Here's
something to look forward to, right along with your next colonoscopy. The New York Times reports that
the Republican Party plans to carry out a sustained, organized attack
on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) for the next year, in the
hope of gaining an advantage in the 2014 elections. The Republican
campaign, described as a “multilayered sequenced assault,” is
outlined in the House Republican Playbook, a 17-page strategy document prepared by their House leadership. It lists a series of
talking points such as: “Because of Obamacare, I lost my
insurance,” “Obamacare increases health care costs,” and “The
exchanges may not be secure, putting personal information at risk.”
House members are advised to collect anecdotes from constituents in
support of these talking points through social media, letters and
visits to their home distract. A new website, gop.gov/yourstory,
centralizes the collection of these anecdotes. Republicans are
instructed in the use of “messaging tools” for disseminating the
stories, for example, a sample op-ed for submitting to local
newspapers.
The idea is to flood the media with anecdotes in support of a particular talking point. If there is
an effective counterresponse from Democrats, they will shift
immediately to a different talking point. Topics waiting in the
wings for possible use include insurance “rate shocks,” threats
to being able to keep your doctor, and possible changes to Medicare
Advantage policies.
The Republicans recognize that
anecdotes can have a powerful influence on public opinion. When
making inferences, people use judgmental heuristics, or mental
shortcuts to make decisions quickly and easily. The use of heuristics is automatic and unconscious. They usually lead to
correct inferences, but they sometimes lead us astray.
One inference we often make is to
estimate the size of a category or the frequency of an event. For
example, how many Americans are being harmed by the ACA? The availability heuristic suggests that the size of a category is judged by the ease with
which examples can be brought to mind. Examples are more easily
retrieved from memory if they are concrete rather than abstract, if
they are dramatic and interesting, or if they happened recently or
nearby. Personal experiences are particularly salient. When people
are asked to estimate the frequency of various causes of death, they overestimate homicides and auto accidents, but
underestimate strokes and diabetes. Clearly, their estimates are influenced by media coverage.
The problem gets worse when you consider the base rate fallacy, which states that people are
inattentive to population statistics, and their judgments are not
sufficiently affected by them. In one study, participants were given vivid stories about misbehavior by prison guards or welfare
recipients. Attitudes toward these groups were equally negatively
affected regardless of whether they were told that the anecdotes were
typical of the population, not typical of the population, or they
were given no base rate information. In another study, college students' intentions to take courses were affected by single brief
face-to-face comments from a stranger, but hardly at all by
statistical summaries of the course evaluations of much larger
numbers of students who had previously taken the course.
The availability heuristic and the base
rate fallacy suggest that even if people are given accurate
information suggesting than the story is unrepresentative, their
false impression is unlikely to be corrected. There was heavy media
coverage of the first wave of anecdotes from people who claimed that
their insurance costs went up due to Obamacare. When critics
examined them more closely, many of these anecdotes were found to be misleading. Insurance companies cancelled policies and raised rates
long before the ACA. The percentage of people whose policies were
cancelled was small. Some of these people were able to get equal or
better insurance through the exchanges without paying more. However,
the corporate media can't be counted on to investigate anecdotes
before airing them, and the debunking stories seldom receive anywhere
near the attention given to the original report.
The Obama administration has apparently decided that the best defense is a good offense, so they are
responding with anecdotes of their own—so-called Obamacare “success stories.” While this may be the best they can do under the
circumstances, they are unlikely to get much cooperation from the
corporate media in publicizing these stories. The media don't cover successful airplane landings--unless you land it in the Hudson River. Meanwhile, the
administration and the media have largely overlooked another
potential source of much more tragic stories: the 5.2 million people who are being denied health insurance entirely because
they happen to live in states where Republican governors and
legislatures have blocked Medicaid expansion. But to the corporate media, an upper middle class person losing a few dollars a month is much more newsworthy than a poor person losing his or her life.
You may also be interested in reading:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are always welcome.