Communication Studies and David vs. Goliath

Then they'll raise their hands,
Sayin' we'll meet all your demands,
But we'll shout from the bow your days are numbered.
And like Pharaoh's tribe,
They'll be drownded in the tide,
And like Goliath, they'll be conquered.
Bob Dylan, When the Ship Comes In

Flying west, high above the North American continent, the words of Bob Dylan come clearly through the high fidelity earphones attached to my generation five iPod. Todd Gitlin's Media Unlimited on my lap, the messages about messages and information present an eerie counterpoint to the mythical incantations of the man who was once called the voice of a generation.

The great dancer, director, and choreographer, Twyla Tharp writes in her book, The Creative Habit, that playwright John Guare says that every tale tells one of two stories. They are Romeo and Juliet and David and Goliath. Whether you agree with Guare or not, it's an interesting lens from which to view Gitlin and Postman. And it seems, also, to resonate in our discussions.

We've identified the Goiaths as the big corporations that control the media onslaught. So who are the Davids? And what will be their contribution? Are we the ones, students and academics, who will lead the way and serve as a counterweight to the Goliaths? Or will it be some young entrepreneur who instead of selling to Murdoch or Google decides to keep her creation and rival the giants? Or will it be a giant like Google that professes a creed of “Don't be Evil”?
Remember, too, that even David, the greatest King of Israel and the forebear of Jesus, was a complicated and tortured soul. The future King who killed the giant becomes a killer himself. David sends Uriah to his death so David can have Bathsheba. And David's son, Absalom, meets an untimely death, a source of tremendous grief for the great King David.

When we work to enlighten the public and weaken the Goliaths what follows in their place? Leadership and artistry confront money and power. The intellectual path influences but seldom compels. Our field of Communication Studies offers a vantage point from which we must bring a practical, real world approach to our deep learning and insight. How do we get beyond the righteous exhortations and condemnations about the status quo?

Stanley Deetz's ideas about practical theory offer a bit of hope for the future. Professor Deetz, himself, engages the corporate world through his work. Michael Schudson is a University of California, San Diego, Communications scholar; like Deetz, he engages the world of business and offers insight. My experience has been that many in the capitalist world are open to a certain type of intellectual who can get off his or her high horse and help handle higher pursuits that are also profitable.

Perhaps this is a utopian capitalism that may never arrive; but it is a worthy goal, more realistic than many of the failed socialist experiments. But if we are to be the Davids opposing the corporate Goliaths we must not forget that once the giant is neutralized leadership is required. And simply knocking down the giant does not make the world better. What follows must be a compelling and rich alternative. Postman is correct in his assessment of capitalist radicals. We need them to drive progress and shape the world. But we must not let them abuse their power. We must help them strive to reach higher and to remember that even the great King David faltered after his boyhood victory over Goliath.

Gonzaga Reflections: Week Three and Four

All power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Lord Acton

Name me someone that’s not a parasite and I’ll go out and say a prayer for him.

Bob Dylan, from Visions of Johanna

As Noam Chomsky fights his battles with what he describes as the powerful, dominant elite, I have to wonder if Prof. Chomsky is deserving of our prayers, or even our praise. Whenever a social critic of Chomsky’s intellectual power makes his case we should listen and learn. We must also ask where is he coming from and where will it lead us? He presents his view that the dominant mass media, aided by corporate and government public relations, manufacture a narrative that perpetuates the power of the powerful. To follow his reasoning, much of society is complicit, from public officials to those working in the media, especially at the networks and the New York Times. He further explains that about 20 percent of the public, the intellectual class, influence the other 80 percent. If you are reading this you are probably in the 20 percent that takes the time and has the intelligence to fall into the group of influencers.

Fifty one years ago the head of General Motors told a Congressional Committee that “What’s good for General Motors is good for the country”. GM is no longer the power it was in the 1950s. In the era of globalization Toyota might be more powerful and, in my opinion, certainly makes better cars. Noam Chomsky would probably not have agreed with GM in 1955 and I’d bet he doesn’t today. The point, of course, of GM’s well known one liner was that if the company does well, its workers do well, its customers get a good car for a good price, and the economy chugs along in 1950s bliss; it is capitalism as it was meant to be! At the very least it’s the narrative that capitalists want us to believe. For the most part it’s a pretty compelling story. The world’s leading competing narrative at the time was Communism, with its utopian aspirations and Stalinist history and reality. In the middle of these two super powerful narratives were the social democracies of Europe, the “Great Society” of the 1960s US, and the other moderate streams of political economy, from Japan to Canada.

As societies evolve so do their media. That the media tend to reflect the values and realities of their communities and nations is the heart of the argument in opposition to Chomsky. As we evolve, Dr. Chomsky fails to present an alternate narrative and power structure superior to the one he deconstructs and criticizes. In the film, Manufacturing Consent, we hear the Dutch Defense Minister accuse Chomsky of having ideas that are contrary to the values of representative democracy, rather, he argues, Chomsky’s values are more in line with direct democracy. Later in the film Chomsky cites the early Kibbutzim in Israel, as an example of the social model that would allow for a media environment powered by the people. The other one that comes to mind is the small town meeting in Vermont, where individuals rule directly without intermediary elected legislators or executives. The problem is that the Israeli Kibbutz and the New England Town Meeting are extremely small scale enterprises and have not thrived except in very limited circumstances. So with those exceptions duly noted it seems there will always be “elites” in any society. And, in general these elites wield power, often responsibly but not always. Noam Chomsky does not like the people in power and what they stand for, and I doubt that he ever will. But their power is far from absolute and the news media have served to check that power, more effectively in some periods than in others.

So it comes down to who is in power. “Power to the people”, was a rallying cry in the 1960s and 70s, also a fairly popular John Lennon song. Since Manufacturing Consent was released, the World Wide Web has become a major platform for media. Much of the content on the web is produced by the same corporations that control the large newspapers and the evening news on the networks. But the web also serves as a platform for distribution of individual expression, unrivaled in history. Really Simple Syndication or RSS makes it possible for anyone with a computer and website to create content and distribute it easily and efficiently. Many high school students regularly post their work on iTunes. So the powerful still have power and our vigilance to guard against corruption is required now as it has been in the past. The web, however, has given more power to the people.

The powerful elite—as a class--have existed throughout history. The values of humility, good will, and the Golden Rule drive our religious, spiritual, and ethical traditions. But even among institutions dedicated to these values, there is an elite group. As members of the 20 percent that influences the other 80 percent, we should look at ourselves and the narratives we perpetuate. Our ability to read Chomsky, Hall, Herman, Marcuse, and many others gives us power, whether we agree with them or not. And who is to say the narratives of Chomsky and like minded theorists are any more compelling than the ideas of capitalism expounded by the so called dominant elites? When it comes to choosing which elites to follow, I’d favor a socially responsible capitalist to the intellectually engaging but wrong headed approach of Dr. Chomsky.

Perhaps adding the preceding line to the Dylan quote from above will make more sense now.

“The peddler now speaks to the countess who’s pretending to care for him,

Saying, name me someone that’s not a parasite and I’ll go out and say a prayer for him.”

In a societal sense, who is it that cares for us?

Reflections on Communication by Computer

This blog is an assignment for the Communication and Leadership Program at Gonzaga University.

Buying an airline ticket, ordering a book from Amazon, or registering for a class, all these transactions are easily and efficiently performed on-line. Telling a loved one that a family member is ill, that a pet died, or that you’re engaged, all these relational messages are handled with more sensitivity by phone or in person. When looking at communication from a relational versus a transactional perspective think of a spectrum, not absolutes. When you buy a book in person, you are relating to the salesperson and cashier. When you discuss a pet’s death, numerous transactions evolve. In exploring the richness of Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) and comparing it to other forms of communication, including Face to Face (F2F), the lenses of transaction and relation can help us see more clearly.

The transactional part of CMC makes life easier and provides access to options not available F2F or by phone. Making an airline reservation is a good example. On websites like Expedia or Orbitz you can look at all the flights available and get the best prices. This is a significant advantage over going to a ticket office or phoning individual airlines. And it doesn’t end with the reservation. As our classmate Megan mentioned on the discussion board, you can use an automated kiosk at the airport to print your boarding pass. With some airlines, Southwest in particular, if you don’t check in by computer, you're at a disadvantage. You don't get the best seats if you wait till you get to the airport.

On the relational side of CMC, rapid growth is attracting advertisers and corporate owners. The examples of relational CMC mentioned at the start of this blog are fairly clear, but they are presented rhetorically, to make a point and explain a distinction. My Space, Facebook, and Friendster, represent leading examples of social networking sites (SNS). Their allure is how they connect people to each other and build on-line communities. Using graphics, photos, video and sounds, users have the tools to create rich environments, and their identity. How the users' homepages reflect particular identities influences the friends they make and the status they achieve, in the online world. Whether that identity reflects reality or fantasy, or lies somewhere in between, can be of more importance to the host of the page than those who read it, according to communication scholar Daniel Chandler.


Personal homepages may not always be of great importance to those who come across them, but they’re profound, creative opportunities for people to reflect on themselves and think about how they want to represent themselves to the world (Thurlow, 2004, p.99).

When my younger daughter got a letter with the name of her freshman roomate, they immediately connected on Facebook. This led to a phone call. When they met F2F, they were already acquainted. Apparently, their representations on Facebook were realistic constructions and neither was surprised.

Much like the off line world, the SNS world is filled with opportunities and threats. Take a look at my earlier blog below on Deadwood as a metaphor for the commercial side of the web. As for threats, a few weeks ago we all received a four-page article from Gonzaga’s Vice President for Student Life, explaining some of the dangers on SNS.


You also might want to take a moment and reflect on the physical safety of this tool when posting information about yourself. No expectation of privacy combined with the full range of humanity represented in these forums means that you may be exposing yourself to someone who may not have the same values or assumptions about appropriate behavior as you, or may even have a mental defect or disease which could put you at risk as a victim of criminal behavior. Very likely you would not place a placard in the front of your house or dorm describing intimate details of your personal life, private sexual
matters, detailed comings and goings or anything else that someone less careful and competent than you might construe as an invitation for communication or even harassment and stalking that could prove dangerous. Use physical space as your guide. What you wouldn't put on a poster on your dorm room door you might want to think two or three times about posting on-line (Gonzaga University, 2006, p. 3).

What we do in the public part of CMC is visible in ways that can be destructive and long lasting. The world can be a dangerous place and media, to paraphrase McLuhan, are extensions of ourselves (1964, Title Page).

When it comes to conducting business transactions online we find a rich environment filled with opportunity. Besides the simple examples previously cited, think about E-Bay and the web based marketplace it enables. You can find almost anything. Specialty sites for everything from wine to windsocks are available; all it takes are a Google search and a couple of clicks.

The relational side of CMC sizzles with excitement but only goes so far. From dating sites to SNS, people are using their computers to connect. My question, though, is where does it lead? Ultimately, if F2F is the end point, or the beginning of a new phase, the richness of what Martin Buber describes as the I-Thou relationship is possible, facilitated by CMC. But through CMC alone, we are left with the more routine and typical interactions characterized by I-It (1958). Most of our temporal life is lived in this realm; but the most intimate human relations require certain senses, which can only be imagined in the world of CMC. As for the spiritual dimensions of CMC, I invite you to consider its role and potential. I intend to do so in the weeks ahead.


References
Buber, M. (1958). I and Thou (Second Edition). New York: Charles Scribner Sons.

Gonzaga University, (2006). Thoughts on Facebook. based on: "Thoughts on Facebook," Tracy Mitrano, copyright, Cornell University, 2006.

McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media:The Extensions of Man. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Thurlow, C., Engel, L., & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer Mediated Communication, Social
Interaction and The Internet. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Lasers in the Jungle, Podcasts & I Love NY

Irv's Eye View-Lasers in the Jungle & Podcasts

by Irv Kass

Sunday, 29 October 2006

http://www.MediaMogirl.com Adapted from an online class discussion in the Gonzaga University Communication and Leadership Program These are the days of lasers in the jungle Lasers in the jungle somewhere Staccato signals of constant information A loose affiliation of millionaires And billionaires and baby These are the days of miracle and wonder This is the long distance call The way the camera follows us in slo-mo The way we look to us all --Boy in the Bubble, by Paul Simon When Paul Simon sang those words in 1986 we were 11 years past Vietnam and five years before the first Iraq War. There was actually an Army recruiting commercial, at one time, featuring lasers in the jungle. Artists identify trends and social dynamics in ways that are, at once, clear and compelling. With the miracle and wonder of technology come consequences. Here's a link to the full lyrics that make the point more completely than just the excerpt cited above. Better yet, listen to the song if you have it. http://www.lyricsfreak.com/p/paul+simon/the+boy+in+the+bubble_20105881.html Now we find ourselves, once again, mired in a war. Indeed, most of our lives we've been in wars, both hot and cold. The current conflict was made possible by the events of 9/11/01, we are told. And so... I write this from New York City. As a native of the city--born in Brooklyn, raised in Queens, and received my undergraduate education in Greenwich Village at NYU in the shadow of the newly erected Twin Towers--I have deep affection for this place and its people. My official residence and voting address are in San Diego County, California, USA, literally on the other edge of the continent. But my parents and older daughter are New Yorkers and I spend the equivalent of a couple of months a year here. So from this center of our civilization, the most attractive target for terrorists because of what it stands for, the social dynamics of our communication technologies are amplified and multiplied. Last week I attended a "Podcasting Summit" convened by the NAB (National Assoc. of Broadcasters). Most attendees were there to figure out how to use podcasts in practical ways. We heard a great deal about "monetizing" podcasts, something I happily embrace. So it was instructive to see the pods in podcast being widely used. Riding the subway from Queens to the Javits Convention Center in Manhattan, iPods were everywhere. Old, young, black, white, Asian, Hispanic, a rough count yielded about every seventh person with earbuds of some sort drowning out the screeching sounds of subway cars. As strange as it might sound, the NY subway is a comfortable place for me. Maybe it's because my mother had me riding the trains before I was born. Something about the motion and the mixed multitude, to steal a Biblical phrase, bring me comfort. Having my iPod added to the experience and lessened the noise. Ultimately all the tech tools we use, email, iPods, near supersonic travel speeds, cell phones, etc., combine to make the mobile lifestyle possible. The social dynamics of doing business with clients in several cities is nothing special these days. In the "flat world" described by Thomas Friedman it can be an advantage. The social dynamic of actually showing up and meeting people F2F (first time I've ever used that abbreviation) can enrich relationships that are usually engaged by computerized communication. The ability to be this mobile is a profound and relatively recent shift in social dynamics. Members of my immediate family can live in three of the four corners (NYC, Seattle, and San Diego) of the US, and be together electronically and physically with relative ease. How different from the world of our grandparents. When my older daughter was in high school, she wrote an essay about a table. Her computer was sitting on a library table that had belonged to my maternal grandfather. We had the table shipped from NY to CA. I'm certain my mother's father wrote letters, conducted business, and used this table in ways people did in the early part of the 20th century. Now my daughter was using the same table with new tools, a computer connected to the internet. In the early part of the last century my parents' immediate families would not voluntarily live far away from their families, too hard to stay in touch. Yet all four of my grandparents fled the Russian Pale of Settlement to escape the pogroms and tyranny of the Czar. Trains and steam ships got them here; long waits between letters kept them in touch with the old country. They crossed the threshold of New York Harbor, welcomed by the well-known words of Emma Lazarus. Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.... http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0874962.html (full text) Today's new immigrants have phone cards decorated with their homelands' flags, and email and websites coded with national identifiers that speed messages across borders and oceans at the speed of light. They are welcomed by some and reviled by others. The other day, I sat in a Russian restaurant where the wide screen high def TV was playing news reports received on satellite directly from Russia. It's been 98 years since my grandfather landed at Ellis Island. He could have understood the words spoken on that TV; I cannot. As mentioned earlier, the convention I attended was at the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center. Javits was a long time US Senator from New York. The Senator was something that sounds odd today, a "liberal Republican". He died in 1986 the same year the Javits Center opened. There is a statue of the late senator at the entrance to the building with this quote from his autobiography: "For me, New York will always have the luster and magic of a brand new adventure around every corner, vitality coursing every street. It is still the most exciting city of modern civilization. "I conceive of the new man of intellect as a worker determined to light the world...as a man whose credo is to learn to teach, to roll up his sleeves and give to the people he is bound to live with some of the intellect, the spirit and the beauty which animates him". Senator Javits was a man who apparently had not yet learned about gender inclusive language. The quote is from another time, not so long ago, but another time, which explains the language. The main message, though, endures. http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_K._Javits So we, the users of technology, should humbly remember the words of Sen. Javits, even as we meet to learn how to "monetize" the new technologies. After all we are all learners and teachers.

Google, You Tube, Deadwood

Irv's Eye View- On Google, Deadwood and Elucidation

Written by Irv Kass

Wednesday, 11 October 2006 http://MediaMogirl.com

Hello, again, everybody. With Google forking over the big money to buy You Tube it makes you wonder if it’s the end of a chapter, and the beginning of a new one. Google is a great company, one I would be pleased to work for or have as a client. Its corporate slogan of“Don’t Be Evil” is an amazing approach for a corporation of its size, influence, and capitalization. We all benefit from such an approach and the success and competencies of Google. But spending 1.6 billion dollars on You Tube? Why wouldn’t this innovative company build its own video site and do it better than any other player in the game? Oh, wait, the company started to do that with Google Video but seems to have gotten off track. For some reason, Google’s big announcement at the Consumer Electronics Show earlier this year focused on building relationships with Hollywood and the networks to distribute more traditional content. To its credit Google also emphasized the open marketplace, but seems to have put its money on Hollywood and the big players, at least until now. Ultimately it will be a combination of content from a variety of distribution sources that will work on the Web, but the excitement, and the money apparently, is where it should be with the emerging grass roots digital video world that will only get better. But Google’s big expenditure reminds me of the late Senator from Illinois, Everett Dirksen, who pointed out that—and I’m paraphrasing—a million here, a million there, and it starts to add up. In our new millennium dollars just substitute a b for the m in million. The real point is that Google and other well capitalized companies should be leading the charge. Yes, it’s exciting that entrepreneurs like the founders of You Tube and My Space before it, get windfalls from Google and News Corp. But we, as users of the digital video resources, have to be vigilant and reject the onslaught of cross-promotional noise that big money owners are likely to inject. The very smart folks at these companies will be wise to pay attention and not tinker too much with their newly acquired and very pricey assets. Virginia Heffernan of the New York Times, http://screens.blogs.nytimes.com has some interesting takes on how the emerging world of You Tube and other open video posting sites are heating up the cold medium of television. When you watch what’s happening, the HBO drama, Deadwood, comes to mind. It’s kind of like the Wild West out there. Now, it’s the not the cleaned up version of John Wayne westerns, or Gary Cooper for that matter, but the real F-You, kick your ass version that we see on Deadwood. I’ve never watched an entire episode of Deadwood from start to finish. That’s because I’m a late adopter of the show and need to catch up. One day I’ll rent the first season and get caught up enough to engage full episodes. But the compelling nature of the show is inescapable. The villains, the heroes, the language and the ambiguity of individual characters give it an almost Shakespearian quality. And nobody really plays fair. So it’s not a nice town but it’s never dull and there are ample opportunities for deadly failure and breakthrough success. At this particular point in the development of video on the web it will become increasingly messy and also exciting to see who emerges as the breakout winners in the crowded streets of VlogWood, worldwide. We can only hope that the evolving character of that world, our world, turns into a positive—not weak by any means—force that will not only entertain but enlighten and elucidate. A good friend—Rolland Smith--who you may know from his work in television news is an eloquent advocate for elucidation as a prime goal for media. www.RollandGSmith.com Creative use of new media can be tough, fun, and it can also elucidate. It’s not just about conflict, though conflict and tension draw interest. It’s how the tension resolves or is left unresolved that’s important. So, kick some ass, go F yourself or whoever is F’ing with you, but in the end, aspire to be like William S, and his progeny, and leave us with something that elucidates.

US v. Lennon, Brangelina, Clooney & McLuhan

US v. Lennon, Brangelina, Clooney & McLuhan...in "IRV'S EYE VIEW"

by Irv Kass

Wednesday, 04 October 2006

http://www.mediamogirl.com IRV'S EYE VIEW Hello, again, everybody. It’s kickoff time for MM.com and I’m the odd ball in the MM pantheon. Okay, there are lots of odd balls in the MM world but here’s why when you read my “stuff” it may be worth noting a few things. First, I’m a guy; second I’m a boomer so probably old enough to be your father if you were born in 70s or 80s; and I love this stuff—technology, the web, video etc. If you haven’t seen the United States vs. John Lennon run out and see it now. It’s an amazing movie about a person who we could really use today. To see the similarities in the national mind set back in the 70s, with Nixon and his crew promoting an unpopular war, compared to today’s White House promoting an unpopular war, makes those of us who lived through that time yearn for a new activism. It’s not an accident that John Lennon and Yoko Ono were in the forefront of the anti war movement. As artists they could do what politicians and other activists are incapable of, or unwilling to do. First, they had the resources of John’s success as a Beatle. Financially they could do what they had to do because they were rich, very, very rich. But it was their sensibility, a certain simple, but not simplistic, appreciation of the madness that was raging around them and the cost in human lives and in our own humanity, that propelled them into activism. They also welcomed the media and understood how being in the spotlight could be bigger than their own success and fame; they used their celebrity for a higher purpose. Now you’re probably thinking that we have models, today, of celebrities who are in it for a larger, better purpose; and, you’re correct. George Clooney, Bono, even Brad and Angelina, do “good” by putting themselves on the line for worthy causes. But the scale of what was happening in the Lennon/Ono persecution and prosecution has no similar, analogous model today. So here’s the challenge. We must use our power in the world of viral marketing, blogosphere driven, personal expression with video proliferating on the web, to move toward bringing a different sort of leader into the front of the global stage. Marshall McLuhan, way back in 1964 (Understanding Media) anticipated our current electronic age with great acuity. Among his many clear and perceptive observations was that artists serve as sort of the canary in the coal mine anticipating and leading where the corporate and political leadership is unable to go, unable to see, or unwilling to take us. Each of us who has access to a computer can see, hear, and create, in ways only imagined just a few years ago. We have industrial giants like Google that profess a creed of “Don’t Be Evil”. And we have websites where everything, good, bad, and ugly, can be posted for the world to see. But what we see lacks the sort of connective power and narrative magnetism that great popular art can deliver. “All We Are Saying Is Give Peace A Chance”, became the anthem of the protest rallies because it was the sort of tune you take for granted and cannot get out of your head. Creating this simple musical stanza made John Lennon more dangerous to the entrenched power in Washington than all the reasoned arguments and sensible rhetoric that came before. Who will sing the song for today and how will the tune go? I’m hoping we find out soon.