Time for the Silent Majority to Be Heard

Time for the Silent Majority to Be Heard
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
May 19, 2015

Executive Summary: DPP chairperson Tsai Ing-wen is her party's presidential candidate. She is now on the campaign trail. The KMT is having a difficult time choosing. Which party will rule the nation in 2016 has become a matter of intense public concern. Every so often polls will publish voter support figures for various presidential and vice presidential tickets. Online data analysis, fortune-telling, and astrological predictions are ubiquitous. But election results on Taiwan often surprise everyone. Only when the ballots are counted early next year will the result be known. Until then, nobody can say for certain. We have no intention of joining the ranks of soothsayers. We merely wish to explore whether Taiwan has a "Great Silent Majority” isolated from the media, including traditional and new media, and how much influence these invisible voters will exercise in next year's election.

Full Text Below:

DPP chairperson Tsai Ing-wen is her party's presidential candidate. She is now on the campaign trail. The KMT is having a difficult time choosing. Which party will rule the nation in 2016 has become a matter of intense public concern. Every so often polls will publish voter support figures for various presidential and vice presidential tickets. Online data analysis, fortune-telling, and astrological predictions are ubiquitous. But election results on Taiwan often surprise everyone. Only when the ballots are counted early next year will the result be known. Until then, nobody can say for certain. We have no intention of joining the ranks of soothsayers. We merely wish to explore whether Taiwan has a "Great Silent Majority” isolated from the media, including traditional and new media, and how much influence these invisible voters will exercise in next year's election.

Our curiosity was piqued by a recent poll conducted by an academic institution. The survey data was quite interesting. The questionnaire asked respondents "Do you support or oppose lowering the voting age from 20 to 18?" The poll results were: Strongly support 10.9%, Somewhat support 33.3%. Total 44.2%. Somewhat oppose 31.2%. Strongly oppose 15.9%. Total 47.1%. In other words, those opposed to reducing the voting age outnumbered those who support it. Furthermore, those who strongly oppose it outnumber those who strongly support it by five percentage points.

The survey data runs counter to current mainstream media wisdom. The Conventional Wisdom is that the opinions of the younger generation must be taken seriously, therefore the voting age should be lowered from 20 to 18, and that the public on Taiwan has already arrived at this conclusion. One finds little opposition to lowering the voting age from 20 to 18 in the mainstream media. In fact the poll shows more people oppose this move than support it, and that those who oppose lowering of the voting age represent mainstream public opinion.

This raises an interesting question – why has a view that is obviously in the majority nearly vanished from mainstream media mention? If those who oppose lowering the voting age constitute the majority, why are their voices going unheard? Why has a minority viewpoint overwritten a majority viewpoint? Frankly, had the survey not revealed the truth, many people would still assume that the mainstream favored lowering the voting age.

This is the "spiral of silence” theory elucidated by German scholar Elizabeth Noelle-Neumann during the last century. The theory is that in the marketplace of public opinion, a minority that aggressively airs its opinions can silence a majority, and gradually lead to minority opinion overwriting majority opinion. It can even create the illusion that it represents mainstream public opinion. In many societies extremist minority views can sometimes overwhelm moderate majority views. This is why.

Consider mainstream public opinion on a variety of issues. Is it possible that given the vocal expression of minority views, mainstream public opinion has chosen to remain silent the entire time? Given the above data, it is entirely possible. In other words, Taiwan has a large number of "invisible voters." They often object to those who shrilly air their views in pubic. But they may be too busy, or perhaps too afraid of the wrath of the radical minority. They are afraid of attracting trouble, so they choose to remain silent, and become invisible voters. The end result is that what was obviously minority opinion, ends up righteously depicting itself as mainstream public opinion.

Another issue is even more troublesome. The government agencies in charge of policy often dance to the tune of an extremist minority. Since March last year, the student movement established new media groups. They aired their views on the web and demanded that the government refer to them during policymaking. This evolved into the bizarre phenomenon of "governance by cyberarmy", with official oblivious to the fact that many of these opinions are extremist minority opinions. If policymakers were to take all these views seriously, policies would be riddled with internal contradictions. They would lack rational justification, and even violate basic laws. The government would eventually lose all credibility and cease all functioning.

Invisible voters can still play a key role. Often an extremist minority can monopolize the marketplace of public opinion. But on election day, invisible voters can teach them a lesson. Take the recent British election. Pollsters, experts, and netizens, all failed to guess the final result. Why? No one knew what percentage invisible voters accounted for. Isn't this true for Taiwan as well?

Most people are busy with their lives. They are politically apathetic, and easily manipulated by the media. Reunification vs. independence battles over the years have gradually led to a he loss of reason. Many people who disagree with the views expressed in the media, often play safe by remaining silent. This newspaper recently published an editorial by veteran reporter Yang Ai-li entitled "Invisible Supporters, Take a Stand in 2016". Yang warned about this phenomenon. She appealed to families busy with work or domestic obligations, and to politically apathetic swing voters, to stop allowing the cyberarmy to dictate Taiwan's future. These voters must stand up and voice their own views. If again and again they remain silent, or refrain from voting, they will hand the the right to dictate their futures over to others.

沉默隱性選民該發聲了
2015年05月19日 中國時報

民進黨蔡英文主席獲得提名擔任總統大選候選人，密集展開競選拜會行程，國民黨提名人選雖然難產，但2016年究竟會換誰當家已成為社會關切的話題，每隔一段時間就會有民調公布，預告各種配對的支持比例是多少，加上網上鋪天蓋地的各種大數據分析，連算命、占星預言都出爐了！但台灣選舉經常讓人跌破眼鏡，沒到明年初開票結束，其實誰也拿不準結果。無意加入預言遊戲，只想就近日幾樁訊息，探索台灣究竟存不存在著所謂「沉默的隱性選民」，也就是絕緣於媒體（包括傳統與新媒體）之外的民意，而這群隱性的民意會不會在明年大選發揮力量？


我們的好奇，在於最近一家學術單位做的一項民調，其中一項調查數據挺有意思，問卷中詢問受訪者「贊不贊成將投票的年齡從20歲放寬到18歲？」調查的結果是非常贊成10.9%，還算贊成33.3%，合計贊成的有44.2%；不太贊成31.2%，非常不贊成15.9%，合計不贊成的有47.1%。換言之，不贊成降低投票年齡的比例，不僅超過贊成，而且非常不贊成與非常贊成的強烈態度對比差距竟然達5個百分點。

這項調查數據，與最近以來的媒體主流意見相違背。流行的觀點是，新世代的意見應該受到重視，因而將投票的年齡從20歲放寬到18歲，應該已是當下台灣社會共識，至少在主流媒體的論述中，基本上是找不到太多反對將投票年齡從20歲降到18歲的；但民意調查的數據結果卻顯示，原來更多的人是反對這種主張的，甚至反對降低投票年齡的意見，照比例看應該才算是主流意見才對。

有趣的問題來了，為什麼一個明明是占多數的意見，竟然在媒體論述中幾近乎全面消失？如果說反對將投票年齡降低的人確實占多數，為什麼他們的聲音發不出來？甚至還聽任少數意見凌駕他們的多數意見？不諱言的說，如果不是調查數據透露了事實真相，許多人恐怕還是認定降低投票年齡，就是當下占多數的主流意見呢！

這種現象，很像是上世紀德國學者紐曼所提出的「沉默的螺旋」理論。意旨在意見市場上原本占少數的意見，因為積極主動表達，反而造成那些原本占多數的意見選擇沉默，造成了少數意見逐漸凌駕多數意見，甚至被塑造成是主流民意的假象。許多社會中的偏激少數意見，有時能夠壓垮溫和多數的意見，正是源於這樣的因素。

台灣面對各項議題的真實主流民意，可不可能因為少數意見的強烈表達，而一路都選擇沉默以對呢？從上述的數據看來，這種可能性是很大的，換言之，這意味台灣的民意板塊中，存在著為數不少的「隱性選民」，他們對那些活躍於各個平台的意見喧囂，很多時候是不以為然的，但或許是因為工作忙，或許害怕觸怒激進少數惹麻煩上身，因而多半選擇沉默以對，變成安靜的隱性選民，最終的結果就是，明明根本是少數意見，竟能理直氣壯的以主流意見自居。

更麻煩的是，主管政策的政府相關部門，竟然也選擇向這種偏激的少數意見看齊！自去年3月學運之後，成立新媒體小組也就罷了，還督促各單位將網路上的意見，引以為施政上的重要參考，甚至演成「婉君治國」的奇特現象，殊不知這些每天量產的意見，很多都是偏激的少數意見。如果決策者全要將這些意見都當回事，許多政策可能前後矛盾、左右失據，甚至違背法理，最後自失立場，政府功能大概也都要停擺。

隱性選民還是可能發揮關鍵作用，很多時候在意見市場上占有壟斷位置的偏激少數，經常會在選舉中遭到隱性選民教訓。遠的不說，最近英國大選的結果，事前包括民調、專家、網路等幾乎都沒猜準最後的結果，原因就在於誰都估不出隱性選民究竟占多少比例。台灣何嘗不是如此？

多數人忙於生活，對政治冷感，很容易受媒體觀點的操控。過去幾年台灣陷入統獨惡鬥，社會漸失理性，許多人雖不贊成媒體通行的觀點，卻選擇明哲保身。本報時論廣場日前刊登資深媒體人楊艾俐一篇專欄文章，題為「隱性支持者，2016站出來」，對此現象心所謂危，乃針對終日忙於工作或家庭，對政治冷感的中間選民，呼籲他們不能再聽任網軍主導台灣未來，應該站出來積極表達自己的看法，若是一而再、再而三的緘默不語，甚至放棄投票，就等於把自己未來主宰權拱手讓人了！