Electric Rhetoric - University of Pittsburghgordonm/JPubs/ElecRhetReportf.pdf · The most effective...

EditedbyGordonR.Mitchell,withcontributionsfromCandiCarter‐Olson,CarolynCommer,BritaDooghan,MattGayetsky,AllisonHahn,LydiaHillary,DavidLandes,AlexandraSeitz,andJosephSery

CommunicationPerspectivesonDigitalDisseminationofScholarlyResearchAreportpreparedbyscholarsfromtheUniversityofPittsburgh'sDepartmentofCommunicationforProvostJamesMaher

Spring10

ElectricRhetoric

ElectricRhetoric:CommunicationPerspectivesonDigitalDisseminationofScholarlyResearch

TableofcontentsFrontMatter

PrefatoryLetter.............................................................................................................................. 1UniversityTimescolumn................................................................................................................ 2CommRCWebsiteNewsFeature ................................................................................................... 4

PartOne:DigitalDisseminationStrategiesChapterOne:UsingD‐ScholarshiptoBoostDisseminationofaLow‐CirculationArticle ............ 5

CandiCarter‐OlsonChapterTwo:SecuringDigitalDepositPermissionforaUniversityPressBook .......................... 9

MattGayetskyChapterThree:PlacinganArticlePublishedbyaPitt‐HousedJournalinD‐Scholarship ........... 12

AllisonHahn

PartTwo:ObstaclesandCul‐de‐sacsChapterFour:Rightslink—BarriertotheOpenAccessMovement........................................... 14

CarolynCommer&AlexandraSeitzChapterFive:TheDeceasedAuthorDilemma............................................................................. 20

DavidLandesChapterSix:TheChallengeofFindingDigitalHomesforArticlesfromOrphanedJournals ...... 23

CarolynCommer

PartThree:HandlingInnovativeScholarlyArtifactsChapterSeven:DramaticPerformances...................................................................................... 25

BritaDooghanChapterEight:PublicDebates ..................................................................................................... 29

AllisonHahnChapterNine:VideotapedLectures............................................................................................. 31

JosephSeryChapterTen:OralHistoryInterviews .......................................................................................... 35

CandiCarter‐OlsonChapterEleven:Documentaries .................................................................................................. 39

AlexandraSeitz

PartFour:DigitalDisseminationofStudentResearchChapterTwelve:GraduateStudentParticipation ....................................................................... 44

JosephSeryChapterThirteen:UndergraduateStudentParticipation ........................................................... 47

MattGayetsky

AppendixCourseSyllabus ............................................................................................................................ 51

FrontMatter

PrefatoryLetter

May22,2010

ProvostJamesMaherCathedralofLearningUniversityofPittsburghPittsburgh,PA,15260DearProvostMaher:Atyourrequest,IampleasedtosharethisreportfromtheDepartmentofCommunicationregardingtheUniversity'songoingstudyandinterimactionregardingstrategiesfordigitaldisseminationofscholarlyresearch.Thereport'smethodologywaspedagogical,withresultsgeneratedfromaFall2009doctoralseminarinpublicargument(thesyllabusisappendedandmorebackgroundinformationonthecourseiscontainedinaDepartmentofCommunicationwebsitenewsfeatureincludedasfrontmattertothereportonpage4).OurUniversityTimes"SenateMatters"column(publishedonFebruary2,2010andreprintedonpage2)functionsasanexecutivesummaryforthereport,withkeyfindingsorganizedtorelatedirectlywiththefourrecommendationsadvancedinthe2009UniversitySenateLibraryCommittee'sreportonthismatter.Icertainlyhopeyoufindourstudents'workuseful,andlookforwardtothepossibilityoffuturecorrespondenceregardingthisimportantandexcitingchallengeforourintellectualcommunity.Sincerely,

GordonR.MitchellAssociateProfessorandDirectorofGraduateStudiesDirector,WilliamPittDebatingUnionDepartmentofCommunication

Skip to Navigation

FEBRUARY 4, 2010

SENATE MATTERS

UNIVERSITY SENATE MATTERS/Gordon R.Mitchell

Disseminating researchRelease of the University Senate library committee’s report on last spring’splenary session, “Scholarly Publishing Today and Tomorrow,” refocusesattention on what keynote speaker David Shulenberger called a “crisis inthe distribution of research.” Disintegration of the financial models forpublishing and distributing academic research, systematic erosion ofauthors’ intellectual property rights and sheer information overload all arefactors that Shulenberger said combine to create an “obligation” foruniversities to revisit their approaches to dissemination of scholarlyresearch.

The University Library System’s D-scholarship repository, an open accessdigital archive of Pitt scholarship (at http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu), is one response to the crisis; thelibrary committee’s follow-up report outlines other recommendations. To gain perspective on theseissues, our study group, composed of students enrolled in a Department of Communication graduateseminar last term, analyzed open-access policies, reviewed landmark articles central to the history ofopen-access and its broader implications, and consulted with key figures in the field via Skype.

In addition, our group gained practical experience with Pitt’s D-scholarship repository by attempting tocomplete 20 original submissions to the archive. In the process, we learned about issues involving theacquisition of author, journal and copyright holder permissions; the formatting and preparation ofdocuments for submission; the preparation of video and audio media; the categorization of differenttypes of documents on the D-scholarship web site, and the increase in visibility as a result ofsubmission to D-scholarship. A full report on our team’s research will be released later in the term; thiscolumn highlights findings that are particularly relevant to the Senate library committee’s recent report.

Recommendation #1: Task force. We endorse the library committee’s call for the formation of atask force to “continue the conversation” on this issue. However, we feel that any such body shouldinclude students. As stakeholders with vested interests in the design of open-access repositories,students (particularly graduate students) should have a say in the creation and implementation ofpolicies that they eventually will inherit.

Recommendation #2: Opt-out model. Noting that currently participation in the D-scholarshiprepository is voluntary, the library committee recommends “that the University open a discussion aboutmoving toward a model of expected participation for faculty with an opt-out clause.” The current trickle

Advertising

Back Issues

Contact Us

Deadlines

Find a Copy

Subscribe to UTDIRECTYour name:

Your e-mail:

PITT HOME FIND PEOPLE

http://www.pitt.edu/

http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/

http://www.utimes.pitt.edu/?page_id=6761











http://www.pitt.edu/findpeople.html

Revised 08/27/09 | Copyright 2009 | Site by UMC Web Team Keep updated with RSS | Contact us at [email protected]

of contributions to the D-scholarship repository (only 26 since its digital doors opened last fall), andthe myriad difficulties we have encountered in attempting to submit material through an “opt-in”system, convince us that the impetus behind this recommendation is sound. However, we are leery ofinstitutional pressure to “expect” participation in D-scholarship without providing requisite resources.Tasks such as standardizing permissions forms and preparing/formatting documents for submissionrequire staff to effectively administer the program. We encountered many hurdles in our ownsubmissions to D-scholarship. Because maintaining staff is costly, funding is paramount in consideringany move toward “expected” open-access participation.

The most effective “opt-out” digital repositories — at Harvard and MIT — were established throughunified faculty action to establish a blanket, nonexclusive license reserving rights to post any Harvardor MIT faculty publication to the relevant institution’s open-access repository. A similar agreement atPitt would make individual faculty negotiations with publishers unnecessary. When the process iseasier and less administratively burdensome, it promotes compliance with mandatory open-accesssubmission policies and reduces administrative costs. Discussion of University licensing thereforeshould accompany or even precede discussions about mandating or even “expecting” D-scholarshipparticipation.

Recommendations #3 and #4: Education. Regarding the library committee’s call for University-wide education about authors’ rights and the implications of open-access for tenure and promotion, wethink that it also would be necessary to educate scholars about the possible benefits and drawbacks ofparticipating in open-access initiatives. Faculty and graduate students must be made aware of what isat stake by signing publishing agreements that allow participation in open access. For instance, openaccess could have a negative effect on journals that rely on subscriptions from end-users (andintermediary institutions representing end-users such as libraries). Free access to materials thatotherwise would have to be paid for through subscription and reprint fees detracts directly from therevenue of such journals, which are common in the humanities and social sciences. However, there arepotential remedies for this: Pitt could join the Compact for Open-Access Publishing Equity, aconsortium of universities committed to reshaping the business model of scholarly publishing in waysthat maximize academic rigor and open access.

We encourage others to join the conversation as Faculty Assembly and Senate Council move towardpossible consideration of specific resolutions growing out of the library committee report.Gordon Mitchell is associate professor, director of graduate studies and director of the William PittDebating Union in the communication department. Study group members included Lydia Hillary(lead student author), Candi Carter-Olson, Brita Dooghan, Matthew Gayetsky, George Gittinger,Allison Hahn, David Landes, Alexandra Seitz and Joseph Serv, all of Pitt, and Carolyn Commer,Carnegie Mellon.

Filed under: Also, Senate Matters, Volume 42 Issue 11

Email This Post

http://www.umc.pitt.edu/web


http://www.utimes.pitt.edu/?feed=rss2

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.utimes.pitt.edu/?cat=337



http://www.utimes.pitt.edu/?p=11088&email=1

http://www.utimes.pitt.edu/?p=11088&email=1

Digital Scholarship Initiatives

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//news/graduate/DigitalScholarshipInitiatives.html[5/24/10 12:39:39 AM]

Revised 4/30/10 | Copyright 2007 | Site by UMC Web Team

Home

About

UndergraduateMajor Requirements, Advising,Apply, Internships,Community, Resources

GraduateRequirements, Courses, Apply,Financial Assistance,Placements, Current Students,Calendar, Resources

Faculty & Staff

DebatePolicy, Community, Coaches,Alumni, FAQ, Contact

AlumniNews, Events, Research

Contact

Student Study Group Weighs in onUniversity’s Digital ScholarshipInitiativesThe University Library System'sD-Scholarship repository is anew, open access electronicarchive showcasing Pittscholarship to the wider world.When it opened its digitaldoors in fall 2009,Communication graduatestudents were some of the firstscholars to submit content. Asa result of these efforts, CandiCarter-Olson's oral historyinterviews of G-20 protestorsare now archived at therepository, which is indexed through Pitt Cat, Google, and other searchengines.

Other Communication scholarship has been archived as well, includingAllison Hahn's speeches for a 2003 public debate on abstinence-onlyeducation, and Meredith Guthrie's article on menstruation, originallypublished in the online feminist journal "MP."

This wave of submissions stemmed from Gordon Mitchell's graduate seminaron Rhetorical Production held during the fall 2009 term. In that course,students pursued a multi-faceted analysis of open access policies, withreading assignments covering landmark articles central to the history ofopen access and its broader implications, and live Skype interactions withkey figures in the field such as Harvard's Director of ScholarlyCommunications Stuart Schieber (see photo) and Georgetown law professorRebecca Tushnet.

In addition, each student gained practical experience with Pitt's D-Scholarship repository by attempting to complete two original submissions(many by proxy on behalf of others) to the repository. In the process ofsubmitting artifacts to the D-Scholarship repository, students learned aboutissues involving the acquisition of author, journal, and copyright holderpermissions; the formatting and preparation of documents for submission;the preparation of video and audio media; the categorization of differenttypes of documents on the D-Scholarship website; the increase in visibilityas a result of submission to D-Scholarship; and many others.

Each successful submission was accompanied by approximately four failedattempts, and the students have documented and reflected on theseattempts in final papers that will be bundled into a full report of the team'sresearch that will be released later in the Spring 2010 academic term. In theinterim, a February 4, 2010 column in The University Times highlights selectfindings that are particularly relevant to the Senate Library Committee'songoing deliberations about challenges relating to the digital disseminationof scholarship at the University.

PITT HOME | SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SCIENCES | FIND PEOPLE



http://www.comm.pitt.edu//index.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//about/index.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//undergraduate/index.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//undergraduate/major-requirements.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//undergraduate/advising.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//apply.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//undergraduate/internship/index.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//undergraduate/community.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//undergraduate/resources.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//graduate/index.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//graduate/requirements.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//graduate/courses.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//apply.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//graduate/financial-aid.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//graduate/placement.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//graduate/students.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//graduate/calendar.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//graduate/resources.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//faculty/index.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//debate/index.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//debate/policy.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//debate/community.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//debate/coaches.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//debate/alumni.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//debate/faq.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//debate/contact.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//alumni/index.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//alumni/news.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//alumni/events.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//alumni/research.html

http://www.comm.pitt.edu//contact/index.html

http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/

http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/2782/





http://www.pitt.edu/~gordonm/Pubapp/RhetProdSyl2009.pdf

http://www.pitt.edu/~gordonm/Pubapp/RhetProdSyl2009.pdf

http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/shieber/

http://www.tushnet.com/


http://www.as.pitt.edu/

http://www.pitt.edu/findpeople.html

PartOne:DigitalDisseminationStrategies

ChapterOne:UsingD‐ScholarshiptoBoostDisseminationofaLow‐CirculationArticleCandiCarter‐Olson

ArtifactNominatedforD‐ScholarshipSubmission

MeredithGuthrie,“TheProcessofBecomingaWoman’sBody:MenstruationandtheContainmentofFemininity,”MP:AnOnlineFeministJournal,1:5(Jan.3,2007),http://www.academinist.org‐/mp/mp_archive/archive_01_07/amp074.htm.

Keywords:Menstruation,femininehygiene,menarche,menses,period,puberty,filth,genderperformance,thegenderedbody,femininity,consumerculture,girls’magazines,bodyguides,adolescence,youthculture,culturaltaboos,ritesofpassage,femininehygieneadvertising,Tampaxtampons,Alwayspads,openaccessjournals.

Status:SuccessfullydepositedonDecember15,2009athttp://d‐scholarship.pitt.edu/2771/

Dr.MeredithGuthrie,lecturerintheDepartmentofCommunication,submittedthisarticleseveralyearsagotoanewonlinefeministjournalthatwasapparentlypeerreviewed.However,aftershesubmittedthearticle,itwassimplysentintopublication.Sheneverheardbackfromthepeerreviewers.Shethinksthisisoneofhermoreimportantpiecesofwork,butshedoesn’tthinkit'sgettingenoughcirculation.WhenwedidaGooglesearchforhername,thisarticledidn’tshowupanywhere.WeranitthroughGooglescholarandgotthesameresults.Inanindependentsearch,Iranseveralkeywords

fromthisarticle,includingmenstruationandfemininehygiene,throughthesamesearchesandthearticlestilldidn’tcomeup.ThesearchesfailedevenwhenIaddedinDr.Guthrie’snamewiththekeywords.IalsotriedthesamesearchonEBSCO,whichisoneofthedatabasesthatthejournalsaysitusesasadepository;andIstillfoundnothing.Dr.GuthriehadhopedthatpostingitonD‐Scholarshipwouldaccomplishafewgoals.First,shewouldlikethearticleanditssubjecttoreceivemoreattentioninthefieldsofcommunication,youthculture,mediastudies,andgirlstudies.Second,todothis,sheneedsto

5

http://www.academinist.org%E2%80%90/mp/mp_archive/archive_01_07/amp074.htm

http://www.academinist.org%E2%80%90/mp/mp_archive/archive_01_07/amp074.htm

http://d%E2%80%90scholarship.pitt.edu/2771/



getitcirculatedmorewidely.Finally,shewouldliketoreceivemorefeedbackonthetextitself.

D‐Scholarshipneedsacriticalmassofinformationtomakeitusefulbothtotheuniversitycommunityandtoresearchersoutsidethecommunity.Whileaddinganyofourartifactshelpstobuildthatcriticalmass,wewanttoalsoshowthatouruniversityisanintellectualpowerhouse.ThisarticleshowcasestheversatilityofPitt'sfaculty,andatleastoneofthewaysthatourworkcanbenefittheoff‐campuscommunity.

Thisarticlealsodisplaystherangeofscholarshipdoneinourdepartment.ManyforgetthatthePittCommunicationdepartmenthasseveralelementstoit,includingrhetoric,publicaddress,rhetoricofscience,andmediastudies.Todotheirwork,ourscholarsdrawontheoryfromEnglish,Women’sStudies,CulturalStudies,Philosophy,PhilosophyofScience,andmanyotherdepartments.Evenprofessorswhoarenotinourdepartmenthaveamajorinfluenceonourthinkingandourwork.However,ourdepartmenttendstoportrayitselfasarhetoricandpublicaddressdepartment,evenwithinourownstudentbody.Forthisarticle,Dr.Guthriepulledfromcommunicationstudies,women’sstudies,youthculture,andprimarymediasourcestoconstructherargument.Notonlydoesthisarticleshowthediversityofourresearch,itshowstheinterdisciplinarityofourwork.Italsoshowsthatwhilewe’recapableofspeakingwithinanacademiccontext,ashasbeendisplayedbyallofoursubmissionsthusfar,wealsohaveakeeninterestinhowacademiacanspeakto“realworld”experiencesandissues.Thisarticledirectlyaddressesachallengefacingparentsofadolescentgirls.Thisarticlecouldalsobeusefultoteachersinmiddleandhighschoolsteachinghealthoraddressingmediaeffectswiththeirstudents.

Whenshepublishedthisarticle,Dr.Guthriewasnevergivenacopyrightcontract.Asfarassheknows,sheownsfullcopyrighttothiswork.TheMPcopyrightstatement,aspostedonitswebsite,wouldseemtoconfirmthis.Itsays:

InordertoassurethewidestpossibleaudiencefortheworkpublishedinMP,thatworkisadded,bycontractualagreement,tooneormoreEBSCOPublishingdatabases.TheusersofthosedatabaseshaveaccessandlimitedcopyingprivilegeswithrespecttoworkappearinginMP.YoursubmissionindicatesthatthisarrangementisacceptabletoyouandthatuponacceptanceyouagreetolicenseyourworktoMPJournalandtoitssub‐licensor,EBSCOPublishing.YoufurtherconfirmthattheworkhasnotbeenpublishedpriortoitsappearanceinMP.Inaddition,youconfirmitisoriginalworkthatabidesbyallcopyrightrulesandregulations.Youunderstandthat,uponpublication,allrightstothisworkwillreverttoyou,theauthor.However,youalsounderstandthatMPreservestherighttopublishthiswork(inpartorinitsentirety)inelectronicformonitswebsiteand/oronelectronicinformationdatabasespublishedbyothers.1

Thelastline,however,mademealittlenervousthattheMPhadreservedallelectronicrightstoarticlespublishedontheirWebsite.ToconfirmthatIcouldpostthisonD‐Scholarship,Iwrotetotheeditor,whoaffirmedthatwecouldpostthearticleaslongasDr.Guthrieagreed.Dr.Guthriehasgivenherpermission.EventhoughDr.Guthriegaveherpermissionorallytome,IhadoverlookedthatIneededtohavehersubmitaproxyagreementtoallowmetopostthisarticleonD‐Scholarship.Thiswasmymistake,anditaddedtotheextendeddelayingettingthisworkonline.

IhaveinformedLyndaHinkle,editorofMP,thatIwillfollowupwithhersoontoseeifthelinkfromD‐Scholarshipincreasedtraffictohersite.Makingcontactswithjournaleditorslike

1“BeAnAuthor."MP:AnOnlineFeministJournal,

10(Oct.2009),http://www.academinist.org/mp/‐author.html.

6

http://www.academinist.org/mp/%E2%80%90author.html

http://www.academinist.org/mp/%E2%80%90author.html

Hinklewillgiveopen‐accessdatabasesanotherwaytoassesstheimpactoftheirwork.PostingthisarticlealsoallowedtoseeifthekeywordsonD‐Scholarshipreallyraiseanarticle’svisibilityandreadership.WhileIcansaythatthekeywordsseemedtohavenoimpactonthearticle'svisibility,IcansaythatjustpostingthearticleandgettingDr.Guthrie’snameintotheauthorsectionboosteditscirculation.Finally,IhadenteredDr.Guthrie’se‐mailsothatshecouldreceivefeedback,makingthisaninteractiveratherthanstaticforum.

IhadsubmittedthisartifacttotestwhetherornottheD‐Scholarshipdatabaseactuallyboostedanarticle’scirculationontheInternetevenifthearticlehadpreviouslybeenpostedonanopen‐accessjournal,likethisarticle.WhenDr.GuthrieandIfirstdidaGooglesearchforthisarticle,wecouldnotgetittocomeupinthesearchresults.IredidthissearchonbothGoogleandGoogleScholaronDec.13,2009withthesameoutcome.However,thisarticlewaspostedonD‐ScholarshiponDec.15,2009.Ironically,whilethearticlenowshowsuponGoogle,it’snottheD‐Scholarshiplinkthatshowsup.Instead,theactualarticlefromtheonlinejournalismovedmuchhigherinthesearchresults.IfIGoogledjust“MeredithGuthrie,”thearticlepoppedupasthelastresultonthesecondpage.IfIGoogled“MeredithGuthrie”and“menstruation,”thearticleturnedupastheveryfirstresult.However,Icouldn’tfindtheD‐Scholarshiplink.ThiscouldbebecausetheD‐Scholarshiplinkisrelativelynewanddoesnothaveenoughclickstomoveitupinthesearchresults,butjustpostingittoD‐Scholarshipproducedenoughinter‐connectivity(extraclickstocheckthearticleandthelink,anactuallink—whichcouldbeconsideredacite—tothearticle)thatthearticlemadeahugejumpuptheresultslist.However,ifIcopyandpastethefirstfourkeywordsenteredonD‐ScholarshipandleaveDr.Guthrie’snameoffthesearch,again,thearticledoesnotshowup.Therefore,untilD‐Scholarshipreceivesmoretraffic,thisarticlecanonlybefoundifsomeoneislookingforDr.Guthrie’swork.

ThisartifactsubmissionprojectyieldedseverallessonsregardingtheD‐Scholarshipproject.BecausewecouldprovidelinkstootherrelevantWebsites,Ihadplannedtopostalinktothejournal’swebsite.ThiswillallowustotestwhetherrepositorieslikeD‐Scholarshipreallydoboostthevisibilityofandrevenueforacademicjournals,aswasarguedbyHeatherDalterioJosephinherstatementtotheUnitedStatesHouseofRepresentative’sSubcommitteeonCourts,theInternet,andIntellectualPropertyCommitteeontheJudiciary.2Boostingvisibilityofarticlesshouldbringmorecitations.ForanacademiclikeDr.Guthrie,beingcitedisamarkofinfluenceandimpact.Thesetwokeyhowideas—howdoesanacademicinfluenceandhowlargeishisorherimpactonhisorherfield—couldbesomeofthewaysthatacademicworkisjudgedinthefuture.OnlinedatabaseslikeD‐Scholarshipprovideauniqueopportunitytotrackinfluenceandimpactthroughcitationcounters.Thesecountscouldbeonewayforacademicstojudgesuitabilityfortenureandpromotioninthefuture.

ThefirsttimeItriedtopostthisarticleinearlyNovember,itwasreturnedtomeaskingforaproxyagreementfromDr.Guthrie,adetailthatIhadadmittedlyoverlookedbyaccidentbecauseDr.GuthrieandIhadseveralconversationsonthisproject,andIknewshewasenthusiasticabouthavingthisarticlepostedtoD‐Scholarship.Mysubmittalwasalsoreturnedforafewtechnicaldetails,suchasanISSNnumberthatwasnotreadilyvisibleforme,apersonnottrainedinlibraryscience.IdidnotmanagetoresubmitthisworkuntilDecember1,2009becauseoftimeconstraintsinmyownlife.AsofDec.13,2009,IstillhadnotheardanythingfromtheD‐Scholarshiprepositoryaboutthisartifact’s

2HeatherDalterio-Joseph,"Heather

DalterioJosephonbehalfoftheScholarlyPublishingandAcademicResourcesCoalition(SPARC)AllianceforTaxpayerAccessAssociationofResearchLibraries,"HearingregardingH.R6845,theFairCopyrightinResearchWorksAct,SubcommitteeonCourts,theInternet,andIntellectualPropertyCommitteeontheJudiciary.WashingtonD.C.,11Sep.2008.

7

acceptability.Isentane‐mailtotherepositorydirectorsonDec.14askingaboutfundingfortheprojectandhowmanypeopleworkfortherepository.Inthekindandquickreplythatwassent,TimothyDeliyannidesnotedthattheD‐ScholarshipstaffhadnotreceivedtheproxyagreementthatIhadturnedintwoweeksprevious.IhadDr.Guthriere‐signtheagreement,droppeditoffinperson,andthearticlewaspostedalmostimmediately.

Havinganopt‐outdatabasewouldeliminatethisunnecessarylayerofpaperwork.ThepaperworkhelpstheD‐Scholarshipstafftomaintainthelegalityofthisdatabase,soit’sunderstandablethattheyneedtheseforms.However,iftheuniversityfacultyweretoagreetoanopt‐outsystem,thisstepwouldonlybenecessaryforartifactspostedafterthePitt‐affiliatedauthorhasdepartedtheuniversity.Thiswouldeasetheprocessforeveryone.

Mr.Deliyannides’e‐mailresponsealsohighlightedafewissueswiththesubmissionprocess.First,inresponsetoqueriesabouthowtheprojectisfundedandstaffed,henotedthatD‐Scholarshipwasstaffedbyseveralpeoplewhogiveaportionoftheirtimetothedatabaseanditwasfundedaspartofthelibrary’soveralloperatingbudget.Ifthelibraryweretoswitchtoanopt‐outdatabase,thedatabasewouldrequireafulltimeperson/peopleandabudgetlineofitsown.Thisisbecausethosepeoplewhowouldbesubmittingwouldneedon‐goingtrainingonhowtonegotiateandpresentcopyrightagreements,howtoacquireallofthedetailsnecessaryforthedatabase,andhowtoproperlyfillouttheformssothatthesubmissionsgothroughonthefirsttrywithoutrepeatedconversationsbackandforthbetweenthesubmitterandtheseeminglyanonymousadministrator.Also,requiringdetails,suchasISSNnumbers,withouttrainingpeopleonhowtofindthemforoddsources,suchasonlinejournals,isfrustratingtothosewhodonothavetechnicalexpertiseintheseareas.ThelibrarycommitteehasrecommendedthatthefacultyreceivetrainingonhowtouseD‐Scholarship.Thiscannotbeone‐timetraining,though,becausetherearenewformsofscholarshipand

publicationsarisingallthetime,andeachsourcewillbringnewquestionsandchallengesforthedatabase.

Next,Mr.Deliyannidesnotedthatsubmittersdonotreceivee‐mailconfirmationoftheirsubmissiontothedatabase,nordotheyreceivenotificationwhentheartifactisactuallypostedtoD‐Scholarship.Whilethedatabasedoesgivesubmittersconfirmatione‐mailattheendoftheprocess,Ibelievethatsendingaquickautomatedconfirmatione‐mailforboththesubmissionandthepostingwilleliminateconfusion.Icheckedseveraltimesoverthelastfewweekstocheckifmyartifactshadbeenreviewedorposted.Mr.Deliyannideswrotethattheadministratorstrytoreviewallsubmissionsinfivedays.ThiswouldhavebeenusefulknowledgesothatIwouldbeabletoascertainthattherewasaproblemwithmysubmissionearlier.BecauseIwasuncertainthattheadministratorshadevenreceivedmysubmissionoriftheywerejustoverwhelmedwithend‐of‐termworkanddidn’thavetimetoprocessmywork,Iwaitedtoolongtowritetotheadministrators,andIlostanopportunitytotrulyassesshowD‐Scholarshipeffectsanartifact’sonlinecirculationandaccessibility.

IwaspleasedtoseethatinatleastonewaytheD‐Scholarshipdatabasereallydoesboostthevisibilityofanauthor’swork.Becauseit’salimitedformofcirculation,however,I’muncertainwhetherthiswillactuallyboostcitationofandreadershipforDr.Guthrie’sarticle.Trackingtheseresultsoveratimeperiodofsixmonthstoayearwouldbeanimportantnumberforanyonetryingtoassessthedatabaseseffectoninformationaccessibility.

8

ChapterTwo:SecuringDigitalDepositPermissionforaUniversityPressBookMattGayetsky


TheodoreOttoWindt,Jr.,PresidentsandProtesters:PoliticalRhetoricinthe1960s(Tuscaloosa:UniversityofAlabamaPress,1990).

Keywords:1960s,administrativerhetoric,argument,civilrightsmovement,crisisrhetoric,cynicism,cynics,feministmovement,ideology,intellectualhistory,JohnF.Kennedy,LyndonB.Johnson,politicalmovements,politicalrhetoric,presidentialrhetoric,proceduralpolitics,protestrhetoric,RichardNixon,symbolicacts,TheodoreWindt,TedWindt,VietnamWar.

Status:Publisherpermissionsecured;authorpermissionpending.

"It'soneofthebigquestionsposedbytheOAmovement‐‐informationmightwanttobefree,buttherearestillcostsassociatedwithitscreationandupkeep.Howarethosecostsshifting,andwhatmightitportendfornon‐profitscholarlypublishers?”

–ClaireLewisEvans,UniversityofAlabamaPress

Itisundoubtedlythecasethattheshifttoopen‐accesspublishingwillaffecttheeconomyofpublishing.Thetraditionalmodelinvolvesahandfulofextremelypowerfulpublishinghouses(e.g.Springer)sellingtheirproductsenmasstouniversitylibrariesatexponentiallyincreasingcosts.However,awhole‐heartedshiftawayfromthismodeltoopen‐accesspublicationwouldlikelycausealargenumberofacademicpressestogooutofbusiness.AsEvansstatesabove,we

mightwanttheinformationtobefree,butthisignoresthecostsassociatedwithpublishing.Someassociatedcostsincludeupkeepofthearchivesandrepositories,peer‐reviewlogistics,physicalproductionofmaterials,anddistributionoffinishedproducts.Eachoftheseservicesrequiresresources,andforthesmall,non‐profitpublishers,itisnecessarytofindaneconomicmodelthatisabletonavigatethiseconomictransition.

ThischapterrecommendsthatthebestmodelforUniversitiesandAcademicPresseswouldbetojointheCompactforOpen‐accessPublishingEquity(COPE).Thismodelallowsatransitionfromthecurrentsystemwheretheuniversitypaysapublisherforaccesstomaterialsforthefacultyandstudentsoftheuniversity.Incontrast,signatoriesofCOPEwouldpledgetopayopen‐accesspublishersnotfortheaccesstothe

9

materials,butinsteadforthepublishingservicesthatarethelifebloodofscholarlypublications.Insteadoffearingthetransitiontoopen‐accesspublishing,non‐profituniversitypressesoughttoembracesuchatransitionbecausesuchashiftwoulddepresstherateofinflationinthecostofaccesstojournalarticles,allowingmoremoneytobeavailableforuniversityspendinginotherareas.MyworktowardsubmissionofTedWindt'sbook,PresidentsandProtesters,totheD‐Scholarshiprepository,providesapointofdeparturetoreflectontheselargerissues.

Windt’sbookisanimportantoneforourfield,asitwontheECA’sEverettLeeHuntScholarshipAwardbyprovidingadetailedandlucidintellectualhistoryofthepoliticallychargedrhetoricofthe1960s.ThisworksurveysthepresidentialrhetoricofJohnF.Kennedy,LyndonB.Johnson,andRichardNixonthroughthetrialsandtribulationsthroughouttheVietnamWaraswellastherhetoricaldevelopmentoftheprotestersfromanethosofdeliberationtoideologyandfinallycynicism.Thisbookalsoprovidessomedetailaboutspecificprotestrhetorics,suchasthecivilrightsmovement,feministmovement,andantiwarmovement.Byexaminingeachoftheserhetoricalmoves,Windtisabletoprovidearichandcompellingaccountofthehistoricaldevelopmentofrhetoricduringthisdecade.

TherearecurrentlyonlytwobooksonD‐Scholarship;oneisanunpublishedmanuscript,andtheotherispublishedbytheUniversityofChicagoPress,butisunderaCreativeCommonsLicense.ItseemsthatWindt’sbookwouldbethefirstinD‐Scholarshipthatapublisherallowstobeuploadedwithoutpreexistingarrangementsbeingmade.Whilethismightbeaninterestingfirstforthesystem,theinclusionofthisartifactalsohighlightshowtheD‐Scholarshipsystemisdifferentthanotherrepositories,likeDASH.WhereastheDASHsystemonlygovernsnewscholarship,D‐Scholarshipencouragestheinclusionofartifactsthatpredatethesystem.And,inthecaseofanartifactlikeWindt’sbook,thisallowsforeasyaccesstoatextthatcanbeunderstoodasa‘classic’inourfield.

Alongtheselines,aquicklookatthecurrentmakeupoftheuploadedworksonD‐Scholarshipmakethesystemappeartobearepositoryfortheses,dissertations,andlittleelse.ByincludingabookbyWindt,itassociatesamajornameandanall‐starinthefieldwithD‐Scholarship.Theinclusionofthisworkalsoreinforcesthe‘Pittbrand.’Whileteachinghere,Windt’slecturesonpresidentialrhetoricwereregardedassomeofthebestattheuniversity.Theinclusionofabook,whichhavingwontheEverettLeeHuntAwardisregardedasthebestinthefieldonlyseemsfitting.

WhileeachartifactsubmittedhassoughttoprobetheboundariesoftheD‐Scholarshipsysteminvariousdifferentways,onethingthathasbeenlackingisadirectengagementwithacademicpublishers.Evenwhenattemptsaremadetobeginsuchadiscussion,thetypicalresponseisadetourthroughtheKafkaesquebureaucracyofRightslink.However,inthisinstanceIwasabletohavedirectinteractionswithcopyrightrepresentativeoftheUniversityofAlabamaPress,ClaireLewisEvans.Whatisuniqueaboutthisartifactisthatitisstillinprint,andTheUniversityofAlabamaPresscouldstillsellthisbookandmakemoneyoffofit.Originally,Ithoughtthatitwouldbeinterestingtoseewhatargumentstheywouldmakeagainstallowingthisbooktobecomeopen‐access.However,throughcorrespondence,IlearnedthatUAPresswasverysupportiveoftheinitiativeandgrantedpermissionsforthisbooktobeincludedinD‐Scholarship.

Whatisinterestingaboutthisexchangeisthatasanon‐profituniversitypress,Ms.Evanswaslessconcernedaboutthelegaleseaboutaccessandcopyright,andmoreconcernedabouttheeconomicmodelbackingtheinitiative.AsmycorrespondencewithMs.Evansattests,thePress'sprimaryconcernfortheinclusionofWindt’sbookwastoensureahighstandardofqualityforthebookscanandthetechnicaldetailsofhowandwhowasgoingtoperformthephysicalreproductionofthebook.Thetypicalrepresentationofpublishinghousesisonewherethedriveforprofittrumpsotherconcerns,yet

10

whattheUAPresscaseshowsisthatAlabama,likePitt,isattemptingtoseewhattheopen‐accessmovementmeansfortheirfuture.Inmyconversationwithher,IrecommendedthatapossibleavenuefortheUniversityofAlabamawouldbetobecomeasignatoryofCOPE.TheeconomicsystemestablishedbyCOPEshiftswhoispayingforwhat.Insteadoftheuniversitypayingpublishersforaccesstoaproduct,theuniversitypaysanopen‐accesspublisherfortheservicesassociatedwithpublication.Thismodelisasustainableone,becausewhentheinformationisopenlyavailable,thecorrespondinginflationaryconcernsnolongermakesense.Peer‐review,forexample,doesnotmysticallybecomemoreexpensiveinaworldwheretheshifttoopen‐accessoccurs,andsincethereviewprocessorpublishingcostsarenotcommoditiesin‐themselves,theexponentialrateofinflationthatwecurrentlyseeoughtnottobeaconcern.

Asecondinterestingquestionregardingthistextconcernsaccessibilityandcirculation.Many

oftheartifactsdiscussedforsubmissionareunpublished,orpublishedinminorjournalsthathavelittleonlinepresence.ThisisnotthecasewithWindt’sbook.Heisverywellknownandhighlyregarded,hisbookwaspublishedbyareputableacademicpress,ourlibraryhastwocopiesofhisbook,anditisalsoavailableonnet‐library.Withsuchabountifulsupplyofpossibleaccesspoints,itshouldbeeasilyavailableandwellread.AccordingtoGoogleScholar’scitationindex,thisbookhasonlybeencited29times,althoughthemajorityofthesearefootnotesto“SeealsoWindt,PresidentsandProtesters:PoliticalRhetoricinthe1960s”.Also,thecopiesofthisbookatourlibraryhavenotbeencheckedoutsince2004.Forsomereason,despitebeingaccessible,thistextisnotcirculatingaswidelyasitotherwiseshould.Tothisend,itshouldbepossibletoseewhetherornotthereisameaningfulamplificationofthetextthatD‐Scholarshipmakespossible,eventhoughalternativeslikenet‐librarycurrentlyexist.

11

ChapterThree:PlacinganArticlePublishedbyaPitt‐HousedJournalinD‐ScholarshipAllisonHahn


AllisonHahn,"ThisHouseRejectsIntoleranceinAsia:TheRoleofStudentDebateinPromotingHumanRightsandFundamentalFreedoms,"InternationalStudiesinEducation9(2008):53‐56,http://iise.pitt.edu/publications/ncontents/09‐03_ISE_IDT.html

Keywords:Mongolia,WorldSchoolsDebateChampionship,parliamentarydebate,Mongoliandebate,Mongolianhistory,traditionaldebate,AsianDebate,globalintolerance.

Status:Conditionalpublisherpermissionsecured;pendingreceiptofcustomPDF.

ThefollowingcasestudyaddressestheuploadingofarticlesfromPittownedjournalsontoD‐Scholarship.Myownattempttouploada2009articlefromtheJournalofInternationalStudiesinEducationillustratesthehesitancyofin‐housejournaleditorstouploadarticles,poorcopyrighteducation,confusingcategories,andtheneedforamandatethatallUniversityofPittsburghownedjournalsandcentersuploadtheirpublicationstoD‐Scholarship.

TheUniversityofPittsburghhostsseveralin‐housejournals,includingtheJournalofLawandCommerceandtheJournalofLawandPolicyattheSchoolofLaw,VariacionesBorgesintheDepartmentofPhilosophy,thePittsburghJournalofEnvironmental&PublicHealthLawintheGraduateSchoolofPublicHealth,andthePittsburghUndergraduateReviewintheHonorsCollege.Further,prestigiouscentersattheUniversityofPittsburgh,suchastheMatthewB.

RidgwayCenter,TheEuropeanUnionCenterofExcellence,andtheCenterforRuralHealthPractice,regularlyproduceresearch,reports,andmonographswhicharecriticaltoboththeUniversity’sprestigeandfurtheringscholarshipintheirrespectiveareas.

AtpresentitisdifficulttoobtainacompletelistofpublicationsfromPitt.Findingactualcopiesofthosetextsisevenmoredifficult.AttemptstomakecompletePDFfilesofthesetextsavailableontheInternethaveoccurredatsomeofthesejournalsandcenters.Yet,therehasbeennocoordinatedattempttocatalogsuchentries,renderingthePDFsdifficulttofind,incorrectlyarchived,andunsearchableviaacademicsearchengines.ThisproblemilluminatestheneedforanarchivesuchasD‐Scholarship.However,myattempttopostanarticlefromthejournalInternationalStudiesinEducation(ISE)indicatesthatsimplymakingthearchiveavailablewillnot

12

http://iise.pitt.edu/publications/ncontents/09%E2%80%9003_ISE_IDT.html

encouragedeposits.Infact,depositswillnotoccuruntilfacultymisconceptionsareaddressedandacopyrighteducationprogramiscreated.

Dr.Jacob,editoroftheJournalofInternationalStudiesinEducation,didnotinitiallyembracetheconceptofallowingdepositsfromhisjournaltoD‐Scholarship.Specifically,heexpressedconcernaboutcopyrightissuesandexpandedhisargumentstoincludeallacademicjournalsandthemiddlemancorporationswhoadvertisejournalstolibraries.HeindicatedthatnoneofthejournalsheusedwouldagreetopostingsonD‐ScholarshipandexpressedsurprisethatHarvardhadarrangedamandatorydepositinginitiativeviaDASH.

DuringourdiscussionIconfirmedthatISEisexclusivelyanelectronicpublication,doesnotsellprintcopiesorelectronicdownloads,andgainsnoprofitfromadvertisement.Assuch,ISEwouldnotfaceafinanciallossorcontractualviolationfromuploadingthejournaltoD‐Scholarship.Yet,Dr.JacobremainedopposedtoD‐ScholarshipandofferedthatImightpostalinktothearticleonD‐Scholarship.SuchconcessionsthreatentorenderD‐Scholarshiptothestatusofalistoflinks,forcingresearcherstotakeextrastepstofindthearticle,andpreventingthetextofthearticletobesearched.

Dr.JacobappearedunconcernedthatarticlesonISEaredifficulttofindoruse.However,thearticleaddressedinthiscasestudyistheonlyEnglishlanguagetextregardingmodernMongolianacademicdebate.ItisimportantthatuniquescholarshipcomingoutoftheUniversityofPittsburghbecomeaccessibletotheglobalacademiccommunity,notonlythosewhohavethetimeandskillstodigthroughsmalljournalshousedondifficulttofindwebpages.

Beyondaccess,thiscasestudyindicatesastrongneedforimprovedcopyrighteducationattheUniversityofPittsburgh.Myunderstandingisthatjournalsrequireasignedcopyrightagreementfromauthors,orthatthecopyrightremainswiththeauthor.AlthoughIdonotremembersigningacopyrightagreementwiththeISE,theyhaveassertedthattheISEholdsthecopyrighttomyarticle.Thisissuewillnothavea

largeimpactonmyprofessionalcareer;itisasmallarticle,anddoesnotradicallyaffectmeregardlessofwhoownsthecopyright.However,theUniversityofPittsburghissettingapoorprecedentbyencouraginggraduatestudentstopublish,whilenotprovidingcopyrighteducationorfollowingbestpractices.

AttheendofmydiscussionwithDr.JacobIwasanexemptiontotheunwrittenpolicyofthejournalofnotpermittingfulltextpostingofjournalarticles.However,IhavenotyetuploadedmyarticlebecausetheexemptionwasconditionedonthecreationofanewPDFpreparedbytheISEstaffthatwillincludeastatementofcopyright.

ThisentireprocesstooktwomonthsfrominitiallywritingtotheJournaltofinallyhavingameetingwithDr.Jacob.And,ifthetimeforthecreationofanewPDFisincludedintothetimeframe,itwilltakefourmonths.Thisishardlyanefficient,speedy,orpleasantprocess.

AlthoughtheLibraryCommitteehasexpressedhesitancytomandatethatallfacultypublicationsbepostedtoD‐Scholarship,itseemsreasonablethattheymandateallpublicationsfromUniversityofPittsburghownedjournalsandcentersbeuploadedtoD‐Scholarship.Suchamandatewouldquicklystreamlinethepostingprocessthatmyexperienceindicateswillnotoccurvoluntarily.

13

PartTwo:ObstaclesandCul‐de‐sacs

ChapterFour:Rightslink—BarriertotheOpenAccessMovementCarolynCommer&AlexandraSeitz

ArtifactsNominatedforD‐ScholarshipSubmission

JamesAllen,“AristotleontheDisciplinesofArgument:Rhetoric,Dialectic,Analytics,”Rhetorica25(2007):87‐108.

Keywords:Aristotle,argument,argumentation,argumenttheory,rhetoric,dialectic,analytic,philosophy,enthymeme,syllogism,categoricalsyllogism,syllogisticlogic,syllogisticargument,Topics,PriorAnalytics,SophisticalRefutations,Gorgias,Zeno,JamesAllen.

HenryHoweandJohnLyne,“GeneTalkinSociobiology,"SocialEpistemology:AJournalofKnowledge,CultureandPolicy6(1992):109‐163.

Keywords:HenryHowe,JohnLyne,rhetoricofscience,genetics,sociobiology,socialepistemology,genetalk,SteveFuller,JamesCollier,E.O.Wilson,RichardDawkins

Status:BothartifactsblockedbyfailuretogainpermissionfromRightslink.

Oneofthegreatestbarrierstoopenaccessfor

scholarlyworkhasbeentheintroductionofRightslink,anonlinerightsandpermissionsserviceusedbymostmajorpublishers,includingOxfordUniversityPress,Springer,NaturePublishingGroup,TheUniversityofChicagoPress,BlackwellPublishing,theAmericanMedicalAssociation,BMJPublishingGroup,PalgraveMacMillan,Taylor&Francis,Elsevier,TheNewYorkTimes,TheUniversityofCaliforniaPress,etc.

Rightslinkisabarriertoopenaccessforscholarlyworkbecauseitsserviceallowspublisherstoautomatecopyrightpermissionsservicessothatcustomerscanhaveaccesstoarticles—butforafee.NodoubtpublishersthatareusingRightslinkhaveincreasedtheirrightsandpermissionsrevenueswhilesavingonhandlingandtransactioncosts,butisthisreallyservingthepublic’sinterest?Whilepublishersclaimthattheservicemakestherightsandpermissionsprocessfasterandeasierfor

14

customers,weshouldrecognizethatthisisonlypartiallytrue.Theautomatedset‐upoftheonlineserviceisquitedifficulttonavigateifyouaretryingtodosomethingotherthansimplyreorderprintsofanarticle—likeobtaincopyrightpermissiontorepublishanarticleonD‐Scholarship.

TheAllenArtifact

Thissectiondetailsthefirstauthor'sattempttogaincopyrightpermissionfromtheUniversityofCaliforniaPressforanarticlewrittenbyJamesAllen,adistinguishedscholarhereatPitt.Inordertoseekcopyrightpermission(Iwasneversuccessful)IhadtojumpthroughmanyhoopsatRightslinkuntilIeventuallycontactedUCPressdirectly(theyneverresponded).ThetroubleIencounteredwithRightslinkshowsthatthisserviceprovidesmajorobstaclesforsecuringcopyrightpermissionintheD‐Scholarshipsubmissionprocess—yetanotherimportantreasonwhyPittscholarsneedtounderstandtheseriousconsequencesofthecopyrightagreementstheysignwithpublishers.

ThisartifactisascholarlyjournalarticlethatexaminestheearlystagesofAristotle’stheoryofargumentation.Inthearticle,JamesAllenshowsthatpriortotheconceptionofanalytic,orsyllogisticlogic,Aristotle’srealmofargumentwascomposedsolelyofrhetoricanddialectic.AllendiscusseshowAristotleunderstoodrhetoricanddialecticasgeneralartsofargumentationthatlackedparticularsubjectmatter;theycouldtherefore,inpractice,beappliedtoanysubject.Allenalsoexplainsthat“ascounterparts”rhetoricanddialecticwerenotautonomousforAristotle,butinterdependent,withrhetoricdrawingonconclusionsorstartingpointsgleanedfromdialectic.WhenAristotledevelopedanalyticorsyllogisticlogicandcalleditthemasterformofargument,hedidnotabolishrhetoricordialectic,butmadethemdeferentialtoanalyticorsyllogisticformalism.WeshouldunderstandAristotle’searlyapproachtoargumentation,concludesAllen,asonethatismoreconcernedwithargumentationinpractice(dialecticand

rhetoric),ratherthanconcernedwiththeformofargumentationitself(analytic).

Allen’sarticleaddsusefulnesstotheCommunicationDepartmentsectionofD‐Scholarshipbecauseitofferskeyinsightsintothehistoryofrhetoricandargumentation.ThoughAllenisaprofessorinthephilosophydepartment,thisarticlewasfirstpublishedinRhetorica,thejournaloftheInternationalSocietyfortheHistoryofRhetoric(ISHR).Rhetoricaisknownforpublishingonlyarticlesofanexceptionallyhighcaliber,andsotheacademicrigorofAllen’sarticlewillelevateD‐Scholarshipgenerally.Additionally,inclusionofAllen’sarticleshowsthattheCommunicationDepartmentsectionofD‐Scholarshipiscommittedtocross‐disciplinarywork,bridgingthehistoryrhetoricandancientphilosophy,offeringeachvaluableresearchonthesharedtopicofAristotleandargumentation.

InordertogetpermissiontoreprintorrepublishworksfromUniversityofCaliforniaPress,IhadtogothroughanonlinecopyrightpermissionsystemcalledRightslink(visithttp://www.copyright.com).Rightslinkappearstobeacopyrightservicethatwantstomakemoneyasakindofcopyright“middleman.”

AfterapreliminaryinvestigationintoRightslink,I’mconcernedthatcompanieslikeitpresentseriousroadblocksforopenaccess;theyseemtomakemoredigitalscholarshipavailableonline,butforasmallcost.Rightslink,forexample,isanonlinecopyrightservicethatallowspeopletologinand“placeorders”forarticlereprintsandpermissions.

Atfirst,Ithoughtitmightbeagreatideatohaveacopyrightsystemthatallowspeopletomakerequestsandreceivepermissionsonline.Ididatestrun,createdanaccountandusername,andtriedtoorder1copyofAllen’sarticleunderthesection“putarticleinlibraryreserve/e‐reserve.”Theytriedtobillme$15.00formyrequest,butnevermadeitcleartomeexactlywhatIwasgettingforthis$15.00,therightto“republish”thearticleinourD‐Scholarshiprepository,ortherighttosimply“reprint”itonmyhomeprinter.Norwasitclearwhatother

15

http://www.copyright.com

feesmightbeincurredinthefutureshouldIsomehowmisusewhatcopyrightImayormaynothavebeengranted.BecauseIdidn’twanttopaythe$15.00Ineverfiguredoutwhat$15.00wouldgetme.ButoverallIfoundtheprocessanduserinterfacefrustrating.AftertwoandahalfhourstryingtofigureouttheRightslinkprocess,IoptedtowritealettertoUCPressandemailittothemdirectly.OtherthantheautomatedresponseIreceived,Ihaveheardnothingelsefromthem.

ItismysuspicionthatsomepublisherslikeUCPresshavenotbeenasdiligentaboutrespondingtocopyrightrequestsnowthatRightslinkhandlesmostofthem.IthinkthismaybeanotherunfortunateconsequenceoftheRightslinksystem,andapotentialbarrierforcontributionstoD‐Scholarship.

TheHowe&LyneArtifact

ThefollowingcasestudydetailsasubmissionproposaltotheUniversityofPittsburgh’sD‐Scholarshiprepository.Theartifactproposedisa1992SocialEpistemologyarticleco‐authoredbyPittCommunicationandRhetoricprofessorJohnLyne,entitled“GeneTalkinSociobiology.”ProfessorLyne’sarticlepresentsuswithseveralinterestingissuesthatpertaintothefunctioningandutilityofthenewD‐Scholarshiprepository.Theprimaryissuesaddressedinthissectionfocuson1)thedifficultyinattainingrepublishingpermissionsfromjournalsand2)theneedtodigitizeolderjournalissuesthatonlyexistinhardcopyformat.Amongthetwenty‐onesubmissionproposalspresentedinourseminar,overtwenty‐fivepercentencounteredcomplicationsregardingcopyrightpermissions.Compoundedwiththisproblemisthesomewhaturgentneedtobegintodigitizehardcopyscholarlyworksthataredecreasingintheirvisibilityduetotheincreasingdominanceofdigitaltechnologiesineverydaylife.CertainlytheseinterconnectedissuesareessentialtothefutureofdigitalscholarshipingeneralandtotheworkingsofD‐Scholarshipinparticular.Thefollowingcasestudyfurtherdetailstheseissues,theirmeaningforD‐Scholarshipanditspotential

submitters,theirrelationtowritersofjournalarticles,andtheirsignificancetothepublishingindustry.

"GeneTalkinSociobiology,"anarticleco‐authoredbybiologistHenryHoweandcommunicationandrhetoricscholarJohnLyne,waspublishedinthe1992specialissueofSocialEpistemology:AJournalofKnowledge,CultureandPolicy.Itseemsthatthepurposeofthisspecialissue,entitled"TheRhetoricofSociobiology,"wastointroducetherelevanceandperspectivesofrhetoricofsciencetothejournal'sreadership.Thus,asthecenterpieceofthisspecialissue,HoweandLyne'sarticlerepresentsanimportantmomentinwhichthefieldofcommunicationstakedaclaimwithinpublicdiscourseonbiology.

Inthearticle,HoweandLynesetouttoaccomplishtwomajorgoals.Thefirstistocritiquesociobiologists'useoflanguagedrawnfromthreespecificfieldsofgenetics‐‐biometricalgenetics,populationgenetics,andmoleculargenetics.Here,theauthorsexaminehowsociobiologistsappropriatean"eclectic"setofphrasesandterms(e.g."gene,""polygeneticinheritance,""fitness")fromthesegeneticssubfieldswithoutattendingtothecontexts,meanings,constraints,andassumptionsofthesespecificscientificcommunities.Thisbroadbasedandsomewhatcarelessuseoflanguageblursthedifferencesbetweentherhetoricsofthethreesubfieldsandleadstodeficienttheoriesandconclusionswithinsociobiologicalstudies.YetthroughtheiruseofwhatHoweandLyneterm"genetalk,"sociobiologistssuccessfullyco‐opttheauthorityofbiometrical,population,andmoleculargenetics.Thisinturnallowsthemtomakemorepersuasivecasesfortheirinherentlyflaweddeterminations.HoweandLynearguethatthisincautioususeof"genetalk"withinthefieldofsociobiologyoftenleadstoarch‐determinismandthewidespreadapplicationofflawedtheoryinpublicpoliciesrelatedtohumanbehaviorandinteraction.

Thesecondgoalofthepaperistopointtoa"thirdway"ofstudyingtherhetoricofscience.Here,HoweandLynearguethattherearegenerallytwotypesofrhetoricofscience

16

scholarship.Thefirstentailsanalyzingandcritiquingthe"internal"rhetoricwithinaspecificscientificcommunity;thatis,itentailslookingathowlanguageandideologyshapethewayscientificknowledgeisproduced.Thesecondinvolvesinvestigatingthe"external"rhetoricof(orabout)science;thatis,itinvolvesexaminingandcritiquingthewaysscientificknowledgeiscommunicatedtoandunderstoodbypublicsbeyondscientificcommunities.Inthisessay,HoweandLyneclaimthatthebestandmostusefulrhetoricofsciencescholarshipwouldattendto"internal"rhetoric,"external"rhetoric,andtherelationshipbetweenthetwo.

JohnLyneisadistinguishedprofessorofcommunicationandrhetoricwhoseworkhasbeencentraltothedevelopmentofrhetoricofscience.TheabilitytorepublishthisveryimportantarticleontheD‐ScholarshipwebsitewillfurthershowcaseLyne'stremendousinfluenceinandcontributionstothefieldaswellasbringcomplementaryattentiontothePittCommunicationDepartment.

Further,publishingthisworkonPitt'sD‐Scholarshipwebsitewillallowforgreaterandmoredirectaccesstothearticleandwilllikelyincreasecommunicationscholars'awarenessofSocialEpistemology,whichmaybeunknownincertaincornersofthefield.HoweandLyne'sarticleisacriticalpieceofscholarshipwithinthesubfieldofrhetoricofsciencethat,duetoits1992publicationdateandappearanceinajournalgenerallydedicatedtoepistemology,mayhavebecomesomewhatlostwithinthecanonofrhetoricofscienceliterature.ItsavailabilitytoPitt‐affiliatedstudentsandfacultyinterestedintheCommunicationDepartment,theworkofJohnLyne,and/orrhetoricofscience‐‐aswellastothewiderpublic(throughtherepository'sopenaccessfunctions)‐‐willallowthepublicationtoemergeoutofitscurrentexclusiveandsomewhathiddenlocationwithinthejournal'sarchives.Finally,thespecialissueofthisjournalishistoricallysignificanttothefieldofcommunicationasitboldlyestablishesrhetoric'splaceintherealmsofscienceandepistemology.

Sincerhetoricofscienceinquiriesshouldbeofinteresttomanydisciplinesoutsideofthefieldof

communicationandrhetoricandbecausethearticlewasco‐authoredwithadistinguishedbiologist,itspublicationontheD‐Scholarshipwebsitewouldlikelyexpanditsreadershipfromthesocialsciencesintothebiologicalsciences.Forexample,keywordsearchesofferingscientifictermssuchas"gene,""biometricgenetics,"and"sociobiology,"wouldlikelyresultinlistingsthatincludeHoweandLyne'sarticle,directingtheattentionofmembersofthescientificcommunityandother"outsiders"tothesubfieldofrhetoricofscience.

ThededicationofthisspecialissueofSocialEpistemologyto“TheRhetoricofSociobiology”demonstratesthegrowingimportanceofrhetoricofscience.WeshouldnotealsothattheeditorofSocialEpistemologyisSteveFuller,aprominentandcontroversialfigureintherealmofrhetoricofscience.ThefactthatHoweandLyne'sarticleisfeaturedsoprominentlywithinFuller'sjournalspeaksvolumesabouttheimportanceoftheirwork.

TheUniversityLibrarySystemattheUniversityofPittsburghcontainsdigitalarchivesoftheissuesofSocialEpistemologyfrom1997tothepresent.Copiesofthejournalfromthefirstissuepublishedin1987upuntil1998areavailableonlyinthestacksofthe"CurrentMagazines,Newspapers,andJournalsRoom"ofHillman.ThustheadditionofHoweandLyne's1992articletoD‐ScholarshipwouldprovidePittstudentsandfaculty,aswellasthewiderpublic,withaccesstoadigitalcopyofthepiece.

AfteralongandtediousprocessofinformationgatheringonthebestwaytoattainpermissiontorepublishHoweandLyne’sarticleonD‐Scholarship,IresortedtofollowingthespecificguidelinesontheTaylor&Francispermissionswebpage.ThisstepwasprecededbyamultipleemailendeavorsthatsoughttodealwiththepermissionsrequestthroughconversingwithanactualpersonatTaylor&Francis.BothHoweandLyneexpressedgreatenthusiasmattheideaofdigitizingthearticleandmakingitavailableonD‐Scholarship.LynesupportedmypermissionrequestbysendingemailstothecurrenteditorofSocialEpistemology,JoanLeach,

17

insearchofguidanceontheprincipalwayofobtainingrepublishingrightsforthepiece.Unfortunately,theseinquiriesalmostalwaysdirectedLyneandmebacktotheinhumanTaylor&Francispermissionswebpage,seeminglyrunbyanoutsourcedcompanycalled“Rightslink.”Aftercreatinganaccountwiththecompanyandansweringmultiplequestionsonthenatureofmyrequestandthearticleitself,Iwasdirectedtoapagewhichinformedmethat“Taylor&Francisdoesnotallowelectronicreuseoftextextracts>500wordsfortheusespecified.”Further,itsuggestedthatifIwished,Iwouldbeallowedtouseanabstractwithalinkbacktothejournal'swebsite.

ItisclearthatjournalpublisherslikeTaylor&FrancisfeelthreatenedbyopenaccessrepositoriessuchasD‐Scholarship.Infact,manyofthesepublishinghouseshaveemployedexternalcompanieslike“Rightslink”tofurtherdistancethemselvesfromhavingtodealdirectlywithindividualrepublishingrequests.Buttheactofposingrepublishingrestrictionstoarticleswhicharenotdigitallyavailableandwhicharehousedinareasthatarebecominglessandlessvisited(i.e.inUniversityjournalreadingrooms)isneitherbeneficialtoscholarsnortothepublishersoftheirwork.Plainlystated,bothauthorandpublisherwinifolderworksarerepublishedinonlineopenaccessrepositoriesbecausebothauthorandpublisherreceiveincreasedattention.Thisincreaseofattentionservestoadvancetheknowledgeandvisibilityofbothparties’product.

Asitstandsrightnow,fewerpeoplehaveaccesstoHoweandLyne’sarticlethanwouldbethecaseifthearticleappearedonD‐Scholarship.ItisvirtuallyhiddeninitscurrentlocationonthestacksoftheSocialEpistemologycataloginUniversitylibraries.Mostnotably,elevenyearsofSocialEpistemologyissuesstartingfromthejournal’sfoundingin1987through1998areavailableonlyinhardcopy,furtherdecreasingthearticle’spotentialreadership.

AsRichardLanhampointsoutinhis1997article,“TheEconomicsofAttention,”“theworlddesperatelyneedsamodelofeconomicsof

informationthatwillschematizeitsformsandfunctions.”1Thisnewmodeliscurrentlybeingcrafted,reshaped,developedandredevelopedeverydayandthereisastrongneedforpublisherstoupdatetheirbusinessmodelsinordertobetteradapttothischanginglandscapeofinformationproductionanddistribution.TherecentembraceofopenaccessrepositoriesbyprestigiousinstitutionslikeHarvard,CornellandDartmouthmarksadecisiveshiftinuniversities’attitudetowardthisissueofattention,signalingtopublishersthatiftheywishtoremainviableandrelevant,theymusttransformtheirmodelsinaccordancewiththisnewdevelopment.Theopenaccessmodel,theyargue,supportsacentralandcoremissionoftheacademy—tomakescholarlyresearchbroadlyaccessibleandavailabletothepublic.Inturn,therestrictionofaccessisfundamentallyatoddswiththismission.OpenaccessrepositorieslikeD‐Scholarshipallowforarticlessuchas“GeneTalkinSociobiology”tobeaccessedmoreeasilythantheywereundertheolderpapermodelandthusarealogicalchoiceforproducingtheaforementionedgoal.Theybringgreatervisibilitytoolderarticlessimplybytheironlinelocation,throughfactorslikesearchabilityandhyperlinking.

OnecanunderstandwhypublisherslikeSocialEpistemologymightfeelthreatenedbytheopenaccessmodel.Butafterassessingtheplausibleoutcomesandpossibilitiesofworkingwiththeopenaccesssystem,itseemsclearthatallowingauthorstoshowcaseearlierworksinonlinelocationsassociatedwithparticularuniversitieswouldonlyincreaseknowledgeandinterestinthejournalsinwhichsuchworkswerepublished.

ThepotentialsubmissionofHoweandLyne'spiecetoD‐Scholarshipraisesquestionsonceagainabouttheproblemofdepartmentcategorizationwithintherepository.Althoughclearlyapertinentcontributiontothefieldofcommunicationandrhetoricandthesubfieldofrhetoricofscience,Iwonderifthearticleshould

1RichardA.Lanham,"TheEconomicsof

Attention,"MichiganQuarterlyReview,36(2007),http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.act2080.0036.206.

18

http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.act2080.0036.206

notbecrosslistedintheDepartmentofBiologicalSciences,duetoitsimmediaterelevancetothefieldofbiology.Clearly,sinceJohnLyneisaUniversityofPittsburghprofessorintheCommunicationDepartmentandHenryHoweisunaffiliatedwithourUniversity,thearticle'sprimarylistingshouldfallundertheCommunicationDepartment.However,therestrictionscurrentlyinplacewhichlimitdepartmentallistingtoasingleselectioncouldbecontestedastheyconstrainthemultiplefilingpossibilitiesforinterdisciplinaryscholarlyworks.

19

ChapterFive:TheDeceasedAuthorDilemmaDavidLandes


WilliamS.Tacey,"Pitt'sSpeechDepartment:PartI,"UniversityofPittsburghWorkingPapersinRhetoricandCommunication2(Fall1980):1‐13.

Keywords:HistoryofPitt,UniversityofPittsburgh,DepartmentofCommunication,CathedralofLearning,religionandpedagogy,JohnBowman,RalphTurner,PechanLoyaltyAct,tenurehistory,publicspeaking,BillTacey.

Status:Pendingduetodifficultyinobtainingpermissionfromauthor'snext‐of‐kin.

Thiscasestudyexploresissuesofseeking

permissionstodepositaworkcreatedbydeceasedauthorinD‐Scholarship.TheworkinquestionwasoriginallyonlypublishedasaworkingmanuscriptinPittCommunication’sstudentjournal,UniversityofPittsburghWorkingPapersinRhetoricandCommunication,andcirculatedlocally.Theworkwasneverpublishedbyaprinterwhotookrightstothepiece,leavingthecopyrightstotheestateofthedeceasedauthor.Thearduoushuntforonlinepostingpermissionsprovedfutile,anditexposesoneofthemanyweaknessesoftheopt‐inmodelofopenscholarship.Theincreasedthelaborrequiredtosubmitolderworksiftheycontinuetobehandledonacasebycasebasisisuntenable.Caseslikethisoneshowwhyopenaccesswilltendtowardhostingvirtuallyonlypresentworks,leavingthelast25orsoyearsofthird‐party‐ownedscholarshipinavulnerablepositiontobetakenhostagetothedwindlingprivatepublisherswhowillstrikebackagainstopenaccesswithincreasinglyhigheraccessprices

forthescholarshipmanyrelyon.Beforeelaboratingmoreontheuniquedifficultiesposedineffortstodepositartifactsbydeceasedauthors,thischapterfirstconsiderstherationaleforincludingthisspecificartifactintheD‐Scholarshiprepository.

ThisartifactimprovesdatabasequalitybothasapieceofscholarshipaboutUniversityofPittsburghhistoryrelevanttoallassociatedwiththeDepartmentofCommunication,withtheuniversityofPittsburgh,andwiththeD‐Scholarshipdatabaseitself.Thishistorymadeavailableforthefirsttimetowidespreadpublicaudiencestouchesuponadiversityofinstitutional,cultural,pedagogical,andhistoricaltopics,fromblackhistorytoreligiousstudiestotheaterartstoPittsburgh’sfamouseconomichistoryandbeyond.Makingthisrichpieceofhistoryapublicdocumentcanprovideresourceforcountlessunforeseenapplications.Theabilityforeachofthehistory’swordstobeamatchwithsomeone’sGooglesearchtermsconfersauniquepotentialfordisseminationthathasbeen

20

heretoforehistoricallyunavailable.Anyonesearchingforanyofthemanynamesmentionedinthearticlewillfindthispieceandenjoyaccesstotheinformationaboutthem.Duetotheageofthearticleanditsfocusonthe19thandearly20thcentury,mostofthenamesinthishistoryrefertodeceasedpeople.Mostofthewebhaspresentisttendencieswithephemeralobjectsthatrankbynewness.

Whilethescholarshipspeaksofahistoricalsubjectmatterofscholarlyandcommunalvalue,thereisanotherdimensioninwhichthisdepartmentalpublicationofworkingpapersisitselfalocalartifact.Currentdepartmentculturecanbenefitfromwitnessingmorethedepartmentlegacythattheycurrentlyareauthoring,perhapsunwittingly.Suchalegacyincludesartifactsofpastcommunalpracticesthatcultivatedtheintellectualcultureofyoungandestablishedacademicsincollaboration.Bypostingrelicsofformercommunities,theystandasmonumentsspeakingtoonlookers,encouragingtheconversationandco‐editingofeachother’swork.Ofnoteisthepreface’sdesperatepleatomaintainexistence,anobjectofinterestforthehistoryofPittCommunication’shistoryofitsworkingpapersjournal:

AswecontinuepublishingWorkingPapers,weareencounteringfinancialproblemsthatthreatenitsexistence.ThankstoDeanBaranger’ssupportofthelastissue,wewereabletocontinue.WehopethattheRhetoricandCommunicationDepartmentwillprovidesupportforfutureeditions.

ThehistoryprovidedbytheTaceyartifact,beingthefirstinstallmentinaseries,coversabroadrangeoftopicsofinteresttomanyaudiences.Afewtopicalhighlightsinclude:

•PittsburghAcademy(1787–1819)growingintotheWesternUniversityofPennsylvania(1819‐1908)beforebecomingtheUniversityofPittsburgh.

•Connectionsbetweenthechurch,Pittsburghmoney,andthedevelopmentofPitt.

•Thechurchinfluenceoncurriculumandfaculty:mandatorydailyprayerandmass

attendance;curricularemphasisonoratoricalabilityduetopreachingpractice.

•HistoryoftheCathedralofLearning.

•ChancellorJohnBowman’sfundraisingtocompletethe20‐year‐incompleteCathedral

•Casestudyinthehistoryoftenure:RalphTurner(popularprofessorofhistory)vs.ChancellorBowman.

•Blackintegration:UniversityofPittsburghmedicalschooladmonishedforroutineexclusionof“negro”admission.

•TheMcCarthyera’sPechanLoyaltyActthreateningacademicfreedom.

•PublicSpeakingoriginatingasaDivisionofEnglish(andatheaterdivision)beforebecomingPitt’sspeechdepartment.

•“Bill”Tacey’splaceinthishistory,makingthispiecesanexampleofproductivistscholarshipinwhichtheauthorismultivocallyspeakingasbothaparticipantandhistorian.

ThispieceislikelyofinteresttotheDepartmentofCommunication’sfacultyandgraduatestudents,anydepartmentofspeech,English,theaterarts,andmoregenerallythosewithinterestintheUniversityofPittsburgh.Thepiece,withitsvariousnarrativeelements,canserveasahistoricalaccountforPittsburghhistory,thedevelopmentoftenure,sociology,pedagogy,religionandsociety,etc.Lastly,theworkcontributestoalocalprofessor’sposthumouslegacyofinteresttothoseseekingresourcesonTacey,hislifeandhiswork.

TheTaceypiecepresentsuswithavexingproblemaboutseekingrepublishingpermissionfrom1)adeceasedauthor,2)averylocallypublishedbutnowdefunctjournal,and3)ajournalofdraftpapers.Thelegaleseintheartifact'sopeningpagesstates:

TherearenocopyrightrestrictionsonarticlespublishedinWorkingPapersinRhetoricandCommunicationotherthanthoseimposedbytheauthors,therebyallowingfreedomtopublictheirworkelsewhere.Individualcontributionsareuneditedandpublishedassubmittedbytheauthors.

21

ItremainsunclearwhoinheritstherightfulownershipofthedeceasedTacey’sdraftwritingsthatwerereproducedinadepartmental(presumablylow‐circulation)publicationthattooknorightsfromitsauthors.ItappearsthatTaceyheldfullrights.Uponhisdeathin1986,rights(likedebts)presumablyfollowthedeceased’sestate.Inthiscase,publicrecordsindicateafewpotentialcontacts:wifeEvelynRiethmillerTacey,daughterMaryTaceyBoatnerofNewportNH,stepdaughterLynnHockenbergerofBirminghamMich,andfivegrandchildrenandabrother.TheremaybeotherpossibilitiesofcopyrighttransfertotheUniversityofPittsburghorpublicdomain,dependingonthelegalpoliciesin1986andcurrentlaw’shandlingofpastlaw.Asthiscasestudyshows,morelegworkisnecessarytocleartheremaininghurdlesbeforethisartifactcanbesuccessfullydepositedonD‐Scholarship.

22

ChapterSix:TheChallengeofFindingDigitalHomesforArticlesfromOrphanedJournalsCarolynCommer


LesterOlson,“ACartographyofSilence:BiasCrimesandPublicSpeechlessness,”JournalofIntergroupRelations,31(4)(2004/2005):76‐102.

Keywords:cartographyofsilence,cartography,silence,publicspeech,publicspeechlessness,mutedmoments,systemicsilence,communicativesilence,communications,rhetoric,biascrimes,anti‐gayviolence,harassment,hatecrime,anti‐gayviolencehearings,NGLTF,anti‐discriminationlaw,symbolicembodiment,homosexualpanicdefense,homophobicviolence,fairyshaking,LesterOlson,AdrienneRich,HarveyMilk,JohnConyers,RobertGravel,BarneyFrank.

Status:Pendingduetounresolvedcopyrightstatusofarticle.

Unfortunately,ifascholardoesnotchooseapublisherwisely,theyrisktheirworkbeingneglectedorevenforgottensincemostjournalsretainreprintandrepublishingrights.Timingisalsoakeyfactorforpublishing;whilesomeworkmaynotseemrelevantinitsowntime,itmaybemoreimportanttofuturescholars.HereD‐Scholarshiphasthepotentialtohelpfillagapinjournalpublishingbyre‐publishingandre‐circulatingarticleselectronicallythatdidnotreceivetheattentiontheydeservedintheirowntime.

ThischapterdetailsmyexperiencetryingtorepublishanexcellentbutneglectedarticlewrittenbyPittscholarLesterOlson;itappearedintheJournalforIntergroupRelations,asmalljournalpublishedbytheNationalAssociationofHumanRightsWorkers.Withinsmallercircles,

thearticlemadeahugeimpact,butduetothesmallaudienceforthejournal,thearticleneverreceivedwideattention,particularlyfromOlson’sownfield—Communication.BelowIdescribeOlson’sarticle,aswellasdetailsomeofitsheuristicvaluebyrecountingmyexperiencetryingtosecurecopyrightpermissionforthearticle.ThisparticularbrieftestifiestothegreatobstaclesthatD‐Scholarshipfaceswithcopyrightlawwhencontactingjournalsforcopyrightpermission.

Olson'sarticleexaminesthesilenceofvictimsthatoftenfollowsanti‐gayandanti‐lesbianbiascrimes,andfocusesonhowcommunicationscholarsmightanalyzeandinterpretthispublicspeechlessness.TheauthorusesAdrienneRich’spoem“CartographiesofSilence”toframethearticleandemphasizehowsilenceisindicativeof

23

asystematicattempttoavoidprosecutingbiascrimes.Thissilencecanbebetterunderstoodbyexaminingits‘cartography,’thatis,themanywaysthatthelandscapeoftheUnitedStates’federaljusticesystem,federallaw,andlawenforcementworktogethertosystematicallysilencethevoicesofvictims.ItisthiscartographyofsilenceforbiascrimesmakesitpossibletoexaminehowthecriminaljusticesystemintheU.S.hasahistoryofmakingbiascrimespossiblewithoutpunishment.Inadditiontobeingofexcellentquality,thearticlehasgreatpotentialtoadddiversitytotheCommunicationsectionofD‐Scholarshipbyfocusingonhowrhetoriccanhelpusunderstandresponsestobiascrimes,makinganimportantconnectionbetweenscholarshipandthereal‐worldapplicationofthatscholarshiptoworkinhumanrights.

Perhapsthegreatestheuristicvalueofthisartifactistheextremedifficultyofsecuringthecopyrightpermissiontoreprint.TheJournalforIntergroupRelationsisdifficultorimpossibletocontactbecausetheircontactinformationiseverywhereoutofdate.IemailedJerryLevinsky(thepersonreportedlyinchargeofsubmissions)butreceivednoinformationbackfromhim.IalsoleftamessageforhimatthenumberlistedonhisprofileandtriedcontactingtheEditor.ThisnumberlistedfortheEditordirectedmetoTheMassachusettsCommissiononHumanRights,whereononeoccasionIspokewithaninternwhohadneverheardoftheTheJournalforIntergroupRelations.DuringasecondattemptIspokewithasupervisorattheCommissionwhowasequallyperplexed.Sincethen,ProfessorOlsondirectedmetoMarkOrbe,thecurrenteditor.Thankfully,MarkOrberepliedtomyrequestandgrantedcopyrightpermission,buthisresponseraisedanewissue:istheeditorofajournalreallyauthorizedtogivecopyrightpermission?

Intryingtoresolvethecopyrightissue,ProfessorOlsonhadtogothroughmanyoldfilesinsearchofacopyrightagreement,aswellascontactMarkOrbehimselfaboutthejournal’spolicies.EventhoughIwasdoingmostoftheworkfortheproject,ProfessorOlsonstillhadto

putinagreatdealofeffortaswell.ThisexperienceshowsthatthesubmissionprocesstoD‐Scholarshipcanbelengthyandarduous,andsotheUniversityshouldproceedcarefullywhendecidingwhethertomakesubmissionstoD‐ScholarshipmandatoryforPittscholarswithoutalsoprovidingmuchsupport.

24

PartThree:HandlingInnovativeScholarlyArtifacts

ChapterSeven:DramaticPerformancesBritaDooghan


JohnPoulakos,TheArachnidsofRichmond(2009)[Performance](unpublished)

Keywords:Spiders,Arachnids,insects,Richmond,comedy,Aristophanes,Spiderman,play,drama,technology,nature,Greek,ancientrhetoric.

Status:SuccessfullydepositedonMarch26,2010athttp://d‐scholarship.pitt.edu/2845/

ProfessorJohnPoulakos’originalplay,TheArachnidsofRichmondisnotreadilyavailabletoalargerpublic;digitalscholarshiphasthepotentialtoprovideaccesstoit.NotonlywillmakingPoulakos’playavailablegarnerattentiontohiswork,butitwillalsogarnerattentiontotheUniversityofPittsburghandD‐Scholarship.BecausePoulakos’playhasalreadynetworkedoutsideourinstitutionalbounds,itcanonlybeassumedthatbygivingmoreaccesswilldrawmoreattentiontotheconnectionofpublicaccessandacademicworks.ThisnetworkaspecttoProfessorPoulakos’creationisanexampleofthepotentialopenlyavailablescholarshiphastoreachoutbeyondone’sowninstitutionalboundaries.Thisoneplaycreatedanetworkbetweenprofessorsandstudentsandscholarsandpublic.Evenmoreso,itdidsointer‐institutionally,bycreatingbondswithanotheruniversity.Additionalnetworkingwillfollowtheactualsubmissiononourown

departmentwebsite,newsrelease,andlinktotheD‐Scholarshipsite.Addingtheworktoapublicaccessdatabasecanonlyaddto,notdetractfrom,thetrajectoryofthenetworkingtheplayhasalreadycreated.Furthermore,theopencirculationoftheplaywilllikelydrawsupportfromotherfacultybothwithinandoutsidetheinstitutionastheyseethesuccessofhavingavaluedpieceofscholarshippromotedonanopenaccesssite.ThefollowingisanintroductiontoPoulakos’playaswellasthehighlightsoftheprocessofobtainingandsubmittingartifactstotheD‐Scholarshipdatabase.

JohnPoulakos,creatorofTheArachnidsofRichmond,anadaptationofhisTheSpidersofAcharnes,drawsonthespiritofancientcomedicplaywrightAristophanes,inparticularthecomedian’suseofinsectstotellhistales.However,whileAristophanesbuzzesonaboutAthenians’proclivitytolaw‐courts,anaddiction

25




hemakesclearthroughtheuseofwaspsinhiscomedicplay,Poulakosspinsataleabouthumans’relianceontechnology(alsoseethe.Thisrelianceblindshumanstotheresourcesthatnatureherselfcanoffer.Poulakos’humorrivalsAristophanes’ownrisquéhumorcombinedwithpoliticalcommentary,andinfactusessimilardevicesthatAristophanesuses.Itisnotsimplythematterofusinganinsectinasimilarmanner,butthecomedyunfoldswithcomparablejokesaboutthebody,humaninteraction,andawarenessofourplaceandcontributionintheworld.Inorderfullytoappreciatethenuancesandcreativeeffortsinvolvedintheproduction,andsubsequentperformance,ofTheArachnidsofRichmond,thefollowingisbackgroundofboththecreatorandthecreation.

ProfessorJohnPoulakosisanestablishedscholarofclassicalrhetoric,andasaprofessorattheUniversityofPittsburghhadtheopportunitytoteachundergraduatesthedelightsofrhetoricintheRhetoricalProcesscourse.Theculminatingassignmentforthiscoursewasaplayperformedbyeachrecitationsectionoftheclassinordertoenacttheproductiveandperformativeaspectsofrhetoric.Additionally,becausePoulakosnotonlyhasavestedinterestinteachingthedramasbutalsoincreatingthem,hisendeavorscapturedtheattentionofmanybothwithintheUniversityofPittsburghandoutsideit.Oneparticularperson,aformergraduatestudentwhoworkedwithPoulakos,namedKellyCongdonwasexcitedabouttheprospectofhavinghisstudentsperformPoulakos’playatUniversityofRichmondforacourserequirement.

Congdon’sconnectionatRichmondspurredthenetwork,orperhapsmoreappropriatelysaid,awebthatconnectsPoulakos’playtoalargercommunity.Congdonwaspiquedbecauseofhisownscholarlyinterests,butalsobecausehiscurrentinstitution:theUniversityofRichmond’smascotisnoneotherthanTheSpider.CongdonandMariLeeMifsud,assistantprofessorofRhetoricandCommunicationsat

theUniversityofRichmond,wereteachinganundergraduatecoursethatfocusedonAristotle’sRhetoricandPoetics.ThedesignofthecoursewastohavethestudentscloselyreadeachoftheworksandfollowwithplaysthatexpressedtheconceptsinAristotle’sworks.Congdon’sownexperienceasPoulakos’formerteachingassistant,sparkedtheideathattheculminatingassignmentcouldalsobeaplayperformedbythestudents.CongdoninquiredabouttransformingTheArachnidsintoanEnglishversionsothestudentswouldbeabletoperformit.

AfterobtainingPoulakos’permission,thelanguageobstaclehadtobeaddressed.Namely,PoulakoswrotetheplayintheModernGreeklanguagebecausetheoriginalwasperformedinGreece(2008).ThestudentswereanEnglishspeakinggroupwiththeintentionofperformingforanEnglishspeakingaudience.Thus,theplayrequiredatranslation.Inorderfortheplay’ssensetocomeacrossinidiomaticEnglish,PoulakossolicitedtheaidofanativeEnglishspeaker.EnterMicheleKennerly.Kennerly,adoctoralstudentattheUniversityofPittsburghandaPoulakosadvisee,alsoreceivedherMaster’sDegreeinClassics,wasapreviousteachingassistantintheRhetoricalProcesscourse,andisproficientinatticGreek.Hercapabilitieshelpedmorphtheplayintoonethatreachedalargeraudience.

TheplaydebutedinApril2009,whenPoulakostraveledtoRichmondtoassisttheperformerswithcostumesanddirection.Although,asPoulakosrelates,thestudentswereatfirstabitshy,theybroughtTheArachnidstolife.Theaudienceengagedtheplaybylaughing,cheering,andevenrecitingthechoruslines.ThroughPoulakos’creativeforce,hewasabletocombineelementsofancientwithmodern,historicalwithcontemporary,GreekwithEnglish,anduniversitywithuniversity.Thewebcontinuestogrow;now,withPoulakos’permissionwehaveaccesstotheEnglishtextofTheArachnidsofArchanes.Withadditionaleffortsthepicturesandvideooftheperformancewillfollow.This

26

accessisnotonlyavailabletousasstudentsattheUniversityofPittsburgh,butbecauseweareuniquelypositionedweareabletoofferthegreaterpublicaccesstothisoriginalcreation.

ProfessorPoulakosisaprominentmemberofthecommunicationdiscipline.Hisscholarlyeffortsarewell‐knownbutthisplayisnot.Submittingtheplayandperformancewillenablealargeraudiencetodiscoverthepossibilitiesofwhatonecandointhecommunicationfield.Second,thisplay,althoughscholarly,wasnotdoneinthepurviewoftheuniversityinstitutionorpublishedinajournaltowhichscholarspotentiallyhaveaccess.Instead,thisisanoriginalworkthatisnotcurrentlyaccessibleunlesscontactingtheauthor.However,sinceitisnotadvertisedorsearchable,onewouldnotknowtheworkexistsinthefirstplace.Third,theplayitselfisrhetoricallysavvy,andanexemplarofwhatgoodscholarlyeffortscanprovide.Itaddressescommunication,technology,humanities’positionintheworld(andmore)intheframeofacomedicplaythatreflectsAristophanes’workfrom422BC,connectinghistoricallysignificantworksandthemesbyusingcontemporaryproblems.AfinalcommentonthecontributiontouchesononethingImentionedintheintroduction:thenetworkaspecttoProfessorPoulakos’creation.Thisworkisanexampleofthepotentialscholarshiphastoreachoutbeyondone’sowninstitutionalboundaries.Thisoneplaycreatedanetworkbetweenprofessorsandstudentsandscholarsandpublic.Evenmoreso,itdidsointer‐institutionally,bycreatingbondswithanotheruniversity.Addingtheworktoapublicaccessdatabasecanonlyaddto,notdetractfrom,thetrajectoryofthenetworkingtheplayhasalreadycreated.

TherearethreeaspectstothisbriefthatyieldsheuristicvaluetotheD‐Scholarshipseminarthemes.Firstistheaspectoftime.Thatistosay,attemptingtoselect,report,andsubmitanartifactforthedatabaseinashortamountoftimeposessomechallengesthatwillbeusefulforlaterattemptsatbriefwritingand

submission.SecondrelatestotheideaoforderofpresentationswhereasIamthefirsttopresentallowsmetoraisesomebasicquestionsfordiscussionaboutD‐Scholarship.Thefinalaspectrelatestothespecificartifactitself.Iwilllookateachoftheseaspectsinturn.

Theshortturnaroundtimeposessomechallengeswhenrequiringtimetoobtaintheartifactand/orpermissionstousetheartifact.TheselectionitselfposesaproblembecauseasfarasIcouldfind,therearenolistsofUniversityofPittsburgh,particularlytheCommunicationDepartment,pastaffiliatedscholars.WedohaveanalumnipageontheCommunicationDepartmentwebsite,butitarelativelyshortlist.

Theshorttimealsoposesachallengetoactuallyobtainpermissions.Supposeweasktheauthorwhoagrees,wethenneedtomakecontactwithotherpotentialcopyrightholders,contributorstotheartifact,etc.Withouthavingclearparametersestablishedandinonecentrallocation,thefocus,inmyexperience,isdeterminingtheappropriatequestionsandwhomtoask,ratherthantheactualsubmissionoftheartifact.Thisalsooverlapsabitwiththeordinalaspectofmyexperiencewithcreatingthisbrief.

Accumulatingmoresupportfromscholarstopromotetheopenaccesssitecouldpotentiallysolvethesetypesofproblems.Furthermore,ifthereweremorepermissiontransparencyitmightbebeneficialinpromptingotherstosubmittheirwork.

Beingthefirsttopresentallowsmetoraisesomequestionsaboutbasicrulesforsubmissiontothewebsite.Forexample,afterbrowsingthroughsubmissionsalreadyincludedintheD‐Scholarshipdatabase,Inoticedthreethingsinparticular.First,thereisnotasubstantiallistofrulesandregulationsthathelpasubmitterunderstandexactlywhatruless/heshouldfollow.WhatisprovidedindicatesthatonlyaUniversityofPittsburghaffiliatedpersoncansubmit,butalsothattheauthorhimorherselfmustsubmit.

27

Thus,therulesremainambiguousandrequireustoaskclarifyingquestions.Forexample,ifonlytheauthorisintendedtosubmit,arewesupposedtoexplicitlyaskpermissionfromtheauthorforboththeuseoftheartifactandtosubmitonhisorherbehalf?ProfessorPoulakosisaUniversityofPittsburghaffiliate,sohecouldsubmittheplayonhisown,whichcouldresolvethisparticularproblem(although,notformycontributiontothewebsite!).However,thismaynotalwaysbethecaseifoneselectsartifactsfromauthorswhoarenolongerattheUniversityofPittsburghorevendeceased.Perhapsnotonlyshouldalistofrulesbemadeavailable,butalsoasectiononpermissionsrequiredinvariousinstances.Forexample,aformforcopyright,aformforpersonalauthor,aformtosubmitonbehalfofauthor,etc.

Finally,Ihadanotherobservationwhenreviewingothersubmissions.Inoticedthatthesubmissionswereaccompaniedbyabstracts,titles,andcitations.Thismademewonderhowmuchofthatisrequiredforthesubmissionofmyartifact.So,forexample,ifProfessorPoulakosdidnotprovideanabstract,butifitisrequiredaspartofthesubmission,mustImakeoneforhimoraskhimtocreateonefortheartifact?Asfortitles,doesthetitleneedtomatchtheartifacttitleordowecreateaseparatetitlefortheartifact?Andfinally,isthereastandardcitationstylerequiredbythedatabaseforeitherthecitationprovidedortheactualartifactsubmitted?

ThefinalaspectthatprovidespotentialheuristicvalueisaboutthespecificartifactIchose.Itisanoriginalwork,neverpublished,andsentdirectlyfromtheauthor.Asitstands,IhaveposteditinPDFformat,whichpreventschangesbeingmadetotheoriginal.However,youwillnotethatinitiallytherewasnorealauthoridentificationonthetext.Inthissituation,Icreatedacoverpage,headers,andidentifiers.However,itmightbebeneficialtomaketheserulesclearonthesubmissionsite.Also,Inotedabovethatmanysubmissionshavecitationsattached,butthisplaydoesnotreally

existanywherefromwhichnormalcitationsderive,soitcreatesquestionsaboutthecorrectcitationforit.Finally,ifIamabletoobtaintherecordedperformanceand/orphotographsoftheperformance,underwhichsub‐headingshouldalloftheartifactsbesubmitted,sincethereareareasforeachoftheitemsIwouldliketobeabletosubmit?

Thesubmissionofthisartifactclearlycontributestothecommunicationdiscipline,totheUniversityofPittsburgh,aswellastotheconversationsurroundingD‐Scholarship.Itisavaluablecontributioninthatitis1)aninnovativeartifactand2)itposessomechallengesabouttheD‐Scholarshipdatabasethatrequireresponseinordertomakeitamoreuser‐friendlysystem.Despitethedeadlineforthepresentation,thereisclearlymoreworktobedoneafterobtainingtheotherartifactsthatshouldbeincludedwiththeplay.Additionalareasmightalsorequirerevisitingafterreceivingfeedbackandpotentialanswersthatresultfromourseminarconversations.Bothoftheselasttwostatementsindicatethisprojectisanunfinishedwork‐in‐progress,buthasthepotentialtohelpcharttheboundariesofD‐Scholarship.

28

ChapterEight:PublicDebatesAllisonHahn


AllisonHahnandGordonMitchell,"Shouldabstinence‐onlysexeducationbetaughtinprimaryandsecondaryschoolhealthcurricula?"[videorecording]/TheWilliamPittDebatingUnionpresentsapublicdebate;speakersMargaretMeekerM.D.;DarinkaMaldonado;BrendaGreen;AllisonHahn;questionersErikaHerald;CandiceFerguson;hostGordonMitchell.[Video](Unpublished).

Keywords:Sexeducation,Sexbehavior,Sexinstruction,ParentChildRelations,Abstinence,Sexualabstinence,Teenagepregnancy,Sexualethics,Healtheducation,Sexuallytransmitteddiseases,Sexinstructionforteenagers,Debate,PublicDebate,Educationdebate,SilverRingThing.

Status:SuccessfullydepositedonDecember15,2009athttp://d‐scholarship.pitt.edu/2780/.

Thefollowingcasestudydiscussesdepositofa2003PublicDebatebytheWilliamPittDebatingUnionintoD‐Scholarship.Thisevent,previouslystoredonVHS,wasacollaborationofPittfaculty,students,andexternalexperts.TheprocessofdepositingthevideoandsupportingdocumentsfromthiseventdemonstratestheadvantagesofauniversitywidedepositorywhileilluminatingfourareasforimprovementorconcernregardingD‐Scholarship:digitalization,formatting,andcompression,andcategorization.

Theartifact,a“PublicDebateonSexEducation”isavideorecordingofapublicdebateexaminingabstinence‐onlyeducationstrategies.Theeventattemptednottosolveproblemsbutaskquestionsandpromptdiscoursethatmightleadtosolutions.D‐ScholarshipisauniquespaceforstoringPublicDebatesandotherlectures,discussions,seminarsheldattheUniversityof

Pittsburgh.Inclusionoftheseartifactshighlightsjointprojectsstudentsandfacultyandprovidesauniquedatabaseofpublicdebates,possiblytheonlysuchdatabaseintheworld.

Atthetimeofpreparation,novideos,letalonedebateshadbeendepositedontheD‐Scholarshipsite(similardepositoriessuchasHarvard’sDASHdonotevenhaveavideooption),PublicationoftheartifacthighlightsboththeWilliamPittDebatingUnion(WPDU)andthecapabilityofD‐Scholarshiptoprovidenon‐textbasedacademicdocumentstothepublic.

Presently,theonlydigitalevidenceofthis2003debateisamediaalertandflieronDr.Mitchell’shomepage.ThosewishingtoviewthedebatearerequiredtofirstfindDr.Mitchell,andthenfindtheundergraduatestowhomhehasloanedtheonlyVHScopy.Transcriptionofthedebatebegan,butwasnotcompleted,in2003.I

29




havecompletedandattachedthedebatetranscripttothisartifactsubmission.Thecompletebundleofflier,mediaalert,transcript,andvideoareofferedforsubmissiontoD‐Scholarship.

ThevideofilesforthiscasestudyweretransferredfromVHStodigitalfilesbyutilizingtheresourcesofCIDDE.Whiletheseresourcesareexpansive,theyrequirecomprehensivetrainingandreservationofoneofthreeterminals.Thedigitizationofthisfilehadpreviouslybeenassignedtoawork‐studystudentbutwasnotcompletedduetothetediousnessoftheprocess.Thislackofcompletionindicatesitwouldbeastretchtoexpectthatwork‐studystudentswillwillinglyformatandarchivevideoartifactstoD‐Scholarship.

ThedepositingprocesswaslengthenedbythelimitationsofD‐Scholarship.TimothyDeliyannides,HeadoftheUniversityofPittsburghDepartmentofInformationSystems,indicatedthatvideofilesshouldbeuploadedinMPEG,QuickTime,AVI,orFLVformats.IattemptedfirsttouploadinAVIformat,butafterseveralfailuresdeterminedthatIcouldonlyuploadQuickTimefiles.Uponthisrealizationthevideoswereuploadedwithinanhour.Theamountoftimespentincorrectlyformattingthefilesindicatesastrongneedforaconcise,step‐by‐stepguidetobepostedtotheD‐ScholarshipF.A.Q.pageregardingacceptablefileformats.

Dr.Deliyannidessuggestedsplittingthevideofileintosmallerchapterstoimprovedownloadspeedandallowpatronstodownloadonlywhatisinterestingtothem.Thefiles,storedasquicktimevideos,areavailableforstreamedviewinganddownload.ThismaximizestheutilityofdepositedvideoandaudiofilesbyallowingresearchersandeducatorstoutilizefilesinclassroomsthatdonothaveInternetconnections.

Thiscasestudywasdepositedunderthe‘video’headingonD‐Scholarship.Thelocationismisleadingbecausetheartifactisabundleoffilesincludingvideo,transcription,posters,andmediareleases.WhenselectingacategoryIwasfacedwiththedecisionbetweenvideoandtext,butno

optiontouploadbothtogether.Inseminarwediscussedthecreationofanew,“debate”headingthatwouldallowforsuchcomplexdeposits.However,suchaheadingwouldfurthercomplicatethedatabaseandperhapsleadotherstoaskfortheirownsubheadings.RatherthandebatingaboutheadingsthisbriefrecommendsfollowingtheexamplesetbyHarvard’sDASHdepositorywherealldepositsfromadepartmentarelistedonthesamepageandthepatronhastheoptiontosortbyauthor,title,format,justastheywouldinanycard‐cataloguesystem.

Thedigitizationprocessofthispublicdebatewasexceptionallylongandtedious.Hadtherenotbeenanyfalsestartsitwouldhavetakeapproximately9hourstocomplete.GiventhatthiswasmyfirstattemptatsuchaprojectIestimatethatdigitalizationalonetook30+hours.AmongthereasonsforthislengthyprocessweretheneedtobreakthefileintochaptersandanerrorinCIDDEfilecompression.

Whilefacultymaybetemptedtopassthisworkontotheirwork‐studyorgraduatestudents,itshouldberememberedthatensuringtranscriptaccuracyordeterminingchapterdivisionsforvideofilesisaindepthprocessthatrequiresbothextensiveknowledgeofthesubjectandattentiontodetail.TheattentionrequiredtoprepareartifactsfordepositonD‐Scholarshipisbeyondthatrequiredbymostworkassignments.Assuch,facultyshouldeithermodifycompensationstructurestoreflectthisextendedengagementorexpectsloppyworkbydisengagedstudents.

30

ChapterNine:VideotapedLecturesJosephSery


BrentonMalin,“ElectrifyingSpeeches:TheTechnologizingoftheVoiceintheEarly20thCenturyUS,”DepartmentofCommunicationAgoralecture,UniversityofPittsburgh,September11,2009.

Keywords:Speech,publicspeaking,technology,emotion,Pronounciphone,elocution,mediahistory,voice.

Status:Pendingduetotechnicaldifficultiesinpreparingartifactforsubmission.

InPublicIntellectuals:AStudyofDecline,RichardPosnertracesthelonghistoryofAmericanintellectualsandtheirimportantrolesthroughoutvariousstagesinourhistory.1Lamentingourpresentcondition,whichhedescribesasonewithawaninginterestinandmarketforpublicintellectuals,Posnerviewsmuchofcontemporarycultureassedatedbyintellectualmediocrity,atbest.Althoughprominentacademicfigures,suchasNoamChomsky,MarthaNussbaum,StanleyFish,and,ofcourse,Posnerhimself,makeuseful,nuancedcontributionstoournationaldiscourseonanarrayofissues,theirpresenceandimpactcontinuestofade.Theyalsorepresenttheexceptionratherthantherule,asmoreacademicscontinuetoretreatbehindtheprotectivewallsoftheIvoryTower.Someengageinlocalissuesandcontributediverseopinionsonsalientissues,butmoreoftenascitizens,notintellectuals.Sadly,thosewithexpertiseandanaptitudeforcriticalexaminationandreflection

1RichardPosner,PublicIntellectuals:AStudyof

Decline(Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,2001).

aredisinclinedtosharetheirtalentswiththegreaterpublic.Instead,theyfocusontheirresearchandteaching,bothofwhichareessentialtotheUniversity,butreachsmalleraudiences.Onlyasmallcoterieoflike‐mindedacademicsandintellectualswilllikelyreadjournalarticles,especiallywhenthelanguageisparticulartoaspecificfieldand,consequently,ofteninaccessibletoalayaudience.Ideally,teachingactsasalinktoaworldoutsideofacademia,onewhereinformerstudentsmaytaketheiracquiredknowledgeandbringittotheirprofessionalcareersandcitizenlives.Althoughwemaythinkourwordsandideasarehavingaprofoundandlong‐lastingeffectonourstudents,ourinfluencefadesovertime.

Aspessimisticasmyassessmentmayappear,onemustnotassumeacademicsareeitherhelplessoruneagertocontributetothepublicsphere;theysimplylacktheadequateopportunitiesandformatsnecessarytosharetheirwisdom.OneoftheexceptionalaspectsoftheD‐Scholarshiprepositoryisbothitsabilitytomakeavailabletraditionalscholarlywork,suchasjournalarticles,andthemultiplemediumsscholarsmayutilize,suchasaudioandvideofiles.Thelatter,inparticular,hastheabilityto

31

reconnecttheUniversitytothepublicsphereonlocal,regional,national,andinternationallevels.Givenoursocio‐culturalobsessionwithYouTubeandstreamingvideos,scholarsmaypostlectures,researchtalks,and,pendingapproval,conferencepresentationsthataremoreaccessibletoalayaudience.Non‐traditionalmeansofengagementarenecessaryinthepresentcontext,eventhoughmetricsmeasuringscholarlyengagementhavenotyetcaughtuptothechangingacademiclandscape.

ThefollowingexamplefromCommunicationProfessorBrentonMalinillustratesthepotentialuseforD‐Scholarshiptoconnectwiththegreaterpublicwithvideopresentations.Inadditiontohiscontributionhighlightingthemeritofnon‐traditionalmethodsofpublicintellectualism,Ialsoaddressthebroaderneedforandimportanceofdepartmentalspeakerseries’findingahomeonline,usingtheCommunicationDepartment’sAgoraasarepresentativeexample.

Dr.MalingaveapresentationfortheUniversityofPittsburghDepartmentofCommunicationSpeakerSeries,theAgora,onSeptember11,2009and,withafullaudienceinattendance,presented“ElectrifyingSpeeches:TheTechnologizingoftheVoiceintheEarly20thCenturyUS.”Theartifactwasselectedfortworeasons.Thefirst,andmostobvious,isbecauseofthemeritsofthepresentationitself.Dr.Malingivesacompellingandthought‐provokingAgorathataddressesimportantdisciplinaryandinterdisciplinaryissues.Thesecond,andmostidealistic,isthepublicintellectualaspirationsforD‐Scholarshipandillustratingthepotentialroleofa“DigitalAgora.”

TheAgorahaslongbeenanimportantsiteofintellectualengagementforthestudentsandfacultyoftheCommunicationDepartmentattheUniversityofPittsburgh.Theforumoffersscholarsanopportunitytopresentresearchasameanstoprepareforupcomingnationalandinternationalconferencesortorefineworkbeforesubmittingittoanacademicjournal.Unlikeotherpresentationopportunities,suchastheNationalCommunicationAssociation’syearlyconvention,theamountoftimeavailableto

speakersextendswellbeyondthetypical20minutes,thusallowingacademicsanadequateamountoftimetoelaborateuponthedepthoftheirwork.Thegenerousamountoftimealsooffersaudiencemembersachancetoexplorethespeaker’stopicwithanextensivequestionandanswerperiod.Presentersbenefitgreatlyfromsuchrigorousacademicinterplayasthewidearrayofintellectualinterestsandperspectivesleadstostronger,morenuancedideas(akintoCassSunstien’s“manyminds”argument).Dr.BrentonMalin’spresentation,“ElectrifyingSpeeches,”offersawonderfulexampleofanAgora.ByaddingittothePittD‐Scholarshiprepository,itmaysparkinterestinestablishingthe“DigitalAgora”asameanstoconnectwithotherscholarsandthegreaterpublic,whilealsoexemplifyingthestrengthoftheCommunicationDepartment.

Theartifactisimportantforseveralreasons.First,thesubjectmatteriscentraltothefieldofCommunication.Malindrawsfromandelaboratesonthepopularelocutionarymovementinpublicspeakingandfollowsthetransitiontoacontrolled,systematicoralityfoundinthe1920s.TheintellectualhistoryDr.Malinoutlinesisanimportantaspectofourfieldandexaminesasignificanttransition.

Anotherkeybenefitofthisartifactisitsinterdisciplinaryconnections.Howhaveadvancementsintechnologychangedpublicspeaking?Whathappenswhenaformalistic,scientificapproachtospeechcollideswithalonghistoryofhumanistictraits(i.e.uniqueness,contextual,etc.)?Malin’spresentationaddressescoreissuesofCommunicationwhilesimultaneouslyextendinganolivebranchtootherdisciplines,whichmakesthepresentationimportantandusefulonitsownmerit.Perhapsitsgreatestcontribution,however,isitsabilitytocultivateanatmospherewhereinAgorapresentationsare,bydefault,recordedandmadeavailableonD‐Scholarship(the“DigitalAgora”).AlthoughmyanalysisfocusesontheCommunicationDepartment’sAgora,otherdepartmentscertainlyapply.

32

OnemustnotassumetheDigitalAgoraislimitedtotraditionalpresentations.Thespeakerserieshasenjoyedawidevarietyofformatstyles,fromconventionalconference‐likeapproaches(suchasDr.Malin’s)totheatricalproductionsofAncientGreekdrama.Inrecentyears,aroundtableforumhasbeenusedtodiscussgraduatedevelopmentissues,suchasissuessurroundingthejobmarket/interviewprocessandpublishingone’sworkinacademicjournals.AlthoughthosetopicsmaynotmeritsubmissiontotheDigitalAgoraastheyarespecificallyintendedforPittstudents,theroundtableapproachmaybeworthexploringoutsideofskillsdevelopment.Forexample,thedepartment,field,andpublicspheremaybenefitfromarangeofbroadquestions:Whatisthepresentstateofrhetorical/media/communicationscholarship?Howdoscholarsenterandbecomeactiveintellectualparticipantsinthepublicsphere?Howwillourfieldbeaffectedbypublicaccessdatabases,suchasPitt’sD‐Scholarship?Thefacultyandgraduatestudentshavethoughtfulperspectivesontheseissues,butrarelyhavetheopportunitytodiscussthemoutsideofprivate,interpersonalconversationsorinclasses.Thetraditionalpresentationstyleisbynomeansuseless,unimportant,orobsolete,butbyofferingtheopportunityformorecreativemeansofexpressionthatwillreachawideaudience,theDigitalAgorawillencourageactivethoughtandreflectiononthefirstcannonofrhetoric:invention.

Inaddition,byallowingpublicaccess,thesepresentationsarealsoawayinwhichwe,asacademics,canreachabroaderspectrumofindividualswithourwork.Thelayaudiencemaybelessinclinedtoread25pagejournalarticles,letalonebook‐lengthprojects,whichrarelycatertothoseoutsideofacademiaeveniftheyaremadeavailablefreeofcharge.If,however,engagingpresentationsareavailable,whichmaybedownloadedorstreamed,thelikelihoodthatanon‐academicaudiencewillfind,utilize,andhopefullybenefitfromaresearchprojectincreasesdramatically.OneneedonlylooktoTEDTalkstoseehowsolidpresentationsskillsandaccessiblelanguagecultivateagreaterlikelihood

thatthepublicwilltakeaninterestinacademicissues.TheDigitalAgoramaycontributetoandfostermorepublicintellectualism.Thegoalofresearchandpublicationisnotjusttheexpressionofideas,butdisseminatingone’sideassuchthattheyhavethegreatestimpact.

Finally,andperhapsmostimportantlyfortheDepartmentofCommunication,focusingmoreattentionandresourcesontheAgorahelpstomaintainandstrengthenitsintradepartmentalroleofcultivatingadeepsenseofacademiccamaraderie.Oneofourdepartment’smostadmirabletraits,theconvivialspiritwithwhichourdepartmentmembersengageoneanotherisalmostpalpable.AlthoughpresentbeyondtheAgora,thespeakerseriesoffersaritualthatbringsourdepartmentmemberstogethersuchthatwearenotsimplyanaggregateofacademics.Weare,toputitsimply,acommunity.DigitizingfutureAgorapresentationsconveysthissenseofcommunitytoallthosewhowatchand,asapracticaladvantage,illustratesnotonlyourexceptionalscholarlypresence,butalsooursuperbacademicculturetopotentialgraduatestudentsandotherscholars.Granted,Iofferonlyonepresentation,Dr.Malin’s,tobesubmittedtotheD‐Scholarshipdatabase,myintentionistocarryonthetraditionofrecordingandmakingavailablefutureAgorapresentations,nottomentionpresentationsfromotherdepartments.

AlthoughvideocontributionshavealreadybeenmadetotheD‐Scholarshiprepository,thisartifactraisessimilarproblemsandconcernswhilealsocreatingsomenewones.

Thechallengeoffilesizehasbeenexpressedconcerningothervideosubmissionsandremainsimportant(ifunresolved).Asthequalityofthevideoisincreasinglyreduced,atwhatpointdoesthevideobecomemoreuseful(orlessdistracting)asanaudiofile?Inaddition,shouldtherebeasetformattingstyleforvideos?Wehavehadtwoothervideocontributions,butnocommunicationbetweenthesubmittersregardingastandardizedapproach(forexample:filetype,lowest/highestqualityaccepted,titles,etc.).IfrecordingtheAgorasbecomesaregular

33

occurrence,shouldtherebeastandardforallpresentations?

Again,reflectingapreviousdiscussion,oughtweattainpermissionfromaudiencememberswhoaskquestions?Oughtweaskforaudiencepermissionbeforethepresentationbegins?Isthisthebestmethod?Isitevennecessarytoseekpermission,especiallyiftheindividualsremainunnamed?

GiventheAgorainvitesspeakersfromotherinstitutionstopresenttheirwork,thepresentPitt‐affiliatedstipulationbecomesproblematized.Bypresentingone’sworkataUniversitysponsoredevent,doesthatmakethepresenter“Pitt‐affiliated?”Ifso,howwilltheybecategorized(e.g.undertheirname?underDigitalAgora?)?Ifnot,arewethenlimitedtoonlyPittstudentsandfaculty?

Moreimportantly,thegreaterproblemofaccesstodistributionmayaffectfutureAgorapresenters.Prestigiousprofessorsfromotheruniversitieswillprobablynotstruggletofindanacademicoutlet;yet,whatifoneofourfutureAgora’swasnotgivenbyanacademic,butratherasocialactivist.Althoughs/hemaybeabletoblogtohis/herheart’scontent,theaddedethosgainedfromassociationwithahighlyregardedintellectualinstituteviaD‐Scholarshipcannotbeeasilyattained(ifattainedatall)whensheisnotastudentorfacultymember.Thepresentationitselfhasalimitedaudience,manyofwhomhaveavestedinterestinthetopic,thusonline,publicaccesspublicationcouldincreasethespeaker’sacademicethosandthemessagecouldreachawideraudience.

Onequestionhidingbehindalloftheartifactswasraised,albeitindirectly,whenDavidBradynotesofsociology,“publicsociologyissimplytheacknowledgementthatsociologymustultimatelyseektoimprovethelivesofpeople.”2Doesourfield(and,moregenerally,ourUniversity)shareasimilartelos?Ifwe,likeHerbertGansandMichaelBurawoy,assumescholarshavean

2DavidBrady,"WhyPublicSociologyMayFail,"

SocialForces,82(2004):1‐11.

obligationtothepublic,thenpostingrecordedlecturesandpresentationsoffersasimplewayofmakingmaterialavailable.Thevideomaterialisalsomoreinvitingtothoseunableorunwillingtoreadourbooksandjournals.

TheinclusionofthisartifactactsnotonlytopromotetheworkofDr.Malin,butalsostressestheimportanceoftheAgoraasasiteofscholarlyengagementandillustratestheintellectualacumenandintegrityofthedepartment.Wealmostassumethatourideasarenevergoingtoreachbeyondthefewpeopleattendingapresentation,butbymakingtheDigitalAgorawehavetheopportunitytoreachamuchbroaderaudience,perhapseventhoseoutsideofacademia.True,myhopethatDr.Malin’spresentationactsasacatalystingainingthespeakerseriesandCommunicationDepartmentmoreattentionandprestige(anduniversityfunding!)maybeabitfar‐reaching.Surelyweareno“TEDTalks,”butthatdoesn’tmeanwecan’tdomoretopromotethedepartment,ourgraduatestudentsandfaculty,andtheAgora.

34

ChapterTen:OralHistoryInterviewsCandiCarter‐Olson

ArtifactsNominatedforD‐ScholarshipSubmission

CarterOlson,CandiandDuncan,Brittany(2009).Pittsburgh'sFlairforProtestII:AnOralHistoryInterviewwithG20ResearchandActivistandUniversityofPittsburghSociologyStudentBrittanyDuncan.[Audio](Unpublished).

CarterOlson,CandiandQuinsaat,Sharon(2009).Pittsburgh'sFlairforProtest:AnOralHistoryInterviewwithInternationalActivistandUniversityofPittsburghSociologyPh.D.StudentSharonQuinsaat.[Audio](Unpublished).

Keywords:G20,Pittsburgh,UniversityofPittsburgh,anarchists,socialists,citizen‐scholar,publicprotest,riots,globaljustice,economicinjustice,economicactivism,socialactivism,policestate,riotcontrol,riotpolice,communityoutreach,communityscholarship,globalpolitics,publicscholarship,intellectualentrepreneurship,publicintellectual,oralhistory,interview,publicsociologies,publicintellectuals.

Status:SuccessfullydepositedonDecember15,2009athttp://d‐scholarship.pitt.edu/2782/andhttp://d‐scholarship.pitt.edu/278.

Ireallywantedtochallengetheideaof“scholarship”withmysecondD‐Scholarshipsubmittal.Asaformerjournalistandanacademicwholikestobasealotofmyresearchonprimarysources,includinginterviews,Idecidedtoplaytomystrengthsanddoaseriesoforalhistories.TheG20summitcreatedaperfectopportunity,particularlysincemanyofthewomenfrommyGenderedSocialMovementscourseandwomenthatIknowfromtheEnglishDepartmentparticipatedintheprotestsbothasprotestorsandasacademics.Ithoughtthiswouldmakeaninterestingintersectionforpeoplestudyingcitizen‐scholarcredibilityandmotivation.

Ichoseoralhistoriesratherthansomeotherkindofoffbeatscholarshipbecausethereisadebateoverwhetheranoralhistoryinandofitselfcanstandasaformofscholarshipwithnowritteninterpretationfromtheinterviewer.Oralhistoryhasbeenembracedbythefeministcommunityasawaytorecoverandhighlighttheforgottenandoverlookedvoicesofhistory.Thesevoicesincludewomen,ethnicminorities,racialminorities,thesocioeconomicunderclass,andotherdisadvantagedgroups.Theinterviewergenerallygatherstheinterviewsandtheninterpretstheminatheoreticalpaper.However,therehavebeenseveralprojectsthatsimplygathertheinterviewsandthendepositthemin

35




http://d%E2%80%90scholarship.pitt.edu/278

oneplacetostandasdocumentsbythemselves.SomeoftheseprojectsincludeNPR’sStoryCorpsandtheUnitedStatesGovernment’srecordingsofslavenarratives.

Iwouldarguethatanoralhistorycanstandbyitselfasapieceofacademicworkbecausetheinterviewingprocessisaprocessofinterpretationandtheprocessoflisteningtothatinterviewisapowerfulwaytounderstandhistory.Addingthewritteninterlocutormayobscurethehistoricalvoice.AstheStoryCorpssitesaysinits“AboutUs”section:

Byhelpingpeopletoconnect,andtotalkaboutthequestionsthatmatter,theStoryCorpsexperienceispowerfulandsometimesevenlife‐changing.Ourgoalistomakethatexperienceaccessibletoall,andfindnewwaystoinspirepeopletorecordandpreservethestoriesofsomeoneimportanttothem.Everybody’sstorymattersandeverylifecounts.Justaspowerfulistheexperienceoflistening.Wheneverpeoplelistentothesestories,theyhearthecourage,thehumor,thetrialsandtriumphsofanincrediblerangeofvoices.1

Becauseeverybody’sstorymattersandeverylifecounts,Ibelievethattherecordedinterpretationstandsasanimportanthistoricaldocumentinandofitself.Thisformofacademicworkforcestheinterviewertobeconsciousofhowheorshedesignsthequestionsheorsheuses,anditalsomakestheinterviewerapartofthehistoricalinterpretationprocessbecauseheorsheisdecidingwhatquestionstoaskandwhichonestofollow.Thestoryistoldbythenarrator,butstructuredbytheinterviewer.Inthisway,itisaformofscholarship.AsShernaBergerGluckargues,oralhistory“isthecreationofanewtypeofmaterialonwomen;itisthevalidationofwomen’sexperiences;itisthecommunicationamongwomenofdifferentgenerations;itisthediscoveryofourownrootsandthedevelopmentofacontinuitythathas

1StoryCorps,AboutUs,[cited2November2009],

availablefromhttp://www.storycorps.org/about.

beendeniedusintraditionalhistoricalaccounts.”2ThestorytellingtraditionofdocumentingeventsandideaswasbroughtfromAfricaandcontinuestodayasanimportantwayforpeopletocommunicatetheirlives,experiencesandinterpretationsofevents.It’saformofacademicworkthatcanstandonitsown,notjustasresearch,butasadocumentconstructedbytheacademicandhisorhernarrator.Oralhistoryisthedemocratizationofscholarship,justlikepublicaccessisthedemocratizationofscholarship.

Thisartifactwasakindof“HailMary”passtoseewhatexactlyconstitutesresearchand/oracademicworkthat’sappropriatefortheD‐Scholarshipdatabase.TheD‐Scholarshipsitestates:“Examplesofitemsthatthisrepositorycanaccommodateinclude:

•Researchpapers,publishedorunpublished

•Conferencepapersandpresentations•Supportingmultimedia(audio,video,

images,etc.)•Researchdata•ElectronicThesesandDissertations”Theoralhistoryinterviews’primarypurpose

wastodocumentthesewomen’sexperienceforPitt’shistoricalmemoryandtoprovideachallengefortheD‐Scholarshipdatabase.Ihavenointentionofwritinganinterpretivepaperbasedontheseinterviewsbecause,asexplainedbelow,Idobelievethattheycouldbeconsideredacademicartifactsbythemselves.Eveniftheyarenotconsideredcompletedacademicwork,theycouldbeconsidered“researchdata”or“rawdata.”

Isubmittedthisartifactlateinthetermbecauseittooksometimetothinkthroughhowtomaketheseinterviewsusableforotherpeople,andthisincludedmakingatimeindexforpeoplewhomightwishtolistentospecificsectionsof

2ShernaBergerGluck,“What’sSoSpecialaboutWomen?Women’sOralHistory,”inWomen’sOralHistory,editedbySusanH.Armitage,PatriciaHartandKarenWeathermon(Lincoln,NE:UniversityofNebraskaPress,2002).

36

http://www.storycorps.org/about

theseinterviewswithoutlisteningtotheentireinterview.Otheroralhistoryarchiveshavepostedeithertranscriptsorinterpretivewritingsoftheinterviews,soIhadnoguidesforcreatingthistableofcontents.Icouldhavecreatedatranscriptforthisartifact,butthetimeconstraintsofthistermwouldhavemeantthatIwouldnothavebeenabletosubmitanyoftheseinterviews.EvenwithaslateasIsubmittedtheseinterviews,Istillonlymanagedtocreateatableofcontentsfortwooftheinterviewsintimetogetthemsubmittedintimefortheendoftheterm.

IhadassumedthatsinceIhadsubmittedtheseaudiofileslateinthetermandtheformatmayhaveseemedchallengingtotheD‐Scholarshipdatabasethattheseinterviewswouldnotbepostedintimeforthisreflection.However,theadministratorsreviewedthesubmissioninformationonDec.15andpostedthefilesthesameday.Iwassurprisedathoweasilythesefileswerepostedbecausetheyaresuchunusualformsofscholarlyworkandpeoplemightfindtheparticularknowledgecontainedthereinsuspectornotacademicenough.InaDec.15responsetoane‐mailfromme,TimothyDeliyannidesnoted,“Theactualreviewtimeisverybrief,usuallyrequiringonlyafewminutes.Wedonotreviewcontentatall.Wearebasicallylookingtoseethatthedescriptivemetadataenteredbytheauthororproxyiscompleteandaccurate.Wealsocheckthateachfilecanbeopenedandreadorviewedasintended.”Inotherwords,contentisnotaprimaryconcernoftheD‐Scholarshipadministrators.Thisissomethingthattheadministratorsmaywanttoconsiderasthedatabasemovesforward.BecauseD‐ScholarshiprepresentsthecollectedscholarshipandknowledgeoftheUniversityofPittsburgh,it’sonewaythatpeoplemayjudgetheeffectivenessofoureducationandcontributiontoknowledge.Ifactualcontentisnotreviewed,peoplecouldpostobjectsthatarenotjustcontroversialformsofscholarship.Theycouldbedownrightbadorjustwrittenandpostedasajoke.

IntermsofwhetherornotD‐Scholarshipisanappropriateforumforrawdataoralternative

formsofscholarship,suchasoralhistoryinterviews,IthinkthatD‐Scholarshipmightofferauniqueopportunityforscholarstoprovideinformationtothepublicwithouttheacademicgazeinterpretingit.However,becauseD‐Scholarshipisreallydesignedforfinishedworksorworksthathavebeenpresentedatconferences,Iamnotsurethatit’sthebestplaceforworksthatdonotobviouslyincludeacademicinterpretation.IfD‐Scholarshipweretoincluderesearchdataoralternativeformsofacademicwork,itsadministratorsmaywanttoconsidercreatingseparatesectionsfortheseformsofworkthatwouldclearlylabelthemasworkthatisnottobereadlikestandardacademicwork.Whenapersonisreadingworkthatislabeled“academic,”whichtheD‐ScholarshipdatabasewillgivetoallofitscontentbecauseitisaffiliatedwiththeUniversityofPittsburgh,heorsheexpectsacertainkindofwork.Includinginformationthatdoesn’tfitthatguiseisimportanttotheD‐Scholarshipdatabase,Ithink,becauseitshowsthediversityanddepthoftheUniversity’swork.However,givingalternativeworkitsownsectionwillhelpreaderstointerpretandusetheinformationinamanageableway.

EachofthepeoplewhosubmittedanoralhistoryforthisprojecthassignedaDeedofGiftgivingalloftheircopyrighttome.Iwillkeepthesesignaturesforfuturereferenceifadisputeshouldarise.Becausethesenarratorshavesignedallcopyrighttome,IshouldnotneedtosubmitaproxyformtotheD‐Scholarshipadministrators.

D‐Scholarshiphasnoaudiofilesyet,sothiswilladdtothediversityofcontentonD‐Scholarship.Inaddition,itwilladddepthtotheUniversity’sownscholarshiponitsownhistory,whichIthinkcouldbeanimportantbenefittoD‐Scholarship.EventhoughthescholarshiponD‐Scholarshiphasvaluetoawideraudience,it’salsoagoodopportunitytoexpandthewaysthattheuniversitycommunityseesitselfandtheworkbeingdonewithinthecommunity.ParticularlysincetheseinterviewswerealldonewithgraduatestudentswhowereinterestedintheG20summitasscholarsandasactivists,thesehelptoadddepthandvarietytothewaypeople

37

seetheUniversityofPittsburgh’sscholarlyactivities.

TheCommunicationDepartmentattheUniversityofPittsburghdoesawidevarietyofscholarship,andoralhistoryisoneofthetypesofresearchthatstretchesacrossmanypeoples’work,fromChristineFeldman’sdissertationontheMod’stotheZboray’sworkonwomenreadingandwriting(although,granted,theirworkismorebasedonarchivedlettersanddiaries).Bysimplysubmittingasetoforalhistoriesanddefiningitastheinterpretiveactratherthantheprimarysourceforapaper,IwillgivingtheCommunicationDepartmentadifferentwaytoseetheirownworkasresearchersandtherolesthattheyallownarratorstoplayintheconstructionoftheinterpretivedocument.

Also,likeJoeSery’ssubmittalofJohnRief’spaper,thisisanexampleofgraduatestudentwork.It’sbyaCommunicationgraduatestudentaboutothergraduatestudentsfromacrosstheuniversity.However,thisisradicallydifferentthatthetraditionalkindofscholarshipthatgraduatestudentsareencouragedtoperform,whichincludeswritingseminarpapersthatappealtoaverysmallaudience,presentingthematconferencesforthatsmallaudience,andthenpublishingtheminacademicjournalswithanevensmalleraudience.TheoralhistoriesthatI’verecordedhavebeendesignedtorespondtobothacademicconcernsandnon‐academicconcerns.Theseoralhistoriescanstartaconversationontheroleofacademicsbothwithintheacademyandoutsideofitbecausethescholarshipisdesignedtospeaktobothaudiences.

Mostobviously,thisparticularartifactchallengesthenotionthatscholarshipmustbeinterpretedthroughaseriesofgatekeepersandtheorybeforeitcanbeconsidered“academic.”

AmIsubmittingacademicworkoramIsubmittingrawdata?IftheD‐Scholarshipteamconsidersthisrawdata,willitacceptitorwillitremandthistotheoralhistorycollectionsthataregatheredelsewhereonthelibrarywebsite?Sinceitwasposted,obviouslytheadministratorsseemsomeacademicvalueinoralhistoryinterviews.Dotheyseethisarticleasacademicorrawdata?Becausethesewerepostedsoclosetodeadline,Ihavenotbeenabletofollowupwiththeadministratorsandgettheirreflectionsonthisissue.

IhadwishedtoseewhethertheD‐Scholarshipdatabasecouldhouseseveralaudiofilesinonesubmission;however,afterspeakingwithmyfellowgraduatestudentsandDr.Mitchell,Idecidedtosplittheseinterviewsintoseparatesubmissionstomakethemeasiertodocumentandsearch.

Tomaketheseoralhistoriesbothacademicobjectsandobjectsopenforresearchandexternalinterpretation,IhadwantedtoincludeaseriesoflinkstoseveraldifferentnewsarticlesandvideosabouttheG20protestsinPittsburghandtheirinfluenceonthePittcommunityinparticular.Thusfar,IhavenotseenawaytodothisonD‐scholarship.Afterpostingmysubmissions,IdiscoveredthattheD‐Scholarshipdatabaseonlyallowslinkstositesthatarerelevanttotheauthor,thepublisher,orthepublication,whichseverelylimitsthekindofcross‐referencedinformationthatsubmitterscanmakeavailabletousers.D‐Scholarshipprovidesauniqueopportunityforauniversitytoprovideacomprehensivedatabasethatwillallowpeopletocross‐referenceresearchandfindoutmoreaboutatopicbeyondwhatisreadilyavailableintheprimaryartifact.Bylimitingthetypesoflinksthatareavailable,theadministratorsarelimitingthesite’sutilityandusability.

38

ChapterEleven:DocumentariesAlexandraSeitz


DavidW.Seitz,AlexandraKlarenSeitz,ChrisCampbell,ErikChurchillandBurkeOlsen(2009).Montserrat:EmeraldoftheCaribbean.[Video](Unpublished).

Keywords:Montserrat,masquerade,visualethnography,Irishslavetrade,AfricanDiaspora,communityradio,documentaryfilm,WestIndies,nationhood,ZJBRadio,Irishmusic,transatlanticslavetrade,SaintPatrick'sDay,shamanisticdance,slaverebellion,ritualstudies,Caribbean,Caribbeanculture,Caribbeanhistory,permaculture,Britishexpatriates,SufriereHillsVolcano,kiteflying,DavidW.Seitz,AlexandraK.Seitz,AlexandraKlaren,ChrisCampbell,ErikChurchill,BurkeOlsen

Status:SuccessfullydepositedonMarch22,2010athttp://d‐scholarship.pitt.edu/2769/

ThefollowingcasestudydetailsasubmissiontotheUniversityofPittsburgh’sD‐Scholarshiprepository.TheartifactunderconsiderationisdocumentaryfilmcreatedbytwoUniversityofPittsburghgraduatestudentsinJanuaryof2009.Thesubmitter,AlexandraK.Seitz,isoneoftheprimarycreatorsofthepiece.AlthoughthesubmissionattemptgeneratedaplethoraofbeneficialknowledgeforD‐Scholarshipusersandadministrators,twoprimaryissuesstoodoutaspotentialcomplicationsfortherepository.First,thepossibilitiesforformattinganduploadinglengthyvideopiecestothewebsitearestarklylimited—videofilesmustbeofaminimalmegabytesize,requiringlongerpiecessuchastheproposeddocumentarytobebrokenupintoseparateQuickTimefiles.Second,theoptionsprovidedtothesubmitterinregardstolicensingareminimalandinadequate—onlyoneoutofatleastsixpossiblelicensingoptionsthroughCreativeCommonsispresentedtosubmittersof

non‐softwarecontent.TheseissuesaremostsalienttothefutureoftheD‐ScholarshiprepositoryinthattheydetailrestrictionsandlimitationsthatthreatentodeterPittfacultyandstudentcreatorsofhighqualityworksfromsubmittingtheirpiecestotherepository.Thefollowingcasestudyfurtherdetailstheseissues,theirmeaningforD‐Scholarshipanditspotentialsubmitters,andtheirrelevancetothefutureofdigitalscholarshipattheUniversityofPittsburgh.

Duringthespringof2005,fourAmericanstudentfilmmakerstraveledtotheislandofMontserratwiththehopeofcapturinguniquefootageoftheisland’sweeklongSaintPatrick’sDaycelebrationthattheycouldlatereditintoacompellingfilmnarrativeaboutarelativelyunknownislandanditspeople.Theproject,directedandproducedbycurrentUniversityofPittsburghCommunicationgraduatestudent,DavidW.Seitz,andco‐producedbyUniversityofPittsburghReligiousStudiesgraduatestudent,

39




AlexandraK.Seitz,culminatedinaone‐hourdocumentaryfilmthatoffersanethnographicportraitoftheisland,itspeople,historyandtraditionsduringMarch2005.

Inthelate1990s,massivevolcaniceruptionsdestroyedMontserrat’sinfrastructureandleveledtheisland’scapital,Plymouth.Today,Montserrat’s4,000citizensarestillcomingtotermswiththistraumaticevent.Montserrat:EmeraldoftheCaribbeanexploreshowsharedvalues—community,hope,faith—andtraditionsserveassourcesofstrengthandidentityforMontserratiansastheyrebuildtheirlivestogether.ThefilmculminatesinaportrayalofthesightsandsoundsofMontserrat’sannualSt.Patrick’sDayFestival,acommemorationofAfricanslaveswhorebelledagainsttheirIrishslavemastersonSaintPatrick’sDay,1768.AuniqueblendofAfrican,Caribbean,andIrishtraditions,theSaintPatrick’sDayFestivalrepresentsthepast,present,andfutureofaresilientpeople.

InrecordingtheeventsofMontserrat’sSaintPatrick’sDaycelebrationsandofferingaspaceforMontserratianstospeaktooutsidersaboutitsmeaning,thefilmfunctions,inaway,asaninterventionintothecommunicationsubfieldsofrhetoric,mediastudies,andculture.Intermsofrhetoric,thefilmexploresvariouslocalforumsandstylesofpublicaddress—poemrecitations,calypsoperformancecontestsandradiopublicserviceannouncements—toelucidatehowMontserratiansconstructarguments,maintaincollectivememories,andmotivateeachothertowaysofthinkingandactionastheystruggletorebuildanationseverelyuprootedbyvolcaniceruptions.Asa“mediastudy,”thefilmoffersanintimateportrayalofZJBRadio,theisland’sonlylocalmediaoutlet.FollowingprominentradiopersonalitiesRoseWillockandBasilChambers,thefilmshowshowZJBRadiofulfillsmanyrolesontheisland(muchlikeearlyradiointheUS):towncrier,publicforumfordebate,repositoryforlocalnewsandcommunityconcerns.Furthermore,thefilmexamineswhatonemightconsidertobenon‐traditionalformsofmediasuchasintricatelydesignedkites,cross‐cultural

“masquerade”dressandshowshowsuchnon‐traditionalmediaconveyspecificmessagestocommunitymembers.

D‐Scholarshipseemstohaverisenabovethecurveinchoosingtoincludeavideosubmissionoptionwithinitsrepository.Harvard’sDASHrepository,forexample,doesnotcontainavideooption.ThefactthatPitt’sD‐Scholarshiprepositorycontainsavideooptionshouldbehighlycommended,asvideopiecescontributetoamoredynamicanddiverselandscapeofscholarlysubmissions.Thisbeingsaid,thefollowingdescriptionandanalysisofthetechnologicalprocessesforbothuploadingandviewingavideosubmissionwilldemonstratethatD‐Scholarshipstillneedstoupdateitsvideosubmissionoptionsforboththesubmitterandtheuser.

Asmentionedintheintroduction,largevideoclips(suchasa60minutedocumentary)mustbesplicedintosmallfilesinordertobeplacedontoD‐Scholarship.Inthecaseoftheproposeddocumentarysubmission,thismeansthattheviewermustfirsthavetheQuickTimeapplicationonhisorhercomputerandseconddownloadallthe(sizable)filestohisorhercomputer.Themainissue,however,thatarisesfromthismandatorysplicingofclipsisthatitresultsinthefragmentationofwhatshouldbeacontinuousviewingofthefilmasawhole.Althoughthisproblemdoesnotseemthatdrastic,thefactthatotherwebsitesallowforsuchaproductiontobeuploadedandstreamedinitsentirety,createsanexigencyforD‐Scholarshipmanagerstoaddressiftheywishtobecompetitivewithsuchsites.

ThebestsolutiontothisproblemmaybetoallowvideotobestreameddirectlyontheD‐Scholarshipwebsite.Ifthisisnotanoption,allowingthesubmittertopresenttheartifactonD‐Scholarshipwiththeappropriatedescription,abstract,promotionalmaterials,ANDalinktothewebsitewhereitcanbestreamedinitsentiretymaybeanotheroptimalalternative.

TheproposedsubmissionofthisartifactbroughttolighttheissueofCreativeCommonsLicensingtotheD‐Scholarshiprepository.WhenattemptingtouploadtheMpegfilesofthe

40

documentaryvideotoD‐Scholarship,Iwasinstructedtochoosealicensingoptionforeachclip.Thewebsitepresentedfouroptionsforlicensingselectionincluding“Unspecified,”“CreativeCommonsAttributionNonCommercialNonDerivatives,”“CreativeCommonsGNUGPL(forsoftwareonly),”and“CreativeCommonsGNULGPL(forsoftwareonly).”AfterreviewingtheCreativeCommonswebsiteandeducatingmyselfontheirvariouslicensingconditions,Iconcluded,inconjunctionwithexecutivedirectorofthefilm,DavidW.Seitz,thatthebestcopyrightoptionforthevideowithinCCis“Attribution,NonCommercial,ShareAlike.”Thisoptionallowsothersto:

Remix,tweak,andbuildupon(the)worknon‐commercially,aslongastheycredit(theoriginalauthor)andlicensetheirnewcreationsundertheidenticalterms.Otherscandownloadandredistribute(the)work…(and)theycanalsotranslate,makeremixes,andproducenewstoriesbasedon(the)work.Allnewworkbasedon(theoriginalwork)willcarrythesamelicense,soanyderivativeswillalsobenon‐commercialinnature.

Remixing,tweakingandbuildinguponothers'workareactionsthatmanyscholarsandartistshaveengagedin,particularlysincetheemergenceofbothwebvideosandmusicremixingtechnologies.Inadigitalenvironmentinwhichthesetypesofactionsarepracticedinabundanceandinwhichdigitalaudiencesexpectsuchpermissionallowances,wedonotseetheneedtorestrictsuchusageofourwork.Further,sinceourdocumentarycontainsmyriadaudioandvisualpossibilitiesforremixingandreconstruction,andsinceoneofourmaingoalsforthefilmistoinspirefurtherinterestintheislandnationofMontserrat,weseethe“Attribution,NonCommercial,ShareAlike”optionatCCasacompellingpossibilityforthelicensingofoursoon‐to‐bepublically‐availablework.Finally,itseemsclearthatthearrayoflicensingoptionspresentedbyCreative

Commonspresentsapositive,reasonable,anduniquewayofincreasingthecreativepossibilitieswithinthescholarlyandartistic“commons,”anadvancementthatclearlycoalesceswiththebroaderargumentsmadebyproponentsoftheopenaccessmovement.

ItisthusunfortunatethattheD‐ScholarshipsystemhasnotallowedfortheparticularCClicensingoption,"Attribution,NonCommercial,ShareAlike,"toappearasapossibleselectionforUniversityofPittsburghD‐Scholarshipsubmitters.Additionally,therearefourmorelicensingoptionsontheCreativeCommonswebsitethatshouldbemadeavailableasoptionsonD‐Scholarship.Theyare:"Attribution,""Attribution,ShareAlike,""AttributionNoDerivatives,"and"AttributionNonCommercial."AstheD‐Scholarshipwebsitestandsnow,onlythemostextremeoptionthatlargelyfavorscopyrightrestriction,"Attribution,NonCommercial,NoDerivative"isprovidedasanoptionforD‐Scholarshipsubmitters.WethereforesuggestthattheotherlicensingoptionsontheCreativeCommonswebsitebeaddedtotheD‐Scholarshiplicensingselectionoption.

DavidW.SeitzisanaccomplishedseniorgraduatestudentintheCommunicationDepartmentatPitt.HeiscurrentlywritinghisdissertationontheestablishmentandinternationalreceptionofAmericanWorldWarIoverseascemeteriesandhaswonanumberofprestigiousfellowshipsduringhistenureatPitt.AlexandraK.SeitzisalsoanaccomplishedUniversityofPittsburghgraduatestudent.ShecompletedherMaster'sinReligiousStudiesatPittinAugustof2009andiscurrentlyinherfirstyearofPhDcoursework.Withthisinmind,thepublicationofthefilmontheD‐ScholarshipwebsitewouldserveasavaluablepromotionalpieceforboththePittCommunicationDepartmentandPitt'sDepartmentofReligiousStudiesindemonstratingtheachievementsoftheirgraduatestudents.

InadditiontotheCommunicationcomponentsofthefilmdetailedinthefilmdescriptionabove,onecouldseethefilmasastudyofcommunicationasculture(asforwarded

41

byJamesW.Carey).Depictingimpromptumusicalperformances,annualteaparties,dancepartiesatthe"OldPeoples'Home,"andillegalfishingtripsinthe"ExclusionZone"(again,Icanexplainifyoulike!),thefilmrevealshowknowledge,relationships,andmemoriesarecreatedandpreservedbymultipleforums(bothofficialandunofficial)oftransactionalritualisticcommunication.

Inregardtoourseminar'sinvestigationofrhetoricalproduction,theinclusionofthisfilmallowsustolookattwoparticularaspectsoffilmmakinganditsrelationtothedisciplineofcommunicationstudies.First,inlightofourclass'sfocusonthechangingmodelforpublishingknowledge,themakingofthisfilmanditssubmissiontotheD‐Scholarshiprepositorysuggeststhatmorecommunicationscholarsshouldengagedifferentmediatechnologiesasproducersatthecreativelevel.Becauseofthetechnologicalrevolutionoccurringinourlifetime,theabilitytoproducehighqualityvideohasbeendemocratized.Furthermore,intermsofmakingknowledge,creativeprojectsoutsideofthescholarlypublicationrealmareoftenlimitedorlostamongstmembersofacademia.Now,morethanever,weshouldencourageacademicstoengageinsuchprojectsbecauseofthisdemocratizationofproductiontechnologiesandmethods.AsKembrewMcLeodhasshownus,academicscanuseartisticandcreativeformstomakepersuasiveintellectualargumentsandpointtosignificantcontemporaryphenomenaworthyofstudy.

Finally,Ithinkthatcommunicationscholarswhowriteabout,thinkabout,andcriticizenewmediatechnologiesandtheireffectsonindividuals,academia,andsocietyatlarge,couldbenefitfrominteractingwiththosemediatechnologiesasproducers(ratherthansolelyasreceiversand/or"objective"critics).Thatistosay,bybecomingproducersofmedia(viatheblogosphere,film,radio,etc.),scholarswouldacquireawiderandsharperperspectiveoftheirobjectsofstudy.Additionally,theymightnoticenewpotentialpathsforproductivecommunity‐

andknowledge‐buildingthatwouldotherwiseremainhidden.

Thisvideopieceisofadifferentgenre(documentaryfilm)thanmyclassmates'proposedvideosubmissionsandthuswillbethefirstofitskindonD‐Scholarship.Thefilmalsotranscendsthescholarlyrealmbothintermsofitsmediumandcontentandthusmaybeofinteresttoarangeofpublicsandindividuals,fromdocumentaryfilmmakers,anthropologists,andCatholics,toMontserratians,membersoftheAfricanDiaspora,andcommunicationstudents.

Itcouldbearguedthatsomedocumentaryfilmsarenotnecessarilyacademic.ThusthesubmissionofadocumentaryfilmontoD‐Scholarshipmeritsaclosereviewtodeterminewhetheritfitsthecriteriaofascholarlypiece.BecauseofMontserrat'sfirmvisualethnographicfoundationandgeneraleducationalaims,IcontendthatitsinclusionintherepositoryisbothvalidandenrichingtotheD‐Scholarshipcatalogue.

Asnotedabove,thecontentofthefilmisunquestionablyinterdisciplinaryandthuscontainstheabilitytobeofinteresttoavarietyofscholarsandstudentsinotheracademicfieldsbesidescommunication.Thefilm'sinvestigationofcommunityradio,ritual,theAfricanDiaspora,permaculture,islandcommunities,Caribbeanhistory,andcatastrophenarrativeexemplifythispoint.Additionally,myinvolvementinthefilmasaco‐producerandmycurrentstatusasaPittgraduatestudentinReligiousStudiesfurtherstheinterdisciplinarycomponentoftheartifact.

ThisparticularfilmhasbeenshownonlyonceinapublicsettingintheUnitedStates.ThisviewingtookplaceatTheJohnsHopkinsUniversityFilmFestivalonSunday,April19,2009.CopiesofthefilmweredonatedtospecificleadersoftheMontserratiancommunitybytheheadfilmmaker,DavidSeitz,andhavesubsequentlybeenviewedbyMontserratianschoolchildrenandadultcitizensatvariouscommunity/nation‐buildingeventswithintheisland.Hence,whenuploadedtotherepository,D‐Scholarshipwillbe,thusfar,thesoleonline

42

venueforthenon‐Montserratianpublictoviewthefilm.

AtthesuggestionofclassmateAllisonHahn,whoisalsosubmittingadigitalvideotoD‐Scholarship,IvisitedCIDDEinordertocreateMpegfilesofthefilm.IuploadedthefilminAVIformattooneoftheprogramsavailableforuseatthevideoproductionstation.Onceuploaded(thisprocessunfortunatelyoccursinrealtime),IwasabletouseanAdobeprogramtosplicethefilmintoseparateMpegfiles,whichIcoordinatedtotheappropriatechaptersofthedoc.WhenuploadedtotheD‐Scholarshipwebsite,theywillappearasseparateMpegfilestitledwithanumberandthechaptername.ApparentlyMpegfilestakelesstimetodownloadthanAVIfilesbecausetheirqualityisslightlylower.However,Iwatcheditsappearanceonthelargecomputerscreenandthequalitywasveryfine.

Finally,itisimportanttonotethattheactual"Details"pagefortheproposedvideosubmissioncouldusesignificantrevampinginordertomakethepageandthustheproposedartifactmoreuser‐friendlyandnavigable.Forexample,itwouldhelpfultobeabletoincludethetimespanofclipsnexttotheirtitles.Moreover,addingalistordescriptionoftheobjectsofstudywithineachindividualcliptothis"Details"pagewouldimprovetheartifact'svalueforarchivalresearch.Forinstance,ifsomeonewassearchingforexamplesofshamanisticdance,heorshecouldseethatthistypeofcontentisincludedinChapter4:KiteFlying.Asitexistsnow,theformatforvideofilesisconfusingandnotveryuser‐friendly.

Inthecaseofthecreationanddeploymentofthisfilm,itseemsthattheantinomypointedoutbyScottConsignyinhisarticle"RhetoricandItsSituations"fitsmostappropriately.DavidSeitzlearnedoftheislandofMontserratthroughhisfriendandteachingassociateErikChurchill,whohadtraveledtotheislandinMarchof2003withtheaimofattendingtheisland'sSt.Patrick'sDayfestivities.SeitzandChurchillspentthe2002‐03academicyearteachingEnglishtoprimaryandsecondaryschoolstudentsontheFrench‐speakingislandofGuadeloupe.Twoyearslater,

Seitz,whooftenrecalledChurchill'sintriguingaccountofthetrip,proposedtheideaofdocumentingthefestivitiesforafilm.

Itthusappearsthatwhile"exigency,"perse,doesnotappeartohavecausedSeitz'seventualrhetoricalresponse,theuniquenessoftheMontserratianSaintPatrick'sDaycelebrationsobviouslystimulatedSeitz'sinterestandeventuallypromptedhimtofilmthephenomenon.Atthesametime,Seitz,inhisownagency,createdarhetoricalsituationoutofthevisitthroughthechoicesheandhiscrewmadewhilefilmingandsubsequentlyeditingtheevent,itsculmination,anditsunderlyingcontext.AsConsignywrites,"theartofrhetoricisanartof'topics.'Therhetordisclosesissuesandbringsthemtoresolutionbyinteractingwiththesituation."1ThefilmallowsustofurtherexploretherhetoricalsituationinMontserrat,butalso,inandofitself,isapieceofrhetoric.Further,thecycleofcommunicationcontinuesastheD‐ScholarshipprojectinourGraduateSeminarinPublicArgumentcreatedanexigencyformetorhetoricallyrespondwiththeproposaltosubmitMontserrat:EmeraldoftheCaribbeantotherepository.

1ScottConsigny,“RhetoricanditsSituations,”

PhilosophyandRhetoric7(1974):179.

43

PartFour:DigitalDisseminationofStudentResearch

ChapterTwelve:GraduateStudentParticipationJosephSery


JohnRief,"TalkingatCrossPurposes:ViolatingHigher‐OrderConditionswithOppositionalArguments."InFransH.vanEemeren,J.AnthonyBlair,CharlesA.Willard,andBartGarssen(Eds.)ProceedingsoftheSixthConferenceoftheInternationalSocietyfortheStudyofArgumentation(Amsterdam:SicSat/InternationalCenterfortheStudyofArgumentation,2007):1147‐1154.

Keywords:Pragma‐dialectics,higher‐orderconditions,argumentationtheory,intercollegiateacademicdebate,normativepragmatics,criticaldiscussion,DebateAuthorWorkingGroup,DAWG,argument.

Status:Pending.

EnhancingtheacademicethosoftheUniversityofPittsburghwithscholarlycontributionstotheirrespectivefields,graduatestudentsfromeverydepartmentplayapivotalroleincultivatingstrongintellectualenvironment.AlthoughtheworktheyproduceaftergraduatingfromtheUniversitymaybewhateventuallydistinguishesthem,manygraduatestudentsareproducingcompelling,important,andusefulresearchthroughouttheirtimeinPittsburgh.Theirfutureworkisoftenanexpansionfromtheideasandissuesexplored,examined,andreflecteduponduringtheirtimeasgraduatestudents,ignitingalifelongpassionfortheirrespectiveareasofexpertise.Theyarepresentingtheirresearchatnationalandinternationalvenues,representingtheacademic

strengthoftheUniversitytoawidearrayofattendees.Settingthemselvesapartfromtheirpeers,anoutstandingfewhavetheirworkpublished;acommendableachievementforayoungscholar.Tooinfrequently,however,dotheseaccomplishmentsreceivetheadequateattentiontheydeserve,especiallyforayoungscholareagertomakeastrongpresenceonthejobmarket.Consideringthetroublingeconomictimes,graduatesstudentsneedtheirscholarlypublicationshighlightedandgiventheopportunitytoreachthewidestaudiences,betheypotentialemployersorsimilarlymindedresearchers.

Assuch,theUniversityofPittsburgh'semergingD‐Scholarshipdatabasemustgiveconsiderablethoughttothewaysinwhich

44

graduatestudentcontributionscanbeincluded,yetalsobemindfulofthegraduatestudent'suniquepositionintheUniversitysystem(andacademicworldwritlarge).TheylackthepoweroftheirfacultymentorsandtheirtimeattheUniversityisfleeting(orsowehope).Asaresult,theymaybeleftoutofdiscussionsconcerningthefutureofD‐Scholarship,whichmayinsteadfocusonfacultyconsiderations.However,ignoringgraduatestudentinput(bothscholarlycontributionstoD‐Scholarshipandtheirperspectivesonpublicaccesspublication)isagravemistake.TheyplayanintegralroleintheacademiccultureoftheUniversityandrepresentthenextgenerationofscholars.

TobetterunderstandthebeneficialroleD‐Scholarshipmayhaveonagraduatestudent'sacademiccareer,Iofferanexamplefrommyhomedepartment,Communication.Ourstudentsaredoingremarkablework,butstruggletohavetheirideas(andnotoriety)spread.Usedwisely,D‐Scholarshiphastheabilitytobringadditionalexposuretoourgraduatestudents,thusmakingthemmoremarketableastheypreparetodeparttheUniversitywhilealsoraisingtheintegrityofourdepartmentandtheUniversityofPittsburgh.

In2006,UniversityofPittsburghgraduatestudentJohnRiefattendedandpresentedattheSixthConferenceoftheInternationalSocietyfortheStudyofArgumentationinAmsterdam.Drawingfrombothpracticeandtheory,Riefexaminesthe"reflexiveturn"inNDTcommunityandchallengesthePragma‐dialecticalmodelofargumentationintheprocess.Aftertheconferenceended,hisessaywasincludedintheconferenceproceedings.AlthoughonemaysuggestconferenceproceedingsdonotreflecttheacademicrigorandlegitimacystandardssoughtforD‐Scholarshipcontributions,theconferenceisprestigiousandhisessaywasselectedforitsstrengthandpotentialinfluence.

Throughbothinterpersonalconversationandemail(attachedatendofdocument),JohnRiefhasgivenpermissiontosubmithisworktoD‐Scholarship.Thepublishers,SicSat,havealsogivenpermissionfortheessaytobemadeavailableonline.

TheartifactoffersseveralimportantcontributionstotheD‐Scholarshiprepository.First,atthemoment,contributionsfromgraduatestudentsarealmostexclusivelythesesordissertations.Onlyrecentlyhavetherebeendifferenttypesofcontributions,buttheseareinfrequentanddonotrepresentthepublishingstrengthoftheUniversityofPittsburgh'sgraduatestudents.WiththeinclusionofJohnRief'sessay,othergraduatestudentsmayfeelmorecomfortablesubmittingcompletedworkthatisnotsimplyapartofathesisordissertation.Hopefully,thisartifactwillencourageothergraduatestudentstosubmitqualitywork,bothinsideandoutsidetheDepartmentofCommunication.

Second,oneofthemostimportantaspectsofthePittCommunicationDepartmentisourhighlyintelligent,motivated,andsuccessfulgraduatestudents.AsDr.MitchellrevampsthePittwebsitetobettercommunicatethestrengthofourgraduatestudents(i.e.anonlinecalendarofconferencepresentations,"wordclouds,"etc.),includingRief'sessaywillonlyhelptoimprovethereputationofourgraduatestudents.Furthermore,prospectivestudentsandfellowscholarswillhavemoreofanopportunitytomakeconnectionswithsimilarlymindedPittstudents.Otherdepartmentswouldnodoubtalsobenefitfromsuchexposure,thusraisingtheUniversity'sprestigeandabilitytoattractthebrightest,mostpromisinggraduatestudents.Furthermore,oneofthemostimportantandusefulaspectsofD‐Scholarshipisitsabilitytofosteradigitalacademicculture,oneinwhichscholarsareconnecttoandthroughtheirwork

Finally,andmostimportantly,JohnRiefwillbenefitfromthesubmission.Likehundredsofothergraduatestudents,hewillbeonthejobmarketsoon.BysubmittinganessaytotheD‐Scholarshiprepository,Riefhastheopportunitytoincreasehisvisibilityandimprovehiscredibilityforthevariouscolleges,universities,and/orfellowshipprogramstowhichhewillapply.Yet,asmostscholarsknowalltoowell,eventhemostprofound,insightful,andimportantconferencepresentationsmaybeill

45

attended.Althoughmoreindividualsreceivedacopyoftheconferenceproceedings,thecirculationisfarlessthandesirable.WithD‐Scholarship,Rief'sessaywillhavetheabilitytoreceivetheattentionitdeserves,especiallywithotherargumentationscholarswhodidnotattendtheconferenceanddonothaveaccesstotheprint‐versionconferenceproceedings.Ifwe'velearnedanythingfromJohnStuartMill'sOnLiberty,itistheimportanceofgettingideasoutofasmall,privatesphereandoutinthefreshair.

Untilnow,Ihavebeenall‐too‐eagertopromoteRief'sworkandothergraduatestudentcontributions.Ihaveneglected,however,whetherornotgraduatestudentsoughttoreadilycontributetheirwork,especiallyifitreflectsalongerprojectthatmaychangeintime.Graduatestudentsmustbepreparedtoask,"ShouldIbeall‐too‐readytosubmitworktoD‐Scholarship?"Isocratesremindshisstudents"nottopublishhastilytheirviewsonthingswhichtheydonotunderstand,buttowaituntiltheycanfindthemselvesinaccordwithmenwhohavemuchexperienceofmatterssubmittedtothemforjudgement(sic);foriftheywillsogoverntheirthoughts,noonecanfailtoapprovetheirdiscretion."1Thereisgreatdangerinputtingoutideasthatneedtimetocookalittlelonger.(Wedon'twanttohaveourgraduatestudentssufferingfromacademicsalmonella,dowe?)Ayoungscholarmaychangehis/hermindafterdoingmoreresearchorengagingwiththematerialfromadifferentperspective.Ifpublicaccesshastheabilitytodrawmoreattentiontoaparticularessay,wehavebeenpresumingsuchworkisworthyofadditionalattention.Disseminationfordissemination'ssakeisnotwiseandmayresultinanessayhauntingtheearlyyearsofone'scareer.Graduatestudentsoughttoreflectontheworthofthearticleandaskthemselvesiftheytrulywantitavailableonline,perhapsdiscussingtheissuewithhis/heradvisorandotherfacultymentors.Iftheessayis

1Isocrates,Panathenaicus,trans.GeorgeNorlin,

LoebClassicalLibrary,Vol.2(London:WilliamHeinemann,1929),272.

submittedinanacademicjournalorincludedinavolumeofcollectedessays,onemaypresumes/hehasmettheadequatestandardsforwiderdissemination.(Note:IamnotsuggestingJohnRief'sessayisnotworthyofinclusion;Ionlymeantostressgraduatestudentsandyoungscholarsoughttoconscientiouslyreflectonwhetherornottheyfeelpreparedforandcomfortablewithsuchwidedissemination).

Asecondimportantpointofheuristicvalueisthetransitionfromtheoldguardtothenewguard.Havingnothingtodowithage,we'veaddressedthroughoutthepasttwomonthshowsomescholarsarereluctanttoutilizeD‐Scholarship.EncouraginggraduatestudentstoutilizeD‐Scholarshipwillhelptopavethewayforacceptingthistypeofscholarshipasnotonlynormal,butexpected.Acquaintinggraduatestudentswithpublicaccesspublication,illustratingitsusefulness,andaddressingpotentialramificationsmaymakethetransitiontoaneweraofacademicpublicationeasier.

GiventhebenefitgraduatestudentsmayreceivefromtheD‐Scholarshiprepository(andthepotentialwaysinwhichtheymaybetakenadvantageof),ImuststresstheimportanceofincludinggraduatestudentsinfuturediscussionsonD‐Scholarshipandpublicaccesspublication.True,thefacultyandresearchprofessorscontributethemajorityofPitt‐affiliatedpublications,butgraduatestudentsarenonethelessanimportantvoiceinthediscussion.TomakeadecisionwithoutconsideringtheirinputwouldneglecttheirroleintheUniversityandmayhavenegativeramifications.Justasfacultycaredeeplyaboutthefutureofpublication,sotoodograduatestudents,especiallyastheyentertheacademiclandscapetoanever‐changingterrain.

46

ChapterThirteen:UndergraduateStudentParticipationMattGayetsky


JenSweeneyandStephanieLuczajko,"CriticalGeneaologyofUnitedStatesSugarSubsidies,"UnpublishedWilliamPittDebatingUnionSpeakingBriefs,UniversityofPittsburgh,2008‐2009.

Keywords:Affirmative,agriculturalpolicy,CEDA,CentralRomana,debate,DominicanRepublic,exploitation,Fanjul,Foucault,genealogy,Haiti,media,narratives,NDT,racism,slavery,sugarsubsidies,WilliamPittDebatingUnion,WPDU.

Status:Pending.

Initscurrentform,D‐ScholarshiphasbeenpromotedastheUniversityofPittsburgh'sdigitalrepositorythatallowsopenaccessforscholarlyresearchwhichhasbeenpublishedbymembersofitsfaculty.Whilethisiscertainlyalaudablegoalforthisfledglingsystem,thelimitsofthissystemoughttobetestedbypushingorpullingthenormsof(1)whatcountsasscholarlyresearchand(2)forwhomisthissystem.ThischapterteststhelimitsofthesetwoissuesbyarguingthatthedebateresearchofapairofundergraduatestudentsisapieceofpreviouslyunpublishedscholarlyresearchthatenhancestheD‐Scholarshiprepository.ThefocalpointofthisinquiryseekstodeterminehowtheUniversityviewstheacademicworkofitsundergraduatestudents.Eventhoughseminarpapersanddebateresearcharenotplacedunderthesamescrutinyasapeer‐reviewedacademicarticle,thequestionoughttoberaisedwhetherornotD‐Scholarshipisalsoaspaceforundergraduatestoshowcaseexemplarypiecesoftheirwork.ThesequestionsbecomeevenmoresalientinaworldwhereD‐Scholarshipbecomesanopt‐outsystem.

Thecriterionforwhatiscompulsorytouploadversusthatwhichmightremainopt‐in(orexcludedfromsubmission)shouldbedeterminedpriortothesystemgoinglive,suchthattheexpectationsforbothfacultyandstudentsisclear.ThisbriefrecommendsthateventhoughD‐Scholarshipshouldtransitiontoanopt‐outstructure,undergraduatestudents'submissionsshouldremainopt‐in,althoughencouragedtoparticipate.

JenSweeneyandStephanieLuczajko,currentlyseniordebatersattheUniversityofPittsburghattendedtheArizonaDebateInstituteduringthesummerof2008.There,theybegantheirworkonagenealogicalinvestigationofhowtheagriculturalpolicyoftheUnitedStates,andinparticularitssugarsubsidies,acttopromoteslaveryintheworldtoday.Bysubjectingouragriculturalpoliciestoagenealogicalanalysis,theywereabletoexaminethewayinwhichoursubsidiesactasatechniqueofpower.However,theyhadlittlesuccesswiththisargument(failingtowinasingledebateroundonthisargumentuntilherthirdtournament)andbegantoask

47

herselfwhyitwasthecasethatanargumentwhichclaimsthatanongoingUnitedStatestradepolicycontinuestoperpetuateslaveryintheDominicanRepubliccouldbesounpersuasive.Insteadofremainingonthiscourse,shedeterminedthatthebestwaytoengagethisquestionwastoprovidearetrospectiveanalysisofhersubject‐positionwithinthecontextofdebateroundsinanattempttoseekoutwhatitmeansthatquestionsofslaveryarenotdeemedasparticularlyimportantwithincompetitivepolicydebate.Giventheevolutionarynatureofwheretheargumentbegan,andwheretheargumentultimatelyendedup,itseemsimportantthatbothargumentsbeexaminedincomparisontooneanother.

BothSweeneyandLuczajkoarecurrentlymembersoftheWilliamPittDebatingUnion,andthedocumentsincludedinthisartifacthaveneverbeenpublished,meaningthatnocopyrightpermissionswererequired.Inconversationswithboth,theydidprovidetherequisitepermissionsforthistobeuploadedontotheD‐Scholarshiprepository.

TheUniversityofPittsburghLibrarySystemispoisedtotaketheleadforscholarlyexaminationsofcompetitivepolicydebate.WiththeupcominglaunchofTimelyInterventions(theDepartmentofCommunication'sonlinejournalwhichpublishesarticlesthattranslatecompetitiveargumentsmadewithindebateroundsintotopicsofpopularconsumption),thatishostedbyPitt'slibrarythroughitsinitiativetolaunchnewonlinejournals,itisclearthattheUniversityhasmadeacommitmenttoargumentativetheory.Whileitappearsclearthatthereisvaluefortranslationalresearchoftheworkdoneincompetitivedebate,thereisalsovalueintheuntranslatedinformation.Ifacommunicationscholarweretowriteanacademicarticlecriticallyanalyzinganimportantspeechorobject,thisobjectistypicallyopenforpublicviewing.Debates,andtheargumentsmadewithinthem,remainhiddenbehindcloseddoorsandhiddenfromthepubliceye,whichputsthedebatescholarinaprivilegedpositionofeliteaccesstotheobjectsofcritique.Byopeningtheobjectsup

topublicdissemination,itallowsthesourcematerialtobecirculatedgenerally,potentiallyallowingacross‐pollinationofdebateargumentationintootherareas.

AnotherpossiblevalueofthisartifacttoD‐Scholarshipistousetherepositoryasaspacetoincludeworkingprojects.SusanBrown,inherarticle"PublishedYetNeverDone,"arguesthatthereisaleveloffictivenessinthepresuppositionthatapieceofscholarshipbe'done'1.Eveninthetraditionalmodelofpublishing,theworkthatappearsinjournalsisonlyasnapshotofascholar'sthoughtsonanyparticularissue.Whatadigitalrepositoryprovidesisspaceinwhichworksofvaryinglevelsofcompletenesshavethecapacitytomoreeasilybework‐shoppedcommunally.Certainly,thefile‐structureoftherepositoryshouldreflectthesedifferentpossiblestages,butsettingupD‐Scholarshipasbeingonlyforfinished,publishedarticles(asisthecasewithotherrepositories,e.g.Harvard'sDASH)missesavaluablewayinwhichthissystemcouldbeused.

TheWilliamPittDebatingUnionisunique,asunlikemostdebateprogramswhichbecomeaffiliatedwithacademicdepartmentsatsomelaterpointintheirlife,theDepartmentofCommunicationattheUniversityofPittsburghemergedfromthedebateprogram.Acrossthecountry,therisingcostofcompetitivedebatehasresultedinvariousschismsbetweendebateteamsandthedepartmentsthatfundthem.Thetypicaljustificationfortheseclashesisthatthedebateteamservesonlyasmallnumberofstudents(oftenlessthaneightstudents);yetevensmallprogramscostover$40,000annually.If,however,itwerepossibletoarticulatetheworkofdebateprogramsasascholarlypracticethatresultsinthepublicdisseminationofargumentswhichareimportant,thiscostmightnotlooksoextremeasitservesasapublicgood.WhilePitthasbeenabletoavoidbudgetary

1SusanBrown,etal.,"PublishedYetNeverDone:

TheTensionBetweenProjectionandCompletioninDigitalHumanitiesResearch,"DigitalHumanitiesQuarterly,3(2009).

48

crunchesbetterthanmanyschools,thereisvalueforthedepartmenttocontinuetoamplifyitsdebateprogrambyamplifyingtheresearchofitsteam.

Asidefromrearticulatingwhatitmeanstodoresearchfordebate,thereareseveralotherreasonswhytheinclusionofthisartifactwouldbeimportantforthedepartment.MostoftheobjectsunderconsiderationforsubmissiontoD‐ScholarshiphavebeenfacultymembersinthedepartmentorotherwiseaffiliatedwiththeUniversity.Incontrast,thisartifactallowsthedepartmenttoshowcasetheworkthatitsundergraduatestudentsaredoing,andillustratethatimportantscholarlyworkisnotrestrictedtofacultymembers.Second,ifthereissuchathingasthe"PittBrand"inthedepartmentofcommunication,itwouldbesometypeofgrounded,interdisciplinarytheorizing.Thisartifactdisplaysthedepartment'sblendoftheoryandpraxis,asSweeneyandLuczajkowouldpublicallyperformtheircritiqueaboutslaveryintheDominicanRepublicandtheirimmanentcritiqueofthedebatecommunitydozensoftimes.Thisfusionofhightheoryandphysicalengagementtypifiestheworkwhichisdoneinourdepartment.

Further,itisimportanttoconsidertheworkthatisbeingdonebyundergraduatestudents,bothinsideandoutsideoftheirclassesasimportant.Debateworkseemsparticularlywellsuitedforsubmissionasseriousscholarshipduetothenature.Onaverage,theargumentswrittenbydebatersaremadepubliclyandcritiquedfortheirmeritsaroundfiftytimeswithinaseason.Lossescarrytheweightof"reviseandresubmit"tothosewhoareseriousabouttheactivity.UniversityofTexasassistantcoachRyanGoodmanhascomparedthelevelofrigorandintensityofdebateresearchandpreparationoverthecourseofayeartotheworkinvolvedincompletionofmasters'thesis."2Ifthisobservationisaccurate,artificiallyquarantining

2GordonR.Mitchell,"PedagogicalPossibilitiesforArgumentativeAgencyinAcademicDebate,"Argumentation&Advocacy,35(1998):41‐60.

undergraduatesfromparticipatingintheD‐Scholarshipinitiativeseemsshort‐sightedandexcludespotentiallyvaluableartifactsfromsubmissiontotherepository.

ThereareseveralimportantquestionssurroundingtheargumentsofSweeneyandLuczajkothatinsistuponbeinganswered.Thefirstisalarge,multifacetedquestionthatquestionsthelimitsoffairuseandwhatitmeanstobePitt‐affiliated.Asonecanseefromreadingthroughtheartifact,typicaldebateargumentsaremostlyverylongblockquotes,whichareconnectedbyabriefdescriptionofwhateachblockquotesays.IntheeyesofD‐Scholarship,doesthisconstituteaviolationoffairuse?Intheeventthatitdoesnotviolatefairuse,thenthequestionbecomeswhetherornotitmakessensetocallsuchanartifacttheproductofaPittscholar.MichelFoucault,afterall,'writes'moreofthisargumentthaneitherSweeneyorLuczajko.However,doesthe'remix'ofotherauthorsargumentsconstituteanewthingbroughtintobeingbyaPittscholar,orwoulditbeviewedasasetofdiscretepartswhichisnotaPittproduct?Intheeventthatitispermitted,whatthenisthelower‐boundofsubmission?Wouldacollectionofcitedblockquotes,withouttagsexplainingthecontentalsocountasauniquePittproduct?Ortopushthisboundaryevenfurther,doeswritingnotesinthemarginsofabookamounttoanacademicendeavor?

Unfortunately,asonethedateofthecompletionofthisbrief,thissubmissioniscurrentlypendingitssubmissiontoD‐Scholarshipsotheanswerstothesequestionshavenotyetbeenprovided.Thisitselfposesanimportantissue,namely,thatiftherepositoryisgoingtobecomeanopt‐outsystem,theresourcedemandsuponthesystemwillexponentiallyincrease.Evenwithanextremelylimitednumberofpeoplearecurrentlyusingthesystem,thelagbetweenanartifactbeingsubmittedandpostedseemsinordinatelylengthy.Ifthissystemwerehitwithseveralhundredsubmissionseachmonthinitscurrentformitwouldbeimpossibletokeepup.Ratherthandisparagingthesystem,thissimplyservesasevidencethatifD‐Scholarshipis

49

goingtobeanimportantpartofPitt'stransitiontoanopen‐accesseconomyitwillneedsubstantialsupporttoensureitsproperfunctioning.

Additionally,Ihavearguedforsomedegreeofrestructuringofthecategoriesthatcurrentlyexistwithintherepository.Ratherthandividingartifactsonlybytheformat(e.g.thesis),D‐Scholarshipshouldconsidermultiple‐taggingofartifacts,bybothformatandcontent‐type.Inthecurrentsystem,thisartifactwouldbeuploadedas"other"becauseitfallsoutsideofthecurrentestablishedcategories.Providingdepartmentswiththeopportunitytodeterminetheirowncontent‐tagswouldatleastdiminishthenumberofartifactsintheunhelpful'other'category,aswellashelpoutscholarswhoareresearchingaparticulartopic.Clickingonthecontent‐categoryof"Argumentation"wouldprovidethisresearcherwithalistofartifactsthatareallrelatedtothegeneralareathatthispersonisinterestedin,ratherthanclickingon"thesis"andbeingforcedtodeterminewhatdoes/notapply.

Thefinalquestionaddressesthe'oeuvre'ofPitt'sopen‐accesstransition.Oneofthebiggestbenefitsofopen‐accessrepositorieslikeD‐Scholarshipisthatitprovidesthepossibilitytoamplifyone'sownresearch.Thisseemslikealimitedscopeforthisinitiative,however.Individualswithinthesedifferentpartsofthelibrarysystemshouldbeginconsideringhowthedifferentpartsoftheinitiativecanhelponeanother;theclearestexampleIprovideabovebeingD‐ScholarshipandD‐Scribeworkingtogethertobemutuallyamplificatory.UploadingtheoriginaldebateargumentstoD‐Scholarshipisawaytoamplify(orcontextualize)thetranslationalresearchoftheseargumentsinaD‐Scribearticle.ThisallowspeoplewhoareseekingoutsomeinformationtoremainexclusivelywithinthePittLibrarySystem.Thecapacitytodothisfunctionstoamplifythesysteminitsentirety,andwhileIbelievetheaboverecommendationtobeagoodone,newandcreativeinteractionsbetweenthesesystemsoughttobeencouraged.

50

!"##$!%&&'(%

)$*+,*-.%/.#01*$%01%2,340!%*$),#.1-%

$56789:;<=%298>?;7:8@%%

)89>8@%#:7;56==%,@:A69B:7C%8D%2:77BE?9F5%

+6G<97H6@7%8D%!8HH?@:;<7:8@%

I6>@6B><CB%JK&LMNK&L%GHO%!4%''PNO%Q<==%PLLR%%

%

%

"S.$S0.I%

!"#$%$&'#()*%&+,-.*&$%*"&/.*#0)-%,*.120/#.(%)$%)%,*)0/#0)-%0")--&(3&%)(1%)%/.,#0%.4%*&4-&+#5&%/"&.*#6)/#.(%#(%

/"&%0.(/&+/%.4%)15)(0&1%0.''2(#0)/#.(%$0".-)*$"#,7%8"#-&%/"&%2(1&*3*)12)/&%0.''2(#0)/#.(%02**#02-2'%

#(/&3*)/&$%*"&/.*#0)-%,*.120/#.(%,&1)3.39%#(%),,-#&1%$:#--$%0.2*$&$%$20"%)$%,2;-#0%$,&):#(3<%1#$02$$#.(%)(1%

)*32'&(/<%4&=%,)*)--&-%.,,.*/2(#/#&$%4.*%".(#(3%,*.120/#.(%$:#--$%&+#$/%)/%/"&%3*)12)/&%-&5&-7%>4%0.2*$&<%)(9%

$0".-)*-9%,#&0&%.(%)%0.(/*.5&*$#)-%/.,#0%0.($/#/2/&$%)(%#(/&*5&(/#.(%#(/.%/"&%4#&-1%.4%$.0#)-%)0/#.(7%?2/%

,2;-#0)/#.(%.4%$0".-)*$"#,%4.*%)%,&&*%)21#&(0&%1.&$%(./%&+")2$/%/"&%*)(3&%.4%,./&(/#)-%#(/&*5&(/#.($%)5)#-);-&%

/.%*"&/.*#0#)($7%

%

>00)$#.()--9%$0".-)*$%&+,&*#'&(/%=#/"%./"&*%4.*'$%.4%*"&/.*#0)-%,*.120/#.(%/")/%#(5.-5&%/"&'$&-5&$%1#*&0/-9%

#(%/"&%0.(/*.5&*$#&$%/"&9%$/219@%>,A&1$<%-&//&*$%/.%/"&%&1#/.*<%*)1#.%),,&)*)(0&$<%$/*&&/%/"&)/&*%,&*4.*')(0&$<%

)(1%'.*&7%B.'&/#'&$<%/"&$&%#(/&*5&(/#.($%4.--.=%)%*&4-&+#5&%/2*(%="&(%/"&%#(/&*5&(/#.($%/"&'$&-5&$%;&0.'&%

/.,#0$%.4%)()-9$#$%#(%,2;-#$"&1%)*/#0-&$7%8"&(%/"#$%"),,&($<%$0".-)*$"#,%;&0.'&$%*&4-&+#5&-9%'2-/#5.0)-C%/"&%

)2/".*D$%#(/&*,*&/#5&%5.#0&%'#+&$%=#/"%/"&%,*.120/#5&%/"&9%5.#0&%2$&%/.%0.-.*%/"&#*%.;E&0/%.4%$/2197%F.=%1.%

/"&9%'#+G%8")/%)*&%/"&%5)*#.2$%$/9-&$%)(1%*&3#$/&*$%.4%*&4-&+#5&%*"&/.*#0)-%$0".-)*$"#,G%8")/%)*&%/"&%

,*.'#$&$%)(1%,#/4)--$%.4%&)0"G%H(%)11#/#.(%/.%&+,-.*#(3%$20"%I2&$/#.($%;9%0.($2-/#(3%-#/&*)/2*&%#(%

0.''2(#0)/#.(<%$.0#.-.39<%)(1%'&1#0#(&<%/"#$%$&'#()*%=#--%,2*$2&%)%0.--);.*)/#5&%,*.E&0/%#(%*"&/.*#0)-%

,*.120/#.(%/")/%)00&$$&$%)%(&=%1#3#/)-%0")((&-%4.*%0#*02-)/#.(%.4%0*&)/#5&%=.*:$7%

%

+M/!T"4*$/T02%!"#2"1.1-%

!"&%J(#5&*$#/9%.4%K#//$;2*3"%L#;*)*9D$%MNAB0".-)*$"#,O%PN#3#/)-%B0".-)*$"#,Q%,*.3*)'%=)$%-)2(0"&1%#(%

$2''&*%RSST7%!"&%K#//%NAB0".-)*$"#,%=&;$#/&%P"//,@UU1A$0".-)*$"#,7,#//7&12UQ%&();-&$%)(9%K#//%4)02-/9%

'&';&*%.*%$/21&(/%=#/"%)%5)-#1%2$&*()'&%/.%2,-.)1%$0".-)*-9%0.(/&(/%/")/%=#--%;&%,2;-#0-9%)5)#-);-&%)(1%

$&)*0");-&%5#)%K#//%V)/<%W..3-&<%)(1%./"&*%1)/);)$&$7%B&'#()*%*&)1#(3$%)(1%1#$02$$#.($%=#--%0.',)*&%)(1%

0.(/*)$/%/"&%K#//%NAB0".-)*$"#,%#(#/#)/#5&%=#/"%$#'#-)*%#($/#/2/#.()-%&44.*/$%P&737%)/%F)*5)*1%J(#5&*$#/9%)(1%

?.$/.(%J(#5&*$#/9Q<%0.($#1&*%/"&%,*.3*)'D$%#(/&--&0/2)-%,*.,&*/9%#',-#0)/#.($<%#',)0/%.(%0*&)/#5&%&0.(.'#&$<%

)(1%,.$$#;#-#/#&$%4.*%&(")(0&1%0.''2(#/9%&(3)3&'&(/7%

%

X$%/"&%K#//%NAB0".-)*$"#,%,*.3*)'%.44&*$%)%0.(0*&/&%.,,.*/2(#/9%4.*%$/21&(/$%/.%&+,&*#'&(/%=#/"%)(1%

*&4-&+#5&-9%#(/&**.3)/&%$#/2)/&1%*"&/.*#0)-%,*.120/#.($<%$&'#()*%,)*/#0#,)(/$%=#--%1&-#;&*)/&%);.2/%".=%;&$/%

/.%&+&02/&%)%NAB0".-)*$"#,%M$2*3&<O%="&*&%$/21&(/$%/):&%/"&%-&)1%#(%.*3)(#6#(3%)(1%&+&02/#(3%)%$2;$/)(/#)-%

5.-2'&%.4%0.(/*#;2/#.($%/.%/"&%NAB0".-)*$"#,%=&;$#/&7%!=#0&%12*#(3%/"&%/&*'<%)4/&*%$&-&0/#(3%)%1#3#/)-%)*/#4)0/%

P&737%)*/#0-&<%;..:%0"),/&*<%,*&,*#(/<%)21#.%0-#,<%,"./.3*),"Q%)(1%$&02*#(3%(&0&$$)*9%,&*'#$$#.($<%$/21&(/$%

=#--%,*&$&(/%/"&%)*/#4)0/%/.%/"&%0-)$$<%)-.(3%=#/"%)%=*#//&(%;*#&4%/")/%.2/-#(&$%/"&%*)/#.()-&%4.*%/"&%)*/#4)0/Y$%

#(0-2$#.(%#(%/"&%NAB0".-)*$"#,%1)/);)$&7%K&&*%1&-#;&*)/#.(%=#--%32#1&%$2;$&I2&(/%$2;'#$$#.(%.4%/"&%1#3#/)-%

)*/#4)0/%)(1%*&5#$#.(%.4%/"&%$2,,.*/#(3%;*#&47%

%

51

Z"&/.*#0)-%K*.120/#.(%U%[)--%RSST%

B9--);2$%,)3&%R%

"3U.!-0S./%

\%8&%=#--%3*)$,%/"&%*&-)/#.($"#,%;&/=&&(%#(/&*,*&/)/#.(%)(1%,&*4.*')(0&%#(%*"&/.*#0%)(1%-&)*(%".=%/.%

),,-9%$20"%#($#3"/%*&4-&+#5&-9%/.%.2*%.=(%$0".-)*-9%=.*:7%

\%8&%=#--%),,*&0#)/&%=)9$%/")/%/"&%].,&(%)00&$$]%'.5&'&(/%0*&)/&$%&+#3&(0#&$%4.*%*"&/.*#0)-%,*.120/#.(<%

$/*)#($%/"&%;.2(1)*#&$%.4%0.,9*#3"/%-)=<%,*&$&(/$%(.5&-%0")--&(3&$%4.*%/"&%,2;-#$"#(3%#(12$/*9<%)(1%

'):&$%,.$$#;-&%(&=%'&/*#0$%.4%$0".-)*-9%)2/".*#/97%

\%8&%=#--%1&5&-.,%2(1&*$/)(1#(3%.4%/"&%/&*'%],2;-#0%#(/&--&0/2)-<]%)(1%),,*&0#)/&%/"&%/&+/2*&%.4%

0.(/*.5&*$9%#/%/&(1$%/.%3&(&*)/&%#(%)0)1&'&%)(1%;&9.(17%

\%8&%=#--%'):&%,*)0/#0)-%0.(/*#;2/#.($%/.%,2;-#0%:(.=-&13&%/"*.23"%)%NAB0".-)*$"#,%]$2*3&7]%

%

$.V,0$.#.1-/%%

PW*)1#(3%*2;*#0$%)(1%)$$#3('&(/%1&/)#-$%/.%;&%4#()-#6&1%)4/&*%4#*$/%$&'#()*%'&&/#(3%1#$02$$#.(Q%

\%V.(/*#;2/#.(%.4%/=.%)*/#4)0/$%/.%/"&%$&'#()*%NAB0".-)*$"#,%$2*3&%,*.E&0/<%=#/"%&)0"%)*/#4)0/%

)00.',)(#&1%;9%)(%&+,-)()/.*9%;*#&4%4#-&1%&-&0/*.(#0)--9%/.%V.2*$&8&;%^_%".2*$%,*#.*%/.%/"&%$0"&12-&1%

$&'#()*%,*&$&(/)/#.(7%

\%B2;$/)(/#)-%*&5#$#.(%)(1%&+,)($#.(%.4%&+,-)()/.*9%)*/#4)0/%;*#&4$%#(%-#3"/%.4%4&&1;)0:%3)*(&*&1%4*.'%

$&'#()*%1#$02$$#.(<%12&%N&0&';&*%T<%RSST7%

\%Z&32-)*%)//&(1)(0&%)(1%0.(/*#;2/#.(%/.%$&'#()*%1#$02$$#.($7%

4")0/-0!/%

>44#0&%".2*$%!2&$1)9$%`S@SS%)'%A%`R@SS%,'%)(1%;9%),,.#(/'&(/%#(%VL%``ST7%X--%0.2*$&%*&)1#(3$%=#--%;&%

)5)#-);-&%.(%V.2*$&8&;7%a./&%/")/%/"&$&%')/&*#)-$%')9%;&%,*./&0/&1%;9%J(#/&1%B/)/&$%0.,9*#3"/%-)=<%`b%JBV%

$&0/#.(%`S`<%&/%$&I7<%)$%=&--%)$%J(#5&*$#/9%,.-#09%)(1%,*.0&12*&$%/")/%,*."#;#/%2()2/".*#6&1%12,-#0)/#.(%.*%

*&/*)($'#$$#.(%.4%0.2*$&%')/&*#)-$7%%

%

$.4.S*1-%*!*+.#0!%2"40!0./%

H4%9.2%")5&%)%1#$);#-#/9%4.*%="#0"%9.2%)*&%.*%')9%;&%*&I2&$/#(3%)(%)00.''.1)/#.(<%9.2%)*&%&(0.2*)3&1%/.%

0.(/)0/%;./"%9.2*%#($/*20/.*%)(1%N#$);#-#/9%Z&$.2*0&$%)(1%B&*5#0&$<%`^S%8#--#)'%K#//%J(#.(<%^`RAc^_Ab_TS%.*%

^`RAd_dAbdee%P!!fQ%)$%&)*-9%)$%,.$$#;-&%#(%/"&%/&*'7%%NZB%=#--%5&*#49%9.2*%1#$);#-#/9%)(1%1&/&*'#(&%

*&)$.();-&%)00.''.1)/#.($%4.*%/"#$%0.2*$&7%

%

B/21&(/$%#(%/"#$%0.2*$&%=#--%;&%&+,&0/&1%/.%0.',-9%=#/"%/"&%J(#5&*$#/9%.4%K#//$;2*3"D$%K.-#09%.(%X0)1&'#0%

H(/&3*#/97%X(9%$/21&(/%$2$,&0/&1%.4%5#.-)/#(3%/"#$%.;-#3)/#.(%4.*%)(9%*&)$.(%12*#(3%/"&%$&'&$/&*%=#--%;&%

*&I2#*&1%/.%,)*/#0#,)/&%#(%/"&%,*.0&12*)-%,*.0&$$<%#(#/#)/&1%)/%/"&%#($/*20/.*%-&5&-<%)$%.2/-#(&1%#(%/"&%

J(#5&*$#/9%W2#1&-#(&$%.(%X0)1&'#0%H(/&3*#/97%

52

Z"&/.*#0)-%K*.120/#.(%U%[)--%RSST%

B9--);2$%,)3&%d%

/!T.+,4.%"Q%#..-01)/W%-T.#./%*1+%*//0)1.+%$.*+01)/%%

/.2-.#3.$%P%

0@798>?;7:8@%

% !.,#0$%0.5&*&1%#(0-21&@%#',&/2$%4.*%1&$#3(%.4%/"&%0.2*$&C%.5&*5#&=%.4%$9--);2$C%&+,-)()/#.(%.4%0.2*$&%

*&I2#*&'&(/$%)(1%1&)1-#(&$<%(&3./#)/#.(%.4%3*)1#(3%*2;*#07%

%

/.2-.#3.$%R%

!<B6%/7?>:6B%:@%$6D=6X:A6%$56789:;<=%298>?;7:8@%

% g)0"%.4%/"&%-&)1#(3%0.''2(#0)/#.(%$0".-)*$%4&)/2*&1%/"#$%=&&:%=*#/&%=#/"%)%*&4-&+#5&%5.#0&<%'):#(3%/"&#*%

,&*$.()-%#(/&*5&(/#.($%#(/.%/"&%4#&-1%.4%$/219%,)*/%.4%/"&%$/219%#/$&-47%F.=%1.%/"&#*%5)*#.2$%),,*.)0"&$%/.%

/"#$%0")--&(3&%0.',)*&%)(1%0.(/*)$/G%8")/%)*&%/"&%$0".-)*$%#(/&*,*&/#(3<%)(1%=")/%)*&%/"&9%,*.120#(3G%

8")/%*.-&$%1.%/"&%4#(#$"&1%)*/#0-&%/&+/$<%)(1%,*#.*%#(/&*5&(/#.($<%,-)9%#(%/"&#*%,*.E&0/$G%!"*.23"%/"&%$/219%

.4%/"&$&%4.2*%&+&',-)*$<%=&%0)(%1&5&-.,%)%5.0);2-)*9%4.*%1#$02$$#(3%,*.120/#5#$/%*"&/.*#0)-%0*#/#0#$'%)(1%

;&3#(%/.%#1&(/#49%:&9%0")--&(3&$%)$$.0#)/&1%=#/"%/"#$%'.1&%.4%$0".-)*-9%=.*:7%

\%V&-&$/&%V.(1#/<%MF.=%?)1%B0#&(0&%B/)9$%!")/%8)9@%?*)#(%B&+<%N&')*0)/#.(<%)(1%/"&%B/)/2$%.4%!*2/"%#(%/"&%

Z"&/.*#0%.4%B0#&(0&<O%Rc%!"#$%&'()*%('#$+),-.&$#&/+)P`TTcQ@%_dA`ST7%

\%h&';*&=%i0L&.1<%MV&)$&%)(1%N&$#$/@%[*&&1.'%.4%g+,*&$$#.(j%#(%/"&%X3&%.4%H(/&--&0/2)-%K*.,&*/9<O%R%0%&%')

PRSSdQ<%"//,@UU#(,*&$$7-#;72#.=)7&12U,.*.#U,),&*$U'0-&.1Sd``S`7"/'-%

\%h&';*&=%i0L&.1<%1&##2%3)%4)567&#88'%9:;)<=#&>#./%-8)?%7+&'@"$)A%>%8).92)<$"#&)59#3'#8)%4)?&#.$'='$+)

Pa&=%f.*:@%N.2;-&1)9<%RSSeQ@%``bA`RR7%

\%i)*/#(%k7%i&1"2*$/<%M!"&%[#*$/%X'&(1'&(/%5$7%F2')(%Z#3"/$@%X%V)$&%B/219%#(%V.''2(#/9%B&(/#'&(/%)(1%

X*32'&(/%4*.'%N&4#(#/#.(<O%^c%B#8$#&9)C%-&9./)%4)*7##(")?%33-9'(.$'%9)P`T_RQ@%À`T7%

\%K")&1*)%K&662--.<%MZ&$#$/#(3%la)/#.()-%?*&)$/%V)(0&*%X=)*&(&$$%i.(/"D@%!"&%Z"&/.*#0%.4%V.2(/&*,2;-#0$%

)(1%/"&#*%V2-/2*)-%K&*4.*')(0&$<O%_T%,-.&$#&/+)C%-&9./)%4)*7##(")PRSSdQ@%dêAdce7%

<7$'%9./)A%9-8)!#.2'9@)

\%i)*/#(%k7%i&1"2*$/<%Mm)-2&$%#(%V.(4-#0/@%X%V)$&%B/219%.4%V.)-#/#.(%[.*')/#.(%#(%)%i.*)--9%X';#32.2$%

B#/2)/#.(<O%c%!#/'@'%-8%?%33-9'(.$'%9%D%2.+%c%P`T_dQ@%`ÀR`7%

\%h&';*&=%i0L&.1<%M[*&&1.'%.4%g+,*&$$#.(n<O%E9)D"#8#)D'3#8)P[&;*2)*9%`b<%RSSdQ@%^dA^^7%

\%K")&1*)%V7%K&662--.<%MK&*4.*'#(3%V*#/#0)-%H(/&**2,/#.($@%B/.*#&$<%Z"&/.*#0)-%H(5&(/#.(<%)(1%/"&%

g(5#*.('&(/)-%k2$/#0&%i.5&'&(/<O%ce%B#8$#&9)C%-&9./)%4)?%33-9'(.$'%9)PRSS`Q@%ÀRe7%

\%W.*1.(%Z7%i#/0"&--<%*$&.$#@'()F#(#7$'%9;)!"#$%&'(G)*('#9(#).92)0%/'$'(8)'9)H'88'/#)F#4#98#)I2=%(.(+)Pg)$/%

L)($#(3@%i#0"#3)(%B/)/&%J(#5&*$#/9%K*&$$<%RSSSQ@)RÀRd7%

\%W.*1.(%Z7%i#/0"&--%)(1%!#'./"9%>DN.((&--<%g1#/.*$D%#(/*.120/#.(%/.%$,&0#)-%1.2;-&%#$$2&%.(%/"&%

#()232*)-%XXZB!%B0#&(0&%K.-#09%[.*2'<%`^%*%('./)57'8$#3%/%@+%PRSSSQ@%bTA__7%

%

/.2-.#3.$%'Y%

0@A6976>%$56789:;<=%/:7?<7:8@B%:@%<@%*F6%8D%!8@76@7%*E?@><@;6%

% Z"&/.*#0)-%$#/2)/#.($%)*&%-#:&%,*&$$#(3%,".(&%0)--$%o%/"&9%0)**9%=.*1%.4%2*3&(/%#',&*4&0/#.($%/")/%0)--%.(%

*"&/.*$%/.%*&$,.(1%=#/"%E2$/%/"&%*#3"/%-)(32)3&7%X,,-#&1%*&4-&+#5&-9<%*"&/.*#0)-%$#/2)/#.($%0)--%.(%$0".-)*$%

/.%#(5&(/%)(1%,*.120&%4#//#(3%#(/&*5&(/#.($%#(/.%/"&%4#&-1$%.4%$.0#)-%)0/#.(%/"&9%$/2197%8")/%*"&/.*#0)-%

$#/2)/#.($%)*&%9.2%#(G%F.=%1.%?#/6&*<%m)/6%)(1%V.$#3(9%$233&$/%1#44&*&(/%),,*.)0"&$%/.%1&5&-.,#(3%4#//#(3%

*&$,.($&$G%F.=%1.&$%/"&%)3&%.4%]0.(/&(/%);2(1)(0&<]%)$%1&$0*#;&1%;9%k&($&(%)(1%L)(")'<%,*&$&(/%(.5&-%

&+#3&(0&$%4.*%/"&%02**&(/%3&(&*)/#.(%.4%)0)1&'#0%$0".-)*$G%

\%L-.91%[7%?#/6&*<%M!"&%Z"&/.*#0)-%B#/2)/#.(<O%`%0"'/%8%7"+).92)!"#$%&'()P`Tc_Q@%À`^7%

53

Z"&/.*#0)-%K*.120/#.(%U%[)--%RSST%

B9--);2$%,)3&%^%

\%Z#0")*1%g7%m)/6<%M!"&%i9/"%.4%/"&%Z"&/.*#0)-%B#/2)/#.(<O%c%0"'/%8%7"+).92)!"#$%&'()P`TbdQ@%èÂ`c`7%

\%B0.//%V.($#3(9<%MZ"&/.*#0%)(1%#/$%B#/2)/#.($<O%b%0"'/%8%7"+).92)!"#$%&'()P`Tb^Q@%`beA`_e7%

\%i#0")&-%k&($&(<%]B0".-)*-9%X2/".*#/9%#(%/"&%X3&%.4%X;2(1)(0&@%Z&/)#(#(3%Z&-&5)(0&%=#/"#(%/"&%a&=%

L)(1$0),&<]%h&9(./&%X11*&$$%)/%/"&%kB!>Z%)((2)-%K)*/#0#,)/#(3%K2;-#$"&*Y$%V.(4&*&(0&<%a&=%f.*:<%a&=%

f.*:<%i)9%`d<%RSS_<%"//,@UU===7(),7&12U$/)44U'E&($&(UE$/.*7"/'7%

\%Z#0")*1%L)(")'<%]!"&%g0.(.'#0$%.4%X//&(/#.(<]%dc%H'("'@.9),-.&$#&/+)!#='#J)P`TTbQ7%

\%f)'&(3%L#2<%MZ"&/.*#0%)(1%Z&4-&+#5#/9<O%R_%0"'/%8%7"+).92)!"#$%&'()P`TTeQ@%dddAd^_7%

<7$'%9./)A%9-8)!#.2'9@)

\%!".')$%>7%B-.)(&<%&17<%59(+(/%7#2'.)%4)!"#$%&'()P>+4.*1@%>+4.*1%J(#5&*$#/9%K*&$$<%RSS`Q@%cTÂcTb%

P&(/*9%.(%MZ"&/.*#0)-%B#/2)/#.(OQ7%

\%F)($%?-2'&(;&*3<%MX(%X(/"*.,.-.3#0)-%X,,*.)0"%/.%/"&%V.(/&',.*)*9%B#3(#4#0)(0&%.4%Z"&/.*#0<O%#(%

h&((&/"%?)9(&$<%k)'&$%?."')(%)(1%!".')$%i0V)*/"9<%&17<%I4$#&)0"'/%8%7"+K)PV)';*#13&<%i)$$7@%iH!%

K*&$$<%`T_bQ@%^RTAê_7%

\%h)/"-&&(%i7%F)--%k)'#&$.(<%MW&(&*#0%V.($/*)#(/$%)(1%/"&%Z"&/.*#0)-%B#/2)/#.(<O%c%0"'/%8%7"+).92)!"#$%&'()

P`TbdQ@%`cRA`bS7%

\%F)($%Z)11&*<%Ma.*')/#5&%Z&4-&+#.($%.(%V.($/*20/#5#$/%X,,*.)0"&$%/.%B0#&(0&%)(1%!&0"(.-.39<O%RR%

*%('./)*$-2'#8)%4)*('#9(#)P`TTRQ@%`^À`bd7%

%

/.2-.#3.$%P&%%

-56%2?E=:;Z"G6@%*;;6BB%#8A6H6@7%

% H(%RSS^<%/"&%J7B7%F.2$&%X,,*.,*#)/#.($%V.''#//&&%*&0.''&(1&1%/")/%/"&%a)/#.()-%H($/#/2/&$%.4%F&)-/"%

PaHFQ%1&5&-.,%)%,.-#09%*&I2#*#(3%4*&&%.(-#(&%)00&$$%/.%*&$2-/$%.4%aHFA42(1&1%*&$&)*0"%$/21#&$7%X/%4#*$/%

PRSSeQ%*&$&)*0"&*%0.',-#)(0&%=#/"%/"&%*&$2-/#(3%aHF%,2;-#0%)00&$$%,.-#09%=)$%5.-2(/)*9<%;2/%#(%RSS_%/"&%

,.-#09%=)$%')1&%')(1)/.*97%a2'&*.2$%#($/#/2/#.($%)(1%)$$.0#)/#.($%P#(0-21#(3%?.$/.(%J(#5&*$#/9<%

F)*5)*1%J(#5&*$#/9<%)(1%/"&%J(#5&*$#/9%.4%K#//$;2*3"Q%")5&%4.--.=&1%$2#/<%&()0/#(3%5)*#)/#.($%.4%/"&%aHF%

,2;-#0%)00&$$%,.-#097%V.',)*)/#5&%$/219%.4%/"&$&%#(#/#)/#5&$<%0.2,-&1%=#/"%)(%2(1&*$/)(1#(3%.4%/"&%aHF%

)0/#.($%/")/%,*&0&1&1%/"&'<%=#--%"&-,%&-20#1)/&%/"&%/*)E&0/.*9%)(1%/&+/2*&%.4%K#//Y$%NAB0".-)*$"#,%

#(#/#)/#5&7%

\%g-#)$%p&*".2(#<%]aHF%K2;-#0%X00&$$%K.-#09<]%dSc%*('#9(#)PN&0&';&*%`S<%RSS^Q7%

\%k."(%8#--#($:9<%B)--9%i2**)9<%V-)#*&%h&(1)--<%X(#/)%K)-&,2<%]N.#(3%i&1#0)-%k.2*()-$%N#44&*&(/-9@%<7#9)

H#2'('9#G)>,&(%X00&$$<%)(1%X0)1&'#0%i&1#0#(&<]%dR%?.9.2'.9)C%-&9./)%4)?%33-9'(.$'%9)PRSSbQ@%eTeAc`R7%

\%i#0")&-%87%V)**.--<%]V.',-9#(3%=#/"%/"&%a)/#.()-%H($/#/2/&$%.4%F&)-/"%K2;-#0%X00&$$%K.-#09@%V.,9*#3"/%

V.($#1&*)/#.($%)(1%>,/#.($<]%k.#(/%BKXZVUB0#&(0&%V.''.($UXZL%8"#/&%K),&*<%[&;*2)*9%RSS_7%

\%L#-)%W2/&*')(<%]V&-&;*)/#.($%)(1%!.23"%q2&$/#.($%[.--.=%F)*5)*1Y$%i.5&%/.%>,&(%X00&$$<]%?"&%9'(/#)%4)

L'@"#&)52-(.$'%9)P[&;*2)*9%R`<%RSS_Q7%

\%V"*#$%?&*1#0:<%]8".%>=($%)(%H1&)G%[)02-/9%/.%N&;)/&%W#5#(3%>,&(%X00&$$%/.%?J%Z&$&)*0"<]%AM)D%2.+)

Pi)*0"%Rc<%RSS_Q<%"//,@UU===7;27&12U/.1)9U(.1&Uc^b^7%

\%X*/%k)"(:&%)(1%k&$$#0)%J--#)(<%]J(#5&*$#/9%X,,*.5&$%>,&(%X00&$$%K-)(<]%AM)D%2.+)P[&;*2)*9%`b<%RSSTQ<%

"//,@UU===7;27&12U/.1)9U(.1&U_dRS7%

\%X*/%k)"(:&<%]L#;*)*#)($%)/%/"&%W)/&<]%AM)D%2.+)P>0/.;&*%RT<%RSSbQ<%"//,@UU===7;27&12U/.1)9U$0#&(0&A

/&0"URSS_USÙ`_U-#;*)*#)($A3)/&%

\%X$$.0#)/#.(%.4%X'&*#0)(%J(#5&*$#/#&$<%X$$.0#)/#.(%.4%Z&$&)*0"%L#;*)*#&$<%V.)-#/#.(%4.*%a&/=.*:&1%

H(4.*')/#.(<%)(1%a)/#.()-%X$$.0#)/#.(%.4%B/)/&%J(#5&*$#/#&$%)(1%L)(1%W*)(/%V.--&3&$<%]!"&%J(#5&*$#/9Y$%

Z.-&%#(%/"&%N#$$&'#()/#.(%.4%Z&$&)*0"%)(1%B0".-)*$"#,rX%V)--%/.%X0/#.(<]%[&;*2)*9%RSST7%

\%J(#5&*$#/9%.4%K#//$;2*3"%B&()/&%L#;*)*9%V.''#//&&<%i#(2/&$%.4%i&&/#(3<%>0/.;&*%c<%RSS_7%

\%k&((#4&*%F.=)*1<%]X%a&=%K2$"%/.%J(-.0:%J(#5&*$#/9A?)$&1%Z&$&)*0"<]%?"&%9'(/#)%4)L'@"#&)52-(.$'%9)Pi)*0"%

c<%RSSTQ7%

/.2-.#3.$%&L%

54

mailto:@.9

Z"&/.*#0)-%K*.120/#.(%U%[)--%RSST%

B9--);2$%,)3&%e%

2?E=:;%*;;6BB%<@>%0@76==6;7?<=%298G697C%:@%Q=?X%

!"#$%&'()(*&+,-.&!*/0,*&12&!3(%4%,5&60.%)&72&8%9:35&6,2&0;<&=(,>(;(0&?2&8%9:3&@,-+%))-,&-+&A-.$/*%,&

!:(%;:%&0;<&B(,%:*-,5&7++(:%&+-,&!:3-90,9#&A-../;(:0*(-;5&C0,'0,<&D;('%,)(*#&

!"#$%&'()(*&+,-.&E%4%::0&F/)3;%*5&G))()*0;*&@,-+%))-,5&H%-,>%*-I;&D;('%,)(*#&J0I&A%;*%,&

% !"&%'.5&'&(/%/.%'):&%$0".-)*$"#,%=#1&-9%)5)#-);-&%#(%4*&&%.(-#(&%1)/);)$&$%")$%$/#'2-)/&1%.,,.$#/#.(%

4*.'%$.'&%I2)*/&*$<%=#/"%'20"%.4%/"&%&($2#(3%)*32'&(/)/#.(%4.02$#(3%.(%0.,9*#3"/%-)=7%B.'&%

)15.0)/&$<%$20"%)$%*&,*&$&(/)/#5&$%.4%/"&%)0)1&'#0%,2;-#$"#(3%#(12$/*9<%4)5.*%*.--#(3%;)0:%/"&%aHF%,2;-#0%

)00&$$%,.-#097%>/"&*%#(/&*-.02/.*$%,2$"%4.*%&5&(%'.*&%.,&(%)00&$$7%8")/%)*&%/"&%:&9%)*32'&(/$%4.*%&)0"%

$#1&G%8"#0"%1.%9.2%4#(1%'.$/%,&*$2)$#5&G%8")/%#$%)/%$/):&%#(%/"&%0.(/*.5&*$9G%F.=%1.&$%#/%)44&0/%9.2G%

\%Z&;&00)%!2$"(&/<%]V.,9%!"#$%g$$)9@%F.=%[)#*%J$&%N.0/*#(&%F)*'$%[*&&%B,&&0"%)(1%F.=%V.,9#(3%B&*5&$%#/<]%

``^%N./#)O.J)C%-&9./)PRSS^Q@%edeAeTS7%

\%Z.;&*/%87%m))3)(<%]>,&(%X00&$$%B0#&(/#4#0<%g-&0/*.(#0%K2;-#$"#(3%)(1%?):"/#(#)(%N#)-.3#$'<]%^%B#8$3'98$#&)

0.7#&8)'9)?%33-9'(.$'%9).92)?-/$-&#)PRSSbQ7%

\%!&1%B/*#,")$%)(1%h&';*&=%i0L&.1<%]B/*)/&3#0%H',*.,*#&/#&$@%V2-/2*)-%B/21#&$<%!"&%g5&*91)9<%)(1%/"&%

K.-#/#0$%.4%H(/&--&0/2)-%K*.,&*/#&$<]%RS%?-/$-&./)*$-2'#8)Pi)*0"Ui)9%RSScQ@%``TA`^^7%

\%F&)/"&*%N)-/&*#.%k.$&,"<%K*&,)*&1%/&$/#'.(9%;&4.*&%/"&%J7B7%F.2$&%V.''#//&&%.(%/"&%k21#0#)*9<%F&)*#(3%.(%

F7Z7%c_ê<%/"&%][)#*%V.,9*#3"/%#(%Z&$&)*0"%8.*:$%X0/<]%B&,/&';&*%``<%RSS_7%

\%g-#)$%X7%p&*".2(#<%K*&,)*&1%/&$/#'.(9%;&4.*&%/"&%J7B7%F.2$&%V.''#//&&%.(%/"&%k21#0#)*9<%F&)*#(3%.(%F7Z7%

c_ê<%/"&%][)#*%V.,9*#3"/%#(%Z&$&)*0"%8.*:$%X0/<]%B&,/&';&*%``<%RSS_7%

\%K&/&*%W#5-&*<%L&//&*%.(%;&")-4%.4%/"&%X$$.0#)/#.(%.4%X'&*#0)(%J(#5&*$#/9%K2;-#$"&*$%/.%F.(7%k."(%V.(9&*$<%

B&,/&';&*%`S<%RSS_7%

\%B0.//%k)$0"#:<%]B,-#/%>5&*%>,&(%X00&$$<]%E98'2#)L'@"#&)52-(.$'%9)Pk2(&%^<%RSSTQ<%

"//,@UU===7#($#1&"#3"&*&170.'U(&=$URSSTUScUSÛ.,&(%

\%k."(%8#--#($:9<%]!"&%K2;-#$"&*Y$%K2$";)0:%)3)#($/%aHFY$%K2;-#0%X00&$$%)(1%B0".-)*-9%K2;-#$"#(3%

B2$/)#();#-#/9<]%b%0O%*)A'%/%@+)PRSSTQ@%RSARR7%

\%k)9(&%i)*:$%)(1%Z.-4%X7%k)(:&<%]!"&%[2/2*&%.4%X0)1&'#0%K2;-#$"#(3@%X%m#&=%[*.'%/"&%!.,<]%^T%C%-&9./)%4)

O'P&.&+)I23'9'8$&.$'%9)PRSSTQ@%^dTAê_7%%

\%B0#&(0&%V.''.($<%]B0".-)*Y$%V.,9*#3"/%X11&(12'%g(3#(&<]%"//,@UU$0".-)*$7$0#&(0&0.''.($7.*3U%

<7$'%9./)A%9-8)!#.2'9@)

\%!"&.1.*)%?-..'<%&/%)-7<%]KL.B%?#.-.39%)/%e@%!"&%[2/2*&%#$%>,&(%X00&$$<]%c%0O%*)A'%/%@+)PRSS_Q@%RScTA

RSbS7%

%

"!-"3.$%[%

16\%#679:;B%8D%/;58=<9=C%*?7589:7C%

% !"&%)15&(/%.4%1#3#/)-%$0".-)*$"#,%)(1%$2*3#(3%,.,2-)*#/9%.4%.(-#(&%1)/);)$&$%0),);-&%.4%)33*&3)/#(3%)(1%

)()-96#(3%$20"%$0".-)*$"#,%")5&%9#&-1&1%(&=%=)9$%.4%'&)$2*#(3%/"&%#',)0/%.4%#(1#5#12)-%$0".-)*-9%

,2;-#0)/#.($<%)(1%&5&(%#(1#5#12)-%$0".-)*$7%8")/%)*&%/"&$&%(&=%'&/*#0$%)(1%".=%1.%/"&9%=.*:G%8#--%/"&9%

)44&0/%42/2*&%"#*#(3<%/&(2*&<%)(1%,*.'./#.(%1&0#$#.($G%8")/%#',-#0#/%5)-2&$%1.%/"&%'&/*#0$%&';*)0&G%

X()-9$#$%.4%/"&$&%I2&$/#.($%0)(%$&*5&%)$%,.#(/$%.4%1&,)*/2*&%4.*%;*.)1&*%1#$02$$#.($%*&3)*1#(3%=")/%

*&0&(/%/*&(1$%,.*/&(1%4.*%9.2(3%$0".-)*$%#(/&(1#(3%/.%,2*$2&%)%-#4&%.4%/"&%'#(17%

\%i#0")&-%k&($&(<%]!"&%a&=%i&/*#0$%.4%B0".-)*-9%X2/".*#/9<]%D"#)?"&%9'(/#)!#='#J)Pk2(&%è<%RSSbQ7%

\%L.:')(%H7%i&".<%]!"&%Z#$&%)(1%Z#$&%.4%V#/)/#.(%X()-9$#$<]%0"+8'(8)B%&/2%Pk)(2)*9%RSSbQ@%dRAdc7%

\%?#--%V.,&%)(1%i)*9%h)-)(/6#$<%]B#3($%.4%g,#$/&'#0%N#$*2,/#.(@%!*)($4.*')/#.($%#(%/"&%h(.=-&13&%B9$/&'%.4%

/"&%X0)1&'#0%k.2*()-<]%`^%1'&8$)H%92.+)PX,*#-%RSSTQ7%

55

Z"&/.*#0)-%K*.120/#.(%U%[)--%RSST%

B9--);2$%,)3&%c%

\%B2$)(%?*.=(<%K)/*#0#)%V-&'&(/$<%H$.;&-%W*2(19<%B/)(%Z2&0:&*<%k&44&*9%X(/.(#2:<%)(1%B")*.(%?)-)6$<%

]K2;-#$"&1%f&/%a&5&*%N.(&@%!"&%!&($#.(%?&/=&&(%K*.E&0/#.(%)(1%V.',-&/#.(%#(%N#3#/)-%F2')(#/#&$%

Z&$&)*0"<]%d%F'@'$./)L-3.9'$'#8),-.&$#&/+)PB,*#(3%RSSTQ7%

\%k.$&,"%Z);&(<%]!&(2*&<%K*.'./#.(%)(1%N#3#/)-%K2;-#0)/#.(<]%`%F'@'$./)L-3.9'$'#8),-.&$#&/+)PB,*#(3%RSSbQ7%

<7$'%9./)A%9-8)!#.2'9@)

\%k&**9%B"&&")(<%]K*)0/#0&$%)(1%K&*$,&0/#5&$%.4%Z&$&)*0"%g5)-2)/#.(<]%R_%E94%&3.$'%9)*#&='(#8)Q)M8#)

PRSS_Q@%RRTAR^R7%

%

"!-"3.$%'(%

-56%0>68=8F:;<=%-?9@%:@%$56789:;<=%/7?>:6B%

!"#$%&'()(*&+,-.&@3(9&80;<%,5&@,%)(<%;*(09&@,-+%))-,&-+&A-../;(:0*(-;5&J-#-90&10,#.-/;*&D;('%,)(*#&

% H(%/"&%,.-#/#0)-%4&*'&(/%.4%/"&%`TcS$<%$.'&%*"&/.*#0)-%$0".-)*$%'.5&1%/.%4.*&3*.2(1%/"&%#1&.-.3#0)-%

1#'&($#.(%.4%)0)1&'#0%0*#/#0#$'<%.00)$#.()--9%3.#(3%$.%4)*%)$%/.%0")--&(3&%/"&%-.(3$/)(1#(3%#1&)%/")/%

M.;E&0/#5&O%*"&/.*#0)-%0*#/#0#$'%#$%,.-#/#0)--9%(&2/*)-7%!"&$&%,*.5.0)/#.($%1*&=%$9',)/"&/#0%)(1%$:&,/#0)-%

*&,-#&$<%$.'&%&5&(%0.'#(3%4*.'%./"&*%4#&-1$%.4%$/2197%8".%"&-1%/"&%2,,&*%")(1%#(%/"&$&%)*32'&(/$G%F.=%

1.%/"&$&%'&/)A/"&.*&/#0)-%0.(/*.5&*$#&$%$/#--%*&$.()/&%/.1)9<%="&(%/"&%,.-#/#0)-%$/)/2$%.4%)0)1&'#0%

$0".-)*$"#,%*&')#($%)%;.(&%.4%0.(/&(/#.(G%

\%Z.;&*/%K7%a&=')(<%MJ(1&*%/"&%m&(&&*@%a#+.(D$%m#&/()'%B,&&0"%.4%a.5&';&*%d<%`TcT<O%ec%,-.&$#&/+)C%-&9./)

%4)*7##(")P`TbSQ@%`c_A`b_7%

\%Z#0")*1%F7%h&(1)--<%MX%Z&,-9%/.%a&=')(<O%ec%,-.&$#&/+)C%-&9./)%4)*7##(")P`TbSQ@%^dRA^de7%

\%Z.;&*/%K7%a&=')(<%MX%Z&,-9%/.%h&(1)--<O%ec%,-.&$#&/+)C%-&9./)%4)*7##(")P`TbSQ@%^deA^dc7%

\%K"#-#,%8)(1&*%)(1%B/&5&(%k&(:#($<%MZ"&/.*#0<%B.0#&/9%)(1%/"&%V*#/#0)-%Z&$,.($&<O%e_%,-.&$#&/+)C%-&9./)%4)

*7##(")P`TbRQ@%^^ÀêS7%

\%K"#-#,%8)(1&*<%M!"&%H1&.-.3#0)-%!2*(%#(%i.1&*(%V*#/#0#$'<O%d^%?#9$&./)*$.$#8)*7##(")C%-&9./)P`T_dQ@%À`_7%

\%X--)(%i&3#--<%MF&#1&33&*<%8)(1&*%)(1%H1&.-.39<O%d^%?#9$&./)*$.$#8)*7##(")C%-&9./)P`T_dQ@%``Â``T7%

\%L)=*&(0&%87%Z.$&(4#&-1<%MH1&.-.3#0)-%i#)$')<O%d^%?#9$&./)*$.$#8)*7##(")C%-&9./)P`T_dQ@%``TA`R`7%

\%[.*;&$%F#--<%MX%!2*(%X3)#($/%H1&.-.39@%Z&,-9%/.%K*.4&$$.*%8)(1&*<O%d^%?#9$&./)*$.$#8)*7##(")C%-&9./)P`T_dQ@%

`RÀ`Rc7%

\%h)*-9(%h."*$%V)',;&--<%MZ&$,.($&%/.%[.*;&$%F#--<O%d^%?#9$&./)*$.$#8)*7##(")C%-&9./)P`T_dQ@%`RcA`Rb7%

<7$'%9./)A%9-8)!#.2'9@%

\%k)'&$%[7%h-2',,%)(1%!".')$%X7%F.--#")(<%MZ"&/.*#0)-%V*#/#0#$'%)$%i.*)-%X0/#.(<O%be%,-.&$#&/+)C%-&9./)%4)

*7##(")P`T_TQ@%_ÂTb7%

\%K&/&*%X7%X(1&*$&(<%M?&9.(1%V*#/#0#$'@%!"&%X0/#5#$/%!2*(%#(%/"&%H1&.-.3#0)-%N&;)/&<O%eb%B#8$#&9)C%-&9./)

%4)?%33-9'(.$'%9)P`TTdQ@%R^bARec7%

\%V)*.-%B/);#-&<%MK&1)3.32&$<%K&1)3.39<%)(1%K.-#/#0)-%B/*233-&<O%#(%X'#/)5)%h2')*<%&17<%?/.88)E88-#8;)

0#2.@%@+G)?-/$-&./)*$-2'#8G).92)$"#)0-P/'()*7"#&#)Pa&=%f.*:@%a&=%f.*:%J(#5&*$#/9%K*&$$<%`TTbQ@%RS_A

RRS7%

%

56

Z"&/.*#0)-%K*.120/#.(%U%[)--%RSST%

B9--);2$%,)3&%b%

"!-"3.$%P'%

2?E=:;%/8;:8=8F:6B%

% J(#5&*$#/9%.4%V)-#4.*(#)%$.0#.-.39%,*.4&$$.*%i#0")&-%?2*)=.9%$/)*/&1%,-)((#(3%/"&%RSS^%X'&*#0)(%

B.0#.-.3#0)-%V.(5&(/#.(%#(%B)(%[*)(0#$0.%$".*/-9%)4/&*%"#$%&-&0/#.(%)$%XBX%,*&$#1&(/%#(%RSSR<%="&(%"&%*)(%

.(%)%,-)/4.*'%)15.0)/#(3%M)%$.0#.-.39%/")/%/*)($0&(1$%/"&%)0)1&'9<O%.*%M,2;-#0%$.0#.-.3#&$7O%X00.*1#(3%/.%

?2*)=.9%,2;-#0%$.0#.-.3#&$%)*&%M&(E.9#(3%)%*&()#$$)(0&O%o%#(%*&0&(/%9&)*$%XBX%")$%-)2(0"&1%)%,2;-#0%

#(/&*&$/%')3)6#(&<%0*&)/&1%)(%)=)*1%".(.*#(3%&+&',-)*9%,2;-#0%&(3)3&'&(/<%)(1%=&#3"&1%#(%.(%,2;-#0%

1&;)/&$%);.2/%)44#*')/#5&%)0/#.(%)(1%*)0#)-%,*.4#-#(37%!"#$%2,/#0:%#(%#($/#/2/#.()-%$2,,.*/%4.*%,2;-#0%

$.0#.-.3#&$%")$%$/#'2-)/&1%)%3..1%1&)-%.4%*&4-&+#5&%1&;)/&%#(%/"&%4#&-1<%#(0-21#(3%$9',)/"&/#0%0.''&(/)*9%

;9%$20"%-2'#()*#&$%)$%X'#/)#%g/6#.(#%)(1%F&*;&*/%W)($<%)$%=&--%)$%$:&,/#0)-%)*32'&(/$%4*.'%$.0#.-.3#$/$%

#(0-21#(3%N)5#1%?*)19<%V")*-&$%!#//-&<%h*#$/#(%L2:&*<%)(1%k21#/"%B/)0&97%

\%i#0")&-%?2*)=.9<%MK2;-#0%B.0#.-.3#&$@%V.(/*)1#0/#.($<%N#-&'')$<%)(1%K.$$#;#-#/#&$<O%_R%*%('./)1%&(#8)PRSS^Q7%

\%N)5#1%?*)19<%M8"9%K2;-#0%B.0#.-.3#&$%i)9%[)#-<O%_R%*%('./)1%&(#8)PRSS^Q7%

\%V")*-&$%Z7%!#//-&<%M!"&%X**.3)(0&%.4%K2;-#0%B.0#.-.3#&$<O%_R%*%('./)1%&(#8)PRSS^Q7%

\%h*#$/#(%L2:&*<%MH$%X0)1&'#0%B.0#.-.39%K.-#/#0)--9%>;$.-&/&GO%R_%?%9$#37%&.&+)*%('%/%@+)P`TTTQ@%eA`S7%

\%k21#/"%B/)0&9<%Mi)*#/)-%B2#/.*$%V.2*/%B.0#)-%B0#&(0&%B,#(AB/&*$@%!"&%J(=#//#(3-9%V.($&*5)/#5&%g44&0/$%.4%

K2;-#0%B.0#.-.39<O%e`%*%('./)0&%P/#38%PRSS^Q@%`dÀê7%

\%[.*2'%&+0")(3&%;&/=&&(%F&*;&*/%W)($<%i2**)9%F)2$&:(&0"/%i#0")&-%?2*)=.9<%X'#/)#%g/6#.(#%)(1%Z#0:%

V"&*=#/6%#(%I3#&'(.9)*%('%/%@'(./)I88%('.$'%9)1%%$9%$#8)P$&-&0/&1%s%g44&0/$%.4%K2;-#0%B.0#.-.39<O%e`%*%('./)

0&%P/#38%PRSS^Q@%`dÀê7%

%

"!-"3.$%PN%

0@76==6;7?<=%.@796G96@6?9B5:G%

!"#$%&'()(*&+,-.&6-30;;0&C0,*%9(/)5&G))()*0;*&@,-+%))-,&-+&A-../;(:0*(-;5&K-,*3%,;&L99(;-()&D;('%,)(*#&

% Z#0")*1%V"&*=#/6%P.4%M*"&/.*#0%)$%&,#$/&'#0O%4)'&Q%")$%&$/);-#$"&1%)%$,*)=-#(3%)(1%#',*&$$#5&%

#(4*)$/*20/2*&%4.*%,2;-#0-9%&(3)3&1%*"&/.*#0)-%$0".-)*$"#,%)/%/"&%J(#5&*$#/9%.4%!&+)$7%V"&*=#/6<%(.=%

X$$.0#)/&%N&)(%.4%W*)12)/&%B/21#&$<%1#*&0/$%/"&%,*.3*)'%.(%H(/&--&0/2)-%g(/*&,*&(&2*$"#,7%N.&$%

V"&*=#/6D$%*"&/.*#0)-%;)0:3*.2(1%0.'&%/"*.23"%#(%1&$0*#,/#.($%.4%/"&%,*.3*)'G%8")/%)*&%M0#/#6&(A

$0".-)*$O%#(%/"&%L.(3".*(%5)*#&/9G%F.=%1.&$%/"&%/#&%/.%;2$#(&$$%$"),&%/"&%#($/#/2/#.()-%;)$#$%4.*%/"&%

H(/&--&0/2)-%g(/*&,*&(&2*$"#,%,*.3*)'%)(1%0.-.*%/"&%0")*)0/&*%.4%*"&/.*#0)-%,*.120/#.(%,&*4.*'&1%2(1&*%

#/$%)&3#$G%

\%m#$#/%/"&%J(#5&*$#/9%.4%!&+)$%)/%X2$/#(D$%E9$#//#($-./)59$&#7&#9#-&8"'7)=&;$#/&%)/%

"//,$@UU=&;$,)0&72/&+)$7&12U0"&*=#/6U===U#&U#(1&+7"/'-%

\%W)*9%?&0:')(%)(1%Z#0")*1%V"&*=#/6<%]H(/&--&0/2)-%g(/*&,*&(&2*$"#,@%X(%X2/"&(/#0%[.2(1)/#.(%4.*%F#3"&*%

g120)/#.(%Z&4.*'<]%db%0/.99'9@)4%&)L'@"#&)52-(.$'%9%Pk2-9AB&,/&';&*%RSSTQ@%RbAdc7%

\%k.")(()%F)*/&-#2$%)(1%Z#0")*1%V"&*=#/6<%]K*.'./#(3%N#$0.5&*9%)(1%>=(&*$"#,@%W*)12)/&%B/21&(/$%)$%

H(/&--&0/2)-%g(/*&,*&(&2*$<]%#(%B"&*=9(%i.**&)-&%)(1%K)/%X*(&$.(<%&17<%R#$$'9@)$"#)H%8$)4&%3)N%-&)

R&.2-.$#)52-(.$'%9)'9)?%33-9'(.$'%9;)I)*$-2#9$S8)L.92P%%TG)P8)$"#(3/.(<%N7V7@%a)/#.()-%

V.''2(#0)/#.(%X$$.0#)/#.(<%RSS_Q@%_dATe7%

\%Z#0")*1%V"&*=#/6%)(1%k.")(()%F)*/&-#2$<%]i):#(3%)%W*&)/%Yg(3)3&1Y%J(#5&*$#/9%Z&I2#*&$%Z"&/.*#0<]%#(%

k.$&,"%?2*:&<%&17<%1'6'9@)$"#)1&.@3#9$#2)0-P/'()M9'=#&8'$+;)F#(#9$&./'>.$'%9)B'$")F'&#($'%9)PB)(%

[*)(0#$0.<%VX@%k.$$&9A?)$$<%RSSbQ@%RceAR__7%

\%L)2*)%W*2(1<%Z#0")*1%V"&*=#/6<%)(1%!".')$%N)*=#(<%]L&)*(#(3%/.%?&%)%V#/#6&(AB0".-)*<]%?"&%9'(/#)%4)L'@"#&)

52-(.$'%9)PN&0&';&*%d<%RSS`Q7%

\%MV#/#6&(AB0".-)*$<O%D"#)I/(./2#)Pk)(2)*9%RSSeQ<%.,A&1%$&*#&$%0.',#-&1%;9%Z#0:%V"&*=#/67%

%

57

Z"&/.*#0)-%K*.120/#.(%U%[)--%RSST%

B9--);2$%,)3&%_%

1"S.#3.$%(%

!<G7:A6B%8D%!8@798A69BC]%-56%+6E<76%"A69%$6;8@B79?;7:8@:B7%/;:6@;6%/7?>:6B%

!"#$%&'()(*&+,-.&?,(0;&10,*(;5&@,-+%))-,&-+&!-:(09&!:(%;:%)5&D;('%,)(*#&-+&8--9-;>-;>&

% g5&*%$#(0&%$0#&(/#4#0%0.(/*.5&*$9%")$%&'&*3&1%)$%)%,*.'#(&(/%-.02$%.4%$/219%#(%/"&%$.0#.-.39%.4%$0#&(0&<%

I2&$/#.($%")5&%;&&(%*)#$&1%);.2/%/"&%,.-#/#0)-%$/)/2$%.4%$0".-)*$"#,%,*.120&1%#(%/"#$%)*&)7%H(%`TTS<%)%/*#.%

.4%$.0#.-.3#$/$%4*.'%/"&%J(#5&*$#/9%.4%8..-.(3.(3%"9,./"&$#6&1%/")/%&5&(%),,)*&(/-9%(&2/*)-%)(1%

M$9''&/*#0)-O%$/21#&$%.4%$0#&(/#4#0%0.(/*.5&*$#&$%)*&%,.-#/#0)--9%-.)1&1%;&0)2$&%.4%/"&#*%/&(1&(09%/.%;&%

M0),/2*&1O%;9%/"&%,)*/#$)(%M2(1&*1.3$O%$&&:#(3%)%-&3%2,%#(%/"&#*%.=(%,2;-#0%)*32'&(/$7%!"#$%M0),/#5&$%.4%

0.(/*.5&*$9O%"9,./"&$#$%$/#'2-)/&1%)%*)4/%.4%4)$0#()/#(3%*&4-&+#5&%0.''&(/)*9%.(%/"&%(.*')/#5&%

1#'&($#.($%.4%)0)1&'#0%$0".-)*$"#,7%

\%?*#)(%i)*/#(<%MB/#0:#(3%)%a&&1-&%#(%B0#&(0&@%!"&%V)$&%.4%K.-#.%m)00#(&$%)(1%/"&%>*#3#(%.4%XHNB<O%Rc%*%('./)

*$-2'#8)%4)*('#9(#)P`TTcQ@%RêARbc7%

\%K)'%B0.//<%g5&--&&(%Z#0")*1$%)(1%?*#)(%i)*/#(<%MV),/#5&$%.4%V.(/*.5&*$9@%!"&%i9/"%.4%/"&%a&2/*)-%B.0#)-%

Z&$&)*0"&*%#(%V.(/&',.*)*9%B0#&(/#4#0%V.(/*.5&*$#&$<O%è%*('#9(#G)D#("9%/%@+)Q)L-3.9)U./-#8)P`TTSQ@%

^bÂ^T^7%

\%F7i7%V.--#($<%MV),/#5&$%)(1%m#0/#'$@%V.''&(/%.(%B0.//<%Z#0")*1$%)(1%i)*/#(<O%`c%*('#9(#G)D#("9%/%@+)Q)

L-3.9)U./-#8)P`TT`Q@%R^TARe`7%

\%?*#)(%i)*/#(<%g5&--&&(%Z#0")*1$%)(1%K)'%B0.//<%M8".D$%)%V),/#5&G%8".D$%)%m#0/#'G%Z&$,.($&%/.%V.--#($D$%

i&/".1%!)-:<O%`c%*('#9(#G)D#("9%/%@+)Q)L-3.9)U./-#8)P`TT`Q@%ReRARee7%

\%g1=)*1%8..1".2$&<%N)5#1%F&$$<%B/&5&%?*&9')(%)(1%?*#)(%i)*/#(<%MB0#&(0&%B/21#&$%)(1%X0/#5#$'@%

K.$$#;#-#/#&$%)(1%K*.;-&'$%4.*%Z&0.($/*20/#5#$/%X3&(1)$<O%dR%*%('./)*$-2'#8)%4)*('#9(#)PRSSRQ@%%RTbAd`T7%

<7$'%9./)A%9-8)!#.2'9@%

\%[*)(:%[#$0"&*<%?'$'>#98G)567#&$8G).92)$"#)59='&%93#9$)PN2*")'<%aV@%N2:&%J(#5&*$#/9%K*&$$<%RSSSQ@%R^RA

RcR7%

\%?*#)(%i)*/#(<%M!"&%V*#/#I2&%.4%B0#&(0&%?&0.'&$%X0)1&'#0<O%`_%*('#9(#G)D#("9%/%@+).92)L-3.9)U./-#8)

P`TTdQ@%R^bAReT7%

\%a)(09%?-9-&*<%M!):#(3%)%K.-#/#0)-%!2*(@%!"&%V*#/#0)-%K&*$,&0/#5&%)(1%Z&$&)*0"%#(%K*.4&$$#.()-%

V.''2(#0)/#.(<O%b%D#("9'(./)?%33-9'(.$'%9),-.&$#&/+)P`TT_Q@%ddAeR7%

\%?*#)(%89((&<%MBBhD$%H1&(/#/9%K)*)1&@%B#3(#(3AJ,<%>44A)(1A>(<O%Rc%*%('./)*$-2'#8)%4)*('#9(#)P`TTcQ@%debA

dT`7%

\%g5&--&&(%Z#0")*1$<%MPJ(Q?.+#(3%/"&%i.($/&*<O%Rc%*%('./)*$-2'#8)%4)*('#9(#)P`TTcQ@%dRdAdec7%

\%i)-0.-'%X$"'.*&<%Mg(1#(3%J,%>(%/"&%8*.(3%B#1&@%i2$/%/"&%!=.%[.*'$%.4%Z)1#0)-#$'%X-=)9$%?&%)/%

8)*GO%Rc%*%('./)*$-2'#8)%4)*('#9(#)P`TTcQ@%dSeAdRR7%

\%B"&#-)%k)$)(.44<%M?&9.(1%g,#$/&'.-.39@%Z&-)/#5#$'%)(1%g(3)3&'&(/%#(%/"&%K.-#/#0$%.4%B0#&(0&<O%Rc%*%('./)

*$-2'#8)%4)*('#9(#)P`TTcQ@%dTdA^`_7%

%

58

Z"&/.*#0)-%K*.120/#.(%U%[)--%RSST%

B9--);2$%,)3&%T%

1"S.#3.$%'N%

25CB:;:<@M!:7:^6@BW%2?E=:;%+:B;8?9B6%<@>%298D6BB:8@<=%$6BG8@B:E:=:7C%:@%#6>:;:@6%

% a)**.=-9%0.(0&#5&1<%,*.4&$$#.()-%*&$,.($#;#-#/9%4.*%,"9$#0#)($%0.5&*$%/"&%0-#(#0)-%*&)-'%P/"&%F#,,.0*)/#0%

.)/"%;#(1$%1.0/.*$%/.%M1.%(.%")*'O%/.%/"&#*%,)/#&(/$Q7%?2/%)$%/"&%,*)0/#0&%.4%'&1#0#(&%;&0.'&$%

#(0*&)$#(3-9%;.2(1%2,%#(%/"&%4);*#0%.4%,.-#/#0$<%()/#.()-%$&02*#/9<%&0.(.'#0$<%)(1%,2;-#0%"&)-/"<%

,*.4&$$#.()-%(.*'$%/&(1%/.%$"#4/7%8")/%)*&%/"&%0#5#0%*&$,.($#;#-#/#&$%.4%,"9$#0#)($%#(%/"#$%0.',-&+%'#-#&2G%

!.%=")/%&+/&(/%1.%/"&$&%*&$,.($#;#-#/#&$%0*&)/&%*"&/.*#0)-%$#/2)/#.($%/")/%0)--%.(%,"9$#0#)($%/.%,*.120&%

,2;-#0%1#$0.2*$&G%X*&%/"&*&%;)$&'&(/$%P'#(#'2'%12/#&$Q%)(1%0&#-#(3$%P*&)$.();-&%-#'#/$%/.%/".$&%12/#&$Q%

/")/%0)(%;&%4)$"#.(&1%)(1%,2/%#(/.%,*)0/#0&G%F.=%1.%W)*1(&*Y$%0.(0&,/%.4%,"9$#0#)($%)$%]0#/#6&(%-&)1&*$]%

)(1%W*2&(<%K&)*$.(%)(1%?*&(()(Y$%(./#.(%.4%],"9$#0#)(A0#/#6&($]%#(/&*$&0/%=#/"%/"&%*"&/.*#0Y$%

,*.120/#5#$/%/*)1#/#.(G%

_%Z2$$&--%L7%W*2&(<%B/&5&(%N7%K&)*$.(%)(1%!*.9&(%X7%?*&(()(<%MK"9$#0#)(AV#/#6&($%o%K2;-#0%Z.-&$%)(1%

K*.4&$$#.()-%>;-#3)/#.($<O%RT`%C%-&9./)%4)$"#)I3#&'(.9)H#2'(./)I88%('.$'%9)PRSS^Q@%TÂT_7%

\%J%B0"2:-&(:<%MK*.4&$$#.()-%Z&$,.($#;#-#/#&$%.4%?#.'&1#0)-%B0#&(/#$/$%#(%K2;-#0%N#$0.2*$&<O%dS%C%-&9./)%4)

H#2'(./)5$"'(8)PRSS^Q@%edAcS7%

\%L)=*&(0&%i7%h*)2$$<%M>11$%)*&%B/)0:&1%="&(%B0#&(0&%!*#&$%/.%N&;)/&%K$&21.$0#&(0&<O%V#J)N%&T)D'3#8)

PX,*#-%dS<%RSSRQ7%

\%!#'./"9%k7%W)*1(&*<%]?2#-1#(3%)%F&)-/"#&*%8.*-1<%[*&&%.4%V)*1#.5)$02-)*%N#$&)$&$%)(1%B/*.:&@%K*&$#1&(/#)-%

X11*&$$%)/%/"&%X'&*#0)(%F&)*/%X$$.0#)/#.(%RSS_%B0#&(/#4#0%B&$$#.($<]%``T%?'&(-/.$'%9%PX,*#-%b<%RSSTQ@%

`_d_7%

\%N&0-)(%?2/-&*<%]!*)($-)/#.()-%Z&$&)*0"@%V*.$$#(3%/"&%m)--&9%.4%N&)/"<]%êd%V.$-&#%PRSS_Q@%_^SAR7%

\%B7F7%8..-4<%]!"&%i&)(#(3%.4%!*)($-)/#.()-%Z&$&)*0"%)(1%8"9%#/%i)//&*$<]%RTT%C%-&9./)%4)$"#)I3#&'(.9)

H#2'(./)I88%('.$'%9)PRSS_Q@%R`ÀR`d7%

%

+.!.#3.$%P%

-56%`2?E=:;%0@76==6;7?<=aK%*@%.@><@F696>%/G6;:6B]%

% 8".%)*&%/.1)9D$%,2;-#0%#(/&--&0/2)-$%".=%1.%/"&9%$/)0:%2,%)3)#($/%/"&#*%,*&1&0&$$.*$G%F)$%/"&%5&*9%

(./#.(%.4%,2;-#0%#(/&--&0/2)-#$'%0")(3&1%)$%/"&%()/2*&%.4%)0)1&'#0%-#4&%)(1%,2;-#0%1&-#;&*)/#.(%")$%

&5.-5&1G%B.'&%0.''&(/)/.*$%1#5&*3&%4*.'%K.$(&*%)(1%k)0.;9D$%,&$$#'#$/#0%)$$&$$'&(/$%*&3)*1#(3%/"&%

02**&(/%$/)/&%)(1%42/2*&%,*.$,&0/$%4.*%,2;-#0%#(/&--&0/2)-%=.*:7%8"&*&%)*&%/"&%:&9%,.#(/$%.4%0-&)5)3&%)(1%

".=%0)(%/"&9%#(4.*'%*&4-&+#5&%)()-9$#$%.4%,2;-#0-9%&(3)3&1%*"&/.*#0)-%$0".-)*$"#,G%

\%B&-&0/#.($%4*.'%Z#0")*1%X7%K.$(&*<%0-P/'()E9$#//#($-./8;)I)*$-2+)%4)F#(/'9#)PV)';*#13&<%i)$$7@%F)*5)*1%

J(#5&*$#/9%K*&$$<%RSS`Q7%

\%Z2$$&--%k)0.;9<%D"#)O.8$)E9$#//#($-./8;)I3#&'(.9)?-/$-&#)'9)$"#)I@#)%4)I(.2#3#)Pa&=%f.*:@%?)$#0%?..:$<%

`T_bQ@%dARcC%`TÀRdb7%

\%V7%8*#3"/%i#--$<%D"#)?.-8#8)%4)B%&/2)B.&)D"&##)Pa&=%f.*:@%B#'.(%)(1%B0"2$/&*<%`Te_Q@%`RÂ`^c7%

\%H*)%h)/6(&-$.(<%M!"&%K*.4&$$#.()-%B0".-)*%)$%K2;-#0%H(/&--&0/2)-@%Z&4-&0/#.($%K*.',/&1%;9%h)*-%i)(("&#'<%

Z.;&*/%h7%i&*/.(<%)(1%V7%8*#3"/%i#--$<O%#(%X*/"2*%i7%i&-6&*<%k&**9%8&#(;&*3&*<%)(1%i7%Z#0")*1%p#(')(<%

&17<%D"#)0-P/'()E9$#//#($-./;)A#$J##9)0"'/%8%7"+).92)0%/'$'(8)Pa&=%f.*:@%Z.=')(%t%L#//-&4#&-1<%RSSdQ@%`_TA

RSS7%

\%i#0")&-%8)*(&*<%0-P/'(8).92)?%-9$#&7-P/'(8)Pa&=%f.*:@%p.(&%?..:$<%RSSRQ@%`ReAè_7%

\%i#0")&-%?&*2;&<%M?#/&AB#6&%!"&.*9@%K.,2-)*#6#(3%X0)1&'#0%V*#/#0#$'<O%dc%*%('./)D#6$)P`TTdQ7%

%

59

Z"&/.*#0)-%K*.120/#.(%U%[)--%RSST%

B9--);2$%,)3&%`S%

+.!.#3.$%R%

$56789:;K%0@769G967:A6%<@>Z89%298>?;7:A6%*97]%

M(;09&:90))&.%%*(;>&0*&NNO&A0,;%>(%&@90:%P&4,(;>&#-/,&0$$%*(*%)&0;<&+(;09&$0$%,)Q&

% X(0#&(/%*"&/.*#0%=)$%,*#')*#-9%)%,*.120/#5&%)*/<%=#/"%)(%&',")$#$%.(%/*)#(#(3%$,&):&*$%/.%,&*4.*'%

&-.I2&(/-9%#(%,*)0/#0)-%$#/2)/#.($7%X$%*"&/.*#0%3*)12)--9%3)#(&1%'.*&%.4%)%4../".-1%)$%)%-&3#/#')/&%4#&-1%.4%

$0".-)*$"#,%#(%/"&%)0)1&'9<%#(/&*,*&/)/#.(%4-.2*#$"&1%)(1%,*)0/#/#.(&*$%4.02$&1%'.*&%.(%)()-96#(3%/&+/$%

,*.120&1%;9%./"&*$7%8")/%#$%/"&%*&-)/#.($"#,%;&/=&&(%*"&/.*#0)-%,*.120/#.(%)(1%*"&/.*#0)-%

#(/&*,*&/)/#.(G%V)(%/"&$&%/=.%'.1&$%.4%*"&/.*#0)-%)0/#.(%;&%4*2#/42--9%0.';#(&1G%B".2-1%.(&%;&%

,*#5#-&3&1%.5&*%/"&%./"&*G%

\%k7L7%X2$/#(<%L%J)$%)2%)$"'9@8)J'$")B%&28)PV)';*#13&<%i)$$7@%F)*5)*1%J(#5&*$#/9%K*&$$<%`TbeQ@%`STA`RS7%

\%!".')$%?7%[)**&--<%M>(%/"&%N#$),,&)*)(0&%.4%/"&%Z"&/.*#0)-%X2*)<O%eb%B#8$#&9)C%-&9./)%4)?%33-9'(.$'%9)

P`TTdQ@%`^bAè_7%

\%Z.;&*/%F)*#')(<%MV#5#0%g120)/#.(<%V-)$$#0)-%H'#/)/#.(<%)(1%N&'.0*)/#0%K.-#/9<O%#(%!):#$%K.2-):.$%)(1%N)5#1%

N&,&=<%&17<%E8%(&.$#8).92)?'='()52-(.$'%9)PX2$/#(<%!u@%J(#5&*$#/9%.4%!&+)$%K*&$$<%RSS^Q@%R`bARd^7%

\%i#0")&-%L&44<%M!"&%H1&)%.4%Z"&/.*#0%)$%H(/&*,*&/#5&%K*)0/#0&@%X%F2')(#$/D$%Z&$,.($&%/.%W).(:)*<O%#(%X-)(%W7%

W*.$$%)(1%8#--#)'%h&#/"<%&17<%!"#$%&'(./)L#&3#9#-$'(8)Pa&=%f.*:@%BJaf%K*&$$<%`TTbQ@%_TA`SS7%

\%W.*1.(%Z7%i#/0"&--<%MK2;-#0%X*32'&(/%X0/#.(%Z&$&)*0"%)(1%/"&%L&)*(#(3%V2*5&%.4%la&=%B.0#)-%i.5&'&(/$<DM%

^S%I&@-3#9$.$'%9)Q)I2=%(.(+)PRSS^Q@%RSTARRe7%

<7$'%9./)A%9-8)!#.2'9@)

\%[*)($%F7%5)(%g&'&*&(%)(1%Z.;%W*../&(1.*$/<%*7##(")I($8)'9)I&@-3#9$.$'=#)F'8(-88'%98)PN.*1*&0"/@%

[.*#$<%`T_^Q@%`TAR_7%

\%!".')$%>7%B-.)(&<%&17<%59(+(/%7#2'.)%4)!"#$%&'()P>+4.*1@%>+4.*1%J(#5&*$#/9%K*&$$<%RSS`Q@%bd_Ab^`%

P&(/*9%.(%MJ//&*)(0&$%)$%B,&&0"%X0/$OQ%

\%!".')$%?7%[)**&--<%MK*)0/#0#(3%/"&%X*/$%.4%Z"&/.*#0@%!*)1#/#.(%)(1%H(5&(/#.(<O%R^%0"'/%8%7"+).92)!"#$%&'()

P`TT`Q@%`_dARST7%

\%B")(9)(3%p").<%MZ"&/.*#0%)$%K*)+#$@%X(%X-/&*()/#5&%/.%/"&%g,#$/&'#0%X,,*.)0"<O%R^%0"'/%8%7"+).92)

!"#$%&'()P`TT`Q@%ReeARcc7%

\%W.*1.(%Z7%i#/0"&--%)(1%i)*02$%K)*.$:&<%M[)0/<%[*#0/#.(%)(1%K.-#/#0)-%V.(5#0/#.(%#(%B0#&(0&%K.-#09%

V.(/*.5&*$#&$<O%`^%*%('./)57'8$#3%/%@+)PRSSSQ@%_TA`Sb7%

\%!*.9%X7%i2*,"9<%MN&-#;&*)/#5&%V#5#0%g120)/#.(%)(1%V#5#-%B.0#&/9@%X%V.($#1&*)/#.(%.4%H1&)-$%)(1%

X0/2)-#/#&$%#(%N&'.0*)09%)(1%V.''2(#0)/#.(%g120)/#.(<O%ed%?%33-9'(.$'%9)52-(.$'%9)PRSS^Q@%bÂ

T`%

\%!".')$%X7%F.--#")(<%Mg5#1&(0#(3%i.*)-%V-)#'$@%!"&%X0/#5#$/%Z"&/.*#0)-%V*#/#0D$%[#*$/%!)$:<O%e_%B#8$#&9)

C%-&9./)%4)?%33-9'(.$'%9)P`TT^Q@%RRTARd^7%

\%g1=)*1%B0"#),,)<%MB.,"#$/#0)/&1%i.1&*(#$'%)(1%/"&%V.(/#(2#(3%H',.*/)(0&%.4%X*32'&(/%g5)-2)/#.(<O%

#(%W7!7%W..1(#3"/<%&17<%I&@-'9@)?%33-9'(.$'%9).92)?-/$-&#%P8)$"#(3/.(<%N7V7@%a)/#.()-%

V.''2(#0)/#.(%X$$.0#)/#.(<%RSSRQ@%eÀe_7%

%

60

Electric Rhetoric - University of Pittsburghgordonm/JPubs/ElecRhetReportf.pdf · The most effective...

Documents

Transcript of Electric Rhetoric - University of Pittsburghgordonm/JPubs/ElecRhetReportf.pdf · The most effective...