Forward

Safeguarding the right of others is most notable and beautiful end of human being.

Gibran Khalil Gibran

In 2019, I designed and taught an undergraduate course on identity, diversity and inclusivity in media representation and production, at the department of Communication at the University of Ottawa. Topics reflecting dynamic and culturally diverse populations of students and professors and their experiences of everyday life through mediated popular culture, social media, and institutional practices shaped new and revised courses with updated and current topics at the department. Topics falling in line with the theme of identity, diversity, and inclusion took a central place in attempt to reflect the socio-cultural, economic, linguistic, and political reality of the multicultural Canadian landscape and history.  The undergraduate course was later followed by a graduate course on the special topic of diversity and inclusion, while focusing on the use of alternative media to elevate the voices of marginalized communities.  Students showed immense appreciation of the themes and topics examined during the lectures and discussions, amidst controversies that arose at the time surrounding racism, violence, identity politics, academic freedom, cancel culture, and decolinization of academia. Unfortunately, in the past few years, the political and social environment has not gotten better despite the efforts of many groups and people seeking justice and equality for all. Wars, atrocities, and political strife worldwide have impacted local and global politics and populations. With the rise of radical right wing politics, for example, the conditions of life of communities who have been historically vulnerable and disadvantaged – due to various kinds of colonialism (i.e. settler, exploitation, surrogate, plantation, internal) and imperialist projects –– are forever affected by apathy and exclusion.  We have seen blunt racism in media coverage of different refugees, where certain groups are portrayed as “better” based on their race and ethnicity, and others are framed as pariahs. We have seen coverage of the Olympic Games in Paris that celebrates able bodies, while coverage of the Paralympics is scarce in mainstream media. We have experienced, in the name of academic freedom, the hacking of platforms by extremist political ideologues and the rationalization of the irrational while censoring, demonizing, and distracting from more progressive narratives. We have seen institutions create Equity, Diversity and Inclusion and claiming absolute commitment to the principles of EDI initiatives and antiracism for all, while, in practice, valuing certain diversities over others.

Equity, Inclusion, Diversity and Decolonization (EDID) is a significant concept and practice because it has to do with empathy and agency. The ability to put oneself in another’s shoes and to understand the other contributes to empowering people from diverse backgrounds to have a voice and to take control of their life through autonomous decision-making.

These inconsistencies between the theory and practice of equity, diversity and inclusion on the macro level also exist on the micro level, and they have to do with imbalances in power structures and how power is understood, despite development of codified policies.

The work of the authors in this supplemental book presents different aspects of EDID studies centered on organizational and institutional activities in regards to development and application of policies and emancipatory practices.  It provides an introductory map related to the Canadian and Quebecois context that initiates students to critical thinking about identity, positionality, intersectionality, history, and power. It is a commendable effort.  It enriches class content and discussions about the implementation of EDID initiatives and their implication on the labor force.

Inherently, the book tackles the following question: Why do EDID policies, despite being necessary, had a limited or an insufficient impact on inclusion? Why are these policies insufficient to establish a true social equality and inclusion for a diverse labor force? What is under the surface of these dynamics?

In an attempt to answer these questions (initially for myself), I revisited the seminal work of late professor Vincent Mosco. In his book The Political Economy of Communication (1996), Mosco explains that under capitalism, the market logic provides a model for collective activities, including businesses and institutions, to be structured around privileging private interests rather than public interests. In order to have a significant understanding of these dynamics, one has to start with the centrality of power and how it is understood.  For political economists, power is a resource structured in inequality and is a form of control to preserve the status quo; it shapes the social field. For policy studies, power is viewed as dispersed and as one of the many contributors conditioning the social field. It also overemphasizes the role of the state and its agencies as the authority for policy-making. Thus, it considers policy as “political” in relation to the state, while understating the role of civil society and actors outside the realm of state institutions in policy-making. It also views power as a resource that is “generally diffused throughout society, is not at all a central formative influence” and “that there is not structural tendency for power to be concentrated in one group or interest” (257). This view of power confuses and equates diversity with multiplicity, and mere participation with effective inclusion (258). It has a tendency to underplay the exercise of power, the role of institutional actors, and the formation of social relations that arrange individual choice.

A case in point is a comparative example used in this supplemental book to explain diversity and inclusion. Diversity is compared to being invited to the party, while inclusion is akin to being invited to dance on the dance floor with the others during the party. Critical thinkers would ask: Who organized the party?  What purpose does it serve for the institution and the organizers? Who decides the music? What dance moves would be acceptable? Who from the marginalized group is chosen to be included? And why? What are the rules of participation? Who is in control of the event? Who allocates space and who is allowed to occupy certain spaces versus other ones? Who is in control? And most importantly, how is control exercised and maintained?

The point being that institutions, states, policies, and so forth do not restrict diversity per se.  Instead, they control the access, participation, and outcome of the totality of the politico-economic and socio-cultural forces that shape the social relations within the established power structures.

The power structure that prioritizes the capitalist market logic emphasizes fragmentation, division, and competition.  These apply to socially constructed identities and their corresponding socially constructed hierarchies. Rather than create collective consciousness and alliances, identity politics have replaced class struggle with group self-assertion  (See the work of Todd Gitlin, 1993). The result of such a condition is to make the laborers bear the responsibility of competing for a place and space in EDID relations – which, in essence, is an antidote to EDID’s principle. This environment creates divisiveness, distraction from questioning the system, and conditions that allow the commodification of EDID by institutions and various groups in order to fill a legitimacy gap in social relations, much like Social Responsibility branding. Under these conditions, the importance of recognizing the political and class nature of intersectionality and positionality becomes diluted in commodified identities intertwined in systems of oppression, competition, extreme individualism, and annihilation of humanity.

The questioning of power relations in shaping social inequalities reveals an interconnection between decolinization and political economy’s approach to the centrality of power and class that were mentioned above.

Decolonization is a process of dismantling colonial legacy and the narratives formed to maintain dominance that ultimately determine the degree of political independence. The works of Linda Tuhiwai, bell hooks, Edward Said, among others,  discuss the intersection of patriarchy, capitalism and colonization, and the possible ways to reclaim political independence and self-determination, as well as cultural, social, and economic autonomy. Decolinization is in part about questioning the existing system and its practices while calling for accountability and transparency.

It is beyond this forward to discuss the processes of decolonization.  The economic, political, cultural, social and historical dimensions of such a task (on the macro and micro levels) are never-ending processes of challenging the status quo and restoring balance in power relations. However, it is definitely a journey to explore and take up in classroom discussions.

This supplementary book is a starting point for critical questioning of lived experiences under particular dynamics of power relations that go beyond the workplace culture.  Conversations in the classroom should be able to address the following questions: How does EDID address structural barriers? How do EDID initiatives provide alliances? And under what conditions EDID initiatives may contribute to divisiveness?  What is decolinization in the context of EDID? What are the legacies of colonization that persist in our system that prevent the ultimate effectiveness of EDID? What is the role of researchers and academics in ensuring the collective well-being of disenfranchised communities? Are all attempts under Capital to abolish inequity, racism, and “non-diversity”, at best, a band-aid solution and at worst, just marketing gimmick? Isn’t the existence of band-aid solutions better than their absence? How are these harshly negative criticisms about temporary solutions countered by both institutions and activists? Who needs EDID? Under what conditions social justice, equality, and EDID can be achieved?

Dina Salha

Assistant Professor

Department of Communication

Faculty of Arts

University of Ottawa