The Gates Foundation Education Reform Hype Machine and Bizarre Inequality Theory
This exchange began when I spotted this piece by Truthout.org on Sandy Asirvatham's facebook page. 24-2014-08
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/25644-the-gates-foundation-education-reform-hype-machine-bizarre-inequality-theory
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/25644-the-gates-foundation-education-reform-hype-machine-bizarre-inequality-theory
Sandy Asirvatham
4:56 pm
A superficial criticism, although I agree it's an off-putting label for a blog. That said, the research behind this article comes in large part from Diane Ravitch, a source worth trusting.
4:56 pm
A superficial criticism, although I agree it's an off-putting label for a blog. That said, the research behind this article comes in large part from Diane Ravitch, a source worth trusting.
George Spicka
6:21 pm
The weird thing is, this is a non-issue being turned into a political talking point. Rush Limbaugh does this all the time.
The "greatest cause" of inequality is a matter of opinion. One could blame it on poverty, racism, the influence of popular media, lack of parenting, and give a convincing argument to support each.
With that in mind, what is truly bizarre is “Truth”out.org attacking Bill Gates notion of education reform as “Hype” and Bizarre.” I mean, who but a biased political advocacy group would think that education reform was a problem? Objective suggestions or insights as to how to better accomplish this would be the norm from anyone truly dedicated to improving the situation, but all this piece does is attack. It’s true intent is to satisfy a selfish, childish ego.
If I had to suggest anything to do with education, I’d say that people need to be taught how to recognize the overt propaganda from both sides that floods the Internet daily, of which this Truthout piece is a perfect example. It’s not that hard to do.
What’s obvious is that Truthout is incredibly biased. The “Truth” they speak of is their own truth designed to promote their leftist agenda.
Adam Bessie’s use of a stylized elephant to represent “The Gates Foundation Education Hype Machine" shows his real intent here is to bash Republicans. As a typical leftist/progressive, he suffers the delusion that there’s something fundamentally “evil” about conservatives, perpetually seeing them as enemies instead of real people.
People like Bessie are typically paranoid in their world view – “On Education, Gates has a hand on every piece of information that goes to the public.” As an “educator,” Bessie should know that sweeping generalizations are one of the worst ways to prove a point, and of course, there’s no references to back up his claim.
Finally, there’s even more paranoia with the vast conspiracy of Gates controlling research, public relations, Viacom, NBC, PBS, and NPR.
While someone as powerful as Bill Gates does need to be continually scrutinized, I feel that people like Adam Bessie and Truthout, and similar types of “liberators” are the greater danger. As George Orwell points out in a number of essays, their way of thinking is rife with intellectual dishonesty and totalitarian in nature.
I’ve debated with these types for close to 20 years. It isn’t that they don’t want to see the world objectively and without bias as a means for all to work on solving common problems, they can’t.
6:21 pm
The weird thing is, this is a non-issue being turned into a political talking point. Rush Limbaugh does this all the time.
The "greatest cause" of inequality is a matter of opinion. One could blame it on poverty, racism, the influence of popular media, lack of parenting, and give a convincing argument to support each.
With that in mind, what is truly bizarre is “Truth”out.org attacking Bill Gates notion of education reform as “Hype” and Bizarre.” I mean, who but a biased political advocacy group would think that education reform was a problem? Objective suggestions or insights as to how to better accomplish this would be the norm from anyone truly dedicated to improving the situation, but all this piece does is attack. It’s true intent is to satisfy a selfish, childish ego.
If I had to suggest anything to do with education, I’d say that people need to be taught how to recognize the overt propaganda from both sides that floods the Internet daily, of which this Truthout piece is a perfect example. It’s not that hard to do.
What’s obvious is that Truthout is incredibly biased. The “Truth” they speak of is their own truth designed to promote their leftist agenda.
Adam Bessie’s use of a stylized elephant to represent “The Gates Foundation Education Hype Machine" shows his real intent here is to bash Republicans. As a typical leftist/progressive, he suffers the delusion that there’s something fundamentally “evil” about conservatives, perpetually seeing them as enemies instead of real people.
People like Bessie are typically paranoid in their world view – “On Education, Gates has a hand on every piece of information that goes to the public.” As an “educator,” Bessie should know that sweeping generalizations are one of the worst ways to prove a point, and of course, there’s no references to back up his claim.
Finally, there’s even more paranoia with the vast conspiracy of Gates controlling research, public relations, Viacom, NBC, PBS, and NPR.
While someone as powerful as Bill Gates does need to be continually scrutinized, I feel that people like Adam Bessie and Truthout, and similar types of “liberators” are the greater danger. As George Orwell points out in a number of essays, their way of thinking is rife with intellectual dishonesty and totalitarian in nature.
I’ve debated with these types for close to 20 years. It isn’t that they don’t want to see the world objectively and without bias as a means for all to work on solving common problems, they can’t.
Sandy Asirvatham
6:45 pm
George, I only have energy to say two things. One: no one is without bias. Two: perhaps you have to have a child in public school currently to understand. What you see as a paranoid vision of the left is actually a fairly accurate assessment of the rhetoric around public education, what allegedly ails it, and what the supposed solutions are. And no, it's not about Democrats versus Republicans. Obama's education department is every bit as guilty of trying to bash teachers and misdirect from a real conversation about poverty as their Bush predecessors were.
6:45 pm
George, I only have energy to say two things. One: no one is without bias. Two: perhaps you have to have a child in public school currently to understand. What you see as a paranoid vision of the left is actually a fairly accurate assessment of the rhetoric around public education, what allegedly ails it, and what the supposed solutions are. And no, it's not about Democrats versus Republicans. Obama's education department is every bit as guilty of trying to bash teachers and misdirect from a real conversation about poverty as their Bush predecessors were.
George Spicka
8:16 pm
“One: no one is without bias." - True, but there is a significant difference between those who work at understanding, and something like Truthout whose foundation is based on half-truths and falsehoods.
“And no, it's not about Democrats versus Republicans.” Then why did you use an organization with a political agenda to make your point? Perhaps Mark’s suggestion of Diane Ravitch would have been a better choice for making the point. I will investigate this for myself.
8:16 pm
“One: no one is without bias." - True, but there is a significant difference between those who work at understanding, and something like Truthout whose foundation is based on half-truths and falsehoods.
“And no, it's not about Democrats versus Republicans.” Then why did you use an organization with a political agenda to make your point? Perhaps Mark’s suggestion of Diane Ravitch would have been a better choice for making the point. I will investigate this for myself.
George Spicka
8:17 pm
“What you see as a paranoid vision of the left is actually a fairly accurate assessment …”
Let’s put your statement to the test.
Adam Bessie claims that “On Education, Gates has a hand on every piece of information that goes to the public.” Show me a bonafide unbiased study that proves that. Anything else is just opinion.
Bessie’s cartoon portrays a conspiracy of Gates controlling research, public relations, Viacom, NBC, PBS, and NPR. Again, show me an unbiased study that proves that.
8:17 pm
“What you see as a paranoid vision of the left is actually a fairly accurate assessment …”
Let’s put your statement to the test.
Adam Bessie claims that “On Education, Gates has a hand on every piece of information that goes to the public.” Show me a bonafide unbiased study that proves that. Anything else is just opinion.
Bessie’s cartoon portrays a conspiracy of Gates controlling research, public relations, Viacom, NBC, PBS, and NPR. Again, show me an unbiased study that proves that.
George Spicka
8:20 pm
"she's totally switched her opinion before. I think that's good - it shows someone open to new perspectives" I agree, though it's sometimes hard, being open minded yields better overall understanding.
8:20 pm
"she's totally switched her opinion before. I think that's good - it shows someone open to new perspectives" I agree, though it's sometimes hard, being open minded yields better overall understanding.
Sandy Asirvatham
9:31 pm
George, the cartoon is linked to a number of fairly detailed articles that, in the aggregate, seem to underscore the validity of Bessie's and Carino's fundamental contention: that Gates Foundation has an outrageously disproportionate hand in determining the terms of the debate on issues such as poverty and education. Beyond that, no, I doubt that anybody has anything that would qualify as an "unbiased study" by the standard you seem to be pushing.
As for why I posted this: OK, you caught me. I hate that the Bill Gateses of the world have been given to believe that just because they're rich, they're also entitled to tell everyone else how to do their job. I hate it on a micro level when I encounter it first hand in the arts funding world; I hate it when I hear about it as a journalist reporting on nonprofits who are being bullied into corporatist thinking by funders who care more about their PR impact than about the recipients of the nonprofits' services; and I hate it when I hear that yet another billionaire has decided to throw his weight around on political and policy matters on which (as Leslie reminded us) they have zero expertise. That's my bias.
9:31 pm
George, the cartoon is linked to a number of fairly detailed articles that, in the aggregate, seem to underscore the validity of Bessie's and Carino's fundamental contention: that Gates Foundation has an outrageously disproportionate hand in determining the terms of the debate on issues such as poverty and education. Beyond that, no, I doubt that anybody has anything that would qualify as an "unbiased study" by the standard you seem to be pushing.
As for why I posted this: OK, you caught me. I hate that the Bill Gateses of the world have been given to believe that just because they're rich, they're also entitled to tell everyone else how to do their job. I hate it on a micro level when I encounter it first hand in the arts funding world; I hate it when I hear about it as a journalist reporting on nonprofits who are being bullied into corporatist thinking by funders who care more about their PR impact than about the recipients of the nonprofits' services; and I hate it when I hear that yet another billionaire has decided to throw his weight around on political and policy matters on which (as Leslie reminded us) they have zero expertise. That's my bias.
George Spicka
25-2014-08 7:20 pm
“ …. detailed articles that, in the aggregate, seem to underscore the validity of Bessie's and Carino's fundamental contention: that Gates Foundation has an outrageously disproportionate hand in determining the terms of the debate on issues such as poverty and education.”
I just read through Diane Ravitch's blog. There is no mention of Bill Gates or the Gates Foundation in any of the current posts.
The closest to the subject was “David Sirota: Microsoft Admits Keeping $92 Billion Offshore to Reduce Taxes.” It’s hard to dispute first person testimony. While Gates isn’t directly implicated, it’s hard to imagine him not being involved someway, though further investigation is necessary to establish the exact connection. I liked his closing remarks about how this and similar monies could be used to underwrite programs to benefit the poor.
I thought Ravitch’s piece, “Los Angeles: Proof That Commitment Can Beat Big Money,” was decent. She makes her point while avoiding denigration. Her mentioning “commitment, integrity, and hard work” was especially appealing.
It stands in stark contrast to the following piece, “Bob Braun: Cami’s Enrollment Plan in Newark Collapses in Chaos,” which is mainly based on the comments of Bob Braun. The trouble is, he wasn’t even there, something he admits at the end of his original post. This is an opinion piece based on the opinions of others. It’s doubly distant away from what actually transpired. Ravitch makes no mention of this in her comments. What especially sullies Braun’s comments is his liberal use of negative statements and qualifiers i.e.: “deeply flawed,” “despite her incompetence,” “scheme.”
This illustrates the condition of assuming that one’s opinions are facts, a scenario most prevalent during adolescence, and hopefully outgrown as one matures. The thing is, political advocacy sites are filled with this kind of “information,” all intent on propping up assorted agendas. The adherents are so “into it,” that’s it’s practically impossible to get them to even begin to consider alternative views.
I thought “Vermont to the Nation: This Is What Good Education Looks Like” was especially good. Articles that talk about the positive aspects of a situation have far better effect on swaying minds then those that dwell on the negative.
“Connecticut: Does Anyone Supervise Charter Schools?” was a fabulous revelation. I looked at the original story in the Hartford Courant. It’s amazing that a convicted drug felon and registered sex-offender, with embellished academic credentials, could go so long without being found out.
Here in Baltimore, a former school board member, Anthony Hamilton, is going to be tried for fraud after he used another man's Social Security number and student identification number to pretend to have degrees he didn't earn.
In closing, I have a friend who retired recently from a lifetime of teaching, which means that she was in the trenches and had real-world experiences. I mention that because many intellectual types believe they know the “truth” when in fact they are very much removed from the real world.
She said the biggest problem that she and other teachers have is the plague of political correctness that is paralyzing teacher’s ability to educate. School boards are so terrified of lawsuits by offended bigots, that severe limits have been placed on what teachers can talk about in the classroom. Rather then learning about tolerance and respect for others views, the hallmark of true democracy, students are being fed a mush of conformity. Talk about your thought-police! Critical thinking, something educators say they encourage, will be difficult to foster in this type of learning environment.
It seems to me that in addition to countering the effects of big money, effort should also be made to throw off these intellectual shackles.
25-2014-08 7:20 pm
“ …. detailed articles that, in the aggregate, seem to underscore the validity of Bessie's and Carino's fundamental contention: that Gates Foundation has an outrageously disproportionate hand in determining the terms of the debate on issues such as poverty and education.”
I just read through Diane Ravitch's blog. There is no mention of Bill Gates or the Gates Foundation in any of the current posts.
The closest to the subject was “David Sirota: Microsoft Admits Keeping $92 Billion Offshore to Reduce Taxes.” It’s hard to dispute first person testimony. While Gates isn’t directly implicated, it’s hard to imagine him not being involved someway, though further investigation is necessary to establish the exact connection. I liked his closing remarks about how this and similar monies could be used to underwrite programs to benefit the poor.
I thought Ravitch’s piece, “Los Angeles: Proof That Commitment Can Beat Big Money,” was decent. She makes her point while avoiding denigration. Her mentioning “commitment, integrity, and hard work” was especially appealing.
It stands in stark contrast to the following piece, “Bob Braun: Cami’s Enrollment Plan in Newark Collapses in Chaos,” which is mainly based on the comments of Bob Braun. The trouble is, he wasn’t even there, something he admits at the end of his original post. This is an opinion piece based on the opinions of others. It’s doubly distant away from what actually transpired. Ravitch makes no mention of this in her comments. What especially sullies Braun’s comments is his liberal use of negative statements and qualifiers i.e.: “deeply flawed,” “despite her incompetence,” “scheme.”
This illustrates the condition of assuming that one’s opinions are facts, a scenario most prevalent during adolescence, and hopefully outgrown as one matures. The thing is, political advocacy sites are filled with this kind of “information,” all intent on propping up assorted agendas. The adherents are so “into it,” that’s it’s practically impossible to get them to even begin to consider alternative views.
I thought “Vermont to the Nation: This Is What Good Education Looks Like” was especially good. Articles that talk about the positive aspects of a situation have far better effect on swaying minds then those that dwell on the negative.
“Connecticut: Does Anyone Supervise Charter Schools?” was a fabulous revelation. I looked at the original story in the Hartford Courant. It’s amazing that a convicted drug felon and registered sex-offender, with embellished academic credentials, could go so long without being found out.
Here in Baltimore, a former school board member, Anthony Hamilton, is going to be tried for fraud after he used another man's Social Security number and student identification number to pretend to have degrees he didn't earn.
In closing, I have a friend who retired recently from a lifetime of teaching, which means that she was in the trenches and had real-world experiences. I mention that because many intellectual types believe they know the “truth” when in fact they are very much removed from the real world.
She said the biggest problem that she and other teachers have is the plague of political correctness that is paralyzing teacher’s ability to educate. School boards are so terrified of lawsuits by offended bigots, that severe limits have been placed on what teachers can talk about in the classroom. Rather then learning about tolerance and respect for others views, the hallmark of true democracy, students are being fed a mush of conformity. Talk about your thought-police! Critical thinking, something educators say they encourage, will be difficult to foster in this type of learning environment.
It seems to me that in addition to countering the effects of big money, effort should also be made to throw off these intellectual shackles.
George Spicka
7:41 pm
“As for why I posted this: OK, you caught me. I hate that the Bill Gateses of the world have been given to believe that just because they're rich, they're also entitled to tell everyone else how to do their job.”
With Al Gore, Michael Moore, and John Kerry, it was rich people telling others how to think.
About bias, everyone has them. To me what matters is whether they’re derived from personal experience, or from unverified rumors, which is what is typically found on politically based Internet web sites.
With that in mind, that’s why I have a bias against Truthout. They were the group that started the conspiracy about George W. Bush being behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It comes as no surprise that some 13 years later this rumor is still unverified.
The biggest influence on my political thought is George Orwell. One of his issues was about reporting events honestly, without any omission or fabrication of facts. That’s why though a democratic socialist, his denunciations of leftist politics were equal to, if not even greater then his criticisms of the right.
“I hate it on a micro level when I encounter it first hand in the arts funding world; I hate it when I hear about it as a journalist reporting on nonprofits who are being bullied into corporatist thinking by funders who care more about their PR impact than about the recipients of the nonprofits' services; and I hate it when I hear that yet another billionaire has decided to throw his weight around on political and policy matters on which (as Leslie reminded us) they have zero expertise. That's my bias.”
I have issues about arts funding too. We’ll have to share our experiences at a future time.
7:41 pm
“As for why I posted this: OK, you caught me. I hate that the Bill Gateses of the world have been given to believe that just because they're rich, they're also entitled to tell everyone else how to do their job.”
With Al Gore, Michael Moore, and John Kerry, it was rich people telling others how to think.
About bias, everyone has them. To me what matters is whether they’re derived from personal experience, or from unverified rumors, which is what is typically found on politically based Internet web sites.
With that in mind, that’s why I have a bias against Truthout. They were the group that started the conspiracy about George W. Bush being behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It comes as no surprise that some 13 years later this rumor is still unverified.
The biggest influence on my political thought is George Orwell. One of his issues was about reporting events honestly, without any omission or fabrication of facts. That’s why though a democratic socialist, his denunciations of leftist politics were equal to, if not even greater then his criticisms of the right.
“I hate it on a micro level when I encounter it first hand in the arts funding world; I hate it when I hear about it as a journalist reporting on nonprofits who are being bullied into corporatist thinking by funders who care more about their PR impact than about the recipients of the nonprofits' services; and I hate it when I hear that yet another billionaire has decided to throw his weight around on political and policy matters on which (as Leslie reminded us) they have zero expertise. That's my bias.”
I have issues about arts funding too. We’ll have to share our experiences at a future time.
George Spicka
7:42 pm
“Beyond that, no, I doubt that anybody has anything that would qualify as an "unbiased study" by the standard you seem to be pushing.”
That standard is the same as Orwell’s: reporting facts honestly.
I’ve been interested in science all my life. In the 1980’s I was considering becoming a geologist. Not only did I take four years of honors geology courses, I served as a docent for three years at the Smithsonian’s Museum of Natural History.
In the world of science, the results of research and studies are published for peer review. I’ve read through several hundred that have appeared over the years on the website, Science News Daily.
All the data is based on evidence that can either be observed or measured. There is no withholding of unfavorable outcomes, no accusations, no assumptions, no blame: no emotions.
That’s why the 2009 King’s College incident, where unfavorable climate change data was withheld from peer review, was such a scandal. A major scientific taboo had been violated.
It’s similar with court proceedings. Hearsay is not allowed.
As the day approaches when political discourse is conducted in the same manner, we’ll witness a decline in the animosities that now flood the ether.
7:42 pm
“Beyond that, no, I doubt that anybody has anything that would qualify as an "unbiased study" by the standard you seem to be pushing.”
That standard is the same as Orwell’s: reporting facts honestly.
I’ve been interested in science all my life. In the 1980’s I was considering becoming a geologist. Not only did I take four years of honors geology courses, I served as a docent for three years at the Smithsonian’s Museum of Natural History.
In the world of science, the results of research and studies are published for peer review. I’ve read through several hundred that have appeared over the years on the website, Science News Daily.
All the data is based on evidence that can either be observed or measured. There is no withholding of unfavorable outcomes, no accusations, no assumptions, no blame: no emotions.
That’s why the 2009 King’s College incident, where unfavorable climate change data was withheld from peer review, was such a scandal. A major scientific taboo had been violated.
It’s similar with court proceedings. Hearsay is not allowed.
As the day approaches when political discourse is conducted in the same manner, we’ll witness a decline in the animosities that now flood the ether.