Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 42

Thread: Ignorance, Politics and Deliberative Democracy

  1. #1

    Default Ignorance, Politics and Deliberative Democracy

    I've recently come across some very interesting results from studies carried out by the Center for Deliberative Democracy at Stanford University.

    From their website:

    The Problem
    Citizens are often uninformed about key public issues. Conventional polls represent the public's surface impressions of sound bites and headlines. The public, subject to what social scientists have called "rational ignorance," has little reason to confront trade-offs or invest time and effort in acquiring information or coming to a considered judgment.
    Selected Results
    Each experiment conducted thus far has gathered a highly representative sample together at a single place. Each time, there were dramatic, statistically significant changes in views. The result is a poll with a human face. The process has the statistical representativeness of a scientific sample but it also has the concreteness and immediacy of a focus group or a discussion group. Taped and edited accounts of the small group discussions provide an opportunity for the public to reframe the issues in terms that connect with ordinary people.

    The weekend samples have typically ranged in size from approximately 200 in the utility polls; however some have had numbers as high as 466, such as at the 1996 National Issues Convention. The process provides the data to evaluate both the representativeness of each microcosm and the statistical significance of the changes in opinion.
    Of particular relevance are the results from an experiment undertaken in Northern Ireland:




    So, what do people think about this? Are most people less informed than they ought to be and are there effective ways we can tackle the problem, if so?

    I suspect the major problems would be to do with logistics and fairness - i.e. ensuring that members of the public are educated rather than indoctrinated. It might be the case that we're better off with a less hands-on approach, given the potential for manipulation, but presumably it should be possible to provide citizens with the opportunity to become sufficiently educated about the issues without the risk of merely exposing them to propaganda. It's worth discussing, at any rate.
    Repeal the 27th.

  2. #2
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    5,131
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mercurial View Post
    I've recently come across some very interesting results from studies carried out by the Center for Deliberative Democracy at Stanford University.

    From their website:





    Of particular relevance are the results from an experiment undertaken in Northern Ireland:




    So, what do people think about this? Are most people less informed than they ought to be and are there effective ways we can tackle the problem, if so?

    I suspect the major problems would be to do with logistics and fairness - i.e. ensuring that members of the public are educated rather than indoctrinated. It might be the case that we're better off with a less hands-on approach, given the potential for manipulation, but presumably it should be possible to provide citizens with the opportunity to become sufficiently educated about the issues without the risk of merely exposing them to propaganda. It's worth discussing, at any rate.
    Certainly, getting people better informed is always a good thing. But this would make people more likely to question how things are done, so it suits the elite of this country to keep the public uninformed.

  3. #3
    Politics.ie Member Astral Peaks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    25,995
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Increased affluence, easy access to multiple entertainment sources/streams, greater leisure time, too much TV for children, decreased emphasis on complex reading in education systems, alienation from political processes and a very heightened emphasis on material over social values all contribute, in my view.
    "Don't need a whore, I don't need no booze, don't need a virgin priest."

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Member Feckkit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    5,823
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Astral Peaks View Post
    Increased affluence, easy access to multiple entertainment sources/streams, greater leisure time, too much TV for children, decreased emphasis on complex reading in education systems, alienation from political processes and a very heightened emphasis on material over social values all contribute, in my view.

    Not only all of that, but, in my 'umble opinion, you can add the failure of education - from primary level upwards - to engage kids in the art of how to think [things through for themselves].

    Youngsters nowadays (yeah, I know) are told what to think, by and large, and end up being parrots with little or no initiative. Generalisation though that may be, I recognise this disturbing feature on a regular basis at a professional level. In my view it has worsened decade by decade.

    The upshot, I suppose, is that many young people regard 'public information' as none of their business. They have their own preoccupations which are largely based around 'self'.

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member farnaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Swords
    Posts
    1,915
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Astral Peaks View Post
    Increased affluence, easy access to multiple entertainment sources/streams, greater leisure time, too much TV for children, decreased emphasis on complex reading in education systems, alienation from political processes and a very heightened emphasis on material over social values all contribute, in my view.
    I'd add cynicism about politics, paradoxically fuelled by those who most want to see more citizen engagement in politics. By constantly pointing out political failings and never recognising achievements, the likes of Fintan O'Toole, Mick Clifford etc. don't (as I believe they'd like to) stoke up transformative anger but lead many to apathetic attitudes like "they're all the same, they're in it only for themselves, can't trust any of them, nothing will ever change, why should I bother".

  6. #6
    Politics.ie Member Clanrickard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Last outpost of freedom
    Posts
    31,855
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mercurial View Post
    It might be the case that we're better off with a less hands-on approach, given the potential for manipulation, but presumably it should be possible to provide citizens with the opportunity to become sufficiently educated about the issues without the risk of merely exposing them to propaganda. It's worth discussing, at any rate.
    I think it is a case of citizens being too lazy to inform themselves. There is a vast swathe of the electorate that are lumpen proletariat who watch foreign soaps, z factor and other nonsense and if they read a paper it is a red top. These people could not know much about important issues. Alongside the right to vote is the responsibility to inform yourself.

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Member ger12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    48,228
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mercurial View Post
    So, what do people think about this? Are most people less informed than they ought to be and are there effective ways we can tackle the problem, if so?

    I suspect the major problems would be to do with logistics and fairness - i.e. ensuring that members of the public are educated rather than indoctrinated. It might be the case that we're better off with a less hands-on approach, given the potential for manipulation, but presumably it should be possible to provide citizens with the opportunity to become sufficiently educated about the issues without the risk of merely exposing them to propaganda. It's worth discussing, at any rate.
    The business of politics (cleaning it up) and the behavior of politicians (a more .. honest .. approach perhaps) may go a long way to encourage citizens to look more deeply at political issues and become more involved?
    At 12 weeks the “clump of cells” toes curl, her mouth makes sucking movements, she has a human face and if you prod the tummy she will move in response

  8. #8
    Politics.ie Member statsman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    54,797
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mercurial View Post
    I've recently come across some very interesting results from studies carried out by the Center for Deliberative Democracy at Stanford University.

    From their website:





    Of particular relevance are the results from an experiment undertaken in Northern Ireland:




    So, what do people think about this? Are most people less informed than they ought to be and are there effective ways we can tackle the problem, if so?

    I suspect the major problems would be to do with logistics and fairness - i.e. ensuring that members of the public are educated rather than indoctrinated. It might be the case that we're better off with a less hands-on approach, given the potential for manipulation, but presumably it should be possible to provide citizens with the opportunity to become sufficiently educated about the issues without the risk of merely exposing them to propaganda. It's worth discussing, at any rate.
    After this baseline poll, members of the sample are invited to gather at a single place for a weekend in order to discuss the issues. Carefully balanced briefing materials are sent to the participants and are also made publicly available. The participants engage in dialogue with competing experts and political leaders based on questions they develop in small group discussions with trained moderators. Parts of the weekend events are broadcast on television, either live or in taped and edited form. After the deliberations, the sample is again asked the original questions. The resulting changes in opinion represent the conclusions the public would reach, if people had opportunity to become more informed and more engaged by the issues.
    Might I suggest that this is, at the very least, open to being interpreted as possibly benign voter manipulation? Who decides what 'carefully balanced' means? Who selects the 'competing experts' and what do you do with areas where experts are not competing? Who trains the moderators?

    On more practical ground, how would you go replicate a weekend retreat for an entire electorate? Because unless you do, the polls will be even more unrepresentative of the general view of things than is now the case.
    Put a thief among honest men and they will eventually relieve him of his watch. Flann O'Brien

  9. #9
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    6,484
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    I think it would be a good thing to have matters of civil and social importance discussed and taught in school as early as possible. Something beyond the debating team in the clever class or the tainted view of social issues from the religious classes.

  10. #10
    Politics.ie Member farnaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Swords
    Posts
    1,915
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sethjem7 View Post
    I think it would be a good thing to have matters of civil and social importance discussed and taught in school as early as possible. Something beyond the debating team in the clever class or the tainted view of social issues from the religious classes.
    Helpful, but likely that those who listen and engage in class will be those who would anyway take an interest in later life; and those who don't, won't. The media distractions mentioned by Astral and Clanrickard are, after all, marketed largely toward this agegroup (teenager to young adult).

    Let's face it, for many of us participating on this site it's an entertaining way to spend time (and lofty notions of incisive contribution to the public debate are lost after 1000+ posts ). The majority of people see no entertainment value in this and prefer to spend their evenings "vegging" in front of the tv. Some may even do so in the knowledge that there is something else much more rewarding to be doing but the effort of doing it loses to the temptation of easy-on-the-brain half-hour slices of light entertainment.

    The point is, if we want the latter group of people to be engaged in politics we either need to pander to their need for it to be easy-going and entertaining, or starting pulling the plugs on the endless streams of vapid entertainment to create space and time for people to deliberate and act. I'd go for the latter.

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •