YouTubing: Ethical Leadership Etc. in Audio Format
Last week I started a Youtube channel to share my thoughts and reflections on my dissertation and research. As much as writing is a great process, I realize that reading is not always as easy of a process to engage with and that audio and video are often much more accessible.
The first two recordings went smoothly, and then when I recorded on the specific topic of ethical leadership and adultery, I found myself re-recording a few times so that I could get it right. On the last recording, I got the details I wanted, but my filler words were annoying to me as I listened, once I caught a few “you knows” and saw how often they were repeated.
I also had to correct myself in the comments, instead of opening an article and making a change. I had said “advanced interrogation techniques” instead of “enhanced” and I might have said a researcher was a theorist…instead of giving them their research cred.
The challenges of audio/video! I don’t know that I am an all around “perfectionist” in life, but when it comes to information, I want to get it right. I really am not the neatest person or the best in anything. My surfboards are stacked awkwardly, my car has a little sand, I even publish the first draft of an article pretty quickly, knowing I’ll clean it up later. However, when it comes to information, I seriously can only tolerate facts and research. If you want to tell me about the harm of battery-powered cars, I want to know the sources and the intricacies of in what ways they are positive and it what ways they cause more environmental damage. I want the complexity of an issue, I want the study, the facts, the discussion from those facts. I want to hear about what companies are doing to reduce the harm, the potential of battery technology. I’m here to learn about and accept things that don’t have black and white or easily predictable answers. If the facts push something one way though, then maybe its not as complex or “unknown” as it may seem. I know I’m speaking in generalities here.
Even this morning, I went back to an article I wrote in which I referenced the border crisis as “misconstrued.” Today, I clarified that the US/MX border crisis is an issue, but its presentation and withholding of other funding is what is problematic. I didn’t want to flippantly dismiss what actually is a problem that needs attention.
I just feel obligated to get things right. There are so many clips and soundbites that don’t tell the whole story, that intentionally hit our emotions instead of our logical brain, I don’t want to be part of that. I wouldn’t want one of my errors to be misinterpreted or leave a comment open to too much interpretation. I want to be in the logical middle that communicates and holds complexity, doesn’t necessarily have a strong “side” for complicated issues, especially those out of my domain, but takes a stand when it comes to treating people well and leaning into justice and fairness, and is empathetic and supportive of others who are treating people well.