No more coathangers?

Who would you go to if you are a bureaucrat faced by revelations that ongoing bullying within the NSW Fire Brigades has allegedly featured branding the buttocks of recruits with red hot coathangers (the letter 'D', not Hester Prynne's letter 'A') along with the usual bloke treats such as golden showers and redecoration of gonads with bootpolish?

The answer to that question, earlier this year, was KPMG and the masters of bland have duly delivered a 121 page report [PDF] featuring recommendations that have inevitably been 'welcomed' and 'supported' as providing "a roadmap for improvement that will be pursued and regularly reported on".

The Minister has announced that -

"Many of the recommendations from the Review that refer to bullying and harassment are already being dealt with by the NSWFB and will ensure the creation of a better workplace environment for all staff.

I have said before that there is absolutely no place in the NSWFB for the kind of incidents that are alleged to have taken place in the 1970's and 80's, nor for more subtle forms of bullying and harassment that appear to still be happening in some areas today. KPMG has identified problems which are of concern, and the Inquiry Panel has reported that the NSWFB is taking strong, appropriate action to address them.

Did we really need KPMG to discover what has been (and apparently still is, albeit more discreetly) happening among the fireies?

The Fire Brigades, embracing a "respectful workplace", have undertaken to address workplace conduct, governance, processes and culture through initiatives that include -

* A new independent 24 hour hotline, staffed by experts in workplace conduct matters, for employees to confidentially report any workplace issues that they may not feel comfortable raising via the normal chain of command.

* Assigning specific liaison officer positions to ensure that matters can be immediately referred to the NSW Police Force and Independent Commission Against Corruption when necessary.

* Appointing the Hon Justice Lance Wright QC, former President of the Industrial Relations Commission, to investigate an incident and to ensure robust systems are in place to deal with protected disclosures.

* Improving systems and processes to more rapidly progress and track all workplace conduct complaints.

* Organisation-wide training in effective workplace communication and complaint resolution commenced in May and is being delivered to all 7000 staff.

* Strengthening the NSWFB’s Code of Conduct and other workplace conduct policies, together with appropriate education and training

* A restructure of the learning and development directorate and an increased focus on training for managers in appropriate communication styles, and dealing with workplace conflict

* Increased resources in the workplace conduct and human resource management areas.

IPRIA CancerSticks Packaging Seminar

Video and slides from the IPRIA seminar on trade marks and plain paper packaging of cigarettes (it's been a long day, so forgive the drollery about cancersticks) are now online.

The Mark Davison slides are strongly commended and for example note the 'Constitutional Argument' that restrictions are permissible because there has been no 'acquisition' of property - "The mere extinguishment or deprivation of rights in relation to property does not involve acquisition", as per Commonwealth v Tasmania (1983) 158 CLR 1, Mutual Pools & Staff Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1994) 179 CLR 155, Newcrest Mining (WA) Ltd v Commonwealth (1997) 190 CLR 513 etc.

retrieving the lemons

The Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC) has released a 57 page report on its Review of the Australian product safety recalls system.

The report follows the Productivity Commission's 2006 review of the Australian consumer product safety system, which recommended that the ACCC conduct a "review of recall effectiveness pursuant to" comments in the 2006 review. The ACCC accordingly examined "the existing consumer product recalls system, the regulators involved in its oversight and the ways in which the risks associated with unsafe goods can be addressed by suppliers and regulators". Overall, "while the review did not reveal significant problems with the system, it has enabled the ACCC to consider a number of product recall processes and practices which may improve the effectiveness of the system". Yes, Sir Humphrey.

The report notes that over 10,000 products have been recalled in Australia during the past 23 years, with 'general consumer product recalls' (eg non-pharmaceutical products) being the responsibility of the ACCC and representing 25% of all safety recalls. The average return rate of recalled goods is 56.75%. (The ACCC notes that return rates vary from 80% to 36% depending on types of goods overseen by the different Commonwealth regulators and reflecting factors such as the communication methods used, hazard posed and level of intervention by regulators.)

Unsurprisingly, the ACCC reports that some regulators encourage industry to voluntarily address unsafe products and only intervene in the recall process if industry fails to "adequately mitigate the risks"; other regulators were "more involved and actively managed the process from the outset". The 'light touch regulation' is of concern, given the ACCC's acknowledgement that "recall was more effective when the regulator actively managed and had a greater level of involvement in all aspects of the recall process".

Four broad aspects of the recall regime were identified by the ACCC: notification of the product recall to the relevant regulator/s, communication of the recall to consumers, retrieval of the recalled product and closure of the recall.

In discussing the notification element the ACCC comments that when a supplier decides to recall an unsafe product from within the supply chain or from consumers, the supplier has a statutory obligation to notify the relevant government minister or commissioner (ie at the Commonwealth and state/territory level) where the product is supplied. For consumer products generally that notification must be made to the Commonwealth Minister via the ACCC. Specialist Commonwealth product safety regulators also require notification regarding recall of particular products such as motor vehicles, food products and animal medicines. The ACCC concludes that "the multiplicity of notification requirements may be a burden on suppliers that could delay recall initiation" and suggests that "there are opportunities to better align and clarify the different notification requirements of Commonwealth product safety regulators", with the ACCC of course undertaking to "work with other Commonwealth regulators to facilitate the alignment of notification requirements".

It notes the absence of a definition of what constitutes a recall, a problem in reklation to ensuring compliance with statutory notification provisions. 'Recall' for example is not defined in the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) or "any other legislative instrument in relation to product safety", with "some suppliers" being seen to "take a narrow view and thereby avoid the statutory notification provisions". The ACCC will belatedly "amend the Recall Guidelines to clarify that suppliers should notify the Commonwealth minister of all actions taken to address the risk posed by an unsafe product, including the issuing of a safety alert, the recall of a product from consumers, and the recall of a product from within the supply chain". Marvellous what a change of government will do.

Statutory notification provisions currently require suppliers to advise international recipients of products being recalled but do not require notification of others in the domestic supply chain, which results in "inconsistent protection of Australian consumers". The ACCC indicates that it will address the deficiency by revising the Recall Guidelines.

The ACCC examined how recalls are currently communicated to consumers and whether that "corresponds with the communication preferences of different consumer demographics". It found that the use of newspapers alone to advertise recall notices is "in many cases no longer sufficient", with "communication channels allowing direct contact between the supplier and consumers [being] the most effective methods of communicating product recalls". Those channels are glossed as including "new internet phenomena like Facebook and Twitter to advertise recalls, responding to the growing popularity among some consumer demographics of blogs and social networking sites".

There are no great surprises in the statement that "recall notices should also be easily recognisable and easily understood, capturing consumers' attention and motivating them to bring the product back as soon as possible". That conclusion reflects a recognition that "the wording, tone and design of a recall notice can create barriers to consumer compliance by providing too little information or too much complex information, and can allow consumers to talk themselves out of complying". Solution? "The ACCC will revise the Recall Guidelines to clarify the requirements".

It will also encourage suppliers to "have systems in place to track products and retain records that reflect the movement of products through the supply chain" and will "encourage other mechanisms to ensure that consumers are made aware of product recalls, such as warranty cards and online registration facilities". That aspiration - one might ask how much encouragement is needed and the enthusiasm with which the ACCC will approach its task - is reflected in the statement that

The Recalls Australia website, which details product recalls occurring around Australia, is an invaluable reference tool for consumers. Currently, over 15 000 suppliers and consumers are receiving emails and RSS feeds about the latest product recalls. The ACCC will continue to actively promote the website.

Cheers and congratulation all around.

The ACCC found that supplier success in retrieving unsafe products is

influenced by the level of oversight product safety regulators have of the recall. Active monitoring and oversight of the recall usually involves the regulator requiring regular progress reports from suppliers and using these to assess the effectiveness of the recall and to identify how recall return rates could be improved. Reporting also assures the regulator that the supplier has addressed the remedial aspects of a recall by identifying the cause of the product defect and taking steps to ensure that further unsafe products do not enter the market. This includes providing evidence of the rectification or destruction of unsafe goods prior to recall closure. By providing additional guidance to suppliers on reporting requirements, the ACCC will ensure that each recall has a better chance of success.

The ACCC will - again, no surprises - address that statement by revising the Recall Guidelines, with reporting requirements to "be agreed on a case by case basis" and "tailored to ensure that high-risk recalls are more closely monitored and necessary additional measures are identified in a timely fashion".

Laura Heymann's 'Reading the Product: Warnings, Disclaimers, and Literary Theory' in 22 Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities (2010) 393-415 meanwhile comments that

The conventional wisdom among some scholars and courts seems to be that product warnings and disclaimers are ineffective – that even if problems with font, location, and other visual elements are resolved, consumers are unable to process these messages. Behavioral economists explain this difficulty by cataloging the various ways in which consumers fail to appreciate risk: cognitive biases, willful ignorance, or the overwhelming appeal of advertising. And yet, the law hasn't abandoned reliance on warnings or disclaimers. Product liability law not only encourages their presence but (in a failure-to-warn case) expects consumers to read and understand them. Courts in trademark infringement cases will, on occasion, order a disclaimer when they feel that important speech-related interests are at stake. And the Supreme Court has suggested the use of disclaimers in several First Amendment-related (albeit not product-related) cases. This conflicted approach is a bit puzzling: If these messages are truly useless, then we might expect courts to abandon reliance on them as any sort of an effective remedy or as considerations in whether the defendant has acted reasonably. The fact that courts haven't done so suggests that courts do not believe that such messages are useless. If that is the case, perhaps we should find ways to increase the chances that such messages are presented effectively, rather than having our initial response be one of skepticism and doubt.

Hatespeech

A recent post highlighted Gail Mason's evaluation of hate crime statutes.

There is a different view in Speaking Out: Stopping Homophobic and Transphobic Abuse in Queensland (Melbourne: Australian Academic Press 2010) by Alan Berman & Shirleene Robinson, which reports on the persistence of homophobic attitudes and their impact on LGBTIQ people.

It draws on a survey of 1,100 homosexual, bisexual and transgendered peoples in Queensland, with the authors noting that 75%t of victims do not report incidents to authorities. That silence is attributed to a range of reasons. 9% feared further violence or discrimination, 16% do not believe their report would be dealt with fairly and 8% feared being outed (an outing that might be followed by further harassment).

Results of the survey include -

Received verbal abuse:

* 76% of males
* 69% of females
* 92% of transgender male to female people
* 55% of transgender female to male people

Physical assault without a weapon:

* 32% of males
* 15% of females
* 46% of transgender male to female people
* 45% of transgender female to male people

Physical attack with a weapon, knife, bottle or stone:

* 12% of males
* 6% of females
* 38% of transgender male to female people
* 9% of transgender female to male people
* 12% of other people

Co-author Alan Berman is reported as commenting that it is time the matter is taken seriously, including characterisation of gay hate crime as a criminal offence with tough penalties including jail time.

We've recommended two educational initiatives including targeting at all ages and levels of education, so that teachers are taught to be comfortable about teaching about sexual diversity in education, beginning at primary school. ...

You need to do all those sorts of things and media campaigns - Tasmania's had an anti-homophobia campaign that's paid for by the Tasmanian Government.

It would be sort of like the commercials for drug abuse or domestic violence, where you would have gay icons saying 'hey listen, this is just not on in modern Australia.

genetic mugshots and insurance

The Katie Sepich Enhanced DNA Collection Act of 2010 (dubbed by one critic the 'genetic mugshot' law) has passed the US House of Representatives.

The Act [text here] amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to "provide for incentive payments under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant program for States to implement minimum and enhanced DNA collection processes".

Put simply, the proposed legislation authorises bonus payments to state governments for the collection and storage of genetic data from people suspected of crimes. The US Federal government would pay state governments to provide DNA samples (including drawing blood with a needle rather than 'spit collection' or mouth swabs) from adults "arrested for" certain serious crimes. Funding for that "incentivization" is reported as US$75 million. The data will be added to the FBI Combined DNA Index System (CODIS).

The legislation provides that the people whose data is collected would be at least 18 years of age. They would have been arrested for, charged with, or indicted for a criminal offense under State law that -

• consists of murder or voluntary manslaughter or any attempt to commit murder or voluntary manslaughter.
•  has an element involving a sexual act or sexual contact with another and that is punishable by imprisonment for more than 5 years, or an attempt to commit such an offense
• has an element of kidnaping or abduction punishable by imprisonment for 5 years or more
•  has an element involving a sexual act or sexual contact with another and that is punishable by imprisonment for more than 1 year, or an attempt to commit such an offense
•  consists of a specified offense against a minor (as defined in section 111(7) of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (42 U.S.C. 16911(7)), or an attempt to commit such an offense
• consists of burglary or any attempt to commit burglary.
• consists of aggravated assault.

As you might expect, it's praise the CSI and pass the resolution, with Rep. Harry Teague of New Mexico (a cosponsor of 'Katie's Law') claiming that -

We should allow law enforcement to use all the technology available to them ... to reduce expensive and unjust false convictions, bring closure to victims by solving cold cases, better identify criminals, and keep those who commit violent crime from walking the streets.

Criticisms encompass claims that establishment of a national DNA database of suspected criminals would be regressive step, with concerns about ethnic or behavioural profiling, an "unwarranted certainty about the reliability of genetic information", problems with correction of data and with removal of information from the database.

The associated legislation thus provides that the Director of the FBI shall

promptly expunge from the index ... the DNA analysis of a person included in the index —
(i) on the basis of conviction for a qualifying Federal offense or a qualifying District of Columbia offense ... if the Director receives, for each conviction of the person of a qualifying offense, a certified copy of a final court order establishing that such conviction has been overturned; or
(ii) on the basis of an arrest under the authority of the United States, if the Attorney General receives, for each charge against the person on the basis of which the analysis was or could have been included in the index, a certified copy of a final court order establishing that such charge has been dismissed or has resulted in an acquittal or that no charge was filed within the applicable time period.

A State "shall promptly expunge from that index the DNA analysis of a person included in the index by that State" if —

(i) the responsible agency or official of that State receives, for each conviction of the person of an offense on the basis of which that analysis was or could have been included in the index, a certified copy of a final court order establishing that such conviction has been overturned; or

(ii) the person has not been convicted of an offense on the basis of which that analysis was or could have been included in the index, and the responsible agency or official of that State receives, for each charge against the person on the basis of which the analysis was or could have been included in the index, a certified copy of a final court order establishing that such charge has been dismissed or has resulted in an acquittal or that no charge was filed within the applicable time period.

'Predictive Genetic Information and Access to Life Assurance: The Poverty of ‘Genetic Exceptionalism’' by James Mittra in (2007) 2(3) Bio Societies 349-373 comments

Concern that advances in predictive genetic testing might result in increased numbers of individuals being denied access to life assurance has led many countries to restrict insurers’ historic ‘right to underwrite’. Critics of the insurance industry present genetic discrimination as a threat to the social values of equality and inclusion. However, by unpacking the foundational principles of private insurance, and adopting a more critical approach to genetic information, discrimination, fairness and inclusion, this article suggests that the normative values underpinning life assurance in Britain are unlikely to engender widespread exclusion in an age of increased genetic knowledge, but over-regulation of industry might itself create unacceptable inequity within the market. This suggests that we ought to link the legitimacy of regulatory constraint to the type of social good particular forms of insurance exemplify, and instead of focusing narrowly on genetic information consider the broader implications of risk assessment for the privatization of welfare.

'Genetics is not the issue’: Insurers on genetics and life insurance' by Ine Van Hoyweghen, Klasien Horstman and Rita Schepers in (2005) 24(1) New Genetics and Society 79-98 comments

This article offers an analysis of the way private insurers deal with the issue of genetics and insurance. Drawing on specific written insurance sources, a reconstruction is made of internal debates on genetics and insurance within the private insurance world in Europe and the United States. The article starts by analyzing the way insurers initially framed the issue of genetics. It proceeds by showing how ideas with respect to this issue developed beyond public policy debates in the nineties. Although not a strictly linear development, a trend towards a change in perspective can be demonstrated: at the beginning most insurance companies took another stance than they do nowadays. The article concludes by questioning the effect of these changes within the insurance world for the definition of the problem with respect to genetics and insurance. Does taking into account the public concerns around genetics also include taking genetics as a public problem?

'Evidence-based underwriting in the molecular age: the politics of reinsurance companies towards the genetics issue' by Ine Van Hoyweghen and Klasien Horstman in (2009) 28(4) New Genetics and Society 317-337 comments

One of the most contentious topics in public policy debates on genetics has been the use of genetic information by private insurance companies. Confronted with legislation prohibiting the use of genetics in private insurance, the insurance industry has been prompted to deal proactively with the issue. One central feature of this change in tactics is the investment in “evidence-based underwriting”, currently promoted by transnational reinsurance companies. This strategy should contribute to de-politicizing the genetics issue in insurance. Drawing on fieldwork in reinsurance companies and in the broader field of insurance, this article analyzes how reinsurance companies deal with this strategy of evidence-based underwriting and whether it has delivered on its promises. Making use of the theoretical work of Barry and others on the politics of calculation in transnational technical zones, we show how the explicit goal of evidence-based underwriting by reinsurance companies helps to reveal uncertainty in life underwriting, which in turn stimulates new contestation and discussion over the issue of genetics and, more generally, the life underwriting process. In fact, it seems that the turn towards evidence-based underwriting standards has provoked new sources of politicization. While the intentions of evidence-based underwriting strategies are to de-politicize the genetics issue, the effects of this politics of calculation may appear to be political (again).

the demise (yet again) of the national ID card

UK deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, has promised that

This government will end the culture of spying on its citizens. It is outrageous that decent, law-abiding people are regularly treated as if they have something to hide. It has to stop. So there will be no ID card scheme. No national identity register, a halt to second generation biometric passports. We won't hold your internet and email records when there is just no reason to do so. CCTV will be properly regulated, as will the DNA database, with restrictions on the storage of innocent people's DNA. Britain must not be a country where our children grow up so used to their liberty being infringed that they accept it without question. There will be no ContactPoint children's database. Schools will not take children's fingerprints without even asking their parent's consent. This will be a government that is proud when British citizens stand up against illegitimate advances of the state.

The UK Home Secretary Theresa May has accordingly announced that the National Identity Card scheme will be abolished within 100 days, with the existing cards to become invalid when the current legislation is repealed in the first session of the new Parliament.

So far there appears to have been no official statement regarding the demise of information held on the associated National Identity Register, which leveraged the bit of plastic that housed an encrypted chip with biometric data (photograph and fingerprints). The BBC reports that once the cards are "illegal" the National Identity Register will be "physically destroyed" - presumably the servers will be purged and re-used, rather than bureaucrats inviting sledgehammer-wielding NoID fans into the computer centres for a bout of 'smash & trash'. (One cruel reader of this blog offered to buy Mr Clegg a crowbar and hammer.)

May stayed on topic, boasting that -

This bill is a first step of many that this government is taking to reduce the control of the state over decent, law-abiding people and hand power back to them. With swift Parliamentary approval, we aim to consign identity cards and the intrusive ID card scheme to history within 100 days.

Some 'decent, law-abiding people' are of course more equal than others. The parallel card scheme for foreign nationals (characterised as 'biometric resident permits'), administered by the UK Border Agency, will continue.

Clegg has modestly characterised the reforms as part of "the biggest shakeup of our democracy since 1832". Let's see what happens once Sir Humphrey points out that compliance with EU and COE requirements restricts his autonomy and that there are sound administrative - or, more importantly, political reasons - for maintaining the plethora of databases.

Erving Goffman

Gary Marx on Erving Goffman, from 'Role Models And Role Distance: A Remembrance of Erving Goffman' (1984) 13(5) Theory and Society 649-662 ...

I still recall his opening remarks to the class. With a wry smile he said "we will try and keep you entertained". I loved that. It reflected his sensitivity to the fact that student audiences are easily turned off, especially in Berkeley in the spring. It also seemed to say something about his need to be liked or, at least not be boring. The academy is not usually thought of as a place of entertainment, at least of a willful variety. Whatever most professors do, entertainment is usually secondary. But here a famous professor opens his class with a promise to entertain. Perhaps it was a way of showing role distance or applying the stage imagery he favored. He was expressing a shared sense that course work was often less than engaging. He wasn't about to be a purveyor of such materials or guilty of putting students to sleep.

The course was very demanding. Its lengthy and comprehensive reading list was a tour de force containing everything of importance in the field beginning with E. A. Ross's 1901 book on social control. What is more, Goffman really expected you to have read it all. Much of his lecture material was drawn from his then unpublished book Stigma. The method he used to study stigma was very different from that presented in other courses. It demonstrated that you could take an interesting topic and just write about it, without having hypotheses, an operational methodology or systematic quantitative data. It was a wonderful example of the unbridled sociological imagination rummaging hither and yon for interesting insights around a bounded theme. Concepts were important but it was premature to imbed them in a grand theory or to confine them to a single means of data collection.

Goffman presented himself as a detached, hard-boiled intellectual cynic; the sociologist as 1940s private eye. His was a hip, existential, cool, essentially apolitical (at least in terms of the prevailing ideologies) personal style. As a Canadian Jew of short stature working at the margins (or perhaps better, frontiers) of a marginal discipline, he was clearly an outsider. His brilliance and marginality meant an acute eye and a powerful imagination. He had a fascination with other people's chutzpah, weirdness and perhaps even degradation. He appreciated people who had a good thing going and those able to assert themselves in the face of what could be an oppressive social structure and culture. In a stodgy, timid, bureaucratic world the hustler has a certain freshness and perverse appeal. ...

Goffman's verbal and writing styles were very powerful. In class he played them beautifully - subtle wit, sarcasm, poker-faced delivery, and understatement had one on the edge of the seat. The class was entertaining. Goffman's humor and sharpness were without parallel. But this was always as a means to revealing some hidden and poignant truth. He offered a searing moral message regarding individual dignity. His slightly mysterious and mercurial character and the ability to shift selves or to hide his own self (a notion he probably would have rejected) increased his appeal.

There was a very human quality to the earthy details of everyday life that he forced us to attend to. It gave sociology a reality and believability that the more abstract and disembodied theoretical and quantitative approaches clearly lacked. In requiring that actors be understood and approached on their own terms, his naturalistic method had a hidden or implicit morality and a democratic relativism that granted a degree of dignity to actors, no matter how abhorent their behavior. Whether intended or not, the course went beyond conveying substantive information and offered directives on life.

Marx goes on to comment that -

Goffman beautifully illustrated for the student how the written word could have power. Writing, he taught us, could offer a way to quietly and safely express your personality and beliefs. You could satisfy your curiosity, express role distance and alienation, and comment on the ironies, paradoxes, and injustices that seemed so rampant. What was more, you could pretty much do this at your own pace and, under the mantle of being a sociologist, even gain a degree of respectability for it.

You could also be successful as a sociologist without becoming a dreaded organization man. Goffman always dressed casually outside of class and did not like to shave. His speech was neither pedantic nor formal and was larded with contemporary hip expressions. While it now seems trivial and almost inexplicable as an issue, I recall a long conversation in which I asked him if it was really necessary to join the ASA. He said no, you didn't have to belong, and cited some well known sociologists as examples.

As a teacher he had his weaknesses. He was both brilliant and learned, if humble about the state of the sociological art and the grave barriers to better understanding. There was little time for student involvement or reason to believe that beginning students could contribute much, absent direct experiential involvement with their subject matter. In class he did not try to draw the student out to see what he or she thought, or could do. Although he was to cite my term paper for his deviance course when he published Stigma, he made only a few cursory comments on the paper and those were hard to read. He was sparse with his praise and was a severe grader. Bennett Berger ('This Is A Fan Letter About Erving Goffman', Dissent, Summer 1973) reports that Goffman said he only gave As to students who taught him something.

What he did well as a teacher was communicate intellectual excitement and heighten one's consciousness of the craft involved in self presentations no less that the cruelty found in many social control efforts to manage others' identities. His material was very fresh. He obviously cared a great deal about it and was actively engaged with it. He used his courses to drive home an argument. As John Lofland observes he demonstrated the difference between "professing and merely teaching." ('Erving Goffman's Sociological Legacies', Urban Life, Vol. 13, no. 1, April 1984, 7-34.)

Yet this could have a negative side. His derisive treatment of psychological and psychiatric perspectives was very appealing at the time, but in retrospect this was not intellectually responsible. He presented a caricature. It is fine for a teacher to have a point of view, but this ought to come after a good faith effort to present alternatives. With respect to practical matters such as care taking criticism is easy. Pointing to the failures of intervention and total institutions is worthwhile. But if this is not linked to suggestions for reform or alternatives, it's a bit of a cop out, at least insofar as one seeks to milk the tit of moral indignation. His earlier deviance work did not show much sensitivity to the needs, demands, and contradictions faced by social controllers and those who set policy. Granted, impression management, fronts, manipulation, and self-serving ideas abound in total institutions. But is it sufficient to just point these out? It would have been nice if he had used his powerful empathetic skills to also describe how the world looks from the standpoint of those responsible for control.

In his dealings with students there were at least two Goffmans. One was wise, warm, and of good humor, eager to impart knowledge via morality tales and specific advice and make the student feel like he or she was within the chosen circle of persons in the know. His use of the inclusive term "student" to refer to himself and others involved in scholarly endeavors made you feel a part of the enterprise. The other Goffman was controlled, insensitive, and indifferent and made sure the student knew his place. Most of the "Tales of Goffman" are negative. In many of his dealings with others he did not reflect the sensitivity and concern for the underdog shown in his early written work.