Ignorant America: Just How Stupid Are We?

[Mabus]

I caught this gentleman on C-SPAN Questions and Answers this morning, and he spoke briefly about an article on AlterNet. While I do not often frequent the site, I figured it was worth a read. I will definitely be reading his book when I can get it.

Ignorant America: Just How Stupid Are We? (http://www.alternet.org/democracy/90161/?page=1)

[Nieninque]

That's a rhetorical question, right?

[Tolwynn]

Just read a few days of political threads on the PC. There, you just saved yourself about 20 bucks.

[Tsa`ah]

I caught this gentleman on C-SPAN Questions and Answers this morning, and he spoke briefly about an article on AlterNet. While I do not often frequent the site, I figured it was worth a read. I will definitely be reading his book when I can get it.

Ignorant America: Just How Stupid Are We? (http://www.alternet.org/democracy/90161/?page=1)

You're a shining example of the answer.

[Keller]

You're a shining example of the answer.

I'd hardly say Mabus is dumb.

He's ingenuous and self-serving, but not dumb.

[Tsa`ah]

Debatable, but I'll concede the point simply because of vocabulary.

[Mabus]

That's a rhetorical question, right?
It should be, but the article does bring up some rather interesting points.

A couple I found interesting:

"Compared with Americans generally -- and this isn't saying much, given their low level of interest in the news -- young people are the least informed of any age cohort save possibly for those confined to nursing homes."

"Since young people on the whole scarcely follow politics, one may want to consider whether we even want them to vote. Asked in 2000 to identify the presidential candidate who was the chief sponsor of Campaign Finance Reform -- Sen. John McCain -- just 4% of people between the ages of 18 and 24 could do so."

[Mabus]

Just read a few days of political threads on the PC. There, you just saved yourself about 20 bucks.
I will likely get the book from the public library.

I am "frugal" like that, and we have an amazing library system where I live.

[Kembal]

It should be, but the article does bring up some rather interesting points.

A couple I found interesting:

"Compared with Americans generally -- and this isn't saying much, given their low level of interest in the news -- young people are the least informed of any age cohort save possibly for those confined to nursing homes."

"Since young people on the whole scarcely follow politics, one may want to consider whether we even want them to vote. Asked in 2000 to identify the presidential candidate who was the chief sponsor of Campaign Finance Reform -- Sen. John McCain -- just 4% of people between the ages of 18 and 24 could do so."

I'm not sure an 8 year old statistic proves the point though. Certainly young people were a lot less engaged in 2000 than this year.

[Mabus]

I'm not sure an 8 year old statistic proves the point though. Certainly young people were a lot less engaged in 2000 than this year.
The point of the article deals with general ignorance of political matters among the total population of citizens, rather then just the youth. The quoted portions were just areas from the article that struck me, and the second seemed rather relevant to the current election.

Even if we look at current data there is still a disconnect between age and attention to the current campaign.
http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/iekxajre_kyj_jy8oa6riw.gif

Some articles even state that shows such as "The Daily Show" are the primary "news" source for those under 30. With one 2004 study (http://people-press.org/report/200/cable-and-internet-loom-large-in-fragmented-political-news-universe) showing the Comedy TV Shows ranking 6th for political news for this segment of the population.

[radamanthys]

My peers are most assuredly ill-informed.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

The point of the article deals with general ignorance of political matters among the total population of citizens, rather then just the youth. The quoted portions were just areas from the article that struck me, and the second seemed rather relevant to the current election.

Even if we look at current data there is still a disconnect between age and attention to the current campaign.
http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/iekxajre_kyj_jy8oa6riw.gif

Some articles even state that shows such as "The Daily Show" are the primary "news" source for those under 30. With one 2004 study (http://people-press.org/report/200/cable-and-internet-loom-large-in-fragmented-political-news-universe) showing the Comedy TV Shows ranking 6th for political news for this segment of the population.

I don't think that's unfair at all.

The youth vote is notoriously hard to get out, let alone make sure they're making educated decisions.

Civics and government classes aren't really prevalent in our school system, and history classes are usually extremely basic and bore a lot of people to death.

I loved history growing up and have always been into politics, but I wouldn't consider most of my friends or people in my age group to be the same way. Some of them, sure, but a lot of them are very indifferent to politics and history and such. That's not to say they're stupid or uneducated, it's just a different outlook and set of priorities I think at that point. I don't think that's really an insult though, just that the general trend is people seem to get more political/interested in politics as they age. That's certainly understandable-- as you start working, saving, buying a house, having a family obviously your bubble of concern is going to grow.