PHM-Exch> Food for an overlooked thought (4) 2 replies

[Claudio Schuftan]

>From Sam Lanfranco <Lanfran at yorku.ca>
>
> The issue of media coverage of important social issues by focusing on
> “star speakers” ( be they academics, rock stars, or retired
> politicians) touches on a deeper challenge. How does knowledge engage the
> public in an ongoing reasoned debate about important social
> issues? The media focus on high profile events because they have
> limited time and skills to do serious investigative research, and the
> general public is increasingly addiction to “sound bites” that attract
> readers and viewers, and support their own beliefs.
>
> The challenge is less how to reform reporting on conference events –
> which are episodic – and more on how to translate knowledge into an
> ongoing process of public education. Special interest groups, with a
> financial interest, fund lobbying efforts that operate non-stop and
> globally. Conference events are the tip of the knowledge sharing
> process, with the real work going on continuously below the surface.
>
> Originally conferences were a way to peer-share work in progress.
> Increasingly they are a form of public relations, for vested
> interests, self-promotion and for subsequent funding. How do we
> (academics, NGOs, community groups) promote the knowledge networking that
> would prompt and feed reasoned public debate?
>
> There are three ways that are unlikely to work. We are unlikely to
> directly shift the attention of the media, since they have their time
> and skills constraints and are bombarded by well-funded special
> interest groups. Universities are now promoting “knowledge
> mobilization” but those efforts are more effective as public
> relations than they are at knowledge sharing. We are cannot secure
> lobbying and public relations resources comparable to financially
> motivated special interest groups. We are unlikely to catch, and
> hold, the attention of the general public directly, even via the new
> social networking technologies of the Internet.
>
> There is one way that holds promise, and has challenges. That is a
> deeper commitment on the part of the evidence-based knowledge
> community (broadly defined) working with stakeholder groups who are
> most victimized by social injustice, economic inequity, social
> discrimination and environmental degradation. The goal is to combine
> voices in pursuit of reasoned public debate. This is not be easy
> because stakeholders are passionate about their plight and passion
> can cloud reason. On the other side, research prides itself on reason
> over passion.
>
> This is where a bridge must be built between two solitudes that have
> seldom had time for serious dialogue or a collective strategy. Of
> course, to do so would also challenge traditional sources of funding
> for research and for social mobilization. Nobody said it would be
> easy.
>


From: Sarah Walpole argotomunky at yahoo.co.uk

excerpts

 As you recognise, though, there are many good ideas out there that haven't
been approved and the peer-reviewed ideas aren't necessarily the best, and
certainly won't always be the best.

Whilst "star speakers" have valuable ideas, it is the ideas, not the
speakers that we should be focusing on. There is increasing recognition of
the need for more participative methods in conferences, such as smaller
groups sessions. It's very difficult on very large scale and under time
pressures.

Things could be better through
- ensuring effective structures for meetings - representative individuals
present, working on a local scale wherever possible and sharing
ideas/information/outcomes with other groups by email/other communication
channels (benefits in terms of time, sustainability and involvement)
- learning and disseminating good facilitation techniques to enable small
groups to work effectively
- trying to break away from our engrained leaning towards "achievement" and
value only in recognised channels (many of which are inaccessible to people
with great ideas) - recognising good ideas from the "non-star" speakers, and
the ones who don't even get to attend the conference
- trying not to promote ourselves through these channels (very difficult, as
we still need to use them to get the message out, and because we can't help
but assign value to ourselves through them!)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://phm.phmovement.org/pipermail/phm-exchange-phmovement.org/attachments/20100417/c3e5c898/attachment-0001.html>