The authors of “Public Opinion” discuss the very nature (history) of public opinion as we know it. The first examples come from Plato and Aristotle. Plato believed the masses cannot be trusted as they are uneducated and incapable of understanding the laws, and government which they reside under. Aristotle disagreed and advocated for the people and argued regular citizens should have a voice.
Although these two fields of thought are very different, both can be seen in modern cultures today. Explain a situation where a person could choose one theory over the other. State why you think public opinion would be a hindrance or a help and whether you think it is “fair” and ethical by today’s standards.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I tend to agree with Plato’s assessment of public opinion. People aren’t always able to make educated decisions because of what they are exposed to or what they aren’t familiar with. I think the media influences people in a negative way which then influences people’s opinion on issues reguardless if the information is wrong or right. An instance that I observed this was with a friend that was positive that Barack Obama was Muslim. She was letting false information completely impact her opinion of him.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of public opinion serving as a voice of the people is a novel idea but the majority of the public isn’t being informed in a way that would lead to educated opinions on all subjects. In class we talked about the 5 categories of public opinion. I sided with category 5 that sees public opinion as being manufactured by politicians, journalists, and interest groups. I think public opinion does not serve as a true voice that is representational of all people.
One could argue Plato’s theory prevails over Aristotle’s theory when examining Plato’s idea that masses could not be trusted because people can not fully understand their own best interests. To me, this goes hand in hand with the saying, “Mother knows best.” Our mothers, or legal guardians, have our best interests in mind and we grow up trusting their decision, whether we understand them at the time or not. As children, we are not bad people, we just do not understand what is best for us. In other words, Plato is saying we are not capable of comprehending the future consequences of today’s actions, therefore we need an educated leader to decide for us.
ReplyDeleteFor example, before the 1920’s the people of America, as a mass, requested the prohibition of alcohol through various means. The majority of people believed this would make our society a better place. In contrast, the exact opposite happened. Bootlegging and speakeasies became a problem. This is a perfect example of Plato’s theory because the people of America believed they were making their country better when they actually created more problems. If they would have left the choice up to the government, we may have prevented the illegal activities that accompanied prohibition.
According to Plato’s theory, even public opinion today can be beneficial but it can also cause many problems. However, I do believe public opinion is more of a help than a hindrance. Not only does it prevent one person from having too much power, but our government better represents its people compared to dictatorship.
I have to agree with Plato’s theory on people cannot always make the decision because they lack information on the whole issue, therefore people needs a direction to follow by the government or by leaders.
ReplyDeleteI think that the concept of public opinion started out well because it gives the people a chance to share their opinion, but in today's world it turned into a complete different direction.
Media covers more and more negative information which leads the people to be cynical about every situation that is occuring. The media only shows parts of the truth and not the whole which is misleading. And because the people might not be educated on the topic or they do not understand the meaning behind some decisions made by the leader, they tend to lock out information they do not agree with and blindly agree with whatever they want to believe.
For example, in Taiwan, former President Chen Shui-Bian and his family members are accused of money laundering and bribery during his presidency. Before the trial, even before any evidence were shown, government officals started to voice out their opinion on the issue. Which later on led out rage upon those who were against him as President. Not taking any side on the issue, people who are for or against this issue doesn't really understand or know the truth about what had happened, only those who were directly involved knows. And the media does not take both sides of the situation and only show one side of the story, either for or against is not very professional. It leads to unnecessary arugments that Taiwan does not need now.
I think public opinion are helpful only when the public is educated on the issue because the people then understands the decisions made by the leader(s).
I agree with Plato’s assessment of public opinion. Through the years it is apparent that the media plays a very influential role in what is deemed as acceptable, good, popular, etc. The media has used this power to their advantage, to more or less, control public opinion on certain issues.
ReplyDeleteThe media tends to display what is in the best interest of their stakeholders, viewers, etc. For examples, it could be argued that FOX news tend to report from a more conservative point of view, whereas MSNBC and CNN tend to be more on liberal in nature. In turn, these news organizations influence public opinion as they see fit. This could be negative in the sense that some stories may seem more one-sided, therefore, influencing public opinion.
For example, on June 14, 1920 three black men working for the James Robinson Circus were wrongfully accused of rape and assault in Duluth, Minnesota. In turn, they were beaten and lynched by an angry mob of white citizens. Irene Tusken accused the circus workers of rape, though her doctor could not find any signs of assault or rape after examining her. Articles were printed in the newspaper on the alleged rape and rumors about the incident spread through the town. A mob of somewhere between 5,000 to 10,000 individuals broke into the city jail and beat and hung the accused circus men.
This sad incident is a good example of how Plato was correct in his assumptions. Our textbook examines Plato’s analogy of the cave. “He argues that democracy produces a sort of chaos that makes its citizens lose sight of right and wrong, of beauty and all that is “good.” Not all men have good character” (p.40). This statement goes hand-in-hand with the example of the Duluth lynching and shows just how easily influenced a mob can be to make poor decisions.
I also see public opinion as being manufacture by politicians, media and others. An example I came up with was with tobacco, the Master Settlement Agreement and how states used the money obtained from the MSA, more specifically how North Dakota used the money it obtained.
ReplyDeleteA large portion of the money North Dakota received from the MSA went towards funding water projects, instead of its intended use of helping those who have suffered from tobacco related illnesses. Former Governor Ed Schaefer and current Governor John Hoeven supported using the funds towards water projects and used that to influence North Dakota citizens.
Now, in the recent election, North Dakota citizens have been asked to vote on the Tobacco Use Prevention and Control Program that redirects trust funds in order to help those who have suffered due to tobacco use. Showing a complete flip in public opinion due to the media using stories that appeal to the audience’s emotions and running headlines that show growing support for the measure from groups as a way to influence the public who may not be educated on the topic.
In this way, I agree with Plato. According to our book, “The people know what they want as far as immediate comforts (food, love, recreation) go, but they do not have the cognitive capacity to rule themselves in the most just and effective ways possible” (p. 39). When the MSA was first allotted, the state convinced the people the money should be used to fund water projects and the people agreed. Now, the people are being told the money should go towards in intended use through use of the media.
In reading the responses to the discussion question, those who have answered so far have overwhelmingly agreed with Plato in that the masses are uneducated and therefore should not be trusted to make important decisions. Respondents cited cases were public opinion lead to negative affects that were not foreseen by the public (as with Prohibition) or where public opinion was easily influenced by the leaders in power (as with the use of funds from Master Settlement Agreement).
ReplyDeleteI on the other hand to agree more with Aristotle. In looking at history, it's pretty obvious to see what can happen when public opinion is squelched and one individual is given the power to control the masses. Look at Hitler in Germany, Pol Pot in Cambodia, or Saddam Hussein in Iraq. When public opinion is no longer given consideration, extreme rulers are able to take control with disastrous results.
While I agree with other respondents that the masses tend to be uneducated, I don't see this as necessarily a flaw in the system or a flaw in the masses. As our book argues, there are so many issues and causes in modern society that it would be impossible for every individual to possess sufficient knowledge about all of them. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the masses to become well educated on issues that are important to them and to let their voices be heard on those issues. As our book also says, hindsight is 20/20 and it is easy to look back on situations and claim the masses acted ignorantly while in fact the masses may have been acting in the best way possible given the information they had at the time.
I am torn in the middle between Plato and Aristotles values of public opinion. I tend to lean a little farther towards Plato just because I believe that people are easily influenced by people such as politicans, celebrities, and the media in general. It is so easy to be influenced by others, but in order for public opinion to be the best opinion means that people need to educate themselves through different outlets to get the whole picture.
ReplyDeleteI think todays advertisements are a great example of how Plato's theory is more legit. Celebrities or people of high power appear everywhere in our everyday lives today because companies know that they are influential. Just because someone famous is promoting an item doesn't mean it is the best item, but people will be more likely to think it is if they see a popular face with it. That is why celebrities are chosen to sponsor so many different brands.
It is not exactly fair to other companies that can't afford to pay for well known sponsors, but that is just how the advertising world works. When people like something just because someone famous is supporting it harms public opinion since it may not be the best product.
I have to agree more with Plato's beliefs versus Aristotle's beliefs. Public opinion is made up of the beliefs of the majority and what the media tells us. I believe most Americans are uneducated when it comes to political and social issues.
ReplyDeleteI’m sure you have seen the Jay Leno Show and his ‘Jaywalking’ portion of the show. Jay walks around the streets outside his studio and asks innocent pedestrians and bystanders simple questions about our government and other common knowledge questions. Week after week, the majority of these individuals do not know the answers to these simple questions. When you think about it, these individuals probably voted in the 2008 Election without a well educated vote. Scary.
This supports Plato’s belief that the masses are uneducated. I do not feel that our government and societal issues are too difficult to understand. I feel that Americans do not take the necessary time to really read and understand what is going on in our nation today.
I agree with Plato's assessment of public opinion more than I do Aristotle's. Although I can see it from both sides, I had a much easier time coming up with examples to support Plato's beliefs. There was one example that stood out most in my mind--The 2008 Presidential Election.
ReplyDeleteJust in talking with friends and classmates during the election, I realized that a lot of people my age were voting just to vote--without educating themselves on the important issues and each candidate's beliefs on these issues. People were just voting based off of what either their friends were doing or based on the media.
I talked with a lot of classmates who were basing their votes off of the media, particularly celebrities. People were voting for a certain candidate just because their favorite celebrity endorsed that candidate, or because their favorite TV station endorsed a particular candidate. To me, this example shows how the masses are uneducated and may not be able to be trusted. The fact that some people were voting for a particular candidate just because their friends were or becuase a cool celebrity was supports Plato's views.
I think that public opinion can sometimes be a help and sometimes be a hindrance. In the particular example I discussed, it can definitely be a hindrance because having people vote during the election when they are completely uneducated is not a good thing and it could potentially be something that these people regret in the future.
I personally lean toward Plato's opinion that "members of the public needed to be educated in order to understand and appreciate their government and the laws they lived under" (p. 39). I feel that we may not always possess enough knowledge to fully understand what our government does when it believes it is acting in the citizens' best interest.
ReplyDeleteOn October 26, 2001, shortly after the September 11 terrorist attacks, the USA PATRIOT Act was signed by President George W. Bush. The Act grants the government the right to search a variety of personal records from e-mail to medical records as well as changing restrictions on immigration. In this instance, Plato's view could be argued because the American public of course did not have a full understanding of the preventative measures the U.S. Government felt were necessary.
In the case of the PATRIOT Act, I believe public opinion would have been a hindrance, because no one would want their information and records to be available for search. However, most people would feel that if others were suspected of terrorist activities their records should be available for search. "Fairness" of this Act is certainly a widely debated issue and I don't believe that it is ethical or right for the government to be able to tap into anyone's personal records.
I agree with Aristotle. While Plato's argument has some validity, he is not looking at the broad scope of the world. I believe that everyone should have a voice and only then do we (as a country, group etc) approach fairness in the workings of society.
ReplyDeleteTake for instance the voting process. If we look back in history there was a time that not everyone could vote and during this time decisions were made based on the beliefs and thoughts of rich white men. As more American's gained the right to vote we began to see changes in our government that reflected the broader scope of what American's felt at the time. The voting process is based on public opinion, as the majority rules. Without public opinion we would see a shift from a democracy to a dictatorship. Overall I agree more with Aristotle's thinking than with Plato's because I feel everyone should have a voice and deserves to be heard.
I guess I tend to agree more with Aristotle’s point of view, but I do understand where Plato is coming from. I feel that everyone should be free to have an opinion/voice because what’s right for one person may not be for another. A perfect example of this is Martin Luther King Jr. himself. He stood up for what he believed and helped make the world a better place for those who felt that didn’t have a voice.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time, I found it interesting during the past election to hear why people were voting for the candidate of their choice. Many admitted that they really didn’t know what either candidate stood for nor had the knowledge to understand an important issue like the economy. I’m not saying everyone I talked to had this response, but it seemed like most people were easily swayed by what everyone else was thinking instead of researching these issues for themselves. In conclusion, I feel that public opinion is a very powerful tool that should not be taken lightly. It’s important to understand what the public wants, but it’s also very important to put real thought into what we feel is right/wrong.
Obviously both theories look to support one part of the society that Plato and Aristotle lived in. It definitely helps when a theory is popular, which spreads the theory around to the masses. I would argue that Plato supported the educated, which in Plato's time would have been a select few. Aristotle obviously appealed to the majority of the population at the time.
ReplyDeletePlato argues that public opinion is easily manipulated and changed. Public opinion has been manipulated so that currently everyone believes we are in a huge recession. I believe that our economy may be sagging, but unemployment is currently only 7.2%, which compared to the Great Depression (24.75%) is drastically lower. Right now we are led to believe by the media that this is an extremely tough time economically. I think that we are currently experiencing a lot of scare tactics by the media because it makes good news and sells advertising spots for media outlets. If the economy in Fargo, N.D. is so bad, then why would 21,700 People fill the Fargodome for the AC/DC concert?
Overall I would say that Plato's theory is more effective because it explains why public opinion is controlled by a select few.
I tend to agree more with Aristotle's point of view. I think that the ordinary citizens should have a choice and a voice when it comes to public opinion. I do not believe that the general public is uneducated and unable to make the right decisions, or incapable of understanding the laws.
ReplyDeleteJust a few years ago women were not allowed to vote, therefore the government was made up of people who the wealthy white men wanted to see in office. The women or people of color had no say whatsoever in the world they were living. I do not believe that these women did not understand the laws or were unable to make the right decisions; they were never given the opportunity.
I think Aristotle's point of view is fair because it gives everyone a chance to speak their mind and have a say in what is going on around them instead of just sitting in silence unable to do anything.
My outlook on public opinion falls somewhere between Plato and Aristotle. In many cases, like foreign affairs, I agree with Plato because I feel that government representatives are more equipt to make decisions than the public as a whole. I think that in general, the public are ignorant to our nation's foreign policies and other matters that do not immediately affect them.
ReplyDeleteHowever, when it comes to more domestic matters, I agree with Aristotle. I find it hard to believe that a elderly, wealthy, white man with a Harvard education can empathize with the average American. Sure, the government is elected to represent its constituents effectively, but in many cases, I feel that the general public would have a better understanding of areas where change is needed.
I think both theories have very strong arguments, but I don't see one being above the other.
I agree will Plato's stand on this issue. Although some people in today's society research politics and the laws we abide by, many would not know a single thing about these issues. The majority of the public does not state their own opinion on many matters that affect society, but rather they go along with what the opinion of most others is.
ReplyDeleteAn example of this is how the media and TV can influence much of the public's opinion. While watching Saturday Night Live one of the nights that Tina Fay was playing Sarah Palin, I thought to myself, this could really have an influence on how some people are going to vote in the election. Since Saturday Night Live is comedy, most of the time Sarah Palin was made fun of. I feel as though this show swayed some of the public's opinion on Sarah Palin and the election.
Another example is how P. Diddy and the cast of "Making the Band" could have had an influence on how people voted. Barrack Obama's name was mentioned numerous times on the show. The cast members and P. Diddy himself were telling viewers to vote for Barrack Obama and even wearing t-shirts to influence viewers.
Plato's theory is much more sufficient with today's society. Although there are individuals that have their own opinions on certain matters, the bulk of society sways their opinions to those that are the most popular. In the situation of voting, public opinion is a hindrance.
I like Aristotle's view on public opinion. I don't agree with Plato's argument that an average citizen is not capable of the level of wisdom required for public opinion. In this day and age, citizens are, in general, more educated than they were in Ancient Greece. The majority of people know the basics about their government and its laws. Many of them would probably not know the specifics of advising the government on foreign policy for example, but they know what each part of the government does and the purpose it serves.
ReplyDeleteThe opinions of individual citizens hold more clout if they are presented in an organized manner. I'm sure many people have opinions on certain topics but the only ones that are perceived as legitimate are the ones that have strength in their numbers. Unfortunately, I do believe that public opinion seems to be the opinion of the media and the elite. As a result, even the most organized groups are presented to the general public through the filter of the opinions of journalists and policymakers.
For example, the Bay of Pigs fiasco in the 1960's was executed mainly because of the opinions of John F. Kennedy and the head of the CIA. Public opinion was mostly against the threat of communism but after the failed invasion, the public expressed anti-Kennedy sentiments because he brought America to the brink of war.
Although public opinion is the product of the elite, I think that people should have a say in the things that will affect their lives. Public sentiment should be greatly concerned because anything that is decided will affect the people.
I have to say I am in agreement with Plato’s theory that people cannot always make the decision lacking information on the issue as a whole. In spite of this people need a direction to be guided to avoid crucial mistakes, so by the government or leaders giving this direction it should be a worthy template to follow.
ReplyDeletePublic opinion started giving people a voice to have their opinion heard, but now society has made it into a brain washing tool by which elections are won for reasons like gay marriage and religion.
The media everyday leads us in a way to believe that there is shooting crimes and stabbings almost daily, but really it is just the kind of news people are found to be interested in. The media for example covering Bush was heavily skewed negatively in his latter months because I believe people just don’t think he does anything good, but people like hearing about his shortcomings.
People have in their heads that Bush is totally ineffective as a leader, but that is the image projected by the media after the judgment errors made by his staff. If someone wrote a story on the successes of George W. Bush many I would say wouldn’t give the reading any credibility because the majority believe he screwed up far more then not in his two terms regardless of the circumstances.
I think public opinion is helpful for many facets of life, but when it comes to making a crucial life changing decision its better left to people who are able to look past the surface level information and see what truly is factual.
I agree with Plato's view on public opinion. Sometimes people just aren't informed enough to make a good educated decision about topics or issues.
ReplyDeleteBy living in America, we get this great privilege of being able to vote for our country's leaders and rules. I know many people are talking about the election, but this is also the first topic that came to my mind as well. Many people have talked about the celebrity back of Obama. I agree that in our society these days, what entertainers think is more crucial then what your platform is saying. I don't agree with this, but that is how is goes.
Other then the way people voted for our President this year, any other topic that really made me agree was the case of Measure 1 and 2 on the ballot for our local election. Many people don't look into these measures on ballots and just pick which ever answer is the shortest or something dumb like that. Measures 1 and 2 were very important to higher education and I don't think many student realize things like that.
It is just difficult when our society is voting based on celebrity, who has a cooler name or what ever letter has the shortest answer.
I believe that in today's society, public opinion is important and necessary, therefore I disagree with Plato's view on public opinion. Yes, some may be a little undereducated to understand the full view of some issues, however it is public opinion that makes our democracy possible.
ReplyDeleteIf public opinion were only left to those who were educated and qualifed to form an opnion, then this society wouldn't be what it is today. After all, I'm not sure if this statistic is exactly correct, however I believe I once heard that only 3% of the world either attended college or attends college. Therefore, if one were to base their view on an "educated person" being that of one that is college educated, that number for a public opinion would be quite low.
All in all, I strongly believe that is too difficult to measure who should be qualifed to form a public opinion and if this aspect of our society were to be taken away, our democracy wouldn't survive.