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 2019

The Current Transcript for November 6, 2019

Host: Laura Lynch

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

This is something that is a crisis that we need to deal with quickly and it is an emergency. We don't have a lot of time to really to do something.

LAURA LYNCH: Scientists like Sheila Cawla of York University are once again urging people around the world to listen and act in the name of saving lives. More than 11000 men and women of science have signed a paper warning of suffering because of the climate crisis. That is first up. After that, Andrew Scheer meets his conservative caucus today amid rumblings about his leadership. We'll hear from our national affairs panel about that. And from former Saskatchewan premier Brad Wall about Western alienation. Then, in an hour?

SOUNDCLIP

Obviously, the porn world can be troubled and exploited, but this little corner effect, which is actually growing and growing, is so sweet.

LL: Sweet isn't a word often associated with pornography, but Jon Ronson travelled to all corners of a troubled and changing industry in his efforts to understand it. And he found some surprises. He'll share them with us later. I'm Laura Lynch and this is The Current.

Climate Change

Guests: Gwenn Flowers, Merritt Turetsky

SOUNDCLIP

[Music]

VOICE 1: The warming effect should begin to be felt by the 1990s. By the end of the next century, average temperatures should be five degrees higher than now. According to the report, there's nothing much we can do.

VOICE 2: Tonight on the Journal, a full edition devoted to the greenhouse effect. The full effect won't be felt for a century or more. But younger members of our audience may well live to experience the first changes, our grandchildren.

VOICE 3: According to a landmark U.N. report released on October eighth, if governments do not make rapid, far reaching and unprecedented changes, the world can expect a climate catastrophe in just 12 years.

VOICE 4: We're running out of time to stop climate change. That's the warning from the United Nations weather agency. The World Meteorological Organization says carbon emissions increased 20 percent in the past four years, which are on track to be the hottest on record. And ice sheets are melting faster.

LL: As you can hear from that tape. It's been decades. For decades there have been warnings about climate change. The urgency of the messages, though, have intensified over the years. This week, the tone is stark. The world's people face and this is a, quote: "untold suffering due to the climate crisis". And that is according to a paper signed by more than 11000 scientists. And it calls for urgent action. Gwenn Flowers is a glaciologist at Simon Fraser University and one of the paper's signatories, she's in Vancouver and Merritt Turetsky is a climate scientists at the University of Guelph. She studies northern ecology, including wildfires, permafrost and peat bogs. She is in Guelph, Ontario. Hello to you both.

GWENN FLOWERS: Good morning.

MERRITT TURETSKY: Good morning.

LL: Gwen, let's start with you. Why was it important for you to sign this paper?

GWENN FLOWERS: Well, for a couple of reasons. First, to lend my voice to this really powerful chorus of scientists and citizens concerned about what the data are telling us about climate change, and even more so, the impact climate change is happening. Secondly, as a publicly funded scientists whose work on snow and ice examines some of the direct effects of climate change from sea level rise to freshwater scarcity, I feel it's my duty. And then third, as a Canadian, I think it's important to speak out in these ways because first, Canada's directly affected by the impacts of climate change, including in our northern and indigenous communities through, for example, flooding, drought, wildfires, extreme weather. Secondly, Canada has, I think, a heightened responsibility to do our part to solve this problem as we're among the highest per capita emitters of greenhouse gases. And then finally, as a developed country, we have a means to lead and really a global responsibility to help developing countries meet their carbon budgets.

LL: What are you and the other scientists calling for?

GWENN FLOWERS: Well, we're calling for the kind of action that is appropriate for an emergency. If you look up the definition of emergency, you'll find things like a serious and often dangerous situation requiring immediate action. And so the importance of calling the climate crisis an emergency is to put a label on the problem that's really appropriate to the scope, the scale and the urgency of it. And then also to signal to the public and to policymakers that we should be dealing with this like we deal with any other emergency, really, by taking significant and immediate action. And the paper itself lays out six different areas in which we can take those actions.

LL: OK, I wanted to outline those for us briefly.

GWENN FLOWERS: Those areas are in energy, short lived pollutants, nature, food, economy and population. And so it's just broad brush approach to tackling this multifaceted problem that recommends specific actions in each of those areas.

LL: Merritt Turetsky. You see the impact of climate change close up in your work in the north. Can you describe some of the changes you've seen since you started doing this work?

MERRITT TURETSKY: Yes, I mean, it's just profound to have the opportunity to travel across the Canadian Arctic and interact with people who are on the frontlines of climate change. And these are Canadian citizens. These are people who love the Canadian north. And they are feeling the impacts now because climate change is impacting northern Canada faster than anywhere else on the planet. So we are seeing mass scale changes in vegetation. We are seeing a proliferation of shrubs that is bringing fire further and further up into the Arctic. We are seeing permafrost thaw completely alter the landscape, lakes draining very, very quickly in the matter of months, landslides and erosion affecting rivers and streams. This is affecting not only, you know, the stability of the landscape and infrastructure that people rely on, but it's affecting people's livelihoods and people's health. And so that's a really important message that scientists are now communicating more strongly that this is not an abstract climate issue. This is impacting people the way that they live and their health. And it's happening today right here in Canada.

LL: Merritt, one of your focuses, something that you really care about, was peat and muskeg. I'm wondering why those landscapes are so important in the climate change equation.

MERRITT TURETSKY: I studied ecosystems that are climate regulators and these are one of the wild cards in climate change. So, of course, we absolutely need to alter human emissions. And there's a lot of scientific attention on reducing human emissions. But we forget the role that our natural ecosystems play in regulating carbon. So muskeg, these peat layers, permafrost, these frozen soil layers have been storing carbon for us out of the atmosphere for thousands of years. What we do not understand very well, from a scientific, lens is what is going to happen to all that stored carbon buried in our peat, buried in our permafrost here in Canada once it starts to warm up and thaw out. So while our ecosystems have been a climate solution, there's a good chance that they are going to wind up contributing to climate change in the future. And these are the sorts of wildcards that we need to better represent in our climate models.

LL: Gwenn Flowers, where you see the impact of climate change most vividly in your research?

GWENN FLOWERS: Well, Canada has about a third of the world's glaciers outside of Greenland and Antarctica, and we work on some of these glaciers in Yukon and in the north. And what we're seeing now is that glaciers in the Alaska, Yukon region and in the northern arctic of Canada are the first and second highest - experiencing the first and second highest rates of mass loss and contributing some of the largest amounts to global sea level right now. We're working specifically on glacier processes and trying to understand the details of how glaciers respond to climate so that we can put this information into computer models to make better projections. But we're also seeing direct effects in the field. For example, this last summer, I was walking along an area that was formerly covered by ice. Just 10 years ago where we used to work, this glacier - that we studied from about 2006 to 2014 - had retreated over a kilometre and opened up this landscape that was almost unrecognizable. So these changes are really taking place before our very eyes.

LL: And what I'm wondering, I've actually seen you do your work and you're very dedicated to what you do, so I'm wondering what it is like for you personally when you see that change happen.

GWENN FLOWERS: I guess there are a whole bunch of different emotions. But first, I would say as scientists, I think we risk becoming desensitised by the work that we do because we're talking everyday about the latest estimates of sea level rise and global glacier volume loss. But it takes some pause to really let these changes sink in on a personal level. Recently I was up at Wedgemount Glacier, which, you know, just north of Whistler, I decided to go back to this place where I had taken a photo 25 years ago when I first moved to British Columbia as a student. So I took some of my students up there and we found this spot where I'd taken the picture. But we looked up and we realized we couldn't even see the end of the glacier in view. It used to come all the way down to watch Mount Lake, but in the last 25 years, it's retreated over 600 metres. It's about six soccer fields and over this bedrock ridge. And we couldn't even see the end of the glacier anymore. So there's just this stunning change that's happening on timescales that are far too rapid. The first response is really one of shock. So it's amazing to see these changes play out on human timescales. And then there's also a sadness, too, that I think really stems from knowing that these sorts of changes are largely human caused. And in cases like Wedgemount Glacier, they're irreversible on human timescales.

LL: Mirrett, I wanted to take that over to you then. I mean, I think that Gwenn is expressing in that sadness and the reaction to it, a lot of people feel, when they listen to warnings about the climate, may feel helpless. I'm wondering how you channel your own emotions about the change that you're seeing.

MERRITT TURETSKY: I think much like, you know, scientists around the world working on this issue, we need to remain energized because there is still hope. We cannot stop climate change entirely because there are emissions in the atmosphere that are working their way through the system with momentum. But we can reduce the worst effects of climate change and we have a moral obligation to do that to prevent suffering around the world. And so I think scientists have been doing their job very effectively and understanding climate change and using the levers of science and the communications of science. We are now stepping out of that box. And, you know, the kinds of communications that we're talking about today are a symbol of how scientists are now reaching out. We're using new communication tools to get the message out. That's very energizing. We still have a chance to control our climate future. We still get to decide what our climate future is going to be like. In a couple of decades, we will not have that choice anymore. Our climate future will be dictated for us. So this is a very decisive, a very important time to be alive, to be a scientist, to understand climate change. And we just need to keep that energy and that momentum trained on this extremely important problem.

LL: Gwenn, I'm wondering, because you hear that the message from Merritt and yet this warning from scientists comes one day after U.S. President Donald Trump formally announced that the U.S., was one of the world's biggest carbon emitters, intends to pull out of the Paris climate agreement. So I'm wondering who this latest message that you signed is for? Is it for the politicians? Is it for the people? How do you expect people to react to yet another urging from scientists to take action?

GWENN FLOWERS: This message is for everyone. It's for the public. It's for policymakers. It's really to reaffirm that we as scientists think it's important to apply this language of the climate crisis being an emergency as commensurate with the scale of this problem. So I think I mean, like many other citizens, I feel a great sense of frustration sometimes about the lack of adequate and timely action by government and sometimes the gap between the promises and the policy action. But like Merritt says, this is a really important time. What we do in the next couple of decades, especially in this next decade, is critical to our climate future. And I think we need to keep emphasizing that we need to be to net zero emissions by mid-century. And that requires really dramatic action right now. And so when this hopelessness for me starts setting in, I find myself actually very inspired by what I've seen with the youth movement so far. And I think really the youth is taking the lead on this issue at this point.

LL: Right. And Merritt, I want to follow up on that with you, because we have seen the climate strikes. But here in Canada, there were a lot of people who voted in the last federal election against the idea of a carbon tax, at least as part of a platform. There are people who are worried that reducing emissions will be bad for the economy and for their jobs. What can and should the scientific community do to respond to those concerns?

MERRITT TURETSKY: Well, I think there is some education that can be done about a variety of tools that we can use at our disposal to reduce carbon emissions. But I was actually pleased by the results of the Canadian election because by and large, Canadians voted for parties that had significant climate policies. And so more Canadians seem to resonate with the idea of strong climate and strong carbon policies than Canadians who chose not to vote for those kinds of policies. That is a step forward. We need to keep pushing, laying pressure on our politicians through our voting actions, through our communications to keep that momentum up. But as Gwenn said, it is extremely heartening to see the youth movement rising up, taking leadership on this. And I do think society will respond. And unfortunately, society also will respond to climate change as heightened and accelerated natural disasters around the world continue to impact people. Canadians are being impacted by wildfires. That is a sign of climate change. And as more people are directly affected by this, that will also sway their attention. I, of course, hope that this can happen sooner before, you know, more destruction happens. But as people are impacted directly, they will see how this affects their lives. And we need to keep talking about it. If every Canadian, if every listener of this program can just have conversations with their social networks, with their families about climate change, we will create momentum on this issue.

LL: Now, we do see a lot of news about climate change that's disheartening. And it's easy for people to forget that there are a lot of smart people out there who are working on the problem. We spoke with Yimin Wu is a professor of engineering at the University of Waterloo. About a project he's working on that mimics photosynthesis. He calls this invention artificial leaf. Listen to this.

SOUNDCLIP

YIMIN WU: Photosynthesis in natural that leaves, the natural leaves, takes in sunlight, carbon dioxide and the water converted to glucose and the oxygens. In our artificial leave we use sunlight, water and carbon dioxide and convert it to methanol and oxygen. Many industry partners are interested in commercializing all our technologies, especially from the industries which we have a lot of carbon dioxide emissions. I believe technology innovation can help to stop climate change.

LL: Okay, I'm just wondering to both of you, Gwen, we'll start with you. What hope do you place in technological solutions?

GWENN FLOWERS: Well, I think we need everything that's on the table and we need to really put our human capital into meaningful and immediate action. And part of that is pouring our energy into researching new technologies. I think part of the point we need to make, though, is that the technologies we need to solve much of this problem already exist. And so I think we should be investing on all fronts. To your earlier question to there've been numerous studies about the impacts of climate change financially and economically. And just as one example, global sea level rise is expected to cost 14 trillion dollars worldwide by 2100. And I think what's really important is that we recognize the cost of inaction. So as Merritt says, we'll be facing the consequences of climate change and it might be a difficult transition now but the cost of doing nothing is so much greater than the cost of really investing now.

LL: Merritt, what about this idea that we can find solutions to climate change or stop it through technology?

MERRITT TURETSKY: Well, I couldn't agree more with Gwen, I think we do need a very diverse and healthy toolbox of solutions. We need all hands on deck and technology is part of that story. However, there is a danger that by placing too many eggs in a particular technology that we might get the idea that we can simply procrastinate on reducing our emissions. And I do have strong concerns about that. We weneed to invest in technology, existing technologies and new technologies. But we cannot forget that there is no silver bullet. There is not going to be a very easy way out of this. We need to reduce our emissions while at the same time allowing emerging financial fronts, emerging markets, emerging technologies to help that picture. But this this cannot allow us to distract us from the very real problem that emissions need to be reduced, flat out, period.

LL: And then therein lies obviously a big problem, because, Gwenn, our whole society is still set up around burning fossil fuels: transportation, the way we heat our homes, people fly for work. They don't want to give up winter vacations. What do you what do you say to people who worry that we just can't make the changes as fast as we need to?

GWENN FLOWERS: Well, we're struggling with that. I mean, but we need to try. We need, as Merritt says, to have all hands on deck and approaching this problem from all different perspectives. And that's something that this declaration does well. It talks about energy, the way that we need to work on efficiency and conservation, as well as fossil fuel replacement and even negative emissions. We need to work on reducing methane and black carbon. We need to work on protecting and restoring ecosystems and biodiversity. We need to think about our food systems and our economy and worktoward a carbon free economy and really address the human dependence on the biosphere, prioritizing the basic needs of humans and reducing inequality. And then finally, this declaration states that we need to think about population in ways to stabilize population as part of a contributing problem. So it does seem overwhelming at times. But when you look at the momentum that's building with these movements, I find myself really encouraged. People are taking individual actions, but there really seems to be this growing movement that's trying to put pressure on governments to take real action against these problems.

LL: Merritt, do you ever feel like you're banging your head against a wall when you try to deliver these messages?

MERRITT TURETSKY: I think this is a very exciting, you know, challenging for sure, but exciting time to be on this planet. We are so lucky to live where we do in Canada. I feel privileged to be a climate scientist in an Arctic nation in particular. It is troubling to me to watch science be, you know, tossed around as a political wedge at times. But to me, you know, science is a process. It is a very noble process. We don't always get it right the first time, but it's a self-correcting process. This is an issue that climate scientists have been studying for decades. We understand very well the changes that are going on. And so it is wonderful to have the opportunity to now deliver that message to the public, to our policymakers. And I agree with Gwenn. I think now is the time. There's a lot more listening going on. And I think we are going to see more action, more solutions be offered to citizens.

LL: Thank you very much to both of you. We will leave it there.

GWENN FLOWERS: Thank you.

MERRITT TURETSKY: Thank you.

LL: Gwenn Flowers is a professor at Simon Fraser University and an expert on glaciers. She's in Vancouver. Merritt Turetsky is a climate scientist at the University of Guelph. She studies northern ecology, including wildfires, permafrost and peat bogs. She is in Guelph, Ontario. The CBC News is next. We'll be on talking about Saskatchewan and Alberta after that. I'm Laura Lynch. This is The Current.

Western alienation

Guests: Kathleen Petty, Tyler Dawson, J.P. Tasker

LL: Hello, I'm Laura Lynch, and you're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

LL: Still to come, the Internet has meant big changes, many not good for the people who produce porn in half an hour. I'll speak with Jon Ronson about his investigations into the pornography industry. But first, provinces united against Ottawa.

SOUNDCLIP

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: We need to work together. We need to listen to each other. We need to figure out the right path forward for every part of the country.

LL: After last month's federal election, Prime Minister Trudeau tried to reassure people living in western Canada, especially since the Liberals failed to win a seat in Alberta and Saskatchewan.

SOUNDCLIP

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: We need to recognize that Albertans and people in Saskatchewan have faced very difficult years because of a global commodity prices, because of challenges that they're facing, but now we are moving forward to solve some of those challenges. But it's going to take all Canadians sticking together. This is what Canadians expect of their government and this is something that we're going to stay focussed on.

LL: But those sentiments don't seem to be quieting Western discontent. And it's not just Alberta. Some people in neighbouring Saskatchewan share that growing sense of alienation. The CBC is Kathleen Petty spoke with former Saskatchewan premier Brad Wall about that recently, and she joins me from our Calgary studio to tell us more. Hi, Kathleen.

KATHLEEN PETTY: Good morning, Laura.

LL: So how would you describe the connection between Alberta and Saskatchewan right now?

KATHLEEN PETTY: You know, it's long and deep. It's ebbed and flowed. But I think it's fair to say over the past decade, certainly the bond has tightened both in terms of political culture and economic culture. And of course, we saw that amplified and demonstrated further when both provinces voted conservative with the one lone exception of Edmonton Strathcona, which had [unintelligible] NDP. And I think, Laura, it reflects our share concerns, which include things like the carbon tax and equalization. And, of course, pipelines and then, you know, the general overarching perceived battle against the energy sector by Ottawa.

LL: But we do hear a lot about a bird is growing frustrations. But does the Scotchman feel the same?

KATHLEEN PETTY: You know, I did explore that with Brad Wall. I think it's fair to say that perhaps it's not as intense, but he thinks it's more intense and he's seen it before. So I would say to a lesser extent. But the answer really is yes. And it was so interesting, Laura, during our conversation, Wall referred to Buffalo several times. Now, this, of course, was the proposed name, every single province encompassing both Saskatchewan and Alberta, an idea that was rejected by Sir Wilfred Laurier. But despite that, and regardless of very different trajectories, after the discovery of oil in Leduc in Alberta in 1947, the two provinces really do have a very long history of inter dependence. And here's how Brad Wall sees it.

SOUNDCLIP

So there's a historical alignment between the two provinces, but also from our province up until well, we saw a bit of a turnaround in 2007, but up until then, we saw so many Saskatchewan people seeking opportunity in Alberta. We're connected by family. I mean, my brother moved there out of high school to get a job in the oil industry and in your medicine hat. So you've got all of this alignment that's based on, frankly, family history and, yes, economy. And I think culturally, it's not surprising that right now it isn't just one of them that's feeling a bit alienated from the centre or at least from the federal government. It's both.

LL: Okay. That sense of alienation that has a lot to do with Albertans. Many Albertans feeling the federal government and other parts of the country, like B.C. and Quebec are trying to thwart its energy industry. But is that also Saskatchewan's issue?

KATHLEEN PETTY: I think to a large extent. I mean, there certainly is common cause there. Don't forget, the Saskatchewan does have an oil industry. Certainly not as large as Alberta's, but it is the second largest in the country after Alberta. The Lloydminster area in west central Saskatchewan has very large reserves of heavy crude, but it's also just resources overall because it's a powerhouse for potash in Saskatchewan, uranium, gold. But the alienation also has to do with the sense that these are provinces dependent on resources for the way of life. And that resource base is sort of under threat. There's also the issue of perceived an equity contributing in an outsized fashion to federal finances and that contribution not being appreciated and the industries that help provide that not being protected. So what Brad Wall is saying is that there's a growing feeling between both provinces that Ottawa doesn't understand or appreciate the way of life or at least doesn't make it a priority to preserve and protect them. Whether that's fair or not, that is his take.

LL: Well, then, how significant is it that Saskatchewan and Alberta seem to be in lock step right now?

KATHLEEN PETTY: Well, you can appreciate the idea that you can't help but feel that you're stronger to. Yeah, there obviously I'm not sure that everyone would characterize it as a partnership of equals. Exactly. Alberta has a larger economy, a much larger population with nearly four and a half million people, roughly foresight times the size of Saskatchewan. But you know what? Symbolically, it matters because they do have that common cause. And together, Brad Wall sees strength in that duel.

SOUNDCLIP

I hope you'll see premiers Moe and Kenney working together as partners. Going forward, I think there's an opportunity now and I might be naive, but I saw for the first time in the prime minister the Wednesday after the election at his newser, maybe some humility or he was chastened or something. And a desire to reach out. And if he does, I think he'll find in those two premiers willing partners who are also federalists but might have some specific asks. There's a two or three or four points the federal government could move on that don't require any messing with the constitution. So if they propose some non-constitutional things to the federal government, the two of them, I think can get a lot done that might alleviate some of the alienation, the pressure that's building.

LL: Pressure. Okay, so that's the key question. How do you relieve some of the pressure that he says is building? What is Ottawa supposed to do?

KATHLEEN PETTY: It is a list. I mean, it's a pretty long one, and I'm not sure everything's going to get checked off. The list, honestly, has been adjusted somewhat. So, first of all, the government has to show in at least the view of Saskatchewan in Alberta and respective governments that it get set. It needs to follow with action, not words. And some of those actions include, according to Brad Wall, the completion of the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion and more amendments to Bills C 69, because it is referred to in this part of the country as the no pipelines bill by the politicians leading these provinces. And it is perceived as something that will discourage investment in the already struggling energy industry. And they're also looking for this is the deviation. I'm talking about some kind of equalization rebate. There's a recognition that equalization there's not going to be some constitutional amendment there. But I think the feeling is if we can't get equalization there, asked me something to sort of recognize the very tough times both provinces have been in because of the downturn in the industry. And so that's easier to do than obviously trying to open up the constitution. We know how that goes. And at the end, he thinks he would go some way in convincing Alberta, in Saskatchewan that Ottawa is hearing them.

LL: This this happening in the wake of this, the birth, if you can call it that, is the so-called Wexit movement. And the people behind it have actually now filed papers to register as a federal political party. What do you make of that?

KATHLEEN PETTY: You know, it's a tough one. Really? I think everyone's struggling a little bit with this. Some would argue that is still a fringe movement. But I would suggest we ignore this at our peril, Laura. Many in Alberta agree with the sentiment. There was an Ipsos poll just out yesterday, I think, as showing support for separation at 33 percent in Alberta, 27 percent in Saskatchewan. So it is hard to predict where it might go. And Premier Jason Kenney, as much as some criticize him, saying he's stoking these sentiments. He dismissed separation as irrational in an interview that we had actually on this show during the election campaign. But still, it's important to note Kenney has raised national unity is a big concern and he now has to figure out how to navigate the anger that is really evident here. And those feelings aren't just centred in Alberta. Here's Brad Wall again.

SOUNDCLIP

I'll just leave you with this. There's been pulling out here lately. I have a high regard for Angus Reid. He asked a question on separation in a very unique way. And I mean a paraphrase here. He asked Saskatchewan people this: If another province was leaving, another western province was leaving the federation, I read Alberta, how would you feel about- would you want your government to join them or not? So, the numbers in Alberta were over 60 percent. The number in Saskatchewan is over 50. And you could have knocked me over with a feather because however angry Albertans are at any given moment in the history of our country and the NEP is a good example, Saskatchewan people have been too but the intensity is not as great. I'm just sensing a intensity to adhere that I have not witnessed but I hear it from people who I know are federalists or proud Canadians, but they're almost in it, you know, with disappointment and sadness in their tone saying, no, I don't know. I don't know what else we're going to do here, what we should do. So this is different somehow and I can't quite- I should be doing a better job explaining why it's different. But that's the best I can do.

KATHLEEN PETTY: You know, you can really hear it in his voice, Laura. He's really struggling with this. And I would suggest a lot of people in this part of the country are struggling with it as well.

LL: All the more reason to be paying attention Kathleen, thank you for bringing this to us.

KATHLEEN PETTY: You're most welcome.

LL: Kathleen Petty is the executive producer of CBC Calgary. And you can read more about the alliance between Saskatchewan and Alberta from Kathleen on the CBC Web site tomorrow. Now, as we just heard, Justin Trudeau has his work cut out for him if he's going to address Alberta and Saskatchewan's concerns. And our weekly rotating national affairs panel is here to pick up on that. J.P. Tasker is a senior writer with the CBC Parliamentary Bureau. He's in our Ottawa studio. And Tyler Dawson is the Alberta correspondent for The National Post. He's in our Edmonton studio. Hi to both of you.

TYLER DAWSON: Good morning.

J.P. TASKER: Morning.

LL: Tyler, let's start with you. We just heard from Brad Wall, the former premier of a Saskatchewan, say he's never seen the appetite for separation so high in his province. How seriously do you think we should be taking Wexit?

TYLER DAWSON: I don't think we should be taking it especially seriously, frankly. The high watermark for alienation and separation by any metric was in the early 1980s during the national energy program. That was a time when Albertans actually did elect a separatist member of the legislature in 1982. We are not there yet. There were, you know, 13000 and some people who cast votes for an Independence Party in Alberta in the provincial election. And, you know, we're talking hundreds, maybe thousands of people being mad here. These are niche fringe movements at this point still. And I don't see any indication that's going to change.

LL: OK. But there still is something for Trudeau to deal with here. J.P., How much of a challenge does Western alienation and the Saskatchewan Alberta Alliance pose for Trudeau?

J.P. TASKER: I think it's big. I mean, a lot of this alienation stems from the actions of the Liberal government, the last parliament, frankly. They have some legitimate grievances at west with how the government has handled the natural resources sector. You have to look at their legislative agenda from the last time. I mean, Bill C 69, a controversial overhaul, the Environmental Assessment Act. You know, that went over like a lead balloon, the northern B.C. tanker ban bill. You know, Rachel Notley called that a stampede of stupid. They vetoed the Northern Gateway pipeline. They kind of bungled the indigenous consultation on Trans Mountain, you know, regulatory changes to Energy East killed that one, too. So there are a lot of reasons as to why western Canadians are frustrated with this Liberal government. And I think they have to tread very carefully in this parliament. They can't treat the region like they did in the last one or risk, you know, moving that Wexit movement from the fringes, from the darkest elements of social media to a legitimate movement. And perhaps I might disagree with Tyler a little bit. You know, Wexit pulled out 750 people on a Saturday night in Edmonton, and that shows that there is a degree of organization there.

LL: Tyler, if there is at least some, and I think we can accept it, some alienation on the part of Albertans and people from Saskatchewan, the Prime Minister seems to be trying to address that. He's already appointed former Liberal Cabinet minister Anne McLellan, who's from Edmonton as a special adviser on Western Canada. The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers said they were hopeful about the advice she'd offer. Is that enough?

TYLER DAWSON: It's a good first step, I think. It's probably not enough. I mean, I think the fair criticism and concern of her appointment is whether or not, you know, someone who's a dyed in the wool liberal is going to be representative of this overall sort of angst. And also more to the point, maybe whether or not someone who's from Edmonton actually has a great finger on the pulse. Edmonton is insulated in a lot of ways from some of these problems because you have the public service here, big university. It's a little bit like Ottawa in that regard. You know, you get a very, very different sense of these things if you're in Calgary or Lethbridge or, you know, in Swift Current with Brad Wall.

LL: So what do you think you should do then?

TYLER DAWSON: I am inclined to think that actually appointing a senator to cabinet would be a good idea symbolically, probably more than anything. But I do think that's a good step. And I also think if he's going to have some advisers from western Canada and the conservatives have been saying this, that it's probably best to have someone who's, you know, presently representing people in some fashion, whether that is a recently retired politician or someone who's currently in government, who'd be an on voice or something and, you know, I'm speculating on how these things could work. But I know you have Brad Wall you have Brian Jean. You have Alison Redford. You have other people who have been more representative and perhaps have a better finger on the pulse of what the concerns are here.

LL: J.P. What do you think? How else could Trudeau ensure Saskatchewan, Alberta have a voice in his government?

J.P. TASKER: Yes, there are so few options and none of them are particularly good. I mean, the Senate option is one, as Tyler mentions, that's what peer Elliott Trudeau did when he was shut out of the West in the 70s and 80s. He, you know, had a lieutenant in in the Senate who could represent the region in his cabinet. They could appoint someone to the Privy Council, as Tyler suggests, someone who could be sworn in, who could sit around the cabinet table, who could be present when there are discussions about western Canadian issues. That's certainly an option. They can also have what the conservatives did in the last parliament. Of course they were shut out of Atlantic Canada. They had no one to speak for that region because all 32 MPs were liberal. They appointed a former MP, Scott Armstrong, to speak for the region, at least publicly, to be part of the caucus meetings, to come out, to talk to the media, to speak about these issues and how the conservatives are going to represent them. They could have a similar thing here. And perhaps Ralph Goodale, of course, who lost in the last election, who lost his seat after some 30 years in parliament. He could be someone like that. He could be the western Canadian envoy, who is present here in Ottawa, who is reflecting the Liberal government in western Canada's cabinet.

LL: J.P. I just want to change gears a bit here. There's another leader facing some challenges as he heads into the next parliament. Andrew Scheer is meeting with his conservative caucus today for the first time since the election. J.P. what will you be watching for?

J.P. TASKER: Yes, I mean, every conservative parliamentarian we've spoken to will not slag Andrew Scheer publicly. They all say they're willing to support him. They want to hear what he has to say this morning, how he'll defend his record and his result in the October 21st election. But I think it's gonna be difficult for him, especially for people from Ontario and Quebec, because he had such a poor result in those provinces. I mean, he lost popular support in Ontario. He lost seats in Quebec, and he only picked up in Atlantic Canada in traditional regions of support. So I think there's going to be some pushback to how they ran that campaign, especially his defence on social issues like same sex marriage and abortion. I think senators in particular, people who don't rely on Andrew Scheer to sign their nomination papers next time, will be voicing some real concerns about where they go from here. The Andrew Scheer has to save his hide. I mean, it's not about the next election. It's about the leadership review, which is only six months away in April in Toronto. And he has to convince at least half of the membership that he should be kept on for the next campaign. And if he doesn't get that 50 percent threshold, then we're headed right into a leadership race. And that's a real possibility, I think, because there are rumblings people I'm speaking to, grassroots people, people not in the centre who are frankly frustrated with his leadership and want to give that opportunity to somebody else to perhaps crack through in central Ontario in the east.

LL: Tyler, I'm curious to know how people in the west feel about, given that he did so well in Saskatchewan and Alberta and he points to that as proof of his quote unquote "wins in leadership".

TYLER DAWSON: Yes. I mean, with all due respect to Andrew Scheer, you could, you know, address a monkey in a blue suit to some extent out here and people would vote for him. So, I think he ran a perfectly fine campaign in the West. I think that he did a pretty good job of channelling some of the grievances, some of the frustration, you know, banging on about the SNC level and scandal, which is something that people in the West care about because it seems so out of character or different than how things are treated out here. So he ran a perfectly fine campaign. But I mean, nobody I spoke to was especially excited about Andrew Scheer. That's just not the guy he was. I mean, he was maybe a lot like Stephen Harper in that regard. So I think probably if his career is in jeopardy, I mean, the big loss for the West might be that he actually is a Western guy, Saskatchewan boy who's in parliament is leading Her Majesty's loyal opposition. And the other thing that I would actually say, which is maybe unrelated a little bit to your specific question, is the conservatives are entering into a risky period. I mean, we saw what happened with the Liberal Party under Stephane Dion, Michael Ignatieff, when you didn't have a stable leader for a period of time. And, you know, it was a little bit of a disaster for the Liberals in those years. So the conservatives, I think - and Jason Kenney has sort of echoed this when he's been asked. - they need to be a little bit careful about jettisoning someone before he has a real chance.

LL: There have been rumblings about Jason Kenney taking over. Do you get any sense that he's interested in the job?

TYLER DAWSON: No. He's been pretty firm about saying that he has no interest in federal politics. You know, he has got an enormous mandate out here. In some ways a very easy job. I don't know why he would possibly want to uproot himself and head back to Ottawa to deal with a little bit more opposition, maybe to what he has going on.

LL: All right. I want to talk about something else. Earlier in the program, we heard from climate scientists who were declaring a climate emergency. And I'm wondering, J.P., how much of a priority do you see that issue being for the next parliament?

J.P. TASKER: Oh, I think it's huge. I mean, voters spoke that they really care about this issue. I mean, all the progressive parties had some sort of platform on this and they were willing to go further and faster than what the Liberal government had done over the last four years. And the Liberals also promised to go further. They promised to go to net zero by 2050. And we'll have to transition to that quickly, frankly, if we're going to meet that target, if we're going to beat even the emissions targets we set at Paris. So I expect the prime minister and the Liberal government will make that a number one priority for them. I mean, they've already done some of the heavy lifting, though, right? They've already implemented that national price on carbon, the carbon tax. They will probably implement in short order the national fuel standards, which will get us along way to our goal. But they're also pushing ahead with things like planning those two billion trees that the prime minister promised. They're going to retrofit all the federal buildings, they're going to have more incentives for electric vehicles. You know, things like that are coming up, I expect, and they really have to do that if they want to maintain the support of the NDP, because the NDP has kind of made a robust environmental platform, a condition of supporting them on that confidence votes when they come up in the House.

LL: Okay. This is a real knife edge in this whole debate about Alberta and Saskatchewan, though, because the environmental initiatives, they're seen out west perhaps as industry killing initiatives. Tyler, how do you think any initiatives the Liberals might introduce will be received by the oil patch?

TYLER DAWSON: Yeah, it's going to be very hard for them to manage this. I think you have seen a little bit of flexibility on the part of the Alberta government. So there's this whole industrial emissions program that Jason Kenney's UCP has been putting together that actually saw some more stringent controls moving from 20 dollars a tonne to 30, more in line with federal standards on industrial emissions. So there's a little bit of flexibility here. You know what? Maybe a carrot to the stick to some extent. But, you know, it's very hard for the government to manage this - both governments to manage this - because, you know, any move the federal government takes on climate is very much overshadowed by the fact that at some point this takes away the livelihood of people who live in Alberta and Saskatchewan. And, you know, Justin Trudeau made that, he mused about having to phase out the oil sands a few years ago. And people really haven't forgotten that. And, you know, I think it's pretty hard to say, you know, you should care about the environment, you should care about emissions. And also good luck finding a new job. So it is a very, very difficult policy environment. And I think there are a lot of hurt feelings. And I don't know if anyone has a really good sense of how to navigate that over the next 30 years.

LL: Well, J.P., speaking of climate change and all the issues around that, we can't leave today without talking about Elizabeth May stepping down as Green Party leader. How do you think that bodes for the party?

J.P. TASKER: I think they're in trouble a bit, frankly. There isn't anyone really on the backbench that they can turn to now to take over.

LL: That is interesting you say that when they've just won more MP than they've ever had.

J.P. TASKER: Yes. I mean, that's reality. Check the results a bit, though. Elizabeth May's like, oh, you know, we've got a million votes and three MPs. Well, that's actually, it's a poor result than what she got in 2008. She likes to talk about how the vote in Quebec doubled for that party. It went from two percent to four. So they're not exactly in a strong position. And actually, I think a lot of party activists were disappointed to hear Jennifer Atwin, who was the MP that was elected for Fredericton, say that she isn't going to run because she's young, she's vibrant, she has a good command of friends, she's has a seat in parliament. She's not going to run. So it now turns to the party grass roots. And I'm not sure they have the same formal structures that the other parties have. There really aren't provincial wings to pull from. There aren't professional politicians, if you will, who are ready and willing to take on the job. She's held that job for 13 years. Right. And there's been so little room for growth, for leadership growth from some of the other people that are in that party. So it's going to be hard for them to find someone viable, I think, in a year's time.

LL: Oh, well, she's not going completely away. She will still be hanging around in parliament and trying to run for speaker. So we haven't seen the end of Elizabeth May quite yet. But I thank both of you for talking to us today.

J.P. TASKER: Thanks very much.

TYLER DAWSON: Thank you so much.

LL: J.P. Tasker is a senior writer with the CBC Parliamentary Bureau in Ottawa. And Tyler Dawson is the Alberta correspondent for The National Post based in Edmonton. Coming up, necessity is the mother of invention, which is true at the moment in the world of pornography.

SOUNDCLIP

One is a guy from Norway who commissioned a team of porn people to destroy his very expensive stamp collection.

LL: Yes, you heard that right. Porn stars hired to destroy a stamp collection. We will hear how the industry is adapting to the proliferation of free content. It's really interesting. You want to stay tuned. We'll be back in 90 seconds. I'm Laura Lynch. You were listening to The Current.

From support lines to 'bespoke' fan films: How the porn industry is opening up about mental health

Guest: Jon Ronson

LL: I'm Laura Lynch, and you're listening to The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: I believe was Monday mornings is the most popular time people would be looking at them, at a porn or pornographic content.

VOICE 2: On their mobile phones.

VOICE 1: On their mobile phones. Like where is someone generally on a Monday morning? And it's usually in the office.

VOICE 2: Or in the bathroom, at work.

VOICE 1: Potentially [unintelligible] in their office or, you know, under their desk or something like that.

VOICE 2: Not under their desk.

VOICE 1: Who knows.

VOICE 2: Not under their desk.

LL: That is Jon Ronson sounding a little bit in disbelief that people would watch pornography under their desks at work. You know, Jon, for his books like The Man Who Stare at Goats or the Psychopath Test. But for a few years, he's been exploring the lives of people who make pornography and the challenges they face being part of an often heavily stigmatized industry. He'll be in Toronto at the Hot Docs Podcast Festival this month, speaking about his two podcasts, The Butterfly Effect and The Last Days of August. But before that, Jon Ronson joins me from New York City. Hello.

JON RONSON: Hey, how you doing?

LL: Good, thanks. What got you interested in telling stories about the porn industry?

LL: I'll tell you what it was. There was a kind of origin moment. I was in Los Angeles at the Chateau Marmont, and I was writing a book about public shaming. And I was going to meet my first ever porn star who did a lot of porn work around the subjects of shame. So I was in my room and the receptionist said, your guest phoned and said, your guest is waiting for you downstairs. I went downstairs and everybody in the lobby looked like I look, the way I dress into sort of shapeless grey hoodies, except for Princess Donna, the porn star, who was dressed to this kind of fey, fey high heels and a fey bright dress. And she looked like, you know, this great mad peacock. And as I walked towards her, I glimpsed over the receptionist and he was looking at her and the look on his face was of a total contempt. He was looking at her with disgust. And I just thought, that's just so interesting because I presume that he would be fine with a porn star when she was safely on his laptop, but put her in his vicinity and he felt contemptuous. Which made me think, well, people don't want to know about the real lives of porn performers. And I so I wanted to know. And that's how it started.

LL: Well, The Butterfly Effect looks at the big picture of the porn industry. And I'm wondering what you think has been the most significant change in that industry in the past decade.

JON RONSON: Oh, well, it's all Canadian. You're to blame for this.

LL: Not me.

JON RONSON: Not you, but over in Montreal. There is an office called Mindgeek, and they're the ones who came up with the idea to give the world readily available free porn on sites like Pornhub, which is like the YouTube for porn. And as a consequence, this enormous flow of money happened from the San Fernando Valley into a handful of people's pockets in Montreal. And because basically, what Pornhun is, or certainly was when it began, was a massive depository for pirated content illegally uploaded by fans. So they were trading in pirated content, which meant that everybody lost their money in the valley and nobody wanted to think about it because nobody wants to think about the lives of porn performers.

LL: So just for those of us who may not understand all of the ins and outs of all of this, how does the company in Montreal make money from making this content available freely?

JON RONSON: Well, okay. So what happened was that the guy who really had the brainwave is called Fabian Thylmann and he made Pornhub big. Everybody started watching Pornhub. The existing porn companies in the valley started to panic. And then Fabian got a 362 million dollar loan from a hedge fund to buy up all of these panicking companies at cut price. Kind of like if you could imagine, you know, Wal-Mart coming in, well, not stealing stuff from the shelves of Mom And Pops stores, but allowing other people to steal stuff off the shelves and putting it on their shelves and then buying the Mom And Pop companies at bargain rates, which meant that Fabian now owns the free sites and the paid sites, which he just he kind of overnight, this guy who had never set foot on a porn set, had no interest in porn, was just interested in tech, the tech disruption world, became incredibly rich, ended up with 18 cars. Whereas if you were a woman in porn, it's almost impossible to convince a bank manager to give you a business checking account, let alone a [unintelligible] 62 million dollar loan.

LL: Whereas before they would have been making what? A decent living doing it?

JON RONSON: Yes, I mean, one could argue that may be kind of too good a living because in the DVD days they were just raking it in and, you know, living in mansions and you know, so there was a kind of disparity there. Maybe that had become a little bit corrupt and broken, hence there being a need for something like Fabian to come along.

LL: So then how are the performers and the creators adapting to a market that's dominated by free content?

JON RONSON: Well, in some ways you would imagine so more than ever, porn performers are going into escorting, which obviously is risky and dangerous. But then I found some much more unexpected consequences. And my favourite one was this thing called Customs. It's like bespoke porn. So let's say you have got a proclivity to watch a porn film that's so bizarre. Nobody would ever think to make it. You can now employ these porn performers, the underemployed because of the proliferation of free porn, to make a porn film just for you. And when I heard about that, I thought, wow, you know, a writer's job is to try and get inside the souls of the people. And what better and more interesting and counterintuitive way to get into somebody's soul than to find out what bespoke porn films they were secretly commissioning people to make.

LL: Can you give us an example that we can talk about on the air?

JON RONSON: Yes. Oh, yes. I was only interested in the sort of non-overtly sexual ones. So all my examples of it are PG rated. One is a guy from Norway who commissioned a team of porn people to destroy his very expensive stamp collection. In fact, he did it 10 times. He had 10 books of stamps that he sent each one to a different custom porn producer and got them to destroy his stamp collection. So obviously we became fascinated in Stampsman. As was the valley, by the way. Stampsman gave the San Fernando Valley much to talk about. One time and one time I asked this porn performer, you know, if you ever had somebody commissioned you to destroy their stamp collection. And she looked at me and she said, are you Stampsman? [Both laugh] Bigger than the spectacles, I presume. He's much thought about it. Yes. But we've managed to get a hold of Stampsman. And his story was that when he grew up in Norway, stamp collecting was this very fancy bohemian hobby. And all the stamps stores were bustling with avant garde thinkers and he just fell in love with the whole scene. And then came the Internet and it cut a swath through the stamp world just like it did through the porn world. And his stamps began to lose their value and the stamp stores closed down and it became depressed and isolated. And so he went to a psychiatrist who told him that stamp collecting is a ridiculous hobby, especially for somebody who's prone to isolation. So that's what motivated him to then get porn stars to destroy his stamps.

LL: And the porn part of it is what? They're dressed up in their skimpy clothes, or naked while they're doing it?

JON RONSON: Well, actually, his ones were a little bit racy in they destroyed his stamp collection naked. But other ones were very non-sexual. I mean, it was one gremlins man, which was a woman in a bikini dressed as Wonder Woman, in fact, wanted to leave her house, but she couldn't, because every time she tried to get up to leave, a tiny gremlin would pop up from behind the sofa and popper over the head with a with a kind of a comedy hammer. And then I met Gremlins Man. And his story is that when he was five years old, his mother left and his only memory of her was sitting on her suitcase trying to stop her from leaving.

LL: So he's the gremlin.

JON RONSON: Yes. So that trauma has manifested itself over the years in that particular film.

LL: Oh my.

JON RONSON: I know. Which made me realize that obviously the porn world can be, you know, at times, dark and troubled and exploitative. But this little corner effect, which is actually growing and growing, is so sweet. It's like the clients and the producers are coming together to work out all of their issues together.

LL: How much do you think the average consumer of pornography is actually thinking about the people who are making the content?

JON RONSON: Oh, like the tiniest fraction. When I was making the butterfly effect, I met this 18 year old woman at a church school in New Orleans. And she was telling me about her Pornhub addiction. And I said to her, did you ever get so into it that you learn their names? And she said, no, it's like when you kill a deer, you don't name it, because then you can't eat it. And I would say that's the prevalent attitude, hence really wanting to do the story.

LL: Right. What about the people who are running the free platforms? I'm betting they don't think about them much either.

JON RONSON: Oh, no. 99 percent of people who work for Mindgeek up in Montreal have never set foot on upon set.

LL: And you have and you've spent a lot of time on porn sets as a result of this work. I wonder if you can take me back to the first day you were on a set. What were you expecting going in?

JON RONSON: I expected it to be sketchier than it was. I kind of imagined mobsters running around. But I was placed. There's a super-agent called Mark Spiegler who's like the last great porn agent. And he sort of set me up with this director called Mike Quasar. Mike Quasars a very kind of respectful wouldn't allow- I'd be amazed if anything exploitative happened on his sets. You know, he's just, that's just not in his world view at all. So I was in a really professional corner of the valley when I was with my quasar. And as a result, instead of it being kind of sketchy and mob like, it was like a kind of off Broadway show, which doesn't- which shouldn't surprise you, because I think people who are drawn to porn are to an extent creative people, the same sort of people who would be drawn to the theatre. So there was that kind of vibe to it, which I found pleasantly surprising. But that doesn't mean, I'm sure, in other corners of the valley, things are very different.

LL: I wanted to ask you about a new study that's just come out about 'deep fakes', the videos that are digitally altered and put someone else's face or a voice onto a video without their consent. This study actually found that most deep fake videos are pornographic videos and all of them, all of them, feature women as their subjects. And I'm wondering how you think that kind of technology is changing the porn world.

JON RONSON: I got a message actually quite recently for move from a woman who's trying to get porn, hope to take down the revenge porn videos. And I presuming that deep fakes and revenge porn, you know, part of the same sort of thing. And she told me that she was having terrible trouble in getting those taken down. But I don't know where they are now. I mean, I would most certainly hope that a company like Mindgeek would endeavour to get down revenge porn videos instantly. And I hope that's what's happening. But I'm not sure.

LL: Do you think they have a responsibility to monitor that kind of content?

JON RONSON: Oh, God, no question. Totally. You know, this sort of amorality of the tech disruptors. And this isn't just implicit in every tech disruption you can think of. But whatever they are they seem to be much more interested in the form than the content. Right. The more interested in the disruption than in the consequences and the ripples. So you have that amorality. But it's critically important for tech disruptors to not be amoral.

LL: I want to talk to you also about your second podcast that's focussed around the porn industry. It's called The Last Days of August. Who was August Ames?

JON RONSON: August Ames was a Canadian porn star, real name Mercedes Grabowski. And she was a real star of porn. I mean, when she went to the valley, I think she was about 19. She immediately became like a big star. In a you know, in a time when there aren't many porn stars anymore, she was one. And the December before last she tweeted something unwise about not wanting to work with a man who had done what's called crossover work or done gay work and straight work. And she tweeted that on Twitter, you know. This tweet went crazy and tore it to bits and that night she she was found dead. She took her life in a park in the San Fernando Valley. And because I'd spent so much time in the porn world and had also written a book about public shaming called So You've Been Publicly Shamed, I just sort of felt that it was appropriate for me to contact her husband, Kevin, to say, if you ever wanna talk about how Twitter contributed your wife's suicide, just let me know. And so he gave me an interview. And then when we started fact checking the interview, I started to hear all of these rumours about other reasons why she might have died. And so we found ourselves sort of swallowed up in that, trying to figure out why she died. And that sort of took up pretty much all of last year then. And yeah, that was the sequel. If The Butterfly Effect shows a really kind hearted side of the industry, then The Last Days of August shows, you know, a much more troubled side. Right.

LL: Because a lot of the focus in The Last Days of August was around mental health. I'm wondering what sort of discussions you hear happening in the porn industry around mental health.

JON RONSON: More recently, things have got better. So just in the last few months, there's a company called Pineapple Support who are really trying to make that work, because porn people always complaining about, you know, they'll go to a psychiatrist and a psychiatrist will say, you know what you do for a living. And they'll say, I'm a porn performer and then a psychiatrist will think, well, all of their problems must be to do with that. And suddenly all the biases, takeover and so on. So there's very few therapists in the valley who can deal with porn performers. I think in a nuanced way. And since August died, there's been more of a move to sort of, you know, we can't do this anymore. You know, there's a there's a lot of deaths in the industry. There's a lot of mental health issues and we have to try and do something. So I'm really happy to see that there really has been some positive steps forward lately. But there wasn't really when I was making The Last Days of August.

LL: You used an interesting word that you talked about them being treated in a nuanced way. What do you mean?

JON RONSON: Well, okay. Take August. Actually, when out when I started making The Butterfly Effect, a porn performer called Connor Habib said something very memorable to me. He said all of the problems we face come not from within the industry, but from the hypocrisies and the troubles of the outside world. So, you know, he was basically saying to me, don't attack the industry, attack the hypocrisy of the consumers. And I think I was maybe a bit overly didactic of him to say that, but I understood what he meant. And take August, August was abused as a child. She was also rejected by her father's side of the family because they didn't believe her when she said that she'd been abused by a member of her father's side of the family. So she came to the valley. And at first the valley really embraced her. She found her community, but then her husband moved her out to a quite far away, to a little town called Camarillo, where she got kind of isolated. And then she shot a scene where she felt that the male performer had been much too rough with her, but she didn't say no or stop because she didn't want to ruin the mood or upset the director. And so she got very upset with herself for that. And obviously it triggered memories of what had happened to her when she was a child. She was isolated in a way that I think a lot of people are isolated in Southern California. It's not a place that's good for you if you're prone to isolation. And then Twitter tore her to shreds. And I think, you know, all of those things contributed to her death. And not all of those things are the fault of the porn industry.

LL: Right. And then anyone treading them would need to be willing to go and dig a little further for you. For you, though, you are dealing with these people and you're talking about subjects that are rife with stigma, mental health and porn. And I'm wondering what your approach is in telling these stories because of dealing with those stigmas.

JON RONSON: Well, mental health, is a lot easier for me to her to tell stories about, I think, than porn for a few reasons. I think first, I've been doing mental health stories since way before I even knew I was doing mental health stories. But, you know, I wrote a book called The Psychopath Test, which is all about, you know, the vagaries of mental health diagnoses. A lot of my work is about that. And I've had my own, you know, issues with anxiety and [unintelligible] related anxiety disorders. So I have no problem at all dealing with mental health stories. I don't worry about them in the slightest. Porn was more difficult because people have exceptionally strong opinions. So, for instance, you know, anti polemically anti sex work feminists would hate - I think would find a way to hate - anything that I did in the industry. Whereas intersectional pro sex work feminists would be much more inclined to like it. So you're dealing with a lot of people's extremely hard biases when it comes to porn. So you're never going to please everybody when you tell porn stories.

LL: You know, over the years, in my work as a journalist out in the field, I have often spoke to people living and certainly less than desirable circumstances. Other some may have been living under stigmas. And I rarely failed to find somebody who didn't really want to live with dignity and self-respect. And I'm wondering if that was similar for you.

JON RONSON: Yes. Yes, absolutely. And nobody wants to be an ingredient in another person's ideological worldview. So it really drives poor performers mad when they fight anti sex work people by saying, well, look, you know, I'm in control of my life. There is exploitation in the industry. But there's exploitation in every industry. Of course, there's lots of mental health problems in this industry, but there are in every industry. And the response they get is, well, you're just you know, you're just one of the very privileged few. You know, I didn't say dehumanizing to tell people this is my lived experience and then be told what actually you're a victim. So that's why I feel sort of empathetic towards the sex workers in that side of the argument, because I know how it feels to be dehumanized by ideologues. I mean, that's a very disempowering. It's like identity theft.

LL: Jon Ronson, as you say, it's a dark and difficult world but I thank you for your podcast and for coming in to talk to me about it today.

JON RONSON: Thank you. Thank you. It was really nice to talk to you.

LL: Jon Ronson will be in Toronto on November, the night for the Hot Docs Podcast Festival.

[Music]

LL: That's our program for today, stay tuned to Radio One for Q The Who's Pete Townshend has written his first novel. He drops by to talk about The Age of Anxiety, a book about the dark art of creativity. Now, earlier in the show, we were talking about the stark new warning about climate change. Well, long before the messages were this dire. Marvin Gaye was writing about the environment. Mercy Mercy Me was a 1971 R and B hit and regarded as a poignant anthem of sorrow about the environment. Here it is.

SOUNDCLIP

[Song: Mercy Mercy Me]

LL: I'm Laura Lynch. Thanks for listening to The Current.

Wednesday November 6, 2019 Full Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode