Dreams from President Obama
Thursday, January 22nd, 2009 by Patrick RossThe world knows history was made Tuesday at noon Eastern when Barack Obama became our 44th President. So many profound things have been said by speakers and writers far more insightful than me, so I don’t wish to travel that same ground. And I’m also hesitant to try to localize his election and inauguration to my own world, the way everyone from sports writers to marketers are doing.
Yet.
I don’t think there’s harm in reflecting on the message President Obama has promoted nationally since his 2004 Democratic Convention speech. His message has been characterized by various words, from bipartisanship to openness, from civility to cooperation, from generosity to self-sacrifice. I would choose one word that I think applies — empathy. I think that should be the mantra for all of us in this debate over artists’ rights and use of creative works.
My Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition, calls empathy “the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner.” A lot of words to basically say that you can put yourself in someone else’s shoes.
Empathy is difficult. Sympathy can be done with moderate effort, and is also of value. But going beyond simply feeling an “emotional or intellectual accord” to actually put yourself in someone else’s emotional and intellectual state takes a certain gift, one I believe our new President both possesses and executes.
While I don’t recall him using the word, Mr. Obama attempts to explain the origins of his gift in “Dreams From My Father.” Born to an absent Kenyan father and an often absent white mother, spending a portion of his childhood with his mother and Indonesian stepfather in that foreign land across the ocean, being one of the only black children at the exclusive Punahou Academy in Hawaii, being a black undergraduate at Occidental College in the Los Angeles basin with little culturally in common with the inner-city blacks there on scholarship, being an organizer in the projects of the South Side of Chicago with a degree from Columbia under his belt, Mr. Obama spent his years always being partially a part of various groups while rarely feeling completely connected. The recurring theme of the book is his struggle to know fully who he is.
That is of course the struggle of all of us in life, and one of the secrets of life is that as long as we don’t fully have the answers, we will continue to grow. But few of us had the eclectic upbringing of Mr. Obama. If we are truly to not just sympathize but empathize with different communities, we have to make a commitment to do so and focus each and every day.
Regular readers know I am constantly calling for civility in debate, even if I am not always perfectly civil myself. I do try, and several years ago I committed to a set of rules on debate and invited readers to call me on it if I failed. Years later, I still feel the copyright debate — which is not a war — could be more civilized. While not pretending to have Mr. Obama’s gifts, I am going to attempt to use his example to make these additional commitments:
1) Assume sincerity on the part of your opponents. If someone says they support artists’ rights, I will try to take them at their word, even if I feel their actions undermine those rights. If someone says users of creative works have rights to works not specified in copyright law, I will respect the fact that they are operating from that belief system, even if I do not agree with that belief system. I am told I am wrong a great deal, and I am fine with that, but I am most fine with it when people say I am seriously misguided but at least have good intentions.
2) Listen to what someone is saying. The stronger one feels about an issue, the harder it is to hear what someone of a different opinion is saying. This is really hard for me, someone who has been around the copyright policy debate for more than a decade and someone who has earned a living as a result of copyright for two decades. Sometimes when I’m on a panel and I vehemently disagree with another panelist, I start crafting my response in my head, eager for an opportunity to respond. But am I truly listening to that person while running arguments in my head? No. Now in fairness to me, it’s rare that I hear an argument I haven’t heard before, but I’m sure those who disagree with me have heard all of my arguments too. That doesn’t excuse us from listening again.
3) Question logic, not motive. One is either right or they are not. If you don’t agree with someone’s argument, find the holes in the logic and target them. But criticizing someone for their possible motives or close allies merely distracts from the debate. One may feel anyone affiliated with a corporation is corrupt and evil, another may assume anyone affiliated with higher education has an agenda to spread knowledge with no consideration of creators. These presumptions could be right or wrong. But they are irrelevant. Their statements should be viewed on their own. For example, listen to what a politician says. Do you agree? The leading champion of fair use in Congress collected almost $2 million in donations from lobbyists and corporations in the 110th Congress even though he was not in a competitive seat. Did he promote fair use because corporations supporting fair use donated to his campaign? In my opinion, no. I have known this individual for a decade now and I believe he is sincere, and it is that sincerity that prompts the donations. But my feelings are irrelevant, as are anyone who suggests corruption; all that matters is the logic of his arguments.
4) Look for a middle ground. My office overlooks a Planned Parenthood. Yesterday morning the front of the building was lined with about 20 pro-life protesters holding 3-foot-tall white wooden crosses. Planned Parenthood employees wearing orange vests stood in the path to the front door to ensure visitors could enter. This was a sizable protest crowd, and they endured the bitter cold for a couple of hours. But even when most left, a few stuck around. In fact, there is always at least one protester out there every day. Can you find middle ground when one side feels that any termination of pregnancy is murder? It’s hard. But to all of those who have told me over the years there is no middle ground in the copyright debate, I say that if lives aren’t at stake, that ground can be found. President Obama will be seeking that ground in every policy debate.
5) Don’t be afraid to offend. Mr. Obama selected the Rev. Rick Warren to give the invocation at his Inauguration, angering those who disagree with the Reverend’s opposition to gay marriage. Mr. Obama then selected an openly gay minister to speak at the Inaugural concert, thus angering the other half of the country. Mr. Obama could have taken the easy way out and chosen someone completely forgettable for both prayers (although that still would have upset athiests) but he knows that you have to break eggs to make an omelet, and you have to risk offending people. So you can pursue the first four tenets, but when putting parties around the table you can’t be so PC in your screening process that you prevent the likelihood of accomplishing anything.
Now I have no moral standing to insist that others in our debate hold themselves to these standards. But I have tried to hold myself to them over the years, even if it was only the Inauguration Tuesday that helped me to crystallize them in prose. I do believe that if we put aside some of the vitriol we see on both sides in this debate and approach each other with at least an attempt at empathy, we’ll get faster to the promised land, that of artists retaining their rights and incentives while all of us enjoy greater access to and flexibility with creative works. I’m willing to work with anyone toward that goal.
