The political divide in American is wide, and the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism has revealed a way to measure it.
In collaboration with PR firm Golin and narrative intelligence company Zignal Labs, USC Annenberg introduced the polarization index, a science-based database tracking national political division as measured with social media conversations. The polarization index mathematically calculates the degree of discord across 10 keys issues using Zignal’s real-time natural language processing capabilities. It is designed to help C-suite executives understand public opinion and use it in their corporate strategies, including deciding on taking sides on controversial topics that impact customers, employees and shareholders.
“It’s clear from our analysis that polarization has become a permanent fixture in American culture, fueled in part by partisan communicators in media and politics who benefit from conflict,” Fred Cook, director of the USC Center for Public Relations at the Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, said in a release. “These opposing political forces are using the issue of immigration as the foundation for building a wall to divide our country.”
Immigration is the top issue contributing to the high level of polarization in the country, according to a release from USC. The polarization index indicates that immigration discussions have grown more contentious since last year’s presidential election, and it is largely driven by engagement with right-leaning media featuring a high level of unreliable information.
“Polarization is a complex, dynamic, and widespread phenomenon of huge import for CEOs who increasingly find their companies embroiled in whether to take a stance,” Guy Churchward, CEO of Zignal Labs, said in a release. “Using real-time technology, we can quantify the degree of polarization of given narratives, track this over time, and provide a framework for business and government leaders, as well as the media itself, to assess the dangers and opportunities that these topics pose.”
Policing policy ranks second, racial equity ranks third and gun legislation ranks fourth, according to recent data in the polarization index. Social media users on the left and right contributed in roughly equal numbers to the discussions on racial equity and gun legislation, an indication they will remain polarizing topics for the foreseeable future.
“When we look at polarization as a quantified entity, we see how powerful echo chambers are being created and amplified, reinforcing existing opinions,” Jonny Bentwood, Global Head of Data and Analytics at Golin, said in a release. “By tracking these trends over time, we gain useful insights into how consumer perceptions evolve on issues that impact society and business.”
The USC Polarization Index can be downloaded at ThePolarizationIndex.com and updates will be released periodically.
–
William says
What is so fascinating is those extremely close elections. If you told the voters in a state to divide themselves into 2 equal teams, they couldn’t do it as well as when they vote for 2 wildly different candidates in an election.
That can happen even if in a particluar state, most of the counties are red (or orange) and a few counties with large cities are blue, yet the election is remarkably close.
It reminds me of my front-loading washing machine. A big blob of wet laundry is sitting at the bottom but during a spin cycle it somehow balances . We have 2 parties that balance out during the spin cycle (campaigns).
I think part of the dynamic is that Republicans have become the contrary party . No matter the issue, from CRT to wearing masks and getting vaccinated, they oppose just to balance the load, I guess. Thus, equally divided even though Democrats are a majority.
The Republicans have become a counter-balance as in a 4-cylinder engine to make it run smoothly. In governing, that should make for compromise but instead we have gridlock.
Maybe we should have Whirlpool or Maytag figure out the polarization. In another analogy, traffic researchers think of traffic as fluid dynamics. Maybe that’s how politics are. We foolishly think it’s based on the issues. As drivers in traffic, we don’t “think” fluid-dynamics do we? We are “individuals” like water molecules must think they are in a pipe.
A 3rd party, you say. That would be the Wankel engine. See Mazda. Oh, wait.
A 3rd party would likely be a minority party with 2 opposing parties. Yikes!
Bottom line. We are thinking this in old political terms when something else is a work.
Tim shot says
You mean this right leaning media…..
https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2021/11/05/real-crimes-glenn-greenwald-takes-media-apart-in-merciless-thread-for-mindlessly-spreading-clinton-steele-dossier-hoax/
You dumba$$
Gratitude says
Escaping partisan echo chambers is freeing. Unreliable information coming from the right and the left, both sides living in echo chambers, both sides unwilling to agree on anything.
Stinger says
I’ll say it yet again: It is time for a purple party.
Matt says
So much of the Democratic Party actually is “purple” though. There are multitudes more centrist/moderate Democrats than there are Republicans right now.
QAnon/Trumpism has virtually taken over the Republican Party and pulled it so far right that it’s incoherent.
The only thing you can count on from Republicans right now is their ShortBus chorus of “lEtS gO bRaNdOn!”
America Most says
I’ll say it again: It’s time for NO PARTIES !!!!!!!!
Tim Scott says
While this seems reasonable on the surface, if you look at the original purpose of parties you find they are more necessary than ever.
The “political party” is a shorthand position statement that lets the voters be informed in a quick and effortless manner. The party has a platform. If a voter doesn’t have the time, inclination, or opportunity to examine a candidate in detail they can make a determination based on the party platform the candidate represents. The party, in theory, is accountable for ensuring that any candidate running under their banner is accountable for being a genuine supporter of the party platform. Currently, there are a huge number of voters who are not only not able or willing to examine candidates, they do not even look realistically at the party platforms.
The GOP platform currently is very simple. Trump is infallible, and anyone who disagrees is subhuman and not deserving of basic human rights or any representation in their government. This is demonstrated by the party censuring any office holder that does not full throat endorse Trump’s lies, or assist in shielding him from the consequences of his actions. Any other positions on issues that may historically be associated with the GOP are subsumed into that.
Against that is the Democratic Party platform, which as it has been for a long time is crafted as a balance between the strong economic interventionist positions of Keynes and Roosevelt and the less actively interventionist positions of the post war generations. That crafting of balance is a messy process, but you can see it happening every day in the current congress.
But the only way to see it is to look, and a LOT of the electorate is too committed to the easy way out. That would not be made better by an “every candidate stands for himself, count on the voters to evaluate candidates individually” process. It would be made worse.
William says
@America Most
No more PARITES????
You mean on New Year’s Eve we have to sit around and read a book…or maybe a bible.
That’s sounds awesome.
They way we’ve been doing it up until now has gotten here. What do we have to lose?
William says
Hmm. That should be “PARTIES”.
America's Most Befuddled says
That’s right. That’s right. I am the: *** PARTY NAZI *****.
Anyone caught partying around here will be ostracized, ridiculed, cancelled, …… Oh, wait, that’s what we do to people here everyday.
OK, now it’s only anyone caught partying without inviting ME.
Gratitude says
Right-leaning, left-leaning, blah, blah, blah. I’m not interested in “ThePolarizationIndex.com.” I wake up to the reality that America is coming undone on all levels, and we have ourselves to blame for all the hate that divides us. Let me wake up counting my blessings, and go through each day with an attitude of gratitude.
Tim Scott says
I have plenty to be grateful for, but sorry I am not going to count insurrectionist swine and their enablers among those things. I am also not going to count people who are intentionally misinforming themselves and then pretending that they are “in the know.” I am also not counting the “centrists” that claim “both sides are the same,” when that is demonstrably not true. In 1940 the Nazis hated the Jews and the Jews hated the Nazis, but to conclude from that that both sides were at fault would be disgusting. Consider that you are taking a very similar position.
Gratitude says
No Tim, I am not taking a similar position by freeing myself of partisan echo chambers. I’m a Jew, and you even using this scenario as similar to this article is beyond sad. Yes, both sides are at fault regarding the left and right echo chamber of politics. I am free, and a lot of people are waking up to the divisiveness of both parties.
Tim Scott says
Looks pretty similar to me.
Survey after survey demonstrates that people scoring lowest when examined for knowledge of current events get their news from right wing sources. They not only score consistently lower than people who get their news from sources that the right wing call “leftist,” they score consistently lower than people who openly say “I watch/read no news at all.” The primary source of right leaning media, Murdoch’s Fox media empire, has been challenged in court and presented as their defense (presented THEMSELVES, so miss me with the “slanderous left” accusations) that they are not obligated in any legal way to tell the truth, so they can outright lie any time they choose.
To not see your position that “both sides are the same” as a false equivalence is either willful negligence or intolerable ignorance of the facts. You can hide that behind the typical right winger’s presentation of outrage over the metaphoric example, or you can face facts. That’s your choice. But don’t demand respect when you have now been informed so willful negligence is the conclusion going forward. I have no interest in the willfully negligent…the country can’t afford them.
Gratitude says
People using holocaust terminology in American politics is appalling and dangerous, and is too often used. Don’t accept this people.
Stinger says
History tends to repeat itself and the parallels are clearly there. IF you really are of the Judaic faith, then you should know the dangers of complacency in this.
The terminology, this time, has due application.
Tim Scott says
“The polarization index indicates that immigration discussions have grown more contentious since last year’s presidential election, and it is largely driven by engagement with right-leaning media featuring a high level of unreliable information.”
Shocker.
Right leaning media featuring a high level of unreliable information? Like that’s new and surprising?
William says
Has anyone looked at what is happening when immigrants from countries run by dictators voted for Trump thinking he will be good for them?
Maybe it’s the culture in those countries that faciitate dictators that these same immigrants think Trump will save them from “socialism” not realizing he’s a “dictator in waiting”.
Out of the frying pan into the fire it seems.