The World Outside and the Pictures in our Heads
Media and its Ways, II (Public Opinion)
This post reflects on an important concept that in theory democracies must consider- Public Opinion.Â
Please find the earlier two posts related to this series at the following links
1.    Media and Its ways
2.    Media and Its Ways (follow up)
Media and its Ways, II (Public Opinion)
_________
The World Outside and the Pictures in our Heads
This famous phrase from Walter Lippman’s seminal book ‘Public Opinion’ (1922), was one of the first things I heard in Media Studies seminar.
It is said that title of the book was purposely kept bland-–‘Public Opinion’, because the contents of the book were explosive. Lippman, based on his work as a propagandist in the first world war, had challenged the core concept of democracy.
That of the ‘omnicompetent public’.
Democracy, Objectivity, Media Coverage and Rational Choices
Democracy is hailed as the system that best supports human freedom on all levels.
Ideally, democracies provide an environment for individual freedom and development. In theory, in a democracy people are the ultimate ‘decision makers’, individuality is honored; collectivity is not imposed.
However, in a democracy the media-public relationship is sacrosanct.
The citizens’ right to know is honored in two ways.
By providingÂ
1.    all the relevant information regarding an issue.
2.    the information objectively- without wrapping it in an opinion.In theory.
The cornerstone of ‘demo’-cracy is the belief that humans are rational beings.
If the public is provided with all the ‘relevant information’, ‘objectively’ public will by virtue of its rationality, choose ‘right and just’.
However, Lippman argued that reality of life is too complex for human beings to understand. ‘Human beings live partly in real world and partly in a fabricated world of their imagination’, said Lippman.
There are several cognitive limitations people face in understanding a (their) political and cultural environment.
To counter those limitations people rely on pre-existing ideas and stereotypes.
Media fills in with information, sometimes reinforcing the prior beliefs sometimes questioning both present and prior beliefs. The authority of what is true and real, still remains too complex to be covered in the time slots allowed to the information.
Ideally, democracies provide an environment for individual freedom and development. In theory, in a democracy people are ultimate ‘decision makers’, individuality is honored; collectivity is not imposed.
Which World is Real?
Our lived reality, the news or the world out there?
Public Opinion, begins with a story from 1914, about a few German, French and British citizens living on an island. They live as one happy family.
Their only source of the world-news arrives once in two months. The islanders know that the news they get is always two months old.
Yet, it is awaited because gives the islanders something to talk about.
When, one morning, the islanders find out that the first world war has broken out, they are confused. They had been friends with their ‘enemies’ all of the six weeks, that the war had been going on.
How to behave with these ‘new enemies’ who were friends until a few hours ago?
Which world was real?
The one in their lived reality that said, ‘We live like a family on this island? Or the one that told them that their countrymen, thousands of miles away were fighting each other?
Which image were they to base their behavior on, now?
What is fabrication and what is real?
All because far away from home, media brought them a two-month-old news.
The cornerstone of ‘demo’-cracy is the belief that humans are rational beings.
If the public is provided with all the ‘relevant information’, ‘objectively’ public will by virtue of its rationality, choose ‘right and just’.
Consider today’s world –where news delivery does not take six-weeks but 60 seconds! Then consider the access to virtual reality and multiple echo-chambers that we already live in!
Add to that the speed with which we, as ordinary people, not working for any media organization, can share the information- whether or not it has been verified.
WhatsApp, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram….
How much space and time do we have for independent research? How likely is that we fall back on opinions, rather than research-based rationality?
We interpret the outside world in the context of images in our heads.
Where does that leave the public opinion? Can the public opinion be fair or accurate enough to be the basis of major national level decisions?
Presently, we live a much ‘mediatized’ life than a century ago when Public Opinion was published. What Lippman highlighted in 1922, still applies.
We do not see first and define; we define first and then see. We define according to stereotypes imposed by our cultures although they are limiting, we rely on them, they are useful tools and also because we have internalized them, we take them for granted.
(Preface to Public Opinion)
History is a proof. Over beliefs, libraries were burnt, nature worshipping women were hung, and many peoples were subjected to sub-human treatment.
In simple words, -a difficulty to digest different ways of living, lead people to believe that ‘morality does not need to be objective but can be politics driven.’
Many decisions are a based-on what Lippman calls a pseudo environment. An incomplete image of the world based on our understanding.
In that case, can we rely on public opinion? Should we?
Us in a Democracy:
How do we see democracies now?
Do all the opinions get heard in a democracy?
Let’s narrow the circumference of the circle we are considering to our limited lives. How often do we listen to opinions opposite from ours? How often are the religious leaders praising ‘other religions?’ How often are we taught to reflect on faults of ‘our’ own?
We are never going to live in a world that John Lennon Imagined for us.
A world without borders may not even be advisable.
Primarily because it will require two major changes,
1. Structural changes
2. Changes in human consciousness.
Several structural changes pertinent to the rights and powers that a state bestows on citizens will be required before we can think of a ‘borderless world.’Â
Changes in human consciousness will have to precede any structural changes in the way any State functions.
Pre-requisites in the continuum of democracy
There are several prerequisites before a country should embark upon the concept of democracy. It is said that widespread literacy and near equitable wealth are perquisites for democracy. For that reason India was laughed at when they chose the democratic route. Not only did it have a low literacy rate, the gulf between rich and poor was immense. Add to that the unmatched diversity in language, religion and political philosophy of various parties.
Despite being the largest democracy, the country still has a communist party that contests election every year.
We are never going to live in a world that John Lennon Imagined for us.
Although an ideal, democracy is a continuum.
Meaning gradations of democracy exist before we get what is called a ‘full functioning democracy.’ Fledgling democracies although autocratic in parts, are nevertheless, committed to the concept of ongoing work to arrive at a stable democracy. Although, we never quite arrive at a full functioning democracy.
Alex De Tocqueville, in his most famous book, ‘Democracy in America’ talks of the concept both with awe and trepidation. It is an ideal concept, with problematic seeds embedded in the freedoms it promises.
Like any system.
Reminds me of a quote from Turgenev
‘The people who bind themselves to systems are those who are unable to encompass the whole truth and try to catch it by the tail; a system is like the tail of truth, but truth is like a lizard; it leaves its tail in your fingers and runs away knowing full well that it will grow a new one in a twinkling.’ 1
Ivan Turgenev
Self-reflection, a presumed attribute
Democracies rely on the majority because of an ideal but flawed assumption: every person has the same level of thinking ability. Or at least that the collective of different levels of thinking ability will result in a sound, rational decision, which can be beneficial to the collective.
An important aspect of democracy is ‘self-reflection.’
Whether we want to acknowledge it or not, democracies require a focus on a better, fuller understanding of human consciousness. Our mind, its short comings and its impact on perception. Our desire to belong to one group vs. the other. In many ways, our stubbornness and inability to see the good in what we consider the ‘other.’
In general countries try to mainstream one culture, which makes a country easier to function. One main language, one main religion, one economic philosophy.Â
Speaking to a friend who writes about governments and democracies, we discussed how democracy in India is viewed, ‘Autocratic.’
Although this requires a separate blog post, I will quote a person from Japan I spoke with on a plane, ‘India is unique, it has many languages, cultures, religions. It cannot be compared to mono-religion, mono-lingual countries.’ The young man has spent two years studying in India, and spoke Hindi with elegance.
That is why it is interesting to see how the western media covers this rising country (India), as it leaves behind developed countries, including its colonisers in many ways (India is ahead of British economy as of September 2022.)
However, most European countries, like India today run media campaigns on diversity and unity. I have seen them in India, the US, the UK and now in Sweden.
‘India is unique, it has many languages, cultures, religions. It cannot be compared to mono-religion, mono-lingual countries.’
However, there is a stark difference. Indians are all one race, even though there can be 10 shades of difference. Colonisation, invasion and migrations have been happening since long before the Christian era.
Therefore, the diversity in India is in thought, language, the way people dress. Not everyone dresses in a western manner and it is common to see people donne their traditional attire more often than not. That traditional attire changes every few hundred miles. As does how people speak and what they eat.
Yet, a unity remains, a continuity of culture. The communities have interwoven ways of life. Hindus have incorporated muslim beliefs and vice-versa. Hindus, Jains, Buddhists and Sikhs (despite recent attempt to create divisions with Sikhism) acknowledge overlapping beliefs.
Nevertheless, the unity campaigns are important in a country that houses all major religions of the world. As they are going to be increasingly important in Europe, US and UK, as the population becomes mixed.
As the demography changes, so will the public opinion.
Whether we want to acknowledge it or not, democracies require a focus on a better, fuller understanding of human consciousness. Our mind, its short comings and its impact on perception. Our desire to belong to one group vs. the other. In many ways, our stubbornness and inability to see the good in what we consider the ‘other.’
Media and Public Opinion
Add to all this a layer of Media content. We never get direct information.
News is mediatized. It always was. Therefore, what we get is a version of the news creators. As discussed in the post titled Pinked by Technology, different media focus on different aspects. Television is sound and image oriented. Newspapers are word oriented.
However, the internet combines all forms of media.
Democracies rely on the majority because of an ideal but flawed assumption: every person has the same level of thinking ability. Or at least that the collective of different levels of thinking ability will result in a sound, rational decision, which can be beneficial to the collective.
From his experience of working as a propagandist, Lippman knew that information that reaches the public is already manipulated—with or without intention.
It is the nature of the media business.
Where does that leave public opinion, and how much should it count for in democracies?
There are no clear answers in this case. However, it is important to discuss these issues from time to time.
One way to reduce this information gap is for people to participate more in community meetings, to know their neighbours, to engage more in local schools and other public organisations. That is a way for the public to counter/verify information they receive in the media with their lived reality.
At the core of it all is our human consciousness and the availability of time, which is a scarce commodity, especially in developed, high-tech democracies.
To be continued ——-
Further Readings and Links
Media and Its Ways: Part 1:
Media and its Ways
Note: This post has been divided into two (as of now) posts, for the ease of reading. Since the post discusses some theories and concepts, the readers will benefit by reading it in instalments. __________ Let us circle back to (part of) the theme of this blog.
References and Suggested Readings
https://culturalapparatus.wordpress.com/walter-lippmann-and-the-stereotype-the-world-outside-and-the-pictures-in-our-heads/
Lippmann, W. (2017). Public opinion. Routledge.
Must admit that I heard this quote in my all time favourite TV show, The Northern Exposure. My research on this is limited. On the net, I found the source of the quote as, ‘Reported as being said by IVAN TURGENEV to LEO TOLSTOY at the Stepping Stones to Freedom International Conclave, St. Petersburg, Russia in 1856. I have repeated this quote so many times, in classes and conferences. It is important to not get too caught up in one kind of system. Every system carries seeds of its destruction within.