2008 Woodie Awards
Students are apathetic to sensationalist political tactics
STAFF EDITORIAL
Issue date: 3/31/08 Section: Opinion
PERHAPS THE LOW turnout in this year's SGA elections speaks to our student body's apathetic nature in general, but it is doubtful that a turnout of less than 1,000 ballots cast can be accounted for by general apathy alone. After all, nearly 2,000 students voted in this year's Homecoming elections, and approximately 1,800 students voted in last year's SGA.
Yes, these numbers are low when you consider that even these "high" levels of turnout meant that well under 20 percent of our student population voted in these elections. But 1,000! That means not even 10 percent of the student population found time to check its Jaguar1 e-mail account and click the link to the ballot.
No one can say the lack of attention was the cause of this year's low turnout. Campaign signs were everywhere, letting students know that it was election time. Even the popular social networking site Facebook was flooded with campaign announcements letting all who frequent the site know how to vote and for whom to vote.
Perhaps the number one reason why students decided not to vote was not the lack of attention the elections received, but rather the overdose of attention that certain candidates were giving to sensationalize the process and the SGA. Such sensationalist, negative attacks only serve to turn people away from the process, and that is exactly what happened.
Of course, the sensationalist candidate will probably point to this lack of turnout as some kind of "proof" that the student body does not care enough about SGA. More than likely, though, this more-apathetic-than-usual turnout is more of a sign that students are turned off by sensationalist political tactics and all the negativity.
Yes, these numbers are low when you consider that even these "high" levels of turnout meant that well under 20 percent of our student population voted in these elections. But 1,000! That means not even 10 percent of the student population found time to check its Jaguar1 e-mail account and click the link to the ballot.
No one can say the lack of attention was the cause of this year's low turnout. Campaign signs were everywhere, letting students know that it was election time. Even the popular social networking site Facebook was flooded with campaign announcements letting all who frequent the site know how to vote and for whom to vote.
Perhaps the number one reason why students decided not to vote was not the lack of attention the elections received, but rather the overdose of attention that certain candidates were giving to sensationalize the process and the SGA. Such sensationalist, negative attacks only serve to turn people away from the process, and that is exactly what happened.
Of course, the sensationalist candidate will probably point to this lack of turnout as some kind of "proof" that the student body does not care enough about SGA. More than likely, though, this more-apathetic-than-usual turnout is more of a sign that students are turned off by sensationalist political tactics and all the negativity.
Be the first to comment on this story