During this past weekend’s V/Blogging Conference at Gallaudet University hosted by the Coalition for Critical Inquiry, I was on a panel called, “Vlogging/Blogging and the Future of the Deaf Community.” Here’s a condensed text version of my presentation, which was somewhat modified after receiving some feedback. You can watch the video clip that will be posted soon at: http://www.ccigally.info/.
Before we go into my presentation, please keep in mind that the Conference was hosted by an organization that promotes “critical inquiry”. The panelists were expected to delve deeper into the intricacies of blogging rather than repeating common knowledge, thus my dense presentation. In addition, keep an open mind while reading this blog.
Organizations and blogs
Blogs demonstrated their power during the Gallaudet protests. Deaf organizations should take note of this new medium and then determine ways to harness its power. Today, many websites are static, meaning that they are not frequently updated. Antiquated public relations rules, strategies, and etiquette are being transformed by a new, dynamic model. Web visitors are more likely to visit sites where fresh content is posted on the homepage on a weekly or daily basis. Most successful organization blogs emphasize the importance of spontaneous information rather than canned press releases.
Community members want to feel valued. They want organizations to care. Blogs offer an unprecedented opportunity to interact with the community. The Gallaudet protests, fueled by deaf bloggers, created the impetus for this change at the University. Dr. Davila has made tremendous progress in communicating with the community about the progress that his office has made to respond to increased scrutiny from outside and within. This has been a huge step forward by Dr. Davila, yet it is only the beginning. Gallaudet should take a step further and interact with its virtual community.
The dialogue that took place on the internet during the protests framed the perception of the Gallaudet protests and the University by the deaf, hard of hearing, and hearing communities. Organizations must ask themselves why bloggers should be given carte blanche control of the image, reputation, and perception of their organization. Instead, they can take charge and counterbalance blogs by setting up their own blogs and building an online relationship with their communities.
Critical thinking skills and detecting biases
The deaf blogosphere, and the blogosphere as a whole, is an excellent opportunity to exercise our critical thinking skills. The decentralization of the media through the Internet has brought us diverse opinions and perspectives. It is much harder to distinguish between fact and fiction, as well as identify blogger biases.
First, I must clarify the definition of, and my use of, the word “bias”. It appears that the word has negative connotations that could be confused with its real definition. When I discuss “bias” I do not intend to convey the message that all bloggers should be neutral. All bloggers are biased, including me. I am concerned that deaf blog visitors may be doing an inadequate job of detecting biases and discussing them openly in the deaf blogosphere.
Let’s briefly examine two biases. One bias that has relevance in the deaf blogosphere is media bias. The Washington Post has a more liberal slant than The Washington Times. A study found that the votes of each paper’s readers were considerably influenced by that paper’s content. Reporters and editors have control over the content and direction of the paper, so although the medium may be neutral, the humans behind the operations are not. This also applies to blogs.
Another bias that could have an adverse impact on the deaf blogosphere, as the number of blogs continues to increase, is called “groupthink”. According to Wikipedia:
Groupthink is any decision-making process in which group members go along with what they believe is the consensus. Groupthink may cause groups to make hasty, irrational decisions, where individual doubts are set aside, for fear of upsetting the group’s balance.
At a 2002 Anneberg Center for Communication Online Journalism Review panel on weblogs and journalism, Rebecca Blood (author of The Weblog Handbook) said:
The thing I’ve seen happening that’s disturbing to me is I’ve seen echo chambers being created in the weblog universe. People who link only to people who agree with their point of view. Back in the day when there were only 100 of us, there were real discussions going on. There are now so many weblogs out there that you see people linking only to those who share their basic world view.
The hearing blogosphere in 2002 sounds very much like the start of the deaf blogosphere of last year. The community should take Blood’s advice to heart as the deaf blogosphere explodes in 2007.
With the concepts behind these biases in mind, let’s examine the deaf blogosphere.
The deaf and hard of hearing community has experienced a shock of new information, after idling for years without a deaf media outlet like The Silent News. This void set back the deaf community for many years. Our primary source of information was through word of hand or from hearing media reports on deaf issues.
As a result, we’re all starting from scratch as we try to rebuild what we lost. We are learning how to detect biases in blogs, decipher messages to find out their true meaning, and investigate and understand motives of deaf bloggers. Many of us have had practice by following general news, yet these skills may not have been fully transferred to the deaf blogosphere. We have been conditioned to question and scrutinize hearing media reporting, but have not put forth the same effort for deaf blogs.
All Americans have CNN.com and Washingtonpost.com to turn to for reliable information, which are governed by self-imposed ethical rules in addition to federal laws. Of course, there are lapses in the enforcement of these rules; however, we can safely say that there is a war in Iraq despite our lack of first-hand evidence that this news is valid. Wag the dog anyone?
If the general public wants juicy information that is less credible, but may reveal the news that is not reported by traditional media outlets, they can turn to the Drudge Report or even Perez Hilton. The deaf community has no outlet for this kind of reliable information about deaf news so we rely on the deaf versions of the Drudge Report as the sole source of information about our community. As a result, we now give deaf blogs almost the same amount of credibility that should be afforded to a deaf media outlet.
In a recent article about blogs policing their own the author, Troy McCollough, explained that, “blogs that practice journalism often fall short of basic journalistic standards.” However, he points out that blogs have made strides in ensuring that they gain legitimacy. The article describes a situation where Microsoft and AMD gave out free laptops for bloggers to review. The blogging community immediately responded, asking how the bloggers who received laptops could offer unbiased criticism when they got free hardware from the deal.
The deaf blogosphere needs this level of scrutiny to gain legitimacy. Glenn Lockhart introduced the importance of this concept in his blog “Why We Need Deaf Blogs” when he told the story of Walter Cronkite being perceived as a credible person, to the point where U.S. President Lyndon Baines Johnson listened to his criticism of the Vietnam War. This is a very important point for bloggers who hope to influence organizational policies and decisions. If erroneous information, emotional outbursts, personal attacks, and similar actions by deaf bloggers and commenters continue to be tolerated, the deaf blogosphere will continue to be perceived as an immature, not credible entity that is simply “entertainment”.
This is why DeafDC.com strives to bring quality blogs that discuss new ideas and unique perspectives to our community.
© Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of the author. As with every blog on this website, this blog does not reflect the opinion of DeafDC.com.
Excellent.
The defining takeaway message for me is that we, as bloggers, need to empathically consider the possible consequences of what we write before hitting the ‘post’ button. And this isn’t just for our own career or business prospects but for the sake of those individuals we write about or even refer to.
It’s about being human and considerate of others.
But, how do bloggers police their own without the appearance of attacking? How do we constructively disagree? How do we respond to criticism without appearing defensive?
Very well said, Shane! I wish someone had said something like this last MAY!
I think a good way for us to police ourselves is to ask whether the blog has a submittance guideline and what kind of ethics do they subscribe to?
Obviously DeafDC.com has that, but not very many other blogsites have that. Like Shane said, if we want to be taken more seriously, more blogsites need those kind of guidelines and transparent policies for all to see.
As for constructively disagreeing, to me, I would think by asking for clarification, more elaboration, and saying something to the effect of, ‘Did you consider this angle? What about this part?’ would be good. Responding to criticism is pretty much the same way. Say that you’ve considered what they’ve said, and you think this or that in response. I see that all the time on here really.
~ Deaf Pundit
P.S. Shane, your url’s fixed on my Deaf Edge blog.
I’m sorry, but when I got here - I was left wondering, “Jesus didn’t exist?”
Oh! There you are all the way up there! :D
I smiled at your comments re: your wife being caught on webcast having a conversation, beating Michael Moore’s record. ;)
Anyway, at the risk of sounding like a “follower” or a well-trained dog, I agree pretty much what was said, along with Deaf Pundit.
It’s a learning experience - for some, it comes with studying the frameworks of other blogs, while for some it’s on “hands on experiment”.
I need to visit DeafDC more, but geez, you people can be a little scary… ;)
You know what I mean? No? It’s like every time I read you people, I’m like, “Where’s my suit? I need to look like I’m reading New York Times drinking my top kind of coffee! Where’s that $500 glasses you got me on credit card last year??”
Oh yeah – I also double check by typing in a Word document before posting here. ;)
Laughing! Especially the suit, New York Times, coffee, glasses… You are so funny!
I think blogs that bring in interesting and brilliant discussions on a constant basis and not require a frequent blogsite moderator giving a brief talk are considered as the blogs of high quality. Also, there is one commenter — she/he is becoming my favorite moderator. It is great. Blog is a perfect example of an open source culture. Indeed, it is challenging to control it. One more thing, I admit I cringed when I saw certain commenters popping up again, however I do witness these people improved their dialoguing skills. Patience pays off.
I wonder if there is a way to simply identify the quality of blogs without “controlling” the context. The problem is - who will decide what is quality or not? How do we know the decider won’t be imposing their bias on the blogs one way or another? Let’s do an intellectual exercise. Let’s set up a blogging quality control position. Let’s hire IK Jordan. Would you trust HIM to decide what blogs are of quality or not? Would you trust his judgement of which information is correct or not? Would you trust him not to impose his own bias on the vlogs/blogs?
You see my dilemna here. In an open source world, I believe we are better off on relying on peer feedback and our own critical judgement rather than imposing arbitrary controls on blogs/vlogs that may or may not be relevant to what is considered quality.
That said, I still do think that a V/Blogger code of ethics is an excellent idea, and that we should all voluntarily chose to follow those principles to the very best of our ability. We can continue to elevate our discourse to the next level by supporting our deaf v/bloggers and making sure we provide feedback to each other when something is amiss, and engaging in constructive criticism when needed.
We also need to accept that often the most common denominator can be pretty vulgar and low-class. That is just human nature. There will always be a select few who would rather watch PBS documentaries than “American Idol”. That’s just how it is. Intelligent discourse will never win popularity contests, at least, not as long as our society values flash more than quality. But we can do our part by drawing others in and making discourse attractive and enjoyable for them (one good reason we all should do more vlogs!).
p.s. I wanted to add that is how we can build credibility - by earning respect from other credible v/bloggers for modeling good standards ourselves. We might not have the most readers, but we will have the best ones!
WSS, I believe that such ethics can be merely used as guidelines, and that they would be very helpful to us (as the readers) in determing which blogs deserve our return visits. Some readers out there simply don’t know what standards they should apply to “credible” blogs, and we have to help them.
I like what WAD said - commenting does help you tune your debating skills. Too bad only 2% of us readers actually comment. I know some of my friends who check this site regularly, and their input would contribute so much.
You got me to think a bit more. Blogs/vlogs uses different tools. I know several blogs/vlogs do not accept comments and trackbacks. Bob’s Weekly Vlog is one of them. It controls Gallaudet’s reputation. It is the right move Bob’s making. Comments do affect the bloggers and blogsites. There are several prominent bloggers who decided to remove the comments and I do not consider them as an open source culture. How do we control an open source culture in media? I have no good answers yet. To me — because I am an engineer, quality is important.
Like I said before, blogs with moderators being heavily involved in the comment section show there are issues with the commenters. I do think these are not worthwhile blogsites to participate. Thus the quality’s low.
Sure, I welcome ground rules for blogs/vlogs. DeafDC already have one and it is sufficient in my opinion. “Do not make any offensive, personal attacks on other commenters or DeafDC.com bloggers. This kind of behavior will not be tolerated. Action taken may range from deletion of offending comment to site-wide ban, with or without notice.” DeafDC’s terms and conditions said it all.
WSS, I am with you about earning respect from others by maintaining a good role model especially blogsites are being viewed publicly.
Shane….well said!
I do agree that its important when we go to different deaf blogs, we do consider the “bias” because what may be one person’s thought is another’s disagreement as long as we’re respectful of each others thoughts. Thats whats so nice abt being a human being. We are and always will be human.
The more dialogue out there, the better our community can grow and evolve into a much more articulate and insightful community.
Thanks for sharing :-)
“…blogs that practice journalism often fall short of basic journalistic standards.”
That’s okay. These days a lot of newspapers do the same thing, most definitely *including* the Washington Post.
I actually have a reply to Rob Rice above (the very first post under Shane’s article), who said “And this isn’t just for our own career or business prospects…” I think that one other thing we need to do in the Deaf Blog-Vlogsphere (hey, competition: who can come up with a catchier–and shorter–name for that… I’ll buy the winner a beer)… we have to actively destroy the perception that if we share our beliefs, we’ll be fired or else never hired again.
Right now that may more or less happen to be true… but that doesn’t mean the problem is going to go away if we all keep posting anonymously. The way to beat this thing is to increase the use of real names so much that very soon what one person says is no more “outrageous” than what another person says. In doing so we render it far less likely that someone will retaliate against you simply for expressing yourself respectfully.
Let me use myself as an example… not to be arrogant, but because I at least know that it’s highly unlikely that I’ll ever sue myself for libel (trust me, I’ve got the inside track on exactly how much money I have, and I hereby proclaim myself not worth the legal hassle). Early on in my career I often had to put up with others’ perceptions that I’m some kind of trouble maker. Well you know what? I am. You show me a day when huge numbers of deaf high school graduates aren’t being released into the World of Work with fourth grade reading averages, you show me a day when a deaf person can go out and get a job without having to be afraid of the prejudice and discrimination he might have to face, and I’ll show you a day when I stop being so political/provocative and start writing poems about fluffy white kittens or something.
It’s ridiculous, in other words, because part of DOING my job (teaching English and furthering Deaf Education) logically involves arguing against the things that I think don’t work. Now if there are people out there who don’t like that, and want to punish me for that, okay. Okay… but what does that say about them? And more importantly, what does that say about YOU… for letting that kind of thing go on?
For example, here’s a comment posted on http://www.rsdeaf.blogspot.com/ .
“Anonymous said…
http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?s=5751374
Dear Mr. Case,
Many people in Jackson have known about the lack of qualified, prepared teachers and principals at the MS School for the Deaf for years. Faculty have spoken up about this issue and have gone to the superintendent to no avail. Some employees have had to resign because they were “too vocal” in their criticism, and some have resigned because they were simply too disgusted, repulsed and demoralized to continue working at the school.
Hiring teachers and staff who cannot sign so that they can communicate effectively with the deaf students is an outrage. It is immoral and disrespectful. It is unconscionable! To add insult to injury, faculty and students at the school assert that the students are being threatened– told they will be arrested. handcuffed, and suspended for 10 to 20 days or expelled if they protest or communicate with the public or reporters– is this rumor or fact? If it is true, there is an even greater urgency to putting an end to the abuse of the deaf students who are under the care of the state of Mississippi. Shame on all of those who are responsible. Thanks for putting the spot light on this abomination.
Please don’t allow this story to die.
Sheila”
Yeah, what are you going to do? Hm? You have it in your power to stop this kind of thing. Are you going to? Because the harsh truth is this: if it’s not safe for me to stand up, then you’re not safe either. And every anonymous post that we read is a visual testament to that fact. If blogging/vlogging has any overall goal to accomplish, it should be the creation of a world in which we feel free to use our real names.
Accomplish that goal however you can. TRY. Don’t just do it for the community. Do it for yourself.
I don’t understand what you’re driving at, Chris. What exactly are you suggesting we do?
For starters I’m suggesting that we figure out why we’re so scared to essentially hold discussions on deaf-related topics using our real names, and then go about trying to deal with those fears. Someone either on this blog or another one pointed out that a lot of people were negatively comparing the UFG protest to the Civil Rights Movement, and countered those unfavorable comparisons with the argument, “Well, how many leaders in the Civil Rights Movement used alliases?”
I can see what he was driving at… then again I can also answer my own question–among the many reasons we don’t use our real names is because we’re afraid of facing retaliation for trying to make things better. The question now becomes, how do we put an end to that retaliation?
Your post is very confusing. It’s like looking for a meat ball in a large bowl of sphaghetti. Will ya concentrate on one issue at a time, plz?
Hiya…
Oh, it’s the same issue. Lots of newspapers won’t print a letter to the editor, for example, unless a full name and address is given. Because…? Credibility. Blogs don’t face that problem for the most part, and there are both pros and cons to that.
PS “…meatball in a large bowl of spaghetti?” Has Olive Garden been upping their pasta quotient lately…?
Ah just kiddin’ ya…
Hi Chris, me again. :) It was great meeting you at the conference!
I’ve been thinking about what you’ve said here. As I understand it, you’re saying that we (bloggers and commentors) need to reveal our real names in order to establish credibility. Also, we can make things happen for the betterment of deaf education and deaf life in general if we come forward and take a stand on the issues and everyone knows who we are. Is that the gist of it?
If so, the issue is not as simple as you make it appear. Once again, I feel there are other factors to consider. Such as gender and sexism. A man has relatively less to fear by speaking his opinion. In our patriarchal society, a man can say outrageous things but generally is still respected for speaking his mind and doesn’t get attacked on a personal level for saying it. On the other hand, a woman who speaks out, especially on unpopular topics, is more likely to be insulted, attacked and called all sorts of names, accused of “acting like a man,” most of them having nothing to do with the content of her ideas and everything to do with the fact that she’s an uppity woman who had the presumption to have an opinion.
Another factor to consider is the internalized oppression within the deaf community. We both know that it exists, and real harm can be done by deaf people to deaf people. In the beginning, I used an alias becaused I feared retaliation. You are absolutely correct on that. Was my fear realistic? I believe so. My opinions would be unpopular in my community and I felt very much in the minority. So I kept quiet, except on the blogs. Across the country, I saw deaf people who spoke my thoughts being castigated. Now, since the blogger/vlogger conference, I’ve been “outed” and many people know who I really am. That’s OK. I haven’t received any flack for what I’ve said. But it’s months after the UFG protests, and I don’t know for sure if I would have been left alone or even respected if I’d been identified earlier.
One final thought. If it’s true that knowing our real names gives us credibility, I don’t think I agree with that. I couldn’t put my finger on the reasons why, but I sensed that my thoughts, reasoning, and experiences would be dismissed because of what I am — a deaf person, a woman, of a certain age, a certain profession, a product of a mainstreamed background, deaf of hearing, etc. — and not on the merits of what I said.
CE: you have made some valid points there abt getting respect, especially if you’re an intelligent female. I have mixed feelings about this, saying who I am, and whether I want to deal with the crapola that comes from being honest and opinated on certain issues. It just seems so unfair that womyn DO get most of the flack when there are men who think and say the same thing and are respected.
Is our community so deeply disrespectful of womyn like you or me have to be careful? I prefer not, and be able to enjoy the freedom my country gives me.
Another thing, protecting oneself. THAT is where pseudonyms come in. As a member of the female gender, I HAVE to protect myself because no one else will. For example, I recall a certain blog giving our personal and often unneccessary info such as home address, home/work phone numbers and all sort of inside info that is not really for the public because this blogger had such a HATE vendetta. These are examples of a womyn being out there and standing up for what she believes in. I personally couldn’t handle this kind of thing. It takes a strong person to be willing to identify themself…especially a womyn…
Another example…when the Rosie vs Donald feud heated up, noticed how Donals would attack Rosie personally? Rosie on the other hand would only attack his work or issues surrounding him, not on his personal issues. That happens a lot…same issue, womyn get crapola, men get guffaws and a slap on the back.
Just my honest thoughts. Take it or leave it.
Hiya CE:
Oh, I certainly believe your fears are REALISTIC, trust me. But I do think that we have to make it a goal to create blogsphere in which those fears slowly become LESS realistic.
You did correctly interpret my argument (I apologize for not being clear the first time around–I have a wicked headcold brewing and am off my game). I think that Shane’s argument about “groupthink” is an especially valid point, especially since, if it’s true, I can very easily create a “majority” that agrees with me. All I have to do is go to various computer terminals and post under different names. Different names + Different URLs = instant credibility… to SOME people. Especially if all of those names agree with what “I” said. I think that one way or another the real world is going to wise up to that tactic (if it hasn’t already) and soon stop responding to the seeming “overwhelming” numbers of emails posted under fake names. They assume (and probably correctly in at least some cases) that it’s all the work one person or a few people creating multiple identities.
That’s why I post under my true name. However that comes with risks too, as you outlined.
Curious Eyes - you and I are eyes to eyes on this same matter. :)
One big difference: your writing skill and your ability to get your message across that can be thought-provoking. *smile*
But back to the point - I think the MESSAGE is most important to look at, not the name of the person for credibility.
It’s up to bloggers or commentors to investigate further based on that “message”.
I, too, have been “outed” by a few and even told a few, but in general, I’d just like to remain unbiased in people’s minds on how I am, but rather look at my messages I have to offer.
CE and Chris, both of you raise excellent points. And what Chris said is exactly the reason why some people I know are opposed to blogs. People can so easily fake identities on-line, and with real names, it’s easily verified if it’s really that person or not.
And to be taken seriously by the general public, we do need to reduce our anonymity.
But like CE said, the deaf world is so small, and people DO discriminate on your gender, your background, and so on. And if you’re well-known, god knows what dirt will be dug up, or made up to decredit you! I’ve seen it happen.
That’s one main reason I stayed anonymous for so long. But I’m hoping that we’ve reached the point where our writings/comments will be considered on its own merits, and not based on who we are. It’s all about character, not personality!
~ Deaf Pundit
Couldn’t agree with you more, DP…its the subject/message/issue thats more important than who the heck said it! :-)
Well, Vikee, not necessarily.
Take my example above of the Mississippi School for the Deaf and their troubles out there.
Now we have two problems here. One is, if we’re really going to use blogging to try and make things better, then sooner or later we need to move beyond discussions into concrete action, right? Okay, so let’s take a concrete action that is relatively low-risk/low-impact, such as letter writing. We write letters to the Mississippi School for the Deaf and we tell them we’re keeping an eye out. And then we sign our names… “Deaf Squinty Eyes,” “Anonymous and Loving It,” and “Deaf Ed Nuclear Melter.”
Oh, great! THAT’S sure as hell gonna have an impact. If I were an administrator, terror would be struck into the very core of my being.
Come on. We’re going to either have to accept here that if we post anonymously, then we’re not really serious about advocacy when push comes to shove, because if direct action is ever called for, our only recourse (if we still wish to remain anonymous) is to put on ski masks or something so we can keep hiding our identities. That’s not going to go over too well in this day and age of “Deaf Extremists” and “Deaf Absolutists.”
So you see, there WILL come a point when WHO says something is more important (or at least equally important) than what was said.
Oh, sorry, I said TWO problems. The other problem is what I described above… suppose the Mississippi School for the Deaf gets 500 emails protesting their act of not hiring qualified signing teachers. Why shouldn’t they think that 5 were real and 495 were copies under fake identities?
I think it’s a given when we’re talking about a legitimate cause such as MissSD or any other school, agency, gov’t venue, corp etc., where we are sending letters of support, inquiry or comment. These are REAL WORLD Causes. (now, now, dont tell me Blogging is the real world! I dont even know 90% of what these bloggers look like other than their names or pseudonym-nah,not gonna work here with me)
Now if we’re talking about a discussion group such as this, where it’s open for all to participate, that is where I feel the need to choose between exposing who you are or protecting oneself with a pseudonym is up to the individual.
Let’s suppose I decided to go to a discussion group or blog where people are talking about an extremely sensitive subject — let’s say domestic violence or the recovery field, people shouldn’t have to say who they are, if they aren’t ready to open that part of themselves. They should be allowed some anonimity because as someone just said…our community is TOO small and chances are, We’re separated by 1 or two degrees not the 6 degrees made famous by that movie with Will Smith. So someone is bound to know someone who…..you get my drift.
Now, I dont care for anonymous posting that is disrespectful, cruel, belittling or out to add fuel to the fire when the fire is only a match, etc. THAT is where I think we need to have some kind of ethics or policy where we respect or agree to disagree…
again…JMHO
Hi Vikee:
Fair enough, but I still think that the one way to beat this “If you rock the boat you’ll be fired or never be hired” mentality is to start getting people to rock that boat. Hard. At the very least we should agree that EVERYTHING in Deaf Ed and even in the Community at large needs to change, and openly talking about the changes that are needed doesn’t make one the Anti-Christ. Our state schools for the deaf on a widespread scale are not performing, and neither are the mainstream schools with only one deaf student. Neither are the oral programs, and neither are cochlear implants. I know that Deaf Pundit has cautioned us to think about what we want to replace the system with before we raze the present structure to the ground, but I think that doing so will quickly become an excuse for not getting on with the razing. In other words we’ll think, think, think and discuss, discuss, discuss, just as we’ve been doing for the last twenty years, and all the while literacy rates will STILL hover around the 4th grade level, and the Deaf Ed Machine will just continue to spit out graduates who are barely qualifed to read See Spot Run, let alone compete in an increasingly demanding global community.
Time to get real before we get left behind.
This practically begs the question. Why can’t we just re-build one section at a time instead of razing?
I just simply do not support the notion of the end justifying the means, and that’s my big concern here. Some people give me the impression that they think the end justifies the means.
I think we were extremely lucky in regards of Gallaudet. We got the right intermin president and provost to lead us out of this. And we’re lucky to have someone like Jill Bradbury teaching at Gallaudet.
What happened at Gallaudet will not happen everywhere. It might happen at some places, but not all of them. So really, I think every case, like Davila said in his vlog, we have to take it by a case by case basis.
My two cents.
~ Deaf Pundit
I get your point, Chris, and know how difficult it is to get people to move their butts. I work around the country as a resident artist at various residential deaf schools and I have to admit that aluminis or deaf people locally become complacent with what is happening at their schools or in their community.
The sad thing is, people are so SCARED of speaking up…I think that before we can even make changes, we have to start at the core. That could be Gally, or even the local communities.
DP has it right…for-for end justifying the means? No, one thing at a time, one person, etc.
Makes me wonder….is this a generational thing? If we teach the next generation how to make positive changes they will do it (hopefully–youth is youth is often wasted on the young-sigh!)
So, instead of razing, why not one thing at a time. That’s what I’m try to do when I work at residential schools (I was asked to leave one a couple years ago *wink*) All I can think about is letting the young people know how important it to approach things positively, not belittle, make fun of or show anger.
Oh we can go on on on on on with a list of things needing change…
now question is…HOW do we go about it?
In other words, Chris, “don’t throw out the baby with the bath water.” There is some that works with deaf education, and some that doesn’t. There are a number of fine deaf programs here and there. Let’s not get too general by tarring all programs and all schools with the same brush. What I’d like to see is local communities taking initiative with their local programs. Rather than suffering in silence, speak out. I would like to see communities gathering together and applying its energies toward a specific target that can be changed. If you’re a part of the system, work within the system, and if that doesn’t work, try some activist strategies. This is where credibility helps.
It’s also important to recognize that deaf communities and deaf students are not static, but dynamic. There are a great many reasons for the poor performance of deaf education, and not all of them are directly attributable to the ineptitude of a program itself. I know several fine teachers of the deaf working in lousy programs, and several lousy teachers working in fine programs. Deaf kids run the gamut of different sorts of hearing losses, language backgrounds, instructional approaches, innate ability, parental support, income level, and so on ad infinitum. Each of those factors has some bearing on the success or failure of the individual child. You know what’s really jarring? We don’t really know which of those factors is the important one, because research studies are so poorly designed and of such small sample sizes, it’s difficult to generalize from the few to the many. For every research study saying Method X works, there’s are others saying Methods Y and Z work. And deaf education is often as just subject to fads and trends as general education. As stakeholders in deaf education, it’s incumbent on each of us to take ownership of the situation.
It’s not a generational thing, Vikee. I’m younger than Chris here. ;)
LOLOLOL DP…then you must be a KID! LOL! ahh…not sure how to explain this…maybe if i did it on v-log, I could get my thoughts across on this. I don’t mean so much by age, etc, but have noticed as I get older, people of my generation as oppose to people in the 20’s, their approach to issues is different whether to accept, acknowledge and own, ah ah ah ah….I’m not making much sense am I? Have to think more on this…
Meanwhile, CE: without being so crudely blunt…I have heard the same old same old same old thing about education. It just simply goes around and around, but nothing changes. People in Education seem to have a thing abt inaction…less is more, redundancy and 9-5 is all they want to do. only a few do the job of everyone with little support or gratitude. It’s tough being in our deaf community that’s for sure.
Of course I have seen some wonderful residential schools…and hope there will be many more. I’ve been to 17 different residential schools and there’s quite a few left…:-)
Now, on another but same topic–blogging –where is the core, the true center, the ultimate point where we can start making positive, constructive, changes for the better, to create a safe environment for all? Can we start by boycotting certain blogs, telling others that what they say is inappropriate and unacceptable. Bashing, belittling, name-calling, etc etc etc, be a product of small minds, (who wants to be called small-minded?) or some sort of Blog approval stamp. I dont know…I’m not a blogger, I’m a commentator….
However, we all pick our battles. I prefer to frequent the blogs I enjoy the most and damn the rest.
RE: Blogging - After some consideration, I have to say that I agree with what WSS said above. Though I would add that if the blogger’s being really unethical, we should blog about it and say ‘Hey. Knock it off.’
RE Education and Activism: Curious Eyes is right, unfortunately. There are so many, many factors that play in the dismal state of Deaf education. But really, it’s up to us to educate ourselves about what’s in play. Then we can tackle each factor and work on it. There are so many ways to deal with this, it’s impossible for me to summarize it all here. But basically, we need to be more engaged with parents and adminstrators. Like the panelists said: participation. :)
~ Deaf Pundit
Yes, I fully confess to being a senior citizen at the ripe old age of 36. Plus I’ve just developed the flu, and feel like a giant orangutan just drop-kicked my body across a soccer field embedded with six-inch long rusty railroad spikes. Translation: I’m not looking pretty right now, even in this day and age when 30 is the new 20 and blah blah blah…
Anyway, I agree with Deaf Pundit entirely on this one. We have to start reaching the parents and start doing it efficiently. That’s one thing we talked about a bit at the conference. Gallaudet currently doesn’t do this at all, not on any widespread, effective scale. Just imagine what we could do with an effective interactive website that gave parents ALL of the information in an unbiased manner… and an INTERESTING manner. For example, did you see Elissa Abenchuchan’s recent article on the effectiveness of cochlear implants? Imagine if we had a website where a) if you clicked on a map of the US, you could first get a breakdown of each state by county, and then we had all the info of EVERYONE a parent living in that county/state might need to call. Including audiologists….
And then we had interactive communication vlogs… if you clicked on an option, someone would pope up explaining that option in voice, English text, or ASL. Plus we could have a donation section on the site, with the message that all procedes would be used to pursue two things:” mandatory early infant hearing screening in all states, and a legal requirement that all practitioners in audiology/Deaf Ed present ALL options in an unbiased manner. We could also offer online counseling services, which is something most parents never get.
A medium-sized grant could build that website, but we’d need more funding for the counseling. That’s where Gallaudet could come in. Rather than just being an educational institution, it could provide information services on a scale nobody has ever seen, and set up majors teaching the students how to run it, which would create more jobs/internships…
What do you guys think of this idea? Sorry it has nothing directly to do with blogging/vlogging ethics…
PS “option” here being the option of getting a CI, enrolling a kid in a Bi-Bi environment, etc…
Chris, I must admit that I’m surprised. I like your idea! Seriously.
Though I wonder if it would be better fit if the American Society for Deaf Children did that?
http://www.deafchildren.org
ASDC is, and I’m quoting from their website, an independent non-profit organization for parents raising deaf children.
That organization even has a journal. I think it’s perfect. But that’s just my opinion.
Hi Deaf Pundit:
Thanks for the info. But why surprised? I may be a radical, but I’m also constructive.
Then why don’t all you education professionals get off your lovely arses and get over to the ASDC and talk to the people abt this idea. Its phenomenal…now all that’s left is 99% sweat.
I’m already doing my part…how about the rest of you? :-))))))
Hi Vikee, All:
Scroll down to the bottom okay?
Chris….either I’m a blind fool or an idiot, I dont see what youre talking abt at the bottom…???????
Nah you saw it you just scrolled down before I finished posting it… the post about sending the letter…
where is bob rice from?
smallville , iowa?
smallville, iowa? As a rabid superman fan, I can’t let this go. it’s Smallville, KANSAS, and nobody on earth can compare to the hunk in blue and red!
I dunno, Rob is pretty close…
Thought you’d be interest in the following link “Jail record near for video blogger who resisted grand jury”:
http://news.com.com/Jail+recor.....g=nefd.top
Chris,
Your points are vaild and pretty well-received. I feel pressured by your comments and your thoughts in having US reveal our identities. That is a good thing, really. You’re driving a point here to make us think. There are plenty of judgmental people out there. People who may criticize your writing, your thinking process, and your articulation. I know in the anti-violence field, secrecy plays a big role in protecting from any incoming violence. Taking up a different name. Changing SSN. Living in a shelter with unpublicized phone number and address. For a deaf victim living in the deaf community, that can be extremely tough due to the community’s close-knitted nature. These are the reactions from a society that normalizes violence.
It’s kinda the same here. To say my name equates the belief that you’re not going to hurt me.
That’s why a lot of people who comment here don’t want to reveal their names just yet. Not until the environment is safe and the masses have taken up this role of openness, respect, and integrity. I think DeafDC is doing a great job of creating that.
And personally, there are times when I really don’t want people to know who I am when I comment something. Anonymity can be a positive thing. And sometimes, anonymous names they pick can be so funny.
Hello Milo:
Well, I DO thank you for using YOUR real name. I understand what you’re saying, but really, how likely is it that anyone’s going to phsyically hurt anyone? Especially since all of the DeafDC writers have their pictures and personal information right up there on the website (well, not their contact info but enough to make a good start at finding it). All are still alive and well, as am I. Not to make anyone paranoid, but I think that at least some of our fear of revealing ourselves is based on the perception of a Boogeyman who doesn’t really exist.
And at what cost do we let our fears get the better of us? Because many of us work in the schools, and those environments ARE well known for “letting people go” if they speak up to loudly. Look at Vikee. Thus we fall silent and into apathy, and that’s why nothing changes or gets any better. And the students end up suffering just as much, if not more, than we do.
It has to change.
Let me be clear. I didn’t mean physical violence. I meant exposing the real identity of the person when posting a comment is risking of being judged or criticized or worse, getting fired. That’s what I meant. It takes a considerable amount of guts to post a comment and perhaps even more to post a BLOG (and they use their real names!).
Deaf community can be so judgmental and vicious. You’ve seen that. But, it’s also the same community that has many changing agents and they’re the ones that will hopefully change the way the community thinks as a whole. So, this should also influence the anonymity factor of this blog center. I’m not saying it’ll be eliminated forever. Anonymity will always be there to preserve whatever integrity there is if it’s necessary. So Chris, it’s not always personal.
Boy… a week away from the blogosphere makes a difference!
Chris, our contact info *is* there– there’s a generic e-mail address there for all of us, and all you have to do is either click on the link at the end of our bios, or run your cursor over it. Mine, for example, is David.EvansATDeafDCDOTcom. Don’t y’all be rushing to e-mail me at once… *grin*
Some of us have various reasons why we post under pseudonyms– I use my alter ego for a couple of reasons, one being that at my other blogsite, I say an awful LOT about politics and other sensitive issues, not the more generic, broad stuff I touch on here. In this era, when Google is as much a verb as a noun, I’d hate to have prospective employers who Google me determine whether to ask me in for an interview based on my political views or personal stances.
Here, I don’t have that option, and that’s ok with me. I do agree though that quite a few schools foster an oppressive environment where groupthink is far more valued than constructive criticism. I know of one incident where a friend of mine tried to effect change at their workplace, found co-workers with similiar experiences and could validate the need for change. But these co-workers were so intimidated they couldn’t/wouldn’t do a thing. This happened at a fairly well-regarded residential program, btw. What is the environment like at less-enlightened programs?
So I can understand why some people prefer to speak up under assumed names. I’m ok with it, as long as they consistently use the same pseudonym, such as Curious Eyes, Analyzin’ Eyes, False Eyes, Big Eyes, Blind Eyes, Droopy Eyes, Shifty Eyes, Hooded Eyes… well, you get the picture. It’s those that use the generic term “anonymous” that bug me. After all, *anyone* can be anonymous. Try being creative.
You do bring up a good point about credibility though, but again, I think if you have a steady pseudonym, you do build a certain credibility of your own. Still, it’s something worth discussing (and we are, as I see from this thread!). It is interesting though that the majority of this conversation is between 3-4 people. Where’s everyone else??
Rob Rice and Shane Feldman point out that the bloggers and vloggers and readers DO have some kind of civic responsibility with the sense of civility and rational thoughts for the sake of argument. So we really do not have to put down anyone or each other on the blog/vlog forum.
Rob Rice is no “mild-mannered” Clark Kent character. Rob always being himself unlike Smallville’s emotionally-struggle Clark Kent. Actor Tom Welling is not really a hunk in my gray cranium.
Justin Hartley aka the “Green Arrow/Oliver Queen” is surely a hottest hunk on today’s one-eyed monster (50s term for the TV) with manly muscles.. That’s why I sometimes use Oliver as my online alias on some blogs for just a fun.
I meant to say about the Washington Post used to be the real conservative paper while the Washington Star was in her own prime newspaper business. Kathleen Graham overtook the newspaper from her deceased husband (committed suicide) and changed the editoral and news content. Nothing to do with the idelogical belief for newsreporting. Just quality of newsreporting itself transformed from time to time with more social and political acceptance of what something is newsworthy or not.
Justin Hartley is the number one “television hunk”. Tom Welling is too bland for my own taste in guys.
Robert L. Mason (RLM)
Nah, I’m not into Tom, either, although I like his potrayal of Clark. My fave hottie currently is Brandon Routh, from the movie. Justin is WAY hotter than Tom that’s for sure. :)
(*flashing geek card for all to see)
I could not attend last weekend’s Deaf Blogs/Vlogs Conference due to the unjustifable “PNG” status slapped on me last August 2006.
I wonder if this conference did discuss eloquently on the so-called ‘Ridor” effect on the deaf blogsphere during the Gally protest. His blog surely transformed the world of online blogs and spawned hundred of deaf blogs/vlogs. Ridor’s blog is not the first deaf blog, but most influential and impact-making in many ways than we could admit.
I was horrified when I read the GallyPrezWatch blog for very first time about people engaged in vicious and demeaning manners. I said to myself “Jesus Christ! The VAX War came back! ” I somewhat enjoyed seeing people uninhibited themselves before my very eyes.
Robert L. Mason (RLM)
Shane,
I just got around to reading this.
Nice post. Interesting thoughts on “group think”.
As always, we need to read/watch everything with a grain of salt…
Hi Vikee, you YOUNG thing, you! (-:
Okay, I propose a social experiment that we can all participate in.
First, open a second internet window and in it open your regular email account. Paste the following address in the “To” field: asdc@deafchildren.org . Then put “Comments Regarding Your Organization in DeafDC.com” in the subject field.
Below that cut and paste the following letter:
*
Greetings, members of ASDC!
We are commenters on the DeafDC.com blog (see Shane Feldman’s blog entitled “My V/Blogging Conference Presentation”). As we discussed that article, your organization was mentioned by one of the commenters, and we would like you to be aware of some of the ideas that were discussed.
We hope that you will have one of your representatives post on DeafDC.com in Mr. Feldman’s blog and discuss some of those ideas with us!
Sincerely,
A DeafDC Commenter
*
When you are done cutting, pasting, signing, and sending, immediately come back here to DeafDC and post, as I will below, the simple message “DONE.”
Why? This experiment will first allow us to see how many of us actually DID something rather than just sitting around TALKING about doing things. Two, the experiment will allow us to see how ASDC will respond, thus giving us some insight into how other organziations will respond if we try something like this in the future. And finally, we can test whether or not identical letters signed with the name “A DeafDC Commenter” has more of an impact than signing with more personal (albeit anonymous) names such as Deaf Ed Nuclear Fireball or something like that. If the signature included in the letter prompts a response, then we know that we can advocate anonymously. If no response is forthcoming, then we’ll know that anonymous signatures (or perhaps just emails) don’t really get the job done.
I’m going to send now.
Chris