I wrote back on September 28th about how Dr. Roger Pielke Senior and Dr. Bob Carter had been invited to present their views on climate science, then after the organizers found out what might be discussed, redacted the invitations to these scientists.
We also recently saw another example of how a “great debate” on climate had been staged by a Hollywood heavyweight, director James Cameron, who backed out of a debate with Climate Depot’s Marc Morano at the last minute, after Morano was already in the air and en-route to the debate. He’s now been dubbed “Titanic chicken of the sea” for saying things like James Cameron boldly slammed global warming skeptics as “swine” on the day he was supposed to be debating them. “I think they’re swine” Also see: Director James Cameron Unleashed: Calls for gun fight with global warming skeptics: ‘I want to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads’ then not having the guts to actually follow through with a debate that he set up in the first place. All bark, no bite.
After all that…. guess what?
I was invited by Chico State University to the Great Debate Oct 28th in the City council Chambers on the topic of the Proposition 23, delay of California Prop32, the “global warming law”. I accepted with a caveat, but due to that caveat I’ve now joined the club of the “disinvited”. My crime? Wanting to show some slides to go along with my oral presentation.
I figured this would be OK because when the city sustainability committee presented their “Climate Action Plan” they got to use their own slide show, but silly me, apparently science slide shows are only for those who believe, not those who want to challenge the belief.
This started way back when I was critical of our local city council and the city sustainability committee’s Climate Action Plan which is heavily opinionated by people from the sustainability cabal of our local university. I was criticized for my stance by sustainability guru Dr. Mark Stemen who said I was ducking debate:
“There are a series of debates scheduled on AB 32/ Prop 23. Do you want to crawl out and play? Or is it too scary in public?”
As I explained to Professor Stemen then, one of the reasons I don’t do a lot of public debate is that I have an 85% hearing loss, and it makes following a live interchange difficult, sometimes impossible. When I was on the local school board, having public meetings in the very same council chambers, the only way I could follow dialog was with a hearing assistance device. It was difficult, and sometimes embarrassing, but I did my public duty the best I could.
I do better when I give a presentation, interaction where I have to hear others and respond on the fly is tough. Most people don’t understand that a hearing loss requires using a lot of brainpower to pull meaning from context when you can’t hear well. This means forming a rebuttal can be tough when you have to think on the fly.
So when this invitation showed up in my inbox…
Name: Thia Wolf
Email: cwolf@xxxxxx
Website: http://www.csuchico.edu/fye/greatdebate
Dear Mr. Watts:
I am writing to ask if you would be interested in participating as a debate team member in the “Main Event” community debate in City Council Chambers on October 28. The debate subject is “AB 32: To Suspend or Not to Suspend?” We are working to put together three-person teams on each side. Teams will meet with the CSU, Chico debate team for tips on debate strategies. This meeting can be virtual. At present, Larry Wahl has confirmed he will be on the team. We are hoping you will be the second member and a business person concerned about AB 32 will be third.
Please let me know if this is of interest to you. The debate is webcast live and may also be televised. We emphasize civil discourse. I would like to send you the general invitation and more information if you are interested. Many thanks for considering this.
thia wolf
cwolf@xxxxxx
Director, First-Year Experience Program
Time: Friday October 1, 2010 at 9:38 am
IP Address: 132.241.36.200
….I had to give it some serious thought. I read the letter carefully, and looked over the website link she gave. I asked initially if she’d be able to control the venue, since the last time I spoke at the podium in the city council chambers on an environmental issue, I was heckled, called names, and shouted at. The venue can be ugly. She said she could help control the debate, and I responded to her assurances with:
On 10/5/10 1:17 PM, “Anthony Watts” wrote:
Dear Ms. Wolf,
Thank you. I’ve looked at the materials provided, and unfortunately I cannot determine:
1. Where the event you are inviting me to would be held (in Council main chamber or in a side room)
2. What time it would be held and the duration.
3. The actual format, length of presentations, etc.
Given my hearing disability, the only possible venue for me is the main chamber. There is a hearing assistance system there, and I can bring my best headphones to plug into the receivers used.
Also, given that disability, I likely won’t be able to pick up well on others presentations and make rebuttals, the only circumstances that I would consider participating would be to be able to provide a slide show while I speak. This would allow me to make a strong factually based presentation without relying on hearing skills to rebut others.
This can easily be accomplished by connecting my laptop to the VGA port on the left side desk. I did this when I was on the school board, and the scan converter made it also transmit to the cable TV channel.
To be fair, others should be able to present a short slide show if they wish. I certainly encourage it, and it would keep the debate factually grounded. I’ll make my laptop available to anyone who wishes to put a PowerPoint presentation on it and help them test it beforehand. Thank you for your consideration.
Best Regards, Anthony Watts
She responded with:
From: “Wolf, Thia”
Date: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 1:26 PM
To: “Anthony Watts”
Cc: “Peterson, Sue”; “Justus, Zachary”
Subject: Re: Invitation to the Great Debate
Dear Mr. Watts:
Thank you for getting back to me! I am forwarding this information to the Communication Studies faculty who organize the evening event. I feel they are best positioned to decide if they can incorporate this technology into the evening debate.
The event is in the main Council Chambers. The format has been developed by the debate experts in Communication, so they can go over this with you. The Main Event starts at 6:30. Again, the faculty should be able to give you a good estimate of how long the student debate will take, prior to the community member debate.
I have copied the two lead faculty members for this project on this email. I am sure they will confer before getting back to you, so please give them a day to do so.
I appreciate your willingness to consider participating.
Thank you,
thia
I thought the response was rather odd, because virtually every city council meeting has a slide show, and there’s a system in place to make it happen and broadcast the slide show live to the town for anyone who wants to use it. There’s really no “technology to incorporate”. Besides, neither the Great Debate Invitation sent to me, the letter Great Debate Letter AB 32 nor the web site had any caveats against using a slide show.
This is the response I got back:
From: “Wolf, Thia”
Date: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 10:43 AM
To: “Anthony Watts”
Cc: “Peterson, Sue” ; “John Rucker”; “Justus, Zachary”
Subject: Re: Invitation to the Great Debate
Dear Mr. Watts:
There is agreement that we are happy to make sure the the hearing assistance system is working well in Chambers before the debate so that you will have the benefit of its use. The debate does not, however, include visuals.
That would require a different format from the one we use. It is possible to place you in the debate team line-up so that rebuttal is NOT your responsibility–for instance, you could open the debate for your team.
Please let us know if you feel you can participate under these conditions.
Best,
thia
I was puzzled. Why could we not use visuals? This made no sense, especially since the room is set up for it, and the Climate Action Plan people made a slideshow when they pitched it to the city council and the public. So why can’t I? I sent this reply:
From: “Anthony Watts”
Date: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 11:13 AM
To: “Wolf, Thia”
Cc: “Peterson, Sue” ; “John Rucker” ; “Justus, Zachary”
Subject: Re: Invitation to the Great Debate
Hello Ms. Wolf,
Thank you for your reply.
I spent my whole adult life making and presenting visuals to help people understand scientific points on television, and now via blogging and scientific literature. You are inviting me to participate because of who I am and what I do. To deny me the ability to practice my craft, combined with my hearing disability, puts me at an extreme disadvantage compared to others there. I don’t work from a script, I don’t use a teleprompter, and I never have. I wouldn’t write a script or statement for this either. The visuals are my guide for the oration. I gave hour long talks in Australia this past June all over the continent and never once gave a prepared statement.
This is a technical argument that I would be making about climate and CO2, which is the root of the issue for Prop 23 and the GHG law. It is impossible to convey it without some visuals. People can’t see science in their heads.
Without visuals, my presence is pointless. In this day and age of visuals, especially when there is easy and ready presentation access at the city council chambers, I find your argument against using them weak and quite frankly, a cop out, especially when the same opportunity can easily be shared by others. This is sad, and out of touch with today’s reality, because the Prop 23 battle is being fought on television with visuals and
innuendo, I would think you’d welcome factual debate with visuals, unless of course the point of this debate is not about facts, but about feelings.
To deny visuals in a public debate is in my opinion, a sad commentary on CSUC’s program. Even in a court of law the prosecution and the defense are allowed visuals. How else would they explain forensic science to a jury? Get with the times!
Given the disadvantages I will face, and unless there is some sort of accommodation for me to present at least some visuals, I see no other option but to decline your invitation.
I await your reconsideration.
Best Regards, Anthony Watts
The reply I got back was pretty curt:
From: Wolf, Thia
Date: Thursday, October 07, 2010 8:50 AM
To: Anthony Watts
Cc: Peterson, Sue ; Justus, Zachary ; John Rucker
Subject: Great Debate
Dear Mr. Watts:
The Great Debate is meant to provide space for citizens to practice an older discourse form. There are various kinds of presentations during the day, some of them technologized, but we are invoking a traditional style of civil exchange in the evening. We do thank you for considering our invitation, and we regret that the format is not to your liking. We are committed, however, to a traditional debate format for the “main event” debates.
Best,
thia
thia wolf
First-Year Experience Program, director
California State University, Chico
“Let your voice be heard.”
(530) 898-xxxx
Wow, some debates get “technologized” but mine can’t be?
I sent this in reply:
From: Anthony Watts
Date: Thursday, October 07, 2010 1:07 PM
To: Wolf, Thia
Cc: Peterson, Sue ; Justus, Zachary ; John Rucker
Subject: Re: Great Debate
Dear Ms. Wolf,
Thank you for your cordial reply. I’m sorry to say this, but I’m going to respectfully call BS on your position.
In your invitation to me,
Name: Thia Wolf
Email: cwolf@xxxxxx
Website: http://www.csuchico.edu/fye/greatdebate
Dear Mr. Watts:
I am writing to ask if you would be interested in participating as a debate team member in the “Main Event” community debate in City Council Chambers on October 28. The debate subject is “AB 32: To Suspend or Not to Suspend?” We are working to put together three-person teams on each side. Teams will meet with the CSU, Chico debate team for tips on debate strategies. This meeting can be virtual. At present, Larry Wahl has confirmed he will be on the team. We are hoping you will be the second member and a business person concerned about AB 32 will be third.
Please let me know if this is of interest to you. The debate is webcast live and may also be televised. We emphasize civil discourse. I would like to send you the general invitation and more information if you are interested. Many thanks for considering this.
thia wolf
cwolf@xxxxx
Director, First-Year Experience Program
You make no caveats on presentation style of any kind. You also highlight the webcast nature of it and the televised nature of it.
Let’s recap: You invite a television person, me, and then deny him his normal tools while at the same time promoting the television and webcast nature of the entire event.
My work has been television for years, and now on the web. I operate the most visited climate science blog on the planet, now with 57 million visits. So yes, I’m fluent with both TV and web presentation. In fact I built, designed, and donated the first live webcast system for the city council chambers in 2005.
So to deny me the tools of that venue that I am fluent in using, while promoting the venue using the same tools you deny me, is a paradox. Do you see how incongruent your position is? I think you’d lose that debate.
I’m going into what I see as a hostile environment, at a disadvantage due to my hearing disability, only asking to present some slides as is normal for my work on television and web, and yet your tagline proudly says:
“Let your voice be heard.”
Well I’m sure trying, but they won’t let me use TV tools on a public TV program. As they say in the news business: “That won’t play well in Peoria”. I urge you one last time to reconsider.
Thank you for your consideration.
Best Regards, Anthony Watts
Yes my response was a little strong, but really, how can a couple of slides cause any trouble? Especially when other portions of the day long venue get to use slide shows? I asked them to reconsider in my last sentence, surely, they’d come to their senses? But days passed, nothing. So I sent this:
From: Anthony Watts
Date: Monday, October 11, 2010 11:01 AM
To: Wolf, Thia
Subject: Re: Great Debate
Hello Ms. Wolf,
It has been four days since I sent my last message and I have received no reply from you. So that I’m not bothering you anymore please clarify. My presentation is not welcome and there will be no further response.
Is that correct? Thank you for your consideration.
Best Regards, Anthony Watts
And this is the response I got back:
From: Wolf, Thia
Date: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 7:02 AM
To: Anthony Watts
Cc: Justus, Zachary ; Peterson, Sue ; John Rucker
Subject: Re: Great Debate
Dear Mr. Watts,
I am sorry for the delay in my response. We do not want visuals during the debate, but we thank you for your input.
thia
So I’m thinking to myself, “I’ll give it some time. Maybe they’ll reconsider.”.
But here it is, the day before the “Great Debate” and I’m still waiting. [Update: I checked the program just after writing this to see that I’m truly disinvited, see graphic below -Anthony]
Given that today’s debates are fought visually in electronic media, it would have been an opportunity for CSUC students to practice debate as it is done in the real world today, rather than the debate structure of times gone by, such as the famous Lincoln-Douglas Debate of 1858.
I suppose if you want to debate in the style of that period using only words to describe technological and science issues, more power to you, but really, this is the 21st century.
Here’s an example of how the Prop 23 debate is being waged in California on television:
The kid with the inhaler is a nice touch, don’t you think? No science here, AB32 it’s about limiting CO2, not particulates! And I used to think the Lung Association was a straight shooter.
They are off my list of charities now.
“”””” John Game says:
October 27, 2010 at 4:00 pm
Concerning prop 23 itself, there is a strong environmentalist argument in its favor that is not being heard: currently, huge solar thermal arrays are being planned and approved in fine areas of the Mojave Desert. They will ruin much native habitat and frgment the finest desrt ecosystem in the world. “””””
Well John; you certainly have hit on a point; but you also have missed the point of AB-32; whcih has nothing to do with the environment .
It is simply a tax scam in the name of environmentalism; making “big Texas oil” the cause of all of California’s environmental problems; and promoting the financial interests of Kleiner Perkins, and other “Venture Capital” enterprises; who have former Veep Al Gore as their standard bearer; and who see public tax dollars as funding their rape of sensitive desert areas; that both CA Senators Barbara Boxer, and Dianne Feinstein, went to great lengths in the Congress to protect; from destruction.
A recent newspaper article on the subject describes a large number fo permits being issued to build these monstrous eyesores on “public lands”; amounting to some 23 million acres of the Desert Southwest. In one instance four Desert Tortoises are going to be relocated to who knows where; to stop them from interfering with these money grubbing venturers; who want the taxpayers to assume the risks for them.
23 million acres is a whole lot of land; for comparison the entire Arctic National Wildlife Reserve; that pristine arctic desert wasteland in Alaska is a mere 19.2 million acres (30,000 square miles); so rather silently; the Obamanistas have given away a whole slew of rare public property for the permanent exclusive use of friends of Al Gore and folks like him.
What do you think is the chance you might get to drive through one of those desert wasteland solar farms in your pickemup truck one Saturday night; well without getting your head blown off by armed guards; who will be needed to ensure that the Native Americans who currently inhabit those lands don’t sneak back into what was once theirs.
Prop 23 simply throws the spotlight on the AB-32 sham; which is already public law in California.
I think I am going to take off next Tuesday; and either go on a wine tasting trip to Salinas Valley or Monterey; or maybe just go to a bar; to get drunk.
I haven’t actually observed anybody commit Hara Kiri; and frankly I don’t really want to stay sober and watch a whole State do it.
But if the polls are on the mark; and Californians do to themselves what the polls say they will do; then I’m not likely to stay around.
If I wanted to live in a backward third world country; I would pick one of my own choice, and move there.
Recent studies show that at least eight countries on earth, are now regarded as “more free”, than is the USA; and I’m sure that such studies of the situation for the 57 States of the USA; would put California as #56 or #57 place.
And luckily one of those countries; I already understand the language; and for its nearest neighbor; I can actually translate with a fair rendition of what they mean.
As they say; be careful what you pray for ; You may get it.
Anthony, I’ve tried several times and different ways to express what I want to, and have failed. So much so, I haven’t tried to post and explain the misperceptions. So, here’s the brass tacks……….
I sympathize(in the truest sense of the word), your indignation is righteous. You’re exposing your flank. Stop it. You’ve a hearing deficit. It sucks. Your adversaries will attack it. Suck it up and fight through it. Make it a strength if you can. Minimize it if you can’t.
For what its worth, advice from someone squarely in your corner.
I think this is a perception issue: You had a perception of what the debate format was to be, and it wasn’t like that. I can’t actually say that I have ever seen a debate that had powerpoint and other visuals, so my perception would have been different from yours. So they didn’t put it in the invite? Looks to me like the invite was a tester to see if there was interest up-front. Did they note how long each person would be speaking for? Who the moderator would be? How rebuttals would be handled? etc etc. They did agree to the hearing assistance system (although they didn’t mention the availability of that in the invite, either).
Yes, its disappointing that they couldn’t (or wouldn’t) accommodate your ideas for the format of the debate, but I think you’re being a bit harsh on the organizers.
REPLY: As I pointed out to Mark Stemen, the last time I was invited to a debate by CSUC the visuals were encouraged, and I was complimented for my use of them. Without any indication of restrictions, how would I know? I’m a TV person, invited to do something that will be carried live on TV…yet I can’t use visuals? Its absurd. Now if they said classroom on campus, I’d have no issue. But this was writ large for TV presentation and live webcast. Without visuals, we may as well do AM radio – Anthony
They are now OFF MY LIST, also!
Maybe you should have accepted the invitation and doggedly mimed the entire event 🙂
“when you control the mail, you control information…”
Newman, in Seinfeld.
Replace “mail” by “format”…
John Game
I put this on the tips thread yesterday, but since you bring it up, maybe it will be ok for me to back you up here.
Interesting article on conflict between local tribes and large solar projects being fast-tracked in California desert at:
http://www.pe.com/localnews/stories/PE_News_Local_D_native20.28b0857.html
“There are various kinds of presentations during the day, some of them technologized, but we are invoking a traditional style of civil exchange in the evening.”
Although you probably burned that bridge, it may have been worth seeing if they could have brought you in for a presentation during the day instead.
Anthony, you have my sympathy. For sure they would never want me and my personal photos there — shots of tropical rain and monsoon forests, savannas and temperate grasslands, deserts and semi-deserts, woodland and scrub, mid-latitude and boreal forests, marine west-coast environments, tundra, ice sheets, ice shelves, sea ice, glaciers, mountains. Someone might think this dude knows as much about climate as those guys playing computer games in air-conditioned offices.
p.s. My comment was aimed at James Cameron!
I’m a special ed teacher who is making progress with my students using cutting edge (“but we don’t do it that way here”) teaching strategies that work. I have data that proves it. Doesn’t matter. Because I am using these strategies (and doing many other things that are new to the district), I have been called on the carpet for writing IEP goals that relate to these strategies. I have also been written up for several other things (like questioning whether or not we have enough information to label a student as being mentally retarded). I was also written up because last year I was unable to get in 100 percent of my I’s dotted and my T’s crossed on my IEP’s due to my own H1N1 illness and the death of my father. But even then, my students made substantial gains, and some even met grade level standards while suffering from learning disabilities.
I am clearly the odd man out, new comer, and rowing in a different direction against the current. All of that is to say:
Belief trumps data. If you are the holder of the belief and the power, you can exclude those with the data, regardless of how accurate or well presented your data is.
Typical signs of downfall
“The Great Debate is meant to provide space for citizens to practice an older discourse form.”
You should definitely check out whether this is true – have someone go there and look if there really no one is working with slides.
If this event is simply to practice debating, for the life of me I can’t understand why they would waste Anthony’s time by bringing him in. I’m quite certain he doesn’t need any practice debating.
Now if they were actually interested in learning something, then what the heck is wrong with a slide presentation?
These people are bush league…
To me the dumbing-down of the world due to overuse of PowerPoint is a greater threat than global warming. The tipping point for me will be when Parliament and Charlie Rose both final cave in and start using slides!
Not to say slides aren’t useful – just that oratory still has a place in the world I think.
Regular reader – appreciate the blog. Gotta say this post seems a bit… Rommnian and I sympathize with Ms Wolf.
Cheers,
-Oliver
Mark says:
“To help people not from Chico: …format is paramount.”
Really? If the format is so paramount, why didn’t they mention it up front?
And:
“I hope Anthony takes the offer to speak at the This Way to Sustainability Conference Nov 4-6th.”
OK Mark, if you’re sincere, and if Anthony’s hearing handicap should cause any kind of a problem, what do you say to a second? There are plenty of knowledgeable skeptics who would easily make mincemeat out of anything with the word “sustainable” in it. [Beginning with: Quantify “sustainable,” while trying not to sound too silly.]
So, do you have any objection to Anthony choosing a stand-in? Or, as in the past, will the modus operandi be to pull the rug out at the last minute – like Doc Thia and her handlers did after their four day huddle?
These Chico shenanigans have only one purpose: to avoid enduring the public spankings that climate alarmists routinely receive from knowledgeable skeptics like Dr. Roger Pielke Sr., Mark Morano, Dr. Bob Carter, Anthony Watts, Lord Christopher Monckton, Dr. Michael Crichton and others. This is just one more example of avoiding a debate by hook or by crook, unless the deck is stacked.
Finally, who will take Anthony’s place, now that the goal posts have again been moved, ex post facto? And who will select Anthony’s replacement? You? Joe Romm? Gavin the Juggler? Or an appointed, ad-hoc committee that meets behind closed doors to strategize over the best P.R. spin to explain how they simply had no other choice but to pull the rug out?
Anthony, I thought I was on this website – http://www.27bslash6.com/p2p2.html – when I read your blog post. My Lord, do we not teach how to prepare invatations anymore? Or is that too quaint (as in an oral only debate!)
Pamela Gray says:
October 27, 2010 at 5:56 pm
“Belief trumps data. If you are the holder of the belief and the power, you can exclude those with the data, regardless of how accurate or well presented your data is.”
========================================================
Pamela, I too, was once in a very similar position. And the progress displayed dearly cost me, to the point of vilification for a short time. Power can’t be held long when it doesn’t also hold truth. An easy test. Push truth towards power. If it doesn’t gravitate then power holds no truth. The resolution is simpler, yet much more difficult. Push truth closer to power. The storm is wicked and resolve is requisite. It isn’t quite enough to speak truth to power. It will fall on deaf ears. Push truth to power.
Sorry Anthony, I think you’re being paranoid on this one.
REPLY: Paranoid? Where did that come from?- A
Smokey (and others)
The debate teams have input to selections. I assume Larry Wahl requested Anthony. You can see from Anthony’s original post who the other two speakers are. I assume Larry was consulted. One of the speakers dropped off the No on 23 side, and we were asked for some names the organizers could call.
While it is unfortunate that the organizers were not clear about format, they have no agenda other than modeling good debate strategies.
Again, Anthony was not excluded or disinvited. The format simply did not allow for his participation in a manner that would work for him.
I have made an offer for another venue. If Anthony agrees before Thursday, I will announce it at the beginning of the debate.
Yes, it’s a BS reply. But the thing is they know that any discussion about it will be bad for you since the topic is the debate format only. That’s a hard thing for people to really invest in. In fact, it makes you look like you had an autistic tantrum where you think the world is against you. A better response would have been to decline and let it be.
I’m reminded of Nichelle Nichols when she got the part for Uhura on Star Trek. It was a small part with virtually no lines. She considered quitting midway through the first season and actually submitted her resignation to Gene Roddenberry. She was a guest at a NAACP fundraiser where a fan wanted to meet her. It was Dr. Martin Luther King. He went on and on about what an important role she is playing and how much it means to everyone. She said it’ll be sad to leave her costars. King said “NO!” He said that this was not a black role, not a female role, not a menial role. It was a role that could have been filled by anyone. She had to stay, said King. And she did. She went back to Gene and told him the story. Gene said, “Thank God someone understands what I am trying to achieve.”
I’m not comparing that to getting the facts out about AGW. That simply cannot be done. What I’m getting at is that sometimes you take what is presented, not because you think it’s the best way to go about it, but because it presents an opportunity. King saw that. I think many of us see a missed opportunity. Yes, it would not be what you wanted. But if you really want to call their bluff, you be there.
Go hard or go home. Don’t screw around with this kind of nonsense.
The Lung Association here in New Brunswick is also a promoter of AGW and the risks of CO2. Perhaps policy was decided at the (inter)national level? Just to rattle his cage I once sent a message to the head of the NB Lung Association. Naturally it had no effect.
IanM
Mark, thanks for the offer, I’m not exactly sure what it is exactly as its rather open ended, but I can say that debating the merits of Prop 23 after the polls close next Tuesday really isn’t of value to anyone.
I can’t see myself doing such a thing. Besides, the last time I spoke at the sustainability conference, I had to leave work mid day, and the small room assigned to me had about 20 people in attendance. This was mainly due to competing sessions. People has a choice of about 5 at that time IIRC.
It’s really hard to justify my work day time for such a small venue. I do thank you though for the gracious offer.
OK, one last comment and then I’ll leave this be. Anthony wrote:
“As I pointed out to Mark Stemen, the last time I was invited to a debate by CSUC the visuals were encouraged, and I was complimented for my use of them. Without any indication of restrictions, how would I know? I’m a TV person, invited to do something that will be carried live on TV…yet I can’t use visuals? Its absurd. Now if they said classroom on campus, I’d have no issue. But this was writ large for TV presentation and live webcast. Without visuals, we may as well do AM radio – Anthony.”
Was the other debate you were invited to with the same group and the same debate series? Presumably not. The classroom vs. live TV is a red herring. There is absolutely no reason they couldn’t broadcast a live debate so that people could *see the speaker and hear their voice and their responses*. The existence of a live broadcast in no way whatsoever implies that there should be visual aids for the presentations. It is not absurd — just not what you expected.
Anthony, I’m a huge fan, but I am hoping after the disappointment of not being able to participate in the debate dies down everyone can learn a lesson. I’m sure they will be more careful and fulsome in their communications in the future. And on the other side, here’s hoping that next time you will quietly ascertain behind the scenes what their format requirements are and if it makes sense to decline leave it at that and walk quietly away, not having made enemies in the process. Credibility is lost if “wolf” is cried too often. There are plenty of legitimate PR battles out there and instances of bad behavior. This one just doesn’t rise to that level, based on the email exchange.
REPLY:Thanks. I will say that’s your opinion from afar, I live here, I know the venue, I know the room, I know the people. So my view differs.
If you invite somebody to a live on TV debate, I and most anyone else would expect to present some visuals. Political candidates in debates often use placards on an easel to get complex points like finance across.
Without visuals, like I said, anything else is just AM radio. The problem could have been simply solved by saying “yes”, and I would have taken care of the rest for them and I know the AV setup there. A win-win for everyone.
I’ll point out that I’ve done hours of debate in that room while on the school board. Without the aid of visuals, many issues would be fully lost to the public. – Anthony
Anthony,
I understand the time constraints. The offer was a slot in our community center talks. I would give you the time slot that worked best for you (between 10-3, 12:00 would be ideal. You can talk about whatever you want about climate change, and the facility is set-up for projection.
I can guarantee a large crowd but we will do everything in our power to make sure everyone knows about your talk. Last year we had both pro and anti nuclear speakers and it was really nice to hear both sides.
If it does not work out, I understand. Just know you have an open invitation from the Institute of Sustainable Development to speak on campus, and they are willing to accommodate your needs.
Take care,
Mark
REPLY: Check your email – Anthony