# data[].attributes.body
Indifference

# data[].attributes.body
1. lack of feeling for or against something. 2. lack of importance

# data[].attributes.body
Some personal indifference that I have noticed is people ignoring environmental issues. Like if somebody sees litter on the ground and chooses not to pick it up or doesn’t make an effort to recycle, they are showing a lack of concern or lack of feeling for the environment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The danger of indifference | Amy Sparrow | TEDxYouth@Haileybury

# data[].attributes.body
An example of global indifference could be ignoring climate change. If people around the world, choose not to take action to reduce their carbon footprint or to help reduce global warming. It demonstrates a lack of concern for global environmental issues.

# data[].attributes.body
Another example of global and difference could be ignoring global health crisis. For instance, if people do not support efforts to combat pandemic, like COVID-19 by refusing to follow public health guidelines or contribute to international aid, it demonstrates a lack of concern for the health and the well-being of people worldwide.

# data[].attributes.body
This article shows us that injustice is taking place in action needs to be taken because it’s sharing how the world is becoming apathetic towards the suffering of others. This is a large example of indifference because the world is gaining a lack of feeling towards the suffering of others in the refugee crisis.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Pope Francis says people are becoming more apathetic to the suffering of others. Is he right?

Cain, where is your brother?
The answer, in the Bible, is that Cain had killed his brother Abel out in the field. God is asking because Abel's spilled blood has "cried out" to him from the sullied ground. "Am I my brother's keeper?" Cain asks, indifferently. The Bible's first model of brotherhood has been shattered; the first human has died.

Today, the answer might be the Aegean Sea. There, seven months ago, a three-year-old Syrian boy named Alan Kurdi washed up on a Turkish beach. Photos of his lifeless body were shared rapidly around the world, producing a surge in attention to, and concern about, the refugee crisis wrought by the Syrian Civil War.

And there, seven months later, the European Union has launched a controversial program to detain migrants arriving in Greece and deport those who don't qualify for asylum back to Turkey and their countries of origin. Hundreds of children have drowned in the Aegean since Alan Kurdi's death, but attention and concern long ago receded. More than a million migrants and refugees have arrived in Europe over the past year, and European leaders and publics-stung by terrorist attacks and incidents of crime involving migrants, along with the broader challenges of integrating newcomers-have recoiled. Stalled efforts to relocate refugees in Europe have left roughly 50,000 asylum-seekers stranded in Greece.

Into that void steps Pope Francis, who this weekend is visiting the Greek island of Lesbos-from which several Turkey-bound ferries full of migrants have departed in recent days-in an effort to rekindle attention and concern. The visit will pose a "moral challenge for Europe," according to The Washington Post. But what kind of morality does the pope have in mind?

Francis has made the plight of migrants and refugees a to a question about Donald Trump, who is campaigning in part on a core component of his pastoral work, memorably responding economic inequality promise to build a wall between the United States and Mexico, by saying Christians should build bridges, not walls. He's argued that the wanderings of the dispossessed are intertwined with other major themes of his papacy: , climate change, and the fracturing of the family. "Migrants present a particular challenge for me, since I am the pastor of a Church without frontiers," he wrote in 2013. His advocacy for Muslim migrants indicates that religious frontiers, too, are immaterial in this case.

In 2013, in his first official trip outside Rome, Francis visited the Italian island of Lampedusa to honor migrants from North Africa who had drowned off its shores. In a sermon there, the pope recalled the story of Cain and Abel to illustrate the threat that the situation in Lampedusa posed to the human family. "God asks each one of us: 'Where is the blood of your brother that cries out to me?' Today no one in the world feels responsible for this," he said.

He had a striking name for the phenomenon: "the globalization of indifference."

And he's argued that it's unique to the modern age. "Clearly, indifference is not something new; every period of history has known people who close their hearts to the needs of others, who close their eyes to what is happening around them, who turn aside to avoid encountering other people's problems," he wrote earlier this year. "But in our day, indifference has ceased to be a purely personal matter and has taken on broader dimensions."

There's no lack of information in today's world about distant hardships; globalization, after all, contributed to the widespread outcry over Alan Kurdi's photo. But as the fading of attention to the refugee crisis since then demonstrates, this kind of knowledge doesn't always translate into compassion; indeed it may compound apathy, calcifying public opinion and paralyzing world leaders. "Sadly," according to Francis, "today's information explosion does not of itself lead to an increased concern for other people's problems. ... Indeed, the information glut can numb people's sensibilities and to some degree downplay the gravity of the problems."

Is the pope right when he contends that this indifference has only recently mutated to acquire "global proportions?" Didn't indifference have global ramifications during, say, the Holocaust? And is the availability of more information about others' suffering really counterproductive?

"The pope seems to be suggesting that this is something new, but of course it's rather the reverse I think," said Peter Singer, a moral philosopher and professor of bioethics at Princeton University. "We've always basically had less regard for strangers, often zero regard for strangers or outright hostility to strangers. And perhaps there are evolutionary explanations for why that should be." (Singer pointed out that unlike the pope, he doesn't approach these issues from a religious perspective.)

Singer argued instead that, since the end of World War II and the UN's 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, "we have tried to actually globalize concern." As examples, he cited international campaigns to reduce extreme poverty and new institutions like the International Criminal Court, which prosecutes individuals accused of committing atrocities.

Refugees and Migrants Stranded in Greece, by Location

"In the past there weren't really global issues because there wasn't very much that you could do about people on the other side of the world," Singer told me. "If the British had learned, let's say, in the mid-19th century that there was a famine in India, what were they supposed to do? By the time the grain got there, the famine might well be over or the people might have died. The communications were too slow. And now we have a completely different world in which communication is instant and a shipment of commodities like grain is very fast, even if not instant. So we're all connected in a way that I think actually promotes greater concern for the rest of the world."

In his famous 1972 essay " Famine, Affluence, and Morality," written in response to a refugee crisis in present-day Bangladesh, Singer introduced a provocative thought experiment: If you walk by a shallow pond and see a child drowning in it, should you save the child? You should try, he argued, even if that means muddying your clothes, and even if other people are callously walking right past the child, and even if that child is actually drowning thousands of miles away but you can place a call to someone who can help him or her.

What matters is whether it's in your power to prevent something bad from happening without excessive sacrifice on your part, no matter how far away the bad thing is occurring-whether you're the only one who can stop it or, in his words, "just one among millions" who could assist.

Psychologically, he concedes, you may be more inclined to rescue your neighbor's flailing child than to send money to a nameless Bengali refugee, but the moral obligations are equivalent. "Morally what is relevant is how certain are you that you will be able to help," Singer told me.

He noted that over the years, people have questioned his parable: If you saved one drowning child, only to come across another drowning child the next day, shouldn't you find out why all these children are falling into ponds, and how it can be prevented, rather than rescuing one after another?

Which is where Singer's thought experiment applies to the refugee crisis: "If you had seen [Alan Kurdi] when he was in the water you would have pulled him out if you were in a boat somewhere or you could have swum after him. ... But we do want to think about why are these people making this risky voyage with their children in leaky boats to get away from where they are, and can we do something about that."

He recommended that people in wealthy countries pressure their governments to jointly address the refugee crisis at a global level, and to find a way-through the UN's refugee agency, for example-to send more aid to Middle Eastern countries like Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan that are hosting the vast majority of Syrian refugees. "We can't really deal with this when people arrive on the borders of countries. We need to deal with it at an earlier stage," he said.
Be it your neighbor's drowning child or a Bengali refugee, "Morally what is relevant is how certain are you that you will be able to help," Singer said.
"I am not going to ask people to transfer their giving from effective charities that are helping people in extreme poverty in developing countries to helping refugees, because there's pretty good evidence that it's actually more cost-effective to help people in their own countries," Singer added. "If someone comes to Germany, things are expensive in Germany, and to provide them with housing and food and all of that is going to cost quite a lot of money." Giving $1,000 in aid to a poor family in Kenya might have a far greater impact on that family than giving that same $1,000 to a family of displaced Syrians in Germany. That's why Singer is troubled by the fact that several European governments are dipping into their foreign-aid budgets to cover the costs of settling refugees in Europe.

If European countries simply accept more refugees, he said, it could "mean that more people will then try and make this perilous journey, and there will be more people drowning in the seas trying to get there. ... I think it's really important that you know that your help will be effective."

That Alan Kurdi's death raised awareness of these issues is, in Singer's view, a demonstration of how concern has been globalized. "That would never have happened before" the era of social and transnational media, he said.

In September 2015, the image of the boy on the beach spread to the screens of almost 20 million people in just 12 hours, according to a study by the University of Sheffield. It resonated around the world for a disturbing but human reason: The boy looked like any boy, the beach like any beach. And then, nearly as quickly, the picture of Alan, and the discussion of what he represented, disappeared from those screens.

Pope Francis might look at the relative silence in the seven months since and lament the globalization of indifference. But Peter Singer might look at those initial 12 hours and marvel at the globalization of concern. Both phenomena are at play in Europe's response to the refugee crisis. The resolution of the crisis will depend, in part, on which force proves stronger.
Where is your brother?
We're better equipped to answer that question today than we've ever been before. What do we do with that knowledge?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'The Globalization of Indifference': How Pope Francis Sees the Refugee Crisis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pope Francis says people are becoming more apathetic to the suffering of others. Is he right?

# data[].attributes.body
This article talks about how climate change is really affecting our world. It talks about how other countries around the globe are doing more to prevent climate change than the United States. They’re talking about how people in America are indifferent to climate change and how they do not seem to think it matters. The article also goes on to say that the president at the time also was not doing enough to climate change. This shows an injustice taking place and action needs to be taken because global warming is really affecting our planet and this is a big issue that needs to be attended to.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The real enemy to progress on climate change is public indifference | Brookings

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As world leaders confer in Paris for climate change talks, there is new hope that negotiators can actually draft a global agreement to reduce greenhouse gases. In this post, Elaine Kamarck analyzes the public indifference and political polarization at home that has been a barrier to climate action in the U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
An example of local indifference could be a community ignoring the needs of a local shelter. If a homeless shelter in the area is struggling, and they need donations of volunteers and all of the residents that are local choose not to help her get involved. It shows a lack of concern for the well-being of those in their community..

# data[].attributes.body
This article is a large example of a local indifference. The article talks about how there was a local election and over 70% of eligible voters in Barrie did not bother to even show up. This shows a large indifference because people are taking for granted that they have a say in the government. There’s a lot of places around the world that are not a democracy and would kill the chance to vote. This is showing how the people of Barrie are indifferent to the fact that they can change the government and that they can help be the change they want to see. This shows the injustice is taking place an action needs to be taken because people are taking for granted their rights.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The seven candidates for Barrie mayor in the 2022 municipal election were, clockwise from top left, Gerry Marshall, Andrew Gordon, Alex Nuttall, Barry Ward, Rob Haverson, Mike McCann and Weldon Hachey (centre).

I'd better not hear it during the next four years.

I'd better not hear it from the nearly 70 per cent of eligible Barrie voters who didn't bother to cast a ballot during the city election for mayor, councillors and school board trustees which ended Oct. 24.

I'd better not hear they don't like their property tax bill, that their street wasn't plowed quickly enough after a snowstorm, or the grass is too long in their neighbourhood park, or Barrie Landfill wasn't open when they wanted to dump something there, or that ice time is too expensive at the hockey rink.

Or that their water/sewer bill is too high, or the road in front of their home is too bumpy and full of potholes, or they would like to put out another bag of garbage every week, or why is there so much road reconstruction and detours, even in the fall, or why is every park in Barrie a dog-off-leash area? (It's not, it's just treated that way by some owners.)

I'd better not hear the nearly 70 per cent of Barrie's approximately 103,000 eligible voters complain because, frankly, you had your chance.

You could have voted, had your say, weighed in on who forms your next local government (2022-2026).

Instead you were a no-show.

You couldn't be bothered voting on-line or by phone, or even in person.

It was just too inconvenient to power up your computer or pick up the phone, I guess.

That's not something you do every day, so how could it be expected to do it for something as trivial as voting.

And there was also only, like, a 10-day window to vote. How could that work?

But yes, this is still a free country. People don't have to vote and they are still entitled to the same services as those who bothered.

The city is not about to only plow the streets of people who bothered to vote (because they still have to pay property taxes. There's no opting out of that one).

And in this case, those who bothered numbered 31,604 of 103,000 eligible voters, or 30.45 per cent.

No, Barrie wasn't the only Ontario municipality where voter turnout was light.

It was 29 per cent in Toronto, 20 per cent in Kitchener, 25 per cent in London and 27 per cent in Brantford.

Voter apathy was rampant right across the province.

Maybe there was election burnout, with the Ontario vote just in June. People had had enough democracy.

But there was real optimism in Barrie this time.

Voting on-line and by phone is so convenient. There would be, at the very least, four new ward councillors elected. There was a real race for mayor for the first time since 2010 (Jeff Lehman took more than 90 per cent of the vote in 2014 and 2018, but didn't run this time).

And former Barrie councillor and MP Alex Nuttall squared off against Deputy-Mayor Barry Ward, a 22-year council veteran, in what turned into a two-man race for mayor.

So what happened?

For whatever reasons, the mayor's race didn't exactly capture the imagination of voters.

Nuttall won with 13,401 votes, or 42.72 per cent of votes cast. Ward was a close second with 12,624 votes, or 40.24 per cent.

So a difference of 2.48 per cent.

Gerry Marshall was third with 2,745 votes, or 8.75 per cent, Mike McCann fourth with 1,700 votes or 5.42 per cent. Andrew Gordon, Weldon Hachey and Rob Haverson combined for 898 votes or 2.86 per cent of the votes cast.

But when voter turnout is this low, we get some strange numbers.

Nuttall, for example, might have received 42.72 per cent of the votes cast, but he received only about 13 per cent of the eligible vote.

Hardly a mandate to lead, but there you have it.

And it's not Nuttall's fault that only 30.45 per cent of those who could vote actually did - or at least it's no more his fault than any of the other candidates for mayor.

But voter turnout this time was virtually identical to 2018, 30 per cent, when there was really no race for mayor.

Why are eligible voters so apathetic?

Perhaps they've had it with politics, with politicians, with unkept promises and with a system that only pays attention to the masses once every four years.

Maybe they're just too lazy to stay involved. Or perhaps there are other ways (protest?) to get involved in the decisions-making process.

"Decisions are made by those who show up," said actor Martin Sheen, playing President Josiah Bartlet, on West Wing.

Only a TV series, you might say, but it has the ring of truth.

Those who didn't bother to vote in Barrie's 2022 municipal election now need to find another way to show up.

Whining about the status quo isn't one of them, in my opinion.
Bob Bruton covers city council for BarrieToday. He plans to show up, in person or on-line, when the new council begins meeting on Nov. 16, 2022.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
COLUMN: Election was a chance to show up ... and most did not

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Columnist says he better not hear it from the nearly 70 per cent of eligible Barrie voters who didn't bother to cast a ballot during the city election

# data[].attributes.body
This article is a very good example of a local indifference. The article shares how Barrie passed a new bylaw that makes it illegal to provide homeless people with clothing, food, and water and other necessities. This shows a local difference because the city of Barrie is indifferent to the struggles that homeless people face. They are not helping the homeless population thrive, they are making it harder for them. This shows that Justice is taking place and that action needs to be taken because homeless people have it hard enough as it is let alone now that it is illegal to help them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A homeless person sleeps in the doorway of a church in downtown Barrie.

Barrie city council's will could become (by)law on Wednesday night.

Addressing chronic homelessness and public safety measures, a May 17 direct motion was approved unanimously by council that day and could be approved by council in bylaw form on June 21.

The bylaws also contain measures to deal with drug addiction, mental health problems, shelter, counselling, limiting camping in city parks feeding the hungry in public places, and contains a panhandling ban.

Jennifer van Gennip, a member of the Barrie Housing and Homelessness Justice Network, first sounded the alarm on Twitter about these bylaws.

"Barrie city council (is) set to pass a bylaw this Wednesday night that criminalizes providing survival items to unhoused people on public property, with zero public engagement," she said. "It's undemocratic and it's mean. This is not how we take care of each other."

Van Gennip had more to say Tuesday afternoon.

"This new bylaw, as we understand it, will make it illegal for people, including charitable organizations, to provide food, clothing or sleeping gear out on city property to people who are experiencing homelessness" she said. "This has significant implications for organizations funded to do this work, for mutual aid groups and even for individuals.

"It adds another layer of barriers for people who rely on these services for their survival," van Gennip added. "We recognize the city feels pressure to do something about homelessness in the downtown. We would prefer to sit down and discuss options that will be more effective and don't violate human rights."

Mayor Alex Nuttall said the bylaws will reflect not only what council wants, but other stakeholders as well.

"We will be working through to tomorrow (Wednesday) night to ensure any bylaws enacted represent the full intent of our previously approved motion at Barrie city council," he said. "I have been meeting with organizations for months now on this and look forward to continuing to do so. Our meetings with residents, agencies and professionals is where a large portion of the motion has originated from."

The bylaws city council will consider Wednesday night come with great detail.

Bill 67 reads in part that: "No person shall display, set up, sell or offer for sale or provide any good, product, service, item, activity or literature within a public park whether an exchange or funds has taken place or not unless authorized to do so. No person shall give away, exchange or otherwise provide at no charge, items, products, samples of items or products, or any other similar item including but not limited to food, clothing, tents, tarps or other similar item used as a shelter, to assist with sleeping or protection from the elements to members of the public from any public park unless authorized to do so. No person shall use a tent or sunshade within a public park unless such tent or sunshade is solely supported by no more than one pole and having no more than one wall or side or unless authorized to do so."

This also applies to Barrie's waterfront parks and dog-off-leash parks, along with Memorial Square and Meridian Place on Dunlop Street East.

In part, Bill 68 reads that: "No person shall sell, offer for sale, or provide due to or through the exchange of funds, any product, service or items from any city property, unless authorized by the city. No person shall give away, exchange or otherwise provide at no charge, items, products, samples of items or products, or any other similar item including but not limited to food, clothing, tents, tarps or other similar item used as a shelter, to assist with sleeping or protection from the elements to members of the public from any city property, unless authorized by the city. The provisions of this bylaw shall be enforced by a municipal law enforcement officer, police officer, peace officer, or other individual duly appointed for the purpose of enforcing this bylaw. No person shall obstruct, hinder, or otherwise interfere with a property standards officer, municipal law enforcement officer, provincial offences officer, police officer, or other duly appointed individual in the lawful carrying out of their duties and responsibilities under the provisions of this bylaw."

It also reads that every person who contravenes any provision of this bylaw is guilty of an offence under the provisions of the Provincial Offences Act (POA) and is liable on conviction to a penalty not exceeding $5,000, exclusive of costs, subject to the provisions of the Act.

A public meeting will be scheduled in late summer about chronic homelessness, addictions and mental health supports in Barrie.

"I do look forward to the public meeting to be held at the community safety meeting in September," Nuttall said, "where we hope to get more ideas on how to help individuals experiencing homelessness, while maintaining community safety in Barrie."

Like many people, van Gennip has problems with a direct motion of council, introduced with no notice, leading to these bylaws.

"The process has been unusual," she said. "Normally, these kinds of things would come through general committee, then to council.

"Since the original motion from May 17 was made without notice at a city council meeting, and the bylaw amendments are also coming on a council meeting agenda, there is no path for public input in the process," van Gennip added.

The May 17 motion gives Michael Prowse, the city's chief administrative officer, the task of implementing these measures and he is to consider and/or utilize a number of ways to address chronic homelessness, and enhance Barrie's public safety.

Ontario government funding will be requested for additional financial support for a rapid access addiction medicine clinic, and to provide more beds and to increase the hours of operation or provide for a similar organization that gives long-term counselling and treatment.

The province will be asked to approve money for a family reunification fund for transportation costs and to help reunite individuals with families or support groups, and pay for operation of a shuttle service for individuals released from Central North Correctional Centre (CNCC) in Penetanguishene.

A cooling and warming centre for at-risk individuals funding is requested, along with money for daily meal programs currently being offered on public land and in city parks, for the Salvation Army or similar organizations to support a lunch program and for food security programs through agencies to reduce the needs associated with panhandling.

Permanent funding from the province and the County of Simcoe is requested for the county's mobile outreach pilot program in downtown Barrie, if it's deemed to be successful by the city and the county.

Changes are planned to Barrie's bylaws, protocols and processes to prohibit the use or distribution of tents or tarps in city parks or on public land without a permit, to prohibit the distribution of food and grocery products in public spaces without a permit and to reduce the time required to address camping in parks and the storage of goods in parks or public places.

There will be methods to prohibit payment to panhandlers on city streets, intersections and highway ramps, along with placing signs on city off-ramps to discourage panhandling or financial support for panhandlers, and encourage donations to the local social service agencies instead.

The city will work with the county and the province on ways to build more supportive housing for community members experiencing adverse mental health or addictions. Supportive housing is a combination of affordable housing with intensive and trauma-informed co-ordinated services to help people struggling with chronic physical and mental-health issues to maintain stable housing and receive appropriate health care.

The city will also appeal to the county for funding to help individuals make the transition from unemployment to employment, through training opportunities.

City staff will also apply for any provincial or federal funding available to support the plan.

Funding to $825,000 annually for two years will be available from the city's re-investment reserve to help pay for these initiatives, as required.

If necessary, Prowse is authorized to waive the city's purchasing bylaw to award any items or services required to undertake the plan's actions. He will also provide quarterly updates to the community safety committee regarding the effectiveness of the options undertaken from these actions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Barrie's homelessness plan called 'undemocratic' and 'mean'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
'It adds another layer of barriers for people who rely on these services for their survival,' says advocate

# data[].attributes.body
This article shed some light on the indifference going on in Barrie Ontario to the toxic drug crisis. It shares how there is going to be a protest to start a supervised consumption site to help aid the toxic drug crisis. This article shows us the action needs to be taken, and that there is an injustice going on because drugs are going to be taken whether the city wants or not. Having a safe consumption site can help with the leftover needles all around, it can help with overdoses and can overall help this crisis end. This shows an indifference because Barrie is indifferent to the drug crisis and isn’t doing enough to help with it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Stock image

NEWS RELEASE
FRIENDS OF ONTARIO SCS
***********************************
On Tuesday, May 28, 2024, community members, front-line workers and advocates will travel from across the province - including Timmins, Sudbury, Barrie and Windsor - for a rally to demand the Ontario government immediately fund and adequately support life-saving supervised consumption services (SCS) amidst the worsening toxic drug crisis.

All members of the media are invited to attend.

Hosted by Friends of Ontario SCS, the rally will begin at Trinity Square at 12:30 p.m., followed by a march to Queen's Park for a 2:30 p.m. rally endorsed by the Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario, HIV Legal Network, CUPE Ontario, Réseau ACCESS Network, Moms Stop the Harm, Street Nurses Network, and many others.

The march will make a stop in front of Dr. Kieran Moore's office along the way to Queen's Park for comments. NDP leader Marit Stiles, Ontario Green Party leader Mike Schriener and Ontario Liberal Party leader Bonnie Crombie have been invited to meet with delegates at Queen's Park.

The event comes on the heels of a wave of province-wide support, with more than 70 groups endorsing an open letter calling on the Ontario Ministry of Health to provide emergency funding to reopen shuttered sites and prevent further closures.

The toxic drug crisis has been growing for over a decade and is tragically impacting all Canadians. Fatal and non-fatal overdoses create massive strains on first-responders, emergency departments and hospitals. The loss, grief and trauma from these preventable deaths reverberate throughout communities, in homes and in workplaces all across the province.

Drug decriminalization, supervised consumption services (SCS), safe supply, harm-reduction support and evidence-based, voluntary treatment are all cost-effective measures that improve public health and community safety.

Almost three months have since passed with no response from Minister of Health Sylvia Jones or Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addictions Michael Tibollo to the more than 70 open-letter signatories. In that time, Sudbury's SCS was forced to close, Timmins has had to rely on charitable funding to keep operating, and an estimated 800 more Ontarians have died preventable deaths from toxic drugs.

The community rally calls attention to the province's inaction and indifference in the face of these ongoing losses and is a demand for immediate change.

***********************************

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Barrie advocates to take part in supervised consumption site rally

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Participants from across the province will travel to Queen's Park in Toronto on Tuesday for rally and march

# data[].attributes.body
This article shares the immense amount of ‘global inference towards human rights’. People don’t seem to care about how all of these people in the Middle East are being arrested, hurt and jailed for fighting for their own rights. Action needs to take place because injustice is taking place but the world seems to be indifferent to the hardships. These people in the Middle East are facing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
international relations and national security

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Global indifference' contributing to Middle East crackdowns, Amnesty says | CNN

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A "global indifference" to human rights abuses in the Middle East is fueling repression across the region, Amnesty International announced Tuesday.

# data[].attributes.body
Another vast example of personal indifference that I have noticed has been with fast fashion. I myself also have fallen into fast fashion and micro trends. I have shopped from places that are very cheap that do not treat their workers properly. A lot of people I know and have seen online all buy from these places that treat their workers horribly because the clothing is cheap. Fast fashion is a large environmental and humanitarian rights issue. A lot of people are indifferent to the fact that fast fashion is a large issue. Action needs to be taken place because all of these articles of clothing that come from fast fashion places end up in a dump. I have linked an article that has to do with fast fashion and the distress. It is causing our planet.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What Is Fast Fashion?

Fast fashion is the term used to describe clothing designs that move quickly from the catwalk to stores to take advantage of trends. The collections are often based on styles presented at Fashion Week runway shows or worn by celebrities. Fast fashion allows mainstream consumers to purchase the hot new look or the next big thing at an affordable price.

Fast fashion became common because of cheaper, speedier manufacturing and shipping methods, an increase in consumers' appetite for up-to-the-minute styles, and the increase in consumer purchasing power-especially among young people-to indulge these instant gratification desires. Because of all this, fast fashion is challenging the established clothing labels' tradition of introducing new collections and lines on an orderly, seasonal basis. In fact, it's not uncommon for fast-fashion retailers to introduce new products multiple times in one week to stay on trend.

Key Takeaways

Understanding Fast Fashion

Shopping for clothing was once considered an event. Consumers would save up to buy new clothes at certain times of the year. The style-conscious would get a preview of the styles to come via fashion shows that displayed new collections and clothing lines several months in advance of their appearance in stores.

But that began to change in the late 1990s, as shopping became a form of entertainment and discretionary spending on clothing increased. Enter fast fashion-cheap, trendy knock-off garments, mass-produced at low cost, that allowed consumers to feel as though they were wearing the same styles that "walked the runway" or were sported by a sexy entertainer.

Fast fashion is made possible by innovations in supply chain management (SCM) among fashion retailers. Its goal is to quickly produce cost-efficient articles of clothing in response to (or anticipation of) fast-shifting consumer demands. The assumption is that consumers want high fashion at a low cost. While the garments are often carelessly made, they're not intended to be worn for years or even multiple times.

Fast fashion follows the concept of category management, linking the manufacturer with the consumer in a mutually beneficial relationship. The speed at which fast fashion happens requires this kind of collaboration, as the need to refine and accelerate supply chain processes is paramount.

$30.58 billion

Fast Fashion Leaders

Major players in the fast-fashion market include Zara, H&M Group, UNIQLO, GAP, Forever 21, Topshop, Esprit, Primark, Fashion Nova, and New Look. Many companies are both retailers and manufacturers, though they often outsource the actual production of clothing.

In addition, traditional mass-market department stores such as Macy's, JCPenney, and Kohl's in the U.S. have all taken a page from the fast-fashion book. For their in-house and proprietary brands, they've shortened design and production times to better compete in the market.

Here's a closer look at some of the leaders in fast fashion.

Spanish retail chain Zara, the flagship brand of textile giant Inditex, is all but synonymous with fast fashion, serving as an exemplar of how to cut the time between design, production, and delivery. Zara's designers can sketch a garment-the company sells men's, women's, and children's clothing-and have the finished piece appear on store racks in as little as four weeks. It can modify existing items in as little as two weeks.

Its secret to this rapid turnover is its ownership of a relatively short supply chain. Over half its factories are closely located to its corporate headquarters in A Coruña, Spain-including countries like Portugal, Turkey, and Morocco.

Its fast turnaround time aids another key Zara strategy: to stuff the stores with more goods, offering the consumer an unparalleled amount of choice. It produces 11,000-plus pieces annually, vs. an industry average of 2,000 to 4,000 pieces.

Zara's annual net sales (including those of Zara Home) were €19.6 billion in 2021. As of mid-2022, it has 1,947 stores across the globe, as well as a strong online operation.

Founded in 1947, Sweden-based H&M Group (short for Hennes & Mauritz ) is one of the oldest fast-fashion companies. As of 2022, H&M Group operates in 74 countries with over 4,000 stores under its various brands, which, along with H&M, include the slightly more upscale COS and the youth-oriented Monki.

H&M Group functions like a department store, selling not only clothing for men, women, and children but also cosmetics and home furnishings. It is more strictly a retailer: It does not own any factories but instead relies on about 600 independent suppliers for its garments. However, these suppliers are overseen by 16 H&M production offices, using state-of-the-art IT systems to track inventory and communicate with corporate HQ. The factories are based all around Europe, Asia, and Africa.

Part of H&M's strategy has also been not to offer just knockoffs but original creations via its much-ballyhooed designer collaborations with elite labels like Alexander Wang and Giambattista Vali. In early 2021, for example, it launched a collection designed by Simone Rocha.

H&M's annual net sales in 2021 came to SEK 199 billion (about $18.9 billion).

Advantages and Disadvantages of Fast Fashion

The Advantages of Fast Fashion

Profitable for manufacturers and retailers: The constant introduction of new products encourages customers to frequent stores more often, which means they end up making more purchases. The retailer does not replenish its stock-instead, it replaces items that sell out with new items. Accordingly, consumers know to purchase an item they like when they see it, no matter the price because it's not likely to be available for long. And because the clothing is cheap (and cheaply made), it's easy to get people back into stores or online to make fresh purchases.

Quick to consumers: As for advantages for the consumer, fast fashion has enabled people to get the clothes they want when they want them. Also, it's made clothing more affordable-and not just any clothing, but innovative, imaginative, stylish clothing.

Makes clothes affordable: Even those of modest means can constantly buy smart new clothes, indulge in fun or impractical items, and wear something different every day.

Democratizes fashion: No longer is the latest look, being "well-dressed," or having a large wardrobe the province of the rich and famous. Everyone can look good.

The Disadvantages of Fast Fashion

Cheap materials and poor workmanship: Because the clothing is made overseas, fast fashion is also seen as contributing to a decline in the U.S. garment industry, where labor laws and workplace regulations are stronger, and wages are better. If a consumer buys multiple fast fashion garments, cheap as they are, it eventually costs them more than buying a few pricier ones that last longer.

Encourages a "throw-away" consumer mentality: That's why it's also called disposable fashion. Many fast fashionistas in their teens and early twenties-the age group the industry targets-admit they only wear their purchases once or twice.

Bad for the environment: Critics contend that fast fashion contributes to pollution, waste, and planned obsolescence due to its cheap materials and manufacturing methods. The poorly made garments don't age well, but they can't be recycled because they're predominantly (over 60%) made of synthetics. So when they're discarded, they mold in landfills for years.

Associated with exploitative, abusive labor practices: Manufacturers are generally based in developing countries-and some have been none too stringent in overseeing their subcontractors nor transparent about their supply chain. That's led to critics charging that fast fashion is built on bad working conditions, poor pay, and other abusive, exploitative practices.

Intellectual property theft: Some designers allege that their designs have been illegally duplicated and mass-produced by fast fashion companies.

Impact on the Environment and Workers

It's argued in some circles that fast fashion is wasteful and harmful to the environment. When accounting for quality of workmanship, materials, cheap labor, rapid turnaround, and low stock for quick sales on the newest fashion items, it's easy to observe that waste can occur.

However, the environmental impact is much more severe than a cursory look at the industry reveals. Here's a quick look at some figures:

The industry uses 93 billion cubic meters of water per year.

It takes 3,781 liters of water to make one pair of jeans.

Of all the wastewater in the world, 20% is from textile dyeing and is highly toxic-many countries where clothes are made have reduced or no regulations for wastewater disposal.

Microplastic fibers used in clothing make their way to the ocean, amounting to about 500,000 tons-close to 50 billion plastic bottles.

Fashion emits more than 10% of global carbon emissions.

Economic Impact

The apparel industry, in general, has been growing by as much as 8% annually (aside from the blip of the 2020 pandemic year)-and fast fashion leads the apparel industry. It's estimated to grow nearly 7% to $39.84 billion in 2025.

However, the industry growth is unlikely to be felt by the fast fashion manufacturing industry workers-profits are not returned to the local economies for the work being done. Instead, revenues are recognized in the countries the companies are headquartered in, leaving these local economies to stagnate while others enjoy the fruits of their labor.

Worker Impact

Fast fashion companies employ thousands in their offices, stores, and factories, making millions in profits yearly. Unfortunately, workers are underpaid, work long hours, and are exposed to harmful chemicals used in the process.

Fast Fashion vs. Slow Fashion

If fast fashion is getting garments to consumers as quickly as possible, regardless of the impact on workers and the environment, slow fashion is the exact opposite.

Slow fashion-a concept first introduced in 2008 by fashion and sustainability consultant Kate Fletcher-uses environmentally friendly processes and materials through "mindful manufacturing," focusing on quality rather than quantity. Mindful manufacturing, an idea championed by 3D printing company Stratasys, is the concept of developing more efficient production, sound chemical and solid waste disposal practices, reusable materials, and recycled packaging.

How to Avoid Fast Fashion

It's difficult to avoid products manufactured by companies that practice fast fashion completely; however, it's not impossible. One of the issues is consumerism and price; many people cannot afford the actual products fast fashion imitates but are still obsessed with the latest fashions.

Apart from resisting the urges of consumerism, there are some steps you can take to reduce the impact of your purchases:

Investigate the brands you like and see if they use sustainable processes and fair labor practices. You can buy your clothes at secondhand stores, which helps to reduce the amount of garment waste and extends their usage.

Additionally, speaking up and advocating against fast fashion and consumerism is one of the best ways to ensure awareness spreads. Most people are unaware of fast fashion's social and environmental impact-only with everyone doing their part to raise awareness will accountability be forced onto the companies making these products.

What Is Fast Fashion and Why Is It Important?

Fast fashion is getting garments that imitate new styles to market as quickly as possible, regardless of the impact on the environment and people's health.

What Are Some Fast Fashion Examples?

Some examples of companies in fast fashion are Stradivarius, Victoria's Secret, Urban Outfitters, Guess, Forever 21, and many other popular brands.

Who Benefits From Fast Fashion?

Consumers who enjoy the latest fashion with the convenience of low prices benefit, but the primary beneficiaries are investors, owners, and other stakeholders who profit from the practice.

The Bottom Line

"The benefits of fast fashion are clear: more consumer spending, more profits, and the consumer satisfaction of being able to participate in a trend almost immediately after they see it in magazines or on their favorite celebrities," stated a 2020 article on the GlobalEdge, a Michigan State University business reference site.

"However, fast fashion creates a host of issues that make it more problematic than it is beneficial... This industry contributes to climate change, pesticide pollution, and enormous amounts of waste," the site continues. The exploitation of and danger to workers, promulgated by the need for speed and cost efficiencies, is fast fashion's whole raison d'être.

The debate around fast fashion, alternatives, and how to proceed will continue as long as people are willing to buy high styles at low prices and ignore the issues the practice creates.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fast Fashion Explained and How It Impacts Retail Manufacturing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fast fashion is clothing design that quickly moves from idea to prototype, mass production, and consumers. Learn how fast fashion retailers make money.

# data[].attributes.body
1. One way that can be beneficial to solving indifference is to inform yourself and inform others, if something awful is going on and there is petitions people can sign and donations that can be made, share that with yourself and with others around you.

2. Saving electricity by unplugging appliances, and turning them off when not in use can help aid climate change, same with turn off lights.

3. Signing petitions for things you believe in

4. Go to protests

5. Listen to others struggles

6. Think to yourself ‘what if it were you?, what would you want?’

# data[].attributes.headline
How to encourage others to use their voice

# data[].attributes.subject
How to encourage others to use their voice

# data[].attributes.body
1. Highlight the importance of speaking up

2. Educate yourself and others on how to speak up properly

3. Learn about the issues

4. Connect with people who care about the same things

5. Organize for action

6. Amplify others voices

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Thanks to the internet and social media like Instagram, Snapchat or TikTok, it's easier than ever to share your views and encourage others to join you in making change. And, due to research conducted as part of the Digital Ecosystem Research Challenge (DERC), we know a lot about how some Canadians are using digital media to get involved in politics. This guide will help show you the ways you can use social networks to make your voice heard and make a difference.

Check out the full guide here, or read on for a quick summary of how you can make a difference online.

How to interest a wide audience

Learn about issues.

Before you can educate others or advocate for your issue, you need to make sure you understand it.

A lot of people only hear about issues through what's shared on their social media feeds. This can be a good way to get your news, but people who only get their news this way generally know less about political issues than people who seek out news and information. You can use hashtags or follow experts on social media, or go to news outlets or reliable sources to find out more.

Educate others and raise awareness.

Don't just use facts and figures - tell a story about a person or group of people directly affected. In the age of social media, personal stories are a lot more likely to spread than facts and figures.

Don't lecture to people, and don't make your message all about risk or danger. It's important to make sure everyone knows about serious issues, of course, but in general people respond better if you base your message on achieving something positiveinstead of avoiding risks.

Use images and video. Most social networks rank posts with images and video content higher, and people are more likely to interact with them too (sharing, clicking on links, etc.).

How to engage an interested audience

Share what you're doing.

Sharing is what social media is all about, and it's also one of the best ways to convince people who are interested in your issue to get more involved. The School Strike for the Climate started with a single strike in Stockholm, Sweden in 2018, and grew to as many as four million people the next year partly because people had learned about it through social media.

Another way of engaging people in a cause is to show them that other peoplebelieve in it. Most of us base our beliefs, at least partly, on what we think most other people believe, and social media can create a "majority illusion" that makes it look like the loudest voices are the majority. If your audience sees that lots of people care about your issue, it will make them a lot more likely to get involved.

Connect with other people who care about the same things.

Social media is also about making connections, and it can be a great way to find other people who care about the same issues as you. You can do things like search hashtags or see who other people are following to find allies you didn't know you had.

Connecting can be a way for you to be an ally, too, and support people who need your help with their activism.

Amplify other people's voices.

Don't just use social media to promote your own voice: once you have a platform, you can use it to help other people be heard as well. You can do this through a hashtag that invites other people to speak out, but you can also make a point of inviting and sharing voices that might otherwise not be heard.

How to mobilize an engaged audience

Advocate for your issue.

There's no shortage of ways that you can use social media to advocate for your issue. Because most politicians, corporations and government agencies have a social media presence, you can connect directly with them. You can also get their attention indirectly by tagging them or using hashtags.

Organize for online and offline action.

Whether you're trying to change people's minds, change the world, or both, you have a lot more impact when you're not doing it alone. Social media can let you work together with people from around the world who care about your issue, and sometimes it can be the best way to organize people in your own neighbourhood.

Some platforms, like Change.org, Dosomething.org and Ushaidi.com, were made for activism, but you can use the platforms that you and your audience are already on too.

Energize yourself and others.

It can be hard to keep from getting discouraged, and even the most committed people in your movement can get burned out and drift away. You can keep them (and yourself) engaged by sharing your successes, and your frustrations too. Have fun and make it social by sharing funny memes and videos as well as more serious stuff. But remember that to keep your audience you must always be respectful - campaigns and their followers can quickly be lost by unkind or unfair content.

Read the full Speak Up! guide here.
The Digital Ecosystem Research Challenge was made possible in part by the Government of Canada through a History Fund Grant.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Speak Up! Your guide to changing the world, online and off

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Thanks to the internet and social media like Instagram, Snapchat or TikTok, it's easier than ever to share your views and encourage others to join you in making change. And, due to research conducted as part of the Digital Ecosystem Research Challenge (DERC), we know a lot about how some Canadians are using digital media to get involved in politics.