montréal REM (ligne A) - Discussion générale

[champdemars]

Il y a 6 heures, mtlurb a dit :

Je vois pas de REM ?!

Les anti-REM ont volé le REM. Pouf! Disparu le REM pas gentil !

 

[KOOL]

Scoop ! Voici en primeur la nouvelle version beaucoup moins bruyante du REM : 

Révélation

 

[Monsieur_MA]

Il y a 20 heures, KOOL a dit :

Scoop ! Voici en primeur la nouvelle version beaucoup moins bruyante du REM : 

  Masquer le contenu

 

Sauf quand ils «répondent par la bouche de leurs canons»!

[Monsieur_MA]

Dans le journal Métro ce matin:

Le REM de l’Est ne passera pas par le centre-ville dans un premier temps

Photo: Courtoisie – CDPQ Infra

 

Notez que l'image fournie dans le journal Métro suggère une vue du REM de l'Est!

[Monsieur_MA]

Le 2023-06-13 à 11:11, Brick a dit :

Je suis rassuré qu'on lui ai donné et non pas qu'elle soit responsable d'un crime!😂

Ca s'achète bien légalement aussi, ces caisses-là.

 

[Maisonneuve]

On 2023-05-18 at 5:56 PM, Rocco said:

Then the Caisse should stop putting deadlines and say "we'll be ready when we are". THEY are the ones creating the whole messy thing by continuously putting a new approximate date. The media is not to blame on this. AT ALL.

In Montreal, the media is always to blame, especially when it comes to building/construction/urban planning, etc...

Think about it...

For everything else, the news (no matter the medium) gets an expert who explains the technical to the layperson, either in the 3-minute story itself, or a standalone 5-minute plus interview. If it's in print, it's an OP-ED:

A medical story, they get a doctor to explain the issue in a 5 minute interview.

An economic story, they get an economist to explain the issue in a 5 minute interview.

Climate, sexual assault, aviation, space travel, tourism, politics, whatever the story, they find an expert and they explain it in a 5 minute interview. Host asks questions, experts answer and explain. Terrific.

COVID, my word, how many times did we see doctors on the news doing 5 minute interviews explaining transmission of the virus, masking, variants, testing, vaccine efficacy, boosters, etc...

Montreal News people and reporters, please, educate your audience!!! You do it for everything!

But for some reason Montreal news treats construction as if the opinion of every Tom, Dick, Harry, Lise, Claire, and Elodie matters more than an actual expert explaining things. 

When it comes to stories about the REM, or any architecture/construction/engineering project, the story always goes like this:

1. Random reporter who knows absolutely nothing about construction other than it's part of their "beat" asks Monsieur-Madame-Tout le monde on the street "what do you think of the REM being delayed....again?"
2. The Caisse's explanation is portrayed as "The Caisse claims", "The Caisse insists", "The Caisee promises". 
3. Then they follow up the Caisse's explanations with the adversarial "but some experts aren't so sure".
4. Then they play a clip of a third party engineer or former CJAD traffic reporter turned traffic consultant  "critiquing" what the Caisse explained.

I understand that the news doesn't want to appear to be doing PR for the Caisse, but the public would be better served with a third party explanation (not just critique) of how construction works. Same for architecture and urban design. The news should get an engineer whose designed and built similar train projects and who has been watching the project, explain what's going on, what are some of the things that could go wrong in the lead up to the opening, what are the challenges, what feats have been achieved so far, what should people expect opening week/ and months, years, decades later, etc...

In some of these news stories about the REM, reporters, who know nothing about how creating things in the built environment actually works, include things in their stories like people complaining "If the REM stations don't have parking, nobody is going to use it and it's going to be another white elephant." No, No, No. Instead of letting Joe Blow Bouchard from Pincourt say that 1960s crap into the reporter's mic at Ste. Catherine and Peel, why not get an urban planner who will say what the public needs to understand about the REM which is "The REM is a real estate project masquerading as a transit project. Having parking next to each station defeats the purpose. The first couple of years, fine, but in the years and decades to come, each station will be surrounded by dense, mixed-use buildings, of varying stories in height. Ten years from now and more, every station will be surrounded by it's own mini-city, not parking lots. It's what we in the urban planning field call TOD-Transit-oriented design."

So many people don't understand what the REM is, even though the Caisse has told us what it is from jump. The REM is laying the ground work for the vertical evolution of our metropolis for the rest of the 21st century.

McDonald's is a real estate company that sells hamburgers.

Starbucks is a real estate company that sells coffee.

The REM is a real estate project that will sell condos and dense, multi-level mixed-used developments

It would be great if third party urban planners could be invited onto the news to explain this, rather than this suburban, 20th century, boomer freak out from Montrealers on the streets downtown about "why isn't the REM finished yet and will there be enough parking??"

[KOOL]

Il y a 5 heures, Monsieur_MA a dit :

Ca s'achète bien légalement aussi, ces caisses-là.

Oui mais qu'en est-il des caisses avec des adresses de site Web en partie masquées par des auto-collants de la Ville de Mourial ? 

© Photo :  inconnu

© Joke anti-Valérie : Rocco

© Effet grossissant : KOOL 

[Monsieur_MA]

© Montage Photoshop :  Inconnu itou.

[KOOL]

il y a 13 minutes, Monsieur_MA a dit :

© Montage Photoshop :  Inconnu itou.

Nope, je suis incapable d'utiliser photoshop et je pense qu'il en va de même pour le vieux grincheux du 21ème A. 

[denpanosekai]