you raise some great points, as always. Wonderful to talk to you.

ANDRE PICARD: Thanks, Mark.

MK: Andre Picard is the health columnist for the Globe and Mail.

[Music]

Back To Top »

Face mask or shield? It's all down to personal preference, health expert says

Guests: Dr. Allison McGeer

MK: Well, from facemasks to face shields.

SOUNDCLIP

People come in feeling like a happy, you know, comfortable space. We thought the shield were just allow to see your face. You know, you can see when your server smile at you. You can even, like, still read their mouth when they talking. Because you know with face masks, it's gotten more difficult, you know, to hear people, see what people are saying. Well, they kind of don't realise what you have to live for.

MK: Well, as provinces and municipalities continue to reopen, the question becomes is, is it better to wear a face shield instead of a mask? Well, joining me now to explain the science is Dr. Allison McGeer, infectious disease expert at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto. Dr. McGeer, good morning.

DR. ALLISON MCGEER: Good morning, Mark.

MK: Well, are there any scientific studies on the effectiveness of face shields, especially compared with masks?

DR. ALLISON MCGEER: Unfortunately, there are not. You know, we we know certain things about face shields. We use them in health care generally to protect workers from taking care of patients who have infectious diseases. But we've never before cared about comparing face shields or masks for what we call source control, what we're using them for now, which is protecting other people from you.

MK: Well, so what do you think on this one then, really? If if we don't have that sort of scientific basis to go on? I mean, it's not just really a question of style, I think for people. They're thinking it was a question of safety. So where do we land on that, at least with conventional wisdom, if not science?

DR. ALLISON MCGEER: Well, you know, the fact that there's not definitive science looking at infection rates doesn't mean there's not a lot of science behind it you can look at and think about how they work. I think so. The bottom line is it probably doesn't matter. I think if you canvassed experts, most of us would say that we have better data supporting masks. And there's some reasons to think that masks might be a little better for source control. With the emphasis are little, though. So I really think it doesn't matter whether you're wearing face shield or a mask. Either one of them will do.

MK: Let me get your thoughts then on this, because, you know, people are trying to make up their own minds as they go along in this pandemic and how best to protect themselves, how best to protect others. I want to get your thoughts on wearing your face shield combined with a mask. Here's a clip from Christian Heyden. She's a hairstylist and creative director at Jubilo Hair Salons in Toronto.

SOUNDCLIP

We're wearing both shoes and face masks at the same time. And basically, we feel there is an extra layer of protection. And certainly any extra precaution at this time when there's too many unknowns really is helpful or that staff members in their environment. It certainly puts our guests that ease as well, just knowing that there are additional precautions are being put in place to keep everyone safe.

MK: What do you think about that? I've been hearing this term that's being thrown around Hygiene Theatre. You know that if you're wearing extra layers, it means extra protection. Does wearing a face shield and a mask actually provide extra protection?

DR. ALLISON MCGEER: Probably not. But you know that.

MK: Why not, though. You just think like conventional wisdom. You'd think that it actually would if you're doubling up.

DR. ALLISON MCGEER: OK, so first thing. Well, no, no, no. Conventional wisdom does not tell you that two is better than mine.

MK: OK, good. Explain that to me, then.

DR. ALLISON MCGEER: It feels that way. No question. But it's that, you know, that's not evidence. So I think two things. Remember that mostly we're wearing masks to protect other or face shields, perhaps other people from us. So that key issue is what happens to the air that's coming out of your nose and your mouth. And whether you're wearing a face shield, as long as it covers to the bottom of your mouth, when you open your mouth wide, or mask, as long as your nose and mouth are covered, then you're fine. You're not going to be shedding it on other people. Except, now, here's an except, and here's the one reason why facials and masks together might be a problem. If what happens when you wear anything on your face is that you raised your hands to your face more often because it's uncomfortable, because you have to adjust it, whatever, then that's bad, right? Because you can also transmit with your hands. And I think one of the things we tend to forget a little bit is you think as long as your face is covered, you're okay. But your hands are a problem, too, okay? And so what should be reassuring to us is face mask or face shield and cleaning your hands regularly, because that key issue of our people who are having contact with you cleaning their hands is really important.

MK: I've heard this points and I want to raise it with you as well, that the masks hinder communication. Especially for those who are hearing impaired, it or it's we had the clip off the top where we didn't realise how much lip reading we actually do, even if our hearing is perfectly good, because we tend to look at the lips. I want you to listen to Heidy Wager. She's a is executive director of Hear-Entendre, Quebec in Montreal.

SOUNDCLIP

So you're hard of hearing, even with your hearing aid device, so you're hearing aid or your cochlear device. You're still picking up anywhere between 50 to 80, 80 percent of the whole communication. The rest of that communication that you're missing is happening through the lip reading and happening through understanding the cues in your surroundings.

MK: So does that make them the face shield, more advantageous for people who are concerned about, you know, getting their message across?

DR. ALLISON MCGEER: I think so sometimes. You know, there is actually evidence about the intelligibility of masks and its from the U.S. Army, interestingly enough, which says that, yes, wearing a mask does impede communication, but not enough to impede understanding from most people. So as long as people are not hard of hearing, the difference is not significant, you lose a couple of words, but you don't lose sense. For people who are hard of hearing, that is different. And there are circumstances in which facials for that reason might be better. Yes.

MK: Heidy also has some experience in the school system and non-verbal communication, she says, is also very important for the little ones. Let's listen to her.

SOUNDCLIP

One of ways of communicating with a child is giving them the look, whether it's a big smile. They've done something right. Whether it's kind of like a look like are you sure you want to do that type of thing, where they get the question their own behaviour.

MK: So as we're talking now, Dr. McGeer, about going back to school, you know, getting the kids back to school, obviously the teachers want to be properly prepared. So perhaps they, too, now are considering. Is it a mask was a face shield in order to best communicate with the kids? What do you think about that?

DR. ALLISON MCGEER: You know, I think a bunch of that is cultural, as Andre pointed out earlier, you know, people who grow up on the Pacific Rim wear masks all the time. And I'm pretty sure that teachers in Taiwan can give you the look while they're wearing a mask. But, you know, culturally, it's difficult. It's a change for us. And so I think it's one of the decisions that might go into whether you're going to choose to wear face shield or mask, because either one will do. And sometimes [unintelligible] are just one and sometimes even just to the other.

MK: The others, now that these restaurants are reopening, we're seeing servers also having to make these decisions, whether they wear on or the other. And I want to go to Kelly Jordan Hamilton at Viejo Hospitality in Vancouver. At their restaurants, they've found servers prefer to wear them because they're just easier.

SOUNDCLIP

A lot of them do for the shield because they also kind of forget they're wearing them, you know, were with the face mask we've got a bit of feedback where it might hurt behind their ears or they are going to the staff room and pull it down just to get a big fresh of breath air. And so that's why a lot of them do prefer the Shield. However some of them are wearing, like if they have glasses and they would opt for the mask. So we do allow them their preference. But a lot of them have performed the shield.

MK: So at the end of the day, when you're looking at this and in your rights, you know, people are choosing these mascaras shield for it for different reasons, inspired or motivated by different things. What about you personally? Do you have a preference?

DR. ALLISON MCGEER: You know, it's interesting. I find a mask more comfortable than the face shield. But that's when we worked with health care workers at Sinai, looking at what people prefer, it really is personal preference a lot of the time. Some people would rather wear a face shield. Some people find face shields a bit confining if they're shaped around your face and would prefer to wear masks. Some people, you know, don't like the feel of a pull a mask behind their ears. There's all sorts of reasons for preferring one or the other. So there's real advantage to having choice. Sometimes just having small elements of your life that you have some control over, you know, makes you feel better about life in general.

MK: Just last point, as you're seeing, you know, as the pandemic stretches on and anecdotally when you're out of the streets, you you're at work. Are you satisfied that whether people are wearing a mask or a shield, that more and more people have got the message in, they're wearing something?

DR. ALLISON MCGEER: Yes, I think that's true. You know, it's still really hard to judge because, of course, you don't need to be wearing a mask or a face shield if you're, you know, more than three metres away from somebody, if you're not going to come close to somebody. And so I think when you watch people out on the street or doing things outside, it's really hard to judge what proportion of people are wearing masks when they should be. So all of us get this kind of, you know, little anecdotal views of what's happening with mass wearing. But I do think the data are telling us that more and more people are wearing masks or face shield. And for as long as we have to deal with stopping transmission of a pandemic, that's a good thing.

MK: Dr. McGeer, always good to hear from you and get your viewpoints on this. Thank you so much.

DR. ALLISON MCGEER: Pleasure to talk to you, Mark. Take care.

MK: You too. Dr. Allison McGeer is an infectious disease expert at Mount Sinai Hospital here in Toronto.

Back To Top »

How music pulled Richard Antoine White out of homelessness to tuba stardom

Guests: Richard Antoine White, Chris Lee

MK: I'm Mark Kelley, and you're listening to The Current. In February Matt Galloway sat down with two tuba players to hear about how this one instrument changes lives. Here's that conversation.

SOUNDCLIP

[Music]

MG: That is the mighty tuba, as played by Richard Antoine White. He is the principal tuba player with the New Mexico Philharmonic Orchestra and a music professor at the University of New Mexico.

[Music]

MG: He calls the tuba the underdog of the orchestra, and it's a role that he can really identify with given his own life story. White grew up in Baltimore, the son of an alcoholic mother. He was often homeless and in a documentary about his life called Raw Tuba, he returns to the local park that he went to as a child.

SOUNDCLIP

And this water fountain has got to be just as old as me because it's where I would drink and bathe if I needed to. And I can barely reach this. I would be like this. Step on is and the water. Oh, still works. [Laughs] Wow. I would do this. It still works. Man. That's emotional. That was bathroom, man.

MG: His bathroom in a public park. That childhood did not define the rest of his life. And that is where the tuba comes back into this story. Richard Antoine White came to Ottawa this week to speak at a screening of that documentary about him. It was hosted by the National Arts Centre Orchestra. Richard, good morning.

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: Good morning.

MG: What is it about that moment in that documentary at the old water fountain that was so emotional for you?

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: I think I had suppressed a lot of my past in-- the film directors actually had some credibility issues because I was so young. They were like, at four, how do you remember all this? Like, I don't know. But maybe if you drive around this neighbourhood, I'll just tell you to stop if I recognise something. So I recognise the park, we get out the car and went to the water fountain. And what really broke me now is I realise how small I had to be. I could not reach the spout. So I would have to climb the water fountain to reach the spot. And then unfortunately, when I got to the top to the spout, I couldn't reach the pedal. So in that moment, I realized, oh, man, that's why I ended up in the fountain, because I couldn't reach the war, couldn't reach the pedals. So I just said, to heck with it, I'm going in. And all those emotions came back in. I was flooded with memories of a past that I had forgotten.

MG: What do you remember about - as you mentioned, you're four years old. So there's a lot of things you don't remember. But what do you remember about life then?

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: Every day was about having fun, finding my mom and finding something to eat. I often shared a story of-- I learned the technique of chewing food and then putting it under my tongue because I didn't know when I would eat again. What I remembered most is that I was unaware of what I had and didn't had. It was just me and mom and all I cared about every day was being a kid and finding mom.

MG: What do you mean finding mom?

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: Well, my mom had her issues with alcoholism. So I would have to search the neighbourhoods, the local park, the hangout spots and find her. And some nights I was unsuccessful, so I would crawl into an abandoned house or wherever I could find shelter. Sometimes even just under a tree on a piece of cardboard.

What do you remember about your mom?

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: ahh. Wow. Now I remember and I hold dear to my heart that she was actually a hero. It must have took a tremendous amount of courage and embarrassment for her to give me up. She realized that she couldn't provide for me. So she made one of the hardest choices, anyone with a kid out there understand, and gave me up so that I could have an opportunity to have a better life.

MG: Tell me about the family that you ended up in. Because this is a huge part of your life taking a different path.

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: It's extraordinary. When I first got there, all I knew I was angry at them because they took me away from my mom. I just want to be with my mom. I had all kinds of issues. I didn't know what a bed was for. I built a makeshift tent one day and my adopted dad, Richard McClain, freaked out. He's like: 'I think he can't breathe. He built some breathing device', he said. Laura. Richard, he just sleeping. Because I would take a bath. They would put pyjamas on. I didn't know what pyjamas where. I'd put my dirty clothes on and sleep on the floor because that's what I was used to.

MG: What did music mean to you? I mean, how were you first introduced to music?

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: You know, a group of people came to my elementary school fourth grade with a whole bunch of instruments. I nudged my friend Dante, who plays trumpet, and I said, hey, man, we should pick trumpet. I got three vowels. It can't be hard. Boy, was I wrong. So I picked trumpet and I was going to repeat fourth grade. They thought I was too big to fail again. And so my parents had the brilliant idea to take the trumpet. And they just told me, if you want this trumpet back, you could turn things around. I've never failed since.

MG: That's the trumpet. How did you end up at the tuba?

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: I was number 18 in Falstaff Middle School. I was not happy because even after number 18, there were still about eight more trumpets to go. I looked back and saw a sousaphone. Is it? What is that? I want to play that because it was only one. The rest is history. I played tuba there and I got football injury. I broke my hip. So I was like, well, I guess football is over. Showed up to the Baltimore School for the Arts. A day after auditions. The director just happened to be there and he looked me in the face and said: 'what are you doing here? Auditions were yesterday' and I said: 'but I'm here now'. He thought that was the boldest thing ever.

MG: The story that's told in this film is amazing because as you said, the auditions had already passed. You just kind of waltz in and think that you can audition for this prestigious art school.

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: I did. I don't know, a one in the million. I don't know how that happened, but I did.

MG: Why did they take you?

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: He said there were something there. He said, you know, we went upstairs and said, 'do you know what note this is?' I was like, 'yeah, that's this'. And he said, 'Yeah, but what is the called?' I said, 'this' and pushed down on the first vowel. He said, 'wait a minute, you can't read music'. I had learned to read music on a cassette tape. Boop. Stop the tape. When you have mastered B-flat, move to C. Boop boop! So that's how I learned to play tuba in a practice room. He heard something special about me or maybe he saw a will, talked to the other brass faculty and I was admitted into the School for the Arts. Out of every 600, they may accept 35 kids.

MG: What is it about the tuba that you loved even when you started playing it? What was it about that instrument that kept you there?

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: No one notices the tuba. You know, in all across the world we see homeless people or children in need and we just go about our business. The tube is much like that. Everyone thinks that it's umpah umpah. I'm just like Tubby, the tuba man. I just want to play the melody. I want to show people that the tuba can do what every instrument can do. So I think I actually relate to the tuba and I'm drawn to it because I think it's a phenomenal instrument. It's just getting started.

MG: And that's why you see it as like an underdog kind of instrument. It's because it's tucked away and people don't notice it, but it's in many ways a core part of of the orchestra. And it has a great sound, too. I mean, you can't avoid, you can't ignore the sound of the tuba.

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: Oh, so glad you said that. You just made me smile. That's awesome.

MG: So you're sitting in the studio next to a pal of yours, Chris Lee. He is the principal tuba player for the National Arts Centre Orchestra in Ottawa. Chris, good morning to you.

CHRIS LEE: Good morning.

MG: How did you meet Richard?

CHRIS LEE: Richard and I met in my first week doing my master's at Indiana University. And we quickly became friends, close friends.

MG: How does that happen? I mean, what was it that drew you to him?

CHRIS LEE: Well, we had the same goals. So and they were very unique and intense, ambitious goals. So we would push each other. We became quite competitive and tuba and basketball, video games, everything. And it was sort of a family. He's like my brother. So it's very competitive. But with a lot of love.

MG: Competitive. How? I mean, what are you competing for?

CHRIS LEE: Well, what we do is it's very difficult goal to accomplish to get into an orchestra playing tuba. Like when I-- my first job in Canada was in Winnipeg Symphony. And when I won that audition, it was the first tuba position that was open in 13 years in Canada. So they're sort of like generational positions are very difficult to come by. And we both knew that what we were doing was a super, super long shot to accomplish. So we just-- it is like training for the Olympics. We would wake up super early and we would train for orchestral tuba additions.

MG: The tuba Olympics.

CHRIS LEE: That's right.

MG: And that would drive that sense of competition. It didn't split you apart. It drove you forward together.

CHRIS LEE: Yes, it didn't split apart at all. We were training for a bigger goal.

MG: Richard Well, what was it in those early days? What was it that made that friendship click or at the very least even, you know, brought you together, do you think?

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: I think, like he said, we had an extraordinary goal. But what made it click is that we were generally honest when we weren't on a level of excellence. We told each other. That's not, that's okay. Or you play really well, but you don't own it. We both signed up for an orchestral rep class where when the teacher tried to punish us one day, they said you're going to play every day, we were like, fantastic.

MG: Take a different punishment.

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: We were thrilled about it. He's like what? Well, how about you play right now? Yes, absolutely.

[Laughter].

MG: So, Chris, tell me about your early days with this instrument. You went to a school in Toronto that had some high profile mentors.

CHRIS LEE: I didn't choose the tuba. My music teacher, Mr. Burns, put me on tuba. But there was an instant click and I would take the tuba home and walk it. There's a big hill going up to one on. And I would walk down the hill with the tuba and take the Hoisington bus with my tuba, every day. And I would just practice in the basement of my house. And I can't even explain it because I have students and I don't know. Like, they're not motivated to practice. And I never needed someone to tell me to practice. I just was motivated. I loved it from the beginning. And yes, we had the Canadian brass were coming in and I developed a relationship with Chuck Donlon Bach from when I was in Grade seven. And I just had incredible role models. So fortunate to have that. An incredible place where music was happening in public schools in Toronto.

MG: Which is something to cherish and celebrate when music programs are often the first thing that's on the chopping.

CHRIS LEE: Yes. It hasn't unfortunately, it hasn't. It hasn't stayed that way in Toronto.

MG: Richard, you and Chris, in your grad school and your music program there were among only, what, five black students?

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: About that, yes.

MG: Did that bring you together? Yes.

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: This question is asked a lot. You know, and diversity inclusion is a hot topic across the country. And I was talking to Chris just yesterday and I said, you know what we have tell people is there's a difference between being included and feeling like you belong. So seeing Chris and other people that look like myself made me feel more like I belonged. We didn't feel like we had to explain ourselves to each other. And there was this instant understanding that, hey, we have to make this work. There is no backup plan.

MG: In that world, did you feel given, again, questions around diversity and inclusion, did you feel like you fit in or did you feel like an outsider in that world? Richard.

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: I never felt discriminated against at Indiana, but I felt more at home when people looked like me because in that time frame, see, there were also, I think, two other undergrads. They're so amazingly they had four African-Americans in the studio at the same time and it was ground breaking in that time.

MG: Chris, what about you? How did you interpret that idea of feeling included versus just belonging?

CHRIS LEE: It's a complicated issue. It's hard to sum up. Certainly moving to Indiana, it's a bigger issue than where I grew up.

MG: In downtown Toronto.

CHRIS LEE: Yes, in downtown trend is more diverse. In my first week in Indiana, there was a huge issue with the Martinsville High School hockey team having - sorry, basketball team, high school basketball team. Like these kids, you know, we're drawn KKK on their sneakers. So that was sort of my introduction to like the culture there that that this was still an issue.

MG: How did you process that?

CHRIS LEE: It was difficult. It was difficult. Moving to Indiana was difficult. And so spending time with the black students there was nice, for sure. And they were all super cool. Like, first of all, they're all like big time high achiever people, people that have very ambitious goals and are hard workers. But then there's another layer, what Richard's talking about, where you don't have to talk about certain issues. You don't have to explain them. And so, like Richard didn't have to talk about that he had this hard background, like, I know he has a hard background. Okay. But we got to play tuba today.

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: Like no one knew. Now, when they hear about the movie, they're like, how did I not know this.

MG: Really? They didn't know at the time.

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: I didn't want it to be my identity. I just want to be a good tuba player.

MG: How how do you feel now about the fact that in some ways it's part of your identity, that a story like this is out and that people see it as shaping who you are right now?

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: My message is the same. I think the world is full of problems. And I think 99 percent of them could be solved if we were just kind to one another. I'm glad people were kind to me. I'm glad I had mentors and educators. You know, I was asked on the CBS special is what do you think is your greatest accomplishment? And I weepingly replied, The fact that I get to go to work every day and teach and make a difference in a kid's life, because that's what someone did for me.

MG: You're doing that now. I mean, part of the work you're doing an Ottawa, this program which offers instruments and support to kids from hard backgrounds, from disadvantaged backgrounds who might not otherwise get a crack to play with someone like you.

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: I'm so excited. I could feel the energy here in Ottawa. Are you guys there planting seeds and just get ready. These kids are going to see opportunities that they wouldn't otherwise normally see. See people that look like them on your classical stages. And boy, Canada's about to grow in a fantastic way.

MG: Do you see yourself now? I mean, this is a loaded phrase often, but do you see yourself as a role model?

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: My biggest goal is to show people whether they have an advantage or disadvantage that they can do it. I think sometimes in life you have to be your own hero. And I just want to give people empowerment to do so.

MG: Be your own hero.

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: Yes.

MG: That's amazing. Chris, you talked about being a teacher and with students and stuff. Chris, do you see yourself in that position to be able to help shape the next generation?

CHRIS LEE: Oh, absolutely. It's this the cycle or the circle. I've had so many incredible mentors and I see that it's part of the responsibility as a musician is to give back. So I love spending time with kids.

MG: Richard, that moment in the music class can be really stressful when you have to pick an instrument. And there are some instruments that are more popular than others. I say this as a former trumpet player. A lot of people wanted to play the trumpet. People might have looked at the tuba and thought, I don't know, what would you say to somebody? What's the pitch for the tuba?

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: Oh, man. The tuba can do what every other instrument can do. Give tuba the tuba a chance to play the melody. Really I think if you have an imagination and you imagine that instrument being beautiful, you should go for it. And there should not be any discriminatory issues based on size, gender or anything. If it's the instrument that you hear in your mind and heart, choose it. And the tuba is not a bad one to choose.

MG: Well said, gentlemen. It's a lovely film and a real pleasure to talk to you both. Thank you.

CHRIS LEE: Thank you all.

RICHARD ANTOINE WHITE: Thank you.

MG: Richard Antoine White is principal tubist with the New Mexico Philharmonic. His life is the subject of a new short documentary called Raw Tuba. Chris Lee is principal tuba for the National Arts Centre Orchestra in Ottawa. As Richard mentioned, his time in Ottawa included an event with kids. They're involved in a program called OrKidstra. It offers free instruments and music lessons to hundreds of children in the Ottawa area.

SOUNDCLIP

[Music]

MATEO: My name is Mateo.

JULIAN: My name's Julian.

RAQUEL: My name's Raquel.

MATEO: The program has given me many things. Music has inspired me and motivated me in my studies. And now I've met like composers and I've fell in love with composers and their music. I love music and I'll always continue music and I'll always remember Orkidstra in my heart.

RAQUEL: I picked up the clarinet and I was lucky to do that. I felt like it was like family, you know. I think OrKidstra really developed like my social skills because I've always been more to myself and now I'm more social.

JULIAN: I was a little kid. I was in need of a passion. That's what my mom said. I discovered the saxophone at school and that evolved into me playing the euphonium. It's my favourite thing like on planet Earth.

MATEO: Play music. We basically grow as a family. So we kind of like share. We share it together. And if something's like I feel like we're like, welcome for them to make them feel comfortable. We'll help them.

[Music]

RAQUEL: Like music unites us. It doesn't matter like your race or your ethnicity. When we play, it's like family.

[Music]

MG: Tina Fedeski is the co-founder of OrKidstra, Tina, good morning.

TINA FEDESKI: Good morning.

MG: I love hearing the kids say that the euphonium is his favourite thing on planet Earth. That's really cool. What did it mean for the kids to be playing for an audience that included these high profile musicians? That must have been a real thrill for them.

TINA FEDESKI: How it was such a thrill. They were really excited to prepare for it. We've worked hard to get them ready. And they were, they performed so well. You could see the gleam of pride in the entire group. And then watching the film and listening to Richard was completely awe inspiring. They were just blown away. We got a little post on our Facebook from one little eight year old guy who came to watch the film and the whole event and he wrote on Facebook: I'm so inspired.

MG: That's amazing. That's exactly what you want. Richard talked about how you're planting seeds. Tell me more about your program. What are you doing with these kids?

TINA FEDESKI: Well, we began in 2007 with a passionate belief in the transformative effect of music, of making music together. And so we brick began with 27 kids and now we're serving over 800 kids ages five to 18 from 62 linguistic and cultural backgrounds. And we passionately believe that if you put an instrument in the hands of a child, they can find their voice and they can have so much fun learning and making music with their friends. And all during this time, they're learning incredible, invaluable life skills such as the importance of commitment, hard work, kindness and compassion. And those skills are transferable to absolutely every other area of their lives.

MG: What's the model that this is based on?

TINA FEDESKI: It's inspired by El Sistema, which was a program that began in Venezuela 45 years ago now. And it was a huge social development program that proved to the world. Now that music can be a social agent of change and it has affected so many other people to stop it, as is veterans by programs throughout the world. So music is really taking on a new role.

MG: Where are the children that are part of your program? Where are they coming from? What's their background?

TINA FEDESKI: Their backgrounds are very varied, of course. We have a number of, I would say, a lot of new Canadians as some who have arrived more recently, some refugees than we have a lot of people, too, who just have never had the opportunity to have the chance to play an instrument. It is not so available now, particularly in the public schools. And it's out of reach for so many because it's expensive to learn an instrument privately. It's very expensive. And so we wanted to bridge that gap and put an instrument into the hands of the kids for them to find, is this for me? And it's you know, it's not for everyone but some kids. Oh, my God. They come alive. They find their voice and they stay with us for years and years. We've been going, as I said, since 2007. We still have kids coming in and playing with us and mentoring and teaching other younger kids who began in 2007 and they graduated from university now.

MG: How do you get them to see themselves in music that perhaps they have no connection to or that they've never even heard before in classical and orchestral music?

TINA FEDESKI: Well, I think the biggest in the biggest way of introducing it is I think it's much harder at the beginning when we started because we didn't have anything to show them of other kids. We wanted the, you know, the little kids to look up at the bigger kids and say, I want to do do that, I want something like that. And that's what we've created now because we've been going so long. And so the older kids are playing such phenomenal music and a variety of music, not just classical. We have using the orchestral instruments, but we're playing a variety of music from classical to folk to jazz and, well, a lot. A lot of world music. We've commissioned a lot of pieces. So the kids get super excited when they can see what the possibilities are, when they see and hear these older guys doing it, they just want to do it.

MG: So what is it like when they get it, when all of a sudden you can see that the light goes on?

TINA FEDESKI: It's magic. You know, their eyes just pop and they're so excited and they want to share what they've learned. That's one of the most heartwarming things for me - I'll share a quote from the founder of El Sistema in Venezuela. And he said, A child who only knows five notes can help a child who only knows two. And so that's what we really foster, is that helpfulness, that kindness. And it's when the child finds they've got something to give when it really takes hold.

MG: Part of this is also about seeing themselves in that position. I mean, a bit like what Richard and Chris were talking about, that if you see musicians who are at this elite level and they also happen to look like the people who are there, the kids that there are people of colour that mean something.

TINA FEDESKI: It does. It does. And I've often said that it's music that brings the kids to us and the families to us. But it's our family that keeps them with us for years and years. It's that tremendous sense of belonging. And as as Richard said earlier, it's a huge difference between being included rather than having that sense of true belonging, because music just transcends differences. And you're just a family and we celebrate our differences through music.

MG: How have you seen that, and just briefly, in the kids that you're working with, there's this orchestra that's coming out quite soon. Just tell me the story.

TINA FEDESKI: We ll, we've heard about this orchestra called Chineke. It was coming to Ottawa in at the end of April, April 27, I believe. And it's made up of non-white players, which is very unusual and very inspiring. And we're really looking forward to working with them. And I told the kids about this opportunity, and one of the girls just started to cry. And she said, oh, my God, it's going to be so inspiring. Seeing musicians playing this music on my instruments, she plays the oboe, that look like me.

MG: You're doing great work, Tina. It's great to talk to you about it.

TINA FEDESKI: Thank you so much.

MK: Tina Fedeski is the CEO and artistic director of a program in Ottawa called Or-kids-tra. Matt Galloway spoke with her in February. That's our program for today. Stay tuned to Radio One for q with Tom Power. Chris Lee, who you just heard speaking with Matt Galloway, was like so many of us holed up his home in Ottawa during the early days of the pandemic. During that time he and his colleagues at the National Arts Centre started doing daily lunch time concerts online. So today we'll leave you with Chris Lee on the tuba, and his wife Desiree on the cello, performing the second movement from the Ralph Vaughan Williams Tuba Concerto. I'm Mark Kelley. Thanks for listening to The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

[Music]

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

Thursday July 30, 2020 Full Transcript

More Stories Like This