A Conversation (or the Notable Absence Thereof) with David Suzuki
Earlier tonight I went to see a set of onstage, live-to-tape interviews between Shelagh Rogers (host of CBC Radio's Sounds Like Canada), sustainability expert John Robinson (who is working on the fascinating Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability) and leading environmentalist David Suzuki.The interviews were interesting - both John and David have compelling messages that they articulately convey. Each speaks with an engaging candor - David, earthily so at times and with well-polished conviction, while John nearly upstaged the rest of his time on stage by demonstrating his ability to recite the Jabberwocky, adeptly and by heart, for the soundcheck.Each had their turn on stage, David being joined by his daughter for part of the interview. Near the end of the show, David and John returned to the stage to take questions.One of the questions, from a former staff member of the David Suzuki Foundation, was (roughly paraphrased - I fear that David's answer knocked the question out of my head) about how environmental issues could be better represented in traditional media, and how new media could be put to better use.John pointed out how much good use new media could be, citing how engaged people are with what the technology enables them to do.Part of David's answer was to characterize the Internet and new media as having little value, a place where you can have, "… the kinkiest sex of your life without … getting AIDS, or die in a gunfight and still be able to come back and fight the next day …" I'll have to listen to the recording to get the exact quote.I called him on it, both in a question on tape - which I may regret, as my ire was up at the time - and afterwards.His response from the stage was non-committal. I was surprised by his response when I caught up with him in person. He said, "That isn't a conversation." and then walked away.I was a bit taken aback. (I shouldn't have been - I work with any number of people who have a similar level of focus and seniority in their own sphere. They can be similarly recalcitrant at times - this seems to be a key survival skill for activists.)I feared that I was perhaps a bit too passionate on the topic (however, I shouldn't really worry; David is of a rather robust temper).I waited until he was done chatting with a small group of people and approached him again. He was slightly more polite. I sat, to convey that I genuinely wished to discuss. We talked for about 45 seconds, in which he asserted that discussion online, whatever people thought it was, wasn't community and that the type of meeting we were at was where real discussion could happen.The incongruity of this rebuttal shook me - the shock of the bad "aha!" moment. I told him that I would talk to Eli, his Foundation's volunteer coordinator, about what they can do to build online community.Then I sat to ponder the odd little burr of incongruity wedged up under my saddle.David had just given what was, in effect, a presentation to a group of 250 people, of which less than ten were able to ask him one or two questions. This was no conversation.This presentation will be broadcast out to a group of some thousands of people. This will not be a conversation.Within 20 minutes after the end of the session, the small hall where the presentation was given was empty, except for staff clearing out chairs. Most of these people left in the groups that they came in. There was conversation - relatively brief. How will they follow up? Did they exchange emails? Did they decide to meet again in some other location? Unlikely.I wanted to discuss something with David that we both feel strongly about, something that is undeniably changing our society, in the medium where he asserts that real communication happens - and he won't engage in the conversation. This was no conversation either.Perhaps if someone prints this on a scrap of dead tree and mails it to him via the post, Dr. Suzuki can ponder this.
Link Summary
Related posts
Posted on Friday, November 23rd, 2007 at 0:10
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
November 26th, 2007 at 17:12
If I remember Bill Gates didn't think the Internet was going to amount to much either. (hehehe)
Your Lovin' Ene, who apparently hasn't had a *real* conversation with you since July!
November 28th, 2007 at 9:23
Funny how people seem to have different public and private persona. Danny Kay, the late comedian appeared to be an easy going, lovable person in public, but as poster boy for UNICEF he was considered an sob.
I guess its harder to relate on a personal level but it seems to me a skill well worth developing if you want to influence people with
a pressing message.
Always great to read your blog.
Poppa