June 25 2009
Starters & Strategies is a magazine that for many years, has gone out to thousands of school teachers around New Zealand. I happened to find a copy of the recent issue (Term 2, 2009) where I came across the ‘Respecting Creativity’ competition.
‘Respecting Creativity’ encourages teachers to introduce the concept of intellectual property and the debate surrounding copyright issues to a classroom discussion for students in years 8 to 13, with an associated poster design project. Here’s an excerpt from their suggested lesson plan:
Who Owns What Is Created?
— Is it possible to own an idea or must it be something you can feel and touch?
— Is it possible to steal an idea or a creation (intellectual property) in the same way as tangible property? Give examples of what could be stolen and how?
— Is it possible to own intellectual property or creative ideas? What do we know about copyright? How does it work? Learn about copyright by visiting the following websites: lovemusic.co.nz, nzfact.co.nz, copyright.org.nz, iponz.govt.nz.
— How is respecting copyright the same as respecting creativity? How does this encourage creativity?
If students proceed step by step through these questions as the teaching guide suggests, they are led to the conclusion that there is a single coherent argument that is ‘factual’ and ‘correct’ in this situation. Unfortunately it isn’t quite that simple.
I get incredibly frustrated when I see the school system smothering students with such pseudo-rationality, faking fair debate by paying lip service to an opposing argument, while all the while setting up the orthodox opinion as the only right answer.
In actual fact, the entire body of orthodoxy relating to intellectual property is disputed in many different ways by many different organizations, and it is utterly wrong-headed to encourage discussion based on shallow common sense hand-waving without researching the history of copyright law and why it exists, let alone ignoring popular alternatives to copyright, and the influence of these alternatives on the possibilities for creative work.
The breakdown of the argument that illegal downloads harm creativity is emphasized by research which questions the so-called ‘fact’ that piracy stifles content creation. There is also evidence that people who download music illegally actually spend more money on music. While hotly disputed, this does call into question the ethics of punishment in infringement cases and many people are starting to wonder: Are downloads really killing the music industry? Or is it something else?.
It may not be immediately clear to students that the ideals being promoted by lovemusic.co.nz are representative of music industry lobby groups and corporate interests who are sponsoring such competitions in order to have their agenda brought into the classroom in a ‘friendly’ and easily digestible format.
Independent thought is not an option being encouraged by lovemusic.co.nz because they only link to websites that tell one side of the story. To me, it is utterly unacceptable that students are being encouraged to plainly regurgitate corporate opinion to gain NCEA credits when they could be learning to think critically for themselves. To be fair to everyone who is affected and influenced by this issue, it is important to consult sources that have opposing viewpoints, and try to understand who is arguing what.
As an alternative to the activities promoted by lovemusic.co.nz, I have compiled a wider series of questions for a class activity. I believe the motivational discussion presented here is a fairly accurate reflection of the views of many artists and creatives today (those who ad agencies like to refer to as ‘digital natives’). Some of these questions may involve research and fact-checking, while others can be raised as a matter of opinion and debate. This will probably make a lot more sense, with reference to the original item in Starters & Strategies.
It is important that students are presented with the opportunity to think critically, rather than be fed with one-sided arguments using handwaving rhetoric that avoids looking at real-life case studies. A useful historical and commercial perspective is provided in a well known article from the early 90’s — The Problem With Music by Steve Albini. This places the ideal of ‘respecting creativity’ in a wholly different light to what is being promoted by record labels themselves and is a useful contrast to consider (keeping in mind that having recorded bands like Nirvana, P.J Harvey, and The Pixies, Albini is no mere armchair pundit).
It’s equally important to emphasize that the entertainment industry is not wholly evil and bad. There are a lot of majors doing positive things and giving artists a real shot that they wouldn’t have otherwise had. Likewise, the so-called pirates are not necessarily selfish plundering thieves — their own justification for downloading could be from an argument of fairness, that they had previously paid money for a track, only to have the CD lost or stolen, or their digital files destroyed in a computer crash. They may resent being made to fork-out money multiple times for the same product, or not being allowed to have full rights of ownership for what believe they have paid for. Continually mistreating and ripping off consumers will always lead to them being disgruntled and in some cases, taking the law into their own hands. It’s a painful and messy situation and nobody on either side will give up without a fight.
Teachers must be encouraged to present this topic in a critical way that focuses on controversy, providing resources and links for students to understand both sides of the story. Focusing on the idea of respecting creativity is a distraction from the real question of who is trying to benefit from this creativity. It is disingenuous and patronizing to treat students as if they are incapable of considering the dispute in neutral terms and forming their own value judgements.
Encouraging simplistic explanations that offer a final and correct opinion on anything is a fantastic way to continue the long-standing tradition of anti-intellectualism and mediocrity in New Zealand schools. Discouraging students from thinking for themselves is feeding the cancer of common sense that continues to define New Zealand society. What a way to truly ‘Respect Creativity’! I congratulate the RIANZ and their cohorts for this fantastic example of what public relations is all about.
Article-about
Asides