The problem with most people is -
"Most People"
You hear it a lot. “Most people” say, or do, or think, this. Or that.
In this political season, you will see characterizations about what “most people” think, say or do. People who are liberal, people who are conservative, presuming that most of the world agrees with them.
“Most” could be seen as a democratizing word. But what is “most?” A majority? Half of a group, plus one? 51% still leaves a lot of people out.
Meanwhile, our society is driven by cohorts much smaller than a majority.
Case in point – The Super Bowl.
There have been 46 of them. In 2012, more people in the United States watched the Super Bowl than have ever viewed ANY television program – an estimated 111.3 million people watched via broadcast, plus another estimated 2 million online via the NFL and NBC. Huge. The most watched television program in American history.http://paidcontent.org/ - Even bigger than the number of viewers turned in for the final episode of the groundbreaking TV series “MASH” in 1983 (nearly 106 million estimated viewers).
The audience was large for the game and the spectacle. The ratings company A.C. Nielsen estimates that the halftime show by Madonna had an estimated 114 million people tuned in.
Christopher Polk/Getty Images
- But ponder this:
In the United States, if we go by what the ratings tell us, at 111 million or 117 million or even 150 million, MOST PEOPLE DID NOT WATCH the Super Bowl in 2012. - I believe that a majority of my friends and associates watched at least part of the game. It seemed like everybody on Facebook that I know was commenting about it. The Super Bowl was a universal meme for a nation. That is my perception.
More than half of the country did not watch. “Most people” did not watch the Super Bowl. The biggest, most unifying media event of our age, and more people watched it than ever, but a majority of Americans did not watch.One of the biggest problems with “most people” (the phrase, not the people) is that even if it is NOT inflating the power or viewpoint of the “most” group, it is often disregarding the “other” people not in the “most.”
There are people who are older than you or younger than you who have none of your shared cultural references. There are people of different gender with a totally different view. Race, ethnic background, religion or non-theism, education, physical ability…the list of our differences is long.
When you recognize America as a complex collection of diverse people, hopes, experiences, abilities and accomplishments, the folly of using the phrase “most people” can begin to sink in. The beauty of our representational democracy is that we can find a way for most people to live together with opportunity and responsibilities that we agree to as a part of our compact with each other as Americans.
Beyond a few certitudes, in journalism, in life, in art, we try to discern what matters.
Most people breath.
Most people eat.
Having more than half of a population care about something is a big deal.
In the United States, we have that with our political system. Most people eligible to vote in the presidential election of 2008 DID vote (62%). The electorate was the most diverse in US History.
Dissecting the 2008 Electorate: Most Diverse in U.S. History | Pew Hispanic Center
Released: April 30, 2009 I. Overview The electorate in last year's presidential election was the most racially and ethnically diverse in ...- But it is also the case that most people in the US who were eligible to vote did not vote for the president in office. More voting-eligible people did NOT vote as people who voted for the winner.
- Newsroom: Voting: Voter Turnout Increases by 5 Million in 2008 Presidential Election, U.S. Census Bureau Reports
About 131 million people reported voting in the 2008 U.S. presidential election, an increase of 5 million from 2004, according to a new t... - As you listen to the rhetoric of anyone – in culture, art, government, religion – if they speak of certitude about what “most people” want, they are probably leaving some people, and often, many people, out.
How we manage to accommodate our differences is a challenge that civil society must learn over and over. In the United States, it has been a remarkable struggle, and a remarkable strength. Here's hoping that the coming year shows "most people" understanding that we are in this together, even though we may not see things from the same place.
Showing posts with label facebook. Show all posts
Showing posts with label facebook. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
The Problem with Most People - the meaning of majority, and how much of our culture is driven by cohorts much smaller than half
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Yelling in America - John Adams had his loud days, too
The most important things are best shared without shouting:
You can't think well while you're yelling. You can't think well when you're sobbing. And the folks on the the "receive" side aren't doing so well, either.
That's not to say yelling or tears aren't important. Extreme emotions have their place. But at some point, the adrenaline eases, a calm presents itself and you need to face your conflicts, your fears, your hopes, your choices. You think. You decide.
When plotting a future, phrases that fit on a bumper sticker cannot explain the details, the nuance, the plan.
Loud Advocacy is Not New
Protest is a long tradition in the United States. Sometimes, protesters gain influence and power, sometimes they don't.
A recent couple of segments from the NPR program (produced by WNYC, New York) On the Media looked into some of the current spate of emotional activism from a broader timeline.
The strategies being used by some conservative activists today have been gleaned from the playbook of liberal activist Saul Alinsky. In an interview with Bob Garfield, a discussion of the importance of passion came up with The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza.
Power in the American model of representational democracy is supposed to protect the minority as well promote the will of the majority. That requires discussion. But discussion only starts once the yelling stops. Yet, when some are ready to listen and interact, others may still passionately clamor only to be heard. After a while, the "calm" ones may get frustrated and start yelling again.
Fortunately, the cycle can wind down as the passions echo. As long as nothing else comes up to wind the passions up again.
American discourse is often loud, sometimes even irrational and violent. In 1856, the Caning of Senator Charles Sumner was a prime example, as the "debate" in congress became violent on the floor of "the world's most deliberative body." The passions were high on both sides, the language harsh and cruel. After an escalation of verbal jabs, U.S. House member Preston Brooks of South Carolina came into the Senate chamber and beat Sumner senseless with a cane. Sumner took three years to recover.
The anger and passion on both sides of the slavery issue was superheated. Just a few years later, the country was embroiled in a brutal civil war.
The current health care debate has not devolved to 1856 levels. But the passions do seem pretty high. I wonder if it has something to do with our current wave of cathartic overload.
In the aftermath of the events of September 11, 2001, the opening of raw nerves of pain and anger was huge and nearly universal. The sensory overload has continued as we've added in the din of computer gaming, web sites, talk radio, 24/7 cable news, blogs, myspace, facebook and twitter. It's possible to be in constant stimulus mode, much of it interactive, and rapidly reflecting and inflating personal viewpoints to an astounding degree.
We have many deep feelings, emotions and data points constantly bombarding us. It is easy to get addicted to the drama and energy. Reinforcing that has been the ease of connection with like-feeling and like-minded people in a crowd, online or in mass media. It is more possible than ever to not be exposed to a viewpoint different from your own in a reasoned way.
With a world of choice in front of us, it easier than ever to hear only what we want to hear.
Other things worthy of passion
John Adams was not a necessarily easygoing politician. His administration passed the Alien and Sedition Acts. Those acts were largely about censoring and punishing dissent when it was perceived that the "other side" had gotten out of hand. Later, the rejection of the Alien and Sedition Acts helped set the stage for the relative independence of American journalism, today.
Even with his missteps, Adams' passion had a purpose, a vision, a yearning.
I love you;This isn't an original idea, but it's one that has been on my mind of late, especially with the tone of political discourse this month.
We're giving you the job;
I'm going to have to let you go;
You have cancer
You can't think well while you're yelling. You can't think well when you're sobbing. And the folks on the the "receive" side aren't doing so well, either.
That's not to say yelling or tears aren't important. Extreme emotions have their place. But at some point, the adrenaline eases, a calm presents itself and you need to face your conflicts, your fears, your hopes, your choices. You think. You decide.
When plotting a future, phrases that fit on a bumper sticker cannot explain the details, the nuance, the plan.
Loud Advocacy is Not New
Protest is a long tradition in the United States. Sometimes, protesters gain influence and power, sometimes they don't.
A recent couple of segments from the NPR program (produced by WNYC, New York) On the Media looked into some of the current spate of emotional activism from a broader timeline.
The strategies being used by some conservative activists today have been gleaned from the playbook of liberal activist Saul Alinsky. In an interview with Bob Garfield, a discussion of the importance of passion came up with The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza.
Ryan Lizza "There’s a famous story. Whenever Alinsky would have a new student coming to organize, he would ask them, why do you want to be an organizer, and they would always say, well, I want to help others, you know, I want to devote my life to doing good. And he would scream back at them, no, you want to organize for power."If you have or get power, you should try to do something with it. Even if you are striving to be heard to at least have some power, you need more than a slogan on a bumper sticker.
Power in the American model of representational democracy is supposed to protect the minority as well promote the will of the majority. That requires discussion. But discussion only starts once the yelling stops. Yet, when some are ready to listen and interact, others may still passionately clamor only to be heard. After a while, the "calm" ones may get frustrated and start yelling again.
Fortunately, the cycle can wind down as the passions echo. As long as nothing else comes up to wind the passions up again.
American discourse is often loud, sometimes even irrational and violent. In 1856, the Caning of Senator Charles Sumner was a prime example, as the "debate" in congress became violent on the floor of "the world's most deliberative body." The passions were high on both sides, the language harsh and cruel. After an escalation of verbal jabs, U.S. House member Preston Brooks of South Carolina came into the Senate chamber and beat Sumner senseless with a cane. Sumner took three years to recover.The anger and passion on both sides of the slavery issue was superheated. Just a few years later, the country was embroiled in a brutal civil war.
The current health care debate has not devolved to 1856 levels. But the passions do seem pretty high. I wonder if it has something to do with our current wave of cathartic overload.
In the aftermath of the events of September 11, 2001, the opening of raw nerves of pain and anger was huge and nearly universal. The sensory overload has continued as we've added in the din of computer gaming, web sites, talk radio, 24/7 cable news, blogs, myspace, facebook and twitter. It's possible to be in constant stimulus mode, much of it interactive, and rapidly reflecting and inflating personal viewpoints to an astounding degree.
We have many deep feelings, emotions and data points constantly bombarding us. It is easy to get addicted to the drama and energy. Reinforcing that has been the ease of connection with like-feeling and like-minded people in a crowd, online or in mass media. It is more possible than ever to not be exposed to a viewpoint different from your own in a reasoned way.
With a world of choice in front of us, it easier than ever to hear only what we want to hear.
Other things worthy of passion
John Adams was not a necessarily easygoing politician. His administration passed the Alien and Sedition Acts. Those acts were largely about censoring and punishing dissent when it was perceived that the "other side" had gotten out of hand. Later, the rejection of the Alien and Sedition Acts helped set the stage for the relative independence of American journalism, today.
Even with his missteps, Adams' passion had a purpose, a vision, a yearning.
John Adams painting by John Trumbell
In 1780 John Adams wrote to Abigail Adams about the priorities of the new society he was dreaming of:
The arts are full of stimulation and passion. But they also require solitude, discipline, training and practice. Who has time for that?
Combined with the emotional upheaval of the past eight years, we've been cutting the arts in our schools and communities. In our rush to equip our youth and workforce with skills, we've risked the ability to help our citizens find meaning.
Media and New Media
Power has value. But if you get power, there is the responsibility of wielding it. Which reminds me of this quote:
The wild card in the latest round of our democratic protest process is the swirling confluence of Old and New Media together. The power and influence of web sites, twitter, facebook, newspapers, radio, TV and cable feed back on each other, fueled by planned and unplanned events. Professionals and amateurs are a part of a cacophonous din like we've never heard before.
There is a "power" in the combination of all of this media, from twitter to radio to cable news and more that has not yet taken responsibility for the influence it wields. With social media, even the smallest among us has the ability to make a lot of noise.
No one is in charge and everyone is in charge. Everyone has the potential for fomenting protest and spreading it across the globe.
This, too, will change. Social media has given more people more tools than ever, but the novelty is already wearing off a bit. Irresponsible use of the power of social media may, over time, fade into the background as more noise.
Everyone has the potential to discover, discuss and exchange, too. When we start to have a conversation, we can talk about what we are for, and maybe discuss where we are going. I just hope that current conduits of communication (and the people who run, feed and use them) don't drive a wedge between citizens when there is so much else in our society we can get together on.
The dream becomes that we all have power and we all take responsibility. And, maybe we can plan to sing, dance and paint a bit more, too.
I must study Politicks and War that my sons may have liberty to study Mathematicks and Philosophy. My sons ought to study Mathematicks and Philosophy, Geography, natural History, Naval Architecture, navigation, Commerce and Agriculture, in order to give their Children a right to study Painting, Poetry, Musick, Architecture, Statuary, Tapestry and Porcelaine.I hope we can find a way to get back on that sort of continuum. It is important to have passion, but there's more to passion than anger and frustration. Art, music, painting and architecture don't have to be partisan to be meaningful.
The arts are full of stimulation and passion. But they also require solitude, discipline, training and practice. Who has time for that?
Combined with the emotional upheaval of the past eight years, we've been cutting the arts in our schools and communities. In our rush to equip our youth and workforce with skills, we've risked the ability to help our citizens find meaning.
Media and New Media
Power has value. But if you get power, there is the responsibility of wielding it. Which reminds me of this quote:
"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."With our convergence of technology and communication, we all have power.
-- Abraham Lincoln
The wild card in the latest round of our democratic protest process is the swirling confluence of Old and New Media together. The power and influence of web sites, twitter, facebook, newspapers, radio, TV and cable feed back on each other, fueled by planned and unplanned events. Professionals and amateurs are a part of a cacophonous din like we've never heard before.
There is a "power" in the combination of all of this media, from twitter to radio to cable news and more that has not yet taken responsibility for the influence it wields. With social media, even the smallest among us has the ability to make a lot of noise.
No one is in charge and everyone is in charge. Everyone has the potential for fomenting protest and spreading it across the globe.
This, too, will change. Social media has given more people more tools than ever, but the novelty is already wearing off a bit. Irresponsible use of the power of social media may, over time, fade into the background as more noise.
Everyone has the potential to discover, discuss and exchange, too. When we start to have a conversation, we can talk about what we are for, and maybe discuss where we are going. I just hope that current conduits of communication (and the people who run, feed and use them) don't drive a wedge between citizens when there is so much else in our society we can get together on.
The dream becomes that we all have power and we all take responsibility. And, maybe we can plan to sing, dance and paint a bit more, too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)