The soundbite phenomenon


I have enjoyed reading about presentations at the recent ALA annual conference. Of particular note for me are Owen Stephens’ extensive notes, available here. The ability for those who aren’t present at conferences to quickly catch up on essentials of what was discussed is, to me, hugely important and beneficial. I’m thankful for the efforts of others to record their impressions for someone like me to read.

The discussions that are written about often raise important issues in my mind and at times I feel strongly enough about an issue to respond to what was written, usually via commenting on a particular blog post. Such is the case with a recent blog post by Roy Tennant, called “Shoot the Dogma.” In this post Roy talks about a presentation in which one of the panelists uttered the statement, “Shoot the dogma,” as part of a larger narrative about why we should question many of our longstanding beliefs and practices. In this case she was referring to cataloging in particular. Roy picked that as the title of his post and said that this was one statement in the discussion that really stood out to him.

After thinking about that statement for a little bit, I decided to respond. See the link above to the post and the following comments for a complete picture of what was said and by whom. I guess what bothered me (and still does) about that statement is that it represents, to me, the latest in what I would call “the soundbite phenomenon.” Someone else who is regularly quoted with provocative or interesting soundbites is Stephen Abram. No personal affront intended, but I get tired of soundbites like this. Why? Well, there are many reasons. One is that many things are easier said than done. Another reason is that in my observation over many years in the profession, there is a tendency for us to grab ahold of a soundbite like this and shake our heads in affirmation, without really exploring its meaning and implications to see if the point made is actually credible or defensible.

In this case, as Karen Schneider pointed out in responding to my comment in Roy’s post, I need to understand and be aware of the larger context of the discussion. I plan to listen to the audio archive linked from that post so that I can be better informed. This is a reminder, as many others have found in the past, that responding to what someone has chosen to filter or write about in a conference session on a blog somewhere, especially if that response is critical, can be tricky.

One final observation. I find it weird that my criticism of something someone said should be met with the response that, basically, questions my criticism because “This is a domain in which [that other person] has a lot of knowledge.” Oh, please. Let’s just set aside the implication that I lack experience in these areas for now. My criticism, or anyone else’s for that matter, should stand or fall on its own merits. Maybe my criticism, such as it is, will turn out to be invalid. If so I will be the first to admit it.

Information and Links

Join the fray by commenting, tracking what others have to say, or linking to it from your blog.


Other Posts

  • sabram
    Family Man:

    I suppose it would look like a soundbite phenomenon if one limited oneself to just panel discussions (or short reports thereof) and blog postings. That would be a shame. All of the panelists in this session write books, long form articles and public reports exploring in deeper ways the issues explored in this session. a variety of formats creates a healthy discussion ecology. One would hope that our blogging and panel discussion formats, where soundbites are used to engage and challenge the audience, would encourage our professional colleagues to read a little deeper before forming an opinion, strategy or policy. Then again I've been following the discussion about our ALA session on Web4Lib and most people seem to be reacting not to the 90 minute session live or the MP3 file/video but to the 3 paragraph short blog report on the LJ blog. I am quite amazed at my colleagues ability to write deeply felt discussion list postings based on a blog soundbite (sometimes impugning or imagining the speakers' intent) that are longer than the LJ posting! I hope they'll eventually gather and build a fully informed opinion. I am not distressed about this but it worries me that so many of our colleagues might neglect to verify the facts before uncritically sharing their conclusions and opinions.

    Thanks for thinking about the roles of the various formats for enlivening discussion of the issues facing our profession and users.

    Stephen (Another family man)
  • Stephen,

    Thanks for commenting. I am in the process of writing a followup post
    because of having listened to the MP3 recording (I finished listening to it
    late yesterday). (Kudos to LITA for making that available.) I should have
    listened to it first, before commenting on Roy's post, because it does
    indeed provide a more well-rounded picture of the discussion and has changed
    my view of the discussion.

    Steve
blog comments powered by Disqus