As politicians on all sides jostle for votes on July 4, the British electorate is faced with an avalanche of politically related materials and debate through all forms of media outlets.
Ideally, in what we might describe as an “ideas-informed” society, all citizens would engage with new information with an open and critical mindset, in order to improve both their own lives and that of their community.
For instance, research shows that living more healthily can reduce our chances of avoidable cancers. It can also lead to less strain on public services. Being ideas-informed would see citizens both engaging and ideally, acting on these findings.
Want more election coverage from The Conversation’s academic experts? Over the coming weeks, we’ll bring you informed analysis of developments in the campaign and we’ll fact check the claims being made.
Sign up for our new, weekly election newsletter, delivered every Friday throughout the campaign and beyond.
In terms of the election, an ideas-informed citizen might be interested in understanding both the content of the manifestos being offered and how the democratic system operates. Voters would thus be equipped to see beyond the rhetorical spin in the leadership debates and vote tactically.
Our research looks at how people engage with ideas and evidence in order to make decisions about their lives. We have found that no matter what politicians say, some of the electorate just aren’t listening.
In his 1893 book, The Division of Labour in Society, French sociologist Émile Durkheim described a state of “anomie” that people can experience during challenging times. Instead of seeing the difficulties as a source of motivation and an opportunity to effect progressive change into society, people can become disconnected from society at large.
Durkheim said that our understanding of morality is based, not on universal laws, but the social norms provided by a functioning stable society. In turn, this stability provides people with a predictable framework within which to make decisions.
But, during times of societal transition or economic, political or social crisis, the resulting insecurity means that, rather than stability, people can lose clarity over what social norms are. They find themselves adrift in a fog of normlessness.
Read more: We can only dream up a better future when we dig into the unfinished past
In 2022, we conducted an analysis of 1,000 UK adult citizens. Almost a third – 29% of our sample – of our respondents did not see value in engaging with ideas.
Some people never discuss current affairs with friends or family or work colleagues. Others don’t participate in activities that provide them access to ideas. Our subsequent study in 2023 looked at why this is.
During focus groups, people told us they avoid staying up to date with current affairs because, as one interviewee put it: “Mostly news is pretty depressing anyway, so there’s never really anything good.”
For some, not engaging is a deliberate act of self-protection from too much bad news. Journalism scholar Nic Newman has shown that this phenomenon is seemingly on the rise.
We found this anxiety was linked to a perceived powerlessness. As another respondent said: “All I can do is control my own little bubble.”
Others revealed that they avoided discussing current affairs with their friends and colleagues as they were concerned about potential conflicts. People cited the “atmosphere” that voicing different views can cause. Similarly, others said that fears of being “trolled” for saying the “wrong thing” had made them limit their use of social media.
Alongside these fears, we found a distinct distrust of the media. People said they felt it was feeding them false information or fake news. For some, this feeling was aligned to a belief that being presented with different perspectives on a topic was evidence of a lack of truthfulness, rather than an acceptable plurality of opinion.
Finally, we asked them about values, including living in a just and inclusive society, looking after mental wellbeing and businesses adopting ethical and sustainable practices. We found that the perception of society as increasingly embracing difference saw some people feeling like the norms they were used to were not being reflected back at them. They said they felt that what we might label as “progressive” ideas were of benefit to “others”. One participant said: “I think they’re addressing the issues of the minority of people, rather than the majority.”
For most of these ideas-refusers, the cultural malaise associated with anomie comes hand in hand with navigating the complexity of the contemporary society. The choice to stop listening presents itself as a solution.
As a society, then, we must find ways to connect with people who feel disconnected. This means tackling the endless bad news cycle, promoting more civil forms of debate and using friendships and wider networks to diversify the spread of information.
A healthy democracy and proper societal cohesion require that all voices are heard. If societal progress is to be beneficial and enduring, it must also be inclusive.