Power and Distance

After the recent outbursts of Rep. Joe Wilson, Serena Williams and Kanye West (the 3 W’s), the pundits have rushed in to explain what all this bad behavior means: we are racist (as represented by the case of Wilson, but not, curiously, the case of Williams or West); we are coarse and impolite; or maybe we just tune in to too much talk radio and TV (seriously).  
 
But there might be a more positive reason for these outbursts. It is something you’re probably familiar with from Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers: the Power Distance Index (PDI).  The PDI “measures the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is distributed unequally.” 
 
The PDI in the United States is relatively low, and in general that is a good thing (see, by way of comparison, “caudillo government” and the PDI of Latin American countries). We respect power, but we also do not tolerate its abuses. I think this is an important point--the outbursts of the 3 W’s were all directed toward people they viewed as abusing a position of authority (Obama for Wilson; the line judge for Williams; and the Video Music Award voters for West).
 
That isn’t to say that any of the 3 W’s acted appropriately. But it is to say that Americans like to communicate with and challenge people who are in positions of power, and often for good reason. We want to keep others honest, so to speak.
 
Recall the incident this summer between Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates and Sergeant James Crowley. Wasn't the need to check authority one of the supposed lessons of that event? 
 
In the world of politics, the balance of power becomes especially important when we have a president who is pushing a cause with which a significant percentage of the population disagrees. We did this with Bush and Iraq, and we are doing so now with Obama and his plan for health care reform.
 
Yet despite this desire for real debate, rarely do non-privileged members of our society have the opportunity to speak with our elected leader. Unlike the town hall forums during campaigns, public events with sitting presidents are often so tightly controlled that they border on being entirely scripted. 
 
Of course, this conversational chasm should be bridged by the media, but it quite clearly is not. The reality is that even before presidents are elected, reporters have an incentive to minimize criticism and cultivate strong, positive relationships with the campaign in order to get inside information. After all, if you don’t stay friendly with a campaign, you get kicked off its plane.
 
It is part of American society to interact with and debate our leaders. But once elected, our political leaders seem to isolate themselves from the regular folks who might ask some tough questions. Not only does this lead our presidents to grow more aloof from the public, but it allows – if not encourages – groups of people to coalesce around what they view as abuses of power. Whether those views are correct or not.
 
Given our society's desire to hold our leaders accountable, coupled with the disincentives of the media to act as our proxy, how can we improve communication between the public and our president? 
 
Read more stories at YPNation.