EOTO Terms & Concepts: Spiral of Silence

The spiral of silence is a technique most often used in the realms of communications and political science. Originally proposed by Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann, a well-known political scientist, this theory demonstrates the positive and negative correlation between public opinion and personally-held convictions and opinions. This model is such a great model for what’s going on in today’s world like censorship and how it can/has affected people, especially certain demographics.

There are 4 major steps in the spiral of silence. Here they are:

1. One has an intense desire to fit in and be socially accepted. This desire fuels one’s inclination to speak up, speak out and share their opinion.

2. When people are in a setting of a “marketplace of ideas” and everyone is sharing opinions, thoughts, beliefs, and core convictions, there is an innate ability to read the room and see what ideas are being more accepted than others. Individuals who believe their ideas are floating to the top are inclined to speak out more. Conversely, one who feels like their point of view is sinking, unpopular, and unaccepted, begins to hold back and not say as much.

3. Popular opinions become more prevalent while the less popular ones dissipate. And this dynamic creates a sometimes false illusion that popular means “true” and “strong” and unpopular means “false” and weak.

4. Because of the previously stated dynamic, the spiral begins to occur. This spiral causes people to follow the central point of view and push unpopular points of view to the “back burner.” The degree of the spiral is evident in the number of people who are fearful and apprehensive about publicly sharing their stance on issues.

          

The spiral of silence has so many implications but here are the two that are very evident to me and that I personally have a frame of reference for. This spiral implies that individuals with minority-categorized views eventually self-censor themselves out of fear that their views will be censored and not socially accepted. According to The New York Post, of a polled 1,500 people, 66% of people said that they either censor themselves all the time or sometimes. And according to the CATO Institute, 62% of Americans say that they are fretful in sharing the political beliefs they hold.

This spiral also implies that the “marketplace of ideas” isn’t as strong or isn’t as evident. One can deduct that if there was a strong marketplace of ideas, one would not have fear sharing his/her views because the environment would be conducive to the varying viewpoints. This spiral lowers and limits the efficacy of the marketplace of ideas by undermining its ability to allow competing ideas to battle and rise or fall on their own.

This spiral of silence affects people individually as well as society as a whole. This spiral negatively affects society being that America was founded on the principle of free speech and embraces the concept of diversity of opinion and belief. This spiral inevitably creates single stories, being that only one side is heard: the loudest and the most popular. Therefore making society one-sided and single-faceted. 

This spiral also negatively impacts me because of how frowned-upon views are treated. Being a Black Christian conservative is not a popular worldview and way of life. So, the majority voice tried to silence me and suppress my voice. I have seen in my personal life how the majority is seen as “truth” and it has disregarded everything else, which happens to be the category I fall under. I have been censored on social media, seen as less than, and even disregarded by people of my same ethnicity just because my “voice” didn’t sound like theirs. I had a seat at the table when they looked at the color of my skin, but when I opened my mouth, they no longer wanted me to sit with them. Funny how that works, right?

As a nation we must realize that in more ways than one we are in this spiral. That is not good news. We must get back to creating spaces for everyone's opinions and belief systems to be heard and acknowledged. We need America to sound a like a symphony of various voices instead of the resounding shout of one singular voice. It is our responsibility to fix and correct the current issues from this spiral and prohibit any more spirals of silence that may try to manifest in our lives and communities. It may be difficult and divert from the current climate of society, but it is the right thing to do! America will be better for it!

 Diffusions of Innovations and Ideas

Everett Rogers' Diffusion of Innovations (and Ideas) Theory has been used to justify and explain the progression and rate of acceptance of theories, ideas, innovations, technologies, and so much more. This theory gives a visual representation of how certain demographics and people embrace the introduction of new concepts and the practice of those concepts. 

Within this theory, there are five categories of people: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards. Innovators are the ones who innovate, cultivate, and introduce ideas. Early adopters are those who jump on the bandwagon immediately, embracing the idea very quickly. The early majority deals with the first major wave of people who accept the idea. This group's acceptance tends to take a longer time than the innovators and early adopters.

The late majority refers to the wave of people that adopts the idea at a later time than the average person and embraces the new idea with slight skepticism and hesitation. And laggards are those who are the very last to accept the idea or innovation and do so with such reluctance because they do not necessarily like change and are comfortable in current tradition. Laggards can even be the small minority who refuse to accept new ideas and innovative advances (the non-conformers).

With this model, I endeavor to explain the gradual rate of acceptance of an idea instead of innovation, the idea being the abolition of Black slaves in America. The mass acceptance of this "idea" was a long and winding road and this "road" can be demonstrated in the following model I graphed. 

So, the pioneers of the abolition movement for African Americans were abolitionists such as Benjamin Lay, Olaudah Equiano, Anthony Benezet, Elizabeth Freeman, Benjamin Rush, and Moses Brown. These individuals were probably the earliest American abolitionists. Many do not know about these individuals because in many cases, those who make something popular are remembered and acknowledged more than those who were the "true pioneers." 

             

The early adopters were Black slaves, free Blacks in the North, and abolitionists like Frederick Douglass, William Lloyd Garrison, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Sojourner Truth, and Harriet Tubman. These individuals helped spark the fire of the abolition movement. These individuals believed that slavery was wrong and had no doubt in their minds about their support for this movement, although it was frowned upon at the time. They were early adopters of abolition because of their knowledge and realization of the immoral nature of slavery and its violation of the inherent nature of America's concept of freedom and liberty. 

           

The early majority consisted of Christians, religious folks, and poor and middle-class white citizens of the South and North who didn't have enough money to own slaves. Although some Christians used the Bible to justify slavery, many Christians accepted the abolitionist movement because they knew  and lived by principles of love and treating one another with kindness and respect explicitly stated in the Bible. The lower and middle-class citizens were part of the early majority because there was no connection, correlation, or benefit from slavery on their part. 

The late majority is comprised of Northerners who had a stake in and profited from slavery, Blacks who owned slaves because of monetary and economic status, and individuals who viewed slavery as a "necessary evil." These individuals were reluctant to accept the ideas and progression of the anti-slavery movement. These people were guided by their pockets and deemed what they gained from this exploitation more important than the freedom of individuals. They also were hesitant because they were used to customs and long-standing traditions of slaveholding and slave labor.

The laggards were those adamant, wealthy slaveowners, slavemasters, and  plantation owners of the South who saw nothing wrong with slavery and "fought til the death" to keep it in the colonies. These were the ones who tried to succeed the union because of their desire for slavery, thus sparking the American Civil War of 1861. These laggards were the "pissed off angry white people" that Professor Smith talks about. When slavery was eventually abolished by the 13th Amendment, I could imagine that these people were so mad that they could no longer own slaves and profit off of their intense labor. The 13th Amendment sort of forced them to adopt and accept the realities of abolition and how it would change America forever, versus them becoming laggards naturally of their own free will.

This progression in abolition led to other movements for the equal treatment and recognition of Blacks in America. This development was positive overall. But if I had to be critical, I could say that a negative effect of this long developmental process of the abolition of slavery is that many have created a false sense of duty to correct the injustices of the past. Unbeknownst to them, they are creating injustices in the present by overcorrecting. People are holding on to the past and have not truly learned from it. They need to move on and implement the lessons learned from the pioneers, adopters, the majority, and even the laggards. Because as my high school teacher always says, "It's best not to bring up old mess. Focus on the future." But all in all, the initial good of this movement outweighs the current negative effects carried out through society. 

 Technology That I Learned From Someone Else

Although the various technologies presented in the EOTO Presentations were familiar to me, there were individual elements or facts that I did not know about. The technology that fascinated me the most and that I learned the most from was Netflix. While listening to Alex Rucker's presentation on this streaming service, I was aware of how Netflix is now but was not knowledgeable about how it was created and started out. 

 

I was surprised to find out that Netflix started out with the distribution and mailing of DVDs to the homes of its subscribers. For some reason, I always thought that they did streaming through an app. With this movie mailing system, they had over 1,000 movies for their subscribers to rent. This fact is intriguing to me as well being that I currently think of Netflix as the go-to for TV shows more so than movies.

I also learned that this DVD mailing process lasted until 2014. They stopped this mailing method and changed their program’s structure based on the progression and development of technology, especially smartphones, tablets, and smart TVs. They realized that people wanted to do more on their phones instead of just using the TV to watch shows and movies.

But along with this factor, I also believe that Netflix transitioned from mailing DVDs to mobile app streaming because of the competition from Redbox. Redbox provided a fresher take on DVD distribution being that there were kiosk dispensers all over the city and the dispensers gave you a DVD right on the spot. Whereas with Netflix, there was an inherent wait from delivery to one’s home.

 

    

Although I do not use Netflix as much as I once did, it was interesting to hear about the founding of technology that revolutionized and changed how we view movies and TV shows and changed the impact and need for cable TV. I learned how this streaming platform evolved with time and technological progression just like most things in history and how society is better for it.

 The Progressive Era- Antiwar

War: What Are They Not Telling Us?

War has always been a profitable entity for countries, especially the United States. The money that the United States gets from the perpetuation of war is unparalleled. Because of this positive correlation between money and war, history has proven the suppression, censorship, and ostracism of anti-war voices.

Some wars cannot be avoided, but many can. This nation should not be entering and engaging in wars and disputes that are not our own. I believe that war should be in self-defense and the LAST RESORT. Our government knows this and yet they overlook this fact and continue to place brave soldiers in unnecessary situations because of pride and ego. When will our government put America first; when will the will, well-being, and safety of American citizens mean more than our government's lust for power, money, and control?

 

When conducting research from Antiwar.com, The American Conservative, and other news sources, I can see that just like the silencing of antiwar voices, the US government endeavors to censor any voice or viewpoint that contradicts theirs. What happened to the "marketplace of ideas" that makes America special and unique?

 

America tends to thrive when the marketplace of ideas is in operation; this allows for all and any point of view and belief system to be expressed and noted. But with the influx of heavy censorship and persecution for those who disagree and merely ask questions about certain topics, it makes me wonder why is there such disdain for those who disagree? Why is there such suppression of opposing thought? Why is the mainstream media biased and so far skewed to the left? Why don’t you ever hear strong antiwar voices or strong “anti-whatever they are doing bad in D.C” voices?

 

You don’t hear them because when one person asks a question or makes a bold statement that is out of the norm, it causes people to think for themselves and evaluate the reality of what they have been believing and supporting. It causes people to begin to think rationally with common sense and discern with consciousness instead of believing and acting out of emotion.

 

     

You also don't hear these antiwar voices because the "powers that be" bury the sites and sources that express these views so deep under the pile of lies and false narratives about the reality and public perception of war. Because they know that the majority of the general public is lazy, doesn't really have a desire to dig for factual information, and only goes to maybe the first three pages of Google, they make these sources so hard to find.

This may be just how I think, but I automatically call foul play when someone is trying to hide or withhold something from me with such vigor. If your information is true and that way of thinking is right, why are so many people going out of their way to prohibit me and so many others from seeing, hearing, learning, and adopting other contrasting principles? Wouldn't truth prevail and rise to the top? I would think so.

American citizens truly need to realize that something is fishy and that they owe it to themselves and their country to figure out why they can't talk about frowned-upon topics like war and why the urge to silence one side is so great. We must educate ourselves on issues like war and never just take what the people try to feed us or how they suppress our opinions. We must do our part and continue to stand for what is right. 

 EOTO Communication Tech Timeline

Carrier Pigeons

Carrier pigeons are such an oddly interesting topic. When I saw it on the timeline, I automatically gravitated toward this topic. I was interested to see what the jobs of these birds were, what events and situations they were used for, and why pigeons. I found out that the idea of carrier pigeons came from pigeons’ innate instinct to return home, no matter the conditions or distance traveled. They possess "compass sense" and "map sense." These senses make them the perfect messengers.

I remember the story of Noah and how he sent a dove to figure out if the land was dry enough to emerge from the ark. This story sort of triggered my thoughts on whether he was the first person to implement this idea. Although it is not exactly a messenger/carrier pigeon, the principle is very similar.

Throughout my research, I wanted to figure out who was one of the first to implement the use of carrier pigeons. And my research allowed me to see that Cyrus the Great was noted to be the first who implemented carrier pigeons. He used them to warn people in Mesopotamia. Julius Caesar also used carrier pigeons when conquering cities in war and battle. Merchants also use these animals as means of communicating with one another in foreign territory. Also, the ancient city of Rome used homing pigeons to let people know the winner of the Ancient Olympics. They would paint the bird the color of the team that the winner belonged to and send the birds to their hometowns.

They utilized these pigeons because they wanted their messages and mail to get to their destination faster. In certain situations, time is of the essence, and they want to maximize that time. They endeavored to cut down on the travel time of these messages and pigeons were the way to go. In times of war, time is not always on your side and many people realized that. These birds were critical in wars like the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, the Civil War, and even World War I. 

But in figuring out the whereabouts of this communication style, they came to realize that these birds only flew one way. So, the people began to put their food at one location and their nests at another to eliminate this issue. 

This idea changed our world because it was one of the first of its kind. It introduced the thought of expedient delivery of messages and mail which had never been done before. It allowed people to imagine what rapid delivery of messaging would be like. We even see the evolution of that idea even today.

Carrier pigeons were one of the first introductions to faster-delivered mail. This concept was later manifested in the Pony Express and email. The Pony Express was an express mail service that spanned 2000 miles across the country and delivered mail at more rapid speeds than before. Electronic mail was a ground-breaking alternative to paper mail that took days to arrive at your residence, versus the seconds or minutes for email delivery online.

     

But with all the positives of the carrier pigeons, there are some negatives as well. They began to carry diseases and spread them as they traveled to different places. Unfortunately, the pigeons’ bodies rejected the antibiotics used to treat these diseases. Sickness became one factor in the elimination of carrier pigeons as means of communication. But another factor was that they were targets for hunters. Hunters would stay near the nesting spots and when the birds would come to nest, they would shoot and kill them.

All in all, carrier pigeons are an interesting topic to investigate and look into. I enjoyed seeing how this form of communication jumpstarted a trend for convenience and more efficient messaging for various situations and circumstances.