The Web and current media technologies have the potential to allow a voter to be informed about every issue from every candidate. Each candidate, citizens, and the thousands of bloggers can discuss, chew, twist, and digest every viewpoint and nuance of every campaign.
One can read just about any national or international paper online. Cable and Satellite TV provides a variety of newscasts. There are also Podcasts, email lists, online groups, MySpace-like places, and so on.
Unfortunately, many people, liberals, conservatives, radicals, right-wingers, and so on, suffer from iPod Syndrome. They listen to the views that they agree with and filter out the rest. Conservatives follow Fox News and the liberals follow the New York Times or NPR.
Note: I don't understand why people consider the New York Times or NPR liberal. I don't believe this country has a liberal press. Most major newspapers are moderate. I don't really see any papers taking a liberal or radical view. They don't want to upset their advertisers. Middle of the road is safe. The closest that we have to a truly liberal press are many of the college newspapers.
iPod Syndrome is not new. In fact, it's not my idea. Cass Sunstein discusses this concept in his excellent book Republic.com. He doesn't call it iPod Syndrome. I coined that name because people use their iPods to listen to just the music they like, in the same manner that people just read the viewpoints that they like and agree with.
From the inside cover of Republic.com:
"See only what you want to see, hear only what you want to hear, read only what you want to read. In cyberspace, we already have the ability to filter out everything but what we wish to see, hear, and read. Tomorrow, our power to filter promises to increase exponentially. With the advent of the Daily Me, you see only the sports highlights that concern your teams, read only the issues that interest you, encounter in the op-ed pages only the opinions with which you agree . . . and underscores the enormous potential of the Internet to promote freedom as well as its potential to promote 'cybercascades' of like-minded opinions that foster and enflame hate groups."
We shouldn't become a state or nation of "same-opinion" viewpoints. This type of "idea marriage" is wrong. Your viewpoints should be diverse. If you are a conservative don't just listen to Fox News. If your a liberal, don't just form your opinions from NPR.
If you are a Deval Patrick supporter listen to the viewpoints of Kerry Healey, Grace Ross, or Chris Gabrieli. If you are a Grace Ross supporter, listen to the viewpoints of Tom Reilly or Christy Mihos.
Don't follow the foolish steps of the "Da Vinci Code" protesters. Just as a movie cannot change the views of one who truly believes in her religion, listening to the viewpoints of another candidate will not hurt your views of your candidate.
And if it does? Celebrate! Embrace! What is the harm if you initially support one candidate but by reading, researching, and ignoring the soundbites you realize another candidate better represents your views?
Ignore the party labels. Visit the candidates' sites and learn who they really are, who they think they are, who they pretend to be, and so on.
The Web and the other new media technologies give you the opportunity to be informed. They offer a simple cure for the iPod Syndrome.
Sincerely,
Alan