I got vox popped once and gave a detailed two minute long answer, which alarmed the journalist and obviously didn’t appear in the news— they’d have lost all their viewers, understandably. But it made me more sympathetic to the public.
I do think the fact that nobody reads the papers genuinely hasn’t seeped through, though. I think in that case there’s possibly a Kuhnian thing going on?
The Older People Who Know How Things Are Done need legacy media to matter as much as it once did, because otherwise their knowledge of How The World Really Is won’t actually work and their grip on power becomes fragile. I think the whole Starmer story makes sense through a Kuhnian lens
Interesting article. The media in particular like to portray themselves as “the voice of the people”, which allows them unjustified influence over politicians, who are generally even more out of touch with ordinary people than the media are.
Where we have a media which is so skewed and biased towards one viewpoint, this has given them undue influence over the years. However, the growing public scepticism about journalists, and the reduced circulation of legacy media, has resulted in a decrease in this influence. However, it is unclear what will replace this influence - hopefully, not X.
The curious part about all this is that politicians are disproportionately from "opinion-making" roles, and over-emphasise the importance of managing perception versus actual execution. So you'd think that this issue would be their wheelhouse, unless it's purely that opinion-formers are generally deluded about the extent to which they form opinions, as opposed to getting people to believe that they do so.
Wasn't there a poll in the macromedia days that had politicians thinking their voters were 20 points more conservative than they actually were? I may be remembering wrong...
I got vox popped once and gave a detailed two minute long answer, which alarmed the journalist and obviously didn’t appear in the news— they’d have lost all their viewers, understandably. But it made me more sympathetic to the public.
I do think the fact that nobody reads the papers genuinely hasn’t seeped through, though. I think in that case there’s possibly a Kuhnian thing going on?
The Older People Who Know How Things Are Done need legacy media to matter as much as it once did, because otherwise their knowledge of How The World Really Is won’t actually work and their grip on power becomes fragile. I think the whole Starmer story makes sense through a Kuhnian lens
As a legacy media reader of the FT and Observer I count myself a well informed dinasaur
Interesting article. The media in particular like to portray themselves as “the voice of the people”, which allows them unjustified influence over politicians, who are generally even more out of touch with ordinary people than the media are.
Where we have a media which is so skewed and biased towards one viewpoint, this has given them undue influence over the years. However, the growing public scepticism about journalists, and the reduced circulation of legacy media, has resulted in a decrease in this influence. However, it is unclear what will replace this influence - hopefully, not X.
The curious part about all this is that politicians are disproportionately from "opinion-making" roles, and over-emphasise the importance of managing perception versus actual execution. So you'd think that this issue would be their wheelhouse, unless it's purely that opinion-formers are generally deluded about the extent to which they form opinions, as opposed to getting people to believe that they do so.
Wasn't there a poll in the macromedia days that had politicians thinking their voters were 20 points more conservative than they actually were? I may be remembering wrong...
Vox pops keep local BBC and ITV news tottering on