More Active Posts
Front Page
Ear Tickling
 |
 3 Comments |
The Wall Street Journal’s Alexandra Alter recently reported the latest in political consulting trends, which entails hooking subjects to devices that monitor brain function, skin temperature, and eye-blinking, in order to better determine what messages and images appeal to people. The consultants interviewed, who work for a variety of presidential candidates, labored to imply that they simply want better predictive information. “We need a tricky way,” explained a political scientist with the National Election Studies, “to get into people’s minds and find out who they’re going to vote for instead of asking directly.”
It doesn’t take much imagination, however, to see that politicians are throwing considerable dollars at this technology for more than just an edge at predicting voter behavior. They want to see what phrasings and postures are most likely to sway voters. One for-profit firm admits as much; as Alter reports: “The company . . . says it could help candidates vet advertisements or hone their language and delivery in speeches.”
This is not a new trend, which took off at a gallop under Clinton, with the use of devices that allowed subjects to indicate their approval or disapproval during each second of a speech, in effect creating an EKG, of sorts, for the speech. Consultants could then isolate which phrases appealed to subjects, and then be sure to sprinkle them more liberally in future speeches. Any unappealing phrases could be excised. This is now a commonplace tactic among well-financed campaigns. Rather than strive to determine and implement what is best, politicians can instead focus on saying what sounds best, regardless of what they intend once in office.
As our elected officials become less inclined to speak directly, and more inclined toward pablum and posturing, this latest technological trend will accelerate what can fairly be described as a cancer in American politics. It is increasingly the case, it seems, that one can only win by saying as little of substance as possible, while working tirelessly to make one’s opponents appear to be allied with the Devil. As American voters, in turn, read less each passing year, while consuming massive quantities of television, we have the makings of a perfect storm of ignorance, out of which stroll the blow-dried empty suits who pass for our political class.
And the thing is, I think we deserve them. Though Paul was warning against heresy, his admonition to Timothy certainly seems apt:
“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.”
Sounds painfully familiar this election season.
 |
Topic: Editor's Choice, Front Page, The Nation |  |
Email a friend |
 |
Keywords: christianity, politics |  |
RSS 2.0 |
 |
Both comments and pings are currently closed. |  |
Share this: |
Less is more
I think the media are a national disgrace. The last two Republican debates have revealed an incredible level of obvious partisan pettiness on the part of the media. They defy our common sensabilities–whatever is left of that.
The CNN/YouTube “debate” was nothing but an ambush. Several question-askers were virtually brain dead and many were outright Decmocrat party operatives, pretending to be otherwise. And CNN orchestrated that disgrace.
The Des Moines Register debate did its best to avoid and ban all the main issues of substance and they conrived ways to make it a circus. They allowed Alan Keyes into the debate on bizarre terms which he did not earn and then kept the perceived fringe candidates on the Deemocrat side out of the debate so that they could look less fringy. That was blatant bias (what else is new).
What is most disgraceful about the mainstream (hard leftist) media is their pretense and shameless dishonesty with regard to their cheap bias.
The Republican candidates are diminished for putting up with this ridiculous and obvious bias from media (hard) leftists who would posture them. Some major Republicans need to nail this nonsense and refuse to put up with it.
Here are some interesting statistics from a recent article in Discipleship Journal(Jan-Feb 2008). The author, in researching literacy in the United States, discovered that
—58% of U.S. adults never read another complete book after high school.
—42% of college graduates never read another complete book after college.
—80% of U.S. families did not buy or read a book in the previous year.
—Only 32% of the U.S. population has ever been in a book store.
—Each day people in the United States spend 4 hours watching TV, 3 hours listening to the radio, and 14 minutes reading magazines.
These statistics make it appartent that, although most Americans can read, they get their information and “learn” (if you want to call it that) primarily from TV. Americans have become intellectual cripples and easily manipulated by those who control the TV media. The American mind has become like mush that can be poured into any mold the TV meisters desire.
Mr. Woodlief has shown us some of the increasingly sophisticated methods being employed by these manipulators. Joel is correct in recommending that conservative political candidates be wary. Their messages and images are routinely being distorted by the propaganda meisters of the media. Conservatives are bashed, liberals are deified and too many ignorant Americans soak it up like a sponge.
RE #2
Those statistics are simply mindboggling!
I spend on average over a $1,000 on books every year and simply can’t conceive of going through even a single day without reading.