mirrorcollecter-blog

[mirrorcollecter-blog]

Division and Outrage

Many would agree that the American chain of political discourse has gotten considerably more hostile and less open to discussion over the years, alongside the rise of increasingly radical politics and spread of ideas through the internet. Statistics also seem to support this theory, with pew research citing that 92% of republicans are more conservative than the median democrat and the average democrat 94% more liberal than the moderate conservative. Even through simply interacting online through social media, people in general seem to have become exceptionally angrier over the last few years. So, in the spirit of identifying the causes behind the United State’s newfound division, let us discuss the reasons we seem to be at each other's throats.

As mentioned earlier, the U.S. was not always so polarized. Ronald Reagan’s first election in 1980 illustrates this quite well, with the former actor swamping the electoral college with 489 votes and winning the popular vote by almost 8.5 million votes over Jimmy Carter.

Since then, electoral maps have become substantially more split, especially when compared to the infamous 2016 election. To quickly recap, Donald Trump actually managed to lose the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by about 3 million votes despite gaining well over the 270 electoral votes needed to win the election.

But what has caused such a divide since the good old days of unity pre -1994?

Journalism has always had a large impact on public opinion as a whole, most notably in instances of extreme emotional disarray. The story of the USS Maine typically springs to mind when thinking of journalism’s role in public outrage. To briefly explain, the USS Maine was a United States battleship stationed in Cuba in 1898 that exploded for unknown reasons, but was played off as an attack by the spanish by news outlets. Despite the mistakes of the past, in today’s world it would seem that outrage journalism has only become more frequent.

Just a few days ago the left-leaning New York Times published an exceptionally anti semitic cartoon depicting the sitting president as a blind Jew being led by a dog depicted as the israeli prime minister in its editorial section. Likewise, the fringe right wing website Breitbart managed to play dirty throughout Alabama’s last election cycle, where they routinely elected to downplay and discredit the substantial sexual assault allegations against Roy Moore. Reactionary and outrage pieces like these are certainly good for business, as advertisers use instances of online engagement to determine how much they pay these news sites for ads. In a fantastic piece by Tobias Rose-Stockwell at Medium.com, it is discussed that the more outrageous and “clickable” an article is, the more money it makes.

What's even more brutal is that people in general don’t seem to care all that much. Another piece of the vast puzzle that is political outrage comes from the concept of internet “echo chambers,” where people are entretching themselves in an ever deepening sea of identical “news” sources. According to The Guardian, an estimated 61% of millennials use social media as their primary source of news, a statistic that certainly helps promulgate echo chambers. Tech companies, namely Facebook and Twitter just so happen to show their users content that is closely related to what they may be currently following, which in turn boosts their own profits.

Thanks to algorithms like the aforementioned, “alternative” news organizations are able to function quite well by capturing new members of angry and outraged viewers. Despite what I have mentioned thus far however, reactionary outlets like the previously mentioned Breitbart are not the only ones able to survive in this new climate. More trustworthy organizations like Zero Hedge and Signs of the Times have also managed to materialize thanks to readers who have a vested interest in the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth to its best possible extent.

The rise of more unbiased and publicly funded journalism does signal that there are more influencing factors at work than just a monetary incentive for our newfound charged political atmosphere. For these reactionary groups to continue maintaining a viable business, there still has to be a social cause for why people choose to ignore less biased media in favor of their prefered outrage, which leads me to an interesting look at the culture of politics in the U.S.

It would seem that the only way that media pushing outrage can stay in business is if people continue to want something to be outraged at. An article published in the Chicago Tribune puts it quite well:

“This is the current pitch of outrage culture, where voicing an opinion someone says she sees as a threat qualifies you for instant annihilation, no questions asked. Why ask questions when it's more expedient, maybe more kick-ass, to turn anything you might disagree with into an emergency?

A sense of emergency is what people on all sides have developed an addiction to. Show us the next person to hate and we are so there; we take an animalistic pleasure in destroying the kid in the MAGA hat, in fashioning a decades-old interview with John Wayne into a knife with which to posthumously eviscerate the actor. And then we look for the next target.

Because we need that next hit, we need it right now. Being in a constant state of emergency — a condition in which people notoriously make terrible decisions — is like having a fire raging inside the body, one that needs to be fed. It needs new fuel, and so we seek new enemies.

Meanwhile, some of us are watching from the sidelines, trying to stay out of the way, hoping not to be next. (Good luck with that.)” - Nancy Rommelmann

This passage illustrates a very good picture of why people seem to gut each other at the first possible opportunity. Maybe we truly enjoy the process of getting angry and delving into our own personal circles where we feel right at home. At a minimum, the process feels a bit cathartic to say the least.

Assuming this is true, and that people have a fondness towards conflict and will neglect to take a rational approach to political discourse, how are we supposed to tame our tendencies and return to a less confrontational state? Unsurprisingly, some of the solution requires a healthy dose of personal responsibility and motivation. Readers should at least attempt to open their echo chamber to more centered outlets, such as the publicly funded ones mentioned earlier. As sociologists, we may also be able to help “lead the way,” so to speak. As we study people and populations, we are somewhat responsible for telling people that they are allowing themselves to buy in to stigmas and assumptions fed to them by their own outlets. As a citizen of a country with such a free and open platform for discussion, I truly hope we can work past our tendencies to discredit and damage before civil debate.

Links and resources:

https://www.people-press.org/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/

https://www.270towin.com/1980_Election/index.html

https://www.pbs.org/crucible/tl10.html

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/28/media/ny-times-anti-semitic-cartoon/index.html

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/breitbart-fake-news-alex-marlow/comment-page-2/

https://medium.com/@tobiasrose/the-enemy-in-our-feeds-e86511488de

https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2017/dec/04/echo-chambers-are-dangerous-we-must-try-to-break-free-of-our-online-bubbles

https://medium.com/real-social-post/top-10-alternative-media-list-1ed52befa70c

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-outrage-culture-metoo-meneither-portland-0226-20190225-story.html

I would just like to state that I found all of these articles very interesting and thought-provoking on their own, and would highly recommend that you visit and read them yourself. Thank you for reading.

[mirrorcollecter-blog]

Issue of the Eighties

Both of my parents grew up in the eighties, best known for the end of the cold war, Reagan's version of economics, and the decline of disco. This was also the decade of one of the worst disasters to strike space-travel, where seven astronauts lost their lives in the blink of an eye aboard the Challenger. 

The initial goals of the NASA Shuttle Program were to revolutionize space travel by creating reusable vehicles, originally meant to drive down the costs of space travel and open the door to a space-faring world. For a while this was the case, semi-reusable crafts (the Challenger included) were used for multiple successful missions into and beyond orbit. (https://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1732.html)

Success brought public support, which is primarily why the program lasted for 30 years before ultimately being terminated. Public support also largely made the program something of a campaign piece for politicians, which led to NASA receiving approximately 209 billion dollars in federal aid. (https://www.space.com/12166-space-shuttle-program-cost-promises-209-billion.html). 

Unfortunately, success would not stand the test of tragedy, as the disaster of the Challenger’s final flight helped accelerate the termination of the NASA Shuttle Program. The explosion that destroyed the challenger and killed seven astronauts was televised across the world, particularly in schools. My dad remembers the day particularly well, as his class was viewing the shuttle’s launch and subsequent explosion during school. He remembers the shock on everyone’s face, his teacher crying, and a long silence that followed. As one could imagine, public opinion started to shift unfavorably towards the program. Ronald Reagan launched a special investigation into the failure of the rocket, and more people started to question how valuable the program truly was. (https://www.history.com/topics/1980s/challenger-disaster). After another tragedy of the same degree in 2003, George W. Bush decided to end the program. 

Despite two catastrophic failures resulting in the deaths of 14 people, public opinion of space travel has not completely faded. In modern times, private companies have taken up the mantle of space exploration. SpaceX, owned by a popular Elon Musk has become a cultural icon of sorts, and has just recently offered a paid round-trip vacation into space. While the original movement of NASA’s affordable has run somewhat aground, the spirit of exploration still appears to sit in the hearts of many people around the globe. Poll data shows that there are many who still believe that space exploration is important, making NASA’s original mission still viable in the eyes of the public. (https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2018/06/06/majority-of-americans-believe-it-is-essential-that-the-u-s-remain-a-global-leader-in-space/)

Today, despite space travel being led almost exclusively by private companies, the original curiosity sparked by NASA’s mission remains somewhat alive. The tragedy that befell those on the Challenger reminded people of the difficulties and hazards of space travel, but did not crush the hopes that humanity will one day have a place among the stars. As of 2018, there are six massive companies with a stake in space exploration, the previously mentioned SpaceX alongside Sierra Nevada, Rocket Lab, and Orbital ATK among them (https://sciencing.com/why-are-private-companies-in-space-13710338.html). Whether government funding and organization is in play or not, there is a monetary incentive present for those daring enough to explore the vastness of space, making the dream of modern day space travel a spiritual successor to the initial dream of NASA’s travel mission. 

[mirrorcollecter-blog]

Activity Posting 4: Residential Segregation

Growing up in Livingston county was admittedly far from a diverse experience. To describe it briefly, my town consisted of farms, fields, a few small patches of woods, and a freeway that would take you to places with names people would actually recognize. Additionally, the place was pretty homogeneous in regards to racial diversity, where Caucasian was an overwhelming majority with minority groups spread thin across the county. While there are a handful of neighborhoods that carried a fair amount of wealth, my hometown always felt overwhelmingly middle class; not quite wealthy, but not poor either. 

Going in to this assignment, I new from the beginning that there was a vast population disparity between the majority and minority races, and the site I used to check exact numbers confirmed this, as pictured below. What I found throughout the course of my research however, is that a sizable population advantage doesn’t equate to a completely unfair economic outcome.

As you can tell, there is a very strong white majority when it comes to population. From this initially, I somewhat expected a financial disparity between racial groups. To my surprise, that is not the entirety of what i found. 

As the graphs below suggest, African Americans have the lowest average income, the potential reasons for which I will discuss more further in to this post. Whites actually only have the second highest income of the three groups I analyzed, which can be seen as a surprise after seeing the population disparity between groups. the most well off class in my county was actually the Hispanics and Latinos, whose average is about 2,000 dollars more than Caucasians. 

So, the next step in my thinking was to check employment rates. Based on the next three charts, I was once again surprised. African Americans have the highest unemployment rate of the three, being about 7-10%. Conversely, whites actually have the lowest  unemployment, which doesn’t quite line up with the average incomes we last looked at. Hispanics and Latinos land in the center, one or two percent higher than whites. 

After viewing all of these charts, I am left with a two very intriguing questions. The first is why African Americans on average are lagging so far behind in this area, and why their population is so low to begin with. The second is how the disparity between employment and average income came to be in the Hispanic and Latino community. 

After some digging, I found some very disturbing information regarding why the African American population of Livingston county is so low. Quite some time ago, the Grand Dragon of the Michigan Ku Klux Klan held rallies in Cohoctah Township. He was introduced to a coffin and buried somewhere in 1992, effectively crippling and disbanding the last remaining members of the disgusting organization. Unfortunately for the city of Howell however, the reputation of being an epicenter for clan activity stuck, despite being cleared by the Southern Poverty Law Center after the death of the aforementioned trash can. This bad bit of history would certainly explain why African Americans tended to avoid the county, and swirling rumors unfortunately keep some of that stigma alive. Perhaps in the future, more African Americans choose to put down roots and finally crush the last remaining history of the angry farmers in the stupid pointy hats once and for all. 

Sources for information used in the last paragraph:

https://www.michiganradio.org/post/why-howell-considered-kkk-capital-michigan

https://thelivingstonpost.com/michigan-democratic-party-chair-calls-howell-the-home-of-the-kkk-now-he-owes-a-big-apology/

http://michiganhistory.leadr.msu.edu/howelladarkpast/

The income versus employment disparity present in the Hispanic and Latino community proves to be a bit less straightforward. My first thought was to look at Hispanic and Latino family units, thinking that areas with higher numbers of family units would have a higher average incomes thanks to having two contributing parents. 

So as you can see, this is really isn’t the case. Families are concentrated in to two areas, consistent with the population trends seen earlier but still making up a small minority of the total number of Hispanic and Latinos in the county. From here, this leaves me to speculate. My prediction is that employed Hispanic and Latinos have high average income jobs, landing in the 90 to 100 thousand mark (or higher) which is raised by family units in dual-employed households. This seems fairly likely, as the relatively low number of unemployed people in this group would balance the average in the high 90′s. 

This thought experiment has helped me reconsider how I view my small section of my hometown, and has given me insight to why I grew up in the setting that I did. What happened in the day of the KKK’s existence is quite unsettling, but I’m glad to see my county is starting to recover. The influx of minority communities performing better, particularly in the Hispanic and Latino community gives me a substantial amount of confidence that the situation is on the upswing. Plus, this extra bit of study has shown me that even when a population is stacked a certain way, race will not always dictate the success of populations. 

[mirrorcollecter-blog]

Media & Society

On the anniversary of Steve Irwin, Crocodile Hunter’s birthday, the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals organization, better known as PETA, decided to jump on a social landmine with both feet. The organization posted a tweet criticizing Steve on the grounds he was unethical towards animals, and was met with a storm of angry feedback.

Public opinion of the organization overall has been controversial to say the least, and as of this post relations appear to have soured further. This particular action has caused a multitude of old cases regarding PETA’s integrity in their pursuit of animal rights to return to public attention, which leads us to today’s sociological project. 

PETA’s primary message, as they claim anyways, has been the protection and liberation of animals from human oppression. As per their twitter history, it seems the current issue they are focusing on comes from the wool industry, where they are criticizing farmers for maiming and tagging sheep whilst collecting their wool. In their posts are videos of farmers slicing the tails off of sheep, among other gruesome and overall deplorable acts. The issue many people take with the group is that they more or less exaggerate these events, lie how common they are, then jump to another issue they find to be more profitable. A common criticism is their stance on euthanasia, which is disturbing to say the least. As an article by Lauren Markoe of the Washington Post claims, they view the practice as a “mercy killing.” This stance ultimately leads to an 80% euthanasia rate at certain facilities.

(Markoe’s Article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/at-petas-shelter-most-animals-are-put-down-peta-calls-them-mercy-killings/2015/03/12/e84e9af2-c8fa-11e4-bea5-b893e7ac3fb3_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1d461e074a9c )

So, in the spirit of internet outrage, I have taken the time to concoct an alternate version of their websites homepage. The original picture is first, and the altered version is in second. The intent is somewhat satirical, though perhaps a more accurate version of the goals PETA is trying to achieve. See if you can spot all the differences!

[mirrorcollecter-blog]

Sociology Post 1: Crime!

Today I’d like to take a second to go over some violent crime numbers in comparison with poverty trends, and family households. 

So, one of the many trends talked about across news and media is the strong correlation between poverty and violent crime, typically linked to gang activity and the like. What I would like to explore however is how this connects to overall family units and households, on account of an argument a friend of mine made on the influence of a family unit and crime. To keep things manageable I will be talking exclusively about different counties in the state of Texas.

The basic assumptions of the argument were that strong ties between poverty and violent crime, and that by having a complete family unit present, crime rates in turn would be lower. The purpose of this post is to test that theory, and look at the effects of high numbers of family homes have on crime and poverty. Information like this would likely be considered useful for social workers and politicians alike, allowing them to draw a more precise view of crime in their cities and then try to counteract it accordingly. 

The first thing that should be pointed out is the strong correlation initially seen between crime and poverty in the Houston area. It is easily the strongest example to point to on this map, and it correlates strongly with a high number of local households. By simply looking at this city, it would appear that the amount of family units either has no effect, or perhaps even a positive effect on the number of violent crimes committed in the area. The problem that arises when looking at this particular city however is its overall population, which is well over 500,000 people more than the next closest city. 

Speaking of the next closest city, San Antonio illustrates a very different picture. It boasts a relatively high poverty rate, but also a large number of households. On top of that, it has approximately 611 violent crime incidents, a fraction of the 8,854 violent crimes that occurred in Houston. In this case, the possibility that a larger number of households within a given area is very plausible, independent of the economic state of its inhabitants. 

The third largest city behind that is Dallas, a city boasting a 34% poverty rate. They also carry a 65% percentage of households, and interestingly enough have a mere 45 violent crimes committed in 2017. 

So in conclusion, the idea that family unit households can reduce crime rates is far from untrue. From the data analyzed, it seems there is an inverse correlation between the number of family units and the total amount of violent crimes. Perhaps over the course of the class, I will have the opportunity to explore these trends further. 

External Sources: http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/texas-population/cities/

Social Explorer Map Links:

Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime Data, 2016. Prepared by Social Explorer. https://www.socialexplorer.com/d762cef95c/explore (2/1/19)

ACS, Households, 2017. Prepared by Social Explorer. https://www.socialexplorer.com/d762cef95c/explore (2/1/19)

ACS, Families: Income Below Poverty Level, 2017. Prepared by Social Explorer. https://www.socialexplorer.com/a9676d974c/explore (2/1/19)

[mirrorcollecter-blog]

Welcome

You know, collecting mirrors is a hobby I could really see myself doing.

Also blogging about sociology, which is why this blog exists. WHOOT