(note the subtitles is not entirely in line with the vlog, my apologies).
I just got back from a two month hiatus (recently married and got back from my honeymoon). Once arriving back, I eagerly checked DeafReead for some exciting news, some progress, perhaps something positive, but instead I was sidelined to reading the unfortunate and huge misunderstanding with DeafRead (not just Tayler, but also his team) whom have unanimously made a business decision to remove Rachel’s vlogs because of a violation of DeafRead’s guidelines.
I have been trying to catch up on all of the blogs/vlogs and its comments. I want to make it clear; it is my opinion that DeafRead’s decision is not personal, it is business. Tayler Mayer is trying to establish a foundation in DeafRead’s policies with respect to for-profit organizations. A huge possibility of the reason for DeafRead to not endorse direct blogs that deal with for-profit organizations is due to a conflict of interest with Sprint which is DeafRead’s Sponsor (see Jordan's endorsement with Nike and covering up his Reebok clothing during the Olympic ceremony). This is very common business practice-it goes back to jurisprudential/contracts law. Again, it is not personal, but business. Unfortunately, Rachel’s blog is being misunderstood by being removed due to a CI endorsement which is not even the LARGER ISSUE. This stirs the pot and creates more divisions which are definitely not necessary. Tayler Mayer even advocated ensuring the right for CI blogs to exist. His position was a business one and had nothing to do with Rachel’s endorsement for CI. It had to do with the fact that she admitted that she was affiliated with a for profit company after blogging for more than 6-months). That is clearly a violation of DeafRead’s rules. It has nothing to do with CI, but the fact that it is for a for-profit organization regardless of what product they sell.
I support DeafVillage’s right to exist. In fact, I might read their site from time to time because I, too, am interested in reading many different deaf/hh/HL’s experiences. However, my time and energy will mostly be with DeafRead because of their amazing resources. I genuinely think that it is Rachel’s and whomever wants to side with her and “quit” DeafRead their loss. It is truly unfortunate and that is their decision.
I beg for Rachel and her supporters to reconsider and recover. Rachel, why not establish a separate website for DeafRead blogs/vlogs? I see DeafRead allowing a plethora of posts regarding CI and why is yours an exception? Simply because it was affiliated for a non-profit organization. Do not let this cheap misunderstanding get in the way of our community.
We need to establish partnerships with two already divided worlds that has been ongoing for centuries. If you feel that DeafRead is not being balanced in their aim to provide the most neutral platform possible, then offer your possibilities, your solutions, and not hate, not negative karma, repression because we all do not need it any more.
Talyer and to DeafRead team, its members, and contributors, lead on as you have done for many of us, at least you have for me.
Yours in the spirit of camaraderieship,
D
34 comments:
Great post, D. I think though, you'll be interested in what I've written over on my blog about the whole controversy. There is far more to this than the meets the eye.
I'm a fan of deaf village too, but I am none too sure like you, moving off is the way to go, I may stay with both ! because the major players of contention need to thrash out what's bugging them. You won't do that if you accept them saying "Clear off we don't want you here..." types of responses, this is mob rule... that is giving IN to the die-hards that won't compromise, we need to chip away at them until they get the message, or are prevented from dividing everyone into A,B or C divisions. As far as violating the advertising side of things, the whole deaf.read site is presumably sponsored isn't it ? If Taylor is bowing to HIS sponsors to remove CI blogs because of adverts, then this is wrong, since this then, changes the aspect of the ban,and makes it unfair. I read many deaf.read blogs and sites listed, alongside a number of them are ADVERTS for sign language, for support, for CI's, for hearing aids, regardless of the blogger's stance on them, you may well find A G Bell links on cultural deaf blogs ! because you have NO control over the adverts, google or someone puts them there, you can't ask them to remove ads because you don't support A G Bell, they have been paid to plug, and they will. Adverts PAY, for 90% of all blogging we do... we wish we COULD exert control over the adverts, but then YOU have to pay more, or construct sites,and you may not have the wherewithal or the desire to.....
This is MY opinions...
a deaf pundit: I definitely know that there is more than meets the eye; however, is establishing DeafVillege the most productive approach? She could have simply created a different website (personal/neutral) that clearly disassociates herself in her for-profit website. I just felt that this whole thing has made it worse off.
mm: Rachel DISCLOSED that she worked for a for-profit website. This basically gave deaf.read no choice. Like they said, they want b/vloggers to use good faith that they are not intentionally trying to directly promote their "for profit" products...this was not the case as Rachel disclosed her affiliations with a for profit org.
I'm curious...since when is VOLUNTEERING for something considered "for profit"? Rachel got no monetary compensation for her website - she paid for it out of her own pocket and it didn't generate any income for her..so I'm curious why you are saying her website is for-profit.
You say:
"Rachel DISCLOSED that she worked for a for-profit website."
Would you be so good as to provide
the primary source?
Merci bcp.
dyneice and jean: Your questions can be answered by Tayler Mayer's comments on various ppl's questions. See http://www.deafread.com/blog/?p=229
dyniece: As you will see in the link, it doesn't matter if she generated money. It is due to the fact that she is affiliated as a volunteer for a for profit organization. Employed doesn't always incur monetary compensations.
Jean: In this specific link, he said "Tayler Mayer Says:
June 3rd, 2008 at 6:57 pm
justamomtothreeboys, Rachel hadn’t clearly disclosed her affiliation with Cochlear Awareness Network (CAN) until yesterday.
She is employed as a volunteer managed by a paid employee of CAN, which is in turn managed by Cochlear Americas. CAN’s sole purpose is to push awareness about cochlear implants."
I hope this helps.
A finest post coming from an intelligence guy. You hit it right on the nail. This whole mess is based on cochlear implant. CI is not the point. I just don't get it. Tayler and his people defends the guideline when those deaf so called "miliants" vented about CI's invasion.
Again, Tayler still stand by a guideline which it comes to Rachel's situation. It really is unfortunate. Just unfortunate. I don't agree with Rachel's belief but she is one of finest bloggers I like to read once a while. Just unfortunate.
How do you know that your blog is making a point across ??? I know… I haven’t see few specific “firestarters” coming in and brewing the comments. I don’t want to name those people. *shrug* Kicking the rock..
She's still not making a profit so her website *isn't* for-profit.
By your reasoning, if I put up a 'donate blood to Red Cross' banner on my blog, since I often volunteer for Red Cross, that would be considered a for profit thing since the woman who teaches us volunteers is paid to teach us, even though I get nothing myself neither does my blog. Heck volunteering for ANYTHING by this type of circular logic would mean you're marketing/profiting even if you get nothing out of it.....
I stand by my belief that Tayler booted her off without due cause. He didn't even have the decency to email her and ask for clarification. He took a "shoot now, ask questions (or make up excuses) later" modus operandi, and now they're busy trying to play catch-up.
dyniece: It doesn't matter if she is making profit. Her affiliation is with a specific website that is for profit. In this aspect, that is a violation of deaf.read's guidelines. This is a common business practice, nothing personal whatsoever. Deaf.read does not even need to "explain" to her as Rachel should already be aware of deaf.read's guidelines especially if she is a frequent blogger. The responsibility was hers.
Your example with red cross is something you want to ask deaf.read. You are in the wrong site (my site) if you want to go ahead and contest Tayler's decision. You need to contact him directly.
My vlog simply states that I felt it was a business decision, not a personal one based on how deaf.read and Tayler has stood by some controversial issues and ensured that deaf.read remains a "neutral" platform (i.e. supporting CI blogs even under intensive firestorm by these so-called deaf "militants."
You definitely are more than entitled to disagree. I am actually more concerned with the fact that Rachel's decision to set up DeafVillege was due to a misunderstanding rather than trying to work with deaf.read on garnering solutions/alternatives.
Now we have more division. Divide and conquer is not the answer. She could have easily created a new website and transferred all of her blog history into a new website. Simple.
I just think this is more of a misunderstanding and the issue is in regards to a hot topic, CI, which has clouded this debate. Nothing more, nothing less.
Thank you for your insight. I do understand your position and look forward to future discussions.
You are just shooting your mouth off. Rachel is NOT making profit at all..you seem to take Tayler's word as if he is a god.
You cited a source that came from Tayler's statement. That is not a good source to use because in a court of law that would be considered hearsay. You need actual proof that she was really profiting from it.
So far, nada
Candy: let me be a bit clear. He is one of the founders of deaf.read. He knows deaf.read's guidelines almost more than anybody and what's more is that he has a responsibility to uphold these guidelines. His words are "not god" but rather from a business standpoint as a co-founder of his own business. That is the ultimate source.
It really is simple as that. Please refrain from trying to make me defend myself. I am simply stating my point and my opinion. At least respect that and not degrade me by saying that I am "shooting my mouth off" and you are threatening me with heresy. A bit decency next time would be appreciated.
*ist - in this case I believe we'll have to agree to disagree.
I don't see the division as necessarily being a bad thing...sometimes its division, and the prospect of a different approach to things that brings new ideas out into the open. And even if I don't agree with what you said, I still do believe you have the right to SAY it. I just wish Taylor hadn't been so quick no the draw and taken the time to approach Rachel and discuss the issues with her, especially considering there *ARE* several blogs on DR that are commercial that haven't been removed.
nyniece: Ah, gotta love Voltaire. Will you fight to the death for my right to disagree? :) I agree, division is not always a bad thing; however, in this specific scenario, I strongly believe that it is counterproductive to our larger community. I have seen it and you have too, yes?
If there are certain blogs/vlogs that are "commercial" then let DR know! We shall then find out if DR is biased. Until then, I still stand by my position that it is a business decision and not personal whatsoever. I think this http://www.deafread.com/blog/?author=1 should help somewhat to show that DR is not afraid to abide their guidelines and that their membership base acknowledges their responsibilities as a blogger/vlogger.
If Rachel was barred from DR because of the for profit she was working for was "pepsi" or "red cross" then I think this would not have been a firestorm. Unfortunately, this for profit was for CI's. The history speaks for itself and we are seeing it now and again and again.
Let us think outside of the box or what Ella Mae Lentz would say "shattering walls" in the room and move forward. I am tired of going into circles.
well ! This blog started off as a 'neutral' comment on Taylor's decisions,then further in after response we saw the rapid, POLARIZATION of the blogger supporting Taylor's view, so, NOT neutral at all ! Reel us in, then hit us with Taylor's stance ?
There was a blog advertising the latest 'Blackberry' gizmo's deaf could use, that sailed through. Is that an 'aid' for the deaf or not ? It's a commercial GIZMO, an CI is not, no more than a hearing aid is, so adverts for these are not conforming to DR guidelines either.
I don't mind these notifications, but consistency seems to be deaf.read's problem. It looks and IS just a knee-jerk reaction to a successful CI blogger. If it looks like a duck and it quacks, it usually is...
Lately, I have stayed out of DeafRead's weekly "storms." Just wanted to share one observation which I find to be amusing.
Those same people completely protested the creation of "DeafSide" aggregator because they said that it would create more divisions within our community. Then those same people created another aggregator that is moderated by staff that is completely opposite of DeafRead staff.
It's always "Blame Deaf", "Blame ASL", "Blame Deafhood", "Blame Deaf Culture" and the like.
Interesting.
Not so, we are 'blaming' Taylor. Does he speak for the American ASL community ? I've said I don't agree with divisions even via aggragation. This IS the point of disagreeing with Taylor's decision, not bashing ASL or culture, but an apparent dubious decison taken to SUPPORT deaf culture on the flimsiest of pretext by attacking the CI, when he knows the hard-core deaf activists hate them..
Deaf.read is NOT about ASL hard-core CI haters is it ? A lot of ASL users didn't support Taylor either....It's got Taylor kudos points, but this just contributes o the 'them and Us' deaf.read claims they don't support.
ist - great post and congratulations on your marriage!!
Brenster - well said! It doesn't matter what ASL users, Deafhood supporters, deaf-centric folks say, they will always be blamed and oppressed for speaking up. They will just live with it and move on with a lot of supporters from grassroots.
I am tired of seeing that term cochlear implants implant go publicly to the hearing and the deaf audience the word cochlear implant may make me forget I am Deaf.
Can you explain to me what the CI community is?
Felix Reich wrote that “instruction scarcely differs from that of other institutions, at most in that no definitive rejection of sign language was ever made that the development of the mind and spirit, and not simply the acquisition of language, was considered the greatest goal.”
“to train the spirits and hands of children so that they could succeed in life, and in addition to give them religious feeling and qualities of character so that they became happy individuals”
I love quotes from the book titled Crying Hands.
Definition of DEAF; CI, ASL,BSL,SEE,PSD,HOH, Cued, and bi-language.
Deafread.com shall not be biased but they still are! Deafread.com has no terms of condition policy on the website so there's favoritism as we know it.
I love deafread last year but I do not love deafread now. Same goes with Deafvideo.tv
Now, it looks stressful to post or being a vlogger. Therefore, it's broken.
We cannot put "SAFE SEX" issues on Deafread...WTF! YouTube is on live now. YouTube's commitment to bring FREEDOM of Speech, Freedom of Expression while Deafread and Deafvideo don't!
Taylor, I know you very well and we party together several times...time for you not to be ONE SIDED business model.
Dino
This is by far the most positive forward-thinking post I've seen yet! Kudos!
Agree, with brenster. The only thing I would add, is with every culture, and its community there are growing pains stemming from a new generation of our people who wish to be respected for their right to co-exist. As with deafhood, I see this movement by Rachel and others who are exercising this right to their own identity -- right now they see their identity as Deaf who have CI who may or may not use ASL. We whom understand this need, can step back and show support. We whom understand our Deaf identities, know eventually the CI aspect as a tool, isn't the primary focus of our partnership but rather, WE as a community are Deaf. And just like many of us, we have to go thru our own exercises of our "rights" to fully understand this need.
In my eyes, both Taylor and Rachel see Unity as a goal.
Eventually, "the twain shall meet" again. I have faith.
Thank you.
~Sheri Farinha
Chrissy
Which identity language are SIMCOM, TC, SEE, PSE, and ASL because of their gestural hands ? What is the reason these cause people to have their mind confused and mixed- up.
“history, however, true history, gives us different understanding of oralism. In fact, the oralist tradition is a story of greed, plagiarism, secrecy, trickery- but not education”
“discourage Deaf congregation and intermarriage, help the Deaf read in English while coultivating their minds.”
the book is titled- When Mind hears a history of the Deaf.
These give you an explanation of ethnic and language in general.
American hearing people are familiar with English language.
African people are familiar with Niger-Congo languages.
Hispanic people are familiar with Spanish language.
Asian people are familiar with Asian languages.
Deaf people are familiar with ASL.
(I decided to delete NO.21 post above )
I think you're doing a great job and I like your positive view :)
Budore, Joey B, Sheri F., and Deb Ann: Thank you for your positive comments. As I was starting to be disappointed that my post may have been counterproductive, it was you guys that reasserted myself that you guys actually 'get it' in terms of what my vlog was trying to portray: a plea for constructive and positive discourses so that we all may finally move forward from this unnecessary and unfortunate scenario.
I cannot begin to tell you how I struggled with myself whether to post this or not just in FEAR that my whole point would be bashed and torn apart and left with nothing to show for it.
I truly know that there are a lot of genuine people out there that want to say and voice their thoughts, but choose not to. I understand their position. They, too, need encouragement and positive comments.
Justin Dart, the father of ADA, in his last speech said "Beloved colleagues in struggle, listen to the heart of this old soldier. Our lives, our children’s lives, the quality of the lives of billions in future generations hangs in the balance. I cry out to you from the depths of my being. Humanity needs you! Lead! Lead! Lead the revolution of empowerment."
This vlog is for the future generation of deaf children.
Thank you for being that source of empowerment that continues me to find the courage to vlog.
Leading on,
D
Can you post your video with captions so that I can understand it? I wish we can communicate using online videos but I don't understand sign language. You can use this new website www.tubecaption.com
Great, great post, *ist!! I am glad you posted your views and your points because I was wondering how many people actually understood what really happened. And, btw, congrats on getting married! ;)
brenster-, you totally nailed that one, too! That's so true.
Congratulations on your marriage.
Good job on your post. Keep it coming. Don't stop there.
Good evening, Tommy! Before you read my comment, I want to throw a disclaimer in: I don't consider myself an expert at deaf politics and I don't care. I don't know anybody involved in this sorry example of a falling out between two parties. Now, that is out of the way...
http://www.bucketofcrabs.net/?p=68
Have you read this one? I thought it was an excellent post by Der Sankt. I took 4 hours reading (pats on my back -- I hate reading) both sides from various bloggers interested in this matter and I have decided that I am on Rachel's side. One damning piece of evidence: an editor (Joey Baer?) at Deaf Read pushed Sprint pagers in one of his posts. How could Deaf Read turn on Rachel when she is just a volunteer for CAN? The profit/non-profit argument has to be thrown out of the window. I can imagine it being a non-issue were Rachel a volunteer for NAD or something similar. I'm not familiar with the circumstances of being a volunteer of an organization BUT I don't see anything wrong with that. I feel that Deaf Read could have easily handled matters behind the curtains and kept everything copacetic! I do agree that this is an unfortunate situation but I believe this hurts deaf readers more than anything.
Thanks for reading my comment and have a great weekend!
touringc, you are SO correct when you said you are not an expert at Deaf politics because if you were, you would know it had NOTHING to do with Deaf politics. :]
Well, you can believe that this isn't a decision with an ulterior motive on Tayler's part but it just smells too fishy to be a straight cut "business" decision.
I'll gladly keep the tinfoil hat on, thankyouverymuch :)
Well, it sure looks good on you! :)
touringc: Deaf258 is exactly right. It had nothing to do with deaf politics,but simply a violation of DR's guidelines. Unfortunately, the issue on hand is the CI which is undoubtedly the hottest issue in our community.
I am not supporting either side; I am simply saying that this whole thing is unfortunate and it is due to a misunderstanding that could have easily been avoided.
Was breaking away from DR the right choice? I don't think so mainly because in this situation, it does nothing productive, but create more divisions.
touringc: How is it "fishy"? I thought Tayler did an excellent job explaining DR's reasoning. See
http://www.deafread.com/blog/?p=229
Thanks,
D
I would love to take this situation at face value, but when my gut rolls out the BS Flag, I have no choice. Deaf258 may be exactly right, but that is an opinion just like a blog is a blog is a blog. Mostly personal opinions, not facts. When I read a blog, I make sure to read all the comments since they usually tie up loose ends in the blog itself. In the end, they are still opinions just like mine in all my comments. The fine line between facts and opinions are heavily blurred.
I have read both sides' comments and I have to say that the Pro Tayler comments have been mostly personal and mean spirited towards Rachel. You could say they were Pro "D"eaf. The Pro Rachel comments mostly attempted to dissect Tayler's policy & censorship and have pointed out several flaws in his policy and decision. In other words, they were looking for a solution.
This is not "simply a misunderstanding" between them; it is indeed a "business decision", but seemingly for the wrong reasons.
All in all, I don't really care. I only wish that the deaf community would agree to disagree yet work together towards the ultimate goal of deaf prosperity. This internet squabble between Rachel and Tayler is just another negative movement for the deaf community. When will we grow up and band together regardless of our deaf ideologies? That is what I really care about.
Keep up the great blog!
Brett Crouch
Post a Comment