Don Herzog has set forth a very interesting question for discussion: Do we have "an incurably ignorant public?" Previously, I suggested that the answer to this question is "yes" based on the notion that citizens are rationally ignorant and are likely to remain so. Now, I would like to refine that discussion a bit by taking into account social norms.

In my first post I suggested that "[o]ne reason people seek political information is for voting purposes." I then noted that if this is the primary reason for seeking political information, there exists little incentive for one to become well-informed given the very small probability one's vote will affect the outcome of an election. Moreover, to the extent others are well informed, one has an incentive to free ride on those efforts, thereby creating a collective action problem.

Thus, an initial hurdle to achieving a better informed electorate is in the reason people tend to seek political information: to inform their votes. I closed by suggesting that "if we are to 'cure' the problem of political ignorance, it seems we need to find a way to make the acquisition of political knowledge a more relevant and useful pursuit than it is currently thought to be."

But there are other reasons people seek political information. One important reason may be to comply with one's surrounding social norms. For example, one's family or friends may be well-informed politically and political knowledge may be sought to fit in with the group. On this understanding, the potential for creating a better informed polity does not rest on the marginal value of one's vote. Instead it rests on things people tend to value much more than their vote: reputation, esteem, fitting in with a favored group, and so on.

Of course, not every social group highly values being well-informed on political matters. Nonetheless, social norms seem to offer an interesting way out of the trap created by the "rational ignorance" line of reasoning. Although any such move toward a more politically knowledgeable society is likely to be slow and partial, it seems worth thinking about how such a norm might be encouraged.

To some extent we seem to be seeing a slight shift in the norm already. The last election appeared to energize a larger portion of the public than usual and many more young people than normal registered to vote. While it is true that this is not the same as seeing an increase in political knowledge, it is, perhaps, a start worth noting.

Shifts in norms may occur for a variety of reasons. One of the most important is through the actions of what Cass Sunstein has termed "norm entrepreneurs" -- i.e., people who attempt to bring about a change in norms. Examples of norm entrepreneurs with respect to the norm governing the acquisition of political knowledge may include, for example, Bill O'Reilly and Michael Moore. Norm entrepreneurs, though, need not be famous. Any individual may be a norm entrepreneur within any particular group.

Recall the question on the table: Is there a way to increase citizens' political knowledge, or do we have "an incurably ignorant public?" Earlier I suggested that we likely have "an incurably ignorant public" if people seek political information for the sole purpose of informing their voting behavior. The introduction of social norms suggests some nuance to the simple answer, though, by offering another reason why people might seek political information: to fit in with social groups.

This understanding seems to offer hope to those who would like to see a general increase in political knowledge amongst the polity. After all, most people probably value their standing in favored social groups much more than the marginal value of their vote. Therefore, attempting to affect a change in the social norm governing the acquisition of political knowledge seems to be a good place to start on the quest for a more politically knowledgeable public.

Of course, none of this is to say this path will prove an effective way to increase political knowledge. But the discussion seems to add an interesting dimension to the original question posed by Professor Herzog. From here we might seek answers to the query: In what ways might norm entrepreneurs attempt to change the norm governing political knowledge? Other interesting questions -- e.g. Does anything much turn on the extent to which the public is politically well-informed? -- also remain.