stupid american

Moved

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:30:00 +0000

I will keep this blog as long as I must, but you should know this blog has moved to globalized scholar.

raw footage of iranian protests

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 02:08:00 +0000

I wrote this in response to some of the raw footage coming in about iranian protests at the end of june. i encougage comments.

Okay, so clearly I am facscinated by this citizen journalism thing. I went to YouTube yesterday, and YouTube is giving prominence to specific channels, especially those promising a glimpse into the Iran protests. One of these channels was Citizen Tube; check it out. NPR today, as I've learned from NPR's feed, is also giving prominence to videos like this, as well. NPR's headline "This just in...If you dare to watch" caught my attention.

So click over to YouTube, to see if I can find the video. The initial video was shot from a cell phone, which you might have learned from my feed yesterday, is a function many Iranians can use. I watched a couple of them. Some of the videos simply show raw footage, and some of the videos have been edited. This video, for instance, has a distinct message that plays off of the emotions we feel when we see this young lady lying in the street.

I went back to NPR to read the commentary about the video, written byAvie Schneider. Her commentary explains the video has gone viral, spreading across the Internet through social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. And I saw evidence of this. Some of those videos have been up for only a few days and have upwards of 60,000 hits. The number does not surprise me at all.

When conflicts such as this one in Iran occur, information coming from the country seems suspect. The government clamps down, journalists might or might not have access to reliable information, and we must attempt to understand situations like this with what we have. When a video of events such as this one pops up, then people want to see it, especially if it reconfirms what we already know about the Iranian government and even if it carries a caveat or warning about how authentic the video might be.

Schneider states this a couple of paragraphs into her commentary. We know nothing about this video. But she tells the reader to forget what we know about politics and Iran. She segways into a celebratory description of new technology and the changing habits of readers that have brought about this new citizen journalism.

"So where does that leave us?" She asks."Thanks to readers' and viewers' changing habits and competition from the Internet, the gatekeeping roles of print and broadcast journalism have been redefined. They are no longer the sole arbiters of what's proper for the masses to read, see and hear."

I agree. What a marvelous thing! But I think we should also remain mindful that whether corporate, freelance, or citizen - whichever modifier you choose - journalists help shape our understanding of the world. To do this, they must place information in context. I'm not sure the rules of the games have changed as much as it's simply become more difficult to assess information.

Jay Rosen has a clear definition of the citizen journalist. But again, there is an emphasis on employing tools and informing the audience. If I walk away knowing no more than when I began, I'm not sure I would call you a citizen journalist.

Oddly, I'm not sure my opinion on the matter is that important. People will continue uploading information to the Internet. My concern is how we use that information. Yes, Schneider compares the video in Iran to the Zapruder video of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. I'm not sure the comparison is apt. In fact, something completely different came to mind, the testimony provided to Congress about Iraqi atrocities toward Kuwaitis that eventually paved the way for the first Gulf War.

Raw footage, like all information, can be manipulated and distorted. The only thing this viral event reconfirms for me is that people love to gawk at tragedy. Much more is needed for us to understand, together, what that tragedy might mean.

What point am I at?

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 04:47:00 +0000

The semester's off to a helluva start. I'm still taking one class, a journalism history class that I felt important to have. My relationship with the professor, I feel, is often tenuous because of my writing. It's not that my writing is bad all of the time. But I feel since this excursion into graduate work began, I haven't been writing as well as I could. I'm working on it. Compounded by my vertigo about my writing - which this professor has suggested is problematic because this is my third year and certainly I should have improved - I am also reading a lot of material for other projects.

One of these projects is an ongoing ethnography at two local newspapers. I am working with a professor to flesh out the project that began this past fall. I am also reading from a list of readings with her, for my comprehensive exams at the end of April. I have read some of the books. I grew fascinated with George Marcus in the fall, after reading most of Ethnography Through Thick and Thin. The professor suggested before the holiday break to also read a journal article by Patrick Murphy and Marwan Kraidy. I did read the article, but felt I needed to read more of Clifford Geertz to understand what Kraidy and Patrick are driving at. I'm almost finished with the first part of Local Knowledge, and will hopefully sit down this weekend to begin fleshing out my outline for the professor's reading list. (Not her suggestion, but my own idea, to help organize the information).

I hope partially to gain some understanding of the debate on positionality. Marcus, in the aforementioned book, talks a great deal about multi-sited ethnography. At first, and I will be honest because it was my first adventure into ethnographic research, I'm not sure what he meant. I felt like it was similar to what Kraidy talked about in his book, Hybridity; he explains the concept as "critical transculturalism." Kraidy's work, combined with some Manuel Castells and Nestor Garcia Canclini's works, provided the basis that I needed to break away from the traditional view of cultural imperialism. We all have agency, in varying degrees, and we aren't just subject to subjugation simply because we engage in cultural exchanges.

So we have Paper "X" and Paper "Y" in a large Northeastern American city. The journalists feel the ground moving beneath their feet. The ownership is experiencing financial difficulties, as presumably many companies are. But the newspaper organization, if not part of a larger sprawling media empire, is experience extraordinary difficulties in the face of shifts in readership, technology, and global flows of information. They have competition, readerships have options, and as Henry Jenkins so eloquently points out, none of these companies has determined the best way to offer content across multiple platforms to make as much money as they would like. As one of my students pointed out on Thursday (from the mouths of babes), they are making plenty of money - just not as much as they want.

These journalists are like journalists around the world. They have ideas and theories about how they do their jobs, why they do their jobs, and what role that job plays in the larger society. But if you look at surveys, like the Freedom of the Press survey by Freedom House or the Media Sustainability survey by IREX, you might see what I see. While these surveys have utility, their underlying assumptions are buttressed by Western notions of government, economy, and media operation. Can we use these surveys to truly understand what occurs outside of the United States? What about nations whose development does not map onto our own? I avoid or sidestep the entire controversy about the words, "developing", "underdeveloped", etc.

Multi-sited ethnography seemed to be a great thing. And it just dropped into my lap. Although the literature that I read was clear, I was still unclear about several things. As a white American woman, can I effectively research in Africa? Can I be fair? Will I impose erroneous ideas onto people who might not even want me there? These are all questions that seem especially pertinent now, given the financial ripples felt globally.

I went to my professor, and I explained these ideas. And she explained to me what I needed to read. And that understanding my positionality wasn't just about calling myself out and being transparent. It seems to also include my voice as a researcher, understanding my underlying assumptions and motivations for research, and laying my cards on the table. Additionally, I need to prepare myself for the inevitability that people will criticize, question, and maybe cajole. "Okay," I think to myself as she's talking, "now I'm a little worried." But she did it, and she's incredibly strong and intelligent. She's also very honest about her journey, her own doubts, and her own struggles to find her place. This information helps. I have an anchor and not necessarily adrift.

I hope to understand more of these readings soon. Having anecdotes in my life that provide context for these epistemological and methodological issues helps. I will give one example, to wrap up this tremendously long post. As I sat grading papers, I had one paper that required a decision. It was not that I wished to scold the student for some of the information. If I were more hard-nosed, I guess I could rip him on his wording; some might take affront to what he had written. I simply wanted to call his attention to what he had written, and ask him to reflect upon the representation created by his choice of words. When a colleague walked by, I ask her impressions. She gave me a stock answer, as I knew she probably would. The kid is a frat boy, and she indicated that he probably wouldn't care what I had to say.

Her point was poignant, but duly noted. It didn't bother me as much as what she said next. "Yea," she said, "I can't seem to get my students to write objectively either." I think she felt me wince, though I'm not sure if it was visible to her. I really had to sit with that idea, objectivity, to understand why I winced like I did. I think it's because I find her statement more a reflection of herself than of her students. I also found it reductive and intellectually dishonest. By reductive I mean the interactions, purposes, and results involved in teaching are truly complex. To reduce the process by criticizing students for not fitting our mold, and in such simplistic ideas, well, it's reductive. And intellectually dishonest to divorce yourself from the educational process altogether. They haven't done what I want; I'm not getting the results that I think I should get. It has nothing to do with me. Dishonest.

Perhaps it's because I'm reading these materials on positionality and have such strong opinions about my classes and their being student-centered. I teach two sections of persuasive writing, so when the word objective is thrown into a conversation, I begin to wonder what's going on in other classrooms. I also believe by not engaging in self-reflection, we will continue to reinforce a power structure that is truly slow to change. These students are already carving the paths for their children's children, in using technology, their exposure to different things, and their access to information. They understand more than sometimes we give them credit for.

Back to objective because it all hinges on what you mean by that word. If she means that students should maintain a distance between themselves and the issues that they feel are important, well, I wholeheartedly disagree. Did she mean that the students need to take a more vigorous approach to issues, weighing carefully their claims, their goals, and other perspectives? If so, then this perspective makes more sense. But only insofar as you have taken the time to explain to the students what you expect, have guided them through a process of self-discovery, and assessed their ability to meet the requirements.

But it goes further than that. In our complaints about students, we convert our students into others. We preclude them from participation in the process by ranting and raving about their inadequacies. I am no less guilty of this than others. And even though some of these students throw me curve balls that I never could have anticipated when making the syllabus for class, most of them work hard to improve. These students are anything but inadequate. They are truly complex beings born into a world that is NOTHING like previous generations. They operate within this sprawling digital network that boggles my mind sometimes. They have thoughts and feelings, and more often than not, have been lulled into a deep sleep by their respective school systems. Many want to continue with the habits of the high school English class, and are quite jolted when I challenge those notions.

All this writing to say this: It occurs to me that is just as important to recognize the power differentials in my own life as I try to untangle the research in the future. In many cases, I am perched atop, squashed beneath, or squeezed inbetween. The true talent, then, comes from using these various perspectives to draw parallels with others around me.

MIT here I come!

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 21:02:00 +0000

school has started, and already i've experienced a number of issues. i have one writing class in a computer lab and the other class is simply in a technology "smart room". as a friend of mine said today, "ah, the problems of the first world." ironic given the location of Temple University. i've been working diligently on my reading lists for my comprehensive exams, and trying to find time to continue working on the ethnographic study that i began last semester.

in the midst of all this, i'm anxiously anticipating word regarding the conferences that i hope to attend. the current tally is as follows: international communication association no, humanitarian media foundation don't know, media in transition at MIT yes, and finally future of journalism in the uk don't know. and i'm not finished yet because i would like to submit to AEJMC. i'm excited and scared by the MIT conference. it seems like a good place to be. one of the organizers, i believe, is henry jenkins. for those who have read his work on convergence culture, if you're a fan, well, you're probably excited for me. for those who have not read his work on convergence culture, you should. not my area but really exciting to read.

exciting, of course, from a geeky perspective.

following this semester, i will know more about journalism, ethnography, political economy, african media, and kenya than i ever hoped to know. and i will be well on my way to forging my dissertation proposal. this adventure seems like the kind of journey where i must learn to go with the flow. i'm still just neurotic enough to drive my profs crazy when i continually check on their progress - something which i think should be the other way around. i'm still anxious enough to worry myself senseless because i really have no idea how to get myself over to kenya. or africa. i have no idea how to get myself to canada, and that's not really far away. and i'm overzealous enough to think that trying to read half of my reading list for one subject area is a good idea.

yes, i must learn to pace myself.

which is never easy for me to do.

in the end i'm sure it will be fine. i had no idea in 2006 how to get myself to philadelphia. but i'm here. i had no idea how to get myself through the first semester, and i'm finishing my coursework. we work it out, as i tell my students, many of whom are worried about the job market. i reply in kind by asking if they had considered graduate school or backpacking across europe. both seemed to work for most of my friends. even with the economy and uncertainty, i consider myself lucky. and i really can't complain. no matter what happens to the economy, people will always need media, and in that respect, i will always have a job.

long time

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 02:48:00 +0000

...i hate when i leave off and don't pick up until a couple months later. it was an interesting semester. rest assured if you ever have any doubts about your writing, then an advanced degree might or might not be the place to work those doubts out. given the nature of our work as scholars, well, sometimes under deadline and grading papers, ideas get tangled in your head. or at least in mine.

so i struggled with my writing. i struggled with learning and using a couple of new methodologies. i never thought a couple of years ago that i would be in a newspaper doing ethnography. not that i doubted my ability, per se. but because i never gave it much thought. i used survey research for my thesis, and i figured that i would be confined to statistics for the rest of my life. when i looked into programs, i wanted to find programs that could teach me both quantitative and qualitative methods. thankfully i found one.

when i began the semester, i wasn't sure what i would study at these newspapers. i wish i could divulge the names, but given the nature of the research, i cannot. i wanted to understand how journalists at both papers thought about their jobs, especially given the tremendous changes in American journalism. while i plan to continue the study into the spring, i found some interesting results. i will write about those soon.

i have also managed to finish my first discourse analysis. for both studies, i argue that journalists belong to an interpretive community. Barbie Zelizer first proposed the idea, and borrowed it from literary criticism. it became an interesting perspective to analyze what the journalistic community said about relationships among editors and owners. journalism trade publications, which were set up as a form of criticism, were not necessarily critical. i think it requires more study, but the experience was interesting.

i am currently getting ready for my courses. i finished my coursework last semester, but i have opted to take a journalism history class. i will also continue the ethnography of the two local papers; i hope to apply for a grant to finish the project. i am also learning about political economy. i will take my comps at the end of the semester, and frankly, i can't wait for the exams to be over.

either way, i am working toward understanding journalism in a globalized world. my interest in africa has only grown; while i had hoped to work in the democratic republic of congo, my inability to speak french stiffled that hope. so i have set my focus on kenya. my interest primarily rests on one primary question: what do journalists think about their profession? from there, a number of questions arise, including how well do american values work in a post-colonial, developing country?

i believe that we might share universal principles. but how those principles are set in motion with practice might be completely different. garcia canclini's view of hybrid culture as "decentered and multidetermined" is useful. i struggled with traditional communications theorists who argued that power should be viewed as vertical and hierarchical. i am excited to unpack these ideas. i believe the next semester will be incredible as my research interests continue to become more clear.

Word to the Wise

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 00:09:00 +0000

Just as a special word to those visiting my blog from search engines. While I do not mention photo credits on my blog, you only need to click the picture to find the original source. This technique seems much more effective than droning on about other peoples' work. Happy Hunting.

Some thoughts on American journalism

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 23:53:00 +0000

These are some responses to the readings in my critical perspectives of journalism class. I would love some feedback. I realize these thoughts might seem incomplete or underdeveloped, but the length requirement was four to five pages.

As the press in the United States has changed and grown, its role and its characteristics have been re-imagined from time to time. The readings for this week highlight major conceptions about the press’s existence through history, its role as arbiter and mediator between the public and its government, as well as various perspectives on the tone and tenor of its purpose. Some of these essays address the current media ecology with scant attention to the global picture and its implications for American journalism; some of these essays, such as McComb’s rehashing of agenda-setting, fail to account for these issues entirely. Trade liberalization, technological advance, erosion of public institutions, and the growing power of transnational corporations have changed our relationship with the world. Overall, commercialization enabled the growth of professionalism in American journalism, providing social space for the role and function to change and expand. However, the tension between commercialization and professionalism remain at odds, with commercialization overpowering professionalism within journalism. Journalism’s role in American society needs revision, given the current media landscape as well as changes globally.
Schudson and Tifft indicate with their essay that commercialization, which is essentially freedom of ownership, has safeguarded and promoted the exchange of information, and became an integral part of the press in political life. Over the years, journalism’s role begins to take on meanings in American society, as journalists respond to their industry and the world around them. Schudson and Tifft point out the adversarial culture adopted by the press following Watergate and Vietnam, as well as the culture of objectivity that began as aspiration and turned eventually into “ideology”. The commercial aspect of the press was adopted by Oliver Wendell Holmes, and was used to illustrate how the merit of ideas can be adopted or rejected (Schmul & Picard. As Holmes wrote: “The best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market” (p. 144).
Commercialization and professionalization have come to a head, and as newspapers have been absorbed into larger media companies, whose primary objective is to make money, journalism’s role in America’s democracy has begun to wane. If lapses in coverage and ethical breeches fail to convey the severity of the problem, then we should turn our attention lack of attention that the average American devotes to issues related to politics. By why are these issues so important?
Each of these essays alluded to a larger function that has grown over the years: its function to keep people in the know about their government. It is this conceptualization of the press should give us cause to pause and evaluate the journalism’s job at certain points in history. It is also this idea that required scholars and journalists to assess who has participated in the marketplace of ideas. The press’s power, while its degree of effect is a matter of contention, is seen in its ability to set the public agenda (McCombs). However, agenda setting only accounts for media influence on the public agenda but fails to address a more pervasive trend. Increasingly those in power find ways to manipulate or bypass the press completely. Bush’s executive order to create the Office of Homeland Security, which subsequently led to the largest government reorganization since Truman, occurred with little discussion in the media. The need for assessment and revision of American journalism is not farfetched.
Changes in social fabric, especially in media landscape, have contributed to changes in its role and function. As indicated earlier, Schudson and Tifft indicate a number of ways in which journalism grew into a profession. The perspectives of journalism are far from uniform. Zelizer begins by using the “frame of mind” (p. 66) explanation of journalism but eventually concludes the journalist should be one who can step outside of himself or herself to see events in a different light (p. 77). One of the most contentious roles resides in the press’s role as watchdog. As Bennett and Serrin argue, watchdog journalists scrutinize, document, investigate, and relate matters of public concern (p. 169). While they offer ways to strengthen the watchdog role as a time when the press is “embattled”, they indicate in their essay not all journalists engage in these activities. Even if journalists do not engage in investigative journalism, Patterson and Seib argue the journalists must do more to “encourage citizens to think about what they are seeing and hearing” (p. 199). Thorson argues news use indicates strongly positive attitudes toward civic engagement, and education still remains a strong indicator of news use. However, young Americans have disengaged on many levels.
These roles are not embraced by all of journalism’s professionals, and as Patterson and Seib illustrate, journalism must compete with numerous sources of information. Credibility and reliability then becomes suspect because none of us really know how to filter and evaluate the thousands of sources of information on the Web. If the marketplace is an apt metaphor for ideas, then we should conceptualize it now as the dusty streets of Mumbai, where noisy merchants compete for attention, not as a place that follows Smith’s idea of market economics. It is a place where finding useful items requires critical and thoughtful strategy. We must think of Smith’s ideas of market economics similarly to Einstein’s re-imagination of Newton’s Law of Gravity. When the idea failed to encompass the phenomena completely, Keynes and others re-imagined the market economics to include the idea of supply and demand. The concept had not occurred to Smith because it was beyond his realm of possibility as he walked the streets of London. The metaphor is a social space that can be reworked. And journalism is just that. It is a space and like other spaces we imagine its function. Over the years its function has been re-imagined and reassessed to reflect changes in society and the media landscape. As part of the larger system, we are socialized to its function, as students, as professionals. As human beings, we make sense of it.
Changes have now dramatically altered how our world operates as well as how we experience the world. Many of these essays illustrate that we are amidst change; Schudson and Tifft wrote as their essay drew to a close that “(F)ewer Americans appeared to value the media’s role as surrogates for the public or its function as a filter through which inaccuracy, imbalance, and unfairness are sifted out” (Schudson & Tifft, p. 42). Curran also points out that many Americans turn to other organizations, institutions, or groups to facilitate mediation with the government. While Schmul and Picard end on a positive note, they do argue that “Rampant commercialization and underlying changes in the economics of media that remove incentives for many firms to make expenditures for costly and less profitable content that serves the marketplace of ideas” (p. 152).
Change is invariably part of life, especially with respect to humankind. Although the death of newspapers might well be an exaggeration, our society has changed. We experience time and space much differently than ever before. We have connectivity with one another that is much more pronounced than ever before. We think of our freedom not only in terms of free will but with respect to fast food, brand names, and cell phone usage. We have more information about most places around the globe, but we have rarely think about WHAT WE ACTUALLY KNOW about these places. We are consistently bombarded with media messages that are incomplete and/or decontextualized.

What has happened to the nation’s news media is not complex, as the Project for Journalism Excellence suggests. At a time when America’s role abroad has taken on global proportions, the nation’s media and their global reach has receded, relying only on a few information wholesalers. At a time when global capitalism’s sway holds more weight than public institutions within the realm of the sovereign nation-state, journalism has a surprising lack of insight on how these shifts in power affect people around the globe. At a time when transparency is desperately needed, corporations have taken hold of the press. While tried and true journalists might still exist, they live in an increasingly noisy media ecology, which tailors to younger audiences who simply ignore information and news rather than trying to filter out what they need. Our demands as a society are much different.
If journalism helps us make sense of our world and by doing so enables greater participation in self-governance, then certainly the way in which we think of journalism should be re-imagined. By providing a partial and decontextualized picture of the world, it becomes difficult to discern what changes in our world might mean, particularly when they derive from something as complex as globalization. It stands to reason many journalists possess a less than adequate understanding of these processes. We cannot argue that journalism should remain the course if journalism functions as a bridge between the public and its government. If journalists provide necessary awareness about the operations of government to enable self-governance, then our role as journalists must fit within the tools necessary for citizens to person the task. However, we cannot begin to assess the media landscape and understand our place without first acknowledging fundamental shifts in how we are governed, and the powers that exist to do so, whether they are elected or not.

*All readings come from the reader, The Press. Particularly Chapters 2, 4, 7 through 12. If you haven't picked it up, by all means, buy it yourself. Don't take my word for it.

A perspective on globalization

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:53:00 +0000

So class is finally finished – the class that I was teaching, that is – and I have had a few weeks off. I have used part of that time to exercise, clean, and prepare for the next two semesters. I also traveled home to see the family unit. Most of my trip was spent dodging my father’s arguments, which typically begin with “Obama is an idiot”, and the most recent, “Well, Americans just aren’t going to stand for globalization because this is a country of independently minded individuals.” True that, dad (on the second part, not the first).

I argued with him for a second before I realized that his idea of globalization is so far from what the actual phenomena is, and dare I speak ill of my father by saying overly simplified. Apparently somewhere in the annals of conservative talk radio, my father has forged an idea of globalization as something forthcoming, preventable, and disparaging to his freedom.

Welcome to globalization, dad. We’re here already. Apparently he – and whomever he’s getting his information from – hasn’t received the memo. I would pick on old, middle class white guys in the United States; however, I’m not sure that’s the issue. It might be part of the issue, though. It’s difficult to see your privilege when you are perched atop, if you know what I mean.

I have explained my previous posts how I feel about news coverage. And globalization is no exception. When you take oversimplified views of highly complex issues, well, you walk around thinking you know something when you really don’t. The adage in this country that we simply need to read the news to become informed citizens in this case doesn’t necessarily work. Anyone want to experiment with that idea? Let me know how that works out for you.

Globalization is such a large, far-reaching phenomena that you could – I don’t know – read for two years in a PhD program and still not have a handle on the issues, especially since it changes so quickly. This brief entry will address just the broad categories that I usually consider, and they are by no means comprehensive. But I highly encourage people to investigate these issues. It is globalization in my mind that brings up questions like: are the banks involved in the mortgage crisis actually U.S. corporations? If not, why should we consider bailing them out? Why is the U.S. government not regulating credit, so that not just anyone can buy a house? Why is it possible for lending institutions to extend the credit of those consumers who might not be able to pay back the money? How would this play out on the international scene – would the WTO intervene to penalize the U.S. government for protecting consumers?

All of these issues are integrated, and we are in NO WAY independent from the rest of the world. We haven’t been for a very long time. When considering globalization, I usually think of three arenas: economic, political, and cultural. I think of these three realms not because globalization really affects all three directly; however, they appear quite frequently in the literature.

Political
So let’s start with political, since my father is convinced that political globalization involves usurpation of American sovereignty in a globalized world. What he really means is that America wouldn’t be the big kid on the block. We might actually be accountable. And you know if we were actually accountable, our power and authority might not be construed as legitimate, which I take it is not the case in many places around the globe. My answer to his fear – since I didn’t get very far with him due to his incessant talking over me – there is no overarching world governance. The closest thing to it, perhaps, would be the United Nations (UN), and the UN yields far less power that the World Trade Organization (WTO), in my opinion.

In the field of political science, and please feel free to correct me if I’m wrong because this is not my field, there are many ways of describing international relations. Two of those ways have been classical realism and neorealism; neither description really places anyone in charge politically, other than the most powerful nation. They are structural perspectives, which imagine the international scene organized in a particular way but for which there is no world power.

Part of the problem is this issue. Although there is no overarching governance, we have international law, which dictates order for the system. Tiny rules like not attacking other countries and holding national sovereignty in the highest esteem have kind of kept everything in place politically. But sometimes countries don’t feel like they need to adhere to these rules. They invade other countries on behalf of the world. Invade, in this case, is the appropriate word. Because when rogue states have placed the welfare of their people at a minimum, the UN typically has voted to send peacekeepers, always trying to maintain the sovereignty of the nation. (In the case of Kosovo and East Timor, the UN departed from this by actually creating its own civil authority).

From my perspective, the UN is a quasi-governmental entity; while it promulgates ethical behavior for both member nations as well as its own actions, it is not necessarily binding if the member nations decide they don’t want to go along. With noncompliance, there exist no consequences. For example, the United States government regularly checks prisons across the country for compliance. In the event of noncompliance, the federal government can intercede – it’s automatic. They do not have to petition anyone nor wait for a vote of Congress. The job of that government group is to keep prisons up to snuff. The UN cannot necessarily do the same thing. If it could, there would be no need for the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank (WB), North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), or the WTO.

Economic
Speaking of the IMF, WB, and WTO, there are also dimensions of globalization that reside within the economic realm. When I told my father that he should be more concerned about the WTO, I wasn’t leading him astray. A number of the reactions toward globalization and the West in particular have hinged on the denigration of national sovereignty as well as lack of action on behalf of the world’s poorest, most marginalized people, to name a couple. Without meaning to, I’m sure, we have enabled those in the most privileged positions to imagine our economic system. Our economic system, for me, is in part a political one. We place a great deal of faith in our political system, by recognizing the legitimacy of those in power to make binding decisions for us. Though we do not realize it, we have enabled corporations to do the same. On a very basic level, we could argue that the political system affords elected officials to decided what and how; likewise, we could argue the economic system enables those who are able to collect and use capital to decide who gets what as well as the conditions under which those resources are doled.

To oversimplify again, we could see two different veins of economic globalization. The first exists in the realm of the nation-state, where monetary and fiscal policy help determine the lifeblood for a people. The second realm exists in the corporate realm, where corporations with loyalties to shareholders search the world for resources. Corporations look for cheap materials, labor, and transportation in order to offer a product at lower prices. With respect to the nation-state, many have accepted aid from other nation-states or international organizations to promote development. There is an entire field of study devoted to development, the field itself has experienced paradigmatic shifts away from the original intention following the end of colonialism. When the word “liberalization” appears with respect to developing countries, typically we mean that governments are taking steps to liberalize trade by privatizing aspects devoted to public welfare, removing trade barriers, and generally accepting policies suggested by the IMF and WB. Sometimes these policies are diametrically opposed to promotion of a healthy state government, hence the resistance at grassroot levels.

On the other end, corporations have worked their way around the globe, probing markets for cheap resources and streamlining – financially – their production lines. Many complain about global and transnational corporations for a number of reasons; however, I will only touch on two. First, these corporations bring with them a cultural logic from other places; some fear this cultural infusion places culture in jeopardy (see below). Secondly, globalization has given rise to really funky practices, which corporations use to skirt national or international law. One aspect of this would be the export processing zones, which governments create to enable corporations to operate without adherence to national laws. Let us not romanticize either way about the corporation; yes, they have a great deal of power over pivotal aspects of our lives, and yes, they might actually run more efficiently and effectively than public entities because of their drive toward the bottom line. But they are not entirely the problem; some responsibility resides with consumers and their allowance for corporations to write the cultural rules. And now we have our final category.

Cultural
The realm of culture is where I do my heavy lifting, academically and philosophically. And previous blogs, I have explained some of the literature concerning the globalization of culture. Essentially we know that when you take human artifacts, such as television shows, fast food restaurants, or music, to places beyond their local context, something happens to culture where these items were imported. At this point, scholars disagree about the impact, its severity, and its meaning. I actually swing toward hybridity theory as a theoretical tool, but others have been quite critical in their approaches. In a way, I have come to see the two previous realms, political and economic, as rudimentary to understanding the processes of globalization with respect to culture. But I do not mean what other scholars intimate.

Let’s take a developing country in Africa. How about the Democratic Republic of Congo? The DRC is trying to find stability within its political and economic spheres in order to develop and grow. When the West interceded, it did so with a purpose. The West touts both democratic governance and liberalization as the best goals to strive for. However, as we provide the DRC with aid attached to policies designed to reach these goals, we are coaxing them to organize or conceptualize their world like ours. You say, “Well, who wouldn’t want to be free?” That’s a good question.

But the root of the problem is, who defines freedom? When the DRC fails to live up to the standards promulgated by the UN, or the U.S., or perhaps even Freedom House, we judge them harshly, downplaying their progress to focus on the expanse of their difference from us. That is the manipulation of culture, or the use of what Joseph Nye called, “soft power”. When you add media artifacts to the mix, such as Jay-Z or Law and Order, then the globalization is greatly complicated. These exchanges are facilitated by the ease at which we can communication and travel, as Tomlinson and others have explained.

My concern, as a scholar and journalist, lies with these connections among economic, political, and cultural. When we tell the DRC that it should strive for democratic rule, we also include either explicitly or implicitly that democratic rule requires a strong, independent media system. This strong, independent media system would follow the American model, and would ultimately be free from both government interference and funding. As we pull back the lens for a wider view, we see that politically, culturally, and economically, the flow of information globally belongs to two primary companies, the Associated Press and Reuters. There is danger in deriving what we know about the world simply from two sources, even if these sources pool information from a variety of points.

In closing, there are several different ways to explore these processes of globalization; one cannot take a myopic view without linking the claim back to this integration. The realization that we are integrating – that what we do in one place really affects other places – still might be an ethereal perspective for many. My father’s generation grew up at a time when the threat of both Soviets and nuclear holocaust became deeply ingrained in their worldview. From his perspective as well as many others, it does not matter whether our actions in the Middle East or other places in the globe are not well received or cause irreparable harm. What does matter is that he is safe and can sleep well at night knowing the U.S. government has his back. But that is the luxury of the white American male; the system exists to protect his privilege.

However, for many others, this integration is all too close to home. This integration has caused food shortages, fuels discontent among ethnic groups, displaces large groups of people, and governmental instability. I do not believe that I have the answers to help many around the globe to solve these problems; I do have, however, resources about how the media system works within one nation-state. I have the ability to help others to develop themselves, hopefully without the caveats that are used as stick or carrot. I have the ability to help my fellow Americans better understand these processes that inextricably bind them to people at all points around the world materially.

As Homi Bhabha wrote in the preface to The Location of Culture:

“In keeping with the spirit of the ‘right to narrate’ as a means to achieving our own national or communal identity in a global world, demands that we revise our sense of symbolic citizenship, our myths of belonging, by identifying ourselves with the ‘starting-points’ of other national and international histories and geographies” (p. xx).

Addressing globalization requires leaders and constituents who have a strong foundational knowledge in what these processes are. We can only truly change the course of history if we understand where we must go; however, we cannot fully appraise our path without first understanding where we are. To do both, we need an open and inclusive discourse about creating opportunities.

Temple Writing Academy

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 02:18:00 +0000

As I stated on my other blog, I'm in the process of preparing for tomorrow. I will make this post brief. I'm a little disappointed that I haven't worked on more research this summer, and that I haven't posted more to my blogs. However, I am working toward understanding how to edit video for the class that I am teaching.

I have been uploading video for the past few days. Check it out and let the students know what you think. I would also be happy to hear constructive criticism. In the meantime, I am working on both papers from the past semester, the first dealing with journalistic practices in Africa and the other exploring how AP and Reuters are constructing the idea of global through their operations. They should be finished soon, so I hope to have something to blog about.

To reach the YouTube channel, click here.

New Blog

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 14:33:00 +0000

I finished my second year, and now I guess I need to update everything, as I am now a third year PhD student. It was a difficult ride, and as I indicated in previous posts, I hope to blog more about it. However, it felt weird blogging about my research ideas and my personal life on one blog. I have thought about over the past year. When I began this blog, my intention was to simply provide my thought processes as I work toward a dissertation topic.

But it doesn't leave much room for fun stuff, and many of those who read my MySpace blog felt my research blog is a little out there for them. After struggling with it, and talking to people, I decided I would begin another blog. Staying true to my intention for this blog, I hope to continue to update my progress as a scholar. I think many are thrown by the name of this blog; I can't blame them. If you're from the United States, I could see how one would experience cognitive dissonance upon seeing the name. If you are from elsewhere, you might simply think that I am a "stupid American" and read no further. But I have noticed over the past few months that many do stop and read, at least for a little bit.

My new blog will deal with my "other life", as I indicated in my most recent post. I named the blog "A Creation of my Own" for many reasons. As in my academic life, I am encouraged by some and discouraged by others about being who I am. And I must be truthful. Many aspects of my identity had not received a great amount of attention. For example, I have been out for several years but have never given it much serious thought until the last few years.

Most recently, I began devoting a great deal of thought to the idea of imaginative space, an idea used by some globalization theorists borrowed from Foucault as well as others to explain this cognitive area that allows us to dream of ourselves as something other than what we are. I designed my class for the Temple Writing Academy solely around this idea. Although the class will deal primarily with argumentation and persuasion, I constructed it with the idea that through language and visuals, my students could manipulate ideas, imagine themselves in different ways. Like my Tae Kwon Do master once said, "If you can see it, you can do it." I want to help them obtain the tools to empower themselves. There is no saving going on here - I have social capital that I can give to them. They have the choice, now or later, to use these tools in the best way that they see fit.

I would not have thought so much about this class if I didn't also see this empowerment as a need that I also had. It has been a long road to get where I am, and I have often wasted time thinking about where I could have been if I had been empowered to think in the ways that I know think. Again, though, as I pointed out in my recent post on the other blog, I am exactly where I need to be, doing exactly what I need to be doing.

I took some time off from the academics, to get my bearings and think about the next year. I will resume work soon, so I will be back out here blogging about my ideas. I hope in the next couple of years to travel to Africa as well as Europe. I am interested in understanding different press models that exist, not just the American model. I am interested in journalistic practices, not just the American practices. I will get there, and it will take time. In the end, I will look back at these entries as milestones in my career, my life, and my perspectives.

Freedom and Fear

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Tue, 06 May 2008 14:13:00 +0000

The semester is almost over, and I have made it through the first two years of my program. While I'm tired, I also have a sense of satisfaction that I have made some progress as a scholar. My two semester projects came together late in the semester, so I think they probably need work. I'll post about those in the coming weeks; I'd like to get into the habit of writing more frequently.

My spare time - perhaps the hour per week that I have - has been devoted to watching documentaries. Although they aren't end-all, be-all to creating an informed populace, they're at least a start. They bring issues to light by at least presenting issues that people might not know anything about. I guess I could watch Bill O'Reilly or Al Franken, but I'm not sure I'd learn as much.

Atomic Cafe is one of those documentaries; there is no narrator, nor interviews of people. It's simply a number of clips from the 1950s, illustrating how atomic/nuclear weapons became a part of American life. It differs from many that I have seen because other documentaries tend to incorporate the thoughts of major players. For example, after watching Why we fight, I have grave reservations about John McCain. His interviews in the documentary lead me to question his ability to be frank with the American people. The first clip is the trailer for the documentary, and the second is an actual clip.

All too often, we have no one who aims at such honesty. I hear a number of excuses for this: national security, the American people are too dumb, or we just simply won't understand. We've come a long way from the days of the Fireside Chats, when the president felt it necessary to explain the banking crisis to the American people. I might be romanticizing a bit, lamenting the bygone days when the Americans could trust their government.

Or perhaps Americans could trust their government not to conduct itself in ways that were unbecoming. I understand that we need to secure our interests; I understand this is a dangerous world. However, it serves no purpose to distort the truth. American companies have played a role in contributing the instability in many countries, especially in Africa. The U.S. government has supported regimes that were not necessarily democratic in order to serve a larger geopolitical purpose, first during the Cold War and now during the war on terror. It occurs to me that hoping for open and honest discourse might simply be a pipe dream. Watch the progression in the videos below, leading up to the present day.

And here's an example of how people have sampled Bush's speeches:

So how does this tie into Atomic Cafe? I spent a better part of my childhood living in fear of nuclear holocaust. The fear was partially brought to life when my parents would assail me with stories about Soviets, bomb drills, silos, and the like. I would have nightmares of wandering alone through rubble, without my family. The film, at least, was a way for me to explore my parents' psyches about that period of their lives. In many ways it brought them into focus.

Other issues became clear, as well. As a reporter, I would cover emergency management drills. For those who don't know, emergency management is like civil defense 2.0. Civil defense began as a way to get the word out about preparedness in case of emergencies. After the recession of Communism, it went through a gradual metamorphosis to emergency management. It's most well-known government department is, of course, FEMA. And I never understood the idea of the "red alert". For as creepy as the documentary is, it helped me piece together a number of things. While I'm not an expert in collective memory, it seems a good study would compare the propaganda from the Cold War to the ideas circulating with the War on Terror. Here are some clips to at least set the stage for the collective memory that might be operating in the minds of the hawkish fellows using the American military "to fight terror" across the globe:

Is it worth understanding these connections? Absolutely. I think it would be difficult for the government to approach terrorism in the same way that it approached communism. Rather, it's easier to promote distraction and inaction; it's easier to paralyze discourse and promote group think through the common stamp of "unpatriotic". If the country is fragmented and polarized over the shadow-boxing campaign that currently exists, collective action against this war and toward a more positive direction is difficult to achieve. If we are not united, it is difficult to act the best interests of the country. If unity was reached, it boggles the mind what might be accomplished. Otherwise, we are left with what we are given.

Cyber dissidents, you know I love ‘em

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 02:40:00 +0000

I'm currently working on an update for both my semester projects. They are coming together nicely. While I don't have too much time, I had promised myself I would try to blog more. And I have failed to keep that promise as well as I would have liked. But I did come across something today that I thought was absolutely fabulous, perhaps for me and not the Egyptian government though.

In my International News Communication class, we're exploring different online publications in various regions of the world. It's often difficult to judge the publications because ultimately I'm American, and more often than not, the journalistic practice differs from mine. I have quite the fascination with Al Jazeera, though. My intrigue began the Iraq war and has only grown since I saw Control Room over a year ago. I often play clips for some of my classes, to give them a sense of how the journalists who work for the organization feel about their roles as journalists. This opens a whole other discussion on cultural variance and the role of journalism.

My point was simply to illustrate what Tomlinson called the "complex connectivity", a term that I think he might have borrowed from Hannerz. Tomlinson argued cultural practices are at the heart of globalization, and I tend to agree. I have begun to see the organization of political or economic life as forms of cultural exchange, for we organize both symbolically. Our choice between capitalism and communism is predicated on how we organize our understanding of the world, how we make sense of life and everything around us. This is why I think die hard capitalists who give nothing back to world are complete assholes.

Tomlinson also talked about disembedding, the idea of cultural artifacts removed from their original context, and the compression of time and space. I believe the idea of both time and space is very pertinent to the point that I want to make today. Without this compression, it would be difficult to show my students this:

Without it, we would need to rely on what many U.S. critics of Al Jazeera say about the news organization, being unfortunately bound to available news sources and historians to help us sort out the "facts". Rather we have a multidimensional world that facilitates a prism of varying perspectives on current events. The one I point out today is the story on the protests in Egypt. The story topped the homepage of Al Jazeera's website, of course coupled with a dramatic photo of an overturned car. There were many elements of the story that I found fascinating. Low wages and little access to staple food items would piss me off, and apparently these men and women in Egypt feel the same way. They are frustrated. The opinion poll, which is highlighted like a pull quote, can be seen in the screen shot below. But the most peculiar item, the coolest thing about this story, was the apparent online organization of the protests. I would not have believed it myself unless I saw it. The government is upset with a group identified only as "cyber dissidents" who are organizing protests in where of all places? The social networking site, Facebook. What better illustration of "complex connectivity" and "hybridity" is there?

Where does the news come from?

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:44:00 +0000

Or the more succinct point, what is the cultural logic of globalized news? Over the past few weeks, I have contemplated my research topics for this semester. Ultimately and ideally, they would be linked, so they could fit into my dissertation. And of course, because I finish my coursework in the fall, I should probably begin thinking about my dissertation topic.

A number of things interest me, which makes choosing just one a really difficult endeavor. My interest in international studies has expanded to include most everything that falls under the umbrella of globalization, particularly news. In the past, researchers carefully scrutinized the flows of information, as well they should. The flow of information was (perhaps still is)asymetrical, and embedded inevitably in the information disseminated from, let's say, the United States, resides our cultural logic. Within each word, within the organization of news stories, the artwork, encapsulated within a news story and its package exists an ordering process that seeks to impose upon the world a perspective of how to experience, how to know, and how to describe phenomena.

To examine these flows, cultural imperialism presented a way to dismantle these flows, and illustrate their possible problems. The primary concern that I can derive from the "cultural imperialism thesis", as John Tomlinson calls it, resides in how this cultural logic - as it becomes globalized through the one-way flow of information - might change or impede upon the local culture. Of course as Tomlinson indicates, and scholars like Kraidy and Pieterse illustrate, the cultural imperialism thesis does not do the resilience and flexibility of culture justice. My concern here is of course: what is American, and what is global?

These two words in particular have concerned me as I read through the literature about globalization and media, especially as the descriptors, global and Americanized. It seems at some point those ideas affiliated with "Westernized" began to morph into "Americanized". While I bring my own understanding of "Americanized" news, I still feel a bit hazy on what is meant. If we mean that Americanized news exist in news items that are constructed as commodities, then I'm not sure what to call Reuters' products other than Britianized news. Likewise, if we mean that Americanized news are news items that belong to an American model of providing information necessary for facilitating political participation, again, I'm not sure what we can consider other news products from non-U.S. countries that might hold similar views. The Kosovo case illustrates the differences between the United States and European countries; they have their own conceptions of free speech, uses of news media, and philosophies concerning the role of media in society.

Additionally, I am equally perplexed by the idea of "global", especially when the term is paired with "news". I'm sure the idea of "global" media products are the focus of a number of countries; however, I think Reuters and the Associated Press are my primary concern. Both state they are companies that provide news and information on a global level. So what do they mean by that? If Associated Press is an American organization, then can it be global? Or can we discount its base of operation? And what are global news items? Can I infer from AP's claim of existing as "the essential global news network" that a news organization anywhere can know almost everything that transpires all the time? Likewise, Reuters is a British company that claims to be a "global information company". Can I infer that Reuters can procure and disseminate information from all points of the globe?

There are many finer nuances in these ideas. When we define news, what exactly do we mean? What news values are used to determine the selection of news? Who decides in local news organizations what routines must be followed? What ownership structure exists in areas of Africa, where the news media might be relatively new compared to the European or Euro-American news media? I hope to tackle each of these in turn, probing what is meant by both these words. It occurs to me that many outside the United States might have just as skewed an idea of the U.S. as we have of their countries. Because I am an American, a journalist, and a scholar, I can't help but ask these questions, especially when I know the complexities, nuances, and textures of Euro-American culture are never properly represented in media. While the media might provide us a picture, it is completely flat; it lacks the social context of place.

Take for example this picture:

Of course, not everyone in the U.S. has access to this type of food. In fact, I found food items in the East that are dramatically different from the Midwest or Southwest. Even while we have a sense of the "imagined community" as Anderson suggests, we lack the social context from the local. We have misconceptions and biases about one another, just as perhaps Bengalis might have about other Indians, or those from Mexico might have about other Latin Americans. So my question to the world would be: What is an American? Ultimately you must search your mind for what elements and ideas came together to form your conception in the first place.

Especially if the original cultural item is removed from its context:

Good news from North Philly...

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 12:30:00 +0000

As this semester flies by and I soldier on, attempting to keep up with the reading as well as everything occurring globally, I received a bit of news this morning. A couple of weeks ago I applied for the Temple Writing Academy, which provides a variety of classes for high school students from North Philadelphia.

For those who are not well-acquainted with this area, North Philly exists as a monument to the cracks in both the capitalist and democratic systems. When I first drove through this area - on my first trip to Philly - I cried. I could never imagine growing up in a place of crumbling concrete, that seems untouched by recent development and ignored by policy makers. While I cringe at thinking myself a great "white" savior, I am happy at the opportunity to meet these young people, to hear their narratives, and to come together with them to learn. It promises so many opportunities.

I have not thought at depth about the curriculum, but I did pitch a global literature class. I have been reading "Graceland" by Chris Abani, and I had the great fortune to speak with educators like Juan Devis last summer as a part of the Media Literacy Lab's research into educators' uses of copyrighted materials. I will more than likely contact these gentlemen, to ask their opinion - other books to read. I think these young people will no doubt understand the colonial and postcolonial human traps and the consequences that have grown from these.

I am estatic, and I welcome suggestions...

Kosovo Declaration of Independence

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 03:42:00 +0000

Here is the Declaration of Independence, taken directly from the website for the Assembly of Kosovo. Click here to learn more. I will respond to the press coverage of this in the next couple of days. It's not every day that a territory posts its declaration on the internet, or is it?

Kosovo Declaration of Independence

Convened in an extraordinary meeting on February 17, 2008, in Pristina, the capital of Kosovo,

Answering the call of the people to build a society that honours human dignity and affirms the pride and purpose of its citizens,

Committed to confront the painful legacy of the recent past in a spirit of reconciliation and forgiveness,

Dedicated to protecting, promoting and honoring the diversity of our people,

Reaffirming our wish to become fully integrated into the Euro-Atlantic family of democracies,

Observing that Kosovo is a special case arising from Yugoslavia's non-consensual breakup and is not a precedent for any other situation,

Recalling the years of strife and violence in Kosovo, that disturbed the conscience of all civilised people,

Grateful that in 1999 the world intervened, thereby removing Belgrade's governance over Kosovo and placing Kosovo under United Nations interim administration,

Proud that Kosovo has since developed functional, multi-ethnic institutions of democracy that express freely the will of our citizens,

Recalling the years of internationally-sponsored negotiations between Belgrade and Pristina over the question of our future political status,

Regretting that no mutually-acceptable status outcome was possible, in spite of the good-faith engagement of our leaders,

Confirming that the recommendations of UN Special Envoy Martti Ahtisaari provide Kosovo with a comprehensive framework for its future development and are in line with the highest European standards of human rights and good governance,

Determined to see our status resolved in order to give our people clarity about their future, move beyond the conflicts of the past and realise the full democratic potential of our society,

Honouring all the men and women who made great sacrifices to build a better future for Kosovo,

1. We, the democratically-elected leaders of our people, hereby declare Kosovo to be an independent and sovereign state. This declaration reflects the will of our people and it is in full accordance with the recommendations of UN Special Envoy Martti Ahtisaari and his Comprehensive Proposal for the Kosovo Status Settlement.

2. We declare Kosovo to be a democratic, secular and multi-ethnic republic, guided by the principles of non-discrimination and equal protection under the law. We shall protect and promote the rights of all communities in Kosovo and create the conditions necessary for their effective participation in political and decision-making processes.

3. We accept fully the obligations for Kosovo contained in the Ahtisaari Plan, and welcome the framework it proposes to guide Kosovo in the years ahead. We shall implement in full those obligations including through priority adoption of the legislation included in its Annex XII, particularly those that protect and promote the rights of communities and their members.

4. We shall adopt as soon as possible a Constitution that enshrines our commitment to respect the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all our citizens, particularly as defined by the European Convention on Human Rights. The Constitution shall incorporate all relevant principles of the Ahtisaari Plan and be adopted through a democratic and deliberative process.

5. We welcome the international community's continued support of our democratic development through international presences established in Kosovo on the basis of UN Security Council resolution 1244 (1999). We invite and welcome an international civilian presence to supervise our implementation of the Ahtisaari Plan, and a European Union-led rule of law mission. We also invite and welcome the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to retain the leadership role of the international military presence in Kosovo and to implement responsibilities assigned to it under UN Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) and the Ahtisaari Plan, until such time as Kosovo institutions are capable of assuming these responsibilities. We shall cooperate fully with these presences to ensure Kosovo's future peace, prosperity and stability.

6. For reasons of culture, geography and history, we believe our future lies with the European family. We therefore declare our intention to take all steps necessary to facilitate full membership in the European Union as soon as feasible and implement the reforms required for European and Euro-Atlantic integration.

7. We express our deep gratitude to the United Nations for the work it has done to help us recover and rebuild from war and build institutions of democracy. We are committed to working constructively with the United Nations as it continues its work in the period ahead.

8. With independence comes the duty of responsible membership in the international community. We accept fully this duty and shall abide by the principles of the United Nations Charter, the Helsinki Final Act, other acts of the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe, and the international legal obligations and principles of international comity that mark the relations among states. Kosovo shall have its international borders as set forth in Annex VIII of the Ahtisaari Plan, and shall fully respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all our neighbors. Kosovo shall also refrain from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

9. We hereby undertake the international obligations of Kosovo, including those concluded on our behalf by the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) and treaty and other obligations of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to which we are bound as a former constituent part, including the Vienna Conventions on diplomatic and consular relations. We shall cooperate fully with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. We intend to seek membership in international organisations, in which Kosovo shall seek to contribute to the pursuit of international peace and stability.

10. Kosovo declares its commitment to peace and stability in our region of southeast Europe. Our independence brings to an end the process of Yugoslavia's violent dissolution. While this process has been a painful one, we shall work tirelessly to contribute to a reconciliation that would allow southeast Europe to move beyond the conflicts of our past and forge new links of regional cooperation. We shall therefore work together with our neighbours to advance a common European future.

11. We express, in particular, our desire to establish good relations with all our neighbours, including the Republic of Serbia with whom we have deep historical, commercial and social ties that we seek to develop further in the near future. We shall continue our efforts to contribute to relations of friendship and cooperation with the Republic of Serbia, while promoting reconciliation among our people.

12. We hereby affirm, clearly, specifically, and irrevocably, that Kosovo shall be legally bound to comply with the provisions contained in this Declaration, including, especially, the obligations for it under the Ahtisaari Plan. In all of these matters, we shall act consistent with principles of international law and resolutions of the Security Council of the United Nations, including resolution 1244 (1999). We declare publicly that all states are entitled to rely upon this declaration, and appeal to them to extend to us their support and friendship.

The political economy of rock, paper, scissors

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 03:19:00 +0000

Sometimes it occurs to me, though it is reinforced time and again in my readings, how we take for granted certain parts of our culture. What often seems self-evident is something overlooked, especially when the cultural artifact is so widely known. Nothing is so apparent than what we learn as children, such as stories or games. Rock, paper, scissors is but one example.

I'm not sure why I assumed most everybody would know about the game. It was a pervasive part of my childhood, cropping up when incredibly important decisions were needed or when consensus could not be reached. As a child, my neighborhood friends and I were prone to adventurous explorations, which sometimes required picking the kid who would wander into and check out what we perceived as dangerous territory. The deciding force behind who went first - the process that made it legitimate - was typically rock, paper, scissors.

And most Americans with whom I come into contact know this game. Hence my surprise when my friend from India acted with bewilderment when I suggested jokingly we should use a game of rock, paper, scissors to settle a decision over our reading for class. As we split up our Manuel Castells reading for our Globalized Media class, I hopped on "Geopolitics and the State"; my friend ended up with "Bolivia and Democracy," a reading she seemed unhappy about. Upon my suggestion, she politely conceded - as she is always apt to do - that she would accept the reading that she received.

However, one of our peers and I, in sensing her confusion over the game, decided to explain the rules. We went round and round for about five to ten minutes before she politely said she had it, with a slight impatient huff and a wave of her hand signaling that she felt the game absurd. Why is the paper better than the rock? Heck, I don't know.

So I began to think about it. Why is it that my friend who has been in United States for some time lacked knowledge about this game? Even more, what did the game say about Americans? The political economy aspect of this game occurred to me as I read through the readings for my classes this week; however, the search for information is always a good place to begin.

I am quite sure if I had an overabundance of leisure time, I would devote that time to more constructive endeavors and not rock, paper, scissors. However, I will say as I entered the term into the Google engine and clicked "search", almost a million web pages came up. I went through several, and found several explanations of the game. I even found the website for the World Society of RPS, a factoid that I probably could have lived without. I also found our symbolic representations of our symbolic representations enlightening and amusing. For example, check out this graphic explanation of the rules from corkinthewater:

Or this beer commercial:

You can visit this website for more information.

I can imagine one would feel a bit of cultural vertigo from experiencing the game without a context by which to understand it. And in rethinking my knowledge of the game, as well as its meaning, I wondered how it related to the perplexing problems arising from decision making and resource distribution. It occurred to me those who possessed the better resources came out on top, and coming out on top depends on choosing the resource that bests your opponent.

The political economy of the game hit me as I perused the pages of my reading. Most of our globalization and international communication theory has dealt with the growth and decline of American media around the world, as well as the idea that capitalism was the engine behind the globalization phenomena. These two ideas - the spread of communications, particularly communications technology and content, and the spread of capitalism - are fused and expounded by Benedict Anderson in his argument about the development of nationalism. It was, argues Anderson, the spread of print capitalism that broke the hold of religious power and facilitated the growth of state mechanisms. Essentially the power of knowledge helped loose the chains of cognitive bondage, and began to place power into the hands of more people.

If I could re-imagine the game within the current media logic, the concept of scissors would include so much more than simply banned books or censorship. Once unpacked, it would also signify our cut-and-paste, fast-paced misinformation society. For the ability to evade and twist reality seems now much more potent than ever before. At some point we should come to understand that the one resource mightier than any weapon is the power of knowledge, especially coupled by the power of imagination. The one exception resides in the power to keep our fellow man ignorant.

And with that, I will leave you with this YouTube video by uphillbothways as an amusing sidebar:

The reaction to the reflection

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 23:01:00 +0000

School started about two weeks ago, and of course, I haven't necessarily made good on my promise to blog more frequently. My bad. I have a great deal to read, and as I wrote in my most recent post, I chose to try some of the Web 2.0 tools with my students.

Google documents, presumably singular when one refers to the online tool, is awesome. I can tell when my students submit their work, they can upload from Word, and they can work with one another on the same document while they are all logged in. I began the semester by asking them to sign up for Gmail, to access the documents. Being undergraduate students, they rarely do as asked at the beginning of the semester. This is the honeymoon period, when an educator must approach students with a compassionate, loving smackdown.

48 students, several mislabeled documents, and three assignments. One word: Clusterfuck.

However, I managed to work through it, and still maintain a bit of sanity. For I know when they come out on the other side of this situation, my students will have taken away much more than simply persuasive writing or public speaking. They will understand, hopefully, how they work in certain group settings, how they adapt to technology that they are unfamiliar with, and how to use these tools to collaborate within their chosen profession. Specifically, though, I wanted to provide them with an alternative way to think about social networking and collaboration, namely tools that exist outside of the Facebook/Myspace universe.

For the first couple weeks, I sent them out to work on specific things. I had them sign up for a Gmail account; I had them use documents that I set up for them; I had them work on assignments that required them to open and save documents. It's misleading sometimes to think that American students should be technologically proficient. While the numbers indicate a large proportion of Americans are wired, there still exists a digital divide; this fact makes implementing technology in the classroom risky. In fact, at a recent conference many made sure to reinforce this idea; some were even disparaging. While I took heed at the warnings, I have proceeded. Few students have complained of difficulty, and given that one of the classes is in a computer lab, I have no reservations about what I have asked of them.

On Wednesday, I finally decided to have the students collaborate online. I have split my persuasive writing class into groups for in-class activities. They have worked to come up with an issue for in-class group work, through brainstorming and blogging. After some deliberation, they reached consensus; after some inquiry about where they stood, I felt it a good time to push them ahead. I asked them to go over what they had discussed with their groups, open their group documents, and write their own impressions about their groups' issues.

After answering the usual I'm-confused-whattya-mean questions, they jumped in. And then they freaked out. They seemed to feel a number of emotions as they realized they were in the same document with their peers. Some were excited, some were a bit confused, and some just thought it was creepy. It was almost like watching a child who realizes the image in the mirror is its reflection. So after their emoting crescendoed - brought about by the picture of a fuzzy kitten placed no doubt by one of their more technology proficient peers - I put my hands up and said, "HANDS OFF THE KEYBOARDS!"

Both the typing and the noise began to subside, and I once again revisited the purpose of the exercise. That seemed to center most of them. We had other problems. Some students couldn't find the document, a couple had not signed up for Gmail, and some had difficulty working with the documents. Once they calmed down, they managed to get through the exercise.

My own classes have had a rocky start, too. I'm not sure I'll receive graduate credit for one of my classes, and I'm trying to figure out my employment situation in the summer. I'm also searching for research project topics. I haven't heard anything about the graduate forum that I submitted to, so I have a feeling that won't pan out. But I hope to submit my case study on Kosovo to AEJMC as a student paper. Again, I would simply like feedback that will enable me to proceed with the project.

Overall it will all fall into place; until it does, I feel same the vertigo that I see in my students. Will it work? How will it work? WHEN will it work? How do I fit into this? In the end, the world is created by those brave enough to seek and present their answers to these questions. When we challenge ourselves to answer, then we possibly come close to touching a dream of freedom, perhaps the one true freedom each of us possesses: the freedom to imagine the world as it could be.

whew! what a semester!

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 04:28:00 +0000

it took me a while to blog. this past semester was difficult. i took nine hours and taught two classes. i will do the same thing in the spring. but busting butt now means finishing course work by next fall. i'm anxious to get to the PhD.

for those of you who have perused my blog, it should be evident that i've been interested in kosovo. it actually became the focal point of my fall semester projects. in my development communications class, i worked on what i hope is a good start to a case study exploring how the regulatory and legislative framework promulgated by the UN mission in kosovo facilitated what has become Kosovar Albanians' opportunity to create their own media. this exploration was remarkable for many reasons. first, many of these documents - at least created by Kosovo's provisional government - are available online. second, in flipping through each of the documents, spread out across my floor by date or by agency or some other descriptor that i used in my haphazard filing system, i saw the creation of what many in the tiny province hope will be a country. i make no predictions about what will happen, only to reiterate what i put forth when i spoke with my poli sci professor. i don't think serbia will let the province go easily. and i don't think kosovo will stay easily. this tiny patch of earth should be kept in mind because it signifies an even larger tension between the united states and russia. sometimes i think following some of these events and speculating on what could happen is actually much more fun than watching television.

speaking of television: i'm almost finished with neil postman's "amusing ourselves to death." i highly recommend it.

my second project - for my international relations class - also focused on kosovo. but i took a much different angle. some have indicated that the un took steps in kosovo and east timor that it hadn't taken previously. while it had helped governments rebuild - for instance in cambodia - it didn't actually take over governance as it had in kosovo and east timor. because i think that the american news media help us organize our understanding of the world, i felt a change in un action such as this should be studied, especially how it appeared in the american news media. i struggled with the project to a certain degree. i was in a political science class, and their research methods vary from those used in media research. in the end, i came up with a framing analysis. i would divulge more, but i plan to submit the project to a symposium. i will write more about how it turns out. i am excited about the project, as i really like framing as a theoretical tool. while it isn't all-encompassing, i challenge researchers to find a theoretical tool that is. but i think it offers ways of exploring phenomena that sometimes cannot be explored in other ways.

school is about a week away, and i'm still working diligently with preparing for the courses that i will teach. i hope to contact michael wesch who teaches at kansas state university. he has used some of these web 2.0 tools in remarkable ways, and i'm interested in using these tools not only in the classroom but in my research, as well. i would be interested to hear from journalists globally about different issues, especially information flows; i hope some of these tools could facilitate that. i know few probably consider information flows a viable research consideration any more but i think it's especially pertinent now.

this semester, i'm taking a geography course that will focus on development in the third world, an international news communications course, and media globalization course. i'm really excited about what i will learn and even more excited what research questions i will discover. is anybody else wondering about how we evaluate information now? a brief vignette to illustrate a point before i close down for the evening.

my aunt, whom i love dearly, came to visit twice while i was at home - my original home is oklahoma, my diasporal home is phl - and we gathered around the kitchen table as we talked. my father, mother, aunt, cousin, and i warmly talked about the world and its state of affairs. on her second visit, because each visit she came with different cousins, she made the comment that she didn't know what had happened to the world. the value of human life everywhere seemed to be in decline. and i'm not sure if i said this aloud or only thought this, but it occurred that when she grew up she didn't have the rapid flow of violent images that she probably sees today, nor was the symbolic environment of her youth shaped the way it is today. i made the point, though i think it was lost on my more conservative elders, that we now have access to other sources of information; when i say other sources, i mean of course sources of information from other nations. i wonder how we would evaluate this information. probably, given my company, with skepticism. many studies indicate the flow of images and news content into the united states show "the other" as an exotic place, a violent, unwieldy place that exists in stark contrast to our comfortable, american lives. in other studies, political content is often painted with a nationalistic brush despite which side of the political continuum the news media may reside. what happens when we have access to news sources from beyond our national borders? how do we evaluate that information? would my aunt's world seem so violent? maybe. maybe not. i've lived in philly for the better part of a year and a half, and i have yet to see a drive-by despite the persistent news items in local media about the violence that pervades the city.

Notes from Video, Education, and Open Content

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 20:40:00 +0000

Below are my notes from the Video, Education, and Open Content Conference in New York. I posted these on my MySpace blog, but I wanted easier access to the links, both for myself and my students. I will continue to update the links, as I've found at least a half dozen more. This is an exciting time in education and the world. We have unprecedented access to technology, and as we try to get a handle, we must attempt to broaden that access to all. Just think about people who cannot afford to go to school having access to course materials from MIT and Yale University. If today's primary mantra is freedom = the ability to consume, then access to cultural heritage worldwide and the ability to recreate can greatly enhance that freedom, taking us through terrain never before seen. Equalizing access should be a top concern in education, always balancing the creator's rights with those of the users. Once you visit some of these links, you'll understand why I'm so excited about these possibilities.

Video, Education and Open Content: Best Practices
Production, Distribution, Technology and the Law
May 22-23, 2007

Opening Remarks

Frank Moretti's information can be found at the above link, as his name kept eating everybody else's code. Don't ask me; I'm not a programmer.

Cathy Casserly,William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, Program Officer in Education at the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.
The goal of the foundation is to equalize access to knowledge and improve teaching and learning. Today's students are on separate but parallel tracks: what they are doing in classrooms and what they are doing in their daily lives.

Peter B. Kaufman, Intelligent Television, CCNMTL, President and CEO of Intelligent Television and Associate Director of the Columbia University Center for New Media Teaching and Learning.
Atlas Media: new division of theatrical documentaries.
Open Culture
1. Demand for online video has exploded.
2. Opportunities to produce have exploded.
3. Access is undeniable. Moving images archives are being digitized.
4. Portability: access anywhere.
5. Laws and economics are changing.

Video and education – new worlds...Appreciating the new role of video in education
Peter Brantley, Digital Library Federation, Executive Director of the Digital Library Federation.
Challenges that video pose for digital libraries
Digital libraries act as repositories. Libraries have been about physical things, basically offline (not on network). They have been passive. Libraries purchased and licensed objects, and people go to the library to use these objects. But now people make own media; access is assured. Dramatic changes in library: cafe at Berkeley with students' engaging in collaborative work. Music and sound not things like books. How can library be active? Video is didactic: it allows for exchange.

Murray Weston, British Universities Film and Video Council, Director of the British Universities Film and Video Council.
The council promotes production, study and use of moving images and sound in U.K. universities through subscriptions. You must be a registered student. How are moving pictures used in education? He provided this list:
1. As instrument: illustration – visual aid;
2. For enrichment: affective domain;
3. For reference as primary or secondary record: use in historical research and scholarship/ for cultural reference;
4. As scientific device: as scientific record
5. As a creative medium: communicate, inform, etc.
Its status in scholarship is underdeveloped in many respects. Importance of context and provenance are of concern as well as access questions. Metadata is king (not always content). Ask questions like: what do most teachers/students want? We need funds to set up and maintain. There should be collaboration of owners, formal reviews, agreements, sharing licenses: ultimately we should seek international harmonization and clarification.

Paul Gerhardt, BBC Creative Archive, Executive Director of the BBC Creative Archive.
BBC conducted project for 18-months, and gained 100,000 registered users. Purposes included education, national history, etc., and content areas included fact and news areas. The archive was restrained with entertainment because a complex set of issues. BBC is heavily regulated (overregulated). It conducted a public value test, which lasted 6-9 months. It was an exhaustive study to discern the value to people and market impact. In a post-broadcast world funding compounds these challenges. The BBC is committed to making content and access more open, but doing this is a huge challenge. It created a digital curriculum, multimedia based on school curriculum. Due to a complaint filed by EU, the BBC pulled plug. The first phase includes share license, and it is still continuing to archive.

Keynote address...Remarks from a recovered archivist and filmmaker, Prelinger Archives and Internet Archive, Rick Prelinger, writer, archivist, filmmaker, is founder of the Prelinger Archives, co-founder of the Prelinger Library, and Board President of the Internet Archive
Best practices include the following:
1. Leverage of existing resources. buy out of rights bundled in educational media.
2. Segmentation
3. Openness: not one-shot deal but on a continuum. There is a broad spectrum of interactions in education, and open earth content should include not just access but production. People need the freedom to remix: to get their hands on object and play. We need to share, to network experience with others. Interoperability rests upon openness, and we should default to open to share materials as freely as the law allows.
4. Moratorium: to declare a moratorium on closure and complex copyright laws. Points of departure: bridging production, archive and education. Archives: gone retail, unprecedented response from new users. Sites like YouTube have raised public's expectations, and it's hard to see how institutions can meet them. Repurposing material is cheaper than making new material, especially with entertainment. When producing content, we should default to openness, not encumber form the start. We should work on exclusivity: distribution channels should allow for openness.

Production – university best practices...A review of several among many innovative university productions
John Frankfurt and Mark Phillipson, CCNMTL, Phillipson is Coordinator of Teaching, Learning, and Library Services at the Center for New Media Teaching and Learning at Columbia University. Frankfurt is Educational Technologist at the Center for New Media Teaching and Learning at Columbia University.
Havel – The Havel exhibit was unusual for center; it was events driven as opposed to content driven. It includes interviews that viewers can watch by chapters. The center negotiated with CNN to use raw footage, allowed to take hours of footage and cut to fit content of the site. The site includes different types of interviews: archives, production, and donated footage. Much of the content was gathered under open, but there are mixed resources from library. Falls into the Digital Bridges Initiative: Havel remains in website but some day will be in repository, share and harvested. It is a RSS website. It involves the recontextualization of video. Videos were collected, and users can add to their notebook. The chapter goes into notebook. You must register to use the site. (I've been trying to figure this site out for two days; I'll let you know how it comes out).

Diana E. E. Kleiner, Yale OER VLP, and Paul Lawrence, CMI2, Kleiner is Dunham Professor of History of Art and Classics at Yale University and Director of Yale's Open Educational Resources Video Lecture Project.
Yale's OER project was funded by the Hewlett Foundation, and will be available through Open CourseWares by Fall 2007. It involves:
1. Video to make available certain number of courses
2. Faculty recruitment that are willing to share intellectual property
3. IP/Collections
4. Full arts and sciences curriculum
5. Innovation
The project is a confluence of content and medium, and fits with Yale's objectives for globalization overall. Video is optimum vehicle for presentation. Initially it will involve seven courses but will expand in the future. The overall goal is a open classroom worldwide free. The project hopes to capture:
1. The person: video will feature professor and unique pedagological approach;
2. A place: video allows open live classroom and ability to share information;
3. The learning process itself: widespread audit, accessing information, and is about gradual intellectual revolution;
4. A creative remix: go beyond auditing, picking and choosing what to view; its
focus is on content. The project optimizes the element of choice, building curriculum. Courses might pose problems depending on securing rights to use.

Scott Shunk, Visualizing Cultures, MIT, Project Director of Visualizing Cultures at MIT.
The site provides a functional platform for the content through examination of historical record through images. John Dowers, professor at MIT, wanted a way to distribute the content as well as a way to wrap text around images to add value to content and his work. The project is digital image scholarship: content (cultural institution), scholars and knowledge to contextualize content in order to allow access to materials. The content now focuses on Japan. It provides content that is broken into units. The core exhibit is text that uses embedded images. These are presented in visual narratives: themes from text, illustrated like a graphic novel. When you provide no context, it becomes difficult to navigate the content. It is a means to add levels of context and have open, free and available; it is also meant to empower with added level of relevance. Moreover, users can create their own productions. It is a scholarly context around visual imagery that enables users to create own pathways into content.

Mike Cubit, MediaVision, Case Western, Director of MediaVision at Case Western Reserve University.
MediaVision allows web delivery of lecture content and other forms of content. The expectations of students are high, and his department uses students as leverage when comes to tackling adoption by faculty. Examples of MediaVision's content include Telesurgery, Wireless Mesh Project, Red (an orchestra), and Second Life. You can view these at Case.TV. There's a searchable archive with fully indexed and tagged and tagged content. While students mostly use video, they do not use audio often. Most students indicated they use video to clarify concepts.

Production – producer best practices...Exemplary educational productions from outside the academy
Margaret Drain, WGBH, Vice President of National Programming at WGBH.
We shall Remain
Car of the Future
Teachers Domain
Adoption
Above are examples of projects using technology for education. These programs include NOVA, American Perspectives, and others. Each program has digital platform. We Shall Remain provides a Native American perspective: WGBH gave cell phones to Native Americans. They are looking for five strong stories about the struggle to survive. They did this for two reasons: it is increasing participation, and they are attempting to bridge the digital divide. They partnered with museum in Arizona. They provided a Nokia camera phones worth about $750-800, and they trained in narrative storytelling. Car of the Future is a way to help today's drivers. The web is used for open production. They put production content online and encouraged feedback. This brings the audience into the process of production. NOVA is the site most used, and it is critical to reach people. Most is open content, but some is not. It is difficult to get carte blanche for mash up, etc. Teachers Domain involves segmenting archival material: 1,000 clips or resources. Some of the content can be downloaded and remix; it provides four levels of usage. The Adoption project is not funded. They should find out this coming week. Its production actually begins online, but then ends up on television. They will provide three families with cameras who will record each week as they go through the stages of adoption.

Thomas Lucas, Thomas Lucas Productions, director and producer and President of Thomas Lucas Productions.
Lucas is an independent producer. He primarily works with scientific data. He creates simulation alongside of theory and data collection. Others from different places can access data and collaborate.

Curtis Wong, Microsoft, Principal Researcher and Manager of the Microsoft Next Media Research Group.
Wong is working to create deeper understanding by providing layered stories, contexts, and information. The narrative provides the story; the context enables the users to explore their interests. One example he provided was the Codex Lester: DiVinci liked organic metaphors. So the graphic included a tree, with a number of other smaller graphics. Microsoft is not thinking about new media, but rather the next media as well as interactive television. Links to examples are below.
Commanding Heights
The Age of AIDS.

Distribution – platforms and technologies – best practices more...Distribution options and best practices for educational video
Obie Greenberg, Google/YouTube
Obadiah T. Greenberg, now at YouTube, helped to launch UC Berkeley's iTunes service.
What is YouTube doing in education? YouTube has reached a critical mass for audiences. To keep up with demand and provide services to students, UC-Berkeley launched its own site on Google Video on September 26, 2006. They include courses, events, sports, etc. YouTube is the host site. YouTube accounts offer branding opportunities. Branded channel includes a watch page. For example, NBA is treated as a user. Play list with sequence of videos is provided. Also, there are communities. with sub channels. Border is an image map.

Stacey Seltzer, Joost, Senior VP of Content Strategy, Acquisition and Operations for Joost.
Joost offers peer-to-peer interaction with television content. It is currently in beta form and only available to friends. It enables people to move information around the internet and file sharing. It is third generation technology that has been optimized and offered to public over the Internet. It deals primarily with closed content, offering a streaming experience. A series of platform widgets enable users to interact with content and share content. Metadata enables users to organize and provide more information about content. It is a channel driven system.

Donna Liu, University Channel/Princeton University, Founder and Executive Director of the University Channel Project at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.
University Channel is an attempt to lower barriers of production and distribution. It is essentially a blog that offers a series of lectures. It distributes to television stations for rebroadcast, and its primary goal is to get the content out.

Ben Hubbard, University of California – Berkeley, Special Events & Video Services Manager at the University of California – Berkeley's Educational Technology Center.
UC-Berkeley distributes webcasts and podcasts of lecture materials and other content. They have partnerships with Google and Apple. Sakai Webcast Systems. Keep eyes on building frameworks.

Archiving – best practices more...Accessing educational video archives
Karen Colbron, WGBH, OpenVault, Manager, Media Library and Archives, Digital Access Management Initiative, WGBH.
Open Vault uses emerging technology to archive and provide a framework for access to rich media material. It brings content from New Television Workshop, Say Brother, and The Ten O'Clock News with grant funds in order to link across content to facilitate access. This website allows functionality; users can scroll over item and the title appears in top left. The site provides a description of the item as well as a notes feature. Users can send the URL to share information. The page also has a feature that is similar to Netflix, by showing items of similar interest. When browsing the archives, users can browse five levels deep. (Not all of the clips are available, though many of these clips are listed).

Jane Johnson, Library of Congress MIC Project, Library of Congress MIC Project Manager.
The MIC provides a tool for discovery. It is a database that provides a layer of functionality. The repository provides a platform for collaboration. AMIA collaborates with the Library of Congress and is funded in large part by the National Science Foundation. A major component to the MIC is a union catalogue, which brings together images from participating archives allowing users to search different archives nationwide. It pulls up moving images. It is an attempt to address what Johnson called a crisis in film preservation. They conducted a feasibility study to explore the integration of databases and discover access policies. They hope eventually to hold the rights to metadata and are currently exploring different metadata strategies.

Andrea Kalas, British Film Institute, Head of Preservation at the British Film Institute National Archive.
This archive enables the preservation and public access to moving images that played role in history and provides different voices. It is a co production with BBC. One example is the preservation of Mitchell and Kenyon films, portrait photography of the everyday lives of those in Britain. They have attempted to build information about the films to give the films context. The collection contains over 800 nonfiction titles 1900 to 1913. In addition the collection includes The Open Road, a collection of travelogues by Claude Friese Greene, a pioneer filmmaker exploring the uses of the color process.

Archiving and production – best practices...New approaches to bringing production and archival sensibilities more closely together
Jeff Ubois, Intelligent Television, Director of Archiving and Access Solutions at Intelligent Television.
There is a need to explore collaborative approaches to archiving. This is especially true as television gains a memory. NetTV is not television. Online communications and archives should be built around production, collaboration and cataloguing. Different organizations, such as Democracy Now!, have begun to tap volunteers on Internet to lower costs. There is a need to explore public-private partnerships.
ParkRidge47
Torture Taxi

Nan Rubin, Thirteen/WNET, Project Director, Preserving Digital Public Television, at Thirteen/WNET. and Kevin Devine, Thirteen/WNET, Vice President and Chief Technology Officer at Thirteen/WNET.
There is a need to preserve digital public television. The station is currently using its existing system to preserve. Through the American Archive, some materials can be made available, especially for use in educational settings.

Video and open content...The expanding role of video in the open content movement
John Dehlin, Open CourseWare Consortium, Director of the OpenCourseWare Consortium based at MIT.
Openness requires a major mind shift. The consortium is attempting to managing growth and maintaining quality. Currently the consortium deals primarily with course materials. Some of the courses have lecture video. Attempting to find ways to preserve course materials. They are struggling with how to make more affordable and richer at the same time. Some universities have take down policies, in case complaints about fair use arise. They are currently collaborating with Itunes Europe. They are attempting to find the funds to build learning communities, and want to create a vertical rather than simply horizontal functionality.

Video, education, and the law – best practices...Rights and other legal considerations for producers, distributors, and consumers
Eric Saltzman, Creative Commons, lawyer and filmmaker, is a member of the Board of Directors of Creative Commons.
From the moment a work is created, it is copyrighted. There's nothing about letting people know the work is copyrighted. For owners who want tell people up front want people to use work, creative content licenses are available on website. They are meant to compliment to copyright. Many licenses require attribution. Some content is more complicated, when users take material from other sources and use. FATHOM. MIT courseware content use licenses that permit derivative work. Science commons are funded by the Hewlett Foundation. Learning Commons attempt to coordinate world of open educational resources.

Josh Nathan, Thirteen/WNET, General Counsel at Thirteen/WNET.
The station has a strong partnership with educators. Rights of copyright owners are negotiated through manner, territory and term. Also they deal with exclusivity. It's all about money. Many want to give up few rights for the amount of money they can get. However, technology is changing the viewership. New economic models are developing, especially with how content is distributed. Rather than video being for sale or rental, it's now specified as home use. How do rights holders get their money? Nathan also foresees that the idea of exclusivity will change. It's early to determine best practices but there is a need to tag and track content to make money. We need to figure out how to build and maintain archive, and we need to rethink public broadcasting. Classroom use needs to change.

Technology – best practices...Technology issues at the intersection of video and education
Maurice Matiz, CCNMTL, Vice Executive Director and Director of Technology at the Center for New Media Teaching and Learning at Columbia University.
The center is trying to get faculty to use technology in a useful way. Trying to employ what it has learned over the years about technology and education. Several aspects are considered: what faculty wants students to learn; faculty needs time for brainstorming; and finding open market. He mentioned TechCrunch. There is a need to know the university's IT stance; are they protectionists or will they open up the content? Finally, students become collaborators. Students often do not know how to use their computers as an educational tool.

Shen Tong, VFinity, Founder and President of VFinity.
VFinity is a social network, which attempts to use the web as a social phenomenon and cultural force. Challenges include difficulties for libraries/archives, broadcasters/publishers, music labels, and film studios. How do we make content equally available to everyone? The software attempts to harness power of the web. It includes an intuitive web interface; users can find video/documents/images. Users can manage in a unified way. The software offers a seemless self-service, controlled vocabulary and free tagging, flexible and open architecture. Users have a dynamic workflow that includes Browser access and is search centric.

Abram Stern, UCSC/Metavid, co-founder of the Metavid Project at the University of California Santa Cruz.
Metavid is a collection of open content, attempting to create open access of U.S. House and Senate. Stern contends the film is public domain. CSPAN did not agree, so Metavid bought about $1,700 worth of film. They are archiving not just video but also closed-caption text. The linear video posed problems. They had the video files but needed to make the files useable. They found information about who is talking based on OCR name data. The archives use Ogg/Theorn software, (which Eric Blankinship let me know Macs have plug-in so I can download files). Metavid enables users to grab smaller portions of video.

Teaching and learning – best practices...Examples of the purposeful use of video in the university
Frank Moretti, John Frankfurt, Michael Preston, CCNMTL
Video in classroom should take advantage of teachable moment. The center used the expertise of Arnold Gesell to help improve teacher education through the use of video. See VITAL as an example. How do you capture details like observe, interpret, think, transfer, and revise? They built a web environment and shoot video, with help of a grant. It includes a video viewer with tools. It enables users to mark in and out points, make notes, and embed video in the essay (text box). Essays can be illustrated with clips, used like quotes, references or footnotes.

Dean Rehberger and Michael Fegan, Michigan State University, MATRIX, Rehberger is an Associate Director of MATRIX and also Associate Professor in the department of Writing, Rhetoric and American Cultures at Michigan State University. Michael Fegan is Chief Information Officer at MATRIX at Michigan State University.
The university had a digital library. Students were not using it much, which lead to the question: how can it be more effective? They wanted students to be able to access, use and reuse content. It acts as a secondary depository: students find digital objects and use digital objects. They can segment and annotate media; they can use with all types of media and combine into online presentations. It includes a layer to help undergraduates think about why and how using source materials, in a form that students fill out. The depository stores URLs, and includes a text database and access when users access. It does NOT store the media.

Judy Stern, University of California – Berkeley, User Interaction Designer at University of California – Berkeley's Educational Technology Center.
The system helps instructors use technology to engage in active learning. Some of the challenges include technology costs, service constraints, and lack of scalability. It allows students to review course materials, but on the human side, the challenges include instructor acceptance. The system involved two different threads: ETS – Educational Technology Services and the adoption of Sakai. The center employs a user-centered design. It focuses on users, attempting to fully understand users based on research and modeling.

Research and scholarly communication – best practices...The research agenda for the role of moving images in education
Richard Lucier, Scholarly Communications Institute, Director of the Scholarly Communications Institute.
The Institute is funded by Mellon Foundation and housed at the University of Virginia. Its purpose is to move scholarly communication to change. The library is at the heart of scholarship. Institute explores scholarly communications as a cyclical process. It begins with research, discovery, dissemination, etc., and eventually back to research and discovery. It deals primarily with humanities scholars. The overall goal is to create opportunities for scholars to understand and embrace digital scholarship. It is working to build cyberinfrastructure with the American Council of Learned Societies.

Patricia Renfro, Columbia University Libraries, Deputy University Librarian at Columbia University.
The libraries are building collections in different ways. Sino-Tibetan Oral History Project. Frontiers of Science. Videotaping professors and develop course materials around that video. Jazz Studies Online. They have acquired different legacy collections. Challenges to these collections include dissemination, storing/accessing/archiving, and preserving analog collections. There is a need for a proposed national agenda for video preservation, i.e., standards/practices, copyright IP, service bureaus, metadata standards.

Richard Kahlenberg, TVSmarts.com
Richard Kahlenberg is the founding archivist of the American Film Institute and Editor of TVSmarts.com.
The site generates a media menu based on the educational standards of various states. The site enables these menus to be imported into school sites. The menu can sort by age and will be based on standards. He says students score higher on tests and write more than if sent to library; however, he presented no data to back this up. It was clear this bothered people in the audience.

Finance – agendas and best practices...The economics of educational video production and distribution
David Weinstein, National Endowment for the Humanities, Senior Program Officer in the Division of Public Programs at the National Endowment for the Humanities.
Digital humanities Initiative deals with what's going on and where the money should go. It is concerned about how best use of technology to serve public. It provides start up grants for activities like podcasting, archives, gaming, or making objects open source. It has five new programs. He felt the walls between public programs and education are collapsing.

Dan Lukash, Institute of Museums and Library Services, Senior Program Officer at the Institute of Museums and Library Services.
The Institute connects people to information and ideas. Its primary institutions for grants are libraries, museums, and institutions of higher education.

Brian Newman, Renew Media, Executive Director of ReNew Media.
Newman talked about the economics of educational video production and distribution. The reality of content is that artists want to make money. Artists want freedom to create, make a profit, but most don't. A paid educational marketplace is important. Artists are not aware of alternative licensing. A disparity exists in what goes into production and what gets back to artists. He talked a little about the Reframe Project, which enables artists to digitize video for free and film at cost. New trends are emerging: DVD on demand, digital download to own or rent. The prices at set by rights holder. The trend is heading to ingest on demand, which might involve charging after a certain number of people watch. The system needs to be sustainable: open content with profit rather than nonprofit or for profit.

Next steps I - new structures and efficiencies...Exploring new potential collaborations in the field
Frank Moretti, CCNMTL
These changes involved redefining, recontextualizing, and restructuring. These points of departure exist in the institution. They must be done within the practice. He pointed to the The Triangle Initiative as an example. These changes need to occur in the classroom, in the community, and within the university.

Mara Hancock, University of California – Berkeley, Associate Director of Learning Systems at the University of California – Berkeley's Educational Technology Center.
The center has over 0,000 hours of media, and has seen 10.6 million downloads in 2006. Dynamic media challenges include making more media, podcasts and webcasts, available as well as easier to access. The barriers include technology, proprietary code, people and culture. The system needs to be: scalable, which means reproducible; sustainable, which involves maintaining, supporting, and funding; and growable, like an ecosystem. Open content should exist in open systems. Open systems and standards lead to the ecosystem. There should be alignment across institutions. We need to teardown boundaries and learn how to be in a networked environment.

Next steps II – opening code and content...Future directions for making educational video openly available
Rick Prelinger, Prelinger Archives

Dean Jansen, Participatory Culture Foundation
Dean Jansen is Special Projects Coordinator at the Participatory Culture Foundation.

Colin Rhinesmith, Berkman Center, Harvard Law School
Colin Rhinesmith is Digital Media Producer at Berkman Center for Internet & Society at the Harvard Law School

Chris Abani on Narratives and Africa

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 04:18:00 +0000

In perusing YouTube, I was pleased to see that TED has its own channel. And looking through the many wonderful videos, I clicked on this video of Chris Abani. He provides an excellent lecture, at least titled on YouTube, "Learning the Narratives of Africa." Take a look.

WMD? OMG! IDK! WTF?

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Wed, 08 Aug 2007 14:30:00 +0000

In the fall, I'll be teaching my very first journalism class. In the past, I've helped teach reporting, and I've taught my own English Comp and Public Speaking courses. But I'm really excited at the opportunity to teach about something that I love.

As a part of that, current affairs, both foreign and domestic - now inextricably woven together, will be a large part. Below is an ongoing list that I'm compiling, and it is not close to complete. But it takes time to go from website to website, finding links and what not. I figured I would share because I know you need them to text your friends about current events on the global scale. Feel free to let me know I missed some, but please include a link to the website!

UN-United Nations
UNESCO-United Nations Education, Science, and Cultural Organization
OPEC-Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries
OECD -Organisation for Co-operation and Economic Development
WTO-World Trade Organization
DDA-Doha Development Agenda
GATT-General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
the Bank-World Bank
EU-European Union
NATO-North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
NAFTA-North American Free Trade Agreement
CAFTA-Central American Free Trade Agreement
IMF-International Monetary Fund
ASEAN-Association of Southeast Asian Nations
AUAfrican Union
AEC-African Economic Union
OAU-Organization of African Unity
SAARC-South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation
SAU-South Asian Union

Developing a mosaic

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Sat, 04 Aug 2007 02:43:00 +0000

As I follow several developments in Iraq, Turkey, and many parts of Africa, as well as Iran, Venezuela, and the United States, I begin to see linearity as almost a slippery slope; each story provides a perspective, and almost like a chicken scratching for food, I follow the various strands flowing from each story. I've always gazed at the larger picture, sometimes completely overlooking the ridges and textures, components and landscapes that reside within the wider view. Often it is difficult not to pursue a more narrowly crafted perspective, but like a glutton for punishment I opt to understand all the forces at work in the human environment. I guess that's why globalization, an intellectual monolith, is so intriguing to me.

Cultural imperialism, globalization, and hybridity represent three theoretical frameworks to examine communications, overlapping but providing distinct tools for understanding communications within the condition of modernity and postmodernity. According to Giddens (1990), "(M)odernity refers to modes of social life and organisation which emerged in Europe from about the 17th Century onwards and which subsequently became more or less worldwide in their influence" (p. 3). The distinguishing mark of modernity is threefold: its pace of change, its scope of change, and its nature of modern institutions. According to Giddens, capitalism is the "emergent social order of modernity", and as such, many theorists have explored their concerns about the expansion of this social order, which, throughout it existence, has developed from the West to penetrate lesser developed areas or nation-states. I find the word 'penetration' is lacking in many cases, as the West has also tried to build nation-states, prop them up, or even raze them to the ground.

While some theorists have argued the cultural imperialist critique is fraught with problems (Tomlinson, 1991) or is essentially one-sided (Kellner, 2002), they do not completely dismiss the critique's usefulness. However, they realize these ideas of inequity fit inside a much broader perspective. Globalization is the body of knowledge that seeks to describe the condition of modernity and postmodernity, but vis-a-vis quickly evolving technological advancement, transportation, and an increasingly integrated economic system. Globalization theories are concerned with the increasingly interconnected world, especially where communications are concerned, and they move beyond cultural imperialism, to recognize the unfolding complexity of global reality, the recent developments in communications and technology, as well as their consequences.

This complexity, these developments, and the resultant human environment involve the overlapping categories of economics, politics, and culture. In trying to describe the most recent phase of globalization, many realize prior models and theories simply fail to account for current processes. In fact, Appadurai wrote in 1996 that these processes simply defied description at that time. These developments challenge older ideas of the relevancy of the nation-state and are changing fundamental social organizations, such as familial relationships and identity based on geographic location. Kellner argued in 2002 for a "critical theory of globalization that will will discuss the fundamental transformations of the world economy, politics, and culture in a dialectical framework that distinguishes between progressive and emancipatory features and oppressive and negative attributes" (p. 283). However, the intermingling of positive and negative characteristics is sometimes difficult to separate, and in many cases more difficult to find equilibrium.

Modern transportation allows for migration, and communications allow for constant contact and mediation among individuals at long distances (Appadurai, 1996). These changes lend themselves to the bending of traditional ideas of temporal, spatial, and geographic contexts that the human condition simply has not encountered before. Within this complexity, all levels of the human condition appear: from the individual, to groups, to nation-states, to international organizations, as globalization theorists attempt to map each strand in ever-growing multiplicities of humans existences.

We can view globalization as a multidimensional process, comprised of social, political, and economic interactive levels (Pieterse, 1995). Developments have given rise to new social formations and have challenged the dominant institutions, allowing us to transcend the geographic boundaries of the nation-state. As social formations and culture recede, so too does geographic importance (Waters, 1995). It is precisely this disjuncture that inflames national, religious and ethnic sentiments (Appadurai, 1996). Appadurai argues of a rupture in modernity theory, through which mass mediation and diaspora collude to create new public spheres in a world that he describes as postnational. These global flows of people, media, and finance cannot be easily reconciled; for example, the diaspora exasperates ethnic tensions but could be viewed positively by some with regard to cheap labor.

Moreover, international theories concerning political systems or political economy just simply fail to encompass the complexity of the human condition created by globalization. For example, Wallerstein had envisioned that a pair of mechanisms - the nation and the state - generally evolved to, among others, serve the bourgeois and its newly acquired power. These mechanisms operated in tandem but are now often truncated, depending on the nation-state's level of development, by other nation-states, international organizations, or in most cases corporations. Like other political theories, Wallerstein's world-system theory presupposes a certain arrangement for nation-states in the international system. In this system, it is clear the nation-state plays a role. But in the larger global system, some theorists, like Appadurai, have pondered the utility of the nation-state, arguing that its role might eventually become obsolete. However, he also adds that he is unsure what would take its place; I hope his book, Globalization will shed some light on this.

It's not difficult, then, if you view globalization as a multidimensional process, to see how the international system would come into play, especially with regard to information. Often many perspectives vie for attention, and in many cases, veracious information is obscured by political, social, or economic agendas. For example, while the Iraq War might have global implications and complications, it had inevitably unfolded primarily between two main players, Iraq and the United States. At the time, the dominant idea for the war was Iraq's defiance with its WMD. I ran home from the university because buzz about the war circulated around campus; I wanted to SEE the war for myself, from Stillwater, Oklahoma, USA. It would not be the first time that I watched war on television; clips from the first Gulf War were a mainstay on CNN. But more than a decade had passed, and communication technologies had improved. Below are clips obtained from YouTube, from various sources including Australian, American, and Asian news organizations; I believe the actual footage for all three might have derived from Al Jazeera.

At that moment, the Iraq War was disseminated, and globally the cultural, economic, and political processes changed; politically the Bush doctrine solidified and became a reality. If Afghanistan was a meek wake-up call, then Iraq was boiling pot of water saying, "Get your ass out of bed." The economic and cultural ramifications that followed seemed on par with the political discussions: Americans take and invade; we permeate other cultures to secure our own place in the world and to ensure our own cultural, economic, and political supremacy. Televising the Shock and Awe campaign simply gave these perceptions dimensions and validation. Of course, I'm sure a slew of perspectives exist, and many Americans sat glued to the television, subconsciously happy that we have the artillery.

But understanding the problems relies on information. In this case, many Americans justified the idea of obliterating another nation-state's sovereignty - a no-no in the international order for a while - with the idea of WMD. I think eventually other ideas, such as liberation as well as connections to 9/11, began to emerge, morphed from the original context, (or even pretext including securing access to petroleum and stabilizing the Middle East for our economic well-being), for even entering the country. Thus, the problem becomes apparent. The problem with the American news media resides in its flat portrayal and the consequent understanding of the situations that require much deeper comprehension. Many Americans slide back and forth on a continuum, from the acutely informed to the absolutely ignorant. And this flat coverage has wings, misunderstanding and scant comprehension spreads and morphs as it does, like some crazy virus.

Can Americans withdraw from our inextricable position within a hegemony to understand the actualities occurring in these other countries? Or is the postmodern condition too much with us? If we believe we act righteously, how righteous are the outcomes when the reason for acting is found unjust?

It seems strange that while we open our newspapers or turn on the daily news, absorbing information from official sources, people criss-crossing the globe are communicating information that gatekeepers withhold or discard. If Appadurai is correct, many exchange information that might be vital to our understanding, but these walls of identity, a citadel at which sentries stand in wait to turn away information that doesn't quite mesh with our reality, keep us from sharing or even knowing. And as I travel from website to website trying to get a handle on Kurdistan, or Iraq, or Swaziland, or Venezuela, the problem is not the lack of information, but rather the veracity of the information. Do we believe Iran needs to develop an alternative form of energy, such as the energy provided by nuclear power, or do we believe the Bush administration that Iran intends to produce weapons of mass destruction? That term, weapons of mass destruction, has a familiar feel to it. But it seems this time around the idea of weapons is already colluding with other ideas - Iranians want liberation; Iran poses a threat to its neighbors; Iran aids terrorists.

When you look back at the mosaic of news stories, one must dig deeper to gather the multiplicity of perspectives and work hard to piece them together. And as you add the layers of complexity and human interaction - news organizations, reporters, editors, audiences, reedits, reposts, word of mouth all multiplying meaning - the meaning morphs and changes, like the telephone game gone awry. Some are content with the evening news or reading the local newspaper.

But those who search throughout the net, what is the news standard by which the quality of that work or information is judged? Do we judge the international news product by the same gauge that we judge the American news product? There is no universal standard, and to claim there is - or to lay claim to it - just simply smacks of outlandish ego. But we forget, don't we? We forget that information coming from other places was gathered by those with different cultural norms. How do we, then, begin to come outside ourselves, to realize this mosaic to form a more aligned understanding of the human condition?

References
Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at Large: Cultural dimensions of globalization. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Giddens, A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford University Press.

Kellner, D. (2002). Theorizing Globalization. Sociological Theory. (20)3.

Pieterse, J.N. (1995). Globalization as Hybridization in Global Modernities. In M. Featherstone, S. Lash, & R. Robertson (Eds)., pp. 45-68, Global Modernities. London: Sage.

Tomlinson, J. (1991). Cultural Imperialism. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

Wallerstein, I. (1974). The Modern World-System I. San Diego: Academic Press.

Waters, M. (1995). Globalization. London: Routledge.

Interactive foreign policy

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:21:00 +0000

Because of the media hype surrounding the YouTube presidential debates, I have not paid close attention. I figured eventually I would get to YouTube to check out the Q and A. My decision on the quality of the questions and answers, as well as the utility of the entire event, are still pending. But I was curious to see what questions were posed and answers given concerning foreign policy. Below are are two questions that were not used and two questions that were answered during the Democrats' debate. Take a look:

Questions answered during the debate:

Going beyond empty promises in Darfur

How do we pull out now?

Questions posed but not addressed during the debate:

America’s policy on preventing al-Qa’eda from using Africa as safe haven

Restoring America’s reputation overseas

Click here to view more video clips from the televised debate.

Betting on Stability

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 23:00:00 +0000

“Returning then to the ethnoscapes with which I began, the central paradox of ethnic politics in today’s world is that primordia (whether langage or skin color or neighborhood or kinship) have become globalized. That is, sentiments, whose greatest force is in their ability to ignite intimacy into a political state and turn locality into a staging ground for identity, have become spread over vast and irregular spaces as groups move yet stay linked to one another through sophisticated media capabilities” (p. 41).
Arjun Appadurai, Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization

As I prepare for next semester, I find myself clicking through websites to understand more about the world. I recently switched my class schedule around, dropping a political psychology class to take an international topics class in political science; I made the change partially because I think the class will be more beneficial. I also decided to accept an offer to teach a class about understanding the American news media.

I would like to enter my classes this fall with some basic grasp of international relations, so I have sought out information about which I always felt unsure. I think one of the most difficult differences for me to understand is the difference between Sunni Muslims and Shi’ite Muslims; understanding these differences forms a basic comprehension of both the history and current political environment in the Persian Gulf region. Cursory looks so far indicate that scholars disagree about the origins; some say the differences derive from Muhammad's death and his chosen successor. Throughout the years, though, these differences have manifested deeply into the culture leading to fundamental differences, such as how both the Quran and Hadith are written and interpreted.

As I work through these differences, I also find myself drawn to stories about the problems in Iraq, caused by sectarian violence and militias. In addition to pulling apart concepts like “Sunni” and “Shi’ite”, I also find myself picking through articles to understand the term, “militia.” Often, many of these articles fail to explain the differences between the two groups; in fact, a consistent theme of the Mehdi Army is anti-American. While I do not dispute this perspective, for lack of information, I wonder how I would react if others invaded my country. Given that I am originally from Oklahoma, I know how I would feel if Texas decided to annex the state.

As I stated in my post on Kurdistan, many believe that the U.S. government is aiding PJAK, which is aligned with the PKK and is causing problems in Iran. Both Iran and Turkey have shelled and amassed troops along the Iraqi border, as part of a solution to root out what both countries believe are “insurgent” groups. But as the American news media cover the meeting among officials from Iraq, Iran, and the United States in Baghdad, the focus – at least publicly – has been on the Shi’ite militia in Iraq. The Shi’ite militia baffled me because Iraq’s current government is predominantly Shi’ite and apparently many Sunnis are not participating.

In addition to the Shi’ite militia, Iraq also has an al Qaeda problem . I have no doubt that al Qaeda found its way to Iraq; the group seems to like a good fight with Americans. The L.A. Times article quoted in my Kurdistan post indicated that many insurgents held U.S. military custody are Saudi nationals, presumably Sunni Muslims who fight for al Qaeda. Al Qaeda, however, is not considered a militia, but rather a terrorist organization. The difference between viewing the Shi’ite group as a militia and Al Qaeda is still unclear to me; I would like to investigate that further.

It was a big week for the Persian Gulf region. While the U.S. Ambassador met with Iraqi and the Iranian ambassador for a second round of talks, the U.S. government has entertained the idea of selling arms to many countries in the area, and the U.S. military has sought out local Sunni tribesmen to work in the security forces. Bush also tied Al Qaeda in Iraq to al Qaeda responsible for the September 11 attacks: “Al Qaeda in Iraq is a group funded by foreign terrorists, led largely by foreign terrorists, and loyal to a foreign leader: Osama bin Laden.” Of course, those fighting for al Qaeda in Iraq are thought to be Iraqi, though the leadership is foreign and is centered around the Pakistan-Afghanistan border region.

I have to say, though, I am not sure how al Qaeda is still funded, as I thought their sources of funding had been frozen by the U.S. government. I understand the argument that Iran is giving guns to the Shi'ite militia, but I'm still not clear on how or why the Sunnis are armed. If you put all of the information below together in an expose in an everyday weekly American newspaper, I wonder what the reaction would be.

Playing with fire
Before the meeting with Iran and the United States, Al-Maliki called on the countries to help support stability and security in Iraq. Tensions between Iran and the United States aside, the meeting’s aim was meant to seek ways to bring security and stability to Iraq, including containing Sunni militants, or al Qaeda, in the country. As I mentioned in my previous post, some believe the U.S. government is supporting PJAK, and both Turkey and Iran have had troops positioned along the Iraqi border. Following the meeting U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker said Iran has not dealt with Iraq in an effective, efficient way, though I am not too sure what this means. The U.S. contends that Iran is supporting the Shi’ite militias; the U.S. military also has two suspected Iranian terrorists in custody. The two were caught during a raid, bringing EFPs into Iraq. However, Iran denies this charge, and the Khamenei in Iran still views the United States and Israel as enemies. The meeting did yield a trilateral committee that will seek ways of bring the violence in Iraq to an end. While this meeting took place, at least three stories emerged about the U.S. military’s idea for using armed local Sunni tribesmen for security.

The idea has its roots in the experiences of the U.S. military personnel in Iraq; many of the Sunni tribesmen have expressed frustration with militias and have aided the U.S. military in several cases. While it enables Iraqis to participate in the protection of their country, the Iraqi government is cautious and concerned about the program. In fact, one major difficulty with training the security forces resides in ridding trainees of their sectarian loyalties. While the Shi’ite dominated government has felt pressure to do away with the militias, a concern arises over the focus. If the government focuses on Shi’ite militias, does it legitimize the problems caused by militant Sunni groups? The government also wants the ability to screen volunteers before they are armed, in addition to bringing these groups under government control. One Iraqi official has called it the "seed for civil war." The military emphasized it is not arming the groups, but it is authorized to give them money and ink contracts with these groups to perform certain tasks, especially the protection of “critical infrastructure.” It is a way to then pull these residents into security forces to eventually train them to use weapons and understand the “American rules of engagement.” (Oddly enough, the deck on that story was: "Irregulars to patrol own neighborhoods").

Clashes with militia are common, like the U.S. military recent run-in with the Shi’ite militia, the Medhi army, while looking for one of its commanders in Kerbala. Although the news media consistently says Kerbala is one of the most protected areas in Iraq – because it is a holy Shi’ite city – 17 militiamen were killed in the city during the clash. The Medhi army is led by Shi’ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, whom U.S. officials believe is fueling sectarian violence.

But it takes two to tango. Saudi Arabia is consistently frustrating the Bush administration; during a meeting in January in Riyadh, the Saudi government produced documents meant to debunk the legitimacy of al-Maliki in Iraq, illustrating that he has had contact with al-Sadr and that he is an Iranian agent. While U.S. officials reportedly believe the documents to be forgeries, tension between Saudi Arabia and Iraq have increased. And some believe it is NOT Iran or Syria contributing to the instability of Iraq but Saudi Arabia:

“Of course, the Saudi government has hardly masked its intention to prop up Sunni groups in Iraq and has for the past two years...the need to counterbalance the influence Iran has there.”

Despite these frustrations, the Bush administration is preparing a proposal to take to Congress; it is seeking approval of an arms package for Saudi Arabia and surrounding countries. The arms package is partially a response to Iran but to secure American influence in the area as well. In addition to selling the arms to Saudi Arabia, the United States also seeks to bolster its deal with Israel, a “significant increase over what Israel has received in the past 10 years.” Egypt would also receive a similar deal. Other countries in the area that will likely receive weaponry include: Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and United Arab Emirates. Despite the U.S. government's concerns about Saudi Arabia and unlike its pressure on Iran, it has sought no public support from Saudi Arabia for the war in Iraq.

“In talks about the package, the administration has not sought specific assurances from Saudi Arabia that it would be more supportive of the American effort in Iraq as a condition of receiving the arms package, the officials said.”

Although I have not heard a great deal about increasing U.S. troops in Iraq lately, I did notice the British are talking about withdrawing their troops from Basra. Iraqis fear the lack of a major military presence in Southern Iraq, as they believe the security force is infiltrated by those competing for control of Basra's oil. One British military official described the difference between Northern Iraq and Southern Iraq as "a problem of gangsterism not sectarian violence." Eventually the Iraqis will need to stabilize their own country, as not only the British mentioned but the Iranians have argued, as well.

As American officials search for solutions, the Iraq war has created a diaspora of refugees, fleeing to neighboring countries, which is rarely mentioned in the American news media. It seems a gamble to pump guns into the region, especially since it remains unclear who bats for which team. While I have no doubt that a link between the Al Qaeda in Iraq and the Al Qaeda responsible for September 11, I also know a link exists between the Al Qaeda responsible for the September 11 attacks and the nationalities of the terrorists involved. If gambling is indeed an art based on probable outcomes, it would seem the Bush administration would place far less faith in Saudi Arabia. And even if Iran's influence had grown in the region and its support for the Shi'ite militia was painfully obvious, to provide more weaponry to a country that has illustrated a propensity for creating terrorists seems reckless, if not hypocritical. In fact, I would say about Saudi Arabia what Sean McCormack, Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs, said about Iran:

"They say they want strategic stability in Iraq. Well, they should start acting like it."

Reshaping our view of the world

noreply@blogger.com (stupid american) — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 01:59:00 +0000

The gatekeeping theory has interested me for a while. I’m curious about where information comes from, where it’s going, who passes it along, and how it changes along the way. Originally the theory applied to food; Kurt Lewin examined how goods and services flowed through certain channels to eventually arrive in the home. But he drew a comparison between what he examined and news items. A short time later, David White applied the theory to a copy editor, and eventually Gaye Tuchman concluded that journalists have their own routines.

And perhaps that was the hook. As a journalist, I had my own routine; occasionally I would switch things up when I was short on time due to deadlines. What they say about lightening striking in the same place rarely applies to crime, and there was a high probability that I would cover two or more stories at once. I created a routine based on how long it took me to go from place to place, thumb through arrest reports and chew the fat (the best stories sometimes appear THAT way), and get back to the newsroom. My routine fit within the larger operation of the newspaper; my behavior usually worked within what the organization demanded of me.

There’s a logic that operates in the news media, and that logic varies from medium to medium. It is this logic that plays into the gatekeeping role, helping journalists determine the appropriate sources, types of information needed, and what is included or excluded. In this way journalists act as gatekeepers, but there are layers of gatekeeping. Think about the structure of a newsroom. Reporters go out and make contact with people, gathering news. The sources with whom journalists speak are gatekeepers; the editors are gatekeepers; even the readers are gatekeepers, choosing what they decide to read or skip over.

Additionally, the logic becomes apparent in how the information is included, how it is organized, and where the story is placed. While placement and organization are important, understanding which information is used as well as its source are at the top of my list. We often do not know the milieu in which the information was gathered. Is the reporter quoting a press release? Other news sources? Press conferences? Interviews? Archival material? All indicate how the information was gathered and packaged – and by whom. Recycled news scares me; if the information is inaccurate or incomplete, it becomes difficult to rectify that inaccuracy. And then how do we track the mistake back to its root?

Reused information renders news less poignant, less useful. It is the interaction with people (and sometimes documents and other artifacts) that creates the news; without them, you have robbed the news of its humanity. Journalists interact with a number of different people, and in doing this, help create an understanding (or misunderstanding) of people, places, and events. Each of us brings meaning to our interaction with one another and actively engages in consensus or disagreement about the world. Journalists use organizational values to shape their news product, and then send it down the editorial chain, where other people interact with the copy. Realizing this, it becomes important to understand the nature of information that we receive and the nature in which we receive it.

I wondered about this as I perused Google news Monday night. Look at the Kosovo stories that initially appeared in the Google search, knowing full well there are algorithms and other “techie” complexities that decide which stories come up. Typically the major parts of a story include the headline, a deck if present, the byline, the dateline, the lead, the nutgraph, the sources, the style, and ultimately the information that makes its way into the story. The order of information is also important, as often it indicates level of importance. Determining that all of the stories derived from news agencies, I sought to know if these stories changed from their original form and how.

Gatekeeping and Symbolic Interaction
Lewin (1947) said in order to change people’s food habits, it is necessary to find the “key positions” along the channel that carries the food, as items travel through these channels, proceeding through “definitive steps” (144). Often, this key position would include a person in a household who determines the necessary items needed and then sends them along the channel to the table. In my house, I would ultimately be the key position at the end of the chain, a definitive step for goods and services. But Lewin contended this concept also applies to other goods and services, especially the diffusion of news. David Manning White took Lewin’s concept and applied it to a wire copy editor, affectionately known at Mr. Gates. He found Gates used the type of news, or category, as a factor in his decision to include wire copy; Gates also made decisions based on how well written the story was and how well the story matched his readership. Finally Tuchman (1973) studied the routinization in lieu of unexpected events. Because variability poses problems for journalists in processing raw material, they ultimately devise methods for efficiently sorting through and labeling types of stories and bits of information. Many researchers have examined gatekeeping throughout the years, and use of the word "gatekeeper" has become as ubiquitous as the use of the word "framing"; many people use the words but rarely understand their theoretical underpinnings.

I imagine these channels to be more of a matrix, with several different possible sources of information and several different gatekeepers. As the information flows through these channels, they flow from and through different gates. For example, news is ultimately guided by an organization’s “common understanding of news values and imperatives” (Meyers, 1997, p. 21). But here’s the question: what happens to the information when it flows through each gate? While we might not be in a position to know pre-press, we can figure it out post-press. The question of gatekeeping becomes clearer when you begin to realize the journalist and each source are interacting with one another, and in turn the reporter’s product and the audience are interacting. They are creating meaning by exchanging symbols, through which a view of the world emerges.

Conceptualizing communication as symbolic interaction has a history. Blumer (1972) and Schutz (1967) both talked about how human beings exchange meaning. Goffman (1974) also talks about this interaction, and how it plays into human understanding and the organization of human experience. Both framing and media formats grew out of Goffman’s theory. But no matter which way you head – framing or formats – what emerges is the idea that the media help shape our view of the world. Ultimately, if you hold a gatekeeping position, you are charged with a responsibility that involves shaping how people see the world, not only the arena in which action occurs but their place within that arena.

In building a research project to study crime coverage in Philadelphia – affectionately called Killadelphia – I came across interesting tidbits about crime coverage. For example, Doris Graber (1980) concluded that many crime stories would include stock information; they tend to be cookie cutter stories, consistently employing specific pieces of information. Name and age of the suspect, address, and type of crime committed are typical in crime stories. Erickson, Baranek, and Chan (1991) contended that these stories would use the same sources; more often than not, many of the sources are official sources. Journalists and these sources engage in a symbiotic relationship. The sources provide information, which is needed by the journalists, and the journalists assure the sources have a place in the media food chain, which is often needed by those who want to disseminate important information. I have wanted to examine how this would play out in stories that didn’t deal with crime; thus, the Kosovo situation and the precipitating online news stories granted me an opportunity.

Kosovo
Late Monday evening and early Tuesday morning, news of the meeting between Kosovar leaders and U.S. officials went out over the wire. Kosovo is a province in Serbia that has long sought independence, and Serbia is attached to Kosovo; it does not want to let go. A majority of those living in Kosovo are Albanian, with a minority of Serbs. Both the United Nations and NATO have controlled and protected the province since 1999, when NATO led an air war against the Serbian military that sought to control Albanian separatists. This area has been a hotbed of contention; you might remember that an assassination in Serbia helped precipitate the war to end all wars in 1914. Of the four stories that appeared in Google news search, three originated from Reuters. When I say originated, I mean that Reuters put the copy over the wire, and other news agencies picked it up. The final story was an Associated Press article that Fox chose to pick up.

Reuters and AP both disseminate news; Reuters is a British news agency, and Associated Press is an not-for-profit cooperative owned by its 1,500 American daily members. This means if a news organization doesn’t have the resources to send its own reporter but has a newshole and thinks the content fits its readership, it can use the story. I wanted to see how news agencies portrayed the situation and how that story changed from news organization to news organization. I looked at five things: headline, lead, the nutgraph, the sources, and the context. I realize there are many ways to write a news story, but I’m from the Missouri school of journalism, so I reverted back to my education. Placed at the top of the story, the headline gives you the whole story in one sentence or less; absent of visuals, the headline grabs the readers’ attention. The lead tells you the news. The nutgraph, or as George Kennedy affectionately called the “rat’s ass” graph, tells you why you should care. “Why should I give a rat’s ass?” The sources tell you where the information came from, and the context gives you an idea of why the news is occurring and what is expected in the future.

The story that ran on Stuff.co.nz was nearly identical to the original Reuters’s story, so I will skip it. Fox ran an Associated Press story, rather than a story from Reuters, so I went to find the original AP story. I was unsuccessful on the Internet; I turned to LexisNexis, a database for news/legal nerds. There were a number of other news agencies that filed stories on the same subject, but since I’m not conducting a full-fledged research project, I decided to take a much easier route. Below is what I found when I looked at four stories. The links are included for all but the original AP story, as I only offer a summation of the articles. I encourage you to examine the stories.

Original Reuters Story
Written by Sue Pleming, this story describes the meeting between Kosovar leaders and U.S. officials.

The Headline: “Kosovo tells U.S. it will not declare independence”

The lead: “Kosovo told Washington on Monday that it did not plan to unilaterally declare independence from Serbia in November, senior officials from the United States and Kosovo said.”

The nutgraph: A paraphrase of a spokesman from the Kosovo delegation Skender Hyseni explaining that Kosovo's leaders assured U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice no unilateral action would be taken, and U.S. officials confirmed cooperation, not unilateral action.

The story provides context throughout, explaining Serbia’s opposition to independence, U.S. officials’ fear that unilateral claim to independence could lead to violence, and discussions within the UN Contact Group. Also, it provides the reason for the meeting: the U.N. resolution for independence was pushed aside by Russia. The story also provides an explanation for the fear of unilateral action: “Kosovo’s Prime Minister Agim Ceku, who met with Rice along with other senior Kosovo officials, had suggested on Friday he could ask the province’s parliament to declare independence from Serbia on November 28.” One additional tidbit to mention is the use of the word guerillas in the explanation of the war with Serbians.

The sources include Hyseni as well as two unnamed U.S. officials.

ABC’s version
Again, Sue Pleming’s name appears in the byline.

The headline: “U.S. urges Kosovo leaders to be patient”

The lead: “Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice urged Kosovo’s leaders on Monday to be patient in their push for independence after the United Nations put aside a resolution that Russia had threatened to veto.”

Nutgraph: The nutgraph in this story is the reason some fear unilateral action: “Kosovo’s Prime Minister Agim Ceku, who met Rice...urged the parliament last week to declare independence from Russian ally Serbia on November 28.”

While some of the context is the same material, it appears differently. In addition, some new information is also provided about the U.N. Security Council as well as the draft resolution that was removed after Russia opposed. Another sentence, which is without attribution, appears as well. “Last week Rice said Kosovo would get its independence 'one way or another,' but the Kosovo delegation was expected to make clear to her that patience was running out over the pace of international diplomacy that will decide their future.”

The sources include State Department spokesman Sean McCormack, an unnamed official traveling with the Kosovo delegation, and Russia’s U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin. The official traveling with the Kosovo delegation had no comment, but the non-statement included a tidbit about talks including National Security adviser Stephen Hadley. It is unclear in what context Churkin made his statements - are they archival? From an interview?

After seeing the differences in the two stories, it becomes apparent that if you read one and not the other, your view of the situation might be different. It should be noted that I recognize a need to know about the editorial processes of both these organizations; information that appears in one story and not the other comes from somewhere. I think it is common practice of many journalists to take information from archive stories to add context, but sometimes the readers might not realize this unless they have followed the story. So what about the Associated Press stories?

Original AP story (Retrieved from LexisNexis, July 25, 2007)
Desmond Butler wrote this story, and like Sue Pleming’s story, it describes the Washington meeting.

The headline: “Kosovo officials assure US they will consult allies before declaring independence”

The lead: “U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice reassured officials from Kosovo that the United States would push for recognition of the breakaway province’s independence from Serbia within months.”

Nutgraph: Both the Kosovar prime minister and president told Rice they would not declare negotiations unilaterally; any action would be coordinated with the United States.

The context of the story includes the same information as the Reuters story, with additional information. The story cites U.S. President Bush "hinting" that the United States “could recognize Kosovo without Security Council consent” during his trip to Albania in June. It also adds Martti Ahtisaari, the U.N.’s special envoy to Kosovo, recommended the province gain supervised independence in April. The story also includes that Kosovo’s population is majority ethnic Albanian, while the Fox story does not.

The sources include Kosovo’s president Fatmir Sejdiu from an interview with AP on Monday. The story also includes information from senior U.S. officials “speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak for attribution.”

Fox’s version
Again, Desmond Butler has the byline.

The headline: “Kosovo head assures Rice on independence”

The lead: “Kosovo’s leaders told Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice Monday that the breakaway province would not declare independence from Serbia without coordinating the move with the United States.”

Nutgraph: Rice gave Kosovo’s officials assurance of the U.S.’s commitment to recognition of Kosovo’s independence within months, “even without a United Nations Security Council resolution.”

The information provided for context is the same as the previous story, though the order of information is different. Some of the information has also been reworked: “The meetings in Washington come days after the Security Council set aside a resolution that Russia called a hidden route to independence.”

The sources include Kosovo’s president, Fatmir Sejdiu, as well as State Department spokesman Sean McCormack.

What did I learn from this?
The point here is not to criticize these news organizations but explore how these stories might morph as they travel through different gates, and as they change, to understand the meaning presented to readers about these events. Of course news organizations will organize stories in a manner that fits their styles, their readers, and their organizational missions. But the perspective of the stories from organization to organization seems dramatically different, which warrants a closer look.

Obviously ABC completely revamped the Reuters story, changing the perspective from the Kosovar leaders to the perspective of U.S. officials. The change in perspective is evident in the headline and the lead. The ABC story also includes information that was not included in the original story; where did it come from? Fox, on the other hand, stayed more true to the original AP story, rearranging some of the information. Both its lead and nutgraph are different, but not quite as much as th ABC story. The sources also varied, but this seems indicative of news organizations making the content their own. To me, as long as I understand the context in which the interview took place or the information was gathered, I'm happy.

What is not mentioned in these stories? The Serbian reaction. The Serbian parliament passed a resolution, stating the government would act if Kosovo declared its independence; it also warned those who aided Kosovo. What is worrisome is that each of these stories provide only a two-dimensional view of this situation, where there seems to be many dimensions. While this does not surprise me, splitting the larger picture into separate stories skews the brevity of the situation and provides reality piecemeal. I also noticed none of these online stories provides a link to stories about the Serbian reaction, though a couple of them provide online forums for readers.

While it might not be possible to read every story, it is possible to be more mindful of where information comes from, keeping tabs not only on news organizations but on sources, as well. Technology has helped create a more open society, but it has also galvanized competition within the news media. One evil produced by the current media environment is news recycling; it is difficult to tell the difference between fresh information and recycled information used for context. It is also increasingly difficult to understand the context in which information is gathered. Given these reasons, examining the news media is more important than ever, especially when the world presented might fit into the narrow perspective of one news organization or another. Even from within this narrow perspective, we as active participants have the ability to break free and search for a more complete picture, understanding that while the news media might shape our initial comprehension, we have the ability to reshape our view of the world.

References
Blumer, H. (1972). Symbolic interaction: An approach to human communication. In R. W. Budd and B. D. Ruben (Eds.), Approaches to Human Communication. New York: Spartan. pp. 401-419.

Erickson, R. V., Baranek, P. M., & Chan, J. B. L. (1991). Representing Order: Crime, Law, and Justice in the News Media. University of Toronto Press.

Graber, D. A. (1980). Crime News and The Public. New York: Praeger Publishers.

Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. London: Harper Colophon Books.

Myers, M. (1997). News Coverage of Violence Against Women: Engendering Blame. London: Sage.

Schutz, A. (1967). Some basic problems of interpretive sociology. In The Phenomenology of the Social world, (Original work published in 1932). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. pp. 215-220.

Tuchman, G. (1973). Making News by Doing Work: Routinizing the Unexpected. American Journal of Sociology. 79(1). pp. 110-131.

White, D. M. (1950). The Gatekeeper: A Case Study in the Selection of News. Journalism Quarterly. (27). Reprinted In Social Meanings of News (1997), Dan Berkowitz, (Ed.). California: Sage.