The Issue: The reading poses the question: if all words mean something different to each person than how can society come to agreement on what the media is saying and therefore how can there be one singular public opinion? I think Lippmann best summarizes it on page 44 by saying, “The world is vast, the situations that concern us are intricate, the messages are few, the biggest part of the opinion must be constructed in the imagination.”
Major Strength: A major strength of this reading is that Lippmann acknowledges stereotypes that divide men and women and students and professionals at the same time as finding common similarities between the groups and putting them all on the same level playing field. This can be seen in his explanation on page 40 where he says, “the tastes of business man and college students in big cities to-day still correspond more or less to the average judgments of newspaper editors in big cities twenty years ago.” Even though we are all human and part of the same society, Lippmann does a good job at explaining that our differences due to stereotypes or not make it difficult in asserting one correct public opinion.
Major Weakness: Lippmann has obviously given much thought to the idea that messages can be lost in translation either due to the diction chosen or lack of space in which they are presented (ex: through coded telegraph message). He explains that this limited space may provide room for a lack of truthfulness or accuracy however, he fails to talk about the opposing point of view – What if short and concise messages are more truthful and accurate because they have to compact all the necessary information into a little space and leave little room for embellishment and unnecessary fluff?
Underlying Assumption: I think a major underlying assumption is that the media always tells the fair and balanced version of the news and that they are complying with their duty as being the watchdogs of our country. As a society we give so much weight and importance to the media because what we read and see is what we consider our reality. However, if we all have different meanings for words and aren’t able to dissociate superficial analogies, differences, and varieties of lucidity of mind than we shouldn’t put so much power in the hands of a select few to tell us what to think.
Provocative Questions:
1) Lippmann talked about the telegram and the limited amount of space and truth someone could compact into a tiny message. This instantly made me think of the 140 character limit of Twitter – Twitter has become a powerful tool for disseminating information and spreading it through followers in attempts of gaining traction and awareness. However, if people are cautious to the truthfulness and accuracy of information packed into a limited space, how can we consider Twitter a legitimate and credible source for information?
2) On page 42 Lippmann stated, “there is no certainty whatever that the same word will call out exactly the same idea in the readers mind as it did in the reporter’s mind.” If this is true and words have different meanings for everyone than why do we put so much faith and trust into the media? How do we know that the reporters and media are trying to produce fair and balanced news and aren’t putting their own spin on it?