Public sociology, or the process of sociologists engaging within the public sphere, has been in the realm of debate for years. Academics, activists, and the public have questioned whether or not this practice is necessary in order to bring about important policy and social changes. After considering the following numbered obstacles to engaging in public sociology, I would like to highlight the underlying ideas that the authors of several articles have argued will bridge the gap between sociologists and public discourse:
1. Academics are not rewarded for their public sociology efforts, so it is difficult to sustain a public sociology discourse when factors such as getting tenure, getting published, and doing research in certain subject areas are what are rewarded most often in academic settings.
In her article “Truth-Telling and Intellectual Activism,” Patricia Hill Collins illuminates how sociologists who delve into "political" work are often seen as less scholarly. However, she emphasizes that this work is necessary for academics because those in society who work long hours, have varying levels of education and consume popular media don't often have the opportunity to hear "new ideas that challenge social inequities." Sociologists often possess the means these individuals lack, allowing them to talk to policy makers and influence public opinion in significant ways. Collins' approach, which involves engaging with the public and addressing those in positions of power and influence, is called "speaking truth to power and speaking in multiple registers."
To expound on Collins' point, Nathan Jurgenson in his article “How Academics Can Become Relevant” brings up the point that in order for sociologists to bridge the gap between academia and the public, sociological research should be made readily accessible to the public and in language and formats that anyone can understand. In short, he argues that if information is made more accessible through social media and more economical journal subscriptions and if ideas are expressed in interesting and clear ways, the greater public Collin refers to will have increased access to information addressing prevalent social issues. This in turn will help bridge the gap between sociologists and the public.
Like Patricia Hill Collins, Fabio Rojas also argues in his article “Why Activism and Academia Don’t Mix,” that academics face certain constraints when it comes to activism because they are rewarded for their scholarship rather than their public works. Unlike Collins, he asserts that people attain higher education for "prestige," which involves research rather than exerting effort towards activism. Rojas implores that though academics have a place in activism, in order to create social change, they must "creat[e] knowledge" rather than simply advocate for social change.
Though academics face difficulties as a result of the aforementioned reasons, I think that an institutional change needs to take place, in which those in university settings who see the value of public sociology discuss it with their peers and begin to reward public sociology efforts in the same way that scholarly efforts are rewarded. I also agree with Rojas in that in order to bring about social change, knowledge production and dissemination are key. However, I disagree with him in the sense that advocating for social change will not help bring about social change. Bringing awareness to the greater parts of society (including policy makers) of inequities is an important aspect of bringing about policy changes and social change.
Orlando Patterson's outlook on the matter in his article “How Sociologists Made Themselves Irrelevant” affirms this sentiment. Patterson has stated that public sociology needs to further its efforts by creating and amending public policy and working to address social problems with support from research and experience.
2. A second roadblock sociologists face when trying to practice pubic sociology is when information that is shared is misinterpreted or simplified in a way that makes it inaccurate.
Karen Sternheimer in her article “The Promise and Perils of Public Sociology,” conveys how it is difficult for sociologists when sharing research with the public because information can be misconstrued or oversimplified, leading to conclusions that can be damaging and do the opposite of bring about desired social change. An example she discusses involves a gender-related trend that was published by the news media as a generalization rather than a probability.
However, like Fabio Rojas and Barbara Ehrenreich have stated, in order to bring about change in policy, one either needs connections with the media or he must take on the task himself by contacting journalists and writing himself; possibly op-ed pieces. Ehrenreich points out that it would be easier for journalists to contact sociologists if they were more accessible. For example, he notes that if the American Sociological Association’s website had a list of sociologists based on their interest areas, it would make them more accessible.
Ehrenreich, Barbara. 2007. "A Journalist's Plea." Pp. 231-238 in Public Sociology, edited by Clawson, Dan, Robert Zussman, Joya Misra, Naomi Gerstel, Randall Stokes, Douglas L. Anderton, and Michael Burawoy. Berkeley, CA: University of CA Press.
Mills, C. Wright. 1959. The Sociological Imagination. London: Oxford University Press.
1. Academics are not rewarded for their public sociology efforts, so it is difficult to sustain a public sociology discourse when factors such as getting tenure, getting published, and doing research in certain subject areas are what are rewarded most often in academic settings.
In her article “Truth-Telling and Intellectual Activism,” Patricia Hill Collins illuminates how sociologists who delve into "political" work are often seen as less scholarly. However, she emphasizes that this work is necessary for academics because those in society who work long hours, have varying levels of education and consume popular media don't often have the opportunity to hear "new ideas that challenge social inequities." Sociologists often possess the means these individuals lack, allowing them to talk to policy makers and influence public opinion in significant ways. Collins' approach, which involves engaging with the public and addressing those in positions of power and influence, is called "speaking truth to power and speaking in multiple registers."
To expound on Collins' point, Nathan Jurgenson in his article “How Academics Can Become Relevant” brings up the point that in order for sociologists to bridge the gap between academia and the public, sociological research should be made readily accessible to the public and in language and formats that anyone can understand. In short, he argues that if information is made more accessible through social media and more economical journal subscriptions and if ideas are expressed in interesting and clear ways, the greater public Collin refers to will have increased access to information addressing prevalent social issues. This in turn will help bridge the gap between sociologists and the public.
Like Patricia Hill Collins, Fabio Rojas also argues in his article “Why Activism and Academia Don’t Mix,” that academics face certain constraints when it comes to activism because they are rewarded for their scholarship rather than their public works. Unlike Collins, he asserts that people attain higher education for "prestige," which involves research rather than exerting effort towards activism. Rojas implores that though academics have a place in activism, in order to create social change, they must "creat[e] knowledge" rather than simply advocate for social change.
Though academics face difficulties as a result of the aforementioned reasons, I think that an institutional change needs to take place, in which those in university settings who see the value of public sociology discuss it with their peers and begin to reward public sociology efforts in the same way that scholarly efforts are rewarded. I also agree with Rojas in that in order to bring about social change, knowledge production and dissemination are key. However, I disagree with him in the sense that advocating for social change will not help bring about social change. Bringing awareness to the greater parts of society (including policy makers) of inequities is an important aspect of bringing about policy changes and social change.
Orlando Patterson's outlook on the matter in his article “How Sociologists Made Themselves Irrelevant” affirms this sentiment. Patterson has stated that public sociology needs to further its efforts by creating and amending public policy and working to address social problems with support from research and experience.
2. A second roadblock sociologists face when trying to practice pubic sociology is when information that is shared is misinterpreted or simplified in a way that makes it inaccurate.
Karen Sternheimer in her article “The Promise and Perils of Public Sociology,” conveys how it is difficult for sociologists when sharing research with the public because information can be misconstrued or oversimplified, leading to conclusions that can be damaging and do the opposite of bring about desired social change. An example she discusses involves a gender-related trend that was published by the news media as a generalization rather than a probability.
However, like Fabio Rojas and Barbara Ehrenreich have stated, in order to bring about change in policy, one either needs connections with the media or he must take on the task himself by contacting journalists and writing himself; possibly op-ed pieces. Ehrenreich points out that it would be easier for journalists to contact sociologists if they were more accessible. For example, he notes that if the American Sociological Association’s website had a list of sociologists based on their interest areas, it would make them more accessible.
3. A third obstacle sociologists face when trying to practice pubic sociology is knowing when to speak up and when not to.
In her article “The Promise and Perils of Public Sociology,” Karen Sternheimer also points out that she has faced difficulties as a sociologist recognizing when to engage is certain discussions and when to abstain. If someone requests that she speak on a topic, she feels she is not always best suited to do so and would prefer to refer the question to another in the field. This point speaks to what Sternheimer brought up earlier about misinformation (i.e. having the public draw false conclusions regarding research). If an intellectual feels she would rather leave it up to another to speak on a matter, it may be better than speaking on a topic that is out of her academic scope.
Though this is a valid concern, it should also be noted that sociologists' voices are lacking in the public media and in the realm of policy makers. Orlando Patternson emphasizes this disparity when comparing the presence of economists' voices in public debates with those of sociologists' over important social issues such as gang violence, high school drop out rates, incarceration, unemployment, and other issues. He implores sociologists to make their voices heard in these public spaces because these topics are heavily studied by sociologists, and like Collins has argued, sociologists have the knowledge and expertise to speak on these subjects and further influence social change.
I believe that C. Wright Mills, a prominent sociologist during the 1950s, would agree with the above suggestions for bringing about social change through public sociology because, as he states in his book The Sociological Imagination, "It is now the social scientist's foremost political and intellectual task—for here the two coincide—to make clear the elements of contemporary uneasiness and indifference." Since activists outside the university setting are also working towards social change, it is likely that they would find sociologists' research helpful in accomplishing this task. Therefore, I think that bridging the gap in public sociology discourse in necessary.
Ehrenreich, Barbara. 2007. "A Journalist's Plea." Pp. 231-238 in Public Sociology, edited by Clawson, Dan, Robert Zussman, Joya Misra, Naomi Gerstel, Randall Stokes, Douglas L. Anderton, and Michael Burawoy. Berkeley, CA: University of CA Press.
Comments
Post a Comment