What Does the JREF Do?

[Dunstan]

Seriously. I'm trying not to be a jerk about this.

But the recent server problems, and the predictable "let's raise some money for the Forum!" threads, have me thinking.

I've been bothered for a while about the way the JREF seems, in my opinion, to regard the Forum as a poor stepchild and a burden to the foundation rather than a means of carrying out its mission.

Evidence? Well, I wasn't around for the whole Bidlack/"95%" (or whatever the number was) brouhaha, but that at least hints that the JREF wasn't exactly embracing the idea of an internet community. More recently, there was the whole "naughty words" fiasco, where Randi appeared to go ballistic because of a couple of email complaints and impose an ill-thought-out rule on the Forum. And now, we have the Forum becoming borderline unusable, and the reaction isn't "we're going to figure out the problem and fix it!" but rather, "well, here's hoping the JREF decides it's worth spending the money to fix it."

It just seems odd to me that one of the recurring themes in all the "how do we promote skepticism" discussions -- whether here, or at TAMs, or elsewhere -- is "let's build communities!" And yet, here's a ready-made community, and it seems to be regarded more as a nuisance than an asset. If you want to promote anything in the 21st century, you need a web presence, and preferable an interactive one.

So if the Forum isn't a priority for the JREF, what is? The Challenge is coming to an end, supposedly because the JREF had bigger and better plans in the works that -- as far as I know -- have yet to be announced. Phil Plait's appointment seemed like a positive step, and I figured it would take a few months for Phil to get his feet wet and start providing some direction, but it's been quite a few months now. I can't remember the last time I heard Randi or the JREF mentioned in the media. TAM is fun and worthwhile, but it's also a fundraising event itself, so where is the money going?

Here's the JREF Calendar from the website, going back to November (as far as it lets me):
-- announcement of next year's TAM
-- Phil Plait book promotion
-- Skeptics in the Pub announcement (hey, there's that community thing again!)
-- Amazing Adventure announcement (another fundraiser)
-- another TAM announcement
-- promo for a Banacek performance (fine, but not something the JREF is putting on)
-- National Science Foundation event on creationism (again, not a JREF event)
-- Drinking Skeptically event (more community)
-- Houston Skeptics meeting (ditto)
-- James Randi lecture at UBC (at last!)

The "Support Us" page doesn't provide a ton of information, either.

So what, exactly, is the JREF doing? Operating a library in Fort Lauderdale? Running the SWIFT blog? Issuing a couple of scholarships a year?

Again, I'm not trying to start a "bash the JREF" thread. I'd be delighted to learn that the JREF is doing all sorts of things I don't know about. Maybe I haven't looked in the right places. Maybe the JREF is doing lots of stuff but not bragging about it enough.

 

[HarryKeogh]

While the forum issues are important I hope we don't just focus on that as Dunstan has raised an important question. "What does the JREF do?"

I haven't been tremendously impressed with what they have done recently and no longer give to them. I give to the Freedom From Religion Foundation, The Skeptics Society and the American Humanist Association because they seem more actively involved with church/state issues, organizing frequent lectures, actively lobbying, producing magazines and DVDs, etc.

I was a member of JREF for three years and honestly didn't have a great idea what they did. I would gladly give them money though but only if I knew it would go to run the forum as I certainly use it enough.

 

[H3LL]

Before this descends into a techie vs. users squabble Dunstan did raise the important question of what does the JREF do?

Other than the forum issues, his list did seem to be pretty comprehensive from what has filtered through to me and on reflection it is rather feeble.

Randi's new YouTube video's were missing from the list and they are a great new addition - Is this Phil's influence? Promo' a bit weak though and hardly justifies "what JREF do". People such as Thunderf00t do better on a tighter budget.

The new SWIFT format isn't working well for me (Friday was SWIFT day) but that's more to do with me changing habits than a bad decision by JREF.

I covered (rather badly) Randi's lack of appearance in the forums in another thread and really got no further than speculation that he wants to spend more time on other things. It does seem to appear that he reads comments on his new videos though.

It's clear what is going or gone but less so where JREF are going.

If existing supporters, fans and forumites are asking the question something has gone awry somewhere.

Casual visitors won't bother to ask.

 

[Darat]

Folks I've split the Forum performance issue comments to another thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=134709

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat

 

[tkingdoll]

I will add to H3LL's comment about the new youtube stuff: JREF has spread its wings internationally with the launch of TAM London. Yes, I know it's more event stuff, but I think it's a clear indication that things are happening and the JREF is trying to reach a larger audience.

It is still really early days for the new leadership and it's often better to make small changes and experiments than overhaul everything and possibly upset the apple cart, so perhaps that's what's happening here. Were there not forum performance issues then the question probably wouldn't have come up, but having said that I do think it's important for those who are invested in JREF (whether that's time or money) to ask questions. I'm sure the answers are positive, too, it's just a case of communication.

 

[volatile]

I will add to H3LL's comment about the new youtube stuff: JREF has spread its wings internationally with the launch of TAM London. Yes, I know it's more event stuff, but I think it's a clear indication that things are happening and the JREF is trying to reach a larger audience.

It is still really early days for the new leadership and it's often better to make small changes and experiments than overhaul everything and possibly upset the apple cart, so perhaps that's what's happening here. Were there not forum performance issues then the question probably wouldn't have come up, but having said that I do think it's important for those who are invested in JREF (whether that's time or money) to ask questions. I'm sure the answers are positive, too, it's just a case of communication.

I'm really gald there's a TAM London - I'll be there - but isn't that just more preaching to the converted?

In other words, where's the 'E'?

 

[Darat]

Why is a TAM not part of the "E"?

 

[HarryKeogh]

Why is a TAM not part of the "E"?

It's like my high school baseball coach always told me..."there's no "E" in TAM"

 

[volatile]

Why is a TAM not part of the "E"?

Surely everyone coming to TAM is more or less already aware of the issues it aims to discuss? It's preaching to the converted. I can see its benefit (and am not knocking it at all), but it's hardly "Educational" in terms of actually educating people about scepticism; not really.

The people that go to TAMs and similar events are already sceptics. What does the JREF do to educate those who aren't?

 

[tkingdoll]

I'm really gald there's a TAM London - I'll be there - but isn't that just more preaching to the converted?

In other words, where's the 'E'?

No, I don't believe it is preaching to the converted, I think it's about bringing together communities for a shared experience who will all come away having learned something.

Everyone at TAM learns something, unless you've hacked into all the speakers' computers beforehand and read their talks.

Now, there is a pricetag to TAM, which does mean some people are going to be excluded. That's why there is always a DVD of TAMs available afterwards. Yes, the social aspect is missing, but the education part is available to all. There is even some TAM content that is given away free via YouTube and such, and as pointed out, Randi has started video blogging. Could more be done to promote that? Yes, and given a little investment of time, planning and money, I am sure it will be.

The 'not preaching to the converted' ambition is also reflected in the choice of speakers. TAMs are not 'skeptic' conferences where the speakers all talk about fringe topics like ghosts or telepathy. They are Nobel-prize winning scientists (Murray Gell-Mann, Neil Degrasse Tyson, etc), they are entertainers (James Randi, Penn & Teller, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, etc), they are scientists with exceptional presentation skills or media experience (Richard Wiseman, Phil Plait), they are the centrepieces of popular culture (Rebecca Watson, who reaches hundreds of thousands of people via SGU and Skepchick), they are often household names (Richard Dawkins, Adam Savage) or people with whom 'organised skepticism' is not the first association you'd make (Ed Lu).

I can't reveal any of the line-up of TAM London yet, but it's more of the same philosophy. Speakers chosen not just for their achievements in their fields but also for their mass appeal. Skepticism goes pop, as it should. It's not an ivory tower, and I think the huge increase in TAM attendance over the years reflects that (TAM6 attracting somewhere near 1000 people).

Further, the PR coverage that TAMs attract reaches a much wider audience than those who plan to attend. This is 'stealth education' as it raises awareness of the existence of JREF and skepticism to the general public, who will then recognise the name when they Google for Sylvia Browne and find James Randi instead.

Go and look at the 360 people who have joined the TAM London Facebook group in the past 2 days. Then compare that to the 'average skeptic' in your mind of, say, ten years ago before TAM was started. This is a whole new generation of people, there's no way it can just be preaching to the converted because then where would all these new, young people have come from? They're not hardcore Skeptics-with-a-capital-S, they're the new ambassadors who will communicate to the general public that critical thinking is not a dogma, and thinking-before-you-believe is the way forward. And thus it'll spread. It might not please the diehard skeptics who don't accept compromise, but skepticism is spreading and it's due in much part to events like TAMs and the buzz they generate.

So yes, TAM is Education. I couldn't list what I've learned from TAMs. The people I've met, the books I've bought, the speakers I've heard, the friends I've made, the resources I've discovered, the opportunities I've gained - nope, this forum would crash if I gave you details of all of those things.

 

[Darat]

I certainly don't know everything and at the one TAM I went to I learnt a lot so I would say that TAMs are educational (as well as other things). Whilst I don't think the JREF should only help educate those already using scepticism I think it should be part of the JREF's goals to provide people interested in what its goals are (sceptics) the tools to help achieve the goals.

 

[Darat]

...snip...

So yes, TAM is Education. I couldn't list what I've learned from TAMs. The people I've met, the books I've bought, the speakers I've heard, the friends I've made, the resources I've discovered, the opportunities I've gained - nope, this forum would crash if I gave you details of all of those things.

Wouldn't have to be a long list to do that.....

Seriously well put, I think part of the problem "scepticism" and "critical thinking" and science in general has had in the past is that for a long time it was regarded as the domain of bearded men in white coats. That is changing and I really do think the likes of TAMs have helped that change along by providing different packaging for the same-old message.

 

[tkingdoll]

I certainly don't know everything and at the one TAM I went to I learnt a lot so I would say that TAMs are educational (as well as other things). Whilst I don't think the JREF should only help educate those already using scepticism I think it should be part of the JREF's goals to provide people interested in what its goals are (sceptics) the tools to help achieve the goals.

Exactly!! JREF gives tools via things like TAM to the people who already have some interest, and those people go spread it to everyone else. You start with the people you know will listen, they become, as I say, ambassadors.

Yes, more can be done. I truly believe it will be.

And I'd really like to see JREF doing stuff in schools but that really does take a huge investment of time and money and so may well not be on the cards for the immediate future.

 

[H3LL]

Teek, are you helping with TAM London?

I seem to recall you helped Richard Wiseman IIRC with some promo' stuff and it would be some comfort to know you were on-board, so to speak.

Meanwhile, how have I missed that such a thing is happening?

.

 

[tkingdoll]

Teek, are you helping with TAM London?

I seem to recall you helped Richard Wiseman IIRC with some promo' stuff and it would be some comfort to know you were on-board, so to speak.

Meanwhile, how have I missed that such a thing is happening?

.

Hey, you forgot that world record spoonbend I organised at TAM6

Off-topic for this thread so will keep brief: yes, I'm organising TAM London from the UK end as it's rather tricky for JREF to do from the USA! There's a news thread in the 'TAM' section of the forum, or search Facebook for TAM London.

Back to the topic, I meant to say that the hiring of Phil Plait is itself huge progress, because not only does that secure a future for JREF with a trusted figurehead (Randi not getting any younger, sadly), it brings in new audience. And only a few weeks ago JREF announced that A Kovacs has joined them as Director of Operations, so we need to give her some time before we see stuff happening. Rome in a day and all that.

 

[Dunstan]

Back to the topic, I meant to say that the hiring of Phil Plait is itself huge progress, because not only does that secure a future for JREF with a trusted figurehead (Randi not getting any younger, sadly), it brings in new audience. And only a few weeks ago JREF announced that A Kovacs has joined them as Director of Operations, so we need to give her some time before we see stuff happening. Rome in a day and all that.

Yes, I suspect that this issue is partly the JREF being in a transition period, partly the JREF not communicating the things it does as well as it maybe should, and partly me just forgetting things I already knew about.

I agree that TAMs have been a great success and do promote the mission (though that still leaves the question of where JREF contributions go, since my understanding is that TAM is a net money-maker), and I think Phil Plait was a great choice -- and someone who obviously appreciates the importance of internet communities.

 

[volatile]

So yes, TAM is Education. I couldn't list what I've learned from TAMs. The people I've met, the books I've bought, the speakers I've heard, the friends I've made, the resources I've discovered, the opportunities I've gained - nope, this forum would crash if I gave you details of all of those things.

Oh, that's all well and good. And it is good. I don't doubt that everyone who attends TAM picks up some valuable knowledge.

But it doesn't feel enough to me. It doesn't feel like outreach. It doesn't feel like it reaches people who aren't already of a somewhat sceptical bent, if you see what I mean.

I love the whole TAM concept. It's bold and exciting and fantastically interesting. But is it really educating the general public and bringing scepticism to the people?

 

[tkingdoll]

Oh, that's all well and good. And it is good. I don't doubt that everyone who attends TAM picks up some valuable knowledge.

But it doesn't feel enough to me. It doesn't feel like outreach. It doesn't feel like it reaches people who aren't already of a somewhat sceptical bent, if you see what I mean.

I love the whole TAM concept. It's bold and exciting and fantastically interesting. But is it really educating the general public and bringing scepticism to the people?

Well, I think it does reach the general public, indirectly, as per mine and Darat's comments, but yes, there are loads and loads of other things that could be done as well. I hope they are done, and I don't expect that the future plans of JREF will be reduced to 'events organising' but it is early days for Phil so I'm OK with giving them chance to formulate and communicate their plans. What's cost-effective must also be considered. For example, if you have to roll out a new database system across a company of 500 people which has 50 managers, do you pay for training for all 500 people? Nope, you pay for training for the 50 managers, who then go and train their teams. OK, stretched analogy, but you get my point. JREF can't afford to reach a million people, but it can afford to reach a thousand, etc.

However, there are bigger questions that your post raises, for example "what is skepticism and is it in a format that the public want anyway?". My opinion is that most people neither want nor care about this concept of 'skepticism' as a thing. But they do want to not get conned or ripped off. They don't want to be made to feel gullible, but they do want reliable information when they choose to look for it. They don't want to be lectured or nannied, but they do expect that frauds will be exposed. They need, perhaps, a watered-down version of the baloney detection kit. Not all of it, because the fringe stuff (psychics and such) doesn't actually affect the majority of the population.

To my mind, such education starts in schools, which is why I would love to see JREF doing stuff in that arena. Equally, the media needs good, balanced resources, and things like this forum are invaluable to people googling for their pet topic and for students.

You have to start with small battles. Reaching a captive audience is a start, and now that's gone international you could look at it as giving something to the community which makes the existence of JREF and this forum possible. But as to whether it's enough, I agree, it's not enough. No amount of money could be enough, a team of ten million people wouldn't be enough, worldwide, to counter all the stuff that actually harms society (anti-evolution, alt meds, holocaust denial etc). It is small steps but TAM is growing which means there's some foundation for the next step, whatever that may be.

 

[tkingdoll]

I agree that TAMs have been a great success and do promote the mission (though that still leaves the question of where JREF contributions go, since my understanding is that TAM is a net money-maker), and I think Phil Plait was a great choice -- and someone who obviously appreciates the importance of internet communities.

I am in no way party to any financial information about previous TAMs, but I do know that Las Vegas conference costs have gone through the roof in the past two years, so (just speculating here), it's entirely possible that the profitability of TAMs is not what it was. As to where the money goes, JREF posts annual accounts online which can be read by all. I haven't got a link but I think there are threads about it. I have no idea how many JREF members there are so no idea how much revenue that scheme brings in, so maybe it's just a case of operational costs eating up what resources there are?

 

[athon]

Why is a TAM not part of the "E"?

Good question, and I think it depends on what is meant by 'educational'.

The common thing I hear much of the time in response to this is 'I learned a few things at TAM'. Sure, I picked up a few bits of interesting trivia, and some fascinating snippets of information, and I guess by that I've also 'learned' a few things. However, to feel this equates it being educational, IMO, is stretching a long bow. It's no different to the continued approach amongst many teachers to view transmission communication as 'education', when time and time again it's been shown to near ineffective.

It seems to be a rather constant cry from skeptics that education needs to be addressed. Yet when I ask what this means precisely, I don't get much of an informed response. Strange how skeptics blow the horn on evidence-based decisions and scientific evaluation, and yet when I inquire about educational goals and communication methods I get classic comments that boldly state education and communication are the same thing.

I had a great chat with Randi at last TAM as I interviewed him for a radio documentary here. A lot of what he had to say was quite inspirational, but it was disappointing to hear some of his views on education, which sounded more like rhetoric than informed opinions on pedagogy or educational strategies. He has a number of advisors on matters of science, yet I couldn't seem to get him to tell me who (or even whether) he had anybody advising him on matters of education strategies. It felt almost as if education was one of things which didn't need evidence to form an opinion on.

I'm sure I'm seen as pedantic in this regard, however having been in a science communication / education field for a number of years, I can tell you it's far from a simple duck-feed of trivia that equates scientific or critical literacy. Considering I'm part of a rather influential research organisation that takes science education damned seriously, and relies on being informed on how people learn and how to communicate effectively with the public on matters of science and science literacy, I can't help but see the JREF's efforts as somewhat amateurish. It will be interesting to see how seriously Phil takes this charge, however so far there's not much to go on. I guess it's a case of 'watch this space'.

Athon