My last post was about why Joe Public would ever want to step in front of a camera. This one, coincidentally, is about why a news camera would ever want to go in search of Joe Public when it could call on any number of experts instead. I’ve just read Edward Docx having a rant (‘If I ruled the world…’) in this month’s Prospect. The online text is subscription only, so let me quote a couple of paragraphs.
He is sick of the way that even serious TV and radio now spends so much time seeking out the opinions of ordinary people. Factual news and informed commentary are now being replaced by ‘feedback’ and comments left by ordinary people who choose to ‘join the debate’.
I don’t care what Andy from Cheadle thinks about the Gaza strip, the ice caps, Manchester City or even Cheadle. Nobody cares. Nobody except Andy, and presumably he already knows. When I turn on the radio or the television, or when I open a book or a newspaper, what I want is an expert. I want insightful commentary. I want stylistic elegance. I want eloquence. I want uninterrupted expertise.
I’m simply not interested in what the public thinks. Nobody is except pollsters and marketing research agencies (and they only do it for the money). Not even the public is interested in what the public thinks. That’s why they are listening to the radio and not stopping to inquire of one another in the street [p7].
He’s got a point, and we have all been bored at one time or another by the inane opinions of those who happen to be passing by a news team in the street. But he is missing a few points too. Let me list, in increasing order of seriousness, the reasons why we like to listen to the voice of ordinary people speaking about big issues:
(1) We like feeling part of a big conversation; and we would like to stop someone in the street and ask them what they think, but we are too shy to do it. (2) Opinions and ideas need to be embodied and not just discussed. A single ordinary person saying what they believe is more powerful than an expert telling us that a million ordinary people do actually believe this. This is why ‘Joe the Plumber’ (real name: Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher) became the focus of one of the Presidential debates between Obama and McCain last year. (3) Passionate personal conviction carries much more weight in today’s culture than objective truth. This goes back to Rousseau, and the whole Romantic movement, but it is part of ordinary life now and not just an elite philosophy. (4) We don’t always trust experts. Partly experience; partly cynicism; partly living in an age of conspiracy theories. (5) The nature of authority has changed. We won’t give someone a hearing just because of their status or title or qualifications. Everyone is equal now.
How does this change politics, or society, or religion? I’m not sure – but I’m sure it does somehow.
Great post, loved this entry.
“I’m not sure – but I’m sure it does somehow.”
Good food for thought.
I think part of the reason vox pops are interesting, is because many of us live in large towns or cities where the people we meet are those of our own choosing (bar work or parish – and how much do most of us talk to other people in the parish?), and not those chosen for us by geography.
Vox pops, or the letters page of Metro, is how many of us learn what the other people at the bus stop think.
Does local opinion, as identified by Newman here, still exist?
Two things this reminded me of:
One is how much our legal system relies on the good sense of the ordinary person: the obvious case is our reliance on criminal juries rather than inquisitorial expert magistrates (a system which is probably more easily rationally defensible) – even going so far as to tell people that the test for whether something is a crime is whether they think it is bad enough to be criminal. This is (roughly) the test for gross negligence manslaughter. Similarly, we judge someone a thief or a fraud if twelve random people think that they are dishonest by the ordinary standards of ordinary people. This http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8240985.stm is interesting on whether that is working.
The other is one of my favourite Bob Dylan lines, admittedly from a terrible song on most levels (I Shall be Free No 10 – arguably not a song at all) “Ain’t no use talking to me – just the same as talking to you.”
I must say, though, that I think that letters pages and comments pages are a very bad way to find out what other people think as the ordinary people you talk to are much more sensible than the people who comment on news stories.
I think it really just stems down to the need to feel important. Everyone has an opinion and everyone just want’s to express it.
even if they comment on a news story and have no idea what there talking about, they will get a little feeling of importance, just from making their opinion public.
Master Thomas. As a person who has had letters published in the papers, I take objection to your last sentence :-)