Real Freedom of Information: The Basis of Democracy

In the right circumstances, having choices is beneficial. Freedom of choice is the hallmark of both democratic government and unfettered economics. But as a species, we humans are demonstrating the limits of the benefits of choice.

The key to getting benefit from freedom of choice is freedom of information. Without freedom of information, our choices are distorted. In effect, they are limited as much as if by law or lack of alternatives. And by freedom if information, I mean something a little different from what most people mean.

Do we in the Western world have freedom of information? We have lots of information. We have the proverbial 500 channels, the Internet, text messaging, and talk radio. But what is our information? Where does it come from? Who creates it, and what is their agenda?

Most of the information we hear, see or read is crafted, and the money that pays for the craft has an agenda. If not, why pay for advertising? Because well-crafted information changes people's minds.

When the topic is breakfast cereal or sunglasses, the effects are relatively small. In the case of food more generally, however, there are social costs associated with advertising. Why does everyone raised in the United States in the 1970s recognize a cartoon tiger who shouts "They're Grrreat!"? Because the agenda of selling corn flakes was worth the expense of the advertising campaign.

Take the marketing of processed foods in industrial societies as a group. The epidemic of obesity in America and increasingly in other industrialized countries may not be completely the product of marketing. But certainly, we as members of industrial societies consumed more sugar and fat - that is, chose to consume it - because of the information we were getting in the form of advertisements.

And this relates to the startling insights of advertising, that repetition and variation of messages appeals to our neural processes. Our brains judge importance and credibility on the frequency, urgency and pervasiveness (across different modes of information) of all information we observe. Research into learning styles, advertising, psychology and military psy-ops points this way.

So what if the product is not cereal or soap? What if it is a policy, a candidate, or an opinion? Religions need converts to expand. Businesses crave new markets, such as Marlboro targeting adolescents in China. And politicians need followers. So a politician with a media outlet is by definition more powerful. Television advertisements are fine, but most of us require repetition by varied sources to be convinced. A television network committed to a party or candidate can swing elections. Imagine if CNN only sold grape jelly all day, in all of its programs. Show hosts, news anchors, spokespeople, ordinary citizens providing testimony - all extol the benefits of grape jelly all day long. Seen so many times in so many ways, even banal or ridiculous - or false - information becomes important and credible information in the human brain. We choose - in perfect but ill-informed freedom - to believe, and then screen out the odd bit of contrary information. To us, convinced of the merits of grape jelly, the idea that something else might be worth trying seems jarring, incredible, even treasonous.

The freedom of information we need to make our democratic (and economic) choices work for us is not what we have today. Today, information power varies with wealth. The powerful and wealthy determine what the powerless can know. We can watch political talking heads mainly on one side, or catch up on celebrity gossip or animal antic videos. That's the choice we're usually presented.

Our choices are like the student at lunch, choosing between the broccoli florets and the brand-name French fries. There are no slick broccoli advertisements, much less a multifaceted advertising blitz funded by billions of burgers served. Should our money allow us to speak louder? Is that wise in business? Is it fair in politics? Freedom of information will be possible, and make democracy more durable, when our voices are heard equally, regardless of income or power.