Global Voices aggregates, curates, and amplifies the global conversation online – shining light on places and people other media often ignore…
Source: Globalvoicesonline.org

Shining light on places and people other media often ignore. I find this quote to be a wonderful reminder of why YOU and I–as bloggers and podcasters–are critical to our democracy. But when we talk about democracy, I often forget that the freedoms podcasters and bloggers need is always under attack. As more people are able to publish at will, there are others who will seek to silence them. However, as I was re-reading The ClueTrain Manifesto this morning, I ran across Doc Searls…

Conversation is fire.

That’s a reality that censors are well aware of, and that podcasters are aware of, but I think, in a different way. I’m excited about sharing a conversation with someone with the world…a censoring organization is more interested in controlling that conversation for its own gain. Yesterday, the top visited blog entry was my short conversation with an El Paso ISD assistant principal sharing what she had to say. For a few days, this assistant principal’s podcast dominated my stats.
The reason for that is that…

People in networked environments have figured out that they get far better info and support from one another than from their own organizations. As we link to each other, as we respond to the honesty, the vulnerability, and truth, we see that hyperlinks DO subvert hierarchy.
Source: adapted from The ClueTrain Manifesto

Doc Searls words are especially true for bloggers and podcasters who are covering education events, events that those organizations may try to control for their own gain. As each of us awakens to our ability to share ideas, publish information, the truth–we are human beings and our reach exceeds your grasp. Deal with it–is especially powerful.
AN EXAMPLE
Encountering censorship isn’t an easy thing. As a writer, I’ve encountered it several times…each time, the censorship was presented in a “frightening” way. In each moment, disapproval was expressed with a particular line of thought. I know it’s easy to read this and think, “Miguel is pretty out there, maybe he deserves to be censored.” In fact, I have to ask myself, “Should you be censored? What are the mitigating circumstances? Are there ever any mitigating circumstances (aside from security)?” Now, if I didn’t live and work in the United States, maybe censorship would be a bigger deal, a life or death issue. For now, it’s an issue that we can write about, discuss, and never forget. But it’s clear to me that people who use organizational power to censor are always oppressive in their approaches.
I still remember my encounter with censorship some time ago when I podcast the events at the Technology Education Coordinators Special Interest Group meeting:

The lesson of sharing? Without podcasting and meeting notes, information shared at a meeting dies after that. If you didn’t attend the meeting, it’s over. However, if you share the information online, you connect with so many people who wanted to be present but couldn’t be there–lack of travel funds, last minute family commitments, etc. I continue to believe that if an organization will not make the means of publishing available to its members–such as blogs and podcasts that enable real time publishing, as TCEA denied when I requested through proper channels–then the membership must step up and share information on its own. The organization exists to serve the membership, not the other way around. In my role, sharing information is an ACT OF SERVICE.
Source: Blog Censorship, Around the Corner-MGuhlin.net

Although a “face-saving” email–face-saving for the organization–was sent out, no change came about or is evident a year later, even though a list of recommendations was presented to the Board of Directors of TCEA. Essentially, a large state-wide organization DID NOT change its practices, even though the Membership clearly found podcasting those resources worthwhile. In the culture of TCEA and TEC-SIG–an organization I have served on the Board of Directors and as President, respectively–it’s clear that the membership wants access to information. The organizations involved choose to restrict that access, perhaps for financial gain. Is such an attitude worthy of us as educators?
REFLECTIONS
At the time, I cited Robert Quinn (Deep Change). I share his words again, In every single case, the transformational leader had, at least once, broken a state law. To transform the ineffective organization into an effective one, required forms were not turned in, regulations were ignored and directives violated. Are you as a podcaster prepared to break the rules to transform the ineffective into effective?
If transformational leadership in a Read/Write Web world in the hands of people like you and me, will we all break the “rules” set by ineffective organizations? Could the means of that peaceful, civil disobedience be to shine light on those places the organization would rather have you ignore and be left in darkness to their benefit?

In light of this example, how would change strategies be implemented? If you are a volunteer in an organization, and you wish to podcast–with the permission of the speakers but not the organization–do you proceed? What if you know the organization has consistently failed to put content online for its members, do you proceed?

Note: This was originally written in 2006 but I find it remains true today. I hope that one day, the examples used in this blog entry will no longer be valid.

UPDATE 2010: I am happy to report that the examples in this blog entry are NO LONGER VALID. Hurray!

var addthis_pub=”mguhlin”;

Subscribe to Around the Corner-MGuhlin.org

Be sure to visit the ShareMore! Wiki.