Finding Our Voice

Communication

Let’s pretend that you have an opportunity to speak on any subject you want, to any audience that you want. You will be given the chance that most people crave. The chance to be heard.

 The only stipulation is that I get to control the conditions when you speak. The conditions are that you will only be given 2 minutes to speak while I, as moderator, will do my best to interrupt you and put you off. You will be standing in the middle of a vast auditorium filled with people and you will be standing on the top of a 30 foot tower, without guardrails, that you will access via a rickety ladder. You will also be standing naked in a box full of poisonous snakes. Now……..who’s first?

 The important thing to remember is that through all of this I can truthfully claim that I created an opportunity to allow you to express your views. I will neglect to point out the fact that I did everything in my power to make it difficult for you. In truth, I have really only given the illusion of listening to your views while in reality manipulating you out of the picture. 

  How many times have you seen similar tactics being used at political events? How many of you have desperately wanted to overcome your fear of public speaking, which is shared by a large percentage of the population, and gone up to that microphone. How much of the evenings time was actually devoted to giving the audience a chance to participate? How many of you have being at the microphone and left feeling empty and cheated because you were only given a few minutes to deal with a complex issue, and were then subject to the usual evasive tactics of a polished public speaker? Did your target say that he would get back to you? Did he? Have you ever noticed that the microphones are often placed on stairs in auditoriums? How does this work for people in wheelchairs? 

 Politics is about tactics, and often these tactics are about not being challenged. Nowhere are the tactics more refined than in creating the illusion of public input. The public, struggling with a process that is geared toward stifling any real debate, more often than not, does not get involved out of frustration. Dialogue cannot be accomplished with the few minutes we’re given at the microphone so you must tailor your few moments to a one shot opportunity that has little chance of success.   The usual excuse for limiting a person’s time at the mike is that the organizers want to hear from as many people as possible, but you end up with a bunch of disjointed questions that cannot have any impact. The one time that a voter can publically challenge any politician is treated as an inconvenient afterthought by the political process. The same can be said about the E-mails and tweets that have become a new official method of gauging public mood and concerns. The moderator involved in a national debate will pick a handful of E-mails to make public and the author will feel a momentary thrill that his or her words were made public. The thrill disappears when you realise that your words, in the end, had no real effect. The moderator will only use one E-mail per issue, which means minor issues get the same attention as important issues. The behind the scenes political junkies decide what is important and what is not.

 The newspapers could be a great way to create a vehicle for public debate, but the average media personality has the attention span of a puppy in a field of butterflies.  Whenever the media talks of wanting to hear your opinion, they really mean they want you to believe that your opinion matters to them. The illusion of the public’s friend translates into an audience for advertising. Advertising means money and for all the facade of high ideals, smiling faces and carefully orchestrated concern, the media is a corporation that exists for money. We talk of political suits and corporate suits, but we need to start recognising the media suits.

 The words “We want to hear from you”, means “We want you to believe we’re listening because it gives us credibility we don’t deserve”.  Read any editorial then look at the comment section below it. Every thoughtful comment is drowned out by a flood of mindless crap from people who treat the comment section as a place to bicker between themselves. No politician, member of the media or the vast majority of the reading public is actually paying attention to this garbage. Only the seriously disillusioned could believe for a moment that the media is reading the comment section. The entire purpose of any comment section is to vent energy away from the political system. Politicians don’t have to deal with the public, just the media, and the media can be bought.  

 All this means is that the process for communication is completely flawed when it comes to allowing the public a voice in our own politics. This flawed process is not only stopping public participation, but more importantly, it’s creating a sense of disillusionment in the whole system. Of course, the disillusionment is intentional because without public input the media and the political junkies can eagerly ease in to fill the void.  We end up with a situation where the politicians and the media power brokers hijack elections while the voter is treated as an onlooker.

 We can’t keep expecting miracles from voters who are trying to work with a flawed system. If voters are stumbling over obstacles, it’s no longer acceptable to berate their inability to overcome those obstacles. There has to be the understanding that the unlimited potential of any society can be stifled by its inability to communicate its will to its politicians.

Mark Nickel