TED Conversations

Scott Nesler

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Let's build a better media to facilitate democratic debate!

Audio version of the idea:
http://www.dogoodgauge.org/files/media/DoGoodGauge/TED_Building_A_New_Media.mp3

Michael Sandel started an idea requiring support. He said, "One thing the world needs, one thing this country desperately needs is a better way of conducting our political debates. We need to rediscover the lost art of democratic argument.". Professor Sandel is doing his part, but more needs to be done to provide a media to facilitate public participation in a civil debate. Tools are required to motivate more to develop better arguments.

The Do Good Gauge is a research proposal seeking others interested in developing a solution to the problem Professor Sandel describes. Applause is not required. Needed are a group of individuals willing to set aside their ego, to set aside a desire for financial gain and focus on a new media to motivate participation and give higher demographic viewership to the best arguments regardless of fame or status.

Here are a few essays to continue Professor Sandel's thought:

What is the Do Good Gauge?
http://www.dogoodgauge.org/site/DoGoodGauge/page_contents/display/170

I Had the Dream
http://www.dogoodgauge.org/site/DoGoodGauge/page_contents/display/165

A Better Way for Political Discourse
http://www.dogoodgauge.org/site/DoGoodGauge/page_contents/display/110

Please, let's give a try. The first step is to continue the discussion.

+3
Share:

Closing Statement from Scott Nesler

I approached this idea as if there were two sides in developing a democratic media, the media and the public. What was learned is appreciated but a typical path in the attempt to sustain dialogue in the conversation. Going into to this TED idea I was more critical of the existing media and its inability to provide a wider representation of citizens thoughts. Upon the expiration of the TED clock it was realized how difficult it is to develop a thought understood and respected by the reader. How difficult it is to acquire feedback and sustain attention in a dialogue.

There were a few successes. Edward Long's streak of questions started with scepticism and ended in a hope for the idea. Though his questions did not traverse the entirety of the idea they did give opportunity for better clarification.

Wayne Tod started a dialogue which extended to private email. What Wayne Tod brought to the conversation was the importance of self reflection in developing a thought.

Feyisayo Anjorin comment motivated what is probably the best summary of this idea. The fourth post down, written on June 2nd, should be read as an extension of this closing statement.

External to this idea TED exposed the difficulty and the lack of good tools to facilitate an individual to advance an idea. Don Wesley's TED idea illustrates a man wrongly pushed to homelessness wishing to respectfully illustrate his case. Existing technology does not provide the public an efficient and respectful means to guide him through the many iterations required build a case worthy of broader appeal.

http://www.ted.com/conversations/11617/at_what_level_does_the_cost_of.html?c=471960

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • May 4 2012: I see where you are going with this But exams are bias in nature so must be taken out of the equation also to get the interest it deserves we must throw the rule-book out and make people excited but I'm afraid this will not happen because of the state in which politics is in People are getting used to a dictorial world even though it appears that have a voice is a PARADOX better designed to suit the politicians So until they changed any idea I may give will be in vain therefore I give my argument in hope to help in your quest. My augment is that people of lesser means Schools in particular don't get taught the so called tools to be interested in the first speaking from my own background & motivated observation The second thing I see is that politicians always say get involved witch mean to me read the program we send and vote but don't you scrutinize the program because we are suppose to take there word for it! knowing fine & well that what they spit is not worth the spit itself By that turning people off & knowing what the individual has to say won't mean anything because the political world is a law onto themselves For instance if a new law is to be past the individual is misinformed mislead by the system as a hole TV,NEWS,INTERNET and many more plus if a law is stopped the name is changed until they get what they won't. It dose not matter what the mob thinks or popular opinion or the opposition of course they will do it regardless So what dose this tell you? Not you or yours interest but there's This is not democracy it is something else! Knowing this is to be named a conspirator for questioning it? What! So getting back to topic in hand Do you not think it possible there is no tool because we are the tool? That the less we no the better so as they can carry out there interest without a popular uprising that they fear the most Also you can't have a tool that says classless with a system that has class A AA AAA and say it is not bias for A is bias in nature
    • thumb
      May 4 2012: Post's Audio Version:
      http://www.dogoodgauge.org/files/media/DoGoodGauge/TED_DGG_Its_A_Republic.mp3

      I don't think the solution is focusing on what those in control can provide, but what we as individuals can supply. Benjamin Franklin said "it is a Republic if you can keep it" when asked what type of government the continental congress decided. It's not difficult to understand the United States is a democracy by inspiration only. It is an attempt. An attempt which is showing its flaws. Government does not need to be overhauled. The existing system can work. A prohibitive media hiding the thoughts and inspirations of the community is more to blame for our lack of democracy than governance. Blaming the ignorance of the people is a scapegoat. More to blame is the lack of opportunity, respect, and the refinement of thought.

      Let me share an image to better put the A AA AAA league system into perspective. The idea is to give each individual an opportunity to participate. To find an audience willing to develop the quality in a thought. The tier of leagues is similar to the United States form of government. Church/subdivision, city, county, state, federal, and global are tiers. Everyone cannot articulate a suggestion worthy of global demographics. Practice in a smaller arena is required. Please visit the following link for a better illustration:

      The Argument Demographic Visibility Diagram
      http://www.dogoodgauge.org/site/DoGoodGauge/page_contents/display/95

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.