thinking at the interface

And, we’re back….. (as my gmail interface says).    So, through my inbox today are two items related to the current state of digital video in higher edu.   First up, from the front of the class, faculty members are beginning to incorporate digital video as a pedagogical tool,from the Chronicle of Higher Ed:

Faculty members at other colleges have recently begun creating homemade videos to supplement their lectures, using free or low-cost software. These are the same technologies that make it easy for students to post spoof videos on YouTube, but the scholars are putting the tools to educational use.

And, in contrast, from the back of the class, grad students are using digital video to poke fun at being a TA, teaching composition:

The videos may be found here and here. In a series of faux interviews, TA’s talk about their working conditions, their students and the curriculum. Some of the talk is crude and mocking, although in the era of Harold and Kumar, the videos hardly push the envelope in that category.

The controversy erupted when the chair of the English department called the director of the videos to a meeting with other senior faculty members and asked for the videos to be removed from YouTube.   Interesting.  Apparently dissent from the educational project of higher education is not allowed in digital video, only the one-way transfer of information from the front of the classroom.    This seems to miss the point of digital-video-sharing as a form of participatory media, but then that’s just me.

Book = done.

10 chapters and almost 300 pages = submitted to publisher this day, April 28, 2008.

Me =happy.

I have no idea whether or not there’s a ‘documentary season’ or not, but there are a couple of new films out from two well-known documentary filmmakers.  Do two films constitute a trend?  Here they are:

• Where in the World is Osama Bin Laden?  Morgan Spurlock’s wacky take on “a franchise larger than McDonald’s - Al Qaeda.”
• Standard Operating Procedure.   Errol Morris’ new film about photography, torture and the Abu Gharib prison.  In an interesting example of convergence culture, Morris is simultaneously co-authoring a book by the same title, with Philip Gourevitch.  The New Yorker website has excerpts from the book and video clips.   This promises to be a major work by one of the best working filmmakers.

Not sure if these two films constitute a trend, but I am, nonetheless, giddy with anticipation at seeing these new releases.   Until then, I am back to the old-media project weighing down on me while trying to imagine a world in which the book is finished and I get to watch documentary matinees.

A friend of mine, Lucky Michaels, has a new book out called Shelter, based on his work with homeless, queer youth (those reading along who took my January course on Visual Media will recall our discussion of this book).    It’s primarily a beautifully photographed coffee table book, with some text included, some of it written by youth at the shelter, some by one of the social workers at the shelter, and some by Lucky.   Lucky is a talented artist with a keen eye, and it comes through in Shelter.  It’s compelling and a passionate expression of Lucky’s committment to all the kids who pass through Homeless Youth Services, the umbrella organization that encompasses Sylvia’s Place (where the book is photographed) and the Marsha P. Johnson Center, where Lucky spends most of his time these days.  And, significant portion of the books’ proceeds go to help Homeless Youth Services, so, it may not be surprising to learn that I’ve given a couple of these books as gifts.

Today, apparently timed to coincide with this guy’s visit to the city, the New York Times City Room Blog (and the print edition of the paper) is running a story about Lucky’s book which has stirred some controversy in the comments section.  I sincerely hope it turns into a case of ‘all publicity is good publicity,’ and that this heat generates some light on the very real problem of homeless queer youth in this city.

I came across a thought-provoking piece about the work involved in using documentary films for advocacy. The article, “Out of the Screening Room and Into the Streets,” by Irene Villaseñor (10/07) provides details of some of what is involved in community activism based on films. In the piece, she describes how her organization, Youth Views, trains young people how to use media for social change by combining media activism with skills in grassroots campaign building and innovative uses of technology to engage people in marginalized communities. Here’s a rather lengthy quote from her case study:

Using Film to Create Community and Social Change: Señorita Extraviada

Young people can use film to expand a community’s perspective and raise important issues regarding injustice. In one instance, Project Reach and their partners—the American Indian Community House (AICH) in New York, NY and the Esperanza Peace and Justice Center (EPJC) in San Antonio, Texas—participated in the Community Engagement and Education campaign for the film Señorita Extraviada by Lourdes Portillo. This film examines the disappearances of hundreds of young women in Juarez, Mexico. While the film was not youth-produced, young people have used the film to train, organize, and mobilize their communities.

For example, Señorita Extraviada was key to bringing communities together—such as border towns in southern Texas and migrant Mexican populations—together. Young people took part in assembling intergenerational teams to present community screenings; led dialogues that considered the connections between violence against women, the culture of machismo, poverty, and attacks against indigenous communities; and organized action in the U.S. and Mexico about the situation in Juarez. Overwhelmingly, the audience was relieved that the film responded to an ongoing tragedy in their community with respect, cultural understanding, and a critical examination of contributing factors. The film, along with skilled facilitators to manage community discussions and experts ready to share their analysis and resources, drove people to action.

In addition, Project Reach screened Señorita Extraviada as part of their Summer Training Series, which is a community-organizer-readiness programs that examined different forms of discrimination. Youth trainers were surprised by their peers’ resistance to examining their assumptions about the roles of power and its misuse in relationships. In response, youth trainers asked the group to separate into male-identified and female-identified groups. They then had men view Señorita Extraviada while women participated in an exercise where each was given an index card to answer the question “How have you been personally hurt by sexism?”

After the screening the groups reunited, and each man received an index card to read out loud. Responses revealed that each young woman in the program had experienced some form of sexual violence. This startling revelation left the young men shaken, newly aware of the reality of sexism across transnational/cultural boundaries as well as on a personal level. As a result, participants in that session vowed to challenge sexism wherever they saw it and support the rights of women and girls.

Señorita Extraviada was also used on Youth View’s Talking Back program, with young people producing and airing video letters from across the country as part of the national PBS broadcast of the film, which reached over a million American homes. Video letters are still available for viewing online via P.O.V.’s website www.pbs.org/pov. The Señorita Extraviada video letters included responses from Amnesty International USA, Feminist Majority, activist Eve Ensler, and Congresswoman Hilda L. Solis (D-CA). Participating groups created a reel with an array of the video letters and also screened it to raise awareness about the Juarez murders and the range of activist campaigns to raise awareness and influence policy around the issue. This campaign was also presented to young leaders from around the world at the United Nations during the 49th Session of the Commission on the Status of Women illustrating of how young people can use independent media as a catalytic tool for social change.

Interesting, innovative work. I predict that the expansion of digital video in all its forms means that these kinds of efforts will be increasingly common strategies for outreach in various communities. One of the things that’s important about what Villaseñor writes here is how much more work is involved than just “showing a movie.”

In conducting interviews with young people about how they evaluate information they find online, again and again I heard them parrot what they’d been taught in those “Internet literacy” courses: look at the URL, if it ends dot “org” or “edu” the information must be alright. As I’ve written about elsewhere, this sort of simplistic approach to critical thinking about the information available online is inadequate to the task at hand. And, now, an additional layer of complexity gets added to the mix of confusing information. According to the Chronicle of Higher Ed (4/17/08):

Web addresses ending in .edu are usually reserved for accredited colleges and universities, but an online college in Missouri has started renting out blog space on its .edu domain to just about anyone willing to pay $50 a month. And the practice has quickly raised objections from college officials worried that such rentals undermine the .edu designation.

Here’s the text from Pickering(PI.edu), the company selling the web space (4/9/08):

“PI.edu is now offering sub-domain blogs that will allow you to educate your potential customers on your field of expertise. Why PI.edu? Our blogs allow you to reach an education minded audience that is difficult to reach with mass market blogs such as Blogger or Blogspot. PI.edu visitors are looking to learn about new things, and we are building the web’s most sophisticated blog community. Having a PI.edu gives you instant credibility because we have strict guidelines as to who can have a blog and the quality and truthfulness of the writing. Your blog will be on your own sub domain of pi.edu. All blogs names will have the following syntax pattern: BlogName.pi.edu. For a limited time, we our offering blogs for only a $50 per month service charge and maintenance fee. Please register for a blog and start running an EDU blog today!”

The Chronicle article above goes on to talk about the ‘restrictions’ PI.edu has in place: ‘no porn,’ ‘no spam’ and from PI.edu, ‘only high quality’ blogs. But I wonder what they would do when confronted by real live political controversy seeking to dress itself up with an ‘edu’ blog, such as some of the pro-life groups, white supremacists, or perhaps most perniciously, corporate interests.

I’ve updated the “Sociology Through Documentary Film” page, and sorted them by broad sociological themes.   Annotations for how they’re useful in class will have to wait until another time.     If I’ve missed your favorite documentary somehow, please do leave a comment and I’ll add it to the list.

Really interesting piece in this Sunday’s New York Times Magazine by Sara Corbett about the impact of mobile phones on global poverty.   Basically, the central argument in the long and interesting article boils down to this:

Even the smallest improvements in efficiency, amplified across those additional three billion people, could reshape the global economy in ways that we are just beginning to understand.

And, there’s a bit in the middle about how mobile phones are being used in health promotion efforts:

Text messaging, or S.M.S. (short message service), turns out to be a particularly cost-effective way to connect with otherwise unreachable people privately and across great distances. Public health workers in South Africa now send text messages to tuberculosis patients with reminders to take their medication. In Kenya, people can use S.M.S. to ask anonymous questions about culturally taboo subjects like AIDS, breast cancer and sexually transmitted diseases, receiving prompt answers from health experts for no charge.

The guy that she profiles, Jan Chipchase is an anthropologist who travels the world on Nokia’s - the mobile phone maker - payroll gathering information about how people actually use their cell phones.    Chipchase gets my vote for “world’s most interesting job.”   Where do I apply?