Canadian Politics from Canada's Centre

Monday, December 25, 2006

CCP Anniversary Contest: $355 in Cash and Prizes to be Won

Save this online in [?] Vote For this Post

Centrerion Canadian Politics (CCP) turned one a little earlier this month, and I didn't really celebrate in any particular way. So on the occasion of the blog's anniversary, I thought I would sponsor a contest with cash and prizes for the winner(s). All in all I'm giving away $355 in cash & prizes*. The contest is really quite easy to enter, and open to just about anybody with a blog on Canadian politics. Here's how the contest will work.

The contest's goal is to see who are the most engaging writers in the Canadian political blogosphere, and hopefully discover new talent in the process. At the same time, I obviously hope to gain some publicity for CCP.

Rules for the Anniversary Contest:
1) An entry to the contest will consist of a blogpost linked to in the comments of this post.
2) An entry will review a post or series of posts from CCP's archives, preferably one that affected you or which you found was really well (or poorly) written.
3) Minimum length for an entry is 200 words. Given the depth of some of the posts in this niche of the blogosphere, that shouldn't be a problem.
4) Blogs with less than 3 months history or less than 60 posts are ineligible to win. You can ask for an exception in the comments if you've been blogging on someone else's blog and just branched out on your own, or for other logical reasons. I of course reserve the right to choose who I'll consider for the contest.
5) Contest entries must link back to both Centrerion Canadian Politics's homepage at, as well as to the post or series of posts (each of them) being reviewed/critiqued/discussed.

Criteria for Contest Judgement:
1) Quality of writing: The main point is to show how engaging and/or thought provoking you can be in your writing. Maybe you agreed with it but thought it ignored a particular aspect of the question. Maybe you disagreed with the reasoning(no ad-hominem attacks, please). Maybe you just loved the piece (I know, it's a stretch of the imagination, but humour me) and thought you'd say so. Write well.
2) Grammar: If you write like you speak, take a few minutes to proofread your post. That will increase the quality exponentially.
3) Seeing the bigger picture: If you can link ideas in my post/series of posts to an authoritative, scholarly article on the topic and look at the bigger context of the issue, you're really going to impress me. Note: When I say link, I mean conceptually, but also with a hypertext link to whereever the article is on the web. You can use Google scholar to help you out, as well as Scirus, CiteSeer, Proquest or any of the other academic databases you have access to. The article must also be freely available without a subscription.
4) Thoroughness: Your review should show that you put some thought into it, that you really looked at as many of the facets as possible. I'll be more lenient if it's a discussion of a series of posts, since that's inherently more work (but also more opportunity to impress) and it would be tough to give each the same level of attention as if you were critiquing a single post.
5) Humour and other discretionary criteria: Can you make me laugh? Can you be relevant to the current political context? Can you be original? Show you're worth the attention of the Canadian politics blogosphere!

Note: You can review one of my posts or one of Centrerion Canadian Politics' other contributors. This is obviously somewhat of an ego-centric contest though, so you can guess whose writing I'd prefer you to review ;).

First place prize: $60 Canadian in cash, payable through paypal; a link in CCP's blogroll, worth $50 annually; and writeup and link in the "And the Winners Are..." announcement post, worth $20. Total: $130.
Second place prize: $20 Canadian in cash, payable through paypal; a link in CCP's blogroll; and a writeup and link in the announcement post. Total: $90.
Third place prize: a blogroll link and an announcement post link with a short write-up. Total: $65.
4th-10 place prizes: links in the announcement post under the subheading "honourable mention" with a quick line or two about the blog and the blogger behind the entry. Total: $70.

As a further incentive, I'll be making badges that you can post on your blog to show that you won.
The first place badge will read: "Best online insights and analysis in Canadian Politics."
Second place's badge will read: "Second best online insights and analysis in Canadian Politics."
Third places' badge will read: "Third best online insights and analysis in Canadian Politics."
4th-10th will get badges the same sizes as places 1-3, and will read: "Up-and-coming Canadian political pundit: worth the read."

If someone has a better idea as to what the badges might read, please let me know in the comments section. Also, if you have questions about something I didn't address here, leave a comment and ask the question! Don't be shy.

*I reserve the right to give away more or less prizes, and to alter the giveaways. For example, if only a handful of people participate, there'll probably be a few prizes, and less cash given away. Or I may just give a fixed amount per entry to charity, like $1 per entry.
If you want to follow our coverage of Canadian politics, consider our free newsletter.

This article and related articles are archived in the topical categories , and .Go back home


At 4:09 a.m., Canadian Politico Blogger ashok said:

I don't need the money, but I need publicity too, and I'd be happy to write on anything you were curious about.

The trouble is while I study political science, and was more than happy to comment on the media in general, I can't make myself concerned with the day-to-day workings of politics. The reason isn't because I'm arrogant and think myself better; it's more that I think there are really, really deep questions out there.

My latest post at my newest blog starts with discussing Being & Truth and ends up asking how someone who was as a sharp a philosopher as Heidegger could be an unreptentant Nazi. I can think of few questions with more weight in an age which prizes Enlightenment above all, assuming that Enlightenment is humane.

But older posts ask what sort of reasoning we need to conduct a politics for the sake of a greater good in the first place, let alone the problems that seem to emerge each time we conduct politics of any sort.

And finally, I write on poetry often. I do it because what is most interesting for me is how the personal and the political relate. We seem to assume they relate only when the political goes too far, as if liberal democracy and rights were the only way of conceiving of governance. Another way of seeing governance is seeing it as the quest for a greater good for all, respecting our diversity simultaneously. That's maybe how I see things, so understanding and appreciating how people feel on the deepest level is the first step, for me, for engaging the political. A complete index of writings that can be organized by topic is here.

I'm advertising because I'd be happy to write something for you, but a topic would be nice.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home