Public mood as compass for guiding the ship of state?

EDITORIAL

The clued-in and the clueless

April 29, 2007

The media may have multiplied, but the messages they're carrying -- the who's who and what's what of our nation and world -- still aren't reaching an alarming number of Americans.

The subtitle of a Pew Research Center report (see the graphic on the Commentary page) says it all: "Public Knowledge of Current Affairs Little Changed by News and Information Revolutions."

In 1989, the Pew center surveyed Americans about their knowledge of news events. Earlier this year, Pew did so again. How clueless are some of us?

Despite newspapers and podcasts and Webcasts and cable news channels galore -- not to mention the notorious hunting accident in which he shot his own friend -- 31 percent of the survey sample couldn't name the current vice president. (He's from Wyoming.) That's a 5 percentage point increase from 1989, when Dan Quayle sat in that chair. And 32 percent of us remain blissfully unaware that the United States has a trade deficit, a 13 percentage point increase from 1989.

Disheartening, huh?

Well, maybe not. As a group we're paying more attention to some domestic affairs. In 1989, only 14 percent of us knew the name of the then Speaker of the House, Rep. Tom Foley. Today, 49 percent of us know that Nancy Pelosi heads the chamber. And 37 percent of us know that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts is a conservative, 7 percentage points more than knew the same about former Chief Justice William Rehnquist 18 years ago.

Specifics aside, isn't it nice to know that we Americans control what, and how much, we know? Consider this: The more well-versed among us are differentiated not by our news medium of choice, but by the engagement level of news we consume. Viewers of "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart" and "The Colbert Report" on Comedy Central, readers of major newspaper Web sites and listeners of National Public Radio and Rush Limbaugh's radio show -- all outlets that rely on our active involvement -- were likely to have a high knowledge level. On the other hand, outlets that allow relatively passive consumption -- conventional TV news and blogs -- yielded lower percentages of users with high knowledge of current events. Our take-away: As technology advances, the delivery of news will continue to evolve. But then, as now, only those sharp and curious enough to care about their surroundings will bother to turn pages, log on, tune in and stay connected. This confirms the enduring primacy of our most important information portal: the human brain.