I was surprised, and pleased, when I got an e-mail going around that there was a new blog up at the Anchorage Daily News called The Village - about "life and politics in rural Alaska." I wondered how long I'd missed out on it, and found out I got word the very day they started trying to get the word out (Friday) - so it's brand spankin' new.
So far there's some VPSO news, a bit about the 1A and 2A basketball teams in town, crazy village snow pictures, and some other interesting bits. I'm very interested to see where this goes. It's hard to find out news about rural Alaska, especially on a regular basis. You have to visit a bunch of different papers, and a lot of the places (including most that I'm interested in) don't have anything online.
I asked ADN Reporter Kyle Hopkins about it, and he was kind enough to answer me. He said it's something they've been wanting to to do for a long time. His answers below:
Why did ADN start this blog? What need did you see?
It was kind of a natural thing to do. I'd moved from covering City Hall in Anchorage to covering more rural affairs stories, which is what I've always wanted to do at the paper, and didn't really have a place to blog about it. Many of the stories I work on now are a little off topic for the politics blog, and it made sense to start a new page/site.
So, that's more traditional side of it: Blogging news as part of our coverage of a beat, or topic at the paper.
Then the thing that hopefully will make this blog a little different is that -- as much as we can -- we want to be posting info/pictures/video that people send us from around the state.
It could take time to establish that connection. But I really like the idea of people being able to go to one place and maybe listening to an interview with someone from Western Alaska, and seeing photos of a hunt from another village, and reading a letter from another.
How do you see this blog being used? To connect rural people? To let urban people know what's going on in rural Alaska?
Hopefully both. A way for people to tell the rest of the state: "This is what's happening in my community. This is what life in my community looks like."
Showing posts with label anchorage daily news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anchorage daily news. Show all posts
Monday, March 16, 2009
Friday, March 13, 2009
New Anchorage Daily News Village Blog
Hey, when did this start?
The Village
From the little blip about it on the side:
Could be very cool... keep you updated.
The Village
From the little blip about it on the side:
The Village is a Daily News blog about life and politics in rural Alaska. Its main author is ADN reporter Kyle Hopkins. Come here for breaking news on village issues, plus interviews, videos and photos. But that's just part of the story. We want to feature your pictures, videos and stories, too. Think of The Village as your bulletin board. E-mail us anything you’d like to share with the rest of Alaska -- your letters to the editor, the photos of your latest hunt or video of your latest potlatch. (We love video.)
Could be very cool... keep you updated.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
From Raven's mouth - Ups and downs in Native language news
Yea! First thought when I saw the headline in the Juneau Empire about the Sealaska Heritage Institute's language revitalization efforts. In recent years, I've been noticing an awesome push from SHI - and Southeast in general - for language and cultural programs, education and emphasis.
The article doesn't goo too in depth with what the specific methods are, but I have a bit of an idea. I was happy to discover that my OWN Tlingit teacher, the woman I learned (part of) the traditional Tlingit introduction from (it's LONG guys... seriously long...) subscribes to this.
See, for the first month of class, we barely looked at words, we just did sounds over and over and OVER. We repeated everything she said, in this crazy order she wanted done. She wasn't really concerned about us getting the textbooks at all - some never did. For the first month, seriously, I questioned her teaching style, and whether any of us were going to learn anything.
After a month, she suddenly began teaching us sentences - not short, little words - she went straight into the introduction, a good 15 minutes if you're doing it right. And... we got it! By doing things her way, it literally got drilled into our heads to correct pronunciations, order and inflections. We could then more easily "self-teach" because we had the groundwork already.
I'm not even totally sure how she did it, but by not doing things the way you're taught you're supposed to do them, we got it. It's been a few years, and I can still rattle off this long introduction with no problem.
The article mentions a few against-the-grain kind of teachings that I can see how they would work:
"One of the difficult things is to convince people to not use the printed form too soon," MacDiarmid said. "A lot of people were trained in literacy, and so there's this inclination to introduce the printed form of Tlingit, Haida and Tsimshian to the kids early. And in this process we are trying to pull them back from that."
It was interesting to me to read this literally minutes after reading about the continued struggle in the Bethel area to get the language voting help, and the ugly comments about Native languages that always follow stories like this in the ADN. I wish people would actually take a look at the numerous studies to see what multiple languages and cultural relevancy does for a child's education.
To me, this SHI curriculum looks like an incredibly smart mix of Western idea and traditional teaching. I've written recently about the "either/or" mentality of one is good, so the other must be bad. I love my culture, and hope it will thrive for another ten millenia, but that does not also mean I can't see what other cultures bring to it.
A friend once compared cultures who must meet as a marriage. In a marriage, if the two people really come together "as one," some things will certainly be lost. But what you gain in the meantime is something very beautiful and strong also. But if the couple comes together with each determined to not give an inch of themselves to the other - call it compromise, joining, whatever - much is lost. Not to mention a pretty bad marriage.
The trick is trying to not get totally lost in the other person - in this case one culture not getting lost in the other. I don't believe one culture has to swallow up another, and I adamantly believe the Native people and cultures of Alaska have a whole lot to give the world.
P.S. The above is a picture of my button blanket I use for dancing. Sometime I'll tell the story of it...
Friday, September 19, 2008
To Clear Up the Todd Palin post
What a difference a day makes. Today, my post on Todd Palin's heritage was highlighed in a few places, including the Anchorage Daily News Newsreader. Most of you that visit here will not have read this, but for those that do, I hope you will hear this part. In the e-mail in which the Newsreader goes out, it was said I was "questioning" Todd Palin's "Nativeness," and I believe it led readers to believe I was saying Todd's level of Native blood should be questioned.
I assure you, I am not.
This is something I would never do - question how Native someone is - and I did not say it. My post was a reaction to the sheer number of people that are still asserting Sarah Palin will be open to a better Alaska Native and American Indian policy simply because she is married to an Alaska Native man.
I was the recipient today of numerous e-mails, as well as several comments, about how horrible is it that I'm "questioning how Native he is" or measuring his blood as to see if he's a "real Native." It is with a sad irony I had to stop responding with a refrain that I have argued against using blood quantum as any kind of measurement to someone's "Nativeness." In fact, there is no measure of someone's Nativeness.
I made it very clear in the post that I do not believe blood quantum is a factor in determining whether he is a "real" Native - my past posts have argued against trying to nail down how "Native" someone is. My post was pretty clear, in multiple parts, about what I was trying to clear up, and why, but especially that he does not support Native issues. People are still confused as to which tribe he belongs to, why his blood quantum would even be brought up in the first place, whether or not he is a member of a Native corporation, etc.
There are still many people, especially those who vote on Native issues, who are announcing Todd's background as a reason to believe he - or his wife - will support Native issues, causes, legislation. My post was not about questioning his heritage or "Nativeness" - and again, the post is pretty clear about how I feel when people "prove" this person is a real Native or not based on their blood quantum. A common argument, for instance:
(From Indian Country Today) ''If she and Sen. McCain are elected, it would provide a basis for a stronger Indian policy,'' said W. Ron Allen, a member of the American Indians for McCain Coalition and chairman of the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe.
''McCain has a strong background in Indian country and understands it quite well. ... and she has familial and Alaska Native insights that I think enhance the ticket's commitment to tribes.''
Palin, the first female Republican vice presidential candidate is married to Todd Palin, who is of Yup'ik Eskimo descent. Their five children are also of Alaska Native heritage.
As shown above, Sarah's proof of "committment" to Native issues has almost exclusively been that her husband is Native. It is being used, even by Native leaders, to show that the McCain/Palin ticket will have committment to tribes. What my post was about was the assertion that he is a Native leader of any kind, a champion for Native issues. He is not.
I strongly disagree with the "introduction" to my post in the e-mail sent out, and much of the commentary that went along with the post. I don't question his Nativeness, and although I tried to clear up for people why blood quantum is (unfortunately) a factor in knowing whether he is tribal member, corporate shareholder, etc., I was strong in my message that people should not use it as determination of his view. That is much of the point.
I do not know Todd, and only know what he has publicly done. It is not a personal attack to say he is not someone who supports Native issues. That is simple fact.
My point is actually highlighted by one of the comments in support of Todd left today, "I've known Todd for almost 2o years... I've never heard him discuss his ethnic identity and I've never asked him about it because I don't care and I don't think he does, either."
If, in 20 years, Todd has not even discussed his Native heritage with his friend, but his heritage is now being used as a pull for votes, a play to voters who WILL vote on Native issues, I will do my best to dispel the myth that he is a leader, spokesperson or supporter of issues so many Native people care for and fight for.
I am certainly not the only one. From "New America Media":
I appreciate what ADN has done in giving the public a voice that does not ordinarily get out there. I will continue to read the ADN Newsreader. But in this case, "Writing Raven" was given a viewpoint that I do not hold. I stand by what I say and have posted. But I do believe the commentary skewed the point I was trying to make, and in fact proclaims a viewpoint that I fight against.
I welcome any and all comments, postive or negative, of those who have read what I said in its entirety. If you disagree with my assertion that Todd's heritage should not be used as "proof" he will stand up for Native issues, much less his wife, that is a valid disagreement. But if you disagree with "me" that nobody should use blood quantum or what you do every day to determine how "Native" someone is, well, I agree with you in the first place. I am not arguing at all that Todd Palin is not "Native enough," and detest the assertion as much as I detest the assertion that Obama is not "black enough," or that myself or any of my relatives are not "Native enough," or "White enough." My past postings, and the one this is centered around, will show you that.
Honestly, there are very few people that will be swayed by whether or not Todd Palin will influence Sarah Palin on Native issues. This post was geared towards those that will care, and hold Native issues dear, or those that want a fuller picture of how Palin has treated the indigenous people in her own state. For those of us that are swayed by a candidate's stand on Native issues, I only ask that you look at all the facts before deciding whether or not any of these candidates should hold enormous decision-making power over the Native people of America.
I assure you, I am not.
This is something I would never do - question how Native someone is - and I did not say it. My post was a reaction to the sheer number of people that are still asserting Sarah Palin will be open to a better Alaska Native and American Indian policy simply because she is married to an Alaska Native man.
I was the recipient today of numerous e-mails, as well as several comments, about how horrible is it that I'm "questioning how Native he is" or measuring his blood as to see if he's a "real Native." It is with a sad irony I had to stop responding with a refrain that I have argued against using blood quantum as any kind of measurement to someone's "Nativeness." In fact, there is no measure of someone's Nativeness.
I made it very clear in the post that I do not believe blood quantum is a factor in determining whether he is a "real" Native - my past posts have argued against trying to nail down how "Native" someone is. My post was pretty clear, in multiple parts, about what I was trying to clear up, and why, but especially that he does not support Native issues. People are still confused as to which tribe he belongs to, why his blood quantum would even be brought up in the first place, whether or not he is a member of a Native corporation, etc.
There are still many people, especially those who vote on Native issues, who are announcing Todd's background as a reason to believe he - or his wife - will support Native issues, causes, legislation. My post was not about questioning his heritage or "Nativeness" - and again, the post is pretty clear about how I feel when people "prove" this person is a real Native or not based on their blood quantum. A common argument, for instance:
(From Indian Country Today) ''If she and Sen. McCain are elected, it would provide a basis for a stronger Indian policy,'' said W. Ron Allen, a member of the American Indians for McCain Coalition and chairman of the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe.
''McCain has a strong background in Indian country and understands it quite well. ... and she has familial and Alaska Native insights that I think enhance the ticket's commitment to tribes.''
Palin, the first female Republican vice presidential candidate is married to Todd Palin, who is of Yup'ik Eskimo descent. Their five children are also of Alaska Native heritage.
As shown above, Sarah's proof of "committment" to Native issues has almost exclusively been that her husband is Native. It is being used, even by Native leaders, to show that the McCain/Palin ticket will have committment to tribes. What my post was about was the assertion that he is a Native leader of any kind, a champion for Native issues. He is not.
I strongly disagree with the "introduction" to my post in the e-mail sent out, and much of the commentary that went along with the post. I don't question his Nativeness, and although I tried to clear up for people why blood quantum is (unfortunately) a factor in knowing whether he is tribal member, corporate shareholder, etc., I was strong in my message that people should not use it as determination of his view. That is much of the point.
I do not know Todd, and only know what he has publicly done. It is not a personal attack to say he is not someone who supports Native issues. That is simple fact.
My point is actually highlighted by one of the comments in support of Todd left today, "I've known Todd for almost 2o years... I've never heard him discuss his ethnic identity and I've never asked him about it because I don't care and I don't think he does, either."
If, in 20 years, Todd has not even discussed his Native heritage with his friend, but his heritage is now being used as a pull for votes, a play to voters who WILL vote on Native issues, I will do my best to dispel the myth that he is a leader, spokesperson or supporter of issues so many Native people care for and fight for.
I am certainly not the only one. From "New America Media":
There was the ever so fleeting moment during her speech at the Republican National Convention when Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin paid tribute to hubby Todd. She lightly mentioned that he's of Yup'ik Eskimo background. Todd Palin beamed with pride at the acknowledgement in front of the packed convention crowd and in front one of the largest TV audiences to ever watch a candidate's convention speech. But the cheering convention participants and millions of viewers won't see the same smiles on scores of other of Palin's Yup'ik Eskimos and many other Native Alaskans.
I appreciate what ADN has done in giving the public a voice that does not ordinarily get out there. I will continue to read the ADN Newsreader. But in this case, "Writing Raven" was given a viewpoint that I do not hold. I stand by what I say and have posted. But I do believe the commentary skewed the point I was trying to make, and in fact proclaims a viewpoint that I fight against.
I welcome any and all comments, postive or negative, of those who have read what I said in its entirety. If you disagree with my assertion that Todd's heritage should not be used as "proof" he will stand up for Native issues, much less his wife, that is a valid disagreement. But if you disagree with "me" that nobody should use blood quantum or what you do every day to determine how "Native" someone is, well, I agree with you in the first place. I am not arguing at all that Todd Palin is not "Native enough," and detest the assertion as much as I detest the assertion that Obama is not "black enough," or that myself or any of my relatives are not "Native enough," or "White enough." My past postings, and the one this is centered around, will show you that.
Honestly, there are very few people that will be swayed by whether or not Todd Palin will influence Sarah Palin on Native issues. This post was geared towards those that will care, and hold Native issues dear, or those that want a fuller picture of how Palin has treated the indigenous people in her own state. For those of us that are swayed by a candidate's stand on Native issues, I only ask that you look at all the facts before deciding whether or not any of these candidates should hold enormous decision-making power over the Native people of America.
Monday, July 7, 2008
Can I get a little objectivity?
The Anchorage Daily News is going to drive me insane.
On Sunday, the Juneau Empire chose to run this headline:
Sealaska seeks resolution of land claim
http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/070608/sta_300571693.shtml?p
It’s a story about Sealaska trying to resolve the land claims from 37 years ago. I don’t think Sealaska has to be held up as doing everything right (Without actually knowing the whole story, it sounds like there are some questionable decisions going on.) But here’s the headline ADN decided to run:
Sealaska’s proposed land grab raises worries
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/457552.html
Not that the tone ADN consistently uses with Native corporations is anything new, but really. Same story, but ADN editors went with a much catchier headline, only a little more biased. And just to make sure I wasn’t steeping in paranoia, here are just a few definitions of “land grab”:
“The term ‘land grab’ is almost always used in a pejorative sense to describe a hostile or unfair real estate transaction.” (WiseGeek)
“...the seizing of land by a nation, state, or organization, esp. illegally, underhandedly, or unfairly.” (Random House Dictionary)
Not that you need a definition to see the difference.
I don’t think Native corporations have always treated the land Native people paid for as they should. But in no way does the upholding of a legal transaction that should have taken place in 1971, or shortly thereafter, make for a land grab.
This is another area in which it is easy to get mired, and I really hate mentioning things that seem so small. After all, why should the “slight” difference of wording be so upsetting? Why should a few different words on a headline make any difference?
I happen to have a healthy respect for the responsibility of the media, and the Anchorage Daily News knows very well what “slight” differences in wording make. People read headlines. Many people will only read headlines. Sensationalism in any form gets people to read the story more, gets more newspapers sold. But for those that only read the headline, Native corporations (once again) come out on the wrong end. The headline sets up the whole tone for any article.
If you really want to see the difference in reader reactions, read the ADN (
I would love to talk about the actual issue more. It is not something I am completely resolved on myself. But it is difficult to focus on real issues when the repeated attention of
Again, I don’t think the Native corporations are all angelic. But they certainly aren’t the devil incarnate either. There are many corporations, serving a diverse people in a completely unique circumstance, and were formed as a requirement from the government. It is frustrating, not to mention a bit ironic, that the Native people are so frequently vilified for being successful at what they were required to begin.
_
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)