Jump to content

"PAs for OTP" Facebook page debacle.


Recommended Posts

Recently, a new facebook page popped up called "PAs for OTP."

The founder/s of this page is pretty genius because they are making really nice facebook Meme's about PAs and how we need to be involved in our future. 

However, the page recently posted a meme basically calling out Mr. Anderson (recent writer of article addressed to Physicians in Washington which basically equated OTP=Independent practice). 

What are your thoughts?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. 

The post has vanished.

Probably a good thing, but I do like whoever is posting these memes. They are genius and memes seem to be how messages can be put out quickly and effectively nowadays. Here is one that was just posted today. This page seems to be hell bent on being extremely frank, motivated, and to the point. 

Image may contain: 8 people, people smiling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently joined the PAs for OTP group and really like it. It's nice to have the transparency and the memes they post contain info about your state delegates, state chapter, etc and encourage us to get involved (something that, frankly, we could learn from the NPs.)  I'm growing more concerned that OTP will just fizzle out, or that this new resolution proposed by TX, VA, and RI will pass, essentially gutting the heart of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

Memes targeting individuals in public fora are distasteful to me.  I prefer to complain through channels, rather than try and channel outrage.  Even if a lynch mob is successfully drummed up and actually goes after a guilty person, the violence is ultimately directed against the rule of law. We should role model being better than the media and its ever-shifting targets for the two minutes of hate du jour.

I believe Mr. Anderson should resign, because I believe advocating a position on professional governance using his appointed position was unethical.  He is welcome to come here and defend his positions and actions.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, corpsman89 said:

Wow. 

The post has vanished.

Probably a good thing, but I do like whoever is posting these memes. They are genius and memes seem to be how messages can be put out quickly and effectively nowadays. Here is one that was just posted today. This page seems to be hell bent on being extremely frank, motivated, and to the point. 

Image may contain: 8 people, people smiling

 

 

As a Texas PA for 25 years I can legitimacy call these people Jackasses!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That particular list of delegates isn't current but that is what the TAPA page says. As for Mr Anderson he is over on the Huddle whining about personal attacks on FB. The disingenuousness makes me sputter. He spent the entire AAPA election cycle smearing candidates with false innuendo masked as "polite" questions and HE wants to whine about personal attacks? He put himself way way out there and his transparent misbehavior deserves to be called out.

I don't think stating he opposes OTP and wrote a misleading and generally incorrect article for an official publication while serving as a PA rep is exactly bashing him. It is describing exactly what he did. Do it...own it. If you want to take a hard stand you get the attention that comes with it. I don't think personal attacks are appropriate but talking frankly about what he did and what he represents, even in somewhat harsh terms, is certainly fair game.

As for TAPA I wrote to Melinda about the proposal (we have known each other for years and politely disagree about a lot of things) and she pointed me to the correct current lead delegate. I wrote to her 3 days ago and to date have not received a response. I simply asked her to articulate what TAPAs concerns are and what they hope to accomplish. *crickets chirping*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like no more money heading their way.  I almost didn't renew this past year and I guess I'll just hold my breath and turn blue this year.  I guess that they won't miss the final two years of contributions.  They don't care anyway, based upon the responses that I've received on the TWO occasions that I've actually contacted them over the past 34+ years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ran for TAPA president twice almost 20 years ago because I had grave concerns about their child-like relationship with TMA (my opinion...the election results seems to show some disagreement) and I was trounced both times. The second time I pulled a few things out of the hat and we had the greatest number of votes ever in a TAPA election to date and I lost again. I remained a member for years trying to change their culture. Several years ago I gave up and stopped giving them my membership money or attending their conferences. This is emblematic of the reason why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

Folks,

One of the folks depicted on that poster contacted the administrators earlier this morning, and is not pleased with being on a "wanted" poster.  This is someone who is a long term poster, and you all would recognize him or her by name if I told you this person's screen name, but he or she has chosen to remain anonymous on the forum.

I'm sure this person wouldn't mind if I shared the message that was sent to us without identifying information, but I'm not going to at this point.  I don't think it's necessary.

In addition to my earlier reservations posted above, it's clear that at least some of the people depicted in these posters are viewing them as potentially inviting harassment, and I don't think that's an unreasonable stance.

To be clear, none of the admins here are involved in any way with 'PAs for OTP' Facebook group, beyond the fact that I'm now following the page to see what all's going on.

Help me out here: how would you suggest we draft a guideline to keep such content off the forums, without stifling free discourse of ideas?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rev I don't see anything that  looks like a wanted poster and I have to stick to my point of view that if you sit in the big chair you get the responsibility and it is a big responsibility. My personal opinion is many leaders have gone for a long time taking whatever position they wanted to  sincerely believing no one would ever hold them accountable or question them and now that is changing. They seem to want to take a position without challenge...and that just isn't how it works if you want to be a leader. You get the bull you get the horns. Take a stand on a tough issue...you are going to get feedback and maybe a bit of outrage to go with some support.

I think anything short of personal attack or suggestions of inappropriate reprisal, such as suggesting harm in some way, is really fair game. These "wanted" posters share public information (the delegates who ran for the seats they hold) and outline, a bit strongly, their position on a key issue. Whether the depiction of their attempt to gut OTP is accurate of not is a matter of opinion.

They now want to hold their position and vote on these HUGE issues and not get any blowback from anyone? That just isn't reality. If you want to play at being a leader and vote on very important issues you better be ready to take the heat.

This reminds me of HOD delegates saying they didn't want their votes recorded because they were afraid of reprisals. Really? Then don't run for the position.

Keep it simple....no threats, no calls for attack or violence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you hold elected office, you invite scrutiny. It is the job of constituents of these organizations to hold them accountable. It is my view that if you do not want to be in the public spotlight, do not run for or accept office. Posting photos of people with their publicly held positions clearly stated is *not* harassment in any defensible use of that word, and if it is encouraging people to write in, well that is democracy. I haven't seen wanted-style posters, but that would be somewhat childish. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Argue against the position, not the person.  People can honestly hold positions that you may personally hate.  Just because someone is in a public position and advocates for a stance you disagree with, it doesn't mean they should be attacked on a personal level.   If people make those personal attacks, I don't believe it should be tolerated on a private forum like this because it just takes away from civil discourse. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Not on Facebook - never have been, never will

2. Argue the position, not the person - excellent advice LKTH487

3. Born and raised in Texas - left nearly 20 yrs ago - TAPA has never been a forefront of progressive thought - the Bible Belt and the TMA are archaic and narrow sighted.

4. Mr Anderson was called out for what he did in the position he holds and what I consider subversive use of that position.

5. OTP needs to happen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lkth487 said:

Argue against the position, not the person.  People can honestly hold positions that you may personally hate.  Just because someone is in a public position and advocates for a stance you disagree with, it doesn't mean they should be attacked on a personal level.   If people make those personal attacks, I don't believe it should be tolerated on a private forum like this because it just takes away from civil discourse. 

The crucial thing is that in a representative democracy, we elect people to represent our interests (read: positions) in government and professional organizations. Constituents in a democracy benefit from true information about the positions officals are taking in their official capacities as our representatives to policy making entities. There is nothing all at all new or interesting about public campaigns naming politicians to inform the public about positions they hold. For example, I might like to know which members of my local school board voted down an initiative to fund new science equipment, and funneled that money instead to some special interest initiative.

It is simply not true that accurately reporting on positions that a representative holds is tantamount to a personal attack, even if that information is meant to inform a public audience (even if that audience gets angry upon learning that information).

 

I do not know the specifics of the PAs for OTP page or it’s activitiy. But if the extent of their activity is publicizing accurate information about people who have chosen to serve as public figures in the profession, is seems truly bizarre to argue that constituets inappropriate personal attacks. Criticism of public political figures for their positions is a fundamental aspect of democraic society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, sas5814 said:

Rev I don't see anything that  looks like a wanted poster and I have to stick to my point of view that if you sit in the big chair you get the responsibility and it is a big responsibility. My personal opinion is many leaders have gone for a long time taking whatever position they wanted to  sincerely believing no one would ever hold them accountable or question them and now that is changing. They seem to want to take a position without challenge...and that just isn't how it works if you want to be a leader. You get the bull you get the horns.

 

2 hours ago, lemurcatta said:

If you hold elected office, you invite scrutiny. It is the job of constituents of these organizations to hold them accountable. It is my view that if you do not want to be in the public spotlight, do not run for or accept office. 

These are the two best posts in the thread. People want authority without accountability. 

If you want to hold office, grow a pair. We live in a very gentle society. People used to get tarred and feathered for their beliefs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That wasn't a positive.

1 hour ago, CJAdmission said:

 

These are the two best posts in the thread. People want authority without accountability. 

If you want to hold office, grow a pair. We live in a very gentle society. People used to get tarred and feathered for their beliefs. 

That wasn't a positive and did not generally result in a civil advancement of ideas.  Accountability doesn't mean it's useful for people to call you names.  That's not what that means.  That doesn't advance accountability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect what he was saying in a hyperbolic way is what I said.... you can't assume a position of great responsibility and not get some heat and sometimes, right or wrong, it will get personal. I entertain ideas without necessarily accepting them, change my mind when information warrants it, and don't let personal stuff bother me much. People are people and passion and fear and frustration often comes out as anger. good leaders understand this and see it for what it is. Many leaders could do with some thickening of their skin.

I don't advocate a personal attack. I've been guilty of it. I've been the victim of it.  It happens. 

I don't think saying something along the lines of "you screwed up" is a personal attack. It is an indictment of your decisions and choices and positions you took when acting in an official capacity usually in a role you volunteered for. Saying "you are an ass" is a personal attack.

Interpreting your actions and positions in a way you don't like or don't agree with isn't a personal attack. It's an interpretation of information. Truth is personal.

If you use your position to espouse an idea, particularly one that is unpopular, you are going to catch some flak. Expect it. Don't act surprised when it happens. Ignore it or respond to it. Don't cry about it.

Words like "nice" and "civil" and "professional" lose their meaning when they are used to deflect. It is not much different than a personal attack. Your attack just is just on the side of "nice" which is supposed to make it credible. It becomes a tool...a weapon of political correctness.

It gets a bit rough and tumble out in the real world. People with good diplomatic skills who aren't afraid to go bare knuckle when needed will probably do best. People who think everything can be solved with diplomacy don't understand the world.

My 12 hour day is coming to a close and I'm getting punchy. Tomorrow is another day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, sas5814 said:

 

I don't think saying something along the lines of "you screwed up" is a personal attack. It is an indictment of your decisions and choices and positions you took when acting in an official capacity usually in a role you volunteered for. Saying "you are an ass" is a personal attack.

Interpreting your actions and positions in a way you don't like or don't agree with isn't a personal attack. It's an interpretation of information. Truth is personal.

That's the type of thing I am referring to, not 'you screwed up' or 'you're wrong'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, rev ronin said:

Folks,

One of the folks depicted on that poster contacted the administrators earlier this morning, and is not pleased with being on a "wanted" poster.  This is someone who is a long term poster, and you all would recognize him or her by name if I told you this person's screen name, but he or she has chosen to remain anonymous on the forum.

I'm sure this person wouldn't mind if I shared the message that was sent to us without identifying information, but I'm not going to at this point.  I don't think it's necessary.

In addition to my earlier reservations posted above, it's clear that at least some of the people depicted in these posters are viewing them as potentially inviting harassment, and I don't think that's an unreasonable stance.

To be clear, none of the admins here are involved in any way with 'PAs for OTP' Facebook group, beyond the fact that I'm now following the page to see what all's going on.

Help me out here: how would you suggest we draft a guideline to keep such content off the forums, without stifling free discourse of ideas?

They deserve to be outted. They try to hind behind annonymity and hinder the PA Profession. Good for PAs for OTP or whatever facebook group. I just saw someone sending out this in masses to all my previous PA class. They all thought it was hilarious and just criticized those in TAPA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
6 hours ago, CJAdmission said:

Diane Bruessow from the AAPA Board accused "PAs for OTP" of "doxing" because they are posting the names of state society officers. 

You can't make this stuff up.

public position

 

stress  PUBLIC - means you need to respond in public - if you don't want the heat don't run for office, and don't express controversial opinions.....    

 

free voice and choice is the very basis of this country....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator
On 5/1/2018 at 6:27 AM, CJAdmission said:

Diane Bruessow from the AAPA Board accused "PAs for OTP" of "doxing" because they are posting the names of state society officers. 

You can't make this stuff up.

I think someone needs to politely educate her about what Doxing actually is. This may be an uncomfortable tactic, but doxing it is not.  It's like a "write your senators!" campaign, but with very much less important people who are not used to the scrutiny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to the Physician Assistant Forum! This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn More