1. What do you see as your strengths and weaknesses as an intervener?
I like to think that I am a very good observer. I am very good at reading body language and things of the sort when I’m around others, which may come in handy in the future as I try to perform my own intervention. I think I have also improved my skills as a writer describing interventions over the course of the semester. Unfortunately, my knowledge of power interventions is still sub-par. I think this is because I just haven’t talked all that much about them over the course of the semester. In my final blog post I briefly talked about the power intervention taking place with Donald Sterling in the NBA and it was probably the hardest intervention I’ve talked about all semester. Hopefully with time I my knowledge of power interventions will continue to improve.
2. Which course assignments or experiences helped you the most to learn about interpersonal and social intervention? Which were the least helpful? Why?
Far and away the best assignment for me in this class was the main essay. The essay allowed me to look at a specific situation in detail and see all the different ways that Dave Grohl and others were intervening at Sound City. The essay was an amazing learning experience as I wrote both the rough copy and final draft. Honestly it was one of the coolest assignments I have ever done. My least favorite assignments were probably the in-class assignments. I felt our group was more focused on socializing than learning the material so I didn’t learn that much doing in-class assignments.
3. In what ways will the knowledge and skills learned in this course be useful or relevant (or not) to you in the future?
Well, as a concert promoter I will be acting as an intervener trying to shift the attention of my audience (concert goers) to my venue, but in terms of actually putting the concepts we’ve learned in class into action? It will never be practical, but it would definitely be fun. Until the Sound City paper, I figured I’d just forget everything I learned in this class once it was over. But now, I’ll probably still look at events in the music industry through the RSI lens on occasion. I guess you could say that there’s a symbolic need in me to use this material now because of the paper.
4. In what ways have your views of interpersonal and social intervention changed or not changed as a result of this course?
Well I had very limited views and beliefs on interpersonal and social interventions before this course, so in that sense you can say that they have changed quite a bit from the start of the semester. Now I have a way to interpret social interventions that I did not have previously because of this class.
5. What is your overall feeling about the RSI model? In other words, how relevant or useful is it to your own experience? How has learning about the model intervened (or not) in your life?
Well, writing about Sound City was definitely a need intervention in my own life as I realized just how interesting the act of looking at an intervention through the RSI model could be. Now I’m just wondering if there’s more. Can all the interpersonal and social interventions taking place in our world truly be summed up between three different kinds of interventions? What about something like love? I personally have very limited experience with it but would falling in love with someone be categorized as a need intervention? To me that seems too simple. Love is too complex a thing to just say that when we fall in love with someone we create a symbolic need to be with that person.There must be more in-depth explanation of it. Obviously I'm thinking out loud, but I am interested. Thanks to Sound City, I want to continue to use the RSI model because it is very interesting to do so.
Thank you for teaching me about the RSI model. I hope to continue to use it in the future!
Recently in the NBA, Los Angeles Clipper’s owner Donald Sterling came under a lot of heat from his players , the league, and just about everyone imaginable for his less-than-admirable thoughts on African Americans. These incredibly misguided and racist remarks have netted in a lifetime ban from the NBA for Sterling. While the comments were just about as terrible as they could possibly be, this discussion is taking a look at what happened after the comments were made. This is the ongoing power intervention that is taking place in the NBA between the league itself and Donald Sterling.
After the comments made by Sterling, the association got together and decided to ban Donald Sterling for life from the game of basketball. The NBA is attempting to remove the influence Sterling has over the Clippers and over the game in general by doing this. As soon as the ruling was made, Sterling pushed back. Currently, he still owns his share of the team and is refusing to sell it. He’s also currently hiring lawyers and preparing to sue the NBA. While Sterling has no problem hearing his name repeated over and over, the NBA is desperately trying to shift the attention the media is giving Sterling away from him and back onto the NBA playoffs, which are also occurring right now. The NBA is trying to foreground the playoffs and background Sterling. To this point, they have not been successful; the mainstream media continues to follow Sterling’s every move.
This situation is a worst-case scenario for the NBA. While they are desperately trying to background the Sterling situation, they are also trying to mask the anomaly of the fact that Sterling has been a thorn in their side for years and they’ve just allowed him to continue to be the racist that he is. To make matters worse, because of this recent outburst from him, the media is also starting to dig into Sterling’s 33 years as the owner of the Clippers. The media is halting any progress the NBA can make on putting this situation behind them whenever they bring up any negative comments or actions Sterling has made in the past. The NBA has responded to these stories and has continued to try to background these anomalies when they asked the president of the Clippers, Andy Roeser, to take an indefinite leave of absence. What the NBA is trying to do is show its audience that it is doing everything it can to right this wrong.
In addition, the players have gotten involved as well and have performed their own attention intervention with the fans, their audience. Shortly after the initial comments were released by TMZ, the players of the Clippers, who are mostly African American themselves, made a statement of unity as a team by not wearing any team gear before the start of one of their playoff games. The players of the team opposing the Clippers also planned on walking out of game 5 of the series were it not for the lifetime ban passed down by the NBA. Because of the ban, player outcry has been mostly silenced as they have shifted their attention from Sterling back to the playoffs, but it remains to be seen what will happen after the playoffs come to an end. Sterling has also remained relatively silent on the whole situation, so it will be interesting what happens when he finally starts talking in an official manner. Obviously this situation is ongoing, however it will be fascinating to continue to look at it through the RSI model.
How do you solve the problem of homocentrisim here at JMU and at colleges everywhere? How do you actually put acceptance into practice? We must conduct a need-based intervention. We must convince the straight community that they need more understanding and compassion towards the LGBT community, and the LGBT community needs to feel more accepted in return. While the overarching goal is an attention intervention among the straight community, the way to get there is through a need intervention. An idea that comes to my mind as I think about putting acceptance into action would be to have a sort of “holding hands” day on campus. A day where everyone, straight or gay, could hold hands and it doesn’t matter what sexual orientation you are. We are together. We are one. That would be a simple yet effective way to preach and practice acceptance.
The primary audience of this need intervention is the straight community. The straight community must decrease ignorance of the LGBT community and increase our awareness of the symbolically created walls that we have separating us from the LGBT community. College is the place to begin this wave of acceptance due to the liberal tendencies of most on a campus. While there will always be those unwilling to change (the @Straightmu Twitter account was an unfortunate example of this here at JMU) most on the campus would probably be more than willing to try to learn to break down the barriers that they knowingly or unknowingly have created with the LGBT community. While there is a GayMU week at James Madison University, there has to be more. It is so easy for most of us to simply just avoid the events of GayMU week and move on with our lives. So, what’s the answer? Those of us within the straight community that are already accepting have to start a movement with those who aren’t. We have to team up with the LGBT community both locally and nationally to begin this movement. I believe that the national LGBT community should focus a lot of their resources at one college with an experiment like this and see if it works, but if a movement of passionate individuals can get started and be supported by the national LGBT community, who knows what could happen next? What would the movement actually do? Well, I don't know. Their objective, though, will be removing the symbolically created walls by those who tolerate, but do not accept. However it is important to note that everyone must get involved. From department heads to promote acceptance in the classroom to members of the SGA to help promote the movement itself to the president of the university being the figurehead for their respective college, this movement would have to reach out to all areas of the university. Those in charge will have to learn to have thick skin, as those who are intentionally masking these anomalies will be out in full force promoting their respective beliefs. But it can be done. It must be done.
While JMU is probably not the place to initially start a movement like this due to its strong roots in southern Christian beliefs, it probably would be a good place to go for a challenge if the movement works at other universities. My goal here as the intervener, my rhetorical maneuver, so to say, is to put this idea in the minds of you, the reader. If you are at an extremely liberal college and feel passionately about this anomaly, get out there and start a movement. Get going, and it’ll only be a matter of time before we are no longer just preaching tolerance, but also practicing acceptance. The time has come. Our world is not composed of LGBTs and straights. We are all brothers and sisters. We are all human beings.
Recently, in our SCOM 330 class, our group came across a very interesting issue that has yet to truly be addressed in our society. Our campus, as well as many others, have come to accept homosexuals in recent years. This is an impressive feat in and of itself given where many campuses were just 30-40 years ago. However, do we truly accept? While we freely tolerate the LGBT community, as of now everyone still assumes that everyone else is straight. This problem is labeled as homocentrism. The anomaly is that while we openly accept the LGBT community, there’s an invisible line that has been placed there by the straight community to separate the LGBT community from everyone else. As long as the LGBT community stays out of our way, we’ll "accept" them. While the straight community probably doesn’t even realize that this is occurring, the LGBT community is very aware of this anomaly and is trying to bring it to the foreground of our minds.
Still confused as to what I mean? Ask yourself this: how often do you see two girls holding hands in a campus dining hall? Or two men kissing on the quad? Probably not much, right? That’s because the LGBT community still feels very intimidated at showing themselves in the public setting. I have occasionally seen a gay or lesbian couple holding hands, and every time I see it I think, “Good for them!” for being willing to show their love in public. But that’s the problem: I should not even half to think that. I should look at something like that and think nothing of it just the same as when I see a heterosexual couple holding hands. See what I mean? An attention intervention needs to take place on campuses everywhere to shift our attention away from LGBT couples and onto our own stories of love.
So what can we do to fix this problem? Well isn’t that the question of the day? You can’t just preach tolerance. It’s more than that. We have to recognize that an intervention must take place between the LGBT community and the straight community. The straight community has to shift its attention away from those labeled as homosexuals and stop viewing them as anomalies. This is not an easy task. I went to an all male high school in my younger years and I think this really taught me to not just accept those of a different sexuality, it taught me to treat them exactly as I would anyone else. Going to an all-male high school helped me to shift my attention away from the fact that the person I was talking to was homosexual and onto their many likes and qualities. The only way that we can truly learn how to accept those in the LGBT community is by interacting with them and making them feel just that: accepted. Included. This is certainly a long and arduous task, but it must happen in order for the LGBT community to truly feel accepted. We can't just talk about this anymore. We must act.
So, it’s March 27, 2014. (Yes I’m dating this.) I am tired, exhausted both physically and mentally, and yet I couldn’t be happier. Over the past week, I went on a trip that I will remember for a long time. I joined our beloved Lady Dukes and went to Texas with the JMU Pep Band (Ho!) to watch our girls play their hearts out in the NCAA Tournament. While the final result was not what we were hoping for (we ended up losing in the second round) the experience was unforgettable. To be around the team and hang out with them and to get to know each other was an incredible experience. We got to see a new place that most of us have never seen before in College Station, Texas, and we got to experience food that we have never experienced before, among many other things. With way too much money to spend in a single day on food being given to us by the university, and a roof over our heads, also by the university, you could say we were living the American Dream ideology for a few days.
However, that’s not what I’m going to talk about in this short paper. I’m going to talk about a moment where my naming an athlete was violated at the end of the trip. We, those labeled as fans, create a persona and certain expectations when we name someone an athlete. We expect them to be tough and athletic. We expect them to be almost looking down on the rest of us. Maybe not look down as much as we expect them to think of us fans as one of a lot. Whenever I personally talk to an athlete and tell them they did a good job, my naming them as an athlete makes me expect that they’ll say thank you and move on with their lives. After all me telling them good job is just one of a lot of people saying the same thing right? Well, on Tuesday night after our loss to Texas A&M, I experienced an anomaly to this that I will remember for the rest of my life. We stayed up at the hotel to cheer on the girls after they returned from the loss. When they got back you could tell they were devastated, but they were holding it together. Staying tough, to use that word again. Once things started to disband, and the girls were heading towards the elevator to go to sleep, I pulled one of them aside, one of the two seniors Kirby Burkholder, hugged her, and told her that what she did in our win against Gonzaga on Sunday was magical. With just a few minutes left in that game and us down by four, Kirby stepped up and led a 12-0 run by JMU that eventually gave us the win. When I told her what she did was magical, I just expected a thank you. She did. However, she also started crying. I could tell that what I said to her really resonated with her, and this violated my expectations of her. It was as if, right at that moment, I, one person, told her exactly what she needed to hear. This experience is definitely an anomaly within this power structure. At that moment, the relationship from athlete-to-student felt more like a relationship from a friend-to-friend. It touched me as much as it touched her, and I will not forget it for a long time.
Update on my paper: I have begun writing the paper, but am only about a page in. Still not an easy task but I still have the confidence that I will be able to do it.
While the Twitch Plays Pokémon phenomenon was occurring, an ideology formed around a certain item. Now for the setup: in the early days of Twitch Plays Pokémon, the world was utter chaos. There was no order, no power structure, no social hierarchy, just our hero Red mindlessly wandering around the world. Well, very early on Red received the Helix Fossil from one of the individuals you encounter. This Helix Fossil was an item, and thus was stored in the item slot of Red’s backpack. Whenever Red would go into battle, chaos would always follow, as the “Fight” function of the menu would be clicked on only about 25% of the time. The “Item” icon would also be clicked on about 25% of the time. While many items were discarded or improperly used as the players (and the trolls) would try to exit the item’s menu, one that could not be discarded was Helix Fossil. As Red constantly clicked on the Helix Fossil and Professor Oak constantly said that it wasn’t time to use that item, an ideology formed.
Over time, people created the ideology that Red was consulting the Helix Fossil for guidance. A superordinate was formed around this fossil to explain the anomaly of Red constantly clicking on it. This idea was created, and Twitch ran with it. The Helix Fossil was named the lord and savior of our hero Red and really of the entire world of Twitch Plays Pokémon. Many memes were created (such as the one pictured above) as many were quick to adopt this ideology. The ideology was created due to a need-based intervention, as the players were trying to find a way to explain anomaly that was constantly clicking on the Helix Fossil. Many events and characters were named and placed into different categories to fit this ideology. For example, an Pokémon called an Eevee was acquired at one point accidentally and it led to many negative events within the game, and thus this Eevee was labeled as evil and a heretic trying to break Red from his loyalty to the Helix Fossil. Additionally, when the Helix Fossil was finally used late in the game (it existed for one purpose and one purpose only) the creature that was created was referred to as a god. The ideology of the Helix Fossil was associated with many things including anarchy, the most powerful Pokémon in Red’s arsenal, referred to as Bird Jesus, and of course the god himself, the Pokémon Omanyte which was eventually evolved into his most advanced form, Omastar. The opposing ideology, which was created simply to oppose the Helix Fossil, was the Dome Fossil ideology. When Red acquired the Helix Fossil, he was given a choice between it and the Dome Fossil. The Dome Fossil represents things like the Democracy system put in place discussed earlier, as well as Eevee. Additionally, an extremely powerful Pokémon was caught in the later stages of the game which led to many Pokémon accidentally being released from the PC as Red tried to get this Pokémon out of the PC. This Pokémon was also labeled as a heretic and named Anti-Jesus.
While Twitch has beaten Pokémon, the ideology of this original play through has not made it into the later play throughs. This is because the only people who now play Twitch Plays Pokémon are the people who want to actually beat Pokémon. As quickly as this became an Internet phenomenon, it became a shadow of it’s former self just as fast. As of late March, the stream was averaging less than 10,000 viewers at any one time, compared to 100,000+ viewers at any one time at the end of February of the same year. It’s amazing how quickly things rise and fall on the Internet. However this is another discussion for another time.
Update on my paper: I am still acquiring research and also using the book to try to figure out how to write the paper. I have not chosen an easy subject, however I am confident that I will be able to pull this one off. Next step is to begin writing the paper!
So remember my discussion of Twitch Plays Pokémon earlier? Well I’m going to talk a lot more about it. It’s unfortunate that this started happening after I picked my topic for my final paper otherwise this would be it. I hope I am conveying to you the incredible phenomenon that is Twitch Plays Pokémon, because it is unlike anything the Internet, the ENTIRE Internet, has ever seen. To see over a hundred thousand players simultaneously play a simple game of Pokémon is something that we’ve never seen before. And likely will never see again. In this entry, I am going to talk about the how Twitch actually beat Pokémon.
Early in the morning of March 1, 2014, something amazing happened. Twitch beat Pokémon. Over 391 hours of gameplay later, they did it. How did they do it? Somewhere around day 14 (out of 17 total) the players of Twitch had an attention intervention. They realized that their Pokémon were not strong enough to take on the final bosses of the game, the Elite Four, and as a result spent over a day making their Pokémon stronger. Up until this point, strategy had been mostly ignored. The character in the game, Red, mostly would just schizophrenically make his way to whatever the next destination was, and then fight the next boss to advance. There was some strategy in specific areas because it would be legitimately impossible for Red to advance without it, but on day 14, a group of players successfully brought the idea that Red was not ready for the final battles from the background to the foreground. These players placed emphasis on the anomalies-Red being defeated due to lack of preparation-and made the rest of the stream realize that they needed to beef up Red’s Pokémon. After advocating their position for quite some time, the rest of the players opened up to the idea, and thus Red spent over a day beefing up his Pokémon.
Once the group felt ready, they made their way to the Elite Four. After several failed attempts, (about 20) Twitch did it. They beat Pokémon. What happened was that the Twitch players took the attention intervention started on day 14 and created a reciprocal social hierarchy. The entire group, 100,000+ players at this point, all started working together to defeat the final adversary. Very similar to the student-student relationship, the players worked together and cooperated, ultimately defeating the final boss. I tuned in for the final fight, and what I saw amazed me. Unlike any point before it in the experiment’s lifetime, everyone was working together. There were no trolls sending the input of start for no reason. Nope. Everyone was using what little control they had over the game to do the logical thing in that situation. Like attack instead of flee. (Which you can’t do, but the option is there.) And when the players finally got the attack selected that they wanted to do, the amount of “A”s that came flying in was amazing. Hundreds of the same input, with not a single input of anything else being entered. Not one. The social hierarchy that was created, to actually beat the game, shined through everything else, despite the fact that the anarchy system was in place throughout this process.
Twitch Plays Pokémon has since moved on to later versions of Pokémon, however they do not have the same power and resonance this this first play through had. It’ll never be the same as when our hero Red managed to take down the Elite Four and then his ultimate rival, Blue.
Update on my paper: I am still searching for resources on the paper. There are not as many as I would’ve liked but I am not concerned yet.
While the world goes on with its day-to-day life, it is, for the most part, completely unaware that one of the greatest social interventions of recent memory is happening right now on the Internet. It's called Twitch Plays Pokemon. First of all, what is it? Well I'll try to make it as easy as possible to understand. Someone at a YouTube-like channel for video games, called Twitch, was able to set up one of the original Pokemon games to be released, Red, (all the way back in 1996) to be played by the viewers of the stream, in real time. Still confused? Here's a link to the stream. What has resulted since, however, is simply spectacular. The stream started out small. Only a few hundred people or so were following it and playing the game. Then some of the nerdier websites got hold of it, and now, over 300 hours since its inception, the stream averages somewhere around 60,000 people simultaneously trying to play a simple game of Pokemon. Now when you click on that link you are very likely going to just see a simple character going in circles and constantly pressing start, but when you look at the grand picture of this adventure, you see something truly extraordinary. To see 60,000 people progress through a video game, even over a significant period of time, is a magnificent social experiment of cooperation and determination.
There is without an ideology behind this game of Pokemon. After all, the game being universally played has an objective: advance to the final boss and defeat him. On the way, the players create symbolic needs that they address and attempt to solve. For example, there are several smaller bosses, or Gym Leaders, that our unfortunate Pokemon trainer, Red (left) must face in order to get to the final boss. In order to defeat each boss, you must have a strategy. Each boss requires certain Pokemon to defeat them, and the players must acquire said Pokemon in some way. These issues are symbolically created needs.
Around day 6 of this event, something fascinating happened. Up until then, the game was set up so anyone could, through the chat, enter an input like up, down, left, right, or start, and the game would follow said command. Naturally, this led to complete anarchy. When there were only a few hundred or even a few thousand, this system worked. For the most part the players knew what to do, and, with the exception of a few trolls who managed to, with luck on their side, managed to release some of the more valuable Pokemon, were able to do it. However by day 5 the stream was up to 60,000-80,000 people. While this system was already being strained, it was completely broken when the players entered a very specific maze. After about 18 hours of no progress being made at all, a revolution began in the comments section calling for a democratic system. Eventually, a system was proposed where for 20 seconds all inputs would be tallied and the number one choice would be what Red did. This occurrence was the very definition of a power intervention. One side wanted to forestall the power event. After all, watching the anarchist system was fun! The social experiment was still just as fascinating as it was before the maze. Why change it? The new system would be boring and uneventful. However the other side, trying to promote the power shift, argued that the symbolically created needs were more important than the experiment. They wanted to get things done. Eventually, a compromise was reached where the players could vote on either a democratic or anarchist system. While anarchy usually still rules, the only time anything ever happens in the stream at this point is when the stream is in democracy mode.
There are so many more things I could talk about. Like the hundreds of memes on the Internet surrounding this intervention, or the "religion" that has risen from it, (all praise to our lord and savior, the Helix Fossil) but I'm going to end my discussion here. In the future, I may return to this stream, as they've already confirmed that they will play the next generation Pokemon game after this game is finally beaten, but I am not certain of this. All I can say is that it is one of the most fascinating social experiments I have ever seen.
Here's the link again in case I need it for a reference: http://www.twitch.tv/twitchplayspokemon
Recently, Bonnaroo unveiled its star-studded lineup for its celebration of music in June of 2014. With headliners including Elton John, Kanye West, and Jack White of The White Stripes, and many other featured bands including Lionel Richie, Phoenix, The Arctic Monkeys, and Skrillex, to name a few, the music scene went somewhat crazy. Ok. It went massively crazy. Who can blame us? The lineup is one of the best lineups to hit a music festival in recent memory. Seeing the overwhelmingly positive reception to this lineup, and many (including myself) virtually lining up to buy our weekend passes, it got me to thinking: is a music festival a social intervention? Tens of thousands of individuals all coming together for a single purpose under one ideology: their love of music?
For three days in June, we all will unanimously enter a symbolic reality at Bonnaroo. We will all go from stage to stage, hear various artists, various genres of music, and step into the respective band’s world that they have created over many arduous years of honing their craft. Some of the artists may not be very good, and we will struggle to find a name for what we just experience. However it’s all for the sake of music, for music is, no matter how big or small, still beautiful. We will be all be one for 3 days. Then return to reality and resume our daily lives.
I think one of the biggest pieces of a music festival as a social intervention is that of the ideology behind it. Well, there are many ideologies that will be at this festival. First and foremost, there will be ideologies courtesy of the various musical artists. I know for a fact that I am in for a real treat when Kanye West takes the stage. However, there are the individual ideologies as well. While music festivals have definitely evolved from their early hippie days in Woodstock and Lollapalooza, there is still a hippie mentality that arises at a music festival. It may not be immediately present, but by the end of the day when everyone gathers around one stage for the headliner, it’s in full force. I think our craving for music creates a biosocial need for togetherness. As the headliner plays, it only gets stronger. The feeling I got last year, at another music festival called Forecastle, when the headliner for the night came on was amazing. Nothing else mattered. Just the music. It is a feeling I will never forget, and I look forward to experiencing it again in June.
Update on the critical essay: I have sent in the proposal, and the professor approved it. I am now starting to collect research on the topic I have selected, which I have narrowed down to the Sound City recordings and Dave Grohl’s decision to purchase the studio, as recommended.
Recently, a social intervention took place between two great schools of thought: the creationists and the scientists. Through a couple of messages that went viral on the Internet, and an invitation on Twitter, Ken Ham, head of the Creation museum, challenged Bill Nye the Science Guy to a debate. A debate that would (somehow) solve the great question of where we came from in 150 minutes. The stage was Ham’s Creation museum, ironically in the backyard of my hometown, Cincinnati. Few were fortunate enough to get a ticket for the debate, (which sold out in minutes) but many more watched the debate on their computer, as it was streamed for free by NPR. Twitter was abuzz before the event, with quite a few hashtags trending surrounding the debate. (My favorite was #OMGWeAreDebatingCreationIn2014) The primary topic of the debate was whether we should be teaching creationism to our children in school. Something that happens in Cincinnati more than anywhere else in the country, by the way. 150 minutes later, nothing has changed. Life isn’t any more logical than it was before this debate. By this point it is safe to say that absolutely nothing came of this debate. However, it is still a fantastic intervention to talk about.
First of all, both sides have a very strict ideology they follow. Well, creationism is very strict at least. Because they are the smaller faction, creationists wanted this debate to happen so they could advocate their beliefs. They were unsuccessful. However, the science ideology was also unsuccessful in advocating their beliefs, so this is (unfortunately) a two-way street. Both sides tried to bring to the foreground each other’s anomalies while simultaneously ignoring their own. Honestly the worst part of this debate was how poor each side was at advocating their own points. Instead, they focused primarily on going after each other’s weaknesses. Essentially, the debate reaffirmed pre-existing beliefs. Creations now believe in creationism more and scientists believe in science more.
A good attention intervention occurred in this instance as well. This attention intervention was Ham’s invitation to Nye in the first place to have this debate. Ham and the rests of the creationists felt threatened by science and how it was slowly but surely taking over the schools. This act was creating deviancy among creationists. After all, if they lose the children, how are they going to continue to advocate for their beliefs? To throw in an incredibly biased comment: creationists can’t just let children chose what to believe because most of them will pick logic over creation. So, following a video Bill Nye created bashing creationists going viral, they felt even more threatened. This video also created more deviancies for our beloved creationists. In response, Ken Ham stepped up to the plate, and created a video that bashed science. Of course, it too went viral, in an attempt to create deviancy amongst scientists. It was in the height of this video’s success that Ham made his move. By offering to debate against Nye, Ham was creating an attention intervention, and he and creationists everywhere hoped that this would result in their problems being solved. While it did no such thing for the creationists, and ultimately resulted in a failed intervention, it was still a great way to spend 150 minutes for everyone else.