Media Law in seventh grade

[vaneramos]

My daughters have the day off school so I drove to Lindsay last night to pick them up for the weekend. Traffic was heavy and the trip took an hour longer than usual. When I arrived at 7 p.m. they were hyper, giggling and talking at once all the way home. Marian tested me repeatedly. I had to tell her not to use the F word, and not to make silly noises while Brenna was trying to talk to me. We argued over whether she could use her own money to buy a large bottle of Coke, and we quarrelled about bedtime. She doesn't have a bedtime at home. I told her that house has one set of rules, but the rules here are different.

This morning they were calmer. We went to Eggcetra for brunch. Then we had this amazing conversation.

Three weeks ago 12-year-old Marian emailed me for help on her speech about responsibility of the media in Canada. She knows I have worked in media. I directed her to a couple useful web sites, discussed libel, and gave her several questions to think about. A few days later she emailed me a couple more questions, which I answered inconclusively. I couldn't do more without doing her work for her.

Today at brunch she started talking about several interesting cases of libel she had found written up on the internet: the one in which two British men were fined for printing false information about McDonalds, and one in which Texas cattle ranchers took on Oprah Winfrey. I started to explain how American journalists can get away with more because Canadian libel laws are stricter, putting the burden of proof on the perpetrator rather than the victim. To give an example, I started talking about what would happen if I wrote an article slandering her.

"That isn't slander, Dad," she said. "That's libel."

"Yeah, I'm sorry, you're right..."

"Slander is verbal dissing," chimed in 10-year-old Brenna.

"Libel is published dissing," Marian said.

"I didn't learn about libel until college," I said. "Was this topic assigned to you by your teacher?"

"No, I chose it," Marian said. "We were allowed to choose any topic at all, but there was a list of ideas in case we couldn't think of one. I chose this from the list."

"Do you find it interesting?" I asked.

"Yes. I could have chosen censorship, too."

"What do you think about censorship?" I asked.

"I think the government is too strict," she said. "There's one example that really bugs me. Christian bookstores won't carry P.O.D. recordings because the band has one album cover that looks like it's about Eastern religion, but that's not really what it's about."

"The government didn't do that," I said. "That's the choice of Christian bookstores."

I went on to explain that this is actually freedom of expression, not censorship.

"Christian bookstores should have the freedom to take whatever point of view they want on an issue," I said. "If they don't want to carry a product, they shouldn't be forced to. On the other hand, if they started lobbying the government to ban P.O.D. recordings from being sold anywhere, that would be an attempt at censorship."

"Can you explain what censorship means?" Brenna asked.

I found myself fumbling for words: "It's when people are prevented from expressing themselves."

By then my head was spinning. Simple answers don't come easily to me. I wish my parents, with their keen interest in politics and social issues, had conversed with me this way. They did not. They were more interested in their own opinions than explaining what anything meant.

Of course my family was the one with this cardinal rule: "Don't argue with your mother." And to argue with Father was unthinkable.

Life with my daughters isn't quite as simple. My head is still spinning, but that's my choice. Over brunch, Marian and I negotiated about bedtime, too.

Comments

[jwg.livejournal.com]

You have a fine pair of daughters - and they a fine dad, too. To be able to have serious intellectual / political conversations with 10-12 year olds who have actually thought about and done some research on such topics is splendid; and I suspect much rarer these days than it used to be considering the influence of pop culture and media.

Re:

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

It took me by surprise. Marian in particular puts on silliness like a mask. The conversation made me realize what goes on inside. She brought up the subject, so I'm pleased that she chose to show me.

[artricia.livejournal.com]

What a gift to your daughters to encourage intellectual curiosity and growth in this way. And what a gift to yourself to participate in their growth, too. I find it rewarding to watch my students grow; it must be that much better when it's your own children.

Re:

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, I am fortunate in many ways.

[themage.livejournal.com]

Ah yes - those are wonderful conversations :) I've had a few of my own with Mystic. I think it comes from talking to children like other people rather than as children. It's amazing what it does to their confidence and willingness to engage in adult conversation.

A great recounting :)

Re:

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Yes, I have always been conscious about that: not talking down to them. In fact I used to be too serious with them, but they have taught me how to unwind and goof off. And kids have delightful ways of expressing things. I loved the "verbal dissing/published dissing" idea, which the two of them must already have discussed.

[art-thirst.livejournal.com]

I certainly wasn't allowed such conversations at that age, and when I got old enough for my parents (father mostly) to have such conversations I had to take the party line or else I was wrong. I think doing this on your part is a good thing as long as it's always civil and balanced. Of course, I'm not suggesting otherwise. It's just my memories floating to the surface. :-)

Re:

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

My father held some extremist views, in fact I was shocked by his racism when it started to sink in to me. He was obsessed with conspiracy theory. During my adolescence, most family conversations revolved around, and were inflamed by, his denunciations of the media and left-wing policies. I was offended, but had no critical thinking skills to develop ideas of my own. I recoiled inwardly and away from politics.

When talking to my daughters I am ever-conscious of their evangelical Christian upbringing and schooling. I resist the temptation to attack their beliefs. Rarely do I have an opportunity like this to encourage them to be objective. When it happens, I feel inadequate. I can only do my best.

Re:

[art-thirst.livejournal.com]

Interesting. My father used to be very dogmatic and harsh to us in many ways. It was his way or wrong. Some 10 yrs ago he said if he had to do it all over again he'd be a different person. That shows tremendous growth on his part. However, when I first realized there was some change in him was when my mother died (1973). He reached out to us (siblings) and asked for our blessings before he remarried. Since that time he's been more of what I wanted as a father, not the strict discplinarian and punisher (razor strop whoopings). And, all the forced church going has made me and siblings pretty skeptical and none of us attend church. I told him I won't ever rejoin and he didn't get upset about it, at least not outwardly because I know he feels that we should. As a result, today we are closer and I enjoy being around him when I we get together.

[ubermunkey.livejournal.com]

Man that is some great stuff. I love the way you interact with your children. I try to do similar with Elli. I have more candid meaningful conversations with my 8 year old child than I do with my 58 year old mother. I wish I would have had some one I could communicate with on that type of level as I was a child.

sweet
both of your daughters sound so wonderful.

Re:

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

It's amazing when you think how frustrated I was the night before. But we turned some kind of corner about 18 months ago, and meaningful conversations became more plentiful. I think I grew up.