Read on Twitter
Earlier this year many NHL teams released some of the most pitiful statements on BLM i've ever read. and that got me thinking: what makes a good statement? i decided to explore this from a linguistic standpoint for my--you guessed it--linguistics class (THREAD)
To me, a good statement is a combination of 1) acknowledgement of the issue, 2) condemnation of the issue, 3) a commitment to carrying out some action that alleviates the issue (monetary donation...s winkwink). but many statements were giving "iwanttoplaythefield" realness (2)
Before I continue I should put my disclaimer here: this is my first linguistics class ever. I'm not a researcher, nor am I an expert. I'm an undergrad who loves languages and just so happens to be an estranged hockey fan. so, take from this what you will! (3)
My research question for this study: is readability an appropriate indicator for the effectiveness of a statement written on social movements, in this case, Black Lives Matter? To calculate readability, I used the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level test. http://readabilityformulas.com/free-readability-formula-tests.php. (4)
As an effectiveness score, I decided to use @peterhassett 's statement scorecard. i found it to be very useful and a good place to start for measuring effectiveness. Thank you, Peter! Here's the link: https://twitter.com/peterhassett/status/1267452984432173058?s=20 (5)
I assigned each team a number based on how they're listed on the NHL's website. I then used a random number generator to select 15 of those teams plus the Pittsburgh Penguins, as they're the team I'm estranged from currently. So, that's 16 teams in total. (6)
Once I had my 16 teams, I collected their statements on BLM from their social media pages. I then collected the statements made by their captains. Here's where it gets a little spotty: not every captain made a statement. I tried to look for other players who might've made (7)
a statement for that team. If I was able to find one, I used it. If not, the captain received an automatic 0 for readability and effectiveness. note: if a team did not have a captain, they weren't factored into the averages of the captains' readability/effectiveness scores (8)
Speaking of averages here's what I got, rounded to nearest 10ths:
NHL team ave. read. score: 10.1
NHL team ave. eff. score: 2.1
NHL cap ave. read. score: 4.8
NHL cap ave. eff. score: 2.3
So, despite NHL teams having a read. score of 10.1 and caps having a read score of 4.8...(9)
NHL team ave. read. score: 10.1
NHL team ave. eff. score: 2.1
NHL cap ave. read. score: 4.8
NHL cap ave. eff. score: 2.3
So, despite NHL teams having a read. score of 10.1 and caps having a read score of 4.8...(9)
their effectiveness scores are only different by .2. This led me to conclude that readability isn't really a good indicator for the effectiveness of a statement. "Okay so now what, A'Yanna?" well, I actually think this is a good thing! It suggests that statements...(10)
...don't need to be complicated or fancy to be impactful/effective! "Content" is the magic word here. Writers need to know WHO their audience is and WHAT they want to communicate to this audience. Which duh, right? Well...not really...(11)
It wasn't always clear who teams were addressing in their stat.: "we're here for you", "we support you", who is "you"? Black fans? All fans? The police departments you hold appreciation nights for? Who is you? How are you supporting us? By "listening/learning"? lol (12)
Anyways, this is just a preliminary study. Here's what I would've done differently under different circumstances (more time, more training, etc): 1) develop an effectiveness scorecard of my own*, look at more statements from players, teams, etc...(13)
*parts of Hassett's scorecard could be up for interpretation. Example: the Dallas Stars were examined 4 times, but received three different scores. This isn't Hassett's fault. Goodness, in this case, is still subjective! (14) https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19d-7ByRMpxdbW9VaWS0v5JN3uc2lrrE4r1hBlD5E8pg/edit?usp=sharing
So, of course Hassett's scorecard isn't the end all be all. In my report, I also cite @courtneyszto 's examination of the NHL teams' statements. There's no official rubric and what one might consider to be effective, another may feel is...well--doodoo (15) http://hockeyinsociety.com/2020/06/01/grading-nhl-team-responses-to-the-blacklivesmatter-protests/
I'm going to go 'head and assume that there were little to no Black ppl in the room, helping to write these statements for these teams. Hire Black ppl y'all, hire Black /women/. We don't say it for our health. Listen and compensate your Black fans for their contributions (16)
Right now, it looks as if hockey (or the NHL) isn't for everyone. But it absolutely can be, if you want it to be.
TDLR: Readability may not be a good indicator for effectiveness. However, we need to look @ more data.
Be clear about your WHO/WHAT, an action should follow a...(17)
TDLR: Readability may not be a good indicator for effectiveness. However, we need to look @ more data.
Be clear about your WHO/WHAT, an action should follow a...(17)
statement. Without that follow through, statements are meaningless and lower the value of your word. Hire Black women and listen to your fans. (End)
PHEW! That was A LOT. I'm sorry if certain parts weren't clear, this thread was so much better when I wrote it the first time, but twitter refreshed on me and i lost it 
I'll be happy to answer any questions you have about my project. I know it's not perfect but i tried my best
I'll be happy to answer any questions you have about my project. I know it's not perfect but i tried my best
