The Girls Project | Train-the-Trainer
Saturday, September 29, 2007
9:00am – 5:00pm
THE GIRLS PROJECT
For the past nine years The Girls Project has conducted girl-centered empowerment programs and has developed curriculum materials for elementary, middle, and high school girls,* with a focus on themes such as stereotypes, media, puberty/sexuality, relationships, women’s history, activism, health, and body and soul (to name a few).
*Note: The materials for the high school level are specifically focused on
immigrant teens.
ONE DAY TRAINING
Whether you are developing programming for girls or want to infuse your existing programs with fresh ideas, curricula, and energy, our training is an opportunity for educators, program directors, and staff who work with girls to learn about The Girls Project curriculum and teaching methodology.
This training will cover:
* Themes in the Girls Project curriculum;
* Collaborative/democratic education methods;
* The role of art and advocacy in education;
* The nuances of running a gender-based program.
WHERE: 535 East 12th Street, New York, NY, 10009
HOW MUCH: The cost is $250 per participant (depending on the size of your
agency, this fee is negotiable.)
This price includes the training as well as a light breakfast and lunch. Each participant will receive a pdf file of curriculum.
write: sheila@gp-bp.org to reserve your place in the training.
For more information about The Girls and Boys Projects, check out our
website:
Category: 2007
International Hip-Hop Education Conference (D.C.) – September 28, 2007
8:30 PM – 10:30 PM
at the National Music Center (after party to follow offsite)
Historic Carnegie Library
801 K Street NW
Come together with educators, scholars, authors, filmmakers, artists, journalists, students, publishers, photographers, and lovers of hip hop culture for a full day of workshops, panels and screenings.
Enrich enrich your knowledge and awareness of hip hop culture and connect with like-mineded
professionals to help further the goal of bringing hip hop back to its creative, educational, and functional state.
www.iahhe.org
Youth Video Exchange Network: Building Digital Distribution for Public Access Youth Channels
These days posting video content to the internet has never been easier. Independent producers, known as videobloggers, or vodcasters, operate their own internet TV stations, syndicating regularly produced segments and shows across the web with the click of a few buttons. It would seem like practically anyone (with a camera, a computer, and an internet connection) can get his/her voice out. However, long before there was Blip.tv, Revver, or YouTube, there was public access TV—local community-based cable stations.
Public access TV is a non-commercial community alternative to the mainstream media. Nationwide there are over 1,200 Public Access television centers which provide ordinary people with the equipment and training needed to make their own television programs, and to have these programs shown on cable television. Public access TV is based on the principle that everyone has a right to freedom of expression. In a world where the media plays such an important role, public access TV allows citizens to express their First Amendment right of free speech through television.
In 1972, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for the first time described cable television as an “electronic soapbox” and guaranteed the right of communities to have access to equipment and airtime. Under this FCC decision all cable television companies must put time aside for educational and Public Access TV. This decision was based on the recognition that cable television companies use “public-rights-of-way;” cables run under public streets, on highways and on other city property. Therefore, using these public places, cable television companies must compensate the public by allowing the public to have television “access.”
Cable access is still an amazing resource for local non-commercial distribution and here in New York City, more and more youth media organizations are getting their media out over the channels of Manhattan Neighborhood Network (MNN), specifically during the block of programming on Monday evenings, Saturdays, and Sundays programmed by the Youth Channel.
Since 2000, MNN Youth Channel has been the youth-serving arm of Manhattan’s public access TV center, Manhattan Neighborhood Network. We partner with schools, libraries, and community organizations to provide media production trainings and media literacy workshops to organizations in need throughout NYC. We provide an accessible non-commercial distribution outlet for New York’s thriving youth media scene by showcasing a block of 20 (and growing) hours of media by youth, for youth every week on one of MNN’s public access cable channels. On channel #34 in Manhattan or streaming live at www.mnn.org on Monday evenings or during the days on Saturdays and Sundays, viewers can tune into the freshest productions that have been submitted by organizations around the city and across the country.
The natural extension of creating such a non-commercial distribution outlet is to develop a network of like-minded stations in local communities around the country and to begin to articulate a model of how existing access centers can begin to open their doors to those under the age of 18. MNN, being one of the first (and largest) centers to experiment with youth services, bore some of the responsibility to visualize such a network. In 2002, a collaborative project called NYMAP (the National Youth Media Access Project) was born as a partnership between MNN Youth Channel and stations in several other cities, including Atlanta, GA, Denver, CO, Seattle, WA, St. Paul, MN, Grand Rapids, MI, and Lowell, MA.
National Youth Media Access Project
The newfound NYMAP partners developed personal relationships with one another, modeled services and programs after each other, shared resources, and began bicycling tapes from one ‘youth channel’ to the other (bicycling is when master tapes are sent via postal service from site to site, dubbed, and put on the air). NYMAP sought to nurture the right of free speech, to strengthen the much-needed presence of alternative and youth voices, and to connect young mediamakers from diverse backgrounds.
Beyond increasing the exposure of media produced was the idea that a collective national voice promoting youth media is louder than one local voice. NYMAP partners were in agreement that there was tremendous value for local non-commercial television outlets to devote programming hours to youth-produced video—a growing trend in cable access.
However, the volume of material to be bicycled became overwhelming from 2002 and beyond. Due to the lack of an existing archive or catalogue listing of what tapes were in stock, the bicycling of these tapes started to falter. As staff members changed and internal priorities and funding scenarios shifted at the various partner sites (MNN being no exception), the sustainability of NYMAP became questionable. Though there was still sporadic tape bicycling, it had significantly declined as a result. Indeed, NYMAP was a living network of passionate individuals and cooperative organizations with great potential for collaboration, but it lacked the infrastructure to support its mission, let alone the ability to expand.
Youth Video Exchange Network
The building of the Youth Video Exchange Network (YVXN) was the answer to solve this problem. YVXN began as an examination and analysis of the needs of the existing NYMAP network. We found that, in addition to sharing programming content, there is a real interest in archiving content, sharing resources—such as curricula and administrative materials—and facilitating collaborative productions. So, in the fall of 2006, with grant support from the Ford Foundation, Manhattan Neighborhood Network’s Youth Channel took a leadership role in developing the participatory web portal that would become YVXN: http://www.nymapexchange.net. The web portal was set to provide the bicycling of videos needed across the partnership.
The project’s primary technical focus was to find a way to share high-quality videos that could be easily turned around and re-aired at an access center 1,000 miles away, without increasing a need for already-overextended staff resources. However, we wanted to create a model network that was more than a technology tool. By utilizing web 2.0 and social networking tools that would ensure (in fact, require) participation and content creation from its constituency, we reached our goal.
So, in mid-2006 a core group of NYMAP partners—Manhattan Neighborhood Network, St. Paul Neighborhood Network, Portland Community Media, and Grand Rapids Community Media, and Atlanta’s People TV—was established to create an advisory board of leading cable access partners, using the web portal as our main interface for interaction, discussion, and sharing.
Our five core NYMAP partners were brought together by a year of successful testing and troubleshooting. This test phase has seen the transfer of over 20 hours of hi-resolution youth-produced video content over the internet. Much of this programming has been played back on local channels during blocks of programming dedicated to youth-produced work. By syndicating youth-produced work from other parts of the country, creating a virtual space for cataloging work that has been produced, and providing a space for new collaborative productions, YVXN is fulfilling its mission—to support the continued exchange of youth-produced broadcast-quality video among public access centers across the country and world.
Next Steps, New Technology
This type of networking (sharing resources and content) is valuable for access organizations and viewers alike. As internal operations at Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) stations around the country have begun to go digital, a major identified need has been to solve problems inherent in bicycling analog programs between stations. The costs, staff demands, and timeliness of sharing programs have always limited the ability of producers to efficiently distribute programming. In the case of MNN Youth Channel, access to media shared over YVXN is a bank of material which enables us to enrich our programming block with videos from youth around the country. As a result of this exchange, young people can more accessibly represent themselves and view the perspective of teens outside their local network.
Over the next year, our focus will be on establishing a National Youth Committee, consisting of young people who will be paid a stipend to participate in and promote the YVXN website, as well as a YVXN Steering Group made up of member organizations and representatives to forge future direction of the project. The Youth Video Exchange Network will grow to be a network that not only includes Youth Access administrators, but youth producers, teachers, and community video programmers, who can utilize hi-resolution video for non-commercial purposes.
We are currently utilizing a variety of free and open source tools for compression of shared videos, in the form of MPEG-4 files. These files are of substantially higher quality than video typically distributed and viewed on the web. As more members download the file, a peer-to-peer network is formed, allowing users to subscribe to auto-downloads, receive an email notification when a download is complete, and easily return the files to whatever format is appropriate for playback on the local public access station.
It is no surprise to media educators, administrators, and producers that emerging technologies and digital tools are changing the media landscape. Indeed, the field of youth media is on the forefront of developing a critical literacy and awareness of new media. Amidst these changes, the Youth Video Exchange Network wants to create new models of sharing our resources and media based on the values of non-commercialism and participation. Using new technology to continue and strengthen the “public” in cable public access is spreading youth made video from a variety of demographics across the nation. Through a network of public access channels that now easily share high quality (and broadcast worthy) video amongst one another, youth voice can be shared, disseminated, and distributed as quickly as YouTube, but on a non-commercial community alternative to the mainstream media.
We want to explore this terrain with you. If you are a youth-producer, educator, or administrator interested in learning more about joining the network, email nymap@youthchannel.org.
Andrew Lynn lives is a media worker living in New York State. He is the Technical Coordinator of the Youth Video Exchange Network, and has been the Education Coordinator with the MNN Youth Channel for the past 3 years.
this month’s youth media professional

Debra Koffler enjoys road trips and camping with her friends. She has a knack for pulling youth out of street living and is up on hip-hop and youth issues.
She is the Founder and Executive Director of Conscious Youth Media Crew (CYMC) in San Francisco, a recent addition to Adobe Youth Voices Projects of Change, sponsored by Listen Up! When I met Debra in the cool loft of CYMC, she treated youth with accountability and received much respect from youth as a result of her leadership. Her interaction with at risk youth was powerful. She is an expert and advocate of youth engagement and uses video/media to engage young people with tangible skills and career pipelines.
Debra founded CYMC to provide a new and exciting way to engage young people in learning technology and discovering the power of their voice through the creation of meaningful and socially conscious youth media art. Since 2001, more than 150 low-income, high-risk youth in San Francisco have successfully participated in CYMC programs.
Having worked as a teacher and community leader for 15 years primarily with underserved and high-risk youth, Debra maintains collaborations with schools, families and youth organizations to ensure ongoing program success of CYMC.
She brings invaluable experience and leadership in education, youth media and technology training, literacy building, youth development, violence prevention, and the arts.
Debra is a strong advocate in the development of youth media programming throughout the Bay Area and for increased access to digital media arts and technology for all communities in San Francisco.
letter from the editor (summer | volume 1: issue 7)
Letter from the Editor
Welcome to YMR’s Summer July/August 2007 (Volume 1: Issue 7) of Youth Media Reporter (YMR).
The theme of this month’s YMR issue is access and audience. Each article provides insight into ways youth media professionals and/or young people enhance the approach, technology, or depth of audience and accessibility of youth media.
The articles in issue #7 of YMR cover:
• New technology trends in ‘bicycling’ videos for national public access broadcasting;
• A practitioner and academic’s perspective on media literacy presented at the National Media and Education Conference;
• Best practices of mentoring young people in culturally sensitive topics;
• A youth-led initiative to increase distribution of videos from television to the internet to screenings in the local city of Baltimore, MD.
Also, check out our professional of the month Debra Koffler, the founder of Conscious Youth Media Crew in the bay area, and a recent addition to the Adobe Youth Voices project.
This summer has been filled with youth media conferences, dialogue and interactions with colleagues, and summer programming. If you are interested in writing an in-brief or a feature article about a youth media event, program, or challenge your organization has experienced or solved, contact YMR. We are interested in learning about you and your viewpoints
YMR has three more issues left in the year 2007 and will be releasing a print version of the journal with 8-12 “special feature” articles that investigate trends, issues, and challenges current to the youth media field early 2008. The next issue (#8) of YMR will come out on September 15th with October and November to follow.
Upcoming themes for YMR include showcasing youth media organizations in radio, print, and video, as well as continuing to highlight current opinions, tensions, and trends in the field. YMR will continue to feature diverse content, including voices from funders, global youth media practitioners, and neighboring fields.
If you would like to be published in YMR please contact me at idahl@aed.org. As always, we also encourage you to provide feedback or begin a conversation about any of the current articles, simply use the comment feature next to each article on the YMR website.
Warmly,
Ingrid Hu Dahl
Editor, YMR
Report from the field and make a difference!
The National Media Education Conference Helps Strengthen the Field
What happens when over 300 classroom teachers, college and university faculty, youth media professionals and community leaders gather for several days and nights of stimulating presentations, screenings, discussions, workshops and keynote speeches? None other than the 2007 National Media Education Conference (NMEC), held in late June this year in St. Louis, Missouri, a bi-annual event brimming with research and reflections on the theory and practice of media education in a variety of school and community settings. With the increasing growth and diversity of the field, we believe this gathering of media literacy educators is more important than ever before.
The theme of the four-day series of workshops and screenings was “iPods, Blogs and Beyond: Evolving Media Literacy for the 21st Century.” For one of us (Robb Grieco), it was our first experience at a national gathering of media literacy educators; for another (Hobbs), it was one of perhaps a dozen such events attended over the past twenty years. We share here, briefly, our critical reflections on the conference, with particular focus on its relevance to readers of Youth Media Reporter.
As described in Hobbs’ keynote address, there are many factors now in place that are enabling the development of media literacy in the United States and around the world. These include:
• the increasing diversity of media content, formats and genres (new genres create new opportunities for critical analysis and production)
• access to digital tools for authorship and new forms of distribution and exhibition
• widespread public awareness of need for critical thinking about new forms of online media
• state curriculum standards (now in almost every state) http://www.frankwbaker.com/state_lit.htm
• new stakeholders—nearly 1/3 of the NMEC conference registrants were first-time attendees
• recognized instructional practices, implementation processes and models for teacher education and staff development
• case studies of practice in school and after-school
• graduate programs and coursework at universities around the country
However, media literacy educators gather at this conference every two years not only to celebrate accomplishments, but also to challenge each other, to provoke each other, to push at each other’s assumptions. After all, the definition of media literacy is still contested, and it will be for quite a few years to come. Is it a skill? A competency? A set of tools? A knowledge base? Does media literacy have a particular perspective or point of view on media culture? Is media literacy a lifestyle? What about the uses and purposes of media literacy? All these different perspectives were presented—and argued about—at the conference.
At NMEC, participants viewed media literacy as widely as:
• a new type of literacy that responds to the digital media environment;
• an educational approach to promote critical thinking about popular culture;
• an awareness-building process for recognizing bias in the media;
• giving young people a voice in their culture and communities;
• the process of teaching and learning about tools and technologies of communication;
• a means to support the development of healthy lifestyle decisions; and/or
• an advocacy tool to push for social and political change.
These different perspectives contributed to the fresh, dynamic mix of engaging ideas from people with a wide range of backgrounds and perspectives, leading to an exhilarating sense of possibility for the future of the field. From our point of view, while the vitality of the field is strengthened by these diverse conceptualizations of media literacy, it can also be confusing. Because of the different perspectives driving the advancement of the field, it is important to ask: What flavor is your media literacy? Practitioners and scholars need to reflect on the understandings they bring to this complex term while respecting the diversity of voices in the field.
Research Expands Our Understanding of the Impact of Youth Media
One highlight of the conference was the two-day Research Summit held in conjunction with the conference, where nearly 100 scholars and graduate students gathered to share research on media literacy. Organized by Marilyn Cohen (University of Washington) and Renee Cherow-O’Leary (Teachers College, Columbia University), the research summit was the first of its kind, the result of a growing number of researchers who are exploring the impact of media literacy on children, youth, and adults. We found ourselves in a state of amazement at the collegial spirit in evidence at the event: this group truly appreciates the pleasure of trans-disciplinary inquiry.
And with scholars from the fields of communication, education, public health, the humanities and the fine arts all rubbing elbows, participants seemed to enjoy the chance to learn about theories, research methodologies and approaches to research that were far outside their own areas of expertise. Unlike traditional academic conferences, where we present our ideas to people who (mostly) share our same knowledge set, here we had to frame our ideas more broadly so they could make sense to people from a wide range of academic backgrounds. As a result, plenty of deceptively simple questions yielded surprising and provocative discussions.
Yet we were also able to share the nitty-gritty of our current work, too. Some research sessions felt a little like the sensation you get when driving from 0 to 60 miles per hour in less than 3.5 seconds. To be truthful, it was an intellectual rush that most of the old timers (used to the more-typical focus on ‘show-and-tell’ teacher workshops which focus on classroom implementation) found breathtaking.
Scholars from many disciplines are exploring how youth media impacts the lives of adolescents. Some of this work maps nicely onto what youth media practitioners have discovered from their own practice. For example, in her work with Native American youth, Karon Sherarts has shown how, when students create media, the production process brings together the intersecting skills of writing, problem-solving, social skills, and creative/aesthetic development. In measuring learning outcomes, she showed that, with guidance from skilled adults, these programs can also generate leaps in students’ self-understanding. This is a key point because, although youth media programs can be positioned to emphasize skill-building and workforce development outcomes, the key benefits may be in supporting a healthy process of identity development, socio-emotional and personal growth, particularly among minority youth.
Other research sessions also focused on youth media, including the work of Korina Jocson, an expert in adolescent literacy who is currently a postdoctoral fellow at Stanford University. Her work examined how adolescent literacy practices are enacted in video production activities. At the Research Summit, she presented a model for examining the developmental trajectory of student learning. Technical skills, conceptual understanding and aesthetic abilities simultaneously develop during the course of a media production experience. We believe that models like this contribute to the process of understanding how youth media production experiences can be best designed and implemented to meet clearly articulated objectives.
Another fascinating presentation was shared by Just Think, a San Francisco-based media literacy organization, who with an evaluation team from the Michael Cohen Group, developed an approach to evaluate the impact of a media arts program implemented with 16 teachers in two low-income California middle schools. This school-based program involved children in critical analysis and media production activities using digital cameras and graphic design software. In this program, media literacy was explored through an approach that was inquiry-based, using the critical questions now codified by the AMLA’s Core Principles of Media Literacy Education. Teachers participated in staff development programs that helped them practice media analysis that emphasized open-ended questioning. There was an emphasis on the development of “strong-sense critical thinking,” in which critical thinking skills are applied to all texts. Based on the work of Richard Paul, strong-sense critical thinking encourages students to question even the ideas and opinions that they support. Critical thinking in the strong sense emphasizes the metacognitive and reflective processes that enable a person to have insight into his or her own cognitive and emotional responses. Throughout the four days, it was easy to see how this passion for strong-sense critical thinking is deeply shared among conference participants.
One of the strengths of the research developed by Just Think was its mix of qualitative and quantitative methodologies. While qualitative work is essential for building the future of the field, it is important to develop quantitative approaches that enable us to address the question: What does a media literate person do, think, feel and believe?
Reflecting on the Research Summit overall, it’s important for researchers to be critical about the practice of their research on media literacy. Because the field is new, we are still searching for the right kinds of theoretical and conceptual tools that offer insight on this work. We saw some sessions where theory and evidence were clearly mismatched, methodological rigor was lacking, and researchers were searching for evidence that confirmed existing theoretical (or ideological) stances. The opportunity to share ideas with colleagues—and ask critical questions—deepens the quality of our own work.
Exploring Popular Music and Personal and Social Identity
Going beyond the “bread and butter” topics of media literacy education—news media/citizenship, advertising/consumerism, media ownership/economics, and stereotypes/issues of representation—this year’s NMEC workshops and presentations provided a deeper focus on issues including popular music, film, videogames, and the Internet by media literacy educators.
For example, Mike Robb Grieco presented a workshop on using music for critical inquiry. He developed a high school English unit that enables students to question, explore and communicate the different ways that popular music holds power in their lives, using carefully selected clips from the popular film High Fidelity (2000) to promote rich discussion. In the workshop, he modeled a lesson from the curriculum where students choose the top five songs that they would want played at their funeral. As participants enacted and then discussed the activity, it became clear our rationale for most of our choices clearly connected to the core questions of media literacy inquiry such as: Who is telling the story? Who is the target audience? How might different people interpret the message differently? What values are embedded in the message? What is omitted from the message? Although this particular unit did not involve youth as music producers, it did focus on students as producers of the meanings and power that music holds for them.
Such lessons help students take greater responsibility for communicating their understanding of the meaning-making process with expressive media like popular music. Activities like this strengthen students’ ability to reflect on how music contributes to the development of a sense of personal, social and cultural identity.
New Media Literacy: Skills for Thriving in Participatory Culture
The theme of the conference was well-articulated by Henry Jenkins, director of MIT’s New Media Literacy (NML) project, who piqued attendees’ interest with his keynote speech, “What Wikipedia Can Teach Us about New Media Literacies.” Jenkins explained how the user-generated, collaborative nature of knowledge (such as that gathered and created in the ever-growing, openly-updated sites like Wikipedia) challenges and changes traditional notions of knowledge and expertise. We are seeing a shift in the role of the expert; instead of the expert being seen as one who creates, holds and distributes knowledge, the expert is one who can navigate resources and connect areas of knowledge for collaborative problem solving.
As media literacy guru Marshall McLuhan pointed out more than forty years ago, we are living at time when the concepts of knowledge, authority and credibility are all in flux. As a result, there is new demand for expanded types of critical thinking and literacy skills, which in turn may need new pedagogical approaches. According to Jenkins, four of these new media literacy skills include:
• Collective Intelligence: the ability to pool knowledge and compare notes with others towards a common goal.
• Judgment: the ability to evaluate the reliability and credibility of different information source.
• Networking: the ability to search for, synthesize and disseminate information.
• Negotiation: the ability to travel across diverse communities, discerning and respecting multiple perspectives, and grasping and following alternative sets of norms.
While acknowledging debates over the credibility of user-generated knowledge in sites such as Wikipedia, Jenkins emphasized the advantages of participatory cultures in developing collective knowledge. For example, the lack of authoritative credentials in wikis often creates a greater impetus for both the author to explain how she knows what she knows and for the reader to scrutinize the basis for credibility of any given entry than most traditionally authoritative sources of knowledge offer. According to Jenkins, collaborative, participatory sites like Wikipedia help overcome a “transparency gap” by calling attention to the constructedness of the media and information that they offer.
We think this perspective has enormous value to the future of the field, but we quibble about whether it’s really “new” media literacy or rather media literacy applied to new media forms. After all, recognizing and responding to the constructedness of media representations is one of the key concepts of media literacy. And media literacy advocates also emphasize that each form of communication and expression has its unique language, codes and conventions. What Jenkins offers is an effective elucidation of the key skills needed for a particular set of communication technology tools—the current dominant online participatory media environment of the 21st century.
This keynote address invited media educators to address the participation gap by helping to provide all youth the opportunities to participate in such knowledge production and to develop new instructional approaches to examine the ethical issues such participation raises. We believe that educators at all levels—and in all settings—need to explore how to incorporate these new competencies, skills and practices into the classroom.
Youth Participation and the Future of National Gatherings of Media Literacy Educators
The Alliance for a Media Literate America (AMLA), the organization that hosts this conference, has long struggled with attracting funders to support its work. At this event, we saw the impact of this challenge on some aspects of the conference, including event coordination and publicity. The conference is run by an elected board of directors who generously volunteer their time. Without an executive director and paid staff, the organization finds it difficult to attract funders who share in its mission. Its status as a membership organization makes it just a little too “grass roots-y” in this regard.
This year, the lack of funding led to a sharp decline in the number of young people who participated in the conference. One traditional component of the NMEC conference has been M3, the Modern Media Makers, an innovative program that has been a major feature of conference for many years. The M3 program consists of a group of teens who attend the conference, partner with media educators to learn media literacy principles, and create digital videos during the conference. At the closing event of the conference, the voices of these youth participants are showcased. Students screen the videos they created during the 4-day conference and answer questions about their work from participants. Old-timers in media literacy have consistently rated the youth participation events as offering the most inspiring moments of the conference.
Sadly, this year’s M3 was smaller than usual with only a handful of youth participating. For some conference participants, this highly anticipated event was a disappointment as compared with previous years; for those attending NMEC for the first time, it was still a treat to be able to engage with even a few young people about their own learning experiences with media literacy. Few conferences for educators involve youth in any meaningful way, and that’s a shame. We would like to see NMEC continue to develop and deepen this active, authentic way to involve youth participants in the next NMEC conference, which is scheduled to meet in Detroit in the summer of 2009. Perhaps the youth media field can support a dramatic expansion of these efforts. Most importantly, the next NMEC conference needs greater support from the foundation community in order to continue to fertilize the field at the grass roots level.
Media Literacy and Global Initiatives
As the largest regular gathering of media literacy educators, the National Media Education Conference drew participants and presenters from England, Canada, New Zealand, South Korea, China, Argentina and many other nations. Paul Mihailidis, Director of Media Literacy Initiatives at the International Center for Media and the Public Agenda (University of Maryland) described a new program set to begin this summer in Salzburg, Austria. It brings together faculty and undergraduate students from six continents for a three-week media literacy course with an emphasis on global media and change.
One of the goals of the institute is for students and faculty to collaborate on the development of a media literacy curriculum for undergraduate students which they will bring back and implement at their respective universities. When asked by an attendee at his workshop, “How will students from such different cultural backgrounds and media landscapes share understandings of the media literacy skills needed for change?” Mihailidis responded optimistically, “That’s what we will find out!”
One thing is certain: media literacy educators are comfortable experimenting with new ideas and new instructional practices. They embrace the possibility of bringing people all over the world a deeper understanding of mass media and popular culture, and are excited to consider the implications of this work for enhancing peace and global understanding.
In a sense, Mihailidis’s goal to explore the implications of media literacy cross-nationally is similar to the goal of the conference organizers of the National Media Education Conference. It’s why the conference is so central to the future of the field. By sharing our experiences and questioning our assumptions, we can grow and learn from one another, finding opportunities to strengthen our own practice and develop the capacity to bring media literacy to people in our own families, our neighborhoods and communities, and around the world.
Renee Hobbs is a Professor at the Media Education Lab, Temple University School of Communications and Theater. Michael Robb Grieco is a student in the Mass Media and Communication Ph.D. program at Temple University. Contact: http://mediaeducationlab.com
An Ally for Youth When it Counts
Every summer since 1999, I have volunteered my services to a local youth media organization called VOX Teen Communications. My “day job” is as a news designer for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s (AJC) editorial pages. I once believed that getting more youth voices on our opinion pages was a good way to grow a younger readership. However, after years of working with teens through VOX, I find myself less concerned with my employer’s circulation and more dedicated to giving young writers the best publishing experience I can.
In the summer of 2005, I had the opportunity to mentor a 16-year-old Somali girl named Ayan Hussein get a very difficult, personal story published in our paper. The experience tested the resolve of all involved and forced some lessons on us before it was over. These lessons included how to be an advocate for young writers, how to negotiate cultural differences, how to support a teen facing outside pressures and most of all, how to guide a young writer through a large bureaucratic process with her voice intact and her spirit empowered.
Ayan and I first met as part of the Raise Your Voice Summer Program sponsored by VOX Teen Communications (http://www.voxrox.org/program/summer.html). Each summer, VOX teaches 16 teenage writers and journalists journalism fundamentals and community leadership. One of the most popular attractions of the program is the one-on-one mentorship with news-industry professionals. As mentors, our immediate goal is to help each teen get an article published in the AJC. We coach our teens to select a topic that the paper might want to publish, give advice on how to cover the topic, and help pitch the finished article to one of our paper’s section editors.
First impressions
The subject matter Ayan wished to write about was challenging. During our initial meeting, she told me she wanted her article to be a personalized introduction to the Somali practice of female circumcision (also called female genital mutilation, or FGM). In her words, “I wanted to educate myself on what happened to me when I was 7 years old through the research that I would be doing. The article would also benefit other victims of the ritual.”
Ayan took this opportunity very seriously. She explains, “[When I gave Pete my first draft], I was sure that he was going to judge me when he was done reading it. I was wrong. He said that it looked good and the only thing missing was the reliable resources and interviews from people in the community. [Female circumcision] has always been in my mind but never talked about because it is taboo. [Yet] I had stories of my personal struggle that I went through since coming to America…this was a chance to share my stories with [a wider audience].”
Soon Ayan was telling me how her family was scattered between the U.S. and Kenya; how her first years in the United States were lonely and difficult; how she lived with her father and younger sister in a tiny apartment; and how her educational ambitions were at odds with her family’s plans for her.
No one in her family had more than a fifth-grade education. Joining the VOX summer program made Ayan’s father fearful that such activities would westernize her beyond his recognition. Ayan explained that most young Somali women were expected to drop out of school and go to work, or marry young and start families.
I quickly realized that there was more at stake here than a writer getting something off her chest. I knew I would need a plan for how to support her without being a disrupting force on her relationships with her family, culture and community.
To that end, I decided that I would do my best to create options for her and leave as many choices as possible up to her. It was my hope that giving her options would increase her confidence and leadership as we progressed toward publication.
Choices, choices
I explained to Ayan that we had several choices where her article could be published. If she kept a detached voice, her article could run as an explanatory news story in our weekly international section called Atlanta & the World. This would require more research and reporting. The advantage of doing a detached, reported-news article would be to expand the scope of her writing from a first-person piece to one that would allow her to explore the context of her experience.
On the other hand, there were advantages to keeping her subjective voice too. By running her article as a first-person piece on our daily op-ed page, she would have more opportunity to reflect on her experience. We already had a daily op-ed venue for young writers called “New Attitudes” that was tried and true, but I felt that Ayan’s story deserved a bigger treatment.
The third option was creating a longer piece intended for the Sunday opinion section, @issue. Publishing a teen writer in the @issue section would be new territory for the AJC, and I warned Ayan that the experience of dealing with several layers of editors could be frustrating for her. In response, Ayan only asked which venue had the largest readership. Getting her message out was paramount. As our “primetime” space, the @issue section would be a gamble—we would get a larger readership, but also more scrutiny from the paper’s editors. More editors always means more changes, and I worried that we might change or even lose Ayan’s voice.
Over the next several days, I checked on Ayan as she progressed on her research. I made some suggestions on where to look for materials and asked if there was any way I could help. At times, her research was emotionally difficult. Ayan explains, “To my surprise, I realized [during my research] that there were three types of female circumcision. At one point I came across a picture taken after the procedure and I almost vomited—I could not hold back tears. I phoned Pete and I will never forget what he said. Instead of telling me to be strong or just move on and not to visit the website again, he said that I was a good writer and I have plenty of stories to work on—that female circumcision was not the only option we had.”
It was still early in the process, and I reminded Ayan that we could go to Plan B if necessary. Ayan reflects, “As a result of Pete giving me options, I chose to stick with the topic. I realized that I didn’t have to continue [with the topic] but that I wanted to.”
Working with the editor
After a round of editing, I arranged a pitch meeting between Ayan and the @issue editor Richard Halicks. Pitch meetings are crucial to a teen writer’s ultimate experience in the VOX summer program. Pitch meetings allow both the teen writer and editor to get to know each other—even before the article is discussed. Doing so creates a partnership, rather than introducing another authority figure for the teen to deal with. It’s also a great time to discuss expectations.
Richard—a very nurturing editor—was enthusiastic about getting her article into his section. However, he wanted to know whether Ayan’s parents knew what she was writing. Although he would not ask for their permission, he wanted to make sure that Ayan understood the consequences of making them part of her story. Ayan replied that she had discussed her article with her father, who was cool to the idea, but did not forbid it.
With that, Richard and Ayan created their own working dynamic. Richard wanted more reporting on the practice of FGM, and sent Ayan for quotes from the Somali community. Ayan seemed to enjoy working with Richard. They haggled over word choices and traded ideas over how to begin and end the piece. You would have thought she was a regular staff reporter.
Over the next two weeks, my role would be to talk to each of them separately to make sure Ayan was meeting Richard’s expectations, and that Richard’s changes were not diluting Ayan’s voice. I further mediated by touching base with staff at VOX to deliver progress reports and ensure that Ayan was not overwhelmed.
A major roadblock
With all parties happy with the article, and with three days before publication, Richard took the piece to his editors. The intent of this meeting was to inform the editors what was going in the @issue section, and also to run interference on Ayan’s behalf if those editors had any concerns. Unfortunately, they had a big one.
The editors wanted some kind of signed note—either from a doctor or parent—verifying that Ayan had the FGM procedure. In the summer of 2005, the journalism scandals involving Jayson Blair and Jack Kelley were still fresh, and for some editors, having a “good feeling” about a writer wasn’t enough (especially a young freelancer we hadn’t worked with before).
Richard and I were crestfallen. We discussed ways to change Ayan’s piece so that we would not have to ask for such verification. For instance, we could pitch it as a news story, without the personal angle. Or give the story over to VOX, which would be happy to publish it as-is in their monthly newspaper. Whatever the answer, we would be going to press in three days regardless.
I contacted the VOX office for advice. Program director Meredith Tetloff said that she would explain the situation to Ayan, and stress that the choice was still hers. I was very thankful that VOX was there as a safety net. I knew that the concerns at VOX would be unclouded by the production concerns at my office.
A difficult choice
Ayan’s first reaction to the news was disbelief. She explains, “At first I thought that it was a joke. But then it sunk in slowly. I understood where they were coming from. The worst part was [asking] my father to write the letter and then sign it.”
Ayan became more determined to get her father’s signature and I could tell she was looking for encouragement from me. I reminded her that she had choices, that the article would be published and that people would be moved wherever they read it.
Later that evening, Ayan called me. She sounded like she had just run a race. I could hear raised voices in the background. The talk had been difficult, but productive. She later told me, “It took hours of talking to [my father]. He finally signed it. I believe that he did it because deep inside he agreed with what I was doing.” Though far from enthusiastic, her father had contributed his signature to a scrawled note saying that Ayan had indeed had the FGM procedure.
With that behind us, we were back on track. Ayan explains, “The next day, [I] spoke to Meredith at VOX about what had happened with my dad and she was comforting.” Meredith and I paid close attention to Ayan’s mood over the next week. She seemed exhausted, and as she says, “I almost changed my mind about the article but thank God I had a good support group at VOX.”
A few days later, Ayan’s article was published on the cover of our “primetime” @issue section and her mood was lifted considerably. In fact, the article led to many great things for Ayan as she entered her senior year of high school. Ayan says that although many in her community were angry about the article, others were now coming to her to share their experiences. She explains, “I have also had open conversations about this ritual with friends, something that I could not do before. I had friends, victims of the ritual who admire me for writing the article but [whose] parents hate me for publishing the piece. I also [received] letters from people who read the article and congratulated me for my bravery. All I care about was that my message was loud and clear to both victims and strangers of female circumcision.”
In the published version of Ayan’s article, she writes, “I wish I had the power to prevent any other 7-year-old girl from getting circumcised. My privacy was invaded that afternoon, and it still haunts me to this day. Sharing my story is difficult, but it is an important step toward my healing.”
My work with Ayan continued after the success of her article. Over the next year, she emerged as a campus leader and a hero to local Somali women. NPR (partnered with Youth Radio) broadcast a first-person segment on her story. She became involved with international and refugee groups. And she continued to write for VOX. Last fall, I began helping her copy edit college and scholarship applications. Ten months later, she is a Gates Millennial Scholar bound for the University of Georgia with a shiny new laptop.
Lessons learned
Getting more youth writers involved in mainstream media outlets can be a challenge, but a very rewarding one. The VOX Raise Your Voice Summer Program is an excellent model in youth media/mainstream media partnership. Even with my long involvement with the program, my experience as Ayan’s mentor taught me to completely rethink the value of the publishing experience and how to improve upon it for teen’s benefit.
For instance, it is not enough to treat young writers with patience and “kid gloves.” Teens are up to any challenge if the right rapport is struck upfront. As with our productive pitch meeting, having teens meet with their editor(s) face-to-face creates a partnership.
Furnish teens with choices throughout the process. Put as many decisions in the teen’s hands as possible. Be clear on your expectations and what they can expect from you.
Be prepared to support teens in ways that are outside the sphere of typical journalism and editing. Also, be mindful of outside pressures affecting the teen. Tread very lightly when dealing with cultural and family connections.
Be an advocate for teens. Ask them how you can help. Run interference on their behalf when the bureaucracy threatens to swallow their voice. Give them a chance to challenge decisions. As with our productive pitch meeting, having teens meet with their editor(s) face-to-face creates a partnership.
Remember that bigger venues bring more scrutiny, more editors, more verification and more headaches. Leave yourself time to address the unexpected. And always have a Plan B at hand if it all goes south.
Along with that, tell the teen (and your superiors) what’s ahead. Despite our best efforts, this is unfortunately where Richard and I failed Ayan. Her biggest hurdle came at the very end of the process and was unduly stressful. It possibly could have been avoided had we involved our own editors earlier on.
And finally, encourage strong cooperation between the youth organization and the professional newsroom. The dual goals of teen-building and voice-raising demand it.
My experience with Ayan reminded me that youth media is a means to an end, but not the end itself. As valuable as the published artifact is, what makes the experience a lasting one for the teen is the ownership and realization of their ambitions. By providing choices, a mentor helps the teen chart their own path. Do this, and you’ll be amazed where they lead.
Pete Corson has been a news designer for the Editorial department of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution since 1998. He has volunteered with VOX Teen Communications since 1999, where he has helped coordinate the summer mentorship program. He is married and lives in Atlanta.
Creating Conversation: Baltimore Youth Explore Audience in the City

It is critical for young people not only to produce their own media segments, but also innovatively bring the issues they raise to a broader and engaged audience. BeMore TV, a student-run media project dedicated to showcasing young people’s ideas through public access in Baltimore, MD, works to entertain, empower, and enlighten the public about issues important to youth. Realizing that television brought limitations to public discourse, young people at BeMore TV find that public access is not always the most accessible medium to reach a local community. Thus, young people at BeMore TV have sought innovative ways to distribute their episodes to a variety of audiences through the internet and grassroots distribution strategies.
BeMore TV is a project of Wide Angle Youth Media, an organization founded in 2000 by Gin Ferrara, who recognized that Baltimore “needed an organization that would do youth media in an ongoing, sustainable way.” Young people need to use media on a larger scale to address issues within their local community. She explains, “Often young people are the target market for what they are seeing on television. [They] need to be able to respond to that.”
Two interns from Wide Angle—Lendl Tellington and Kyle Halle-Erby—conceived BeMore TV after successfully producing a documentary on student-led activism as a response to the education crisis in Baltimore in 2006.
Their documentary, “Schooling Baltimore Street,” made students realize they needed to use media to educate the public on issues that affect Baltimore from a youth perspective. Tellington, now Coordinator for the BeMore TV program explains, “We wanted to find a way to develop critical work that talked about youth issues, but at a faster rate because ‘Schooling Baltimore Street’ took us almost a year to produce.”
With the guidance of mentors such as Ferrara, students researched and developed a plan for a television show. They traveled to New York City to consult other youth media organizations such as the Global Action Project, Listen Up! and the Manhattan Neighborhood Network.
After much discussion with these organizations, BeMore TV decided to air half hour episodes that would feature segments about a specific theme by youth across Baltimore. Submissions for the show—solicited across the city—would provide a platform for many young voices and give BeMore TV a finger on the pulse of issues affecting Baltimore youth.
Youth issues, public access
Tellington and Halle-Erby decided to use public access television—a medium regularly viewed by many Baltimore teens—as a means to generate discussion in the local community. Airing the show on Baltimore’s Public Access would make these voices available to a wide range of people on a recurring basis. As a result, a diverse audience in the city would be exposed to the opinions and perspectives of young people, particularly on issues the young people themselves deemed of significant importance.
Co-founder Tellington describes his vision for the show’s role in the city: “Baltimore is probably one of the most geographically segregated cities, as far as having communities primarily black, and then primarily white. There are so many different communities, and they really don’t talk to each other. BeMore TV is trying to produce work about youth, and motivate communities to talk about issues affecting youth, because most times in the news, [youth are portrayed] in a negative light.”
After successfully producing two episodes since 2006, students at BeMore TV found that Baltimore’s Public Access was not particularly public or accessible. Explains April Montebon, a MVP intern, “BeMore TV is only on Baltimore’s Public Access, and that’s only for people who have cable and who live in the city, so we had a very limited audience.” The lack of a permanent schedule provided further complications to reaching an audience. Though BeMore TV’s purpose was using television to increase access, it would have to explore other vehicles to distribute their work and increase its viewer base.
Outside the city
The youth and practitioners at BeMore TV and Wide Angle confronted these challenges through innovative dissemination techniques on-line, on paper, and in the community.
First, the youth at BeMore TV took advantage of the nationwide popularity and user-based ranking systems of sites such as MySpace and YouTube. Douglas, a student who has been working with Wide Angle Media for three years, currently working on a marketing campaign explains, “We post our videos online, so people can view and rate them. [As a result], we get more viewers; have film makers across the country and across the world as MySpace friends, increasing access to our videos.” For young people, networking on-line to showcase these episodes increased their ability to market media to a variety of demographics across the World Wide Web.
Though networking and marketing videos on-line taught youth at BeMore TV important skills, the internet did not lead to enough local dialogue with community members in the city of Baltimore.
As a result, in conjunction with using MySpace and YouTube, young people researched local trends in media distribution specifically for the city of Baltimore. Using a do-it-yourself distribution guide (www.creativealliance.org/camm/distro_guide.pdf) put together by four Baltimore youth media organizations—Wide Angle Youth Media, Creative Alliance, Kids on the Hill, and Megaphone Project—youth at BeMore TV learned that they had to have more face-to-face contact with the local community. Ferrara at Wide Angle explains, “We found that the Internet is a really great way to get outside the city, but inside the city, you have to go to people’s homes. You have to go to the neighborhoods and do events either at a school or at a church or an after school site… for people to really see things.”
Such findings inspired a student-written grant for a new community outreach plan, which April Montebon helped to write and obtain. In order to reach a wider audience the students came up with a yearly plan: they would make two episodes each year, which would be aired at public screenings, and help teach three workshops each year, using a peer-to-peer model. In this model, students assist the Mentoring Video Project at Wide Angle to teach youth about technology. At public screenings, youth present each episode, lead discussion on the topics they raise, and use the time to get a sense of possible future themes.
Inside the city
Montebon explains the importance of community screenings in this new approach: “The reason for a screening is, you can [sit at home and] watch something on TV… but it takes another step to have a type of forum. I think what the community screenings are supposed to serve, is a platform where people can start a sort of discourse.” Airing a youth-made TV episode in a community context, such as a public park, museum, or neighborhood event, creates a potential for dialogue. It is easier for people to talk to one another about youth-led issues in a group setting, as well as engage with youth media makers on the issues they raise.
The screenings provided a context for learning more about the local audience of Baltimore, which as times, were challenging. The youth at BeMore TV believe in the issues represented in each episode. In a youth media organization, young people are supported for such ideas, but in the community at large young people often face challenges of stereotypes and condescension.
Two types of community reactions posed challenges to the success of the screenings. Recounts Tellington, “When people hear about youth media, it’s like ‘Aw, the kids [are] telling stories with cameras,’” which does not take the issues young people represent within their video seriously. On the flip side, Tellington explains, “Last year there was an individual who came to the screening, which was presented as a community screening, not as youth-made work. This person got there and said, ‘I thought this was a community meeting,’ and broke out and left.” Convincing the community that youth perspective is as valuable as any other to community success is often difficult.
BeMore TV believes young people often have more of an understanding of local city issues before these issues become part of mainstream news coverage. For example, Ferrara states, “We were talking with students about issues in schools way before it became a city-wide discussion.”
Since most Baltimore residents do not realize youth are often the first to recognize real issues, BeMore TV is working on its audience to embrace young people as informers and influencers of important issues within the city of Balitmore. While Ferrara openly admits, “I’m really grateful to have some idea of what’s going on for young people in Baltimore,” the rest of Baltimore still needs to listen to what youth have to say.
Entertainment
The latest episode on hip-hop, the trailer for which students have already shown at two city-wide events, marks a transition in BeMore TV’s approach to representing and distributing issues raised by young people.
The episode uses hip hop to both entertain and talk critically about issues. Using hip hop draws the local Baltimore audience to learn about critical issues while having fun, which aligns with the mission of BeMore TV that values entertaining and enlightening the public about issues important to youth. “We’re trying to make a transition,” says Tellington. “We found a component in hip hop that is very entertaining, that people can relate to. We are trying to use that as a vehicle to talk to more communities. [It is about] finding that [arena] where you can talk critically, and use entertainment to get your message across.”
While results of adding entertainment to BeMore TV’s episodes has yet to be assessed, BeMore TV’s multi-faceted approach to disseminating media products is an example of how youth media organizations might distribute media and affect a local audience.
The young people of BeMore TV show how sometimes it is not only about making a media product—such as airing episodes on local television—but also working to realize the goal of community dialogue. In Baltimore, MD youth find that distributing their episodes on the internet, on television, and in local screenings increases access and distribution of the issues raised in their videos.
Learning from challenges of these different approaches, youth continue to find ways to get their voices heard—helping to bring vision and perspective to the local community in Baltimore. Youth media practitioners can support young media makers by offering insight, sharing research and findings on channels of distribution and audience, as well as advocating for youth media at public and community-based screenings locally. Young people of BeMore TV are not simply representing issues in the local community; they are finding inventive ways to inspire conversation while using multiple distribution strategies to increase the range and impact of their media—with a twist of entertainment.
Grace Smith is the Assistant Editor intern at the Academy for Educational Development. She is a writer who grew up in Baltimore, MD that recently moved to New York from New Orleans.
Gender Equality Youth Festival
Brooklyn Hosts the Second Annual Gender Equality Festival
(July 28, 2007 * 11am – 6pm)
We can’t forget that we fight for gender equity because women have the right to be safe and respected, whether the violence comes from a national radio host or a teenage boy we pass on the street.
Girls for Gender Equity is proud to organize the Second Annual New York City Gender Equality Festival on July 28th 11am – 6pm at Von King Park in Brooklyn, NY. Featuring performances by artists including singer/songwriter Pamela Means, hip hop artist Carlethal, Women’s
Project theater group, and spoken word poets Urban Word NYC, the Gender Equality Festival is a free public event for education, networking, resource sharing, community interaction, arts and recreation that is open to New Yorkers of all ages and genders.
Over 70 community organizations will participate, offering workshops on a wide variety of topics – responding to street harassment, zine making, HIV/AIDS, self defense, youth leadership, online activism, responding to police violence, reproductive justice, and more. “NYC
must come together to let everyone know we will not tolerate discrimination or abuse against girls and women in any form, anytime, anywhere,” says Oraia Reid, co-founder of RightRides. In addition to the activities, free food and prizes will also be given out to those who attend.
For more information, contact Devon Claridge at 718-857-1393 or
info@ggenyc.org.
Hand Bookbinding Opportunity in NYC for Youth
As part of its Education Outreach Program, the Center for Book Arts offers a tuition-free, daytime intensive workshop in hand bookbinding and artist’s books, especially for high school students.
Participants will explore their individual cultural background through the process of making books. Basic structures will be taught to create one-of-a-kind artists’ books that depict the student’s relationship with family, community and culture of origin.
This workshop is open to all artistic levels, although it is open only to students in the 8th through 12th grade. Students must possess an interest in the project and see it to completion over the course of the week. The workshop is tuition free for those accepted.
The workshop will be held August 6-10, Monday through Friday, from 10am to 4 pm. The workshop was developed and has been taught by book artist New York Public Library staff member Cheryl Shackleton-Hawkins since 1993.
