Does anyone understand why the US Census's ad campaign seems so deliberately aimed at only the demographic that's most likely to already feel positively about the census?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The name of this blog is largely meaningless.
3 comments:
Good observation!
I would say that its because the people making and distributing the census are roughly in this demographic and most people have trouble persuading those of different backgrounds or with different cultural references. We assume that other people are like us. Also, government propaganda is most effective when appealing to those who already agree. Its much easier to strengthen beliefs than it is to change them.
An alternative explanation would be that the census people just don't care to get other demographics signed on. But given the middling level of bureaucracy that the US Census exists at, I'd fall toward incompetence more than anything.
If you want to see the same kind of effect (though not as obviously skin/income oriented), watch the opening video to the Copenhagen Climate Conference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OIPYUlHv38. Now imagine you're a skeptic (or maybe you already are?). That video was deemed excellent, eye-opening, emotional, and give other various platitudes--by people who already think that climate change is an existential problem. But it just looks like scare-mongering and garbage to those who disagree.
The Copenhagen video and the census video you linked to are both designed to strengthen beliefs and emotions that are already "correct."
Jeez let's not forget "this demographic" is also feeling a little sour and nervously guilty about ANYTHING the gov't does, so a little feel good on the US census is just what the doctor ordered ;)
Bolo: An alternative explanation would be that the census people just don't care to get other demographics signed on. But given the middling level of bureaucracy that the US Census exists at, I'd fall toward incompetence more than anything.
I actually think that these two explanations go together very well and are probably 100% accurate.
Soj: I hope you will take it in the entirely snark-free way it's intended when I say could you expand on that a bit? I'm not sure what you're getting at.
Post a Comment