Americans afraid of risks?! I won't risk that!
"By now it's almost a commonplace that many American's are overly afraid of risks - and that thier fears are often magnified by alarmist reporting." This can be seen as true because alarming news sells the majority of newspapers. If something isn't a risk, then why would people be interested in it. Most people don't worry abour driving their cars on the highway, but many would see jumping out of a perfectly good plane for fun as a tremendous risk. That said, a reporter looking for news isn't going to want to cover a news story about everyday drivers, but instead the dare devils that dive out of planes.
Since we've been talking so much about the ways in which statistics can be manipulated, I really liked the sentence: "In other words, statistical information is inevitably one level removed from reality." Every day individuals can't be expected to go out and create a statistical experiment in order to validate their own concerns. Thus, we're receiving our information second-hand, perhaps from someone else's reality.
Chapter 8 discussed how some statistics appear to be rising but this may be due only to the better ways in which the data has been conducted. Child abuse reports may seem to be steadily rising, but this may only be due to the fact that the police are reporting more of these crimes. This is just another thing to think about when wondering just how valid those statistics that you read are.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Americans afraid of risks?! I won't risk that!.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blogs.setonhill.edu/mt/mt_tb-awoisdlkfj.cgi/10792
Even though "IANS" keeps saying the same thing over and over (more or less), they are drawing some good conclusions. Being on the other side of the newspaper, knowing it from the writing perspective rather than the reading one, gives a whole new view on the news world, which we should not forget. We can't move into the reader perspective again and take statistics and information for granted- keep the reporter mindset and see that not everything is as it seems.
I like your quote, "If something isn't a risk, then why would people be interested in it. Most people don't worry abour driving their cars on the highway, but many would see jumping out of a perfectly good plane for fun as a tremendous risk."
It is true that if something is not a risk then most people do not read about it for pleasure or hoping to find concern in it. It is just like the frog blog I wrote. Deformity in frogs may be related to humans. Does it say that for sure? No, but there is a suggestion that raises the attention of the reader.
Like you said, chapter 8 of IANS plays into the bigger picture of the book. I didn't really find that many ideas or examples that presented something new in this chapter, but it is important to realize a rise in the reports of some action doesn't equate to rise in the actual occurrence of the action - another point to remember when scanning the latest story for the traps of science reporting.
I agree. Most of the news stories deal with something big that happened. Sometimes it good but more often its something bad that has happened and affected a number of people. This kinda bothers me at times and makes me feel that people arent treated equally...its seem that in order to be noticed you have to do something insane or something has to happen to you and it just doesnt seem fair. I guess thats just how life is. But you made a good point...a point that I think just about everyone seems to be talking about and agrees on.
I think that from the time we are a child-(Satan/Santa Claus) we are forced into behavior out of fear (hell/no Christmas presents, so we are normed to this idea of fear, and we grow older the fear either grows or subsides, but the idea lingers. Throw in some sketchy numbers, and the backing of print/tv news and you have either rediscovered/uncovered some fear. We are a society afraid of our shadows-why is this surprising?
I think that from the time we are a child-(Satan/Santa Claus) we are forced into behavior out of fear (hell/no Christmas presents, so we are normed to this idea of fear, and we grow older the fear either grows or subsides, but the idea lingers. Throw in some sketchy numbers, and the backing of print/tv news and you have either rediscovered/uncovered some fear. We are a society afraid of our shadows-why is this surprising?
Mitch, you left the same comment on my blog! I feel cheated...
I recall reading about a study of the Holocaust... children who were taught to behave by a system of punishment (that is, a strong concept of hell, penalties for minor infractions, etc.) were more likely to collaborate with the Nazis and less likely to speak or act in defense of the Jews. The same study looked into the lives of the rescuers and found that those who were more likely to rescue Jews were brought up in a household where instead of simply dishing out punishments, the parents explained concepts like morals and justice. In those households, when the religious instruction came from a strong father figure, the children were more likely to resist (even if passively) the Nazi version of "truth". There are times when you have to grab a child's hand to keep them from grabbing something that will break, but I work hard to make my children understand that they shouldn't behave a certain way out of fear of punishment, but rather out of a desire to do good. My nine-year-old son knows that, because he has reached "the age of reason," if he and his five-year-old sister do the same naughty deed, he will be punished more seriously because, as the older brother, he is supposed to set a good example.
Anyway, here's a newspaper article that discusses the difference between permissive, authoritarian, and the unfortunately-named "authoritative" parenting styles.
http://www.smh.com.au/cgi-bin/common/popupPrintArticle.pl?path=/articles/2004/02/09/1076175100637.html
And here's a blog entry in which I discuss my own parenting style.
http://jerz.setonhill.edu/weblog/permalink/3634/
Maddy, I love your statement..."If something isn't a risk, then why would people be interested in it?" Good point, Nobody wants the dull boring stuff, everyone wants something dangerous, something that makes them look again and double check all the surcomstances. I a reporter was to cover 1 of 2 different stories, and he/she got to pick. Would they pick A the story of the poor kitty stuck in a tree, or B the story of the hundreds of people trapped in a burning buildin all "taking risks" to save their lives. I know as a reader...i would much rather read or even see on the news scenario B, but hey thats just me. So as for taking risks...I'm all about doing, and seeing or reading...