[Stylist] Food for Thought: NFB Literature for a Younger Audience

Mon Apr 15 20:15:43 UTC 2019

In my experience a child's logic is impeccable.  All it may lack is years of
life experience and acculturation seniority.  Our sighted, now 25
year-old-son described my and Cheryl's families perfectly through his
perceptions as a six-year-old:

"Mom's family swears alot and Dad's family talks about farts."

Now y-all know the truth about us, to a point.

Bill Meeker

It takes a heap o livin' to make a house a home
A heap o sun and shadow
And sometimes you gotta roam.

Name the above Michigan poet whose son, Bud, had a 15 minute morning show
from 0815-0830 on 760 WJR.

-----Original Message-----
From: Stylist [mailto:stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Bridgit
Kuenning-Pollpeter via Stylist
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2019 2:47 PM
To: 'Writers' Division Mailing List'
Cc: Bridgit Kuenning-Pollpeter
Subject: Re: [Stylist] Food for Thought: NFB Literature for a Younger
Audience

I find it interesting in this organization that any time someone suggest
trying a new idea, an out-of-the-box, fresh idea, people, especially
veterans of the org, equate it to watering down the philosophy. It's not
necessarily synnonomous.

First, children and teens often have a different understanding of
information than adults. But so can adults depending on a wide variety of
variables such as education, language barriers, vernacular used, secondary
disabilities and a wide range of other things. This is why most marketing
firms use plain language. It's not dumbing down information, but making it
as concise and precise as ossible, able to reach a large demo of people.

And it's a hard, cold fact that the brain of children and teens is very
different developmentally than older people, especially those 30 and older.
Even when they understand specific words, they don't always comprehend or
remember bigger concepts. There's a big difference between knowing the
definition of words and understanding concepts. For example, you can tell me
about theoretical physics, and when breaking down word-by-word, I can tell
you the definition of most words. However, as an entire concept, I still
don't understand it.

So, it's not about "dumbing" down but using language that when shaped into a
concept, makes sense for a majority. Which, for me, would indicate creating
material specific to young people is not a bad thing. And how anyone draws
the connection to better word choice and more precision of concepts to
changing the philosophy, well... that's quite the feat.

Also, during my tenure in this org, I'm always so surprised by how wordy our
literature and communications can be. Particularly when discussing comms
like brochures, you want as little text as possible. It's not just our org,
but I've definitely noticed our tendancy to over-explain, which, in a way,
is dumbing down, because the idea is that a simple sentence or two is not
enough; it requires more explanation. And the hallmark of good writing is
when it's done with clarity and precision.

We also have to look outside those of us who are members, especially
long-time members, who not only have read the literature but have been
immersed in this culture, met leaders, participated in conventions and
activities and know not only the philosophy but the rhetoric in our sleep.
When I try to use our packaged language, explaining the org to sighted
people or people unaffiliated with us, it doesn't always hold the same
meaning, because they are unfamiliar with it. We don't create literature,
language, communications for the members but the non-members. This must
always be present in our minds when creating and distributing literature.
When we did a branding overhaul a few years ago, the outside marketing firm
hired to assist helped us understand this in a way I don't think we did
before. In my opinion, the one-minute message and the way we now construct
our communications makes more sense, especially when trying to reach the
world outside the org. But we can still go further in reaching a majority.
Let's be real, not everyone, including our own membership hold doctorates or
JDs. We need to ensure what we say and how we say it, and the structure we
use to accomplish this makes as big as impact as possible, which means
tailoring our message for the largest audience possible. Again, this does
not equate to dumbing down. And BTW, it's sort of offensive to say that if
people don't understand something and require it explained differently that
they are dumb or need the language dumbed down. The goal is to make our
message clear, why does it matter how that's accomplished?

I recently gave a couple of presentations for a student retreat hosted by my
local NFB. Jernigan's speech "The Nature of Independence" was played. The
students were bored and didn't fully understand the point of it, and some of
them are connected with the Federation. The consensus of many of us adults
was that it may have been better to package the idea of the speech in our
own language and give a shorter presentation that was also interactive.
Honestly, students or adults, I often think this is the best result.

So, should we be more mindful of wording and gathering of concepts in
written form within our org? Yes, for sure, but not just for youth.

Bridgit

-----Original Message-----
From: Stylist <stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org> On Behalf Of Tina Hansen via
Stylist
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2019 12:44 PM
To: 'Writers' Division Mailing List' <stylist at nfbnet.org>
Cc: Tina Hansen <th404 at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Stylist] Food for Thought: NFB Literature for a Younger
Audience

I'm not sure I'd want to dumb down our philosophy. I'm after how to relate
the philosophy to a younger audience.

Back in 1995, there was an issue of Future Reflections that tried to do
that. We didn't have the one-minute message at the time, but the philosophy
was there. Our philosophy has stood 79 years, and I don't see it changing.
My thinking is that yes, kids may not yet have fully developed minds of an
adult, but they do need to be able to appreciate our philosophy. That is why
I'm asking this question. Is it necessary that the wording for a younger
audience should be different from an adult audience? Also, since technology
has indeed changed since that issue, how can we leverage technology to reach
the younger generation?

I also got this idea thanks to a podcast.

https://www.dreambigpodcast.com/

The host is a young girl, Eva Cartman, with help from her parents. She
started this because her parents were listening to self help podcasts in the
car, and Eva says she wasn't relating to them. She wondered: Can a podcast
be done that relates the concepts my parents are hearing, but in a way kids
like her can understand and relate to. I was impressed, and I think what
she's doing is blazing a trail. Not only do kids like it, but I also like
it. I admire her youthful energy and her enthusiasm.

Face it, I'm not knocking anything we've put out for the parents, but I do
wonder if there is a need for NFB literature targeted at a younger audience.
Face it, these kids may have many of the same struggles adults do. They need
to also be able to make friends, learn effective socialization, and other
things. Like adults and work, kids are always needing to learn how to cope
with school.

I'm also not intending the literature to take the place of interactive
training. I believe kids learn best in a highly interactive environment,
whether it's provided by a school or with the parents.

I'm also not wanting to say that parents can't do any teaching. They should.
But again, should someone write or record something for kids? In the podcast
I referred to, Eva uses examples from her own life to make her points. Her
hope is that kids can relate to her stories, and as an adult, I feel drawn
in just because she's being real.

And no, the last thing I want to do is to water down our philosophy. I want
to keep it intact, but find out how we can help kids, especially elementary
and middle school students, relate to it.

I'm not sure if there is a need for a lot of literature like this, but I'm
just putting this out there as food for thought.

I also recognize this potential gap because apart from our own literature, I
get nervous when I find a book for that audience with a blind character. I'm
always aware that any book written for that audience could fall into that
trap of going for the old stereotypes, unless it's been written by one of
our own members.

Also, are there already books that do a good job of showing children the
truth about blindness? If there are, I've not spotted them.

I think once they hit high school, there is less of a need for such targeted
literature. They may need some things around being a teenager, but that's
about it. Their minds are more developed, and with some guidance, they
probably could work through our literature.

Any thoughts? Thanks.

_______________________________________________
Writers Division web site
http://writers.nfb.org/
Stylist mailing list
Stylist at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
Stylist:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/bkpollpeter%40gmail.com

_______________________________________________
Writers Division web site
http://writers.nfb.org/
Stylist mailing list
Stylist at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
Stylist:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/meekerorgas%40ameritech
.net