Abstract and Introduction
Sources report US Baha'i Review has failed to function according to one or all 1971 Universal House of Justice (UHJ) guidelines requiring (1) prompt review, (2) correct information and (3) dignified presentation. Associated ethical issues surpass the question of possible censorship and include basic questions about justice, integrity and honesty. Why is Baha'i Review becoming a failed policy and process? How should Baha'i Review policy develop to become a useful tool?
(1) Prompt Review One example is a short book sent to the US Baha'i "Office of Review". By "short", we're talking about 100 pages and less than 16,000 words -- something an adult reader with below average word-per-minute rate could easily read in little over one hour. Allow a few more hours for reference checking using on-line data or books in the reviewer's library. This short book was sent to US Baha'i Review, with receipt acknowledged, over two years ago. Thus far, not a single peep from US Baha'i Review, no review results, nothing, zip. The "prompt review" UHJ guideline appears to have been discarded.
(2) Correct Information This short book reportedly featured quotes from the Baha'i writings. Thus, fact-checking would be straight-forward. Are the quotes and their references correct? In over two years, US Baha'i Review has not found and reported any errors in the manuscript. This might be a vote for "approval". But the "correct information" UHJ guideline may no longer be a prime concern in US Baha'i Review.
(3) Dignified Presentation In the Baha'i community, quotes of writings of the Central Figures of the Baha'i Faith are the very definition of a dignified presentation. "Dignified" means something worthy of respect. Our short book example presented these quotes in a clearly favorable light, with objective to educate both Baha'is and the general public. Despite this no-brainer result according to the third 1971 UHJ guideline, we have over two years of silence from US Baha'i Review.
In sum, this little example might suggest that all three 1971 UHJ guidelines may have lost control or importance in US Baha'i Review. It's almost as if the "Office of Review" no longer exists and did not inform authors of Baha'i-related content of its closure.
Let's now look at some ethical issues in this story, possible causes of US Baha'i Review dysfunction and finally, some hopefully constructive ideas on how the sinking ship of Baha'i Review might remain floating given changing conditions in the world since 1971.
Ethical Issues
According to my early family upbringing, it is unethical to ask people to do things they are incapable of doing, knowing beforehand they almost certainly will fail. Would authors who are Baha'is ask for Baha'i Review if they knew beforehand that people conducting it are not able to do it? Asking people to do things that they are not capable of doing can cause them sorrow, embarrassment and even some loss of self-esteem.
Censorship The ethical issue most often cited by observers of Baha'i Review policy is possible censorship of individual expression by the Baha'i administration. Specifically, an author who publishes a work disapproved by the administration may be sanctioned by the administration. Without publically available statistics, it is difficult to know how often such a scenario actually occurs. Also, the possibility of sanctions may inhibit expression via a sort of self-censorship.
Perhaps the major liability of possible censorship outcomes is terrible public relations for the Baha'i community where critics might compare it to oppressive governments or corporations that censor, punish or criminalize free speech. Which is more important? Avoidance of alignment with the pervasive censorship and suppression of free speech in essentially all countries in the world today, on the one hand, or a few publications with some incorrect information or undignified presentation? More on this latter option below.
Justice Is it just and fair if Baha'i Review policies are not applied uniformly for all authors who are Baha'is? In 1967, I published three papers -- one each in Sociometry, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion and World Order -- without prepublication Baha'i Review. I don't recall any negative feedback that this was improper. On the other hand, some have reportedly been excommunicated from the Baha'i community austemsibly for publishing Baha'i-related material. Fortunately, in my case, these three papers continue to be read and cited by other scholars over fifty years up to the present.
One might also consider that variations in review policy might indeed be appropriate given the world-wide scope of the Baha'i community and specific situations in particular countries and regions.
Integrity In the Merriam-Webster dictionary, integrity implies trustworthiness and incorruptibility. To achieve its overall objectives to foster the health, vigor and growth of Baha'i communities, Baha'i Review policy might benefit from updates suggested below which might help it earn a reputation for integrity.
Honesty Concerning the honesty component of integrity, some might claim that it is dishonest to request authors to send manuscripts to Baha'i Review given its known failures to perform.
The foregoing thoughts on ethical issues might motivate consideration of possible causes for Baha'i Review performance problems.
Causes of Baha'i Review Failure
The most obvious cause of review failure is probably lack of sufficient competent personnel or budget constraints. What other factors might be in play?
"Good-Old-Boys" Cliques Everybody knows that people tend to form groups based on shared characteristics such as beliefs and interests. This is all well and good. We have chess clubs, farmers markets and endless thousands of groups with beneficial results. However, outsiders may be seen by group members as potential threats, perhaps upsetting the apple cart. When these well-known phenomena occur among Baha'i Review personnel, some sort of mayhem and dysfuction might be expected where an author outside such a clique may not receive a fair shake.
Consensus Opinions When a group of review personnel, including elected members of Baha'i administrative units, share a consensus opinion on a topic, we know the expected result. There will be a tendency to reject authors with a different perspective or opinion on the topic. Thus, authors seen as outside the group consensus might not receive fair treatment. In this cause of review failure, a different opinion of an outsider author might be judged to be simply wrong or even worse, harmful to the Baha'i Faith. Indeed, the review group with a consensus opinion might wrongly esteem itself to be the Baha'i Faith.
Conflicting Opinions While investigators in all fields of the humanities and sciences may hold certain consensus opinions, there are always discussions, debates, disagreements and some degree of competition among aspiring scholars. Thus, an author who has previously differed from a reviewer on some topic may not receive a fair, unbiased review from that reviewer.
Unrealistic Fear Publications by authors who are Baha'is which may be deemed to contain incorrect information or undignified presentation are a drop in the bucket compared to the tidal wave of material on the internet these days which is intended to be hostile to the interests of the Baha'i Faith. Thus, there may be an unrealistic fear of what well-intended Baha'is might publish. The world has changed and Baha'i Review has remained in the stone age, so to speak.
Bad People Now the plot thickens, as they say. Namely, the US Baha'i Review office may have been effectively hijacked and sabetoged by one or more persons. In this plot twist, note how easy it is for frankly wicked people to enter the Baha'i community and seek to control, limit or harm it. To enroll as a Baha'i, one only need learn the right things to say. Then, as weird as it might seem, such bad people may have a free glide path to power and control in the Baha'i community, including Baha'i Review as a possible target. This sort of plot twist could produce a radical change in the direction and expected outcome of the present story.
Possible Updates To Baha'i Review Policy
Service Package Baha'i Review as a free service which authors of Baha'i-related content may use or not, as they wish. This service would provide fact and reference checking and optionally, suggestions on effective presentation ideas. As a free service, Baha'i Review could provide leadership based on attraction of authors to valued information, not based on forced compliance. The service should be so good that authors might even pay money for it. In short, a win-win situation for the Baha'i administration and content creators.
An added advantage to this free service approach may be that authors who are not Baha'is could also be invited to use the service. In addition, censorship claims could be nullified when the service becomes optional and not obligatory.
Humility Review personnel should be trained and coached (1) to set aside their own personal views, opinions, theories, etc, and (2) focus on assisting the author to achieve legitimate objectives. Any critique of a manuscript under review must be justified using widely accepted criteria defining academic excellence, expressed in a way that guides the author to correct any perceived deficiencies. In brief, neither the author or the review process care what the reviewer's personal opinions are.
Detachment The Baha'i notion of detachment may pertain to the humility component above. Way back in the day, I served as chairman of site visit teams evaluating a number of separate research proposals bundled in a program grant proposal to the US National Institutes of Health. Each review team member was an expert in the specific fields of the applicant investigators. In the review team meeting the night before the visit to an applicant institution's research facilities, I found it useful to suggest "detachment" to the team's scientists. That is, when interviewing the applicant investigator and inspecting the laboratories, "leave your personal opinions and theories here at the hotel and focus on helping the investigator achieve his or her goal", "if you write in your review that specific proposal changes are recommended, explain why, so the investigator will know how to improve or revise the proposal for final approval", etc.
Diversity Updated Baha'i Review procedures should promote more diversity of opinion. Of course, without diversity of perspectives, the best approach may be absent in the discussion about and consultation on a topic. Hence, Baha'i institutions, both elected and appointed, might be on the lookout for unusually high levels of uniformity of opinion on selected topics and now and then send out "excessive opinion uniformity alerts" encouraging Baha'is to explore the merits of alternative ideas.
Homework Assignment
1. Describe your own updates to Baha'i Review policy and their benefits.
2. Find statements in the Baha'i writings related to the content of this article.
© 2024 James J Keene
No comments:
Post a Comment