Archive for the 'Uncategorized' Category
24
May
12
10114-012-C
Demosthenes, the prominent Greek statesman and orator of ancient Athens wished that we could “see ourselves as others do.” If he could only see the ease with which smart phones make this possible, and the ubiquitous communication on Facebook, YouTube and Twitter, he might take that back. 
There has been a noticeable shift in students’ perceptions of being recorded. While this shift has the potential to produce better communicators, instructors of public speaking need to direct students to take steps to professionalize their recorded presentations.
Groans emanated from my public speaking classes throughout the nineties and 2000s when I would announce that speeches in class would be recorded. I prided myself on being a “better instructor” than professors who just graded and let the record of the speeches disappear as memories fade. In my courses we have evidence of each presentation in the form of a video recording that I require students to view to critique themselves. Only “seeing themselves as others do” would help them to improve, I believe and I hold onto this mantra even now, during this time of smart phone video ease.
Around 2010 the groans in class stopped when I announced that their speeches would be recorded and that, in addition, they would be required to produce a “recorded speech of self introduction.” Knowing, confident faces greeted me and inevitably one student would pipe up: “Can we use our smart phones?”
I realized that this generation is used to be recorded, photographed, and they are immensely more comfortable in front of a camera than those who came before them. It doesn’t mean they are better at it. After viewing hundreds of student speeches sent via Internet links on YouTube and other video sharing sources, I’m convinced that students need to learn skills to present themselves professionally in front of the camera. Today’s public speaking classroom is missing a key teaching imperative for the digital age if it fails to include how to speak effectively on video. In the age of Skype and video conferencing today’s student needs to navigate the ways to speak professionally while being recorded.
Here are some ways to direct students to a more professional recorded image:
1. Dress as though you expect a future employer to see you. Young women seem especially confused here. There is a fine line between professional attire and nightclub attire. Plunging necklines, short skirts and excessive make up detract from a professional image. And young men should realize that hoodies do not enhance ethos. John Molloy was the guru of dressing for success in the 1980s, but styles have changed. More relaxed clothing seems acceptable in many workplaces. Still, some simple tips shared here for new teachers will serve students well.
2. Practice! Oh, this seems obvious, doesn’t it? But today’s student can be so comfortable in front of the camera that they think they are better than they are. Explain to students that only their best effort should be submitted. On the contrary, ensure students have performed multiple takes by requiring that they submit three versions of the presentation in addition to the final one.
3. Guard against verbal frying. This is a new style of speech reminiscent of Kim Kardashian and Brittany Spears, and is most common in young women. Both young men and women are guilty of excessive “likes” and “you knows” and remind students to keep them to a minimum.
4. Choose a professional environment. Your kitchen, bedroom or swimming pool are not appropriate backdrops. Neutral is better. Sitting at a desk will immediately signal seriousness.
5. “How’s it going, guys?” is not a professional salutation. Professionalize speech. “Thank you for your interest in my presentation” is more appropriate if you feel the need to open with something other than the message itself. Keep repeating this line: public speaking is more formal than conversation. Students are especially confused because media has made every public figure so accessible. Still, a good presentation does not resemble a conversation on a bar stool. Sit up straight. Take hair out of your face.
6. In essence, practice. And imagine your grandmother in the audience.
To effectively teach students skills for success, it is imperative to show them samples of effective video presentations. Have at least three examples handy: An “A” presentation that follows the above guidelines, a “B” presentation that falls short for a couple of small reasons and an epic failure or “F” presentation that not only doesn’t fulfill the assignment but damages the speaker’s credibility as well. When students understand that communication they see on reality television programs is different from the communication they need to gain success in today’s competitive world, they will begin to respect that just because they *can* record themselves, perhaps they should not record themselves until they have something thoughtful to say and a professional way to say it.
Clearly, this is a technologically fast changing world. Let’s do our part as communication professors to provide our students with instruction that keeps pace with technology.
Sitting among the capacity crowd last night at Northampton Community College’s Spartan Center listening to historian Dr. Doris Kearns Goodwin weave tales of her experiences, research and family life, I felt fortunate to be in what felt like a master class on Lincoln, the importance of making the most of our opportunities and how to lead with character. Drawing from the life of Lincoln, Goodwin emphasized the traits that made Lincoln great and that can help us lead our lives effectively. 
1. The ability to motivate oneself in the face of adversity
2. To learn from failure
3. Share credit
4.Shoulder blame
5. Be aware of one’s weaknesses
6. Control emotions, especially anger
7. Find ways to relax and to regain a sense of humor
8. Spend time with the people you lead, especially those in need
9. Remain true to your goals
10. Communicate your ideas with eloquence
Lincoln’s second inaugural address, Goodwin noted is perhaps the finest example of Lincoln’s eloquence when he urged: “Malice toward none and charity for all.”
Dr. Doris Kearns Goodwin drew from her roles as a daughter, mother and historian and emphasized that history is both vocation and avocation, a joy to embrace and learn for when we know our past we can better shape our future. And whether we are leading an organization, our family or just our own life, Goodwin distilled the lessons of leadership from Lincoln in the most accessible, entertaining way. Dr. Doris Kearns Goodwin is a master teacher, an entertaining speaker and a true American treasure!
The Supreme Court has been in the news a lot recently. Will Obama’s healthcare act be found unconstitutional? Having researched the women of the Supreme Court for the past couple of years, I immediately scanned the below editorial cartoon to find the three women currently serving. In my forthcoming book I try to make the case that the two younger women on the court (Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan) no longer have as many gender struggles that were faced by the two first women on the court, (Sandra Day O’Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg).
But Chan Lowe, the artist of this editorial cartoon that appeared in USA Today on March 30, 2012 depicted only two women on the Supreme Court, apparently forgetting that Elena Kagan replaced the retiring John Paul Stevens in 2010. Maybe it seems like a small error, but for women who have fought for equality in the field of law, it is, shall we say, an impeachable offense. No doubt the witty Justice Kagan would have something amusing to say about not being depicted, but to me the omission is simply no laughing matter. To be excluded is the ultimate gender struggle.
It’s been more than thirty years since the Supreme Court could no longer be called nine “brethren.”Maybe it is time to allow cameras into the court so that the justices may become at least as well-known as say Tina Fay or Jon Stewart. Likely the artist was using an outdated photo of the court to make his cartoon. Since the Supreme Court has so much power, and that power has been especially long in coming for the women on the court, let’s remember that currently 1/3 of the court is composed of women.
In this case it is good to have art reflect life.
Nichola Gutgold is associate professor of communication arts and sciences at Penn State Lehigh Valley and author of a forthcoming book: The Rhetoric of Supreme Court Women: From Obstacles to Options (forthcoming June 2012, Lexington Books).
This past Sunday we attended church at Zion’s Reformed UCC Church in Allentown. I usually attend my Catholic church in Orefield (and lately I’ll admit to wanting to spend the whole morning in bed reading newspapers instead of going) but the invitation looked too good to pass up so we went to check it out. I thought Mark Twain might be right: “A change is as good as a rest.”
Well the service and everyone we met were wonderful! We got there after the opening music, unfortunately, but it was fun and interesting to learn about the history of the Civil War. Attention was paid to many details, including even the typeface on the program, which was “Civil War Press.” The Prayer for Confession, Prayer for Unverstanding and General Prayer came from the Soldier’s Prayer Book. The 96th PA Regiment re-enators were there and Pastor Bob Stevens gave a stimulating sermon about the legacy of humble religiosity left by Abraham Lincoln. Don Nixon sang a fantastic rendition of Dixie Land and I even got to ring the replica Liberty Bell housed in the museum beneath the church. It was an inspired way to spend a Sunday morning. 
Another event dealing with war and its heroes is part of Penn State Lehigh Valley’s 100th anniversary celebration. The Gallery at Penn State Lehigh Valley is recognizing the role of women in the campus’ history with a new exhibit, “Homefront Heroes: Women of WWII,” from Feb. 27-Apr.28. An artist talk will be held at 3 p.m. on March 1, followed by a reception from 5-7 p.m.
In the early 1940s during WWII, women were needed to support the war effort. During this time Penn State Lehigh Valley, then known as the Allentown Extension, offered courses in drafting, chemistry, management, defense training, and more. Thousands of women enrolled in courses and became employed by local companies.
This exhibition features the work of ten artists who have participated in the art educational programs at many Penn State campuses. The works displayed are their interpretations of this period in the campus’ history using diverse materials such as graphite, paint, fiber, found objects, wood and acrylic, as well as printmaking and photography processes.
For example, one local company that hired campus students was Consolidated Vultee Aircraft Corporation located at Queen City Airport. There, women enrolled at the campus became involved with the Seawolf bomber project. One of the exhibit’s artists, a former information systems instructor at Penn State Lehigh Valley, Jane Noel, has used archival materials to create a piece that tells this particular story.
Other artists featured in the exhibit are Holly Trostle Brigham, Allyssa Eve Csük, Marilyn J. Fox, Rosemary Geseck, Bonnie Levinthal, Yvonne Love, M. Camille Eaton Romig, Harriet Rosenberg, and Heather Sincavage. Their interpretations are really interesting. For example, Yvonne Love
Yvonne Love’s work explores issues of identity, memory and self and the conversations that take place between juxtaposed images and materials. This series places familiar objects in unfamiliar settings, change the functions of the objects from utility to anxious memory and are often laced with ambiguity.
Artist M. Camille Eaton Romig recognizes the rapid geographical, social and technical changes that occurred during World War II that ushered large numbers of women into areas that were previously gate with an apron. Her apron suggests the complex social expectations of women as wives and mothers. But aprons represent a larger metaphor, as the first mythological garment of Adam and Eve it covered one’s sexuality. It is this sexless quality of the apron that lends meaning to the ways women were asked to serve for the duration.
The exhibit, artist talk, and reception are free and open to the public. I’m really looking forward to helping my campus celebrate our 100th anniversary by remembering how women stepped it up to help our nation and the incredible art that it inspired. Join us for the free artist talk at 3 p.m. on March 1, followed by a reception from 5-7 p.m. Come to Penn State Lehigh Valley and just imagine what the next 100 years will bring for all of us!
21
Jan
12
Lights, Camera,Communicate!
The first two weeks of the new semester have passed and the modern age “digital speech of introduction” has been assigned and graded. I’ve enjoyed watching students’ speeches (for the most part) and I’ve developed a list of ‘dos and don’ts’ for communicators everywhere who realize that speaking well on camera isn’t something you may need to know how to do. In this video age, it is a communication imperative. This dawned on me a couple of years ago and it prompted me to add the digital video assignment to the basic speech class at Penn State and a more professional version to the organization communication course. In short, if you are alive, you need to speak on camera!
Peggy Noonan, former Reagan speech writer even contended in her book about public speaking that “Sooner or later, we’re all on C-Span.” Well, I’m not sure I agree with that, but I do believe that we will all have opportunities to speak “on camera.” Whether that’s over Skype with the grandchildren or being interviewed by Anderson Cooper, speaking effectively on-camera is a must-have communication skill.
Another observation is that today’s college-age population is relatively comfortable speaking on camera. I think it is the You-Tube phenomenon. But comfort does not mean effective, so here’s my list of dos and don’t for on-camera speaking. Get your smart phone out, turn on the camera and give it a try. The technology may have changed, but one thing never will: practice makes perfect!
1. Atmosphere – Choose a neutral place, or a professional setting such as a desk area. We don’t want to see your kitchen, bedroom, bathroom (unless you are a realtor giving a home tour). Keep the background neutral and neat. YOU are the main focus.
2. Dress – Again, neutral and veer toward the formal. We don’t need to know your favorite sports team. And we don’t want too much information about your physique (unless you are promoting a fitness video). No cleavage, tattoos, or underwear should be revealed. You know what clothing flatters you without revealing too much–wear it!
3. Smile – Not constantly because you’ll look suspicious and weird. But a little and at try to look pleasant. I was struck by the number of speakers who said “I have a passion for ______” with the enthusiasm of someone being sedated for a root canal.
4. Delivery – Speak from notecards with key words on them only, not the entire script. Some speakers write out the script and strategically place it somewhere to read it word-for word. Invariably, it means that they are looking off camera. Look INTO the camera. Make a few key-word notecards for yourself and glance at them, but natural beats memorized every time.
5. Lighting – Bright is better (trust me on this). Anyone over 45 understands that “let there be light” may be our favorite declaration. So position yourself in a well lit area.
6. Not too close – Oh, sure you can eliminate the awkward or messy background by zooming in really close, but if we can see your nose hairs, pull back, OK? It’s weird to have you so close. This isn’t a soap opera. Viewers like to have a sense of context.
7. Relax - Who are you? Let your personality come through. But don’t relax so much that you are speaking in tangents unrelated to your topic.
8. Don’t curse - Please.
9. Have some fun – It will show on camera that you aren’t tortured by this experience and that’s a good thing. Maybe you’ll get that job you want, or the business you need, or you’ll get to know your family better.
10. Practice – You’ll get better!
One of the obstacles facing women who’ve run for president is that news outlets and even historians tend to forget or fail to mention that they did so. I remember being surprised when The New York Times did not list Patsy Mink’s 1976 presidential bid in her obituary. So today, when I came across a news article about Elizabeth Dole’s endorsement of Mitt Romney’s presidential candidacy, I was delighted to see that her 1999 brief bid for the presidency was in there. The article, in USA Today, mentions Dole’s presidential bid (though reminds readers about her early drop out) and the News Max article focused on Elizabeth Dole’s endorsement and career first and her husband Bob’s endorsement separately and secondarily.
As women continue to aim for the White House, it is crucial that they are seen as independent political players, even if their husbands are political powerhouses. A good example is how Hillary Clinton has created her own political image, apart from the venerable former president’s. Not an easy undertaking, especially for a woman who served in the gender time-frozen role of first lady. When we hear “Clinton” we have to ask: “which one?”
The barrier of the “minimizing press” and others are discussed in my forthcoming co-authored (with Theodore Sheckels and Diana Carlin) book: Gender and the American Presidency: Nine Presidential Women and the Barriers They Faced. The Lexington book, and the cover art are due any day now!
In a recent Time magazine cover story, Hillary Clinton is credited for her “smart power.” The author appeared on CNN with anchor Carol Costello, who noted that “many people would still like to see Hillary Clinton run for president.” Specifically, Clinton is lauded for her ability to embrace the new communication methods for international relations while still mastering the traditional communication methods of diplomacy. It is this same rhetorical elasticity that made her such a compelling presidential candidate, though as Massimo Calabresi the article’s author states, her “closest aides” say she is not interested in staying in public service. Recent poll numbers show Hillary Clinton could save the democratic party in the 2012 race. Where was the media attention to Clinton’s ”smart power” in 2008 when she was running for president?
What this new article on Hillary Clinton shows is that women in high positions of power and those aspiring to the presidency must possess considerable rhetorical finesse, and even when they do, the media may pay little attention. As a presidential candidate women candidates’ phrases will be scanned for the words that suggest high seriousness in a world with major economic and international problems. Rick Perry’s silly gesticulations or Herman Cain’s flip-flopping statements about sexual harassment make it to The Daily Show routines or a run on the major news networks, but they won’t disqualify them from the race. Women candidates who don’t exhibit brainpower, rhetorical sensitivity and likability simultaneously and consistently will be discounted as not ready for prime time. There is less room for mis-steps for women seeking the White House.
This is one of several imbalances between male and female candidates found in a forthcoming book I’ve co-authored with Theodore F. Sheckels and Diana B. Carlin on women and the US presidency: Gender and the American Presidency: Nine Presidential Women and the Barriers They Faced (Lexington Books, 2012).
Until there are more women running for president who overcome the considerable, yet often ridiculous barriers, the US presidency will remain an all-male affair.
Hardcover: 978-0-7391-6678-9, $85.00Paperback: 978-0-7391-6679-6, $36.99
324 pages, Lexington Books, 2012 by Sheckels, Gutgold and Carlin
“N.J. Gov. Chris Christie has decided not to seek 2012 presidential nomination, GOP source in New Jersey says.” The news flashed across my email and reminded me again just how much pundits and the press wanted Chris Christie to run, even though he emphatically said he wasn’t. “Now is not my time,” he declared. How refreshing. But it begs the question: why does the press get so worked up about a candidate who has no intentions of running when there are other viable candidates, who happen to be women, with more experience than Christie?
It is because women are the forgotten would-be candidates.
It isn’t surprising that a governor would attract Republicans who are looking for fresh leadership. Political scientists often direct attention to governors when determining who will emerge as presidential candidates. From a communication perspective, the governorship gives a candidate a platform that showcases leadership ability while distancing them from legislative intricacies, which can complicate their presidential possibilities. Governorships frequently serve as a proving ground for presidential hopefuls. A governor rises above partisan legislative actions, which increases her ethos, at least theoretically speaking, as a presidential contender.
Here are two women governors you may have never heard of:
Democratic governor of Washington, Christine Gregoire is enjoying the same high approval ratings during her second term that marked her first. A compelling personal narrative, Gregoire was raised by a single mother and was the first woman elected attorney general in Washington. As governor, she balanced the budget and expanded health coverage.
Like Gregoire, former Republican governor of Hawaii, Linda Lingle, enjoyed success and popularity in her second term. She was the first mayor elected governor of Hawaii and the first female governor of Hawaii. During the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York City, Lingle took to the national stage when she served as chairman of the convention.
It seems as though Republicans are actively seeking a new figurehead. Maybe they should focus their attention on potential candidates who seem to receive the least attention: women. Despite her success at offering Hawaii a “new beginning” by making state government more open, and her high approval ratings throughout her two terms, former Hawaii Governor Lingle, like Governor Chris Gregoire, are not mentioned as presidential timbre.
Even when a woman declares her candidacy for president, the press often reduces her “yes” to as close a “no” as possible. In 1999 press speculation abounded that Elizabeth Dole’s presidential bid was really just a hope for a vice presidential nod. And even after Hillary Clinton won almost 18 million votes, the most notable aspect of her campaign that lingered in the media was that she lost. Women running for president are subjected to an overly critical media and a downplaying of victories, as we have seen with the campaign of Hillary Clinton. Even worse, women who have served two terms as governors have barely recognizable names because the press forgets about them.
In case anyone wants to beg a potential candidate, here are the names of women governors, in addition to Christine Gregoire, Democratic, Washington: Beverly Perdue, Democratic, North Carolina; Jan Brewer, Republican, Arizona; Susana Martinez, Republican, New Mexico; Mary Fallin, Republican, Oklahoma; and Nikki Haley, Republican, South Carolina.
I say we forget about Governor Christie, at least for now.
Nichola D. Gutgold is associate professor of communication at Penn State Lehigh Valley and author of several books, including the forthcoming: Gender and the American Presidency: Nine Presidential Women and the Barriers They Faced, co-authored with Theodore F. Sheckels and Diana B. Carlin.
When young Hillary Rodham made an exploratory visit to Harvard Law School in the late 1960s her friend, a law student there, approached a professor and explained that Hillary was trying to decide between Harvard and one of the close competitors. Hillary recalled “This tall, rather imposing professor looked down at me and said, ‘Well, first of all, we don’t have any close competitors. Secondly, we don’t need any more women.’” She entered Yale Law School, which, at the time, admitted about forty other women in her class and had no female law professors.
Elizabeth Dole, former North Carolina senator, has recounted similar hostile reactions to her when she attended Harvard Law School in the early 1960s and Patricia Schroeder, former Colorado congresswoman, who attended HLS at the same time, has told similar stories of overt sexism. She remembers: “I think it was not until I got to Harvard Law School where it suddenly hit me that not everybody was quite as open and supportive of women as my father. …[T]here were only 15 women in the class and routinely male professors asked: ‘Do you realize you have taken this position from a man?’ And even the dean of Harvard Law School said the same thing, and he was then [a member of] the U.S. Civil Rights Commission. He had all the women over to his house the first week, and he put us in a circle and said, ‘I want to know why you came here.’ His spin was: We let you in equally, but I don’t think any of you are going to use this [law degree].”
Fast forward to 2003: Elena Kagan is about to become the first woman dean of Harvard Law School and women made up forty-five percent of the 2003 graduating class. The curriculum includes courses taught by men and women that touch on gender issues. The number of women on the permanent faculty is fifteen. In the span of forty years women had finally made it into the hostile, male centric world of Harvard Law in an undeniably strong way.
Fast forward to 2011 and Kagan is now a Supreme Court justice, the fourth woman since the Court’s inception in 1790.
In several ways the rhetoric of the women of the Supreme Court has followed a similar trajectory.
The issues of gender have receded and the comfort of women justices to speak without having to address their novelty as women is apparent. Sonia Sotomayor’s quick and lively questioning on the bench at the start of her tenure as a justice and the repartee exhibited by Elena Kagan during her confirmation hearings is further proof of their confidence and comfort with their place at the table, so to speak. These are sure signs of progress. Glacial, but progress, indeed!
I hope you’ll read more in my forthcoming book: In Their Words: The First Four Women of the Supreme Court!
