How influential are sound bytes in American culture?  Just ask Sarah Palin, she will tell you how devastating they can be.  From campaign slogans, “Change we need,” to marketing ads, "Are you in good hands?," the messages have become shorter and shorter.  The purpose of the sound byte is to appeal to a larger audience because you don't have to pay attention very long to understand the basic point that is being made.  While this practice may be harmless enough when it comes to commercialized products, it is extremely dangerous when applied to news broadcasts concerning politics.  The message has become so short that the audience is losing focus of the actual argument.  Sound bytes have included more people who are ignorant of actual events by appealing to the audience's entertainment and short attention spans, rather than focusing on important issues.  Are we better off with a large audience who knows very little if anything about real issues, or would it be better if we had a smaller, enlightened group involved in the important issues?  I say the latter. 

Remember the line, "I can see Russia from my house," the line that all but ended Sarah Palin's run at the Vice Presidency?  She never said that.  It was a spoof by Tina Fey on Saturday Night Live. What Palin actually said was "you can see Russia from land in Alaska."  The point of her response was to say that because Alaska and Russia are so close, as governor, she had to deal with them for various reasons.  Palin immediately explained this fact just after her quote during the interview.  Well, people know the difference between comedy and news, don't they?  Apparently not.  The Zogby Poll that was released in 2008, was designed to see how much voters knew about the political atmosphere.  Almost 87 percent of those polled believed that it was Sarah Palin who made the comment, "I can see Russia from my house", and not Tina Fey.  Despite the fact that the original interview was conducted on a major news network, it was the brief sound byte from Saturday Night Live that stayed in people's minds up to election day.  

Whether you like Palin, or not, it is scary to think that 87 percent of voters polled, people who determine important elections, don't know the truth. 

How does Saturday Night Live get away with this?  Saturday Night Live is not, and has never claimed to be, an actual news source. Saturday Night Live uses this presentation because it allows them to turn a comedic sound byte into "actual news" by presenting events in an entertaining forum.  This practice is not unique to Saturday Night Live, it can be seen everywhere.  A Florida Congressmen jokingly said, "I use cocaine and prostitutes because it is a fun thing to do" on The Colbert Report, and it was on Good Morning America the next morning.  CNN uses sound bytes from The Daily Show with Jon Stewart to make fun of John McCain and how he had a 1200 page medical report and suffered from "acute oldness".  This, again, was relayed to all of CNN's sister networks.  The Daily Show is a self proclaimed fake news show that became the number one way people got their political news during the 2008 presidential election.  The sound byte has become the most widely used tool in the new media age.      

Whether you like Palin, or not, it is scary to think that 87 percent of voters polled, people who determine important elections, don't know the truth.  How can we improve as a society, if people are clueless about the events that are going on around them?  There is no way for anyone to truly understand an issue by listening to a thirty-second sound byte.  Understanding comes from time and dedicated focus to a given subject.  Does this mean we should block everyone from becoming involved in political arguments?  Absolutely not.  But we should demand that if you want to be a part of the argument, you have to be able to make an argument, not just regurgitate a sound byte.  Let's stop focusing on entertainment and comedy in the news, and focus on real issues.  Let's demand a society where inclusion in the debate is open to all, but only if you can improve the quality of the debate.  If we stop focusing on comedy and entertainment in the news, won't we lose viewers?  Maybe.  But ask yourself which option is better.  A smaller, informed group who has a good understanding of the issues, or an emotional, clueless mob whose opinion depends on who entertains them best.  I choose the enlightened few over the emotional mob every time.   

The Ohio State University

Winter 2010