6 ms·

The Iowa Caucus, Pseudo-Events, and Hyperreality

48 points by longdefeat 7y ago

PaulHoule 7y ago
I was surprised to see it mention this 1962 book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Image:_A_Guide_to_Pseudo-events_in_America https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Image:_A_Guide_to_Pseudo-e... certainly you find many books in history circa the 1960s that take it for granted that American culture has been full of BS from the very beginning, but that book clearly dates before the surge in French Theory, TV News as we know it, ...
xvedejas 7y ago
These pseudo-events are almost necessary in our first-past-the-post system, to build consensus among two wings and avoid the spoiler effect. With its air of legitimacy it creates a schelling point (or two) so that a bunch of strangers can cooperate in a very strange game. It doesn't really matter what schelling point you choose, just that you're able to choose the same one, and your expected payoff will be higher.
elhudy 7y ago
>Yes, he’s right, that assumption is not warranted. We don’t need to know immediately and the desire for immediacy is part of the problem, but that no longer matters. It hasn’t mattered for years. In the currently-existing media-political environment, waiting a day or a week is unthinkable. This premise seems at least somewhat disagreeable. Let's say I live in New Hampshire and am equally partial to two candidates, and dislike the front-running candidate. It's advantageous for me to know as soon as possible which of my two favorable candidates best competes against the front-runner, so I can focus my donations and support on them asap. Am I missing the point?
- maxerickson 7y ago
  Your example is coherent, but you don't make an argument about the magnitude of the advantage. If we take the week between the Iowa mountains and the New Hampshire primary, donating 24 or 36 hours earlier is likely to be worth essentially nothing.
  - elhudy 7y ago
    >Your example is coherent, but you don't make an argument about the magnitude of the advantage. Admittedly there's no data that exists to support a large magnitude of advantage. Likewise though, the author has none either yet is making the claim that it "doesn't matter". It's purely theoretical. It would be like saying that whoever wins the jump-ball at the start of a basketball game is irrelevant, because the other team gets the ball at half anyway. Yet strangely enough, we find it gives a 3.5% win rate advantage. https://kenpom.com/blog/the-value-of-ben-gillery/ https://kenpom.com/blog/the-value-of-ben-gillery/
- yongjik 7y ago
  The passage you quoted reminds me of those pseudo-intellectuals who, when met with (say) a pothole on the street, launches a treatise on how modern society is addicted to speed, and how our lives could be enriched if we could just stop and admire our surroundings, instead of trying to drive from point A to B so goddamn fast. I'll bet most of these people never had to bring their kids from kindergarten while buying groceries for a family.
socialdemocrat 7y ago
Can't say I fully got it. Probably because at this point I am tired of paying attention to train wreak American elections are. Why, why oh why are American elections ALWAYS screwed up in some way? How come every other rich country manage to run elections fine, but not the US? They can send a man to the moon, but they cannot run elections: Either ballot boxes go missing. The lines of voters go around the block, it closes before people can vote or the voting machines are broken, hacked, failed or whatever. It is almost morbidly fascinating how there is some new way every election where things get bungled somehow.
- AnimalMuppet 7y ago
  True. And yet... I see news photos from various other countries where there are soldiers guarding the polling places with guns. In the US, the polling places are guarded by grandmothers. I suppose I'm comparing the US to third-world countries, which is not a standard that the US should have trouble meeting. You're comparing it to first-world countries, and while the US should also be able to meet that standard, it seems to have trouble doing so...
  - tenpies 7y ago
    I think the US is the only country in the world where you don't need ID to vote. Banking? Need ID. Getting a job? Need ID. Doing anything with the government? Need ID. Driving? Need ID. But voting? No way, we'll take your word for it because one party has convinced everyone that asking for ID would be racist. I mean even if there were some conspiracy to make sure one group does not get ID, the solution is to get that group ID, not cripple them in society by leaving them ID-less but able to vote. The US is such a weird place.
- crooked-v 7y ago
  The largest factor in this continual chaos is that US national elections are actually 50 (plus territories and the military) separate elections, all run completely independently without any real national standards and with only state-level (or sometimes only county-level) funding.
- 7y ago
TurkishPoptart 7y ago
A weird article, but the title reminded me of this documentary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation I think everyone should watch it.
JackFr 7y ago
The machine needs to be fed. Multiple 24-hour news channels need to put something on the air to sell ads, as do the network news programs. To say nothing of print and the web. Honestly its information pollution.
- war1025 7y ago
  The information vacuum was pretty palpable this morning. The programming was all set up assuming there would be new information for people to talk about. Guests were lined up. Alternate stories were shelved or delayed. Then there was no new information. But they still had time to fill. Plus they had special coverage last night with no information to report. I do not envy the reporters put in that position.

48 points by longdefeat 7y ago

I was surprised to see it mention this 1962 book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Image:_A_Guide_to_Pseudo-events_in_America https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Image:_A_Guide_to_Pseudo-e... certainly you find many books in history circa the 1960s that take it for granted that American culture has been full of BS from the very beginning, but that book clearly dates before the surge in French Theory, TV News as we know it, ...

xvedejas 7y ago

These pseudo-events are almost necessary in our first-past-the-post system, to build consensus among two wings and avoid the spoiler effect. With its air of legitimacy it creates a schelling point (or two) so that a bunch of strangers can cooperate in a very strange game. It doesn't really matter what schelling point you choose, just that you're able to choose the same one, and your expected payoff will be higher.

elhudy 7y ago

>Yes, he’s right, that assumption is not warranted. We don’t need to know immediately and the desire for immediacy is part of the problem, but that no longer matters. It hasn’t mattered for years. In the currently-existing media-political environment, waiting a day or a week is unthinkable. This premise seems at least somewhat disagreeable. Let's say I live in New Hampshire and am equally partial to two candidates, and dislike the front-running candidate. It's advantageous for me to know as soon as possible which of my two favorable candidates best competes against the front-runner, so I can focus my donations and support on them asap. Am I missing the point?

maxerickson 7y ago
Your example is coherent, but you don't make an argument about the magnitude of the advantage. If we take the week between the Iowa mountains and the New Hampshire primary, donating 24 or 36 hours earlier is likely to be worth essentially nothing.
- elhudy 7y ago
  >Your example is coherent, but you don't make an argument about the magnitude of the advantage. Admittedly there's no data that exists to support a large magnitude of advantage. Likewise though, the author has none either yet is making the claim that it "doesn't matter". It's purely theoretical. It would be like saying that whoever wins the jump-ball at the start of a basketball game is irrelevant, because the other team gets the ball at half anyway. Yet strangely enough, we find it gives a 3.5% win rate advantage. https://kenpom.com/blog/the-value-of-ben-gillery/ https://kenpom.com/blog/the-value-of-ben-gillery/
yongjik 7y ago
The passage you quoted reminds me of those pseudo-intellectuals who, when met with (say) a pothole on the street, launches a treatise on how modern society is addicted to speed, and how our lives could be enriched if we could just stop and admire our surroundings, instead of trying to drive from point A to B so goddamn fast. I'll bet most of these people never had to bring their kids from kindergarten while buying groceries for a family.

socialdemocrat 7y ago

Can't say I fully got it. Probably because at this point I am tired of paying attention to train wreak American elections are. Why, why oh why are American elections ALWAYS screwed up in some way? How come every other rich country manage to run elections fine, but not the US? They can send a man to the moon, but they cannot run elections: Either ballot boxes go missing. The lines of voters go around the block, it closes before people can vote or the voting machines are broken, hacked, failed or whatever. It is almost morbidly fascinating how there is some new way every election where things get bungled somehow.

AnimalMuppet 7y ago
True. And yet... I see news photos from various other countries where there are soldiers guarding the polling places with guns. In the US, the polling places are guarded by grandmothers. I suppose I'm comparing the US to third-world countries, which is not a standard that the US should have trouble meeting. You're comparing it to first-world countries, and while the US should also be able to meet that standard, it seems to have trouble doing so...
- tenpies 7y ago
  I think the US is the only country in the world where you don't need ID to vote. Banking? Need ID. Getting a job? Need ID. Doing anything with the government? Need ID. Driving? Need ID. But voting? No way, we'll take your word for it because one party has convinced everyone that asking for ID would be racist. I mean even if there were some conspiracy to make sure one group does not get ID, the solution is to get that group ID, not cripple them in society by leaving them ID-less but able to vote. The US is such a weird place.
crooked-v 7y ago
The largest factor in this continual chaos is that US national elections are actually 50 (plus territories and the military) separate elections, all run completely independently without any real national standards and with only state-level (or sometimes only county-level) funding.
7y ago

TurkishPoptart 7y ago

A weird article, but the title reminded me of this documentary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation I think everyone should watch it.

JackFr 7y ago

The machine needs to be fed. Multiple 24-hour news channels need to put something on the air to sell ads, as do the network news programs. To say nothing of print and the web. Honestly its information pollution.

war1025 7y ago
The information vacuum was pretty palpable this morning. The programming was all set up assuming there would be new information for people to talk about. Guests were lined up. Alternate stories were shelved or delayed. Then there was no new information. But they still had time to fill. Plus they had special coverage last night with no information to report. I do not envy the reporters put in that position.