|
My wife and I are reading it together. We've only gotten through the introduction, though. It seems that after every sentence I feel compelled to make some kind of comment echoing what he's saying.
I thought the crux of the book was summed up on pages 15 and 16. He goes through the numerous complaints that people have about the politics of today- that it's excessively partisan, that people are apathetic and don't vote, that special interests are too influential, that politicians are all image and no substance and manipulative.
He sums it all up with this:
"There are grains of truth in all of these concerns. I have come to believe, however, that these perceived causes are actually symptoms of a much deeper crisis.
"The present threat is not based on conflicting ideas about America's basic principles. It is based on several serious problems that stem from the dramatic and fundamental change in the way we communicate among ourselves <emphasis added>. Our challenge now is to understand that change and see those problems for what they are.
"Consider the rules by which our present public forum now operates and how different they are from the norms our Founders knew during the age of print. Today's massive flows of information are largely in only one direction. The world of television makes it virtually impossible for individuals to take part in what passes for a national conversation.
"Individuals receive, but they cannot send. They absorb, but they cannot share. They hear, but they do not speak. They see constant motion, but they do not move themselves. The 'well-informed citizenry' is in danger of becoming the 'well-assumed audience.'"
-------------------------
The idea behind democracy was and is that the government is supposed to belong to the people. The people, further, have to understand the responsibility that goes along with that power. But today's citizenry- barring the Internet- is simply powerless to interact meaningfully with the mainstream media holding the debate on today's political issues. As Gore said, it is a "one-way" path of communication- and it is, apparently, supposed to be sufficient to support a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. But it isn't. There has to be more than that, especially when the mainstream medium of television has become so corrupted by corporatism.
|