Friday, September 5, 2008
The Record Says
Have you ever truly gotten angry at a student? I think the angriest I ever got was when a student attempted to plagurize a speech. This student actually took a speech that another student gave, in another class, with another teacher. We talked, however, and both students ended up in trouble. Personally, I think something like this should result in Criminal Court Records for both students. Things, probably for the best, did not go that far but the situation did give me something else to talk about when it comes to my discussion on ethics.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Was It Appropriate For Lieberman To Speak?
Apparently the Democrats have indicated that, while they understood Joe Lieberman was speaking at the Republican Convention, they felt he went too far with his attacks on Barack Obama. It is a fascinating dynamic.
First off, I am not sure what the Democrats were expecting from Lieberman. This is a convention and convention speeches, by their very nature, tend to be attack speeches. Certainly Lieberman made no secret of his respect and admiration for his friend, John McCain.
Yes, Lieberman was the VP candidate for the Democrats in 2000 as Al Gore picked him as his running mate. However, since that time, Lieberman lost a primary to another Democrat but ran in the general election as an independent. Running as an independent, Lieberman won. Still, while be an independent, he does caucus with the Dems.
Did Lieberman, as a result, owe it to the Democrats, the party that nominated him for the second highest office in the United States, not to speak at the convention? Doesn’t a person have the right to publically endorse anyone he or she wants? Doesn’t the constitution grant us Freedom of Speech? Still, why it certainly was legal, was it ethical and/or appropriate? I suggest that is for you to decide but I would expect that more Republican would respond he was ethical while Democrats would say he acted inappropriately.
Personally, I do not find Lieberman to be a particularly riveting speaker. Still, to the convention crowd, he was riveting and to those watching at home, it was more the fact that he was saying these things as opposed to how he said it, or even exactly what he said.
That, than, leaves us with the question, will the Democrats take action against him and is it appropriate. The Democrats could certainly tell Lieberman that he can no longer caucus with them. After all, he is an independent who ran against, and beat, a Democrat in a general election and has no publically supported a Republican. One could even claim that this is not retaliation, just bringing things to where they should be.
Regardless of what happens, I am guessing some people are not going to be happy. Again, considering that I deal with the ethics of public speaking, this fits right in. What ethical responsibilities did Joe Lieberman have or not have in regard to speaking at the convention and what ethical responsibilities, if any, are the Democrats bound by?
I love politics. Aren’t they great?
First off, I am not sure what the Democrats were expecting from Lieberman. This is a convention and convention speeches, by their very nature, tend to be attack speeches. Certainly Lieberman made no secret of his respect and admiration for his friend, John McCain.
Yes, Lieberman was the VP candidate for the Democrats in 2000 as Al Gore picked him as his running mate. However, since that time, Lieberman lost a primary to another Democrat but ran in the general election as an independent. Running as an independent, Lieberman won. Still, while be an independent, he does caucus with the Dems.
Did Lieberman, as a result, owe it to the Democrats, the party that nominated him for the second highest office in the United States, not to speak at the convention? Doesn’t a person have the right to publically endorse anyone he or she wants? Doesn’t the constitution grant us Freedom of Speech? Still, why it certainly was legal, was it ethical and/or appropriate? I suggest that is for you to decide but I would expect that more Republican would respond he was ethical while Democrats would say he acted inappropriately.
Personally, I do not find Lieberman to be a particularly riveting speaker. Still, to the convention crowd, he was riveting and to those watching at home, it was more the fact that he was saying these things as opposed to how he said it, or even exactly what he said.
That, than, leaves us with the question, will the Democrats take action against him and is it appropriate. The Democrats could certainly tell Lieberman that he can no longer caucus with them. After all, he is an independent who ran against, and beat, a Democrat in a general election and has no publically supported a Republican. One could even claim that this is not retaliation, just bringing things to where they should be.
Regardless of what happens, I am guessing some people are not going to be happy. Again, considering that I deal with the ethics of public speaking, this fits right in. What ethical responsibilities did Joe Lieberman have or not have in regard to speaking at the convention and what ethical responsibilities, if any, are the Democrats bound by?
I love politics. Aren’t they great?
Sarah Palin's Speech
I would guess that many of you watch Sarah Palin’s convention speech last night. Former mayor of New York City Ed Koch used to ask, “How Am I doin’”. Well, how did Sarah do last night?
I thought there were a number of positive things about her speech. The first thing the McCain-Palin ticket needs to do is sure up its base. If we accept Convention Delegates as being the base (and that point can be argued), certainly she was effective. She was on the national stage, the big stage last night and she did not falter. I did find it a little awkward when she talked about being the mother of “one of those troops,” since I have always consider the word ‘troop’ to be plural. The thought going through my brain at the time was, “The woman must have an awfully big uterus to be the mother of an entire troop”. I would have preferred her using the word ‘soldier,’ but really this is a minor point.
I also thought she spent a little too much time talking about her family and her family life. I do not feel that qualifies her to be Vice President and really does not tell us much about her. Yes, it is important to talk a little bit about family and upbringing in this day and age, yes she did indicate that parents of “special needs children” would have an advocate in the White House (which said something about policy) but the amount of time she spent talking about her family was overdone.
To my surprise, she did a nice job of talking about the issues. Did she only portray one side? Of course, but this is a campaign, this is the Republican Convention and that is to be expected. She let us know her position on drilling for oil and then mentioned other things that could be done to reduce the US reliance on oil (I thought Barack Obama said something similar at the Democratic Convention but still Palin told us something about her beliefs. She talked about line item vetoing and closely going through a budget, she talked about the need to cut rather than rely on the ‘tax and spend’ policies of Obama.
Given the fact that she has only been Governor of Alaska for two years, she did a nice job of combining attacks with telling you a little about her philosophy and approach. Did she tell you what she would do as Vice President? No, but let’s face it, other than advise the President, be a representative of the United States in some World Affairs and be ready to take over at a heartbeat should something happen to the President, the VP doesn’t do much. Personally, I think Sarah Palin would do great at the first two items mentioned but I have great and grave concerns about the third.
I did find it amusing how the Republicans criticized the Democrats for having no Executive experience at the VP or Presidential level. I did not know that was a prerequisite for the job and for years thought the belief of both parties was someone who had experience on the Federal level, with Federal issues, was better qualified than someone who had Executive experience on the State level. I still find it amusing that people are claiming that Sarah Palin is more qualified to lead than Barack Obama (maybe she would do a better job, I don’t know, but at this point to say she is more qualified is absurd). The claim, however, that he has never authored a piece of substantive legislation as either a state legislator or a Senator I thought was effective.
In viewing Palin’s speech as a speech, given the surroundings she had, I thought she did an excellent job with the speech. Should she win, I have no idea how good of a job she would do as VP (or President, should the need arise).
Stay tuned for reaction to Joe Lieberman coming up later today!
I thought there were a number of positive things about her speech. The first thing the McCain-Palin ticket needs to do is sure up its base. If we accept Convention Delegates as being the base (and that point can be argued), certainly she was effective. She was on the national stage, the big stage last night and she did not falter. I did find it a little awkward when she talked about being the mother of “one of those troops,” since I have always consider the word ‘troop’ to be plural. The thought going through my brain at the time was, “The woman must have an awfully big uterus to be the mother of an entire troop”. I would have preferred her using the word ‘soldier,’ but really this is a minor point.
I also thought she spent a little too much time talking about her family and her family life. I do not feel that qualifies her to be Vice President and really does not tell us much about her. Yes, it is important to talk a little bit about family and upbringing in this day and age, yes she did indicate that parents of “special needs children” would have an advocate in the White House (which said something about policy) but the amount of time she spent talking about her family was overdone.
To my surprise, she did a nice job of talking about the issues. Did she only portray one side? Of course, but this is a campaign, this is the Republican Convention and that is to be expected. She let us know her position on drilling for oil and then mentioned other things that could be done to reduce the US reliance on oil (I thought Barack Obama said something similar at the Democratic Convention but still Palin told us something about her beliefs. She talked about line item vetoing and closely going through a budget, she talked about the need to cut rather than rely on the ‘tax and spend’ policies of Obama.
Given the fact that she has only been Governor of Alaska for two years, she did a nice job of combining attacks with telling you a little about her philosophy and approach. Did she tell you what she would do as Vice President? No, but let’s face it, other than advise the President, be a representative of the United States in some World Affairs and be ready to take over at a heartbeat should something happen to the President, the VP doesn’t do much. Personally, I think Sarah Palin would do great at the first two items mentioned but I have great and grave concerns about the third.
I did find it amusing how the Republicans criticized the Democrats for having no Executive experience at the VP or Presidential level. I did not know that was a prerequisite for the job and for years thought the belief of both parties was someone who had experience on the Federal level, with Federal issues, was better qualified than someone who had Executive experience on the State level. I still find it amusing that people are claiming that Sarah Palin is more qualified to lead than Barack Obama (maybe she would do a better job, I don’t know, but at this point to say she is more qualified is absurd). The claim, however, that he has never authored a piece of substantive legislation as either a state legislator or a Senator I thought was effective.
In viewing Palin’s speech as a speech, given the surroundings she had, I thought she did an excellent job with the speech. Should she win, I have no idea how good of a job she would do as VP (or President, should the need arise).
Stay tuned for reaction to Joe Lieberman coming up later today!
Preparing For An Impromptu Speech
Recently, I gave a speech at my Toastmaster meeting and tackled the “Speaking off the Cuff” assignment. This assignment calls for the speaker to pick five categories and then let a person choose one of the categories and the speaker gives a five to seven minute speech on that category.
The idea behind this assignment is, when we give an impromptu speech, it is not totally unprepared. We usually are only asked to talk about topics of which we have knowledge; we often have an idea that we might be called upon to speak. The assignment goes on to say, as a result, we should always have some stories in the back of our mind that we can adapt to certain public speaking situations.
I absolutely agree with this philosophy and approach. It is true, it makes a lot of sense. For this assignment, however, I chose to do things slightly differently. The one down side to this assignment is, in effect, one can prepare five separate speeches and then based on which one is picked, that is the speech you give. Many people would have a tough time coming up with five separate speeches but some would not. I believe I am in the latter category. That was my reason for doing things differently. I told the person picking my topic that she had complete control over the topic. I did not want to limit her to five topics and know what they were.
The way I attempted to handle the situation was to have ten different anecdotes and figure, depending on the topic picked, I would adapt one of those anecdotes to the question and make a point or two with my story. After all, the point about having stories ready to go is quite valid.
Overall, it worked fairly well. It was not the strongest speech I ever gave but it certainly held together and responded to the question.
When it comes to teaching Public Speaking, students often panic when they learn they have to give an impromptu speech in class. I think this approach helps, to know that although it is impromptu you still can prepare. Not all student do prepare speeches but just knowing you have the option can release stress in regard to that impromptu assignment.
Later today look for a post concerning my thoughts of Sarah Palin’s speech. Also, keep your eyes open for a post concerning Joe Lieberman speaking at the Republican convention, which I also expect to have posted later in the day.
The idea behind this assignment is, when we give an impromptu speech, it is not totally unprepared. We usually are only asked to talk about topics of which we have knowledge; we often have an idea that we might be called upon to speak. The assignment goes on to say, as a result, we should always have some stories in the back of our mind that we can adapt to certain public speaking situations.
I absolutely agree with this philosophy and approach. It is true, it makes a lot of sense. For this assignment, however, I chose to do things slightly differently. The one down side to this assignment is, in effect, one can prepare five separate speeches and then based on which one is picked, that is the speech you give. Many people would have a tough time coming up with five separate speeches but some would not. I believe I am in the latter category. That was my reason for doing things differently. I told the person picking my topic that she had complete control over the topic. I did not want to limit her to five topics and know what they were.
The way I attempted to handle the situation was to have ten different anecdotes and figure, depending on the topic picked, I would adapt one of those anecdotes to the question and make a point or two with my story. After all, the point about having stories ready to go is quite valid.
Overall, it worked fairly well. It was not the strongest speech I ever gave but it certainly held together and responded to the question.
When it comes to teaching Public Speaking, students often panic when they learn they have to give an impromptu speech in class. I think this approach helps, to know that although it is impromptu you still can prepare. Not all student do prepare speeches but just knowing you have the option can release stress in regard to that impromptu assignment.
Later today look for a post concerning my thoughts of Sarah Palin’s speech. Also, keep your eyes open for a post concerning Joe Lieberman speaking at the Republican convention, which I also expect to have posted later in the day.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Sarah Palin To Speak In Less Than Ideal Circumstances
There has been a lot of talk of lot surrounding Sarah Palin, John McCain’s pick for the Vice Presidential nod. In a previous post I indicated that I felt she provides some balance to the ticket and I still feel that way. The down side is, given McCain’s age and health, I personally do not want someone as inexperienced as Palin a heartbeat away from the presidency. I think the two of them would work well together but if it ever came to the point where over the next four years she would be running the country, I would have concerns.
I found it humorous that the Republican talking heads claim that she has more experience than Barack Obama. I am not suggest he has a lot of experience and it is up to you to decide if he is qualified to run the country but don’t insult my intelligence by claiming she has more experience than he.
Obviously, there have been a number of issues that have already arisen concerning Sarah Palin. Despite what McCain says, despite what Palin says and despite what Obama and his people say, the fact that Palin’s 17 year old daughter is pregnant is absolutely news worthy.
Of course candidates and their families deserve to have private lives (although in today’s political society, that is not the way it works). Still this is newsworthy given Palin’s record. Palin believes schools should not teach sex education and that it should be left up to the parents to teach their children abstinence. Obviously, by her own standards, Palin failed. Of course the final decision is always up to the individual. I am not suggesting that Palin should be monitoring her 17 year old daughter 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Still, she, Sarah Palin, is the one who made this an issue. How can she tell the people of Alaska that they are responsible for making sure their unmarried children don’t have sex when she can’t even prevent her daughter from having sex (and getting pregnant). To me, that is the story.
Other issues regarding Palin have also come out during the campaign and she has not even been in the National eye for a week. What amazes me about this is, despite what is coming out, it appears that people are ignoring it and giving her a free pass. A friend of mine suggested that McCain could not get out of this well, so he should get out of it quickly and drop her from the ticket.
I don’t claim to know how the entire public feels about this but, from what I can tell, most don’t seem to care. The Republicans are not letting it distract them and it seems that McCain will keep her on. I am excited to hear her speech tonight, amidst all this craziness. All public speakers, at times, speak in less than ideal circumstances. While the convention is a favorable and welcoming atmosphere for Palin to speak, given all of the issues, we will not only learn something about Palin’s character tonight, we will learn something about her public speaking abilities.
I found it humorous that the Republican talking heads claim that she has more experience than Barack Obama. I am not suggest he has a lot of experience and it is up to you to decide if he is qualified to run the country but don’t insult my intelligence by claiming she has more experience than he.
Obviously, there have been a number of issues that have already arisen concerning Sarah Palin. Despite what McCain says, despite what Palin says and despite what Obama and his people say, the fact that Palin’s 17 year old daughter is pregnant is absolutely news worthy.
Of course candidates and their families deserve to have private lives (although in today’s political society, that is not the way it works). Still this is newsworthy given Palin’s record. Palin believes schools should not teach sex education and that it should be left up to the parents to teach their children abstinence. Obviously, by her own standards, Palin failed. Of course the final decision is always up to the individual. I am not suggesting that Palin should be monitoring her 17 year old daughter 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Still, she, Sarah Palin, is the one who made this an issue. How can she tell the people of Alaska that they are responsible for making sure their unmarried children don’t have sex when she can’t even prevent her daughter from having sex (and getting pregnant). To me, that is the story.
Other issues regarding Palin have also come out during the campaign and she has not even been in the National eye for a week. What amazes me about this is, despite what is coming out, it appears that people are ignoring it and giving her a free pass. A friend of mine suggested that McCain could not get out of this well, so he should get out of it quickly and drop her from the ticket.
I don’t claim to know how the entire public feels about this but, from what I can tell, most don’t seem to care. The Republicans are not letting it distract them and it seems that McCain will keep her on. I am excited to hear her speech tonight, amidst all this craziness. All public speakers, at times, speak in less than ideal circumstances. While the convention is a favorable and welcoming atmosphere for Palin to speak, given all of the issues, we will not only learn something about Palin’s character tonight, we will learn something about her public speaking abilities.
Ethical Lessons From Gustav
It is a relief to see that Gustav was not nearly as devastating as was predicted. People fled Louisiana based on predictions; Republicans changed their convention based on predictions; people across the nation braced for another devastating storm, similar to that of Katrina, based on predictions. We all breathe a sigh of relief that the predictions were incorrect.
Yesterday, in my Public Speaking class, the discussion dealt with ethics in public speaking. Are there any ethics and if so, what? Is it ethical to give a speech praising Osama bin Laden or Adolph Hitler? Is it ethical to urge people to break the law, be it smoking marijuana or actually going out and killing someone? Can we say that you should never urge someone to break the law. For instance, when MLK urged people to hold public sit-ins, or had blacks been urged to sit in the front of the bus, following the lead of Rosa Parks, isn’t that urging people to break the law. Where does one draw the line?
These are tough questions, and perhaps have no right or wrong answer since everyone views it differently. Still, one can ask similar questions about the way the reporting of Gustav was handled. Did the media turn this into a story, claiming that the hurricane was going to be on par with Katrina when they knew that in fact it was not? If so, are they to blame for forcing people to leave who might not now should another hurricane head that way? Is the media to blame for forcing the Republicans to alter their convention—to my ultra right wing friends who see the media as too liberal, do you see this as a plot of the liberal media to destroy the Republicans’ fun?
Then there is the other side of the issue. Should the media have just sat on the information for fear it might be incorrect or the hurricane might change course? If so, would the media be to blame for any deaths and/or injuries because it did not alert people as to how serious the hurricane was believed to be?
Similar questions can be asked in terms of threats to national security. Following 9-1-1 and the implementation of the homeland Security office. When there was a report of a threat that never materialized, we were critical for being told there was a danger. Had we not been told and something had happened, we would have been critical for not being alerted. Did the office actually intercept intelligence and prevent terrorist activities from occurring which we were never told about? We don’t know and probably will never know.
Considering the ethics and questions involved when it comes to reporting, to creating a story or simply reporting the facts or just waiting to find out what the facts are before reporting is a very difficult job. Examining these situations can actually show how tough the “ethics question” is when it comes to public speaking.
Yesterday, in my Public Speaking class, the discussion dealt with ethics in public speaking. Are there any ethics and if so, what? Is it ethical to give a speech praising Osama bin Laden or Adolph Hitler? Is it ethical to urge people to break the law, be it smoking marijuana or actually going out and killing someone? Can we say that you should never urge someone to break the law. For instance, when MLK urged people to hold public sit-ins, or had blacks been urged to sit in the front of the bus, following the lead of Rosa Parks, isn’t that urging people to break the law. Where does one draw the line?
These are tough questions, and perhaps have no right or wrong answer since everyone views it differently. Still, one can ask similar questions about the way the reporting of Gustav was handled. Did the media turn this into a story, claiming that the hurricane was going to be on par with Katrina when they knew that in fact it was not? If so, are they to blame for forcing people to leave who might not now should another hurricane head that way? Is the media to blame for forcing the Republicans to alter their convention—to my ultra right wing friends who see the media as too liberal, do you see this as a plot of the liberal media to destroy the Republicans’ fun?
Then there is the other side of the issue. Should the media have just sat on the information for fear it might be incorrect or the hurricane might change course? If so, would the media be to blame for any deaths and/or injuries because it did not alert people as to how serious the hurricane was believed to be?
Similar questions can be asked in terms of threats to national security. Following 9-1-1 and the implementation of the homeland Security office. When there was a report of a threat that never materialized, we were critical for being told there was a danger. Had we not been told and something had happened, we would have been critical for not being alerted. Did the office actually intercept intelligence and prevent terrorist activities from occurring which we were never told about? We don’t know and probably will never know.
Considering the ethics and questions involved when it comes to reporting, to creating a story or simply reporting the facts or just waiting to find out what the facts are before reporting is a very difficult job. Examining these situations can actually show how tough the “ethics question” is when it comes to public speaking.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Labor Day
When I was going to school, schools traditionally started the year the Wednesday after Labor Day. This was true of the elementary schools, the middle schools and junior highs, the high schools and the colleges and universities. I am not quite sure why it was that Wednesday and not the day before since Tuesday was the day immediately after the holiday, but the start of the school year was after Labor Day. Some schools still do that. My son starts the Wednesday after Labor Day.
Still, this approach has largely changed. Like many instructors, my college courses started the week before Labor Day. School began the Monday before the holiday. While it may allow the school year to end earlier and help institutions meet standards and goals, there is a problem with this. After just one week of classes, students are getting a day off.
I teach a Tuesday morning class. For many of the students, this is the first class after the Labor Day holiday. That means, when they return to classes on Tuesday, it is hard getting them to refocus. Many have still not broken out of the summer vacation mode and now they aren’t even given a chance to settle into the school year before getting a day off.
I realize that this is not going to happen but, I think schools which start before Labor Day should sit down and truly reconsider. Perhaps some of those who make the decisions should try teaching a class the day after Labor Day and see what they think.
Either way, it is good to be back teaching as I enjoy it. I just wish we had a little more time to ease into the routine.
To one and all, teachers and students, here is wishing you a good, enjoyable and successful semester.
Still, this approach has largely changed. Like many instructors, my college courses started the week before Labor Day. School began the Monday before the holiday. While it may allow the school year to end earlier and help institutions meet standards and goals, there is a problem with this. After just one week of classes, students are getting a day off.
I teach a Tuesday morning class. For many of the students, this is the first class after the Labor Day holiday. That means, when they return to classes on Tuesday, it is hard getting them to refocus. Many have still not broken out of the summer vacation mode and now they aren’t even given a chance to settle into the school year before getting a day off.
I realize that this is not going to happen but, I think schools which start before Labor Day should sit down and truly reconsider. Perhaps some of those who make the decisions should try teaching a class the day after Labor Day and see what they think.
Either way, it is good to be back teaching as I enjoy it. I just wish we had a little more time to ease into the routine.
To one and all, teachers and students, here is wishing you a good, enjoyable and successful semester.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
