With that said, this campaign video has no place in a student government election.
Allow me to explain. During the first week and a half of this election, David and Katie have made it clear that they're different. Different from the other candidates, previous administrations and a lot of the students at this university, but they're not ashamed of it, nor should they be. They've talked about wanting to be a voice for students, rather than a megaphone for the administration, and they are passionate about making minority groups a priority in student government. More than anything, they want to be taken seriously.
But after watching this video, I can't help but question that last part. These two individuals are in the running for student body president and vice president. Their responsibilities, if elected, will include, but not be limited to, creating a $2 million Student Services Fee budget and representing the student body to the mayor, governor and other important people. And their idea of proving to voters that they're the most capable candidates to handle those responsibilities is an amateur music video? While other candidates have used their campaign videos to introduce themselves and talk about their qualifications and specific plans and ideas for the future of UNI, David and Katie dressed up in drag and danced across campus, with text from their platform appearing at different intervals.
They can't be serious. In fact, some students, myself included, have wondered if David and Katie really believe that they can win this election, and aren't simply using it as a platform to raise awareness about their issues and get the conversation going. I'm not saying that this is the case, but it certainly looks that way to some people. Because as much as David and Katie claim to be a voice for the students, the only views they seem to be interested in expressing are their own. It is fine if drag is the outlet David and Katie use to express themselves, but when you're student body president and vice president, you're not in that position to express yourself. You are there to express the needs and concerns of everyone else. And is a drag performance really representative of the whole student body?
More than anything, I'm disappointed. This video mocks what this election is all about. Being student body president and vice president is not a joke. Yes, not everyone cares about NISG, but if you're running for a position, you need to take it seriously. And if you think a music video is the key to winning this election, then you're running for all the wrong reasons. This is not a popularity contest. This about finding and electing candidates who are qualified to represent and make important decisions on behalf of the entire student body.
I understand that David and Katie are different and want to set themselves apart from the other candidates. But there is a difference between being different and being unprofessional.
I'd love to have some clarification on what Mr. Ruane means when he says, "It is fine if drag is the outlet David and Katie use to express themselves, but when you're student body president and vice president, you're not in that position to express yourself."
ReplyDeleteDoes this mean that students lose their first amendment rights the moment they start to work in student government? That in exchange for representing students they must shed all trace of personality in order to become the most bland and banal person possible so as to avoid any kind of expression? And what happens as expression is so often tied with identity?
What Mr. Ruane is saying is that anyone who is not "normal" has no right to expression. He's saying that HE has the right to self-expression but candidates don't? In an atmosphere that values the 1st amendment, academic freedom, and self-expression likely more than anywhere else in the world, he is saying that suppression of self-expression and identity is a per-requisite to join student government.
This is wrong.
If this is who they are, let them express it. If the student body does not like it for their reps, they can not vote. It's that easy.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry am I the only one who remember this video?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AX_Q-qoWKN8
Megan, that video didn't have anything to do with the election or their positions on campus. It's simply a video put on by Her Campus that they asked Spencer and Ian to participate in. They in no way tied it to them being Student Body President or Vice President, simply as "former Campus Cuties." In addition, they had already been in office for 10 months. It's just not relevant to this discussion.
DeleteYet it is relevant to this discussion. If we're discussing free expression (which we are) and conduct befitting the NISG president and vice president (which we are), it is most certainly important.
DeleteAccording to Mr. Ruane's standards, Spencer and Ian were in no position to express themselves! They were student body president and vice president! They forfeited their self-expression upon entering office.
So why are candidates expressing themselves dancing not okay, but the then-NISG president and vice president shaking their butts on camera and dancing in a similar completely affirmed?
It is relevant because Blaine did not have any issues with the dance but the fact that they are in drag. Is Blaine saying that it's okay to dance like that once you win but not okay while campaigning? Were they or were they not representing the student body at the point the video was made? Was it during the election or NISG Pres and Vice Pres? Should they not have been setting an example on proper decorum?
DeleteHis name is Blake.
DeleteYeah, this article just reinforces the small-minded ideas that have been holding back our campus and our world for far too long now. Way to bring a different perspective than every other piece of totally biased crap we have to put up with.
ReplyDeleteI totally read this in a snotty accent and it fit so well! Seriously, this is the snottiest drivel I've ever read. You keep saying that you don't have a problem with the drag enough to make it clear that that's exactly what you have a problem with. This video maintains their theme: they're different. They didn't go the route of boring campaign video. They used their creativity, a good quality in any form of government. It's unfortunate that you couldn't take the time to pause and reflect on what specifically made you uncomfortable before writing off as a bad campaign tactic because it didn't meet your arbitrary standards.
ReplyDeletePretty sure they expressed themselves just fine without the video.
ReplyDeleteBlake,
ReplyDeleteIs it the drag that bothers you or the style of dance? I mean I think you could have argued against the sexualized dancing, or the use of profanity and your argument would be reasonable- it is unprofessional-
but to simply argue that the issue is drag is getting in really just simple bias. Ian and Whatshisname danced similarly in the video Megan linked, but I remember that you were supportive of them when they ran. So what is really going on here?
I'm sticking with Blake on this article. He writes that there is nothing wrong with expressing who you are, and I wholeheartedly agree. If David and Katie get elected, I sincerely hope and encourage that they continue to openly express who they are. However, my concern is with representing yourself professionally in a video. When you're running for a position in which you're expected to act professionally and represent the needs of 13,000 students, it just isn't fitting to release a video that lacks these qualities. I’m sure David and Katie are professional people, but this video doesn't promote themselves as such. The issue here isn't with cross dressing or their sexuality, the issue is with being taken seriously in an election for a position whose decisions affect the entire student body for the next 12 months. This is an unprofessional video for a professional position.
ReplyDeleteI've followed this article and comments closely and without giving an opinion regarding this specific video, two things are concerning me:
ReplyDelete1) What are the parameters of "professional" and "unprofessional"?
Even if everyone buys the argument that campaigns must be professional, the line between professional and unprofessional seems blurry at best. In all of 30 seconds I can see pictures on certain campaign websites that would seem to be "unprofessional" by certain standards. In order for this video to be evaluated I think that the parameters of "professionalism" need to be defined much more clearly than they currently are.
Which leads me to,
2) How consistent are those parameters?
Two days ago, passing out condoms was characterized by the blog as, "trying to get their name out in unique ways". Today, a music video of the most current song on the radio accompanied by dancing and platform planks running across the screen is characterized as unprofessional and "disappointing".
What are we supposed to tell tickets in the future? What are the specific standards that ought be set for campaigns, and how can they be consistently enforced/evaluated by this blog?
Those are some tough questions to answer and I don't envy the person that attempts to answer them.
Well, if we are to look at precedent set by the former Pres and VP (Spencer and Ian) you will see that overwhelmingly the majority of their videos on youtube made before, during and after their tenure would have to be considered unprofessional by Blake's standards and yet UNI awarded them for their unprofessionalism. (The video below won 1st prize in the I am purple and gold contest and is just flat out silly).
DeleteTheir entire tenure can be remembered as year of the "Dance party."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6DCXW8gE4w&list=UUpgpedjakzq6OIKsrjLinfw&index=14
It's creative marketing. They have a short amount of time and this catches your attention and gets you talking. Yes, some people may not agree with it, but it will be REMEMBERED compared to just a video of them sitting there and talking. Plus, it's a big part of their lives, at least they are being their real selves. Props to David and Katie for being creative and original!
ReplyDeleteWhat Blake is saying is that as a Student Body President you are to express the views of the entire student body. I'm not saying that dressing in drag or expressing one's self is wrong, but in some circumstances it is completely and utterly inappropriate. Imagine these two individuals walking into a Board of Regents meeting dressed in drag, I guarantee there would be an issue of some kind to arise. At the University of Northern Iowa not every student is of a minority of diverse situation, therefore these student's need represented as well. This video is extremely unprofessional and extremely rude to all types of individuals. Not once in the video did it mention thanking students and staff at the financial aid office for their support in helping student's through tough financial situations. These individuals are merely using this campaign to allow students at UNI to open there eyes to Diversity, this campaign is not the right outlet for that. The other students running for these offices have put their time, talents, and money into becoming a student leader, and this campaign and video is a disgrace to the other two parties. Period.
ReplyDelete^Why so nonsensical?
DeleteFirst:
// I'm not saying that dressing in drag or expressing one's self is wrong, but in some circumstances it is completely and utterly inappropriate. Imagine these two individuals walking into a Board of Regents meeting dressed in drag...//
Umm... What does that example has anything to do with the video? Are they screening the video at the next BoR meeting? What're your objections to drag in this instance?
Second:
//Imagine these two individuals walking into a Board of Regents meeting dressed in drag, I guarantee there would be an issue of some kind to arise (sic).//
What sort of problems would arise? What about that meeting uniquely requires David to wear men's clothing and Katie to wear women's? Would transgendered folks be ineligible for NISG president/vice-president? For appointment to the Board of Regents?
And where's the line? Should we make sure that UNI students know that they shouldn't violate clothing norms in the classroom? Is that a setting where it's "a disgrace"? Should students sacrifice their comfort and expression in case a problem could "to arise (sic)" there too?
Third:
//At the University of Northern Iowa not every student is of a minority of diverse situation, therefore these student's need represented as well.//
Umm...... Is that how democracy works? "Hey Barack Obama, not everyone in the United States is black! Wow, look at that guy, being all black like that, not representing white people." What does this even mean?
Fourth:
//This video is extremely unprofessional and extremely rude to all types of individuals. Not once in the video did it mention thanking students and staff at the financial aid office for their support in helping student's through tough financial situations.//
Not once during my breakfast this morning did I thank the students and staff in the financial aid office. I can't believe I was so unprofessional and rude!!! What is this standard? Why must every video thank those folks? Rose is a custodian in Lang Hall and she does great work providing an environment for students to learn in. Why wouldn't it be unprofessional and rude for the video to not thank Rose too?
Fifth:
//These individuals are merely using this campaign to allow students at UNI to open there eyes to Diversity, this campaign is not the right outlet for that.//
I assume diversity is capitalized because it's a German noun? Regardless, what's wrong with a campaign that encourages students to confront diversity? Why doesn't that make David and Katie student leaders? Of course, their platform also addresses other issues (student safety for example), so you're also inaccurate on the facts.
I apologize if being so sarcastic makes you uncomfortable. I think you should seriously rethink the position you've expressed. Fundamentally, I get the sense that when you say "I'm not saying that dressing in drag or expressing one's self is wrong," you mean exactly the opposite.
Running for President or Vice President is a big commitment and one you have to make in a selfless manner. You will be devoting a large portion of your life to serving students. In order to do that, you must represent them completely. And to be able to represent them and help make changes to our University and continue to uphold our great strengths that we have here, you must be taken seriously. No, that doesn't mean losing yourself while you are President or Vice President but if you can't be taken seriously, honestly, who will listen to you? Unfortunately in our society, with in 8 seconds of meeting someone, most people already have their first impression of you. So wouldn't you want your future President or Vice President to be seen as respectful, serious but passionate about their job, and approachable? I am not saying there is any problem with expressing who you are and being forth coming but this election is about the students, not those running. This election is about the candidates selling themselves to the students about how well they'll represent the entire campus' needs this upcoming year, not just 8% of them. No, you shouldn't lose yourself in a campaign or a position but usually it's best to keep your personal life separate from your work.
ReplyDeleteThe dancing perhaps would have been more appropriate if it was for a shorter portion of the video, with their campaign goals being the main focus. HOWEVER, I just got done viewing the video and slightly agree with Blake. Don't get me wrong - I enjoyed the video and it was entertaining. But if I actually participated in student elections (currently, I do not) I would have no idea what these candidates stood for. The dancing in drag was 90% of the video. Everything actually related to the campaign shot across the screen at an ultra-fast speed and was extremely vague. "Fix financial aid"....How??
ReplyDeleteI don't know how extreme the politics of student elections are, but I really don't believe the drag was the issue that Blake had with this video. I didn't find it extremely professional. The condoms were clever and creative - something college students will remember. The video is clever but maybe a little more elaboration on the issues could have bumped it up to a professional standard.
You are acting like you will base your entire decision on one video. This is part of a much larger campaign. I keep going back to my first encounter with the Pres and VP my first year at UNI. The only thing I knew about them- and most people who did not follow NISG- is that they were the silly dance party guys who created the Interlude and a bunch of joke videos about UNI. I am sure they did more, but that is not how they presented themselves before, during and after their presidency. As far as Kaliegh goes- she is now running for President after being VP for a year and her video says nothing about who she is or what experience she specifically has - the video is memorable for her VP eating Great Wall Sushi for your vote. What does that even mean? It's just more silliness.
DeleteOh, also, anyone who knows me knows I am an activist for gay rights....So this is a pretty open-minded opinion.
ReplyDelete