First Things First

•Give the merchant the first chance to solve the problem. Contact the salesperson, retailer or business when you have a complaint about any goods or services you bought. When there is a complaints department, use it. When there isn’t, talk to someone in authority, such as a manager. A face-to-face discussion is best. Be firm and businesslike, but polite. Calmly and accurately describe the problem and what you want the company to do to resolve it.

•

If the problem is not resolved that way, ask for the telephone number of the company headquarters and contact the customer service department. Request specifics about how and when something will be done, and get the company representative’s name in case you have to refer to the conversation later. Write down any details of your complaint and keep them in a file. Make sure to date your notes.

•

If your call doesn’t produce satisfactory results, write a letter to someone higher up, such as the general manager or owner (see sample letter). Provide all the details of the problem and explain your efforts to resolve it. Ask for action. In the case of products, send a copy of your letter to the manufacturer, and be sure to keep a copy of it yourself.

•

If none of these steps work to your satisfaction, consult the key consumer contacts of this Handbook for government offices and consumer organizations that apply to your situation. If you don’t know where to start, call the federal-provincial-territorial government consumer affairs office where you live. Someone there will direct you to the right organization. Or, use the Complaint Courier to file your complaint online.

•

Taking legal action should be your last choice. If you decide to sue, remember that there are often time limitations on filing lawsuits. You may wish to check with a lawyer about the legal process and any limitations that may apply to your case in your province or territory.

Strategies for Success

•

Do not be afraid to complain. Good businesses will be pleased to correct any mistake on their part. They know that customer goodwill is the best form of advertising.

•Always keep a file of important information related to your purchase, include the sales receipts, repair orders, warranties, cancelled cheques, contracts and any letters you have written to or received from the company concerned.
•

Do not procrastinate. When a product is defective or unsatisfactory, it is important that you return it quickly so that you do not lose the right to get your money back or to collect damages in some cases. Always check the return policy before you buy.

What to Do When You Have Complained Without Any Results?

If you feel you have given the company enough time and that your problem has not been resolved, send a copy of your complaint letter and copies of supporting documents (not originals) to, or file a consumer complaint with, your provincial or territorial consumer affairs office or Better Business Bureau. If you use the Complaint Courier it will give you the option to automatically forward your complaint to the appropriate government office.

Small Claims Court

Small claims court can be an informal and relatively inexpensive way to resolve disputes when the amount involved is less than $3,000 or, in some provinces, up to $25,000. However, you will have to pay a fee to file a claim. Once the suit is launched, you may have costs for such things as serving orders, payments to witnesses and travel expenses.

You do not need a lawyer to go to small claims court, although in most provinces and territories the help of a lawyer is allowed. The court staff is experienced in helping consumers prepare the necessary forms, and the judges have the power to settle disputes. This court allows each side to explain its story and does not expect consumers to know legal technicalities.

For information on how to proceed, contact the small claims or provincial or territorial court nearest you (look in the government listings in your phone book). The websites of these courts also often list the procedures to follow and have copies of the forms you will need to complete.

“How bizarre is that?” the Fox News correspondent exclaimed Wednesday. “Confusing reality with a reality show? But you can’t make it into something cosmic. To inflate it to the decline and fall of the Roman empire, I don’t buy that.”

But the boundaries between illusion and reality, journalism and advocacy, fair trial and free press, all seemed elusive Wednesday as they were battered by conflicting waves of rage in the wake of Anthony’s acquittal on the charge of murdering her 2-year-old daughter Caylee.

As talk shows, Twitter feeds and Facebook pages erupted with rants against a verdict that many Americans considered shockingly wrong — Twitter comments denouncing the jury outnumbered those praising it by 64 to 1, according to the digital bean-counting company NM Incite — a countervailing wave of complaints that media coverage distorted the trial also took hold.

Anthony is scheduled for sentencing Thursday on four misdemeanor convictions for lying to police, which likely will only feed the growing storm of media criticism.

It came most intensely, and least surprisingly, from Anthony’s defense team.

A Florida Bar complaint has been filed against one of Casey Anthony’s attorneys for making an obscene gesture at reporters and spectators after Anthony’s acquittal on murder charges.

While celebrating the jury’s verdict Tuesday at an Orlando restaurant, attorney Cheney Mason gestured with his middle finger toward people gathered outside. An Associated Press photographer snapped a picture of the gesture.

But Mason’s critique was echoed, in only slightly less pungent terms, through the legal and journalistic communities. Many there complained that some television news shows built their ratings up by taking an openly prosecutorial stance against Anthony, leading to public expectations that a conviction was a slam-dunk certainty

“The way TV has handled this is an embarrassment,” said Howard Kurtz, host of CNN’s media-criticism show Reliable Sources. “The sheer volume of coverage for stories that are basically local tragedies is impossible to defend. Toss in a tone of sensationalism, legal pundits who want to be the next Judge Judy, and a rush to judgment that belies the inevitable nuances of a criminal case, and you have the Casey Anthony story. She was convicted on the air long before the courtroom jury took a vote.”

The most pointed criticism was aimed at HLN’s Nancy Grace, a former prosecutor whose nightly attacks on the woman she scornfully referred to as Tot Mom almost single-handedly inflated the Anthony case from a routine local murder into a national obsession. Grace made no attempt to hide her rage at Anthony’s acquittal. “Tot Mom’s lies seem to have worked,” she exclaimed moments after the jury announced its verdict. “The devil is dancing tonight.”

Toobin believes that television should cover trials more, not less, as a sort of running civics lesson. So does lead CNN legal analyst Sunny Hostin, a New York defense attorney who has also worked as a federal prosecutor. She believes the anger over the Anthony verdict resulted not because TV hosts misinformed viewers but because they got to see the evidence for themselves.

“There were cameras in the courtroom, and they showed a very competent prosecution team, a very competent defense team, and a very competent judge,” she argued. “You can say people were fooled, but I give them more credit than that. I think people watched — we know they watched, because of the ratings — and they made their own decisions.”

In any event, cautioned former Miami federal prosecutor Kendall Coffey, it’s nothing new for Americans to treat murder trials as entertainment.

In its ruling the PCC said the police officer’s privacy had not been invaded because the reporting of this comment was in the public interest.

After the death of Tomlinson during the London G20 protests in April, the officer posted an update stating: “I see my lot have murdered someone again. Oh well, shit happens.”

The People ran a story about the Facebook comment and another comment the officer made on Friends Reunited.
“The commission has recently made clear that it can be acceptable in some circumstances for the press to publish information taken from social networking websites, even when the material is originally intended for a small group of acquaintances and not publicly accessible. However, this will generally be only in cases where the public interest overrides the individual’s right to privacy,” the PCC said.

“The commission was persuaded that this was such a case. The individual in question was a serving police officer, commenting on a matter that was the subject of considerable media and public scrutiny. He had done so in a way that made light of a person’s death and the role apparently played by the police. There was a clear public interest in knowing about police attitudes, whether publicly or privately expressed, towards the incident.”

A picture of the officer on his private driveway and a picture taken from his sister’s Friends Reunited profile showing him in uniform were published by the People, but the PCC rejected complaints that the images were an invasion of privacy.

The MBTA yesterday asked Clear Channel to remove the mannequin from a billboard located on the Somerville-Boston line for heating oil company Clickfil, said T spokesman Joe Pesaturo. Clear Channel manages the T’s billboard program.

“We received complaints about it, and we agreed it should be removed to avoid unnecessary confusion,” Pesaturo said. The billboard is located on T property.

At least three calls were placed to fire departments in Boston and Somerville about the mannequin yesterday.

Clickfil is a part of the Fort Reliance Company, which is the parent company to Irving Oil, according to its Web site. A message left for a company spokesperson was not immediately returned

PC gamers have been most shocked by the relelations to come out of Infinity Ward. During an online chat session, the following new news about the game was discovered:

Of course, people understand by now that PC players will not have dedicated servers. In addition, however, Modern Warfare 2 will not have the ability to vote-kick players from a match. When pressed about the issue, Infinity Ward has stated that they’ll be taking action against hackers that make their way past VAC (the anti-cheating system). Infinity Ward has confirmed that gamers cannot opt-out of hosting matches, a concern for those players that are on ISPs that don’t allow dedicated servers. With all of these limits, it’s hard to imagine more, but… Modern Warfare 2 is also limited to 9 vs 9 matches, only 18 total players on a map.

One last kick to the PC gamers is the lack of a Console Mode (a mode where PC gamers are able to enter commands directly into the game). When asked if Modern Warfare 2 was simply a console port, Infinity Ward said “No, PC has custom stuff like mouse control, text chat in game, and graphics settings.”
Apparently, they have absolutely no idea what was meant by the question. And the real answer is “Yes, why the hell would we develop 2 games, when we can just make one and get the same amount of money?”

It cites long-term research that correlates an increase in television watching with the prevalence of attention disorders, such as ADHD.

What do you think?

Here’s my take. Yes, there is an abundance of television programming geared at getting those who are still on the boob into the tube. But at the same time, this is the age of hyper-parenting, at least among relatively affluent social stratas, where you’d be hard-pressed to make the point that kids are babysat by television. On the contrary, they’re likely carted around to Gymboree and parent-and-tot music and introduction to origami.

If anything, companies like Baby Einstein have capitalized on the whole “Years before five…”/”Mozart effect” phenomenon by convincing consumers that they’re actually giving their children a leg up in life by exposing them to colours, numbers, the alphabet, in DVD form, all while they’re still in nappies. They’re tapping into a marketplace that would rather know what they’re putting into the DVD player than pop their kids in front of whatever is on Treehouse.

I guess what would be dangerous is lulling ourselves into a false sense of the enrichment that so-called “educational” programs provide. A baby’s best entertainment is the face of a parent or other loving caregiver, so substituting hours and hours of tri-lingual puppets for old-fashioned interaction would be a shame. It’s likely the most isolated parents — with fewer resources for classes — that are most likely to lean heavily on these products.

But every so often, we all need a little help from Treehouse or TVOkids or Baby Einstein. I wish I could say that I never get to a point on a long, cold January Sunday afternoon when we’ve all been cooped up inside and say, both boys have suddenly gotten bloody noses at the exact same time (separate incidents – true story), and I’m tired of plucking my toddler off the dining room table. Those are moments when I’m going to say yes to TV or a short DVD. Because they seem to need some “down time,” as my five-year-old has taken to spinning it, and we need them to leave us alone for five minutes so we can do the dishes or shower and stuff. (And if I can get through a cup of tea without having to warm it up twice in the microwave, that is a complete luxury for me.)

My takeaway from this is pretty commonsense: don’t think of educational programs like a visit from the Mensa fairy, use them — and all kids’ TV — in moderation, and make sure your kids get exercise. Then, when you do plunk in the Backyardigans as an alternative to losing your temper or crying more piteously than the baby, do it without guilt.