[eDebate] repost: Final round video-need ec feedback

Steven D'Amico stevendamico
Sun Apr 5 14:29:28 CDT 2009


Zach,

I think you should really back off the ad-homs. It comes off pretty
disrespectful for someone concerned with the public image of debate. If you
think that me pointing out that debate is not like the NCAA is childish, I
most certainly apologize for the egregious violation of edebate etiquette.

I'm not going to do the edebate line by line. That's soooo 2004. You make a
few fair points, but I think you miss the broader issue at stake:

There are legal consequences when an organization such as CEDA writes an
official policy addressing student privacy, the distribution of video
material, etc. These are not issue taken as lightly as you seem to imply
with your "why nots." We could have a long discussion about why debate is
not like the NCAA, why debate isn't seen as important as basketball, etc,
but it doesn't really matter. CEDA must protect itself. As an organization
with limited resources, a policy like this most certainly achieves that goal
without incurring many negative drawbacks besides you not being able to see
the CEDA final round fast enough.

In my opinion: students should have the ability to not be recorded if they
prefer not to. Justin's example is really only the tip of the iceberg of the
negative consequences of your suggestion.

I had a debater who if he was required to be filmed would probably have quit
the activity. He was very very good ( a 1st rounder). He was not only
distracted by the camera, but also extremely uncomfortable with it. Why? I
don't know. It was just his hangup. Should he have been pushed out? No.

I also fully invite you to come to explain to my novices why any person
should be able to walk into their first debate with a camera and post it
online for all eternity. If you want to kill the activity, allowing that
behavior is a good way to start.

Best,

On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Zach Round The World <zachrtw at googlemail.com
> wrote:

> Good spread on CEDA vs. Basketball, but it fails to miss the point,
> that was an example, not the crux of my argument. Those are all things
> that are the way they are because of the media attention that
> basketball gets today. They were not the rules that filming of
> basketballl games started under. And for almost everything else my
> answer is "why not?"
>
> -Debate teams do not produce revenue for schools.
> Why not? They produce money for the staff, what about debate camps?
> You telling me that a debate camp isn't a revune stream?
>
> -Debate teams are not followed by entire communities outside of the
> university.
> But they are. Go to Youtube and look at how many deabtes are online.
> Look at me I'm 15 years out of having any connection to any program.
>
> -Debate teams are not regularly televised and schools do not get paid
> for televised debates by networks. Debaters never signed any informed
> consent agreeing that their image can be distributed on public
> airwaves and Internets. NCAA players waive these rights with informed
> legal paperwork. Their interests are protected by entire college
> athletic (and legal) structures absent from debate.
> 1) why not? 2) I can promise that you waived those rights to the
> school when you were admited. Anything you do while representing your
> school is something they have say over, not you. Just like when you
> attend a major league game by simpling buying the ticket you give them
> to right to se your image for any thing they want.
>
> -Debate teams are often not supported by school administration.
> 1_) Why not? Oh maybe because they won't let themselves be taped and
> get some attention to the program. 2) Often? You mean there are more
> deabte teams that get NO funding from the school then do? Amazing,
> where are those stats?
>
> -The vast majority of debaters do not get significant scholarships to
> compete.
> Claim data warrant, that's how we did it when I debated, has that changed?
>
> -Debaters do not have drug tests.
> 1) Why not? 2) Too many would fail 3) What does this have to do with
> anything, they test me at my job, does that mean I can be filmed now?
>
> -Debaters do no have an extreme code of conduct anything close to what
> the NCAA does.
> Why not? They could. I didn't know that common sense was one of those
> things that could be codified.
>
> -Debate stars are not public figures like NCAA stars.
> 1) Why not, oh that's right they won' tlet themselves be taped so
> therefore they can't become public figures. That's not my fault, maybe
> you need a better PR department. Even my lowely self was interviewed
> by university paper and city papers. No bright line here. Then again
> what are you trying to hide?
>
> -The top debaters do not get drafted by a professional debate league.
> No but they do try to get drafted into grad school.
>
> -Most people do not find what the NCAA does objectionable, many
> people, believe it or not, hate what we do.
> So the way to get people to stop hating you is to stop them from
> watching you? Only by shining the light of day onto CEDA's dark little
> secrets can you hope to win over people. You are still close minded
> and not looking at the big picture.
> -etc etc etc
>
> Um let's seem what else, people worried about how they look on TV?
> Grow up, put on your big boy shorts and debate. At the level of a
> nation championship if you are not worring about how you look you
> shouldn't be national champion. If there is anything you might say
> that could look bad is someone else saw it 1,5,or 10 years from now,
> don't say it. I said some pretty crazy stuff when i was debating for
> Carson (Big T Technocracy anyone?) But I will stand by anything I said
> in any debate round that I was ever end. I said it, I meant it.  Just
> because it's switch side debate doesn't mean you can't be true to
> yourself.
>
> We aren't talking about prime time TV, we are talking about posting
> videos to youtube. I'm willing to bet there is a good chance that
> every single person in the final round has already been on youtube at
> some point and time.
>
> I don't buy the arguement that debate forces you to defend things that
> are objectionable. You don't argue that nuke war is good because
> someone is forcing you to, you do it because it's easier then
> answering the line by line. Show me the argument that can be made
> where the ONLY way to win is to say nuke war good. The easiest answer
> to Towson is to say racism good, and that africans are an inferior
> race (you know those cards are out there) but most would never say it
> beacuse you would have to have no soul to stoop that low to win.
>
> So I ask this....
> Say I show up to nationals next year with a camera, sit out of the way
> of everyone and quitely sit and record the event.
> Am I going to be kicked out? On what grounds? Is CEDA not a public event?
> I make a recording and I post it, you going to sue me? Send a cease
> and desist letter?
> I said no way in hell.
>
> It's much better to be open and up front, and say every second of ever
> round will be recorded, posted, and kept up for ever and ever. And if
> you can't live with that, maybe you should be debating.
>
> I'm sorry i really had no intention of saying anything after my first
> post, but your reply was so childish and condisending that it really
> got my blood boiling.
>
>
>
> Zach
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Steven D'Amico <stevendamico at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Zach,
> >
> > I think you are unaware of some the reasons for the policy. Most
> > importantly, I believe there was a legal concern over privacy. It's not
> just
> > about what happened last year.
> >
> > Let's count the other ways we are not like the NCAA, because I think they
> > explain why your rant was not very well informed.
> >
> > -Debate teams do not produce revenue for schools.
> > -Debate teams are not followed by entire communities outside of the
> > university.
> > -Debate teams are not regularly televised and schools do not get paid for
> > televised debates by networks. Debaters never signed any informed consent
> > agreeing that their image can be distributed on public airwaves and
> > Internets. NCAA players waive these rights with informed legal paperwork.
> > Their interests are protected by entire college athletic (and legal)
> > structures absent from debate.
> > -Debate teams are often not supported by school administration.
> > -The vast majority of debaters do not get significant scholarships to
> > compete.
> > -Debaters do not have drug tests.
> > -Debaters do no have an extreme code of conduct anything close to what
> the
> > NCAA does.
> > -Debate stars are not public figures like NCAA stars.
> > -The top debaters do not get drafted by a professional debate league.
> > -Most people do not find what the NCAA does objectionable, many people,
> > believe it or not, hate what we do.
> > -etc etc etc
> >
> > Simply put, debaters should not have to worry that 10 years down the line
> a
> > video of them defending spark will surface when they are trying to get a
> > government job, running for public office, or doing anything else that
> has a
> > routine background check.
> >
> > They shouldn't be forced to be on television. You don't prepare for a
> debate
> > event like you would being on video. I don't know if you've ever been on
> TV,
> > but trust me, whenever I go on, I spend hours thinking about how I look.
> > Debaters should not have to deal with that if they don't want to.
> >
> > There have also been debaters who requested to be left out of videos
> because
> > of safety concerns. (use your imagination on this one, I'm not going into
> > details).
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Steve D'Amico
> > On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Zach Round The World
> > <zachrtw at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Long time lurker, reading lots of posts, but never posting, but this
> >> makes me so mad I have to post.
> >>
> >> Post the stinking videos! I'm an ex-debater who still likes to follow
> >> along with what is going on in debate and I'm very confused not to
> >> mention sad. I read the listserv and was at nationals last year to
> >> watch, and was there for the big conflict, but this year I wasn't, so
> >> because I wasn't there personally I don't get to watch the rounds?
> >> Bullshit!  The idea that a national championship would not be taped
> >> and displayed for all to see is stupid. The idea that it could be
> >> recorded and a someone could say ?I don't want to appear in it? and
> >> you actually listen to them is absurd and makes me very sad. What
> >> other collegiate competition would be this way? These were public
> >> performances in a public place where anyone could attend. I know
> >> everyone is walking on egg shells after the bill blow up last year,
> >> but no one should have the ability to keep these videos from being
> >> posted. This is really egregious considering that many of the
> >> attendants are from publicly funded institutions. Courts have up he
> >> idea that video taping in public is protected under the first
> >> amendment. CEDA you are really being reactionary and short sited. This
> >> is PUBLIC SPEAKING folks. If you don't want to be taped DON'T compete.
> >> Your reasonable expectation of privacy went right out the door when
> >> you joined. Let's me be clear, anyone can be recorded in a public
> >> place, and there is nothing that can be done to stop it. I can follow
> >> you around all the time and record every second of your life outside
> >> of your house and post it to Youtube, and you have zero recourse to
> >> stop me. You don't own your imagine. That one or two people could say
> >> ?I don't want to be on the net? and let them have the final say is
> >> stupid. This is 2009 people, everything is being recorded, and there
> >> is nothing you can do to stop it. Can you imagine a basketball team in
> >> the NCAA refusing to be televised? Anyways that's my 2 cents. I'll go
> >> back to lurking in the shadows, and hopefully never see anything else
> >> that makes me want to post.
> >>
> >> Zach Ferris
> >> Wichita State Debate 1994-1996
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 7:57 AM, Andy Ellis <andy.edebate at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >> > From: Andy Ellis <andy.edebate at gmail.com>
> >> > Date: Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 11:28 AM
> >> > Subject: Final round video
> >> > To: "CEDA-L at ndtceda.com" <CEDA-L at ndtceda.com>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > hello ceda....this may be a question specifically for the ec, but it
> has
> >> > some aspects that i think are relevant to everybody.
> >> >
> >> > We went to ceda with two cameras and had every intention of following
> >> > the
> >> > video taping policy, I at least learned an important lesson last year.
> >> > As we
> >> > where setting up our cameras to tape the final round(for our own
> private
> >> > educational use, large portions of the towson team where not there and
> >> > hey
> >> > who doesnt wnt a video of a team they work with in the final round of
> >> > nationals)ceda ec members approached us and asked if we could shooot
> the
> >> > offical tape because the arrnagements as i remember for them to tape
> it
> >> > had
> >> > fallen through. This went to the extent of agreeing that if we could
> >> > stream
> >> > it we should as gordon announced before the round
> >> > started....paraphrasing
> >> > now i said "uh you sure you wnt adam and i to tape and post a video
> from
> >> > ceda, that seems to be exactly what the policy prempts(i was less
> funny
> >> > then
> >> > but still made the point)...yes...was the answer i got...so i toook
> the
> >> > tapes and have been working on converting them as an act of community
> >> > service....that brings us to now...at least two people have asked that
> >> > they
> >> > not be included in any video, and have reminded me about the policy
> that
> >> > the
> >> > round opperated under....im sorta stuck ive been willing to do the
> work
> >> > that
> >> > i have done so far in converting and editing the video but i dont want
> >> > to
> >> > post it if people are opting out...even with ec sanction...nor do i
> want
> >> > to
> >> > be responsible in that scenario for developing the "private
> educational
> >> > purposes" system that will allow the people we want to see it to see
> it
> >> > but
> >> > not everybody else...? how to go fwd? thanks
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > eDebate mailing list
> >> > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> >> > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> eDebate mailing list
> >> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> >> http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20090405/f6b49d2b/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list