bfslides0708

Information about bfslides0708

Published on February 24, 2008

Author: Elena

Source: authorstream.com

Content

Tactics against injustice: the dynamics of backfire:  Tactics against injustice: the dynamics of backfire As an individual: think of an injustice you know a lot about. :  As an individual: think of an injustice you know a lot about. For example: • a bullying boss • homelessness • treatment of refugees • the Holocaust Rodney King beating:  Rodney King beating Rodney King beating:  Rodney King beating Generated sympathy for Rodney King. Generated hostility to the police officers who did the beating. Generated adverse publicity for the Los Angeles Police Department. Backfire An attack can be said to backfire when it creates more support for or attention to whatever is attacked.:  Backfire An attack can be said to backfire when it creates more support for or attention to whatever is attacked. Conditions for backfire:  Conditions for backfire An action that is perceived as unjust, unfair, excessive or disproportional — a violation of a social norm. Communication to receptive audiences. Rodney King beating backfire:  Rodney King beating backfire The beating was perceived as unjust in itself or as disproportionate to anything King had done. The beating was recorded on video and broadcast on television. How to inhibit outrage:  How to inhibit outrage Cover up the action. Devalue the target. Reinterpret what happened. Use formal procedures. Intimidate or bribe people involved. Rodney King beating: cover-up:  Rodney King beating: cover-up Resistance to accepting complaints Police code of silence “It consists of one simple rule: an officer does not provide adverse information against a fellow officer” — Christopher Commission, 1991, p. 168 Rodney King beating: devaluing the target:  Rodney King beating: devaluing the target Calling Rodney King a felony evader, a monster, an ex-convict Arrests of Rodney King, media on hand Rodney King: Once a Bum, Always a Bum By David Horowitz FrontPageMagazine.com | September 9, 2003 Rodney King beating: reinterpretation:  Rodney King beating: reinterpretation Rodney King was a threat to the police Police were doing their duty Slide12:  The videotape proved that “Rodney King was always in control of the situation, not the officers” — Stacey Koon, Presumed Guilty, 1992, p. 182 Rodney King beating: formal channels:  Rodney King beating: formal channels Christopher Commission Court case 1 against four police officers Court case 2 against four police officers Civil case against city, officers and police officials Rodney King beating: intimidation:  Rodney King beating: intimidation Witnesses did not come forward Police use-of-force experts refused to testify “We talked to any number of other force and policy experts, who told us the video showed excessive force … but none of them would go on the record. They said it would end careers.” — Alan Yochelson, quoted in Tom Owens, Lying Eyes, 1994, p. 266 Rodney King beating: inhibition of outrage failed:  Rodney King beating: inhibition of outrage failed Video did not subscribe to the police code of silence Video cut through media’s normal use of official sources and interpretations Video was not intimidated Slide16:  First trial verdict did not conform to popular perceptions of justice Conditions for backfire:  Conditions for backfire An action that is perceived as unjust, unfair, excessive or disproportional — a violation of a social norm. Communication to receptive audiences. Attacks on protesters backfire:  Attacks on protesters backfire Salt march, India, 1930 Attacks on protesters backfire:  Attacks on protesters backfire Sharpeville, South Africa, 1960 Attacks on protesters backfire:  Attacks on protesters backfire Santa Cruz cemetery, Dili, East Timor, 1991 Get into a group of 3 or 4 people — preferably people you didn’t know before. In your group: decide on one injustice for later discussion.:  Get into a group of 3 or 4 people — preferably people you didn’t know before. In your group: decide on one injustice for later discussion. Conditions for backfire:  Conditions for backfire An action that is perceived as unjust, unfair, excessive or disproportional — a violation of a social norm. Communication to receptive audiences. Unfair dismissal backfire:  Unfair dismissal backfire People perceive dismissal as unjust in itself or as disproportionate to anything the worker has done. The treatment is exposed to the world. How to inhibit outrage:  How to inhibit outrage Cover up the action. Devalue the target. Reinterpret what happened. Use formal procedures. Intimidate or bribe people involved. Dismissal outrage: inhibition by cover-up:  Dismissal outrage: inhibition by cover-up No announcement Reasons hidden Silencing clause Destruction of files Dismissal outrage: inhibition by devaluing the target:  Dismissal outrage: inhibition by devaluing the target Derogatory labels: slacker, “difficult personality” Rumours, e.g. theft, bullying, sexual behaviour Dismissal outrage: inhibition by reinterpretation:  Dismissal outrage: inhibition by reinterpretation Restructuring Change of duties Lack of money Worker’s inadequacies Dismissal outrage: inhibition by official channels:  Dismissal outrage: inhibition by official channels Lengthy, bureaucratic procedures: tribunals, courts, ombudsmen, etc. Dismissal outrage: inhibition by intimidation/bribery:  Dismissal outrage: inhibition by intimidation/bribery Poor references No pay-out Legal action Support management and keep your job Me boss. You not. For your group’s chosen injustice, discuss the 5 methods of inhibiting outrage. Write examples on a sheet of paper.:  For your group’s chosen injustice, discuss the 5 methods of inhibiting outrage. Write examples on a sheet of paper. Cover up the action. Devalue the target. Reinterpret what happened. Use formal procedures. Intimidate or bribe people involved. The Mickelberg brothers:  The Mickelberg brothers Ray Peter Avon Lovell:  Avon Lovell Conditions for backfire:  Conditions for backfire An action that is perceived as unjust, unfair, excessive or disproportional — a violation of a social norm. Communication to receptive audiences. Defamation backfire:  Defamation backfire People perceive defamation threats and actions as unjust in themselves or as disproportionate to anything a person has done. The treatment is exposed to the world. How to inhibit outrage:  How to inhibit outrage Cover up the action. Devalue the target. Reinterpret what happened. Use formal procedures. Intimidate or bribe people involved. How to promote outrage:  How to promote outrage Expose the action. Validate the target. Emphasise interpretation of the action as an injustice. Mobilise public concern (and avoid formal procedures). Resist and expose intimidation and bribery. Promoting defamation outrage: exposure:  Promoting defamation outrage: exposure Leaflets, emails, website Use a support group Refuse silencing clauses Promoting defamation outrage: validate the target :  Promoting defamation outrage: validate the target Present an honest, principled image Personalise the story Behave well Promoting defamation outrage: explain the injustice :  Promoting defamation outrage: explain the injustice Emphasise the frame of censorship and free speech Promoting defamation outrage::  Promoting defamation outrage: • Avoid courts • Don’t countersue focus on campaigning Promoting defamation outrage: resist intimidation :  Promoting defamation outrage: resist intimidation Proceed with publicity Join with others For your group’s chosen injustice, discuss options for promoting outrage and write them on a sheet of paper.:  For your group’s chosen injustice, discuss options for promoting outrage and write them on a sheet of paper. Expose the action. Validate the target. Emphasise interpretation of injustice. Mobilise public concern (and avoid formal procedures). Resist and expose intimidation and bribery.

Related presentations


Other presentations created by Elena

Words
06. 12. 2007
0 views

Words

Cheryl Walker Literary Terms
05. 11. 2007
0 views

Cheryl Walker Literary Terms

Flame Pics 04 05
05. 11. 2007
0 views

Flame Pics 04 05

Storage tank Leak check 1
07. 11. 2007
0 views

Storage tank Leak check 1

mulkukarakus
22. 11. 2007
0 views

mulkukarakus

5para
23. 12. 2007
0 views

5para

From World War Two to Vietnam
24. 12. 2007
0 views

From World War Two to Vietnam

Burnswebversion
04. 01. 2008
0 views

Burnswebversion

9elKharrat
07. 01. 2008
0 views

9elKharrat

DesafioBibliotecaEsc olar
05. 11. 2007
0 views

DesafioBibliotecaEsc olar

group1
03. 01. 2008
0 views

group1

learning2004
16. 11. 2007
0 views

learning2004

Historizmus
01. 10. 2007
0 views

Historizmus

PUNJAB Sidhu
04. 10. 2007
0 views

PUNJAB Sidhu

Graciela Camara
04. 01. 2008
0 views

Graciela Camara

upwa6
01. 12. 2007
0 views

upwa6

Facilities Presentation CHE 4 02
04. 01. 2008
0 views

Facilities Presentation CHE 4 02

b689 w04
20. 02. 2008
0 views

b689 w04

prak astro
15. 11. 2007
0 views

prak astro

06svenss
03. 12. 2007
0 views

06svenss

alt2
29. 02. 2008
0 views

alt2

OCCAnalystsVisitNov01
12. 12. 2007
0 views

OCCAnalystsVisitNov01

04 05
05. 03. 2008
0 views

04 05

dgassnerFlexAjax360F lex
28. 11. 2007
0 views

dgassnerFlexAjax360F lex

PlanningDDivine
03. 10. 2007
0 views

PlanningDDivine

fiscalyear06a
27. 03. 2008
0 views

fiscalyear06a

Japan Spring 06
30. 03. 2008
0 views

Japan Spring 06

Old Faithful Premier Video
09. 10. 2007
0 views

Old Faithful Premier Video

eci147p3e
13. 04. 2008
0 views

eci147p3e

D5 Laura Botwinick Peter Angood
02. 10. 2007
0 views

D5 Laura Botwinick Peter Angood

family rel Qs 2004
28. 12. 2007
0 views

family rel Qs 2004

Shaxson
27. 12. 2007
0 views

Shaxson

WIC BFP Training Script
23. 11. 2007
0 views

WIC BFP Training Script

Vanhempainilta
05. 11. 2007
0 views

Vanhempainilta

OME CASEWRITING WORKSHOP
29. 12. 2007
0 views

OME CASEWRITING WORKSHOP

NASTIES AND BEASTIES THINGS1
19. 11. 2007
0 views

NASTIES AND BEASTIES THINGS1