Jihad's critique
From CyberOne Wiki
Jihad Beauchman January 4, 2008
Empathic argument is the tricky strategy in attempting to provide the audience with a proper and relatable perspective to understand the viewpoint or argument being offered. It must be used carefully, as when certain subject matter is covered with this type of argument, it can be quite polarizing. Empathic argument is the attempt to draw people away from the poles, and towards a medium of understanding. A thin line separates the idea of allowing others to see a perspective they had not previously entertained from the idea of asking the individual to sympathize with a viewpoint that may not be entirely sympathetic. A consequence of demanding too much from the audience is potentially alienating them from the arguments altogether by requiring the audience to step too far away from their original viewpoint and comfort zone. Therefore, it is important in using empathic argument to not preach the viewpoint being proffered, but rather attempt to show the audience that an alternate viewpoint does not infringe upon their basic beliefs and morals.
With that sense of empathic argument, I fully analyzed the Facebook group “Openly Learning Disabled”. Before actually visiting the site, I was able to get a sense of the potential audience given the medium used for the empathic argument. As a long-time user of Facebook, I have grown to become very versed in the many intricacies of Facebook. By placing the group on Facebook, the argument should be geared toward a younger audience. This audience is generally college educated, with the majority of the sites’ users still pursuing undergraduate or a graduate education. With the higher level of education than the general population, the argument may take on a more complex or intricate subject than would be appropriate for a general audience. In addition, the users of Facebook, being college students, also generally have a higher level of income than the general population. Given this fact, the users will have more disposable income, and higher participation in health insurance plans. This would be relevant given the increasing ability for those subject to learning disabilities to receive additional education and assistance during the important formative years of their lives.
The first portion of the page that the audience encounters when coming to the group is the description. The openly sentence reads: “This group is devoted to students and people with learning disabilities and their allies who wish to advance the status of learning disabled folks on campus and in the community.” Though this seems innocuous enough, I think that in attempting to argue empathically, drawing lines as to who the group in projected towards is troublesome. By creating sides to an argument, the argument becomes an attempt to pull people to a particular side, rather than attempting to create a middle ground where both viewpoints can be entertained. I would modify the first sentence by removing the term “allies”. The term insinuates that there are definitive sides to the argument, which is an adversarial approach to the discussion. The group should be intended for those with the disabilities and those who have an interest in learning more about the disabilities.
The next aspect of the page that I noticed was the image used for the group. The picture portrays numerous faceless individuals in a red outline. The faceless person is a powerful metaphor and is used well in this manner. The idea that is illustrated with this usage is the possibility that people close to the audience might be affected by a learning disability, and the audience may be unaware of this fact because often times people keep these personal details about themselves private and attempt to cover them up as best as possible. This group is an attempt to change that stigma that has been placed on individuals with learning disabilities so that they no longer have to remain faceless individuals hiding an aspect of their being.
I think that a very smart approach that has been used in the opening description is setting the tone for the rest of the page. The particular topic of this project is a fairly serious, especially as compared to range of topics discussed in the class. However, the description attempts to ease the audience by suggesting that the group should maintain a sense of humor and the principle goal is to foster an understanding. These assurances allow the reader and eventual contributors to take a more light-hearted approach to the discourse that is provided. I think that this is a necessary approach, especially given the medium through which the discourse is being projected. Though the designers of facebook have attempted to broaden the content of the site, it remains a tool of students to use as a source of entertainment and is often used in lackadaisical manner. By staying away from a harder and more serious tone, the group does not put off those who simply desire a leisurely experience while using facebook, while still being able to address the issues of the learning disabled.
The meat of the message is overall well put together and addresses the main issues that those with learning disability encounter. Though I personally know little about the subject matter and therefore will not provide an analysis of the content of the material, I did have a concern about the structure. My concern is how the body of the Facebook group is introduced. The content begins with: “It’s Time to Come Out of the Closet. I hear a lot of people talk about the choice to tell people about your learning disability. I for one am in favor of telling people about my disability. Telling people is a tricky subject. People who are open about their disability often may face stigma from people around them who have archaic beliefs about LD, such as all LD folks are stupid, that LD does not exist, and/or that LD people get advantages that they don’t deserve. Some people choose not to tell people because they themselves fear the reaction of people or are ashamed of the fact that they are LD at some level”. As addressed earlier in this critique, this takes a fairly adversarial approach to the issue of making others aware of one’s learning disability and how that individual deals with that revelation. This particular excerpt is directly followed by a more moderate viewpoint, but I think that beginning with the more moderate viewpoint would do more for easing the audience into the author’s viewpoint of how this particular aspect of living with a learning disability should be addressed.
It is not apparent given the content strictly on the site whether this idea will be projected further than Facebook. Though I feel Facebook is a great medium through which information can be quickly and efficiently disseminated, a large amount of the population is not on Facebook and therefore would not have any access to the site. It would therefore be important to provide a general address to those not on Facebook who might have an interest in learning more about living with a learning disability. Once a portal is established, getting out the word that the portal exists will be a challenge. I have found that the best way to create traffic to a site is to have links and posts placed on blogs and in forums. Without monetary backing for the site, these mediums can provide a free channel through which readers can be found, and can get quite specialized to the topic of the portal. LDBlog.com is a leading learning disability blog with a fairly large readership and frequent updates. Setting up a dual referral program could help drive traffic to both sites and greatly increase the visibility of any new site created to further this project. Additionally given the purpose of the group is to foster understanding about the learning disabled community, I would provide more access to additional information about different learning disabilities. This could come in the form of links in the Facebook group to other sites that have information regarding learning disabilities. This additional information would satisfy the individual who after viewing the page would like to find additional information on the subject.
The entirety of the Facebook group projects a very informative portal while not preaching to the audience. This is a tough balance to achieve, but I think that this has been done well. The most important modification to the message is a more consistent empathic argument, with an emphasis on staying away from polarizing the audience. By working at the problem collectively, more can be achieved than through being forced to choose sides and defending the position against an adversary.
