my second epiphany on the bus

I know this was meant to be done sooner, but I think something just clicked after my conversation with Michele this afternoon. Through talking with her about her project, I came to realize that to situate my topic in this class would require another epiphany on the bus.

My paper is about the mediated public sphere in New Orleans. It is about how the public communicates with its governing institutions through the media about the city's big problems. The big problem, however, that no one seems to be talking about is that the public sphere has become truly corrupted by local opportunists because the creation of the "New Orleans Brand" that has so flamboyantly merged crime and politics is now having visible effects on the rebuilding of New Orleans because the public sphere is characterized by rampant cynicism.

This is what I am trying to say, and this bigger picture is what I intend to use to guide my analysis of the case I've been tracking. The local and national media discuss one particular issue in such a way that perpetuates cynicism as to prevent the public from engaging in political communication. This particular issue is street crime. New Orleans has always suffered from a high crime rate and has frequently been reported in the national news as a murder capital of the US. Following the devastation and anarchy unleashed in the streets of New Orleans by Katrina, stories of crime and lawlessness have garnered significantly more national and local media attention. 

Nearly all homicides in New Orleans involve black men and occur in poor neighborhoods that were particularly hard-hit by Katrina's wind and water. As residents returned to the city following the well-publicized and mismanaged evacuation of the entire city's population, crime returned as well. While some neighborhoods received attention for their quick recovery, others received attention for their violence. The attention was not positive in tone, offered few solutions to the problem, sensationalized stories, and passed around blame.  Most problematic was the media's emphasis on the negative effects caused by the repopulation of the criminal element-- namely, that their violence was scaring off the wealthy white folks. This link between street violence and neighborhood repopulation intrigued me and I began to collect data on both the content of articles about New Orleans and crime, as well as homicide and repopulation data at the neighborhood level. I can clearly establish that the media's claim that crime is deterring the repopulation of certain parts of the city is false, and suggest that this illusion created by the press of an alternate reality fuels the corruption the public sphere. 

But why would they do such a thing?  Why not reverse it, why not use Katrina as the catalyst to challenge that damned cynical brand? 

Ourspace

Harold's Ourspace was probably my favorite book from this seminar, if for no other reason than because of my deep admiration for the students of '68 and their AWESOME poster art. Like Westin, Harold understands the role of emotion in political communication and suggests that repeated emotional appeals create images that become part of a brand. Negotiating these brands that dominate consumer culture by carefully crafting identities and differences squeezes out room for public values in which "sharing and openness trump property and profit" (xxiv). Consequently, those who fear the detrimental effects on democracy caused by the encroachment of consumerism have employed a tactic known as culture jamming that essentially interrupt the flow of power through the circuits of pop politics. 

Harold describes three modes of intervention: sabotage, appropriation, and intensification. Sabotage involves a direct confrontation with existing power structures that condition and discipline market behaviors. She uses AdBusters as an example, although surely many others exist. Specifically, her example of the mastectomy patient used in an AdBusters campaign begs a crucial question: under what conditions is the public's resistance to SHOCK more visible? In situations that violate physical norms (as in the case of the AdBuster campaign against breast cancer) versus moral norms (as is witnessed in the case of the IFC's television show The Whitest Kids U-Know)? 

Second, the strategy of appropriation accepts the premises of popular culture and engages with its messages on its own terms. Finally, intensification strategies actively augment certain aspects of markets by promoting a concept of the commons. In this sense, market behavior occurs in the public sphere-- the market and the public are not mutually exclusive. 

This conversation about branding and the mediated sphere inspires a set of additional questions or thoughts tangentially related to my project. While performing my content analyses, the venerable mayor of New Orleans, C. Ray Nagin, has routinely described the crime problem as being representative of the "New Orleans Brand." Whatever that means. Is he referring to the intoxicating combination of the laissez faire attitude, the good times always rolling, and Euro-Carribean culture that has maintained New Orleans as a top tourist destination. This brand, I understand. The crime-ridden, rotting streets of a failed urban geography, however, is another brand that I think he is actually describing. The brand of post-colonial decay? Hm. What does this invocation of the New Orleans brand by the mayor indicate for a) the way the public interacts with decision-makers and vice versa, b) the potential for CHALLENGING that brand (by one of Harold's three methods) to improve the quality of life for residents, tourists, and even elites? 

It certainly identifies a range of possibilities for those of us who still admire the spirit of the '68ers, however, this situation seems to have to do with consumerism in a different way than Harold imagines. First, if you buy that repopulating the ravaged city is not only a market decision but a political decision (in the sense of competitive federalism--- cities compete for populations by providing better services), you still have to buy that this decision to repopulate reflects some sort of marketing strategy on the part of local elites to lure the people back to their city. This is clearly not happening. If anything, the tendency of the mayor and his people is to exaggerate the obstacles the city faces.  

?

Critique of Pure Reason

While I appreciate Westen's efforts to re-strategize the Democratic party's communication by evoking emotional appeals rather than rational appeals, the ultimate success of this book is, in my opinion, revealed in his understanding of cognition, emotion, and reason. I think its important that Westen acknowledges what I call the "self-satisfaction bias" present in much scholarly and philosophical writing that (implicitly or explicitly) faults the public for making decisions in a non-rational manner. Thus, through an understanding of the brain's networks--how nerves fire at one another in a manner that science has only recently understood-- reveals emphasis on only one of the brain's functions. This, as I understand, probably isn't that new. He adds that by only speaking to one kind of emotion,  democrats lose elections.

Again, the critique of reason is more important to me than explaining why democrats lose. It's interesting to think about, but I disagree with many of his strategies and recommendations. I think that his discussion of race relations and abortion was particularly problematic because they played upon existing stereotypes... but that's really not the issue of my disagreement. I take issue not on any sort of anti-intellectual bias he advocates by dumbing down his discussion of neuroscience, but moreso because I think he limits the sort of deliberative discussion that Habermas theorized. Habermas idealized a public space for rational discourse, Westen advocates emotional communication in a still mostly private space from politicians to private citizens.  The space that Mutz opens up by looking at deliberation as a supplement to participation is not present in Westen's work, and I think it's still important to keep advancing the theories of democracy we're working with. 

So with this understanding of the limits of rational thinking... what next? What are the processes that Westin's insights can lead us to despite himself?  Right, so what is the goal of deliberation again? It might be helpful to reconsider Lance's insights from last week's discussion. I will try to summarize from my notes but it appears this will be difficult judging by their quality: 

_________________

from 5/6

We're looking for a way to hook up all the scattered interactions that resemble a mediated public sphere that may be participatory and motivating for those trying to manage the consensus. What is standing in the way of this project, apparently, is the current administration's willful projections of power in shaping reality. In selling a bizarre war to the people of the United States, the administration has created a reality that people will accept given that reality is leaking around the edges to form a huge public relations problem. The greater the distance between these people and what is actually happening in the rest of the world can lead to a disconnect with democratic ideals and public diplomacy. Under these conditions, we see a disconnect between what we think ought to be happening and what actually is happening, such as torture, that reveals hypocrisy.  Because PR types understand the disconnect between the local and the global that brand managers think WITH decision makers about the impact of these decisions on target audiences based on desired feedback. So if the government really screws up, it can just keep doing stupid things. We see no government that seems to be interested in communicating in a way that invites feedback into the PR process.  

Under different conditions, a model of public relations that exists at a high level of "public sphere-ness" may be useful for thinking about what else we need besides a new set of street levels norms, or what sorts of street-level nor s we need. Maybe the norm we might want is the same norm that consumers deeply hold already in terms of wanting to be part of the brand story. Like Habermas says, we want to be part of the construction of our own reality. 

_____________

How can we construct our own realities given our cognitive limitations?  I think that street-level norms are important here, and that it might be useful to think of more local interactions. If, as is discussed above, people have a hard time connecting the local to the global without pictures of hypocrisy like in the case of torture, what explains why even local politics are entrenched in hypocrisy? What then explains corruption, or the persistence of social problems like segregation and crime? It appears that we are cognitively limited by both emotion and reason in this regard, at least in some cases, as well. 

When Doesn't the Press Fail?

I liked this book.  It directed my (justified) political rage into a more meaningful discussion of the conditions under which the press fails and succeeds at turning a critical eye towards government in performing its watchdog function. The semi-independent press  (not unlike Schattschneider's semi-sovereign people?) operate within institutional constraints that produce contradictory incentives. Worst case scenario, an unending war. Best case scenario, corruption and incompetence revealed? 

I can't help wondering why criticism of the federal government did not address policy issues oriented toward remedying the persisting social problems in New Orleans (and deplorable urban conditions in general) rather than focusing mostly on the pathetic federal response.  In understanding how this event was focal (by understanding how the media interpreted it), maybe it would be possible to understand the impact of disasters on social policy.  Katrina seemed focal largely in its negative attention to President Bush; not so much in developing urban policies.  This can be seen in my research, in how the media discusses the crime problem not in terms of policy solutions, but in terms of blaming different people. Surprisingly, the federal government has stepped in to provide criminal justice assistance, but mostly to prosecute corrupt politicians. Not so much to reduce the murder rate. Katrina opened a window of opportunity for both increasing media criticism and effective social change; however, neither one of these promises seems to have amounted to much. 

My Public Opinion -- Week 4

Apparently I've caught some foreign pathogen as I am rather bothered by an insufferable amount of coughing and aching. 

Anyway, I thought I'd clear the air a bit and be explicit about my research and how it relates to Lippmann and maybe Habermas. So go back and reread "Sleepless in Baltimore" to get the gist of my research, then come back.  I'm interested in explaining why the media is sensationalizing crime so much. Last week's discussion about how the media contends with competing incentives, like to publish news and to sell newspapers.  Obviously, given the loss in readership for the Times Picayune following Katrina, the incentive to sell newspapers may have increased and lead to increased sensationalism. The price to the public is also higher, as the real problems and policy solutions are not being reported and used to channel effective policy change.  I'm still trying to work through a plausible research question that sort of brings all of these elements together. 

De-Liberating Democracy

I am writing this from the Philadelphia airport-- the only airport I've been to that has free wireless internet. Ironic, that in one of this --democratic-- country's founding cities that the internet would be free to all passers by. Especially as I find myself about to compose my thoughts on Coleman and Blumler's The Internet and Democratic Citizenship. 

I went to Washington, D.C. last night and discussed my recent epiphanies with my lifelong friends now at Penn State who came to meet me in Baltimore for a long overdue adventure. This is my best attempt to recreate the conversation because its very relevant, I think, to what I read in Coleman and Blumler. Preston is an anthropology grad student, Caryn is a communications grad student. 

Preston: So... tell us about that epiphany you had.

Me: Hang on. This radio station sucks. 

pause. 

Ok. 

sigh. 

So you know how the world pretty much like, sucks, right? I mean we know that assholes and morons have conspired successfully to pretty much ruin the lives of the peaceful and well-meaning masses. Well, I'm in this com class that is sort of, like, bringing up a lot of resistance in me toward the idea that there's anything regular people can do to ever be free, like, ever again. 

Caryn: What are you reading?

Me: Remember? I asked you if I should take this class and sent you the syllabus... 

Caryn: Oh yeah... man, my TA job sucks this quarter... 

yada yada yada... 

Me: Yeah, that sucks. I can see why you chain smoke. Anyway, so like I was saying. I was riding the bus after class last week and decided, for just a little while, to suspend disbelief and to think my way through these issues. So the internet is new, right? And we have absolutely no idea what's going to happen. Maybe it could make life better, you know, like, so it wouldn't suck all the time and we can go online and not be bothered by the same bullshit that happens every day because of the socialization process that teaches the neoliberal model of individualism, like how we're taught that we're all on our own and the world is a harsh place... I mean, what if we could actually have a sense of public awareness emerging from this totally free space?

Preston: Yeah, but self-interest is so ingrained in our culture... the industrial revolution showed the rise of the American dream as being ingrained in our peasant origins as a nation... the ethos that we can do anything, even starting with a place of nothing, is more than just a story to Americans, more than a myth, its... its who we are, you know?

Me: What if we're on the brink of a new revolution, a tech revolution that can distort that myth, at least a little bit? What if our norms can change and we adjust to this new type of experience that brings us out of our obsession with ourselves by freeing us from the like, self-reinforcing cycle of neoliberalism?

Caryn: snoring

Preston: I mean, maybe. Yeah, that could be cool.

Me: What it would mean is a shift in the traditional distribution of power that we currently have from the elite level to the individual level... I mean, what if every individual had power rather than only economic elites? What if we could take it all back, you know, just by being able to be ourselves, unencumbered by all the pressures of our own self-interests? It would mean a fundamental change in the way we think of power and in the way power is distributed. We could all be empowered, not to run for office or vote, but to have at least some sort of public identity.  The trick is now, to just make sure that the government or market don't step in and totally destroy whatever it is that the internet could do for us all as a whole before we figure it out for ourselves. You know, like, to not worry about self-interests quite yet, to keep it totally free....

Preston: Like China? I mean, what if they do the same thing to us and we don't even know it...

Me: They don't. Trust me. I've looked up some shit that should have gotten me hauled off.

Preston: Yeah, me too.  So like, I know that voting in city elections is more significant and has a bigger effect on stuff than national elections. So what if every city had its own website... 

(we collectively came up with a brilliant idea)

Me: Man, we should patent that idea. For real. 

Preston: Yeah.

Me: Anyway, so that was my epiphany.

Silence.

Preston: Do you ever wonder if they switch like, a lot more babies than they say they do in hospitals? 

Me: Yeah, so like, what if nobody's really who they think they are?

++++++++++++

So that's about the extent of that conversation. More specifically, this week's reading generated a series of personal questions for me, such as what would empower individuals and how to go about obtaining those. The deliberative democratic ideal is to allow free communication of individuals in public. I envision something very simple, but very radical. End the war, immediately. Then use that money to give every person in America a free laptop. Make internet available in every town across the 50 states for free.  Then buy my idea and see what happens. 

I can talk about it later, if anyone wants to know. I'm not putting it up on the internet though. Irony is free but its not cheap.  

Excuse me, but I have a plane to catch.

sleepless in baltimore

Greetings from B-more...

I decided to post my reflections on my observations of this city so far. Traveling is great for students of cities because it keeps perspectives fresh. I'm absolutely captivated by Baltimore, I think because it has this great rhythm to it. I mean, every city more or less has its own sounds and pace that constitute a distinctive beat. But this one is kind of raw, like the kind that can only be appreciated through understanding the aesthetic pleasure of decay.  Kind of like New Orleans.

I also notice some interesting but familiar patterns of neighborhood development. The former retail district is now the 'hood. But basically, the entire city except for the newly revitalized downtown hub is the 'hood. There's the Inner Harbor that's got these skyscrapers and looks nice and attractive to elites and visitors, then there's the whole rest of the city. My hotel is about 10 minutes east of the Inner Harbor, so yes, that technically means I'm staying in the 'hood. But I wouldn't have it any other way. 

I really like the residential space of the neighborhoods I passed through around Johns Hopkins. Yes, its in the 'hood too. There are front steps, or stoops, in front of adjoining two story brick buildings. I think they're beautiful in their simplicity and the outdoor seating on the stoop that provides contact with neighbors. If you watch the Wire you know they're also the 'hood equivalent of lemonade stands. Urban Entrepreneurship 101. The dual edged sword of public spaces.

Now that you had to read my ramblings on Baltimore, I can tell you all how my presentation went this morning. My luggage was delayed but arrived just in time. So thankfully I didn't have to show up to the Urban Affairs Association conference to network with scholars I've adored from afar wearing dirty clothes and no makeup.  And I also wasn't flustered when I arrived just in time to listen to a great panel on cities in historical perspective. One of the presenters was one of my undergrad mentors, Peter Burns, who gave an outstanding paper on the "new" political space of New Orleans.  Then I was on a panel on urban violence. Two of us were discussing the racial aspects of crime, and the other two, the gender issues.  I think sometimes at this type of conference there are two basic types of presenters. One who tells a story and provides no data, and one who provides all data and no story. I think I did have a lot if data that I could have contextualized a bit more.

My paper focused on two main themes. First, how is the media defining the problem of crime in New Orleans now compared to before Katrina, and second, does media divergence from factual evidence suggest a failure to harness the power of a focusing event to affect the urban social agenda. I had a content analysis of media frames showing that crime was, according to media frames, causing the city to depopulate. Then I had a regression showing that crime was not, in fact, causing the city to depopulate. That race and class housing inequalities were.  I really liked my graphics (yay methods!) and other people did, too. I think they were helpful and pretty.

I actually got some great feedback, which was to show not only what the media is covering, but what the media is not covering, specifically, the enduring problems providing services to treat addiction and mental health related issues.  These sorts of problems are the ones that might actually be addressed by rebuilding policies better than the causal stories emerging to sort out blame.  I also heard that people wanted me to provide impactful examples of the sorts of stories the media is constructing, like quotes. I think that is great advice.

Afterwards, I went to a panel on the rebuilding of New Orleans and found some drama there. Panels specifically on New Orleans tend to get emotional because people doing this sort of work tend to be closely attached to the city and still have lingering traumas about what happened (ahem). Anyway, one of the presenters was Bob Whelan from UNO. He did an interesting survey of displaced public housing residents to find out what they would like to happen in terms of creating housing. One of the main reasons they cited for not returning to the city was crime. So I tried to find out more specifics from their survey data to sort of dovetail with my research but they didn't have exact numbers. 

My next task is to track down this record shop and get some wax. Baltimore has its own kind of music coming out called, "Bmore" or "Gutter music." This is a sample.