Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumbleSun Editorial:
Restoring civility
Ugliness in politics needs to be reversed to put America back on track
Sunday, Feb. 5, 2012 | 2 a.m.
What do you think?
Send your thoughts in a letter — no more than 250 words. Include the writer’s name, address and phone number. Anonymous letters will not be considered. E-mail: letters@lasvegassun.com.As the politicians and their campaigns move on from Nevada and Saturday’s caucuses, it’s worth taking a moment to step back from the heat of the political battle and consider the tone of the debate.
This is a larger issue than what the candidates are saying about each other. Campaigns throughout American history have been tough and often nasty affairs. (In 1884 Grover Cleveland faced a paternity scandal and was taunted with the chant, “Ma, ma, where’s my pa?”) Politicians either learn to have thick skins or find some other way to occupy their time.
What concerns us is how the political debate is shaping the way voters are looking at politics and dealing with issues. There has been a distinct and disturbing rise in the lack of civility among not just elected officials but also the voters who put them there. You don’t have to go far to see that. The Internet is filled with people taking shots at one another.
We have heard people cite reasons for the rise of incivility, but unfortunately, discussions about the reason often erupt into bouts of finger-pointing. (We’ve actually seen verbal fights over the issue, which would be ironically funny if it weren’t tragic.)
Studies suggest that people largely blame politicians, campaigns, radio talk shows and TV programs. They also suggest that people are tired of the negativity of it all.
A study last year by a coalition of research firms found that 65 percent of Americans consider uncivil behavior in public to be a major problem, and more than half of all Americans say incivility is going to get worse. Pollsters said the number of people who felt that way increased 16 percentage points from the year before.
A 2010 study by Allegheny College found that nearly half of Americans believe civility is in decline since President Barack Obama took office. That’s not a surprise, considering the tenor of the rhetoric in Washington, on talk radio and on cable TV, where it’s often not enough just to disagree with someone. Instead, political disagreements have become vile exercises in personal destruction: Opponents are vilified — even within the same political party — and there’s no room for compromise on just about anything.
That’s not how Americans think things should go. The Allegheny College study said 87 percent of Americans think people can respectfully disagree and 95 percent believe civility is important to the democracy. If that’s so, why don’t Americans do that more often?
The survey last year found that nearly three-quarters of Americans had “tuned out” government because of the ugly tone, and thus they probably don’t discuss it much. Who can blame them? Who wants to talk about civic issues if you only think you’re going to get shouted down or called an idiot by someone who disagrees with you? Much of what passes for debate in the country is little more than people dismissing others’ opinions out of hand while trying to score a snarky comeback — much like a presidential debate.
That is troubling because it’s not conducive to solving the nation’s problems, which are far more complex than can be described in a sound bite or a witty retort.
This has to stop if America is to get back on track, and people are apparently ready to take action. The 2011 survey said 67 percent of Americans decided to vote against a candidate because of the candidate’s uncivil behavior.
But it’s going to take more than voting to reverse this. People are going to have to demand more substance and less ugliness in politics, and they’re going to have to find ways in their own lives to work together, compromise and agree to disagree.
The bottom line: It’s going to take everyday Americans to lead the way.
Discussion: 20 comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
Post a comment
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
Everything Under the Sun
Blogs
The Kats Report
Clint Holmes is a big deal at Cabaret Jazz and 'The Carlyle!'; Playboy's furry-ous closing; Elvis is a 'Legend'
Joe Pesci remembers his own honeymoon in Vegas -- meeting the Rat Pack (1 Comment)
Las Vegas Philharmonic says search for new music director to begin 'immediately' (1 Comment)
With Shenandoah project stalled, Wayne Newton hits back legally (7 Comments)
Where does a Playmate play when she turns 21? Vegas! (3 Comments)
Ice Ice Billy
The road to six-toed cats and Mayor Bubba
The Kats Report
David Itkin tells L.V. Philharmonic officials he's on his way out (14 Comments)
- Locally owned and independent since 1950; Winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, best news website in the nation & DuPont Award for broadcast journalism
Our leaders give the public what they think the public wants. The public see their leaders responding and give the leaders even more reason to "stand firm on principle" and not take crap from anyone.
People find the least excuse to make snarky, hateful comments. Mark my words, even this editorial will generate comments filled with hate because it mentioned that uncivility has increased since Obama has taken office.
There has been a marked increase in the number of personal attacks expressed in the comments section on the Sun. Combine that with the name-calling, and inappropriate comments such as "Your wife says hello" and there should be little wonder that our leaders have stooped as low as they have. Again, the leaders are just selling the product the public will buy.
I'm not looking forward to what I'll be reading in the months to come.
boftx...
We are on the same page.
Precisely!
Left, right or center...
to hate shouldn't be part of the debate.
Obama goes out of his way to divide this country.
Obama is anti private businesses.
Obama makes it a point to only be the President of his friends and cronies.
Obama call consrevative the enemy and rednecks.
We desire a President that is for all Americans.
----------------
Obama demands we "Stop complainin'. Stop grumblin'. Stop cryin'." -- and Start Taxin'
gmag39,
Hatred is not in and of itself wrong. I'm sure you would say that you hate injustice as much as I do. It is the way that hatred is expressed that matters, and some expressions are just plain wrong, and deserving of hatred themselves.
It is extremely ironic that the Las Vegas Sun would ever print such an article entitled, "Restoring civility;
Ugliness in politics needs to be reversed to put America back on track". What a joke!!! This comes in the direct aftermath of a Las Vegas Sun journalist posing what I personally perceived as a "personal appearance" attack on Donald Trump? How hypocritical is this? No wonder the author of this article is termed as a "Sun Editorial"! I don't blame any Las Vegas Sun journalist for not wanting to put their name on this one. Or is it, that the Chief Editor and President of the Las Vegas Sun, Brian Greenspun, is standing in the shadows of this article testing the "waters of change"? If I were a betting man, I would wager that this advice came from Brian Greenspun's band of so-called, "think-tank scholars" from the Brookings Institute. If so, my reply to this would be, "Way too late for that. The Las Vegas Sun has clearly flown its colors of left-wing extremism."
And then, just an hour after this article was published, here comes the hypocritical soldier boys of the Las Vegas Sun whose commentators are just as sneaky and contemptibly inadequate. One of these little foot soldiers writes, "Left, right or center...to hate shouldn't be part of the debate." Oh boy!!! They are coming out of the woodworks! These type of sneaky little extreme left-wingers are now claiming, "Oh no, I don't hate." For, they just think that anyone who disagrees with their views is not mentally stable." Slick, real slick, "WillieWannaBe's"!!!
Enjoyed the editorial and agree with the premise. We need to restore civility in politics.
But we can't. We are doomed for failure in that regard.
Why?
The media seems to always report about this, but the very same media (not this outlet in specific) seems to encourage it.
Why?
Because this is how they make their money.
They want the pot stirred. It gets people watching their news shows. It gets people reading their news.
It started with William Randolph Hearst and "yellow journalism" and here's where we're at right now. And it's not going to end.
A specific example was on Fox News. This segment is available to look up. And it involved Nevada politics.
After the November 2010 elections, Ms. Sharron Angle showed up on the Sean Show. I guess with her tail between her legs after her defeat, and that's where failure Tea/Republicans go to get "Hannitized."
Mr. Hannity said hello and, before any questions were asked, he immediately said he was very sorry Ms. Angle did not win and defeat Senator Reid. Mr. Hannity went on immediately to say because he absolutely HATED Senator Reid.
So, I understand the premise of this editorial, and I agree with it, but it's only talk. Because some news media sources DON'T WANT it to end. Especially the white collar ultra-conservative crowd. It will still continue.
They want me to act civil in my discussions. But they, in turn, don't have limits.
That's why I fight them bastards and their propaganda. With the truth.
The ideological fight continues. It has to. Because we, the hard working middle class of America, MUST and WILL have a say. We are no longer silent. We must get out there and have our say. Because if we don't, the other side will get their way. By our inaction.
People need to understand this brand of conservatism that infects the Republican Party, and their Tea Party parasites, is WAY beyond the pale. All they know is uncivility. Because they don't have a message. They change the truth around to suit an agenda. The rich are the "job creators." GIMME A BREAK! For years we've all been told that and it wasn't true before and it's still not true now.
If it is called uncivil for me to call them out with the truth, then so be it. If you think that way, then the fight continues. We stand to lose too much by being silent.
"The bottom line: It's going to take everyday Americans to lead the way."
SUN -- this is about the only part I agree with. Your tired old "why can't we all just get along" whine is hypocritical, considering your usual rants against all things Republican. Since the different branches of government were founded to act as checks and balances, I certainly hope they don't get along. Especially in smashing the current status quo.
"Our leaders give the public what they think the public wants."
boftx -- way too true. And isn't the flip side of all government does to us? What else can be expected from citizens who allow our little girls to be fondled and our elderly mothers' Depends searched before getting on a flight -- all in blatant violation of the Bill of Rights?
"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." -- Eric Blair, aka George Orwell
Brad,
I have a minor criticism to make regarding your comment. The "official" Sun editorial never carries the name of the author, only those by Brian Greenspun do. It can be inferred that the Sun editorial is an official statement of policy.
On the other hand, I agree with your remark that this piece seems at odds with the piece recently published by Mr. Coolican. Granted, he is a columnist and not a reporter, but I question the wisdom of some of the words he used. I have little doubt that I was alone in sending him a private message saying as much.
The Sun could do much to help the situation this piece highlights by exerting every effort to keep opinion out of news stories, and clearly labeling pieces such as those by Mr. Coolican as opinion. Too many people seem to lack the ability to do so for themselves.
The Sun might also do well to run a story that explains the difference between a piece by a columnist and a story by a journalist.
KillerB,
It really isn't necessary for us to all get along. Instead, what matters to is have faith in the bell curve for human intelligence and count on the fact that the majority of people should be capable of recognizing idiocy when it rears its (empty) head.
The key is to offer reasonable statements that reasonable people can see the truth of.
No civility? Hogwash! A stupid editorial! Go gargle with razor blades!
One has to wonder, if this "Restoring Civility," article is kindly being mentioned due to the array of words some Las Vegas Commenters pen each day that appear disrespectful and not really "elevating" discussions, but is a show of egos.
Lively exchanges provoke thought, testing for truthfullness, and ammending positions. We, as a human race, treasure and embrace language and communication as a vehicle that steers our lives. We all value what is right and just. What is right and just is a matter of perception. We all possess our own brand of point of view. Hopefully, one also possesses the ability to communicate their stance in a mature manner that is not blantently offensive. For some, the exchanges with hints of offensiveness are enjoyable reads, while others skip such.
To each their own.
Blessings and Peace,
Star
The first step, if the Sun wishes to be a media outlet that participates in the restoration of civility in debate and disagreement, is to eliminate any and all postings of comments by those not using verified real names. The second would be to make a clear distinction between the work of reporters and the work of editorialists. The third would be to uphold a policy of editorial civility from the inside out.
Hatred obscures the real issues in a campaign. Those who have no vocabulary or facts have to use hate or they would be unable to post.
I would expect anyone who posts the usual nasty comments about ANY President or ANY candidate will be banned from posting correct? Trolls of either party often use openly negative lies to throw a nasty light on the other party.
Commentary that is fact based has merit. Comments that rely on partisan nastiness and that parse facts into something it is not need to be removed. Those who support a candidate can continue to do so using fact and their opinions.
Opinion does not excuse vile comments such as we have seen from both extremes.
From an earlier comment by me - "I have little doubt that I was alone in sending him [Mr. Coolican] a private message saying as much."
That should have read "I doubt that I was alone ..."
Comment removed by moderator. - -
An article on civility has a comment removed by moderator.
Irony, it's what's for dinner.
Why can't we respect dissenting opinions, anymore? It's ridiculous, and it serves none of us.
We need discussion, compromise, and STATESMEN. People who care more about the country than their personal biases.
I don't care who Newt slept with, or that he wants an open marriage. I don't care if a couple of guys want to make their union legal. I don't care if some poor person feels they can't support a child right now, and gets an abortion. It's none of my business.
Am I alone in my frustration about what we should be talking about vs. what we are talking about in America's political scene today?
Mr. Reza,
Having one's real name appear on a comment is not sufficient to prevent inappropriate behavior. The only comment to be removed from this piece (so far) came from a "trusted" user whose name is displayed.
Heretic,
What is more ironic with regard to the subject matter of this editorial is that the removed comment implied that a well-known personality should be killed. That is hardly a "civil" attitude.
I am on occasion, siding with Libertarians, other times, Dems, in the old days many republicans were people I endorsed, and lastly I would side with none of the above, I thought all current solutions were rubbish.
The current system is no longer working. The ability to and the need to be re-elected supersedes doing their jobs.
I can see various scenarios that can and would fix the system, but no action will be taken on these fixes until we have almost ruined the USA.
I will criticize all sides to a certain extent, but during this phase of the dismantling of the "American Way Of Life" the bulk of the blame rests on the shoulders of republicans, those of you that lean that way will try any number of justifications to change the dialog (The Birthers?) but the end result is until we either find a new industry to exploit for a generation or two, like we did the last century or we get our clocks cleaned by the Chinese, The India Indians, or an African rogue country, etc. we are losing ground to EVERYONE and EVERYTHING.
Hate it or love it. It is the truth. Think I am kidding? Just crawl back in the Fox News Hole and when you look out in 3-4 years you will see America disintegrated.
Face it, nations with fair and unbiased media have good governments. Apparently you can't have one without the other! Our greatest mistake has been allowing too much media ownership to so few and until we, once again, make change regarding such our problems will drag on longer than they should.
With regard to civility one has to question the motives of TV and newspapers. They seem to thrive on stirring the pot in order to have people listen to them (24hrs) Couple that with the fact that all remarks that are outrageous get notoriety ,once again news companies thrive on controversy.
Add to that a Congress that is truly a madhouse then what can the average person do. One suggestion is to honestly answer for yourself and yourself alone whether your congress person is part of the problem or part of the solution. Question whether you believe that one party can walk in lockstep to block any legislation and you will find the answer.
The problem is not defining the issue more likely how do we change whats going on. Sad to say these things have a way of becoming violent as each exchange becomes louder and more threatening.
If these keeps up we won't have to worry about Al Queda or the Taliban we will have to worry about a civil war that this time will surely destroy our nation.
What we really and truly need is like a constitutional convention of Republicans and democrats The Supreme court and the President to sit down together and realize that they themselves have to commit to civility and a national purpose. They must set the tone or we have to know that one spark and we will explode. My first recommendation in order to set the tone correctly is for people to stop demonizing the Office of the President . You may disagree with the man yet demonizing his office and right to the office is one of the most destructive actions against our democracy.