by Geneviève Lalonde
We talk a lot about water wars going on across the globe although the water issues can be found much closer to home. A study done by the Polaris institute in September 2009 concludes that water fountains are hard to find these days on campuses of Canadian universities. The Online Journal “Water” highlights this study in a review article called “Water fountains on Canadian campuses: where have they gone?”.
This article in “Water” written by an anonymous author introduces the study as uncovering the trends in the public water drinking system. It summarizes in brief how the study looks at three sides to the issue namely from the good, the bad and the ugly. Looking at the study through these three angles certainly makes both it and the review article effective.
As the Journal, “Water” states “The Good – looks at what kind of reinvestment in public tap water infrastructure is happening on campus.” This is true however, the Polaris study goes deeper into not only looking at the infrastructures in place, but also reveals many of the flaws in these seemingly “good” initiatives. For example and under the section of “The Good” the Polaris study states that here at the University of Guelph, the new science complex completed in 2007 has 18 water fountains though none of these fountains were found to have spouts, so that students could fill reusable water bottles.
The Water journal’s review as to “The Bad” declares are that the public water systems have been blatantly ignored in new building plans. The primary source to this article shows that it is not just new schools from which water fountains are omitted, but that there is a high rate of water fountains that have been neglected. The students studying in older buildings do not have as much access to fountains because “they are being decommissioned or are left in disrepair” says the Author Richard Girard. He also entails that in places like British Columbia the building codes do not state that there needs to be public water fountains thereby leaving university students having to simply “fill up at the washroom tap”. The Polaris study sites many examples of universities in the country, where water fountains are overlooked or neglected.
As for the “ugly truth” the two articles do not place the same emphasis on who and what is at fault. The Water Journal talks more in generalities, while the study is more direct at identifying the root causes. In fact the Polaris study is calling for universities to have “a wake up call”. Richard Girard includes statements such as: the decrease of public water systems will come down to “either putting ones’ head under a bathroom tap or purchasing bottled water, and students, faculty and staff will most likely choose the latter.” The anonymous author in the Water journal concludes that the ugly is “the forces on and off campus that make it is possible for university and college planners to design and construct new buildings without water fountains.” The Water journal provides us with a quick summary of what is true in the report but as the big “punch line” of the fundamental document, it is not quite as captivating as the original.
The Water journal does compile the authentic version and meaning of the Polaris study in a quick and orderly fashion. They include a few general comments from the director of the Polaris institute saying that, “Easy access to publicly delivered tap water in the form of water fountains is a crucial piece of every publicly funded institution in this country,” .
The Water journal summarizes the Polaris institute discourse by this statement: “As it stands now a number of large buildings on Canadian campuses have been constructed without water fountains, forcing students, staff and faculty to rely on private for profit bottled water to stay hydrated.” In the actual Polaris study we find the conclusion states that students and faculty were starting to resist the new trends of “no public water” and that privatization of this matter on public life is without a doubt a debate that will be soon taken place.
Therefore, we can conclude that the “Water” article posted on September 3rd 2009 did not fully interpret with the same strength the subject as presented in the official research study, nor does it make the same impact, when you read about buildings described in the study that are in your own town. However, we can say that most of the information in the article was correct and framed in a conventional way. There is no perfect manner to publicize research but I found that in presenting it as a “quick summary” they did not relay the full message. I feel that there were many different ways they could have discussed this issue and they chose what suited their needs, their perceived audience and the journal’s “ style”.
Resources
Water fountains on Canadian campuses: where have they gone?
- September 3rd 2009 by Anonymous
http://www.polarisinstitute.org/water_fountains_on_canadian_campuses_where_have_they_gone
Water fountains (a report by the Polaris institute) – September 2009 by Richard Girard
I found it very organized and the thoughts flowed smoothly. However was it only University of Guelph that had good results in the new buildings or other university's also had the same results? Good job thought, makes me want to carefully reorganize my own post.
ReplyDeleteThis was very interesting to read, especially as it concerned public institutions like our very own UoGuelph. Good spot on the vagueness and generalities of the Water journal's root causes for the problem; blaming it on "forces" without identifying them does seem kind of weak. That was a good example of the limitations of secondary sources.
ReplyDelete