culture

Poll Dancing

by

Well, if you have been paying any attention to the news, you’ll see people talking about polls.  Polls this, polls that, etc.  Mostly it revolves around Nate Silver, who is being questioned about his polls showing a 75% change for Obama because . . . well I guess politics and ignorance of math.  Silver’s got a good record and doesn’t really hide anything.

Of course there has been an advantage to this in that people are paying attention to polls and asking questions about them.  The disadvantage is this seems to be pathetically political and ignorant in many cases, but at least there’s attention.

The thing is polls are inherently unsure – this is where your friend, Mr. Margin of Error comes in.  This is why people analyze them, why folks like Silver and other analysts build models and study trends.  Because yes, it is unsure, so you strive to get better.

I’m hoping as people examine polls and hear them talked about, we’ll get, on average, increased attention to how they work and how analysis works.

Sadly, I also think we’re going to see everything about polls more politicized.  Of course that could get interesting, because if you skew polls to fit a political view, you start destroying their value . . .

This is also another example of why I think math and some basic statistics/research skills are indispensable to survival.

– Steven Savage

Steven Savage is a Geek 2.0 writer, speaker, blogger, and job coach.  He blogs on careers at http://www.fantopro.com/, nerd and geek culture at http://www.nerdcaliber.com/, and does a site of creative tools at http://www.seventhsanctum.com/. He can be reached at https://www.stevensavage.com/.

The Debate Died Early

by

The Obama/Romney debate was unimpressive (big looser?  Jim Lehrer).  From what I hear about the Stewart/O’Reilly debate it was livlier but uninsipriing.  Everyone’s already talking Twitter, Facebook, and how that impacts the debates.  Big Bird is a meme, the Stewart/O’Reilly debate’s technical glitches are being discussed, and the debates kind of fade away.

I miss the idea of good, substantial debate.  Catchphrases, bumper stickers, and blatant lies aren’t exactly the substance of great historical import.  Neither is statistics diddling or mathematical games.

So I began speculating that perhaps the internet is replacing debates.  There you can post length discussions and link to numbers.  There the dialog is ongoing.  There things happen.

My answer to this is, possibly, yes.  But I don’t think the internet killed the debate.

I think that it died a lot earlier in our media.

Everything is turned into media sound bites, spectacle, and sensationalism, and our supposed politics and policies aren’t much different.  It’s an age of sensationalism and catchphrases, of what makes audiences angry over any kind of discussion, of what sells ad time.  Politics is entertainment – it’s always been, but it’s pretty much merged as far as I’m concerned, accelerated by television, media empires, and 24-hour news cycles people have to fill.

Worse, it’s a mix of advertising and reality television.

To put the final capper on it, it’s been entertainment long enough for people to imitate it.  You’ve heard the catchphrases bubble up in people’s political discussions.  You know the people who ape their favorite media-news pundits.  This reality-TV politics has infected us.

So debates are dead.  We just started killing them early – and I think the internet is replacing the gap.

Even if that gap sometime is using LOLCats as template for political discussions.

– Steven Savage

Steven Savage is a Geek 2.0 writer, speaker, blogger, and job coach.  He blogs on careers at http://www.fantopro.com/, nerd and geek culture at http://www.nerdcaliber.com/, and does a site of creative tools at http://www.seventhsanctum.com/. He can be reached at https://www.stevensavage.com/.

Media Awareness 9/15/2012: Social Patterns

by

Continuing my media awareness experiment – essentially watching how I consume media and what I see in media consumption, and what I learn from it.

Since I gave up on cable, I’ve noticed my socializing patterns have changed.  It’s stunning to me how much of our socializing is centered around media – television shows, movies, etc.  Sure this is understandable, but it seems almost dominant, and also seems odd when there’s so much else in life that such a great deal of time is devoted to media.

This also makes me think that, when people study media, we’re often overwhelmed by “there’s so much” and forget to ask “what’s it all for.”  As soon as I began noticing the prominence of media, especially big media, in our culture, the “what for” question kept popping up – and there’s no one answer.

However I think we’re unaware of how much of our lives are influenced or driven by television, movies, and publishing.  At an age where there are more media choices – and more ways to choose them – we may be in some pretty seismic shifts as peoples awareness and choices change.

That also means changes in social patterns.

– Steven Savage

Steven Savage is a Geek 2.0 writer, speaker, blogger, and job coach.  He blogs on careers at http://www.fantopro.com/, nerd and geek culture at http://www.nerdcaliber.com/, and does a site of creative tools at http://www.seventhsanctum.com/. He can be reached at https://www.stevensavage.com/.