A cross-section of Ohioans from Cleveland participated in a Focus Group moderated by Pollster Peter Hart. Every archetype of working-class America was represented. A fascinating discussion. He does an amazing job of getting them to just talk, not politic.
A bit about Joe the Plumber from a real plumber, then the all-important question, "who are you voting for, and why?"
A 40-year Democrat leaning towards McCain, Cookie is a hard one to figure out. Is it the latent race effect? A cut of just her responses from the Group.
The entire Group and a diagnostic session with reporters who watched can Be seen in C-Span's Video Library.
[Book Review] Millenial Makeover: Myspace, Youtube, and the Future of American Politics
Here we are now, entertain us.
This book by Winograd and Hais is a timely dissertation on generational changes and the political realignments which occur as a result. Such changes are typically catalyzed by a dramatic evolution in communicative technology, often simultaneous with a major economic or world-event . What is refreshing about this book is the focus on the cognition of the people involved as individual actors, not just a conditioned group reacting to their circumstances.
The basic premise is that there are four generational archetypes which repeat at regular intervals. Two of these generations are outgoing and produce "idealistic" realignments which become gridlocked by social inequality and moral debates. The other two are passive generations which shape "civic" realignments, generating policy and community-centered government. Since generation X is an idealist generation, The coming-of-age Millenials are a civic group, focused on ... change.
Prior to reading this book I didn't put a lot of stake in generational theory. Certainly to make sense of American history one must break time into eras, but its not as if a light went on Jan 1 2000 and the world changed. Actually, the lights were supposed to go out and didn't even flicker. The renaissance period of classical music didn't simply end and turn into baroque with Handel's first symphony either. It's somewhat presumptuous to define history as it is happening. Experts disagree on when each generation ends and the next begins, and there is some gray area in the middle. Technically we're still in the romantic period of music, but I believe history will judge that a new era started around the time the first recordings were made. Born at the cut-off I am by all definitions a Gen-Xer, but I feel like a Millenial.
Since I've got a foot in the Millenial generation, on that authority I can disagree with one point made early in the book. Most people call children born after 1982 the "Me" generation, for being overly self-absorbed and self-important. Winograd and Hais eschew this term for "Millenial," citing studies which show the current generation to be more empathetic than any before it.
While it may be true that is society is becoming more sensitive to the feelings of others, the resulting mentality may in fact be "I think you're important, so you'd better think I am too." One needs only to study a random sample of 18-24 year old social networking pages to see who's number 1 - me. A Myspace page is effectively a shrine to oneself, complete with theme song. A majority of Youtube videos consist of teenagers whining about their day, or practicing the guitar they just bought. AIM away messages are filled with obtuse self-centric wisdom like "everything happens [to me] for a reason." Twitter's eternal question of "what are you doing?" is faithfully answered millions of times per day with mundane dietary and otherwise idiosyncratic answers which beg another question: who cares?
[Note: I'm awfully pessimistic, so it's possible that I have got more than a bit of Gen X in me.]
So while Millenial Makeover is a euphonious title and a welcome one, it is not incorrect to critique the new generation for being hung up on themselves. Obviously - I'm writing a book review in my blog.
A few more words about my adopted generation- we learn fast, we think fast, we can integrate different ideas to create new, we don't memorize anything if we know where to find the answer, and as a result we can out-think and problem-solve the pants off our parents. What we've traded in for these skills is the ability to concentrate attention on any one thing for an extended period. I'm writing this at work, one paragraph at a time. If you've read this far, you're probably over 30, one of the authors of Millenial Makeover, or my girlfriend. Hey sweetheart :)
But all this is merely preamble; what the book is really about is the way social networks are going to change the face of politics in the coming realignment. It's suddenly become uncool to be ignorant of politics - a complete flip flop from the tune-in tune-out mantra and apathetic disinterest of the last two generations. Whereas we used to find refuge from political campaigns in Saturday Morning Cartoons and Super Mario Brothers, the vote has now been rocked into every corner of our very digital lives. Facebook, Myspace, Youtube and Twitter all factor heavily into the election and as proud gettin-paid players, constantly remind users of the election looming. Barack Obama has even begun using new technology to run ads in popular racing and football video games. This political permeation, coupled with the desire to "buck" conventions (represented by cranky white-haired old men who probably never even sent a text), will result in a landslide victory for Obama.
One way that I'm empathetic is I tend to adapt to the speech patterns and in some cases, even accent, of the people I'm talking to. Another bad habit I have is emulating the style of whatever I'm reading into my own writing. This review is a bit dry and comma-laden because all I've been reading is Millenial Makeover and the AP.
Since I've begun to write a book myself in this post, I'm going to wrap it up. Millenial Makeover is an enjoyable read with lots of history about electoral patterns, changes in communication, and some interesting generational theory. This would be a great resource for anyone interested in new media, politics, or the history of American electoral changes. I was however put off by the copious amount of statistics throughout the book. I know that's what you're supposed to do to validate your claims, but hey what can I say, I'm a Millenial at heart.
Cheer up emo kid.
This book by Winograd and Hais is a timely dissertation on generational changes and the political realignments which occur as a result. Such changes are typically catalyzed by a dramatic evolution in communicative technology, often simultaneous with a major economic or world-event . What is refreshing about this book is the focus on the cognition of the people involved as individual actors, not just a conditioned group reacting to their circumstances.
The basic premise is that there are four generational archetypes which repeat at regular intervals. Two of these generations are outgoing and produce "idealistic" realignments which become gridlocked by social inequality and moral debates. The other two are passive generations which shape "civic" realignments, generating policy and community-centered government. Since generation X is an idealist generation, The coming-of-age Millenials are a civic group, focused on ... change.
Prior to reading this book I didn't put a lot of stake in generational theory. Certainly to make sense of American history one must break time into eras, but its not as if a light went on Jan 1 2000 and the world changed. Actually, the lights were supposed to go out and didn't even flicker. The renaissance period of classical music didn't simply end and turn into baroque with Handel's first symphony either. It's somewhat presumptuous to define history as it is happening. Experts disagree on when each generation ends and the next begins, and there is some gray area in the middle. Technically we're still in the romantic period of music, but I believe history will judge that a new era started around the time the first recordings were made. Born at the cut-off I am by all definitions a Gen-Xer, but I feel like a Millenial.
Since I've got a foot in the Millenial generation, on that authority I can disagree with one point made early in the book. Most people call children born after 1982 the "Me" generation, for being overly self-absorbed and self-important. Winograd and Hais eschew this term for "Millenial," citing studies which show the current generation to be more empathetic than any before it.
While it may be true that is society is becoming more sensitive to the feelings of others, the resulting mentality may in fact be "I think you're important, so you'd better think I am too." One needs only to study a random sample of 18-24 year old social networking pages to see who's number 1 - me. A Myspace page is effectively a shrine to oneself, complete with theme song. A majority of Youtube videos consist of teenagers whining about their day, or practicing the guitar they just bought. AIM away messages are filled with obtuse self-centric wisdom like "everything happens [to me] for a reason." Twitter's eternal question of "what are you doing?" is faithfully answered millions of times per day with mundane dietary and otherwise idiosyncratic answers which beg another question: who cares?
[Note: I'm awfully pessimistic, so it's possible that I have got more than a bit of Gen X in me.]
So while Millenial Makeover is a euphonious title and a welcome one, it is not incorrect to critique the new generation for being hung up on themselves. Obviously - I'm writing a book review in my blog.
A few more words about my adopted generation- we learn fast, we think fast, we can integrate different ideas to create new, we don't memorize anything if we know where to find the answer, and as a result we can out-think and problem-solve the pants off our parents. What we've traded in for these skills is the ability to concentrate attention on any one thing for an extended period. I'm writing this at work, one paragraph at a time. If you've read this far, you're probably over 30, one of the authors of Millenial Makeover, or my girlfriend. Hey sweetheart :)
But all this is merely preamble; what the book is really about is the way social networks are going to change the face of politics in the coming realignment. It's suddenly become uncool to be ignorant of politics - a complete flip flop from the tune-in tune-out mantra and apathetic disinterest of the last two generations. Whereas we used to find refuge from political campaigns in Saturday Morning Cartoons and Super Mario Brothers, the vote has now been rocked into every corner of our very digital lives. Facebook, Myspace, Youtube and Twitter all factor heavily into the election and as proud gettin-paid players, constantly remind users of the election looming. Barack Obama has even begun using new technology to run ads in popular racing and football video games. This political permeation, coupled with the desire to "buck" conventions (represented by cranky white-haired old men who probably never even sent a text), will result in a landslide victory for Obama.
One way that I'm empathetic is I tend to adapt to the speech patterns and in some cases, even accent, of the people I'm talking to. Another bad habit I have is emulating the style of whatever I'm reading into my own writing. This review is a bit dry and comma-laden because all I've been reading is Millenial Makeover and the AP.
Since I've begun to write a book myself in this post, I'm going to wrap it up. Millenial Makeover is an enjoyable read with lots of history about electoral patterns, changes in communication, and some interesting generational theory. This would be a great resource for anyone interested in new media, politics, or the history of American electoral changes. I was however put off by the copious amount of statistics throughout the book. I know that's what you're supposed to do to validate your claims, but hey what can I say, I'm a Millenial at heart.
Cheer up emo kid.
Ralph Nader Calls Out NYSE CEO Duncan Niederauer
I saw this rally on CSPAN yesterday. The first cut was 18 minutes of the original 30. Yeah, it's so good I could hardly cut any out. I had no trouble trimming two hours of presidential debate to twelve minutes.
"Better to vote for someone you believe in who may lose than to vote for someone you don't believe in who may win, because that person will certainly betray you."
"Better to vote for someone you believe in who may lose than to vote for someone you don't believe in who may win, because that person will certainly betray you."
-Eugene V. Debs
To live and die in D.C.
I'd like to do a really wicked quick stream-of-consciousness Kerouacian blog about my trip to D.C.. Deep breath, here we go.. [stay tuned]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)