You know it's a problem, but do they?
August 23, 2022 2:04 PM Subscribe
"We find a form of pluralistic ignorance that we describe as a false social reality: a near universal perception of public opinion that is the opposite of true public sentiment. Specifically, 80–90% of Americans underestimate the prevalence of support for major climate change mitigation policies and climate concern. While 66–80% Americans support these policies, Americans estimate the prevalence to only be between 37–43% on average. Thus, supporters of climate policies outnumber opponents two to one, while Americans falsely perceive nearly the opposite to be true." An article on how what we believe others believe, can encourage inaction.
Same situation with Covid protections: The majority of Americans support either continuous mask mandates or at least mask mandates that kick in when cases are high (also by about two to one), but somehow the framing in the media is that people aren't willing to do anything.
posted by ssg at 2:19 PM on August 23, 2022 [10 favorites]
posted by ssg at 2:19 PM on August 23, 2022 [10 favorites]
A similar effect was observed in the 1980s-90s with drug prohibition, where support for the excesses of the Drug War was very thin on the ground, but this was obscured by the unanimity with which various elites talked Zero Tolerance and Just Say No.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 2:28 PM on August 23, 2022 [7 favorites]
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 2:28 PM on August 23, 2022 [7 favorites]
I guess sometimes the majority really is (relatively) silent.
posted by The Underpants Monster at 2:57 PM on August 23, 2022 [1 favorite]
posted by The Underpants Monster at 2:57 PM on August 23, 2022 [1 favorite]
There are lots of other things like this. When asked to estimate the portion of the federal budget dedicated to foreign aid, the average is generally around 20 percent (when it is well under 1 percent)
posted by rockindata at 3:08 PM on August 23, 2022 [4 favorites]
posted by rockindata at 3:08 PM on August 23, 2022 [4 favorites]
Same situation with Roe v. Wade. Another version of "what the people want is not what those in charge want." We are all trapped on their sinking ship.
posted by tiny frying pan at 4:15 PM on August 23, 2022 [7 favorites]
posted by tiny frying pan at 4:15 PM on August 23, 2022 [7 favorites]
Yes, there’s all kinds of polling like this, but when people actually vote for referendums, let alone candidates, the outcomes are usually not what you’d anticipate based on issue polling. The questions are broad enough that the respondents envision some vague kind of gun control or environmental regulation or abortion regulation that they approve of. When faced with a decision on an actual specific law, they find reasons to oppose it.
E.g., Maine voters reject transmission line that would bring clean energy to Mass.
E.g. Voters Say They Want Gun Control. Their Votes Say Something Different.
E.g. this is pre-Dobbs, but
A majority of Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, but many are open to restrictions. In that poll, only 19 percent of respondents favor abortion that is “legal in all cases, no exceptions”, the status quo under Roe.
It’s not so much that we are ignorant of what our fellow citizens believe. It’s that our fellow citizens don’t behave or vote in a way that’s consistent with their stated beliefs, and we can all see that. It’s not a false perception. These issue polls are no doubt useful politically but the reality is more nuanced.
posted by chrchr at 4:37 PM on August 23, 2022 [14 favorites]
E.g., Maine voters reject transmission line that would bring clean energy to Mass.
E.g. Voters Say They Want Gun Control. Their Votes Say Something Different.
E.g. this is pre-Dobbs, but
A majority of Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, but many are open to restrictions. In that poll, only 19 percent of respondents favor abortion that is “legal in all cases, no exceptions”, the status quo under Roe.
It’s not so much that we are ignorant of what our fellow citizens believe. It’s that our fellow citizens don’t behave or vote in a way that’s consistent with their stated beliefs, and we can all see that. It’s not a false perception. These issue polls are no doubt useful politically but the reality is more nuanced.
posted by chrchr at 4:37 PM on August 23, 2022 [14 favorites]
Uhhhh lots of polls disagree. That 19% sounds crazy inaccurate.
Majority of Public Disapproves of Supreme Court’s Decision To Overturn Roe v. Wade
62% of Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, little changed since before the court’s decision
posted by tiny frying pan at 4:49 PM on August 23, 2022
Majority of Public Disapproves of Supreme Court’s Decision To Overturn Roe v. Wade
62% of Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, little changed since before the court’s decision
posted by tiny frying pan at 4:49 PM on August 23, 2022
Link shoves you halfway down the page - I put the headline in the link title.
posted by tiny frying pan at 4:51 PM on August 23, 2022
posted by tiny frying pan at 4:51 PM on August 23, 2022
Also I cannot with the NY Times saying no one wants gun control. They are such ultra conservative assholes I believe them maybe one iota over Fox News. But all of this is a derail, anyway, apologies.
posted by tiny frying pan at 5:06 PM on August 23, 2022 [1 favorite]
posted by tiny frying pan at 5:06 PM on August 23, 2022 [1 favorite]
You just cited the exact same abortion poll. Yes, 62% say legal in all or most cases, but it’s 19% all and 43% “most”, i.e. in favor of some restrictions on abortion.
Yes, the ultra conservative New York Times of course, but what it cites are modest gun control referendums going down to defeat in Maine and narrowly passing in Washington and California.
posted by chrchr at 5:12 PM on August 23, 2022 [2 favorites]
Yes, the ultra conservative New York Times of course, but what it cites are modest gun control referendums going down to defeat in Maine and narrowly passing in Washington and California.
posted by chrchr at 5:12 PM on August 23, 2022 [2 favorites]
The part that is almost universally excluded from these kinds of polls are the followup:".... and would you vote against a candidate who disagrees with you on this issue?"
This is where the answer rapidly turns to no. Their claimed beliefs do not directly correlate to their voting choices.
posted by tclark at 5:17 PM on August 23, 2022 [2 favorites]
This is where the answer rapidly turns to no. Their claimed beliefs do not directly correlate to their voting choices.
posted by tclark at 5:17 PM on August 23, 2022 [2 favorites]
In that poll, only 19 percent of respondents favor abortion that is “legal in all cases, no exceptions”, the status quo under Roe.
No, under Roe, third-trimester abortions were limited to certain conditions.
posted by LindsayIrene at 5:25 PM on August 23, 2022 [5 favorites]
No, under Roe, third-trimester abortions were limited to certain conditions.
posted by LindsayIrene at 5:25 PM on August 23, 2022 [5 favorites]
E.g., Maine voters reject transmission line that would bring clean energy to Mass.
But isn't this an example of an artificially false dichotomy? It's my understanding that this plan had flaws, was approved by an asshole Trumpist governor who has since been sent packing, was a bit of a sweetheart deal to begin with, and pitted one state against another when it comes to benefits vs. impacts.
As voters we're only given an up or down choice, and the deal couldn't be renegotiated unless it was rejected. It seems very reductive to conclude that people just don't want clean energy. Don't get me wrong. There have totally been times when bad actors have convinced people to reject something on the vague promise that something better could replace it.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 6:04 PM on August 23, 2022 [8 favorites]
But isn't this an example of an artificially false dichotomy? It's my understanding that this plan had flaws, was approved by an asshole Trumpist governor who has since been sent packing, was a bit of a sweetheart deal to begin with, and pitted one state against another when it comes to benefits vs. impacts.
As voters we're only given an up or down choice, and the deal couldn't be renegotiated unless it was rejected. It seems very reductive to conclude that people just don't want clean energy. Don't get me wrong. There have totally been times when bad actors have convinced people to reject something on the vague promise that something better could replace it.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 6:04 PM on August 23, 2022 [8 favorites]
My googlefu is completely failing me on this, but I've read studies that in general, regardless of the issue, people think that their neighbors are more conservative than they actually are. (Here's one example but I can't find the original study and it's not the one I remember reading anyway which was about perceptions of the public at large.)
posted by joannemerriam at 6:38 PM on August 23, 2022
posted by joannemerriam at 6:38 PM on August 23, 2022
I find this article both interesting and encouraging.
For one thing, it's encouraging to learn that so many more Americans are aware of the peril of climate change than I had thought. It's depressing to think that a majority of your nation is willfully, dangerously opposed to understanding the existential danger of what's happening. And it gives me hope to think about this in the context of one acquaintance I've been talking with lately - a quite conservative older gentleman who watches Fox News but is not full-on Fox, who probably never has and never would vote for the previous president; this person is aware of the threat of climate change and gets quiet and distressed when talking about the drop in water levels in Lake Mead, which he's seen with his own eyes.
It's also most interesting to learn that this phenomenon is seen in other countries, too: "with representative samples from US, China, and Australia showing that although most in each country believe in man-made climate change, people underestimate the extent to which their fellow citizens do."
But mostly it gives me hope, and encourages me to action, because it suggests that the task ahead is not QUITE as terrifyingly daunting as I thought: I don't have to convince everybody that the climate emergency is real and devastating; I just have to convince them to VOTE, and vote for offices other than just president.
At the end, they note that
Thank you so much for posting this, mittens - I am always most grateful for information that encourages me to be more vocal and more active in making the world a better place. Also: SCIENCE!
posted by kristi at 6:43 PM on August 23, 2022 [6 favorites]
For one thing, it's encouraging to learn that so many more Americans are aware of the peril of climate change than I had thought. It's depressing to think that a majority of your nation is willfully, dangerously opposed to understanding the existential danger of what's happening. And it gives me hope to think about this in the context of one acquaintance I've been talking with lately - a quite conservative older gentleman who watches Fox News but is not full-on Fox, who probably never has and never would vote for the previous president; this person is aware of the threat of climate change and gets quiet and distressed when talking about the drop in water levels in Lake Mead, which he's seen with his own eyes.
It's also most interesting to learn that this phenomenon is seen in other countries, too: "with representative samples from US, China, and Australia showing that although most in each country believe in man-made climate change, people underestimate the extent to which their fellow citizens do."
But mostly it gives me hope, and encourages me to action, because it suggests that the task ahead is not QUITE as terrifyingly daunting as I thought: I don't have to convince everybody that the climate emergency is real and devastating; I just have to convince them to VOTE, and vote for offices other than just president.
At the end, they note that
misperceptions have been addressed by interventions in a variety of domains, such as those aimed at increasing perceptions of tax compliance, reducing perceptions of heavy drinking on college campuses18, and reducing perceptions of that school bullying is approved of. Our work suggests the importance of developing a similar intervention in the climate policy context to correct pluralistic ignorance and help empower efforts to pass transformative climate policies.The more we understand about how many of our neighbors support significant action, the better chance we'll have of organizing, influencing our representatives to act quickly (they probably have the same misperceptions we have), and recalibrating the conversation to reflect a much more widely shared sense of urgency.
Thank you so much for posting this, mittens - I am always most grateful for information that encourages me to be more vocal and more active in making the world a better place. Also: SCIENCE!
posted by kristi at 6:43 PM on August 23, 2022 [6 favorites]
Heh. I was having dinner with father recently, who asserted that despite the heatwaves and floods fewer and fewer people believed in global warming than ever. After he doubled down on the claim did the obnoxious pull-out-the-phone-and-Google and had the smug satisfaction of instantly finding Gallup has historical polling data handy showing a steady increase in time.
The conversation shifted to political division, which yes is arguably worse than ever. In the early 2000s Republicans had to at least pretend to care--anyone remember Bush II's hydrogen economy thing?
I need to repeat what a big step forward the Inflation Reduction Act is though! It's a very good climate bill.
posted by mark k at 7:58 PM on August 23, 2022
The conversation shifted to political division, which yes is arguably worse than ever. In the early 2000s Republicans had to at least pretend to care--anyone remember Bush II's hydrogen economy thing?
I need to repeat what a big step forward the Inflation Reduction Act is though! It's a very good climate bill.
posted by mark k at 7:58 PM on August 23, 2022
I want to see a breakdown by policy proposal.
A breakdown of the polling you mean?
One of the problems with this stuff is of course that the details are easier to nit-pick away than the high level goal. So that's legitimate. But the disconnect between perception and reality is on the high level goal, so I think the point still stands.
posted by mark k at 8:21 PM on August 23, 2022
A breakdown of the polling you mean?
One of the problems with this stuff is of course that the details are easier to nit-pick away than the high level goal. So that's legitimate. But the disconnect between perception and reality is on the high level goal, so I think the point still stands.
posted by mark k at 8:21 PM on August 23, 2022
Yes. I want to know what people would like to take place for the sake of the environment, what they’d be willing to back.
posted by Selena777 at 8:56 PM on August 23, 2022
posted by Selena777 at 8:56 PM on August 23, 2022
Sadly, it's not about the proportion of people with a given belief, but the number of senators representing people with that belief.
posted by kaibutsu at 9:13 PM on August 23, 2022 [5 favorites]
posted by kaibutsu at 9:13 PM on August 23, 2022 [5 favorites]
Selena777, the policies they asked about were "a carbon tax, a 100-percent renewable energy man- date for electricity, siting renewables on public lands, and a Green New Deal (GND);" the wording is shown at the top of page 8, and they say it matches almost exactly the wording used to gather the original polling data, which was done by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication (YPCCC). I'm not positive this page on Yale Climate Opinion Maps shows that actual data, but it seems likely.
posted by kristi at 9:16 PM on August 23, 2022 [1 favorite]
posted by kristi at 9:16 PM on August 23, 2022 [1 favorite]
True, kaibutsu; but the study shows that across states, even Republican-leaning states, the number of people who actually are in favor of action on climate change is significantly higher than we believe. If those senators are hearing from their flooded-out, crops-dried-up constituents, they may feel the pressure to vote for significant action - and the more we, as a nation, become aware how many people in red states are worried about their crops and their cattle and their homes and their electrical grid, the sooner we can get enough votes for action beyond the bill the Democrats just passed.
And, as with abortion, the climate emergency has become bad enough recently enough that some of the many independent voters might be fed up with Republicans who vote against green investment. If I'm reading this Ballotpedia page on the 2020 Senate elections correctly, out of about 35 races, 6 had a margin of less than 4%. Some states are REALLY close. And states can shift suddenly - I don't think anyone thought Georgia was in play until very recently, but - Sen. Ossoff won by almost 8 points and Sen. Warnock won by almost 14? And they were the first Democrats elected to the Senate from Georgia since 2000, I think?
The current Senate is an unrepresentative mess. But if we get enough of the climate action supporters who've been staying home to get out and vote, and get the many many unaffiliated voters to vote for the party that's just passed major climate legislation, it can become more representative and more prepared to pass the legislation we need.
posted by kristi at 9:39 PM on August 23, 2022 [1 favorite]
And, as with abortion, the climate emergency has become bad enough recently enough that some of the many independent voters might be fed up with Republicans who vote against green investment. If I'm reading this Ballotpedia page on the 2020 Senate elections correctly, out of about 35 races, 6 had a margin of less than 4%. Some states are REALLY close. And states can shift suddenly - I don't think anyone thought Georgia was in play until very recently, but - Sen. Ossoff won by almost 8 points and Sen. Warnock won by almost 14? And they were the first Democrats elected to the Senate from Georgia since 2000, I think?
The current Senate is an unrepresentative mess. But if we get enough of the climate action supporters who've been staying home to get out and vote, and get the many many unaffiliated voters to vote for the party that's just passed major climate legislation, it can become more representative and more prepared to pass the legislation we need.
posted by kristi at 9:39 PM on August 23, 2022 [1 favorite]
This is a basic lesson of having Corporate -owned media, manufactured consent 101.
That people are never allowed to see what they think, collectively. especially by political collectivities---most media stories like this are about national opinion polls, but the USA has a federalist state government system which makes national polls the least useful.
You would want this information on polling broken down by ward and precinct, but the media rarely does that.
The people that own and run the news organizations and social media are as much to blame as Senators.
My organization was educating our followers on climate change and the companies liable on Facebook, and Facebook suppressed the messages. Cable news doesn't run climate stories, I feel this has been well documented.
Zero surprise then, that most people don't know what other people think about climate policy, or even what even passed in the "climate bill."
Just like no one in the country knows that "Carbon Capture" means "drilling and building pipelines offshore Port Arthur, Texas." The context is always missing.
posted by eustatic at 9:48 PM on August 23, 2022 [7 favorites]
That people are never allowed to see what they think, collectively. especially by political collectivities---most media stories like this are about national opinion polls, but the USA has a federalist state government system which makes national polls the least useful.
You would want this information on polling broken down by ward and precinct, but the media rarely does that.
The people that own and run the news organizations and social media are as much to blame as Senators.
My organization was educating our followers on climate change and the companies liable on Facebook, and Facebook suppressed the messages. Cable news doesn't run climate stories, I feel this has been well documented.
Zero surprise then, that most people don't know what other people think about climate policy, or even what even passed in the "climate bill."
Just like no one in the country knows that "Carbon Capture" means "drilling and building pipelines offshore Port Arthur, Texas." The context is always missing.
posted by eustatic at 9:48 PM on August 23, 2022 [7 favorites]
“legal in all cases, no exceptions”, the status quo under Roe.
that was not the status quo under Roe
but actually it is my impression that polling on abortion and Roe shows a certain amount of status quo bias (or just political caution) - as you say people actually have a whole range of opinions that don’t necessarily fit exactly with the parameters of Roe but generally a majority seemed to think that, whatever the status quo was, it was close enough to acceptable that they didn’t want to see it change. And the polls I’ve seen seem to indicate that this feeling has probably strengthened since it did change.
posted by atoxyl at 10:29 PM on August 23, 2022 [2 favorites]
that was not the status quo under Roe
but actually it is my impression that polling on abortion and Roe shows a certain amount of status quo bias (or just political caution) - as you say people actually have a whole range of opinions that don’t necessarily fit exactly with the parameters of Roe but generally a majority seemed to think that, whatever the status quo was, it was close enough to acceptable that they didn’t want to see it change. And the polls I’ve seen seem to indicate that this feeling has probably strengthened since it did change.
posted by atoxyl at 10:29 PM on August 23, 2022 [2 favorites]
You would want this information on polling broken down by ward and precinct, but the media rarely does that.
Possibly because it doesn't exist? The average precinct size in the US is around 1000 voters, which is coincidentally about the size you need for a poll to be ±3%. I have a lot of media complaints but this one is not on them.
posted by mark k at 10:44 PM on August 23, 2022 [2 favorites]
Possibly because it doesn't exist? The average precinct size in the US is around 1000 voters, which is coincidentally about the size you need for a poll to be ±3%. I have a lot of media complaints but this one is not on them.
posted by mark k at 10:44 PM on August 23, 2022 [2 favorites]
How the hell should I answer a poll asking me if the country is on the right track or the wrong track?
If I answer "wrong track" I'm playing straight into Republican narratives. If I say "right track" I'm ignoring some very real problems that aren't being properly addressed. Are we on the right track as compared to two years ago? Definitely. Are we on the wrong track because our expectations haven't been met re: covid, voting rights, and throwing Trump in jail? Also true!
Polls matter. Politicians pay attention to polls when making policy. Media narratives are built on polls. Sometimes I feel like answering a poll (from a reputable polling company) is up there with voting in terms of civic responsibility because it's another mechanism for me to make myself heard.
But then every other poll question is a fucking false dichotomy with zero room to capture nuance. It's almost like they want to obscure what everyone believes.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 3:08 AM on August 24, 2022 [2 favorites]
If I answer "wrong track" I'm playing straight into Republican narratives. If I say "right track" I'm ignoring some very real problems that aren't being properly addressed. Are we on the right track as compared to two years ago? Definitely. Are we on the wrong track because our expectations haven't been met re: covid, voting rights, and throwing Trump in jail? Also true!
Polls matter. Politicians pay attention to polls when making policy. Media narratives are built on polls. Sometimes I feel like answering a poll (from a reputable polling company) is up there with voting in terms of civic responsibility because it's another mechanism for me to make myself heard.
But then every other poll question is a fucking false dichotomy with zero room to capture nuance. It's almost like they want to obscure what everyone believes.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 3:08 AM on August 24, 2022 [2 favorites]
IMO, the media are very much to blame. Journalists and commentators are rarely in touch with reality, and specifically political journalists are caught up in their narrow political world and all the spin. Recently I read an editorial by a very smart and experienced local political commentator (and editor and former media boss), where she wrote "nobody could have known that climate would become such a big issue".
Seriously? Nobody?
She added in some other "unknowns" that were totally predictable, like an aging society (in Europe) and the lack of teachers and nurses.
And this is not just a local thing, there's a long standing joke that Tom Friedman (from the NYTimes) is always wrong. (It is a joke but it is also a proven fact). And obviously for the last six years we have had to deal with endless reports on the "White Working Class Voter", invented by journalists who struggle to deal with reality, which is thus left to the comedy shows. Weird times.
The politicians are to blame too, because they are cynical, corrupt and generally in the pockets of the donors and obviously even more out of touch than the average journalist, but their corruption could be addressed if we had good media.
Also, we are rarely single issue voters. I recently read an interesting article (in Danish) that pointed out that there is a hidden generational conflict in today's voting patterns. Translated into this specific issue, it may well be that elderly voters are truly very worried about climate change, but at the end of the day, it seems more important for them to vote for the racist. And since the racist can count on their vote, he doesn't need to address the climate issues, and can just do his donor's bidding.
And the other way around, at the last local election here, I actually did place my vote based on a single (environmental) issue, as did tens of thousands of my fellow citizens. The other parties successfully spun the vote into "something something young socialists". I'm near 60. Everyone knew what it was about and there were polls to prove it, but the journalists were all too happy to follow the lead of the politicians.
posted by mumimor at 8:04 AM on August 24, 2022 [1 favorite]
Seriously? Nobody?
She added in some other "unknowns" that were totally predictable, like an aging society (in Europe) and the lack of teachers and nurses.
And this is not just a local thing, there's a long standing joke that Tom Friedman (from the NYTimes) is always wrong. (It is a joke but it is also a proven fact). And obviously for the last six years we have had to deal with endless reports on the "White Working Class Voter", invented by journalists who struggle to deal with reality, which is thus left to the comedy shows. Weird times.
The politicians are to blame too, because they are cynical, corrupt and generally in the pockets of the donors and obviously even more out of touch than the average journalist, but their corruption could be addressed if we had good media.
Also, we are rarely single issue voters. I recently read an interesting article (in Danish) that pointed out that there is a hidden generational conflict in today's voting patterns. Translated into this specific issue, it may well be that elderly voters are truly very worried about climate change, but at the end of the day, it seems more important for them to vote for the racist. And since the racist can count on their vote, he doesn't need to address the climate issues, and can just do his donor's bidding.
And the other way around, at the last local election here, I actually did place my vote based on a single (environmental) issue, as did tens of thousands of my fellow citizens. The other parties successfully spun the vote into "something something young socialists". I'm near 60. Everyone knew what it was about and there were polls to prove it, but the journalists were all too happy to follow the lead of the politicians.
posted by mumimor at 8:04 AM on August 24, 2022 [1 favorite]
Yes, there’s all kinds of polling like this, but when people actually vote for referendums, let alone candidates, the outcomes are usually not what you’d anticipate based on issue polling.
Agree with this. People may believe in global warming, but that doesn't mean they are interested in taking action to do anything about it at any governmental level.
If journalists have anything to do with this, it's that they amplify minor minority concern at the local level entirely too much -ie: they find some random old grump who is against even the most modest proposal (some bike lanes or whatever).
That's why Biden is so concerned about fuel price inflation, when high fuel prices are good to shift transportation mode share and those few who are actually hurt by them should get direct subsidy. His group understands this dichotomy.
posted by The_Vegetables at 8:42 AM on August 24, 2022 [2 favorites]
Agree with this. People may believe in global warming, but that doesn't mean they are interested in taking action to do anything about it at any governmental level.
If journalists have anything to do with this, it's that they amplify minor minority concern at the local level entirely too much -ie: they find some random old grump who is against even the most modest proposal (some bike lanes or whatever).
That's why Biden is so concerned about fuel price inflation, when high fuel prices are good to shift transportation mode share and those few who are actually hurt by them should get direct subsidy. His group understands this dichotomy.
posted by The_Vegetables at 8:42 AM on August 24, 2022 [2 favorites]
@chrchr
No, this is not at all what's being talked about in TFA.
The effect that you mention is real, but it is something else. There are a lot of counterintuitive outcomes based on the fact the people say they prefer $X but when confronted with an actual instance of it they say "No, I like $X but not that one."
The effect discussed in TFA is genuine mass misperception of typical opinion, where a common or even majority popular opinion is branded as nutty/deviant/outside the universe of discourse and genuinely perceived by a majority as unpopular.
The people who are invoking manufactured consent are closer to the mark.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 10:17 AM on August 24, 2022 [3 favorites]
No, this is not at all what's being talked about in TFA.
The effect that you mention is real, but it is something else. There are a lot of counterintuitive outcomes based on the fact the people say they prefer $X but when confronted with an actual instance of it they say "No, I like $X but not that one."
The effect discussed in TFA is genuine mass misperception of typical opinion, where a common or even majority popular opinion is branded as nutty/deviant/outside the universe of discourse and genuinely perceived by a majority as unpopular.
The people who are invoking manufactured consent are closer to the mark.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 10:17 AM on August 24, 2022 [3 favorites]
The effect discussed in TFA is genuine mass misperception of typical opinion, where a common or even majority popular opinion is branded as nutty/deviant/outside the universe of discourse and genuinely perceived by a majority as unpopular.
I'd say the generic polling is functionally useless but if it helps you sleep at night then fine. Actions speak more accurately than polls, so who is really misperceiving them?
I wish they'd had some example where poll and action line up. Maybe that is Roe.
posted by The_Vegetables at 12:02 PM on August 24, 2022 [1 favorite]
I'd say the generic polling is functionally useless but if it helps you sleep at night then fine. Actions speak more accurately than polls, so who is really misperceiving them?
I wish they'd had some example where poll and action line up. Maybe that is Roe.
posted by The_Vegetables at 12:02 PM on August 24, 2022 [1 favorite]
I accept the point that this article isn't really about polls lining up to voting patterns. I honestly think some of the misalignment can be solved with better policy initiatives.
A case in point, if I may be permitted to highlight one last election result: In 2018, voters in Washington rejected a carbon tax 57% to 43%. On the other hand, we have the climate provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act. The IRA shifts the environmental strategy from the kind of policies favored by economists who see climate change as a negative externality that can be solved by making carbon producers pay for the environmental costs of their actions to a more politically palatable approach of rewarding those who embrace new zero carbon practices. I guess we don't really know if IRA would win a referendum, but it won in the U.S. Senate, which might be a higher bar. If instead of a carbon tax Washington voters had a referendum for tax credits for EVs and green energy, maybe you would see the 60-80% support described in the article.
posted by chrchr at 2:21 PM on August 24, 2022
A case in point, if I may be permitted to highlight one last election result: In 2018, voters in Washington rejected a carbon tax 57% to 43%. On the other hand, we have the climate provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act. The IRA shifts the environmental strategy from the kind of policies favored by economists who see climate change as a negative externality that can be solved by making carbon producers pay for the environmental costs of their actions to a more politically palatable approach of rewarding those who embrace new zero carbon practices. I guess we don't really know if IRA would win a referendum, but it won in the U.S. Senate, which might be a higher bar. If instead of a carbon tax Washington voters had a referendum for tax credits for EVs and green energy, maybe you would see the 60-80% support described in the article.
posted by chrchr at 2:21 PM on August 24, 2022
A certain amount of disconnect comes from mass communications trying to ‘be objective’. Journalistic objectivity is NOT the same as say, medical objectivity. Add to that the political biases of media outlet owners and you can end up with information inconsistent with reality. It really is tiresome, especially when it comes out of the mouths of people who you’d expect to know better.
posted by Katjusa Roquette at 7:20 AM on August 25, 2022 [1 favorite]
posted by Katjusa Roquette at 7:20 AM on August 25, 2022 [1 favorite]
« Older 'Doppelgänger' is fun to say | ‘My Boss Wants Me Back in Office Full Time. Can I... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by OHenryPacey at 2:15 PM on August 23, 2022 [15 favorites]