Irish Election are pleased to announce our collection of Irish 
Rock The Vote is an absolute failure
Read more about: Blogging, Democracy, Electoral Register, Grassroots, Irish Election, Irish Politics, Youth
(Originally posted on AdamMaguire.com)
I’ve had more than a passing interest in politics for many years now and I’ve always believed that young people need to engage and be engaged in the larger political discourse. I believe that the main instrument of youth participation within Ireland’s political parties, the youth wing, is actually counter-intuitive and counter-productive and that young people and young voters shouldn’t be patronised into engagement – they should just be shown the relevancy and left to decide from there.
Based on that I believe that Ireland’s Rock The Vote campaign has been a complete and undeniable failure.
The campaign’s intention is to encourage young people to vote, which is very noble, but while attempting to reach that goal the organisation took the same tired route as all the political parties do when they’re pretending to be youth-friendly too.
Just like some hacked Hot Press interview in which a politician removes his tie, lists off his favourite bands and reminisces about the time he thought he saw someone smoke “the pot” in his general vicinity, Rock The Vote offers the kind of well packaged political candy-floss that looks impressive but contains nothing real.
Sure, the campaign has shown people how they can go about voting. It’s shown people who they can chose from when casting their vote. It has shown them when they’ll need to cast their vote. It has even shown them where they’ll need to do it. Unfortunately it has failed to tackle one question which when left unanswered renders all else irrelevant – “why?”
Rather than discuss the issues, inspire debate, highlight relevancy or encourage engagement Rock The Vote has given us silly hand-symbols, minor celebrities, a meaningless catchphrase and a series of humourless, apolitical skits called “Frazier Fraze”, which dedicate more time to discussions on Westlife and Boyzone than on anything of any remote substance.
The reality of youth apathy is that young people have plenty of political opinions and concerns, they simply may not look at them in that way.
Where the political importance of stamp duty, income tax, transportation policy and crime issues are all too apparent for someone with a career, home and family they can seem far more obscure to someone whom has no immediate plan beyond the length of their college course and whom just earns money to keep themselves going from week-to-week.
When the relevance of the political system is clear to them, however, they can become the most vocal and active people in the country. Just look at the reaction Noel Dempsey’s plans to re-introduce college fees in 2002, or the massive protest against the Iraq War in 2003, or ask any young person for their opinion on the US Army’s use of Shannon Airport or issues of road safety. These kinds of instances show that ignorance is not the problem, just a failure to find relevance in everything.
But the reality is that the current lack of youth participation is fine for most political parties. Having such an unaccountable minority out of the picture makes things far easier and besides, apathy of any kind isn’t a problem as long as they can get through to the ones who are going to vote.
Young people simply cannot sit and wait for politicians to come to them with appealing legislation and the failure of young people to organise any kind of effective lobby has meant that there is no need amongst politicians to take any heed of young people’s concerns. What is needed is an organisation that brings the debate to young people, shows them what effect politics has on their lives, the effect it will have on their future and that bridges the mental gap people may have between what concerns them and what they can do about it.
The problem with Rock The Vote is that it fails to engage and instead ends up patronising young people. It’s campaign assumes that young people need to have everything dumbed down in order for them to become politically aware. It assumes that some celebrity credibility is all that is needed to turn youth apathy into activism. It assumes that young people need to be told something is cool before they’ll bother themselves to do it. It assumes young people are too thick to be engaged in a real debate.
Worst of all it skips over the actual issues and gives young people nothing in terms of a real reason to vote.
To put it simply, all Rock The Vote says is “you should vote” and that’s not a message anyone should have to tolerate in isolation. For example, what would your reaction be if a politician knocked on your door and said “vote for me”? I’d bet the first thing you’d say to them is “why?” because you sure as hell wouldn’t just accept their insistence and act on it obediently.
Maybe when the next election comes around we’ll have an organisation that tries to do this and aims to engage rather than dictate – I’ll certainly be looking to organise or get involved in one if I can.
I agree totally with this viewpoint. I mean what does the phrase ‘Rock the Vote’ actually mean. If all these young people did actually vote they would inevitably ‘rock the system’ with the whole political landscape becoming radically different. Of course though the campaign can’t be seen to advocate the radical changes that many young peolple would like to see or even appeal to them on this basis. It is therefore bound to be about little more than lip service to the notion of empowering youth.
I disagree with this argument. The only way that the ‘rock the vote’ could promote young people voting in a non-partisan way is through drawing attention to it. I think they have done that reasonably well.
The only criticism you can have is to say that this type of advertising and branding doesn’t work. Well it does.
Drawing attention to the election in a new and different way is not patronising. If the point is to grab the attention of as many people as possible it would be unwise to plough into boring policy differences that may or may not effect young people. Minor Irish celebs (and some not so minor) embarrassing themselves will get people’s attention.
As regards the ‘why’ of voting, I’m telling you there is no real answer to that. As a collective, it is good to vote because the government is more representative and have a greater mandate. As an individual, there is absolutely no logical reason to vote. (Even if some by-election was decided by a single vote.)
I think you are mixing up and exercise in advertising and an actual political youth movement.
Everyone involved with RTV should have walked as soon as polling day was set for a Thursday. A big ‘fuck off’ to Bertie etc would’ve impressed n00b voters more than all the showbiz fluff and bollix.
I disagree with this argument. The only way that the ‘rock the vote’ could promote young people voting in a non-partisan way is through drawing attention to it. I think they have done that reasonably well.
That’s assuming that something can only be partisan if it doesn’t interact with the issues – I don’t agree with that at all.
The only criticism you can have is to say that this type of advertising and branding doesn’t work. Well it does.
Drawing attention to the election in a new and different way is not patronising.
Does it? It’s not the “new and different” ways their using that bothers me – any campaign aimed at young people nowadays simply must utilise blogging, youtube, bebo etc. What I find patronising about the whole thing is the attempt to add “street cred” to voting as it seems to work on the assumption that young people aren’t voting because it’s not cool enough yet.
Drawing attention to the election itself isn’t bad either, but I believe that a well-planned information campaign that creates relevance will do that as a by-product. If you get people interested in politics and policies they’ll seek their franchise out themselves.
If the point is to grab the attention of as many people as possible it would be unwise to plough into boring policy differences that may or may not effect young people.
Well that’s just the problem – RtV and politicians at large seem to assume that young people are bored by politics but I just don’t believe that.
Yes, there are plenty of issues that young people simply won’t care about – pensions for one because it’s just too far away for them to take seriously. But if it’s made clear to a young person just what kind of difference tax policy, stamp duty policy and road safety policy etc. will have on their lives they’ll start to take notice.
Minor Irish celebs (and some not so minor) embarrassing themselves will get people’s attention.
As regards the ‘why’ of voting, I’m telling you there is no real answer to that.
But what are they saying once they have your attention? Nothing. The question of ‘why’ is a vital one – why should I vote? Without an answer to that people will just switch off again.
As a collective, it is good to vote because the government is more representative and have a greater mandate. As an individual, there is absolutely no logical reason to vote. (Even if some by-election was decided by a single vote.)
But the collective cannot exist without the individual and any argument that says that one vote doesn’t matter ignores the complexity of the PR system and is based on an illogical contradiction of one vote failing to matter when votes in general do.
Ignoring that, however, why hasn’t this been addressed by RtV? I saw Paddy Cosgrave on RTÉ News saying that all votes count and I agree, but their media output hasn’t even tried to convey that argument.
@Enda
Everyone involved with RTV should have walked as soon as polling day was set for a Thursday. A big ‘fuck off’ to Bertie etc would’ve impressed n00b voters more than all the showbiz fluff and bollix.
Well yes, any good RtV could have done has been completely neutralised by Ahern’s antics.
On the first point that you can discuss the issues in a way that invigorates debate amongst young people whilst also being completely partisan, well you will have to show me how. I just can’t accept that without an example.
On the second point, I can accept that you may find it patronising. There is no argument there but is it really aimed at you? Are you the person that they are trying to reach? I think the videos and websites and stuff are, well, mildly amusing at best, certainly not offensive.
I stand my the point that arguing the ‘why’ of voting is a dead-end. People don’t raise the issue because you can’t argue against it. One vote does count but the point is that as an individual when you ask yourself ‘does MY vote count?’ the answer is unequivocally NO. This more of a bald fact than an opinion.
On the first point that you can discuss the issues in a way that invigorates debate amongst young people whilst also being completely partisan, well you will have to show me how. I just can’t accept that without an example.
Well disseminating the information in a non-partisan way is the job of the mainstream media on a daily basis – they do it to varying degrees but it can be done.
For example, why not have a short, snappy video which explains how anyone thinking of or hoping to buy a house in the next 5 years should pay attention to what’s being promised by the various parties as it could save they thousands? Same goes for anyone who wants broadband in their area. Or wants to be able to rely on their bus service (or wants a bus service). Or wants to get their full driver’s licence without waiting 50 weeks for the test. It’s a case of bridging the gap between what young people want and aspire to and what the political system can do in relation to that.
Another more detailed way would be to take an issue and explain what each party is promising in a way that is relevant to young people. Tell them party x’s proposal will mean they won’t pay tax on their part-time wages and so will come home with more money every week, while party y’s proposal will see them earn a higher minimum wage. One video could talk about transport, another tax, another crime etc.
It’s just about framing everything in the context of young people and showing them that it does have an effect.
On the second point, I can accept that you may find it patronising. There is no argument there but is it really aimed at you? Are you the person that they are trying to reach? I think the videos and websites and stuff are, well, mildly amusing at best, certainly not offensive.
Well I’m 22, so I don’t see why it shouldn’t be aimed at me. Sure, I’m already politically minded but even if I’m already the subscriber to an idea or product I can still feel the appeal of a well-made campaign. I might be sold on the message already, but it doesn’t mean I’m immune to hearing it again.
I stand my the point that arguing the ‘why’ of voting is a dead-end. People don’t raise the issue because you can’t argue against it.
Can’t argue against what? I’m not sure what you mean by this. Reasons for voting stretch way beyond the lack of impact people feel it has. From my own anecdotal experience people don’t vote because the politicians don’t speak to them or offer them something relevant.
One vote does count but the point is that as an individual when you ask yourself ‘does MY vote count?’ the answer is unequivocally NO. This more of a bald fact than an opinion.
That’s nothing resembling a fact. If voting matters as a whole then the individual vote itself matters too.
Naturally it would be foolish to imagine that one vote will tip the balance between one party or another, or one government or another (it has tipped the balance for individual seats in rare occourances though). That said each individual vote, especially in PR where every vote is counted, contributes to an overall result and pushes candidates and by extension parties in certain directions.
Anyone who thinks their vote will decide the election is deluded. Anyone who thinks their vote will have no impact whatsoever on the election is equally so.
On the first point how do you propose to highlight policy differences to a younger audience without in some way coming off as partisan? The way the media try and do it is through attribution. If your ‘rock the vote’ campaign does that won’t it just be aping the media as opposed to promoting voting.
You clearly don’t get my last point. There is no argument from self-interest for voting. Even if you believe that government policy affects you, one individual vote never counts. So to the self-interested individual there is no reason to vote. (Ok a ‘rock the vote’ ad claims that one vote decided something somewhere, but the chances of that are so remote it is negligible.)
On the first point how do you propose to highlight policy differences to a younger audience without in some way coming off as partisan? The way the media try and do it is through attribution. If your ‘rock the vote’ campaign does that won’t it just be aping the media as opposed to promoting voting.
“aping” the media isn’t a bad thing per se – as long as it’s well targeted and getting people interested in the issues is the most logical way of encouraging voting, so it serves that purpose too.
I think my examples are perfectly non-partisan. You can raise the issues that are effecting young people and say “what happens on polling day will effect you because…” or you could show each party’s proposals in the area and ask “what would you like to see happen?”.
You clearly don’t get my last point. There is no argument from self-interest for voting. Even if you believe that government policy affects you, one individual vote never counts. So to the self-interested individual there is no reason to vote. (Ok a ‘rock the vote’ ad claims that one vote decided something somewhere, but the chances of that are so remote it is negligible.)
No, I do, I just don’t agree with it.
Yes, a single vote actually deciding a seat is an extreme rarity but in the PR system a handful of votes can – I think I read that SF’s Nicky Kehoe missed out on a seat in 2002 by 74 votes, for example. That’s tiny when you consider the fact that 34,500 people voted in Dublin Central.
As I said before, you’d be an idiot to expect your vote alone to turn the tide but young people aren’t stupid. If it’s made clear just how often a small amount of votes can swing a result they’ll be able to see that their vote can make a direct contribution to an outcome.
The person in charge of RTV (no finger pointing) is swimming in a sea of retarded sexuality and bad poetry.
Perhaps a more apt title would have been Cock the Vote.
A
Adam you seem to miss the point entirely. You clearly have no understanding of the underlying reasons why young people don’t vote. God bless.
Adam you seem to miss the point entirely. You clearly have no understanding of the underlying reasons why young people don’t vote. God bless.
You said much the same in the email you sent me the other day, Mary, so perhaps you can now explain what they are.
From my own first hand experience making people aware of polling day and their right to vote is just one small piece of the puzzle – trying to make voting look cool is also a waste of time and counter productive.
Listen Adam, on the last point. Ask yourself logically, without appeal to citizenship or society or the collective or being Irish or any other abstractions, what effect my vote has. It has absolutely NO effect. It changes nothing. Think of the last time you voted. Did it put anyone in government? No. Did it force policy change? No. Apart from imparting in you a sense of civic pride, it achieved nothing.
Any argument you make for voting is just appealing to abstractions that I can choose to reject. They just get away from the basic logical deduction that voting doesn’t change anything. And this doesn’t ignore the nuances of the PR system and it isn’t idiotic, it’s LOGIC.
Listen Adam, on the last point. Ask yourself logically, without appeal to citizenship or society or the collective or being Irish or any other abstractions, what effect my vote has. It has absolutely NO effect. It changes nothing. Think of the last time you voted. Did it put anyone in government? No. Did it force policy change? No. Apart from imparting in you a sense of civic pride, it achieved nothing.
Well this is my first general election where I can vote, so I can’t answer your questions.
That said I disagree that it has no effect as I’ve said already – it might not have a dramatic effect or at the best of times a very obvious one but to expect a single vote amongst millions to make the decision it in itself undemocratic – no-one should believe that they’re vote will decide fate but they should know that it contributes to decisions, especially in a PR system.
Any argument you make for voting is just appealing to abstractions that I can choose to reject. They just get away from the basic logical deduction that voting doesn’t change anything. And this doesn’t ignore the nuances of the PR system and it isn’t idiotic, it’s LOGIC.
You can choose to do that, and it’s your decision. I have no argument against people not voting as long as they’re doing it for a reason – rather than out of ignorance or laziness. I would only support a mandatory vote if we were given the “none of the above” option and I think such should be introduced anyway.
I don’t agree that a single vote has zero effect but if someone understands the PR system, as you do, and comes to that conclusion then that’s their own decision based on their own analysis.
maybe they aren’t interested in voting because tv, alcohol, advertising, lack of parental guidance, rampant consumerism , middle class affluence and their educational “programming” have turned them into self absorbed mindless little idiots with no decent ethical or intellectual framework to motivate them in trying to effect change in the only small way left to them. i.e. voting for a more ethical government