The rise of the “newer formats” was followed by the
2000 presidential election, so the environment was ripe for a more extreme
political polarization to infect the country. It does seem like there has been
a loss of mutual respect between opposing ideologies along with a reluctance to
engage in civil discourse over pressing issues of the day. The word “compromise”
has been forgotten by so many political pundits, and that has seemed to rub off
on audiences. When both sides are always
in attack mode while simultaneously digging in their heels to promote their own
agenda, it would appear unlikely that any real progress may be made.
With that being said, I do believe that this kind of
programming has engaged a greater number of people, which can be good for
democracy. The entertainment value of
the shows may be what initially increased viewership, but the result is more
people watching and therefore learning about current affairs. Certainly that can be considered a positive
step towards a democracy for all of the people.
Sheila, you touch on the "loss of mutual respect between opposing ideologies." that seems to prevail on these "newer formats." I think this is one of the things that turns people off to politics these days, young people especially. Why would anyone get involved in politics or participate in ideological debates if doing so meant opening oneself up to denigration, mockery and ridicule? And if, as you say, no real compromise between opposing points of view seems possible. That said, I personally think they are some issues about which compromise is impossible.
ReplyDelete