Weekly Writing 8

It’s disconcerting that the mainstream media focus on documenting the accusatory verbal punches aimed at knocking policy and the public off-track. The rhetoric of fear posited by scientists is hardly better than the dismantling of scientific proof with character attacks favored by conservatives who are against international climate change sanctions that might change the business landscape that has filled their pockets. If the barrage of lobbyists in Washington is any indicator at all, big industries are pressuring our representatives to look the other way when changes are proposed. In fact, based on Jeff Goodell’s recent article in Rolling Stone, many of these lobbyists quote faulty estimates from industry-sponsored studies. Its time that climate change is presented clearly and in a way that normal people can understand.

Harvard psychology professor Daniel Gilbert writes that because climate change lacks the key markers that grab humans’ attention—a clear danger, or a moral or emotional trigger—-we’re essentially immune to viewing it as a current threat to our survival and well-being. It’s a much more abstract phenomenon than unemployment or health care and that much easier to ignore. Because its affects are slow yet dire, its up to journalists, scientists, and policy-makers to recast climate change and give it tangibility and relevance now, when we still have time to make changes.

Letter to The Dean

Dear Dean Powers,


Seattle University's Communication and Journalism Department is a critical link between the university and the community.  The existence of an autonomous department in this discipline has long benefited students and staff by giving them greater freedom to participate in internships, community journalism, private public relations, and publications (like the Spectator).  While the Communication and Journalism department may be one of the smallest on campus, it has wisely and efficiently used its budget to keep its production equipment up to date, send students and staff to conferences, and promote study abroad opportunities beyond Seattle University. 
The University's financial situation is especially trying to the Communication and Journalism Department since its students have historically faced the most competition heading into the job market.  In an effort to maintain the commitment to social justice as well as its student's competitive edge, I believe a healthy compromise can be reached that will ensure that the Comm. Department can continue to offer its students the best possible education while streamlining the programs it offers.
Currently, the department offers three distinct majors, Journalism, Communication Studies, and Strategic Communications.  These majors share a core in rhetoric but then branch out with Journalism and Strategic Communications students focusing on the various aspects of their prospective careers and Communications Studies students focusing on the philosophical and rhetorical implications and aspects of communication.  While the department heavily promotes social justice in its work, it lags in its commitment to leadership and community involvement.  Because students in the department are encouraged but not required to participate in the university's own communication outlets (i.e. The Spectator, KSUB, Seattle University Public Relations) they are missing out on a chance to further link themselves to the community.  By cutting one class from each major and requiring a quarter-long participation in one of the university's existing communication mediums, we would save money while promoting leadership and community involvement. 

Thank you for considering this proposal and we look forward to seeing positive changes soon,

Jamie Wallace

Final Project Cover Memo

Project Title: What’s The Risk—Tripping the Alarm for Climate Change


Genre: Podcasts, Radio Programs

Publication: Public and College Radio Stations

Audience: I’m trying to reach out to citizens who are concerned about climate change but whose interest in the issue may have waned. I want to focus the audience’s attention not on the risks of climate change, but on the way that they think about those risks. Hopefully, this will help to move the climate change debate beyond scientific and political grumblings and increase our understanding of the issue in a way that will move us to action. Ideally, listeners will think differently about climate change after listening to these short programs.

Analysis: Climate change is an abstract issue. I want to bring that issue down to earth and make it conversational and understandable. Because climate change talks usually consist of abstract predictions and figures, it’s easy for people to tune out the real implications of ignoring it. The conversational and personal nature of radio makes the discussion palatable and friendly. Also, because I’m steering the discussion away from the figures and predictions, I hope that the audience will find that they can reach a more nuanced idea of climate change that doesn’t consist solely of financial figures or gloom and doom forecasts.

Letter to Senator Murry D-Wa.

Dear Senator Murry,

As I'm sure you're aware, the impact of the state budget on students who are struggling with tuition costs is of paramount importance right now.  The proposed tuition increases will effectively make higher-education cost prohibitive for many students.  With the dissolution of work study, the larger class sizes, and underpaid professors and staff, I'm beginning to wonder just how much the state values education at all.  When cuts are necessary, it seems like higher education is one of the first institutions to be put on the chopping block.
 An investment in education is an investment in the state and its citizens.  An educated population is far more able to participate in the political process and contribute to the state economy, so why would the legislature focus only on short-term goals when adjusting its spending. 
The very people who the tuition increases will impact most are those who are most dependent on the government for their education.  Without the option of work study, individuals will need to take out more loans, which will limit their future financial contributions to the state and local economy. 
Its time to focus the lens on the big picture and consider the long-term effects of a tuition increase of this magnitude.  I urge you to evaluate other sectors of the state economy before you resort to penalizing those who are seeking higher education.

Sincerely,

Jamie Wallace

Rising Tuition

Remedying state budget shortfalls by raising tuition costs has students, educators, and policy makers struggling to find a middle ground.  Students' concern that they will not be able to pay for their education and the resultant protests mean that lawmakers need to come  up with a quick solution.  Education should be one of the last areas that budget shortfalls touch.  It seems like lawmakers are looking to cut costs in an area that will be the least politically damaging (and offend those with the least political power).  If the state concludes that raising the cost of education is its only option, it should condense universities instead of compromising current educational standards (larger classes, no work study, lower-salaried professors).  By accepting smaller classes with the same demographic makeup as now exists, the policy makers could cut their overall spending without enraging and financially penalizing the student population.  Unfortunately, this is contrary to the goal of educating more citizens and does little to make education more accessible.  Passing the penalty of budget concerns on to students is just not the answer.  Education is an investment, the state needs to realize that the return is far greater than the initial cost.

Problem Solving Letter

Dear Landlord,

Recently, the raccoons in our yard have been out of control.  They are tipping over trash cans, digging up the flower beds and being a general nuisance.  Not only am I concerned about the mess that they're causing on the property, I also fear for the health and well-being of the residents and neighborhood pets, who are kept up by the raccoons late-night antics.  Based on the trail of garbage and the frequent rustling and squealing noises, I've determined that the raccoon den is under the porch of our building (this would also account for the small dead rodents that we've been picking up near the front door).  The possibility of disease is also a worry since raccoons have been know to become rabid and bite humans.  The animal control department directed me to contact you and I'm hoping that you'll address this problem soon be it with traps, poison, or den relocation. 

Thank you for sharing this concern,

Jamie Wallace

The Onion Bans Tolerable Relationships

The Onion beautifully satirizes the anti-gay marriage movement in their, "New Law Would Ban Marriages Between People Who Don't Love Each Other" video. Implying that separate beds, stunted conversations, and sexless existences make loveless couples less qualified for marriage than couples who are in love takes the gay marriage debate and makes it seem silly and trite. Its very funny in the way that it takes a serious debate and places the same argument in a different contextual arena in order to break it down.

AdCouncil: SpeakUp Campaign

In an effort to curb teenage reckless driving habits, the AdCouncil's new campaign uses comedians in faux-teenage drag riding along with apathetic adolescents to say: Slow Down and Drive Safe or risk killing everyone in the vehicle. The campaign, Speak Up Or Else, aims to get teens to tell their peers to keep their eyeballs on the road and only the road and obey the speed limit. The pitch itself is a little hokey but it seems to get the cause and effect point across well enough. Reckless driving + Peer's unfavorable opinions - thrill-seeking lust = A safer driver

Cause and Effect Letter: Theater Solo

There's nothing like sitting in a theater as the previews morph into the feature and knowing that the two empty seats next to you mean that you have a cupholder and an armrest all to yourself. By attending movies alone, one avoids the pressure to buy popcorn, the compromise over seat choices, and the dreaded hand-holding conundrum. It really allows you to let go of all the unnecessary social distractions and focus on the film. Though it seems selfish (and it is), there's nothing like sitting between two empty velvet seats to really immerse oneself in the theatrical environment. I find that I'm able to better understand and delve further into a film when I watch it by myself in a theater. Its a conscious choice to forgo cultural norms (aka, being an individual [loser/loner]) for a few short hours to really sit down and enjoy a movie, absorb the cinematography, be captivated by the dialogue, and entranced by the actors' craft. That, and its way cheaper than going for a massage.

Weekly Writing 7: Credibility and Review

In order to best represent the risks associated with climate change, I would need to find credibility in a place where others have entered the discussion and failed. I already know that many Americans feel like climate change is an issue that is outside of their day-to-day existence and the current players in the debate are doing nothing to change that. Unlike the scientists, experts, and politicians that have exhausted the public with tales of doom, money, and doubt, I would start by bringing the issue much closer to home. Besides demonstrating an understanding of climate change in regards to its science and how it is portrayed in the media, I would earnestly personalize climate change so that individual American's and communities would find that addressing it is to their environmental and economic advantage. Because economic concerns are tangible, it’d be very important to present the issue in a way that is complimentary to personal economic benefits. Instead of positioning climate regulations in opposition to economic growth, I would need to explore new technologies and how developing industries can shape a world where new climate policies and economic redevelopment are complimentary goals. Additionally, representing this issue authoritatively would include accounting for the difficulty of imagining abstract ideas. Instead of conceding that the science is too complex to address, I think it’d be better to see how the science applies here and now. It’d make an impact to explore what climate change means locally and how our choices to invest in new technology or enact emissions restrictions would affect us every day. By combining hard facts with personal and community concerns, my audience and I would be exploring how climate change reaches beyond the debate and into real life.

The RealClimate website provides a forum for scientists and concerned citizens to discuss climate change. One of the most interesting recent posts discusses a new iPhone app that provides quick rebuttals to arguments that are skeptical of climate change. The author of this post (and certainly the app’s creator) are really trying to move the climate change debate from criticism of scientists and the media back to the science itself. They’re doing this admirably by proving that they are tech-savvy and knowledgeable and appealing to a wide audience. The site, which is part of the UK’s Guardian Environment Network, is comprised of responses to climate change articles published in the mainstream media with particular focus on articles that have appeared in The Guardian. The authors and the discussions that follow each post (the site format is similar to a blog) are drenched in scientific know-how with a large helping of practicality. The blog often deconstructs misleading media pieces and corrects out of context quotes and iffy scientific assertions with copious citations. Sometimes, the scientists and contributors who were misrepresented in the original piece also weigh in. RealClimate catches the media in the act of distorting climate change and then corrects its mistakes--very persuasive indeed.

Letter of Inquiry

Ms. Elizabeth Barratt-Brown
Co-Chairperson
Center for a New American Dream
6930 Carroll Ave., Ste. 900
Takoma Park, MD 20912-4466


Dear Ms. Barratt-Brown,

The Seattle University Department of Communication Requests $500,000 to increase public awareness of the impacts of climate change on local economies and public quality of life.

Organization:  As communicators, all humans are part of an ongoing conversation. Whether professional journalists, public speakers, teachers, managers, or simply citizens, we live in a social world shaped and continually remade through communication practices. The messages we send and receive from others do far more than transmit information or express feelings. They shape attitudes, build and modify relationships, and even change the course of history. The mission of the Communication Department is to empower students and faculty to develop more meaningful and effective voices in this communal conversation.

Seattle University has a history of public service and leadership in the interest of creating a just and humane world.  Keeping this in mind, and considering the increasing threat of climate change to disadvantaged communities, Seattle University's Department of Communication would like to undertake a student-produced and directed film project that aims to expand the public's understanding of their local environment and visualize what climate change will mean to their community.  In order to best accomplish this, we propose creating a film called The Globe in My Backyard that will examine the risks of ignoring climate change and how, if allowed to continue, emissions and pollution will change local environmental and economic landscapes.

The film will focus on two communities:  the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Seattle, Washington--a young, progressive community in the Pacific Northwest that is taking steps to decrease the human impact on the environment; Pueblo, Colorado--a small city in Southern Colorado that has recently cut its recycling program and is plagued by economic woes and an aging population. This mission aligns with the Center For a New American Dream's goal of providing profound experiences that change the way American's perceive their interactions with the environment.  It aims to reduce the abstract quality of climate change while contextualizing the short- and long- term impacts  of prioritizing economy over environment in two very different communities.

Major expenses will include film production and travel.  Other funding for this project will be provided by Seattle University, grants supporting the arts, and environmental awareness grants.

Thank you for considering this project.


Jamie Wallace
Seattle University Journalism '10
901 12th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98122-4411
(206) 296-5340