10.92 Nonalignment and the Global South Worksheet

An essay on communication examined why silence can carry different meanings in different settings. In a courtroom example, the essay explained that a pause might be strategic, giving a witness time to choose words, but it can also be interpreted as evasiveness by observers. In a family argument, silence might signal withdrawal, respect, or exhaustion, depending on history and power dynamics. The author argued that people often treat silence as an empty space to be filled with assumptions, yet the same person may use silence differently from one context to another. Rather than offer a single rule for interpretation, the essay recommended paying attention to surrounding cues, relationships, and cultural norms before concluding what silence 'means.' It concluded that learning to notice silence is less about decoding a hidden message and more about resisting the rush to certainty.

A report on climate research partnerships described a project in which scientists worked with Indigenous knowledge holders to study coastal change. Community members shared long-term observations about shifting currents, erosion patterns, and the timing of animal migrations, while scientists contributed satellite data and instruments that measured wave energy. The report emphasized that collaboration required more than collecting anecdotes; it involved agreements about data ownership, consent, and how findings would be communicated. It described moments of tension when scientific models contradicted local experience, and how joint field trips helped identify where the model missed a protective reef feature not captured in coarse maps. The report concluded that integrating knowledge systems can improve accuracy and relevance, but only when partnerships are equitable and when uncertainty is discussed openly rather than hidden behind technical language.

A journalism ethics essay examined the use of composite characters in nonfiction. The essay described a book that combined interviews from several people into one named figure to create a clearer narrative arc. The author of the book argued that the composite protected privacy and represented a pattern rather than a single individual. Critics responded that composites can blur accountability, making it hard for readers to know what was observed versus constructed. The essay noted that disclosure practices vary: some writers state openly when composites are used, while others reveal it only in later interviews, which can erode trust. The essay concluded that the key ethical question is not whether storytelling matters, but whether readers are given enough information to evaluate how the story was built.