When I set out in the Boston neighborhood of Allston to do my man-on-the-street interviews about involvement in politics in the 18-24 crowd, I wasn't expecting much of a response. I live in Allston. Allston is a young neighborhood, with more than half of its residents between the ages of 20 and 34 (according to a 1990 census).
I wouldn't have been surprised if one or two of the people I interviewed had said they saw Obama the first time he spoke at the Common, but weren't going again because they didn't want to cough up the $23 [the second time he came to town, the fund-raiser cost that much to attend]. Or that The Daily Show made Giuliani seem like a real tool, so they’d like to vote for someone who could beat him. Something along those lines. And, to be quite honest, their lack of political involvement-- their overwhelming "no" answers to the last question, "Are you involved in the campaign of the candidate you support in the primary?"-- didn't surprise me in the least. It didn't even offend me that much.
At the risk of sounding like yet another politically-apathetic Allstonite, it is "just" the primary. It's not like I was talking to people who said they didn't plan on voting in the presidential election because they didn't care, or because they didn't think their vote mattered. Most people I talked to said they were registered to vote, even if they weren't sure with what party. The Massachusetts primary isn't until March 4—they have another 3 months to decide who they want to vote for, if anyone. The optimist in me thinks that at least a few of them will watch the debates after it’s narrowed down to two candidates. They’ll pick the candidate whose views best match their own, and go to the polls on Election Day.
What surprised me was how comfortable everyone seemed with this. “Oh, are these questions all about politics?” one person asked me after he answered that he doesn’t affiliate himself with a political party, “If they are, you’re asking the wrong person.” One of the young women I interviewed, after telling me she hadn’t picked a candidate she supports for the 2008 primary, said “Oh, is that all?” and she smiled as if she’d just successfully completed a test. Several of the people I surveyed were with a friend or two at the time. The group would laugh together when one of them answered they didn’t actually know anything about the candidates.
The optimist in me hopes the laughter is a defense mechanism, a way of getting around the embarrassment they might feel for not fulfilling an obligation to be at least politically aware, if not involved.
The pessimist in me says that the young adults I spoke to don’t actually feel this obligation in any way. That they have immersed themselves in a culture that is typical of our generation, a climate of political apathy in which their own ignorance of politics is funny.
Almost as funny as The Daily Show.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Where Have All the Campaign Events Gone?
Task: compile a list of presidential primary events that would appeal to young adults aged 18 to 29 in the greater Boston area. Given that this age group is social and that New Hampshire (which falls within the geographical limits of my search) is a haven for political junkies, sounds easy, right?
Wrong.
My first intuition was to search on each candidate's website - all 17 of them - and find events in the Boston area. This strategy proved to be relatively fruitless for one of three reasons: the website did not have a link, page or section devoted to campaign events; the website had an events page but was either outdated or only included events up to four days in the future; or the events page had hundreds of events added by supporters and comprised mostly house parties and postcard-writing sessions.
I checked CNN, the Washington Post, the Boston Globe, Boston Now, boston.com - nothing, or at least nothing that I hadn't already found.
The pages with the most events were the front-runners: Clinton and Obama, mostly. Not too much in the way of Republican events, though. This gives rise to the age-old debate over whether the richest candidates always win simply because they have the most resources and staff members to publicize their campaign efforts. But that's another story for another day.
The journalist in me began to dig deeper; instead of trying to find the seemingly nonexistent events, I tried to figure out why there were no events catered toward the under-30 piece of the voting public pie.
This demographic has been notoriously absent in the polls on voting day, although numbers are rising. Are candidates simply ignoring them because they get better results from more politically involved age groups? Or are young adults less apt to vote because candidates ignore the issues most important to them? Or is it something else altogether? Eventually, this age group will become middle-aged and senior citizens and today's voting majority will no longer be around to dominate the political scene.
It seems like a good strategy (to me at least, although politics confuses me more than quantum physics) that candidates begin to address this age group and the issues important to them in order to build support for the future.
Well, maybe they are trying. Even though most of the events in the Boston/New Hampshire area are fundraisers, house parties and stamp-licking sessions - which may or may not appeal to young adults - candidates have found a new way to reach out to young voters: cyberspace.
Most of the candidates' websites included a section with links to Facebook, MySpace, YouTube and other online social networking sites that seem to be popular among the college crowd. Candidates have profiles and host events through these sites, and supporters can create or join groups and participate in discussion forums about their favorite candidate.
Our survey asked young adults in the Boston area what they think is the most effective way for candidates to reach their age group: campus or citywide events, online events or debates, or both? The answer was split pretty evenly into thirds.
So while some young adults may be encouraged to vote by online resources, others still prefer to see the candidate in person or feel that the candidate cares enough to visit their corner of the country.
But the category of 18 to 29 is very split when it comes to online networking. When Facebook was launched in 2004, today's 29-year-olds were well out of college, while today's 18-year-olds were freshmen in high school. As the Internet continues to grow, so might online support for candidates. But a good, old-fashioned pep rally never hurt anybody either.
Wrong.
My first intuition was to search on each candidate's website - all 17 of them - and find events in the Boston area. This strategy proved to be relatively fruitless for one of three reasons: the website did not have a link, page or section devoted to campaign events; the website had an events page but was either outdated or only included events up to four days in the future; or the events page had hundreds of events added by supporters and comprised mostly house parties and postcard-writing sessions.
I checked CNN, the Washington Post, the Boston Globe, Boston Now, boston.com - nothing, or at least nothing that I hadn't already found.
The pages with the most events were the front-runners: Clinton and Obama, mostly. Not too much in the way of Republican events, though. This gives rise to the age-old debate over whether the richest candidates always win simply because they have the most resources and staff members to publicize their campaign efforts. But that's another story for another day.
The journalist in me began to dig deeper; instead of trying to find the seemingly nonexistent events, I tried to figure out why there were no events catered toward the under-30 piece of the voting public pie.
This demographic has been notoriously absent in the polls on voting day, although numbers are rising. Are candidates simply ignoring them because they get better results from more politically involved age groups? Or are young adults less apt to vote because candidates ignore the issues most important to them? Or is it something else altogether? Eventually, this age group will become middle-aged and senior citizens and today's voting majority will no longer be around to dominate the political scene.
It seems like a good strategy (to me at least, although politics confuses me more than quantum physics) that candidates begin to address this age group and the issues important to them in order to build support for the future.
Well, maybe they are trying. Even though most of the events in the Boston/New Hampshire area are fundraisers, house parties and stamp-licking sessions - which may or may not appeal to young adults - candidates have found a new way to reach out to young voters: cyberspace.
Most of the candidates' websites included a section with links to Facebook, MySpace, YouTube and other online social networking sites that seem to be popular among the college crowd. Candidates have profiles and host events through these sites, and supporters can create or join groups and participate in discussion forums about their favorite candidate.
Our survey asked young adults in the Boston area what they think is the most effective way for candidates to reach their age group: campus or citywide events, online events or debates, or both? The answer was split pretty evenly into thirds.
So while some young adults may be encouraged to vote by online resources, others still prefer to see the candidate in person or feel that the candidate cares enough to visit their corner of the country.
But the category of 18 to 29 is very split when it comes to online networking. When Facebook was launched in 2004, today's 29-year-olds were well out of college, while today's 18-year-olds were freshmen in high school. As the Internet continues to grow, so might online support for candidates. But a good, old-fashioned pep rally never hurt anybody either.
Obama’s Confessional
Here’s a pop quiz:
Question: How in the world does the following statement fit into the presidential campaigns?
“I was kind of a goof off in high school... I got into drinking and experimented with drugs.”
Answer: Barack Obama said this in a speech at a New Hampshire high school on November 20.
Reuters news agency quoted Obama as saying, “I made some bad decisions… There were times when I got into drinking and experimented with drugs. There was a whole stretch of time where I didn’t really apply myself. It wasn’t until I got out of high school and went to college that I started to realize, man, I wasted a lot of time.”
Why would this presidential hopeful air his dirty laundry to high school students and to the country? It seems that he was trying to connect with the young audience, the majority of whom aren’t old enough to vote. He probably wanted to confess his regrets so they don’t make similar mistakes. It was a move to portray himself as real – just another person who makes mistakes, learns and moves on.
But could his confessions also be interpreted as shrugging off the importance of high school and condoning experimentation? Obama got away with goofing-off, drinking and doing drugs in high school, and then went on to Harvard and is now running for president. Is high school overrated? Do authority figures overreact to partying and slacking in school?
Reuters quoted a 14-year-old high school student as saying, “I think everybody deserves to play around a little bit, you know?...He got his priorities straight, you know." It looks like he interpreted Obama’s remarks to mean that slacking off in high school doesn’t do much harm and is even suggestive of having balance in ones’ life.
If I were Obama’s political advisor, I would say, “Go ahead and talk to high school kids. Talk with them in a way that you connect – get at what they’re thinking about. Admit that you wished you had taken high school more seriously, that you regret you tried drinking before you were of age, but for heaven’s sake, unless you’re asked directly, leave the illegal drugs bit out of it!”
The American people should expect candidness out of their candidates…it’s to voters’ advantage. However, politicians need to be smart in what they confess about things that are irrelevant to how well they will govern as president.
Access the Reuters article at http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/2007/11/20/obama-visits-nh-high-school/
Question: How in the world does the following statement fit into the presidential campaigns?
“I was kind of a goof off in high school... I got into drinking and experimented with drugs.”
Answer: Barack Obama said this in a speech at a New Hampshire high school on November 20.
Reuters news agency quoted Obama as saying, “I made some bad decisions… There were times when I got into drinking and experimented with drugs. There was a whole stretch of time where I didn’t really apply myself. It wasn’t until I got out of high school and went to college that I started to realize, man, I wasted a lot of time.”
Why would this presidential hopeful air his dirty laundry to high school students and to the country? It seems that he was trying to connect with the young audience, the majority of whom aren’t old enough to vote. He probably wanted to confess his regrets so they don’t make similar mistakes. It was a move to portray himself as real – just another person who makes mistakes, learns and moves on.
But could his confessions also be interpreted as shrugging off the importance of high school and condoning experimentation? Obama got away with goofing-off, drinking and doing drugs in high school, and then went on to Harvard and is now running for president. Is high school overrated? Do authority figures overreact to partying and slacking in school?
Reuters quoted a 14-year-old high school student as saying, “I think everybody deserves to play around a little bit, you know?...He got his priorities straight, you know." It looks like he interpreted Obama’s remarks to mean that slacking off in high school doesn’t do much harm and is even suggestive of having balance in ones’ life.
If I were Obama’s political advisor, I would say, “Go ahead and talk to high school kids. Talk with them in a way that you connect – get at what they’re thinking about. Admit that you wished you had taken high school more seriously, that you regret you tried drinking before you were of age, but for heaven’s sake, unless you’re asked directly, leave the illegal drugs bit out of it!”
The American people should expect candidness out of their candidates…it’s to voters’ advantage. However, politicians need to be smart in what they confess about things that are irrelevant to how well they will govern as president.
Access the Reuters article at http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/2007/11/20/obama-visits-nh-high-school/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)