Dear Colleagues,
There were three seemingly unrelated news items this week which – when viewed through a different lens - are actually very related to the work that we do, the climate we are in (with our students and in society) and speak very clearly to the approaches we need to take.
“Kill the Messenger”
The first is the “breaking” news regarding Sarah Palin’s response to her daughter’s former fiancée speaking out about their relationship. In his interview (on the Tyra Banks show, which speaks to another phenomenon), he discussed whether or not Gov. Palin knew that he and Bristol were sexually active, whether they used protection, etc. Gov. Palin’s response was to attack him, essentially referring to him as an opportunist, as opposed to addressing his message.
This is not new to politics, but has seeped further and further into “everyday life” and our students have noticed. See the Facebook pages, Ratemyprof.com, etc. where the individual is attacked not for the substance of their work or teaching, but for seemingly unrelated characteristics that border on defamation (Actual poor Professor ratings included “I’ve seen him out drinking at bars,” “she dresses like a (tramp)” – Actual Facebook Group: “Students who took and hate Dr. Smith”). One fraternity even went so far as to dig up criminal background on a dean they were unhappy with to put it in the paper. This ignores the professional/faculty substance in their teaching and decision, and makes it personal.
“Stop the Madness”
The second news item involved the violent incidents in Oakland, Alabama, Binghampton, and Pittsburgh – all of which involved individuals seemingly at their breaking points for a variety of reasons. The media attributed the violence at some level to the economic downturn/recession, rather than looking at the broader scope and context of violence in the United States over the past 10 years.
While the economic situation may be a contributing factor to the desperate actions of these men (certainly the one who took his daughter with him to rob a convenience store is an example), we cannot ignore the growing trend toward the lower threshold for extreme violence. It has been creeping up on us (in the US) for 40+ years, and this is where we find ourselves. We should not be surprised, we should be appalled.
“All or Nothing”
The third was the recent conservative response to President Obama’s trip overseas. From Rush Limbaugh on the radio to Glen Beck on Fox, the response to him “apologizing for America’s arrogance” to his “rejecting Christianity” has been, to put it mildly, hyperbolic (with one call for his removal from office, and another to “start a fire” reminding viewers that “(we) outnumber them, and they need to remember that”).
While this may make for good ratings, it is inappropriate and irresponsible for anyone with a pulpit to ignore the sociological ramifications of their statements. This immediate call to hyperbole does not represent the “fringe arguments” that advanced certain movements (e.g. civil rights) in history, but instead represent arguments that ignore opposing principles, value systems, and worse -- call for the removal of those with opposing views.
Why are these related and why do they matter to student affairs professionals and faculty? Well, when combined with what we already know about the troubling trends regarding our student populations, they paint a dismal picture if not addressed properly. I certainly do not want to be “Beck-esque” in my assessment (that is to say – hyperbolic), but it merits analysis from a college and university perspective.
Imagine the student who:
1) Doesn’t like your message so s/he wants to attack you personally,
2) Has a lower threshold for violence, and
3) Believes that your values are different, so you must “be removed”.
I will blog in Part II of this blog thread next week about how to address this...to be continued.
Have a great weekend,
W. Scott Lewis
Friday, April 17, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment