David Slayden and Rita K. Whillock, editors
Sage, 1999

Reviewer: Mark Neely
Infolution Pty. Ltd.

In a world which receives 24 hour news coverage, offers increasingly thicker newspapers and current affairs journals, endless hours of talk-back radio debate, and thousands of Web sites devoted to public policy issues, you would be forgiven for thinking that our society is rapidly approaching the pinnacle of informed public debate.

But, of course, it isn't.

Well, "of course" might be a little harsh, but once you scratch beneath the surface of all this very public dialog, you start to notice just how shallow it really is. Discourse is dying, but it is not for want of information.

Slayden & Whillcock have brought together a broad range of opinions and views on subjects as seemingly unrelated as hate speech, academic scholarship, classroom teaching methods, political correctness, and even punk rock, to draw out underlying themes which, startlingly, often demonstrate how little value ought be placed on traditionally revered sources of information and public discourse.

Several contributors touch on the usual suspects. One frequently identified issue is the "dumbing down" of the media's coverage of public issues to make them more palatable for the broadest possible audience (amply demonstrated by the politician's "soundbite", from which the book draws its title). Also canvassed are the perils inherent in the packaging of news and opinion as entertainment, which often allows the personalities of the day to dominate the discussion, leaving scant room for exploring the issues.

Other contributors dig deeper, holding up common hurdles to effective discourse, such as "identity politics" - in which individuals align themselves by promoting what is different about others - and "policy-by-public-opinion", both of which serve to polarise and mobilise sections of society into political action without engaging in much needed debate and discussion.

One of the book's more powerful pieces, for this writer, centered on an analysis of the role played by political correctness in public forums and debate. One contributor highlighted how "P.C." is often used to attack not the substance of a particular argument, but the manner in which it is expressed, ingeniously, though perhaps unwittingly, transforming that which purports to free society from oppressive thoughts and actions into a pervasive form of censorship.

On a more topical note, given the media buildup surrounding the forthcoming US Presidential elections, is the chapter critiquing the use of so-called "town meetings" between carefully chosen members of the press and public and political candidates. Despite the apparent off-the-cuff and free-flowing nature of such encounters, rarely do they approach the altruistic and egalitarian nature of the original democratic processes upon which they are modeled. More tellingly, few sections of the media adequately interpret their significance or outcome.

The book itself appears aimed at media study students and researchers although, unfortunately, it will no doubt also be popular amongst political science students and political advisors. Due to the case-study nature of some of the contributions, the book does offer some very practical instruction on how to stymie debate and discourse.

Each contributor provides detailed endnotes and references, and the book is well indexed. Occasionally individual sections appear too dry and unnecessarily abstract - perhaps an unwise comment to make when reviewing a book proclaiming the death of discourse - but, overall, few readers will find themselves as challenged by the various writing styles as they are by the messages presented.