Media exposure and the 'silent majority'

(An introductory piece on pre-election behaviour with special reference to the concept 'silent majority'.)

The term 'silent majority' if I am not mistaken was first used by a sociologist named Vance Packard in his book 'Pyramid Builders', which intensively dealt with the subject of the consumer and voter behaviour with reference to various types of opinion making, opinion formation and opinion holding.

Once again the term 'silent majority' came to my mind as a result of a conversation that ensued in a group of us the other day pertaining to the subject of pre-election behaviour.

The chief researcher showed us the 'silent majority' matters and they will decide the victory of a candidate in any election.

Then one of our group members asked a question as to why some of the respondents are denoted by this term.

The answer was quite explanatory as there are some respondents who are reluctant to say anything about their responses during the early stages since they are guided by a web of mass media around them and some others by alternative measures like individual connections and social interactions.

But the reasons for being silent are sometimes graspable scientifically. One of the reasons being that a particular person may have still not decided or thought out clearly as to which party or which candidate he is going to cast vote until the last moment.

"Have you decided to whom you are going to cast your vote?", is one of the stock questions raised by a pollster or a pre-election behaviour researcher. There are three possible answers (a) yes (b) no (c) not decided. The (b) response indicates a vast number of respondents depending for the large part on various media exposures such as the newspapers, radio, television and interpersonal campaigns such as discussions, in order to gain an awareness as to what they should do.

This is a persuasive measure on the part of mass media channels where people express their views and opinions in the best possible manner, and the final role being the candidates themselves who should express their persuasive skills to the maximum effect in order to win the goodwill of the masses, in this case the voters.

It is shown that mass media carry three broad types of persuasions or persuasive content. Firstly, the advertising, matters especially the creative type which is treated along with the public relations. Here the broad mission is the way the attitudes of the masses are changed with facts and figures taking into the concept of mass conscience.

The masses are silent, but at the same time there is a gradual change occurring within themselves which makes them exercise their votes to a particular candidate.

The second category is called intentional advocacy where if you take the print medium as an example, the news reports, editorials, columns, cartoons, photographs, discussions with opinion leaders, interpretative articles like interviews with people who matter especially intended to lead the reader to a conclusion.

This may be different in the case of sound and visual media, where the strength of the medium matters as instant impact on the viewer. Thirdly, media campaigns matter intended primarily as entertainment or creative indirect communication where persuasion may be taken as a by-product. All these may look sometimes high flown but they are being tested over the years as valid ways to create a media exposure.

Though a person looks silent for a particular period of time he or she may change the attitude held for sometime with the concurrent media exposure of varying degrees denoted as high media exposure, mid media exposure, and low media exposure, perhaps depending on the basic factors such as the literacy rates and cognitive measures.

It is at this juncture that the controversial role of the mass media plays a vital role which is for the most part rest on ethics such as the unbiased reporting and balanced and impartial expression of facts and figures.

This is the use of mass media as a watcher and as a teacher, the two functions highly valued by the masses all over the world. In the forum type of television programmes that we normally see day in and day out, one of the factors missing is the 'agree to disagree concept' as laid down in the democratic frames of communication.

Why can't the participants selected to express their views be vigilant listeners to their opponents in a forum which is being watched by thousands of viewers. The important factor is that there is a vast 'silent majority' sensitively watching as to what they communicate among themselves.

"I was highly persuaded and impressed by such and such a person's expression of his political views and I wish that I should vote for him or his representative" may be the end result of the media exposure.

Though this is not openly presented to anybody that may be the genesis of a persuasion. "I am quite clear about their political ideologies but I don't agree with them so I cannot make up my mind to vote for them" may be yet another comment on the part of the silent majority.

One more comment is widely known as a passive comment which goes as "all politicians are the same, so it is a matter of personal choice. I will decide at the last moment".

But if there is a way of convincing the 'silent majority' that "all politicians are not the same" through a manner conceivable by them, the chances would be that there will be an attitudinal change.

Furthermore, the 'silent majority' consists of rational teachers, artistes, administrators, business tycoons, high calibred lawyers, priests, who are rather reluctant to express their views presupposing that the comment will lead to more disaster than good for their respective functions.

They would prefer to go on asking further questions than answering. "Whatever is said and done" said our learned researcher, "Silent majority is the most important segment of decision makers at an election whether it is a general or a presidential one."

The topic happened to be a starting point to a wider discussion on the concept of silent majority.