A silly little blog for me to drop the excrement of my mind.
-or- why the sound-bites rule
Published on October 14, 2004 By BlueDev In Politics
Last night we witnessed a debate between two men desiring to be elected the President of the United States. Both had their opportunity to discuss their plans and policies, both had the opportunity to win over undecided voters, and both had the opportunity to educate the populace.

Both are pretty poor choices in my opinion as well, but that is just thrown in here for fun, doesn't really have to do with the rest of what I will write.

More than anything last night though, the candidates did just what they knew they needed to. They gave us more sound-bites. The media loves them for it I am sure. It gives them the chance to print, show or play a phrase, sentence, or perhaps a couple, and then spin it however they want to. The campaigns love it as well. It allows them to take a word or two, and spin it so far out of context that the original meaning is obfuscated entirely.

And boy, do we eat it up.

But wait, we are smart, savvy voters. Right? Hmm, I'm not so sure. I generally refrain from commenting on the political threads because, well, I am far too cynical about the political climate of the US these days to be objective in even the most minute manner. At least I recognize that though. I do read them however. And I laugh. I laugh at the Bush loyals, brilliantly penning the most recently spun buzz words by their side. Fantastically tossing the out of context sound-bites we hear the President himself repeat, or we hear in his ads, they boggle the opposition with their borrowed wit.

The ardent Kerry supporters are no better. Reminding us of the most recently quoted statistics, with the appropriate anti-Bush spin. Benevolently looking down on those who can't seem to see as clearly as them, they remind us of just how far gone the country is. It makes me feel better at night to know Sen John Kerry is going to get America back for those of us wandering aimlessly in some heretofore unnamed country. Seriously. I do.

We have become a society of short attention spans, and politicians know it. They make sure they come up with just enough phrases to stick in our minds (because many of us probably won't bother to actually study out entire ideas). Their speech writers help them distill anything important or pertinent down to a sentence or less. That way, not only can we remember it, but we can repeat it!

I don't blame the politicians though. They are just doing what they know works. We need just look at the entertainment industry to see that the biggest sellers are often the movies/TV shows/music/books that cater to our most superficial senses. Whether it be flashy special effects covering a paper thin story, glossy production and marketing hiding cookie cutter and vacuous pop music, or aggressive hype and a fancy cover neatly wrapping up scintillating but hallow prose, it works. So the politicians just follow suit. They prey on our short attention spans, convinced that the majority will latch on to the sound-bite and pass on the actual work necessary to find out the truth of the issues themselves.

And what burns me up the most is when I find myself falling for it.

Comments
on Oct 14, 2004
Well said.

And what burns me up the most is when I find myself falling for it.


lol, I can definitely relate to that.
on Oct 14, 2004
They gave us more sound-bites.
I agree totally. Check out my blog on "Unsatisfactory Debates..."
on Oct 14, 2004
Very well written and Insightful post. I feel very similarly. When will the sound bite spin cycle end? After the election? I sure hope so... Of course, we will just look elsewhere if politics lets us down...
on Oct 14, 2004
lol, I can definitely relate to that.


Glad to know I am not the only one Abe. It is so frustrating when I find myself thinking of the issues distilled down to the impotent sound-bites the media feeds me on a daily basis. I am just as guilty as the next in getting sucked in. Hopefully though, my realization will serve as a shield to prevent me from falling into the trap again soon.
on Oct 14, 2004
I heard an interesting viewpoint. It was related to the League of Women Voters and PBS, somehow. Anyway, the gist of it is this:

Since the debates have been done independently of the League of Women Voters, it's been the two major parties (Reps and Dems) who've decided on the 90-second response segment. Basically what you said about politicians pandering to America's attention spans, except with a little more conspiracy involved. I can't remember the link--it was some random one that popped up on a site I was at. Apparently part of the conspiracy was that the LWV was setting the guidelines and the major parties didn't like that, so they decided to do the debates themselves (set up through an "independent" organization, of course) in a format they liked and that they thought would be more beneficial than the LWV format. I haven't seen debates from the LWV days but was given the understanding that they were more substantative than our current ones. Also under the current format, the "independent" organization decides who should be involved (i.e. just Bush and Kerry instead of including Nader, Cobb, Badnarik, etc.). When I find it, I'll post it.

Personally, the 90-second thing reeks of politics and not substance. I peruse the candidates' websites because I find far more complete information there than I do in any news story, TV or news copy, or debate. I do, however, find in other news stories that I fall for the short attention span drivel, so I relate to you guys on that.

-A.
on Oct 14, 2004
steven--As I mentioned over in that thread, I agree completely. And I don't think it will change until we, as a people, demand it. Maybe I am cynical but all I can say is I see the following happening first:

on Oct 14, 2004
chiprj--Thanks so much. For me it was one of those "Aha" moments as I sat there browsing some of the political threads. The first step to not getting sucked in is being aware, so perhaps we are.

Anglo--I don't doubt that at all. The debates just seemed really dumbed down. There is no real substance in the remarks. In part that is due to the short time for each answer, in part because we don't seem to demand it. Thanks for your comments.
on Oct 14, 2004

Reply #6 By: BlueDev - 10/14/2004 7:54:17 PM
steven--As I mentioned over in that thread, I agree completely. And I don't think it will change until we, as a people, demand it. Maybe I am cynical but all I can say is I see the following happening first:


Yeah but that happens every year. In "Hell, Michigan".
on Oct 14, 2004
Yeah but that happens every year. In "Hell, Michigan".


Hmmm, I wonder where the photo came from? Certainly NOT Hell, Michigan.