I've been considered a "contributing writer" with the Korea Times since August, 2008, but had appeared in the paper earlier than that. It was never made clear what that meant, but hey, it was nice to have something to do with my time besides teaching. I had something in the paper every now and again, and it was nice to reach an audience I wasn't hitting by just writing on my blog.
Two weeks ago I sent some emails to the editor about the garbage that had appeared in the paper lately: Jessica Kim, Haydn Sennitt, Jon Huer, and some of the fake letters. You'll remember I wrote a rebuttal to Park Nam-sheik's ignorant comments, but it and an even better one were rejected. I then sent in a piece that addressed some of the garbage and turned it into a bigger discussion of the role of the English-language media in Korea. The paper was clearly not being responsible or responsive to the needs of the native speaker English teachers among its readership, though I of course know that's not the target demographic.
That, too, was rejected. The editor then asked me to write a report for internal circulation among staff, in which I was to list the strengths and weaknesses of the paper through the eyes of an NSET, and suggestions on ways the Times could better serve this demographic. I put it together in a few hours, but heard no follow-up. The editor also suggested I turn some of my concerns about NSETs into an enumeration of ten common misconceptions held of us by Koreans. My idea to turn it into ten full-length articles was rejected several times. To repeat what was written to me, and what I posted on Facebook: "In journalism, we refrain from publishing the same subject in a series."
In any event, though, the reception to the list was pretty good, but I was a little surprised by the comments at the bottom of the article. I had written the editor last year suggesting they remove the comments option on the website, but to no avail, and it was one of the suggesetions I made in the report. Yet when I checked the article after a weekend away I saw there were 300-some comments, most quite nasty. But the emails I got from Korean readers were quite the opposite, and I was happy to speak with an audience I've never had on the blog.
I was again promoted to "contributing writer," even though I was given the title in August. The same day, the editor caught my piece in the Joongang Ilbo, the weekly column I had been doing since late March. He said I would have to write exclusively for the Times. I agreed because the stuff I had done with the Herald had heretofore been sporadic, and I wasn't sure how much longer the JI column would continue. I was interested, too, in getting paid for my writing when my teaching contract expires in August. When Matthew Lamers at the Herald contacted me about writing more about misconceptions of native speakers, I declined, saying I would write exclusively for the Times from now on.
This morning I sent a proposal for a piece providing some balance to the atrocious piece "12% of Native English Teachers Dismissed at Schools in Ulsan," wrong on a number of levels. It, too, was rejected, with another reminder that I was not to write about English teaching. By that point I had made up my mind to not confine myself to a single paper, especially one that wouldn't let me do my thing. First and foremost I'm a teacher, second I'm a blogger, and one who has made a decent-sized name for himself writing about issues in English education in Korea, among many other topics. To not permit me to write on this topic, all the while letting other pieces in, is frustrating to me and dishonest to my regular readers, who want something with a little more punch. It would also unfortunate were I not able to engage Korean readers on topics we both find interesting, and from perspectives they might never have considered. I had more dialogue with Koreans on these issues this week than I think I've ever had before.
What prompted me to email my decision in a tone more strong than I had intended this morning was the Jon Huer piece that just went up. I won't link to it, I won't deconstruct it, I won't comment on it other than to say that a paper that continues to allow hit pieces on us, and refuses to allow rebuttals of equal size and strength, clearly is not committed to its native English-speaking audience. I will continue writing the weekly piece in the JI, and will write regularly for the Herald's Expat Living section on issues I think we'll find interesting and instructional. I'm excited to reach out to other teachers and foreigners here who have not yet talked with me or read my blog, and I'm even more excited to reach Korean readers who, to my surprise, have responded to several of my latest pieces with enthusiasm.
I can't continue to write for a paper that is so habitually offensive to a portion of its audience, and that refuses to give voice to the group that is the target of so much of its negative coverage.
25 comments:
Standing up for your own principles isn't easy and most times, isn't popular. At least you can look yourself in the mirror with your back straight and chin up.
There comes a time when you realize you're nothing more than the countermelody, actually giving synergy to the offkey melody, and the only thing to do is to stop playing to the establishment's tune. Sometimes silence is the best response, glad to hear that's what you're giving the times.
bravo your integrity.
un-bravo the times.
Brian, I've sometimes taken issue with the tone of your blog posts but I've never doubted your intelligence - or your good intentions - and your aticles in the paper have always seemed very reasonable and respectful. I'm sorry the Times are being so unfair and glad that you're sticking to your guns. Rob said "integrity" and that was a good word. Kudos!
~Melissa
Maybe they didn't like your writing?
You need to get translated into Korean. Then, just put it up on your blog, you'll get hits. Do you have someone to translate for you?
Brian,
Anytime you write about education in Korea and want an audience outside of Korea feel free to cross post as a guest blogger at EFL Geek.
The only editorial control I exercise is that it's related to teaching.
"Maybe they didn't like your writing?"
They print letters from "nine" year olds. How bad does it have to be for them to nix it?
Maybe they didn't like your writing?
The only possible reason I can think of for Brian to keep you around is that you make everybody else look so good in comparison.
Anyhoo... They asked him to write exclusively for their paper, hardly a sign of not liking his writing. They clearly have different ideas about what types of articles they want: Brian wanting to address obvious problems that he sees and the paper wanting to touch on a wider range of topics.
Brian, I can see why you would want to be able to address Professor Huer's writings, and I guess it must be frustrating to be unable to do so in the same paper.
I do think the "Gold Rush" analogy that Professor Huer makes, however, is not too far off the mark. The relative ease with which one can enter the profession, the haphazard nature of the industry in Korea, teachers forced to rely on "his own wits, ingenuity and inspiration, and nothing else."
The problem is that he takes some valid, even insightful points, and slathers them with a thick layer of generalization that belies the diversity of thought and experience of English teachers or other international residents (much the same as many 외국인 do about Koreans).
I think this is a problem of his discipline, sociology, where there has been so much emphasis on categorization, stratification, etc., where people are placed into generalizable (and manageable) groups or subgroups that are more easily studied.
From where you sit, this is wrong. Even within the same region, someone in a university in Seoul, for example, might end up with a completely different experience from someone like Kelsey living in Chindo.
So while Professor Huer's "observing the whole field" may provide him with a certain type of perspective those closer to the ground won't get, he also misses a lot of detail that he is also sorely needed.
The only possible reason I can think of for Brian to keep you around is that you make everybody else look so good in comparison.
Like you, Kushibo? Ah right, Brian already told you to tone it down, I forgot.
I have faith in Brian's ability to accept criticism, unlike you, Kushito.
My question was valid. I have been published in the KT and so have other friends. I guess we just pandered. Those who get rejected have a choice. They can suck up the criticism and go on to improve their writing, or they can blame the publisher.
The newspaper was not specific enough to gauge their reasons for rejection.
Well, I have no doubt in the quality of my writing or proposals. It's the topic the editors considered tired. That's fine, I get sick of English teachers running their mouths, too, and I can understand a paper not wanting to be seen as an advocate for a minority (a minority who, if the news is to be believed, has a drug problem and isn't very good in the classroom). That would be more acceptable if the newspaper as a whole stopped the English teacher coverage; but on the contrary what has stopped is a chance for a real look at the issues.
And Brian, I think you are right on by saying someone of your cultural knowledge and intellectual curiosity about Korea puts you, among your English teaching brothers and sisters, in the minority.
I actually shared your Top 10 list with a whole range of English teacher friends in Korea (good portion were gyopos--not of the angry, expat-hating types), and they took issue with a number of points. I am also a writer, so I am a believe in constructive criticism, and just not saying "You suck, jackass!" behind the veil of an online blog comment.
I agreed with a number of my friends' points (I taught English in Korea for 3 years myself, so not as long as you, I think, but a long time), but I'll synthesize them for you here. Again, I hope you can take this with an even head, and I'm trying very hard to put this objectively. To start, I thought your piece made some valid points, but it was a bit of a soap-box piece. Anyways, to the constructive criticism:
The best suggestion was you should have written the piece detailing YOUR life as the examples. Focus just on yourself versus trying to dispel myths across the wide spectrum of NSETs with abstract hypotheticals and generalities.
Many of my friends said they didn't know many teachers who could dispel all, or even a majority of the myths you provided--and that included the responses from the nearly half a dozen White teachers in the thread! (one guy just admitted straight up: I've definitely milked being a White guy in Korea)
That's not to say there aren't NSETs like you describe -- I would say there are many well-intentioned foreigners like yourself whom I applaud! -- but even you yourself admit that it is a "minority" group, albeit an important group and the voice you provide, in whatever media you choose, is unique: that foreigner who is well-versed in Korean culture and language, and you actually care!
But the article seems more intended for an audience of readers just like yourself--in that, foreigners just like yourself would read this and say, "Yah! That's right Brian! We aren't ALL that way!" You spent the article taking on some gripes, when we wanted to read a piece that provided a slice of life (of your life), and by showing, instead of telling.
Particularly Points 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 would be excellent sources of inspiration for an op-ed piece. Some might say it's self-congratulatory, but should you write it with enough general human interest points involved, then even the native Koreans (the ones who read English newspapers) might relate to you, sending you the empathy you are clamoring.
Hope this helps.
Samuel wrote:
Like you, Kushibo? Ah right, Brian already told you to tone it down, I forgot.
Why, yes, Brian asked everyone to "stick to the topic at hand" and not contribute to others' "bickering," while asking me specifically not to "go into giant line-by-line counterarguments for each and every post" while suggesting I address lengthy misconceptions I see on my own blog to which I "post six links to... in every reply."
But despite my voluminous and frequent prose, as well as my bad habit of fisking, to answer you question: I still look better than you by comparison. Indubitably.
My problem is not that I have nothing constructive or useful to offer, just that I try to offer too much of it. You, on the other hand...
Your "valid question" about them not liking his writing was anything but, because it simply did not jive with the facts in the case. It was an unwarranted attack.
Now I've got loads of studying to do today, so I'll let you have the last word. And since you're obviously unclear on what I mean by that, it is not "smug condescension" where I think you need my permission to have the last word; I'm simply stating that I am done talking about this and will likely not reply.
On the other hand, my earlier statement about everybody else looking better than you in comparison, while not "smug," was condescension.
Kushibo out! Peace!
I still look better than you by comparison. Indubitably.
So says Kushito.
It was an unwarranted attack.
Prove it. There is no indication of an attack.
so I'll let you have the last word.
It is so mighty of you to let me have the last word. It makes you look like the good guy, which you aren't.
I'm simply stating that I am done talking about this and will likely not reply.
Promise? Stop embarrassing yourself and go back to writing that joint master's and doctor's degree in health studies.
Salve Kushito. Ultio me vocat
hello... hapi blogging... have a nice day! just visiting here....
Thank you for the support you show towards your fellow expats.
"That's not to say there aren't NSETs like you describe... but even you yourself admit that it is a "minority" group... and the voice you provide... is unique: that foreigner who is well-versed in Korean culture and language, and you actually care!"
Maybe I've been reading too selectively, but, isn't this precisely one of the misconceptions he's been trying to break? That of the ignorant, uncaring foreigner as a majority in the expat population?
You've made a good decision.
As for engaging with the other local English-language rags, expect the worst, because at least then you won't be disappointed in the future, and might be pleasantly surprised if luck is on your side.
Remember, this is Korea, and they'll only let you stick around as long as they think you're "useful" for them.
Oh yeah, and screw John Huer!
Well Samuel has a point since there might be some other possible reasons why KT refused to publish some of your articles. Although i think maybe its not the quality of writing since you seem to be better than most bloggers ive seen (and since KT is known to publish crappy articles as well), although there's quite a big room for improvement in case you wish to pursue or try serious journalism. First thing is to AIM HIGH by choosing a high QUALITY, well respected and credible journal. Im sure KT is not one of those, not even JI.
IMHO, English newspapers in Korea are not that strict/selective when choosing foreign contributors or guest articles, letters to editors etc.. to their newspapers, primarily because its a lot better than the English article written by their Korean regular columnists. They (Korean) might perform better if they will just write in their own language, but them doing an English article, the result is disgusting for my taste. To become a regular columnist however in the case of (foreigners), i guess they will ask for a very pretty resume. Im not sure.
As long as you can stay neutral (or more), lessen over defensive tones and be more versatile and creative in your writing, then i think it will be good for you and your readers. I think you can do it.
@johnb
Check Brian's comment above my previous one. Maybe Brian was being facetious, but he had called the group of foreigners he associates himself with as a "minority" group.
Especially if you group in the military as foreigners and exclude gyopos (who rarely get called foreigners even though we are are in many ways), the vast majority of non-native Koreans in Korea do not care much for the local culture or language. So I think Brian would be accurate to call it a "minority" group.
@arvinsign
Thank you for far better communicating my intended point. I read your comment and said to myself: That's what I wanted to say but failed at.
t_song, you make some good points about the list. I think there will be some room to explore examples from my own life in the future. I thought that adding too much personal experience would weaken an article about a media bias.
You're right that we are a minority, a very small minority. But what I was getting at was NSETs are the minority not only in Korea, but among other foreigners. When people talk about "foreigners" to mean "native speaker English teachers," I think they sometimes forget that we are but 50,000 (or so, I don't have the numbers with me) out of 1,000,000 that includes students, business people, laborers, factory workers, teachers of other languages, professors of other subjects, spouses, entertainers, and so on. When people talk about the foreigner experience in Korea, they often forget that what we as NSETs go through is quite different than what others experience.
And on that point, yeah, I do think we're too opinionated and maybe too uppity. I'll tell you, it seems like every time I'm on the bus sitting behind some English teachers, they're bitching about something. THere are reasons to be unhappy, to be professionally dissatisfied, and reasons to blow off steam. But that doesn't change the fact that the impression of NSETs here---based on examples like that---is that we are too opinionated.
These opinions seem to stand out more than other minority groups here. Unlike minority groups in the US, though, most of us don't have roots here. You'll notice that when there's some biased coverage about a certain group there, it's Korean-AMERICANS, Japanese-AMERICANS, African-AMERICANS who hit back. How many of us can argue out points as residents or citizens?
But the point I try to make on my site and in the papers is that since NSETs and English education are such hot topics, it only makes sense to afford us the same space to give our side. I don't want the papers to turn into paper copies of Dave's ESL Cafe, and there are plenty of teachers in the papers I DON'T want to read anymore. But I don't see what's wrong with having a NSET write from our perspective. It doesn't even have to be me; I offer myself out of convenience since they've approached me to write stuff of local interest. But as I suggested in my report to the KT, there are plenty of people qualified and probably interested to do the job. But I've had it up to here (motions with hand) with this fixation on NSETs and with their one-sided portrayal. Not only do we have to step up and lead by example, but we also have to demonstrate why the bias heretofore shown is incorrect.
@ t-song
Thanks. I agree with your comment too. I also think writing articles regarding this very sensitive topic should focus on "showing" instead of telling as you mentioned already. Thats why i always feel there is a tinge of over defensive tone in many of the articles about this. Of course you can expect a barrage of "yes thats right!" "nice writing!" etc from people who benefit from articles like this. I dont want to think they are the only target readers for this, however it makes me think maybe it is. What im not sure is how constructive and unbiased they were when they said that.
If the objective of writing an article is just to be sensational hence popular, then thats pathetic. The only consolation for that is winning a flock of slow-witted admirers.
But if the objective is to present a counterargument to a negative stereotyping made by an unfair society, then there's a lot of things to change and to do.
IMHO, getting the nod of critics and enemies is i think the best gauge of quality here.
Samuel,
I think you may be missing the point.
The real problem with the KT is not why Brian's articles were rejected, but the paper's consistent, Tourette's like habit of slating English teachers and an insistence upon fencing us into a homogeneous target for (and by) writers such as Huer.
This wouldn't be so much of a problem if it weren't for the fact that English teachers make up a significant portion of the audience of the KT (look at how many adverts target that demographic.)
This leads me to the conclusion that the KT is purposefully trolling our demographic for sales and/or the satisfaction of the more xenophobic natives who frequent the site and 'comment' on the articles(slag us off)ad nauseum. The hype and controversy breeds sales.
It took me a few reads of different editions of the paper to spot that the KT was actually doing this on purpose and that these weren't isolated articles. It's an editorial decision.
It's clear that the KT has actually built up a particular (peculiar?) readership that want these sort of attacks and that it is continuing to provide content for this angry, xenophobic audience.
Hey Brian, I worked at the KT for a few years (this was quite a few years back) and I can say without reservation it's the most poorly written and edited newspaper in the world :)
Most of the editorial staff were alcoholics and on the take. For instance the "Thoughts of the Times" editor was pocketing contributor payments, another guy was getting kickbacks from hotels to add them to the laughable "Hotel Lobby" columns, and so on.
Initially I was appalled by the shoddiness of the KT (I'd worked as an editor in the U.S. for almost a decade previously) but I quickly realized the staff was hopeless and moved on when a much better gig came along.
There was/is a lot of unintentional comedy in the KT though. Do you remember the "Dr. Henry" column? Fricking hilarious pseudo-medical advice, like the article titled "How to Clean the Bunghole" (I'm not making that up!).
They didn't target English teachers that often when I was there, it was more the "crime by foreigners is rising" general zenophobia.
The average reporters there were nice, underpaid young people and the desk editors/management were useless, overpaid clowns. That likely hasn't changed. Cheers.
"How to block or open the bunghole"
WORD VERIFICATION: forting
Post a Comment