“Tuesday’s turnout numbers are even more dismal if you factor in the number of eligible voters who aren’t registered. Nationally, that’s about one in three,” stated an APP editorial today. “That means about 15 percent of eligible voters bothered to cast a ballot on Tuesday.”
Granted, there were no state-wide offices or referendums on the ballot. Still, at a time when overall taxes in New Jersey are the second highest in the country, according to a nationwide survey and analysis published in the APP on October 30, and the state’s economic recovery seems to lag behind much of the country, why did so few voters bother to cast a ballot?
When New Jersey did have a state-wide office at stake in 2014, it ranked 40th in voter turnout on Election Day, with only 32.5 percent of registered voters casting ballots, according to a study released in March by Nonprofit VOTE, and reported in NJ.com. (The national rate was 37 percent.)
In years past, some experts have pointed out that being located between the New York and Philadelphia media markets has made it difficult for New Jersey residents to get news about elections in the state, thereby leading to voter apathy. I don’t buy that argument.
With the growth of social media and other on-line information sources in recent years, it’s easier than ever to quickly get news about almost anything and anybody. For those who don’t like to get their information from digital sources, there are still plenty of newspapers and radio stations around. And, to the annoyance of many of us, telephones and postal mail are still used by candidates to disseminate their messages. And, therein, may lie the cause of the problem.
Voter apathy in New Jersey is likely caused by the quality, not quantity, of communication about candidates and issues. Even though some experts may claim negative advertising actually helps candidates beat their opponents, I believe what it does more than anything else is just turn people off to the whole election process itself.
Most communication around elections merely succeeds in belittling those in government or their opponents, reinforcing their general image as narcissistic liars or worse. And, why would the average voter want much to do with that? By the time a person reaches voting age in New Jersey and elsewhere in the country, they’ve learned to shut out political messages and not trust what candidates are saying. This is largely true whether the communication is being received via social media, another on-line source, or more traditional mediums like television.
Obviously, the election process in New Jersey and across the U.S. needs some serious fixing if it is going to work the way it was intended: to represent the will of the majority of the people. A good start is for candidates to improve the quality of their communication to the public. They should keep their messages simple, state them in positive terms, and demonstrate where they can make a difference.
Perhaps communication channels, especially those that profit from politicians, should be emboldened to only accept Election Day messages that help fix the problem, rather than make it worse. Maybe, just maybe, some positive communication actions can help reverse the trend of voter apathy in the years ahead.
No comments:
Post a Comment