There has been plenty of talk over what mid-term election outcomes will mean. Will majority changes mean that Americans disagree with the President? Are people simply discontent with the state of America in general?  In a recent Zogby Interactive poll (administered November 4 – 6), 72% of likely voters said they believe that Democrats will lose seats in 2010. This is amidst Republican wins last Tuesday in Virginia and New Jersey, but a Democratic win in New York’s 23rd.  The President’s approval rating hovers around 50% and few are happy with leadership for healthcare reform, a major topic not only of political debate but also of our everyday news.  On top of these figures, 89% of likely voters say that the American public is polarized.

With these indicators that voters are discontent and the belief that America is polarized, how should pundits and other media figures interpret these numbers?  Do you think the 2010 elections will mean Democratic losses and if so, why?

Leann Uncategorized elections, health, history, media, politics, zogby

Today’s Zogby blog post comes courtesy of Cheryl Korn, a Writer/Analyst with Zogby International, and an avid hockey fan since she was old enough to follow and understand the game. Thanks Cheryl!

Patrick Kane, a forward with the Chicago Blackhawks of the National Hockey League (NHL), made history by scoring the first NHL goal in Finland. This is most likely a moment Kane will carry with him for the rest of his life. But what will he remember about pleading guilty to a noncriminal charge of disorderly conduct after being accused of assaulting a cab driver over a fare dispute this past summer?

Kane could have faced up to 15 days in jail and a $250 fine, but the judge in Kane’s case issued him a conditional discharge. This meant he would avoid facing jail time as long as he does not run into problems with the law for a year. Kane was also ordered to make a statement of apology to the cab driver.

Luckily for Kane, everything seems to be neatly swept under the rug. The NHL has not chosen to punish him for his actions off the ice this past summer. However, how well does this lack of punishment sit with hockey fans and the general public?

According to a recent Zogby Interactive survey, 65% of adults nationwide agree that regardless of Kane’s guilty plea, he should face some sort of disciplinary action from the NHL. Respondents age 65 and older (70%) and parents of children under the age of 17 (69%) are among the most likely to agree. Eighteen percent of those surveyed do not agree and believe Kane should not face any disciplinary action from the NHL.

Electronic Arts Sports’ (EA Sports) NHL 10 was released on September 15. This release featured Kane’s image, and the software company has not said anything about replacing Kane’s image on the cover because of the off-ice incident this past summer. Clearly, this lack of action does not sit well with some. Our survey shows that 42% believe EA Sports should change the cover of the game and remove Kane’s image. Respondents ages 50-64 (48%) and 65 and older (47%) and parents of children under the age of 17 (44%) are among the most likely to agree that the cover should be changed. Three in ten (31%) do not agree that Kane’s image should be removed, with First Globals™ (18-29 year olds) (44%) among the most likely to say that Kane’s image should remain on the cover.

What is your opinion about this? How does this situation compare to the incident a few years ago where former Vancouver Canuck Todd Bertuzzi issued former Colorado Av Steve Moore a check into the boards? The play would end Moore’s hockey playing career. As you may recall, the referee during the game did not call a penalty as the check was deemed legal. However, Bertuzzi was later suspended by the NHL due to the severity of Moore’s injuries. Clearly, Kane could have seriously injured the cab driver during the incident, so why is the NHL continuing to look the other way? Did the NHL “miss the call” by not issuing Kane a suspension or some type of disciplinary action for his conduct off the ice this past summer?

ZogbyFeaturedContributor culture, lifestyles crime, entertainment, first globals, history, international, lifestyle, sports, summer, war, zogby

We are thrilled to welcome Maya Frost as a guest blogger on The Way We’ll Be. Maya is an internationally recognized expert on nontraditional and innovative paths through higher education. Maya is the author of The New Global Student, a primer for students and parents interested in global and unorthodox higher education while avoiding the anxiety and expense of traditional college. You can read more about Maya at her website and blog. Thanks Maya!

This has been a tipping-point summer for higher education. Shrinking endowments and slashes in state funding have crippled universities of all sizes and descriptions, resulting in unprecedented cuts in administration, programs and services.  Meanwhile, family resources have been decimated by job losses, reduced housing values, and an inability to get credit.

Middle-class families are asking hard questions about the value of a name-brand university degree and rejecting the option of taking on a great deal of debt to pay for one.  As a result, community college enrollment has surged across the United States, and many students are now planning to earn their degree at a state school instead of a private university.

Accepting students with the means to pay full room, board and tuition is a time-honored approach to filling the coffers at private universities, and in the current economic climate, the admissions gap is likely to widen at elite colleges. Administrators have reinvigorated their efforts to attract those who are not making their enrollment decisions based on financial aid.  A higher percentage of students from wealthier families will earn their diplomas at top schools alongside the lucky few who are offered full scholarships based on need (and the colleges’ quest for more diversity). Meanwhile, the middle-class kids will walk en masse at graduation ceremonies at not-terribly-impressive-but-reasonably-good universities across the country.

Savvy employers understand this shift.  They have their own economic challenges and need to find employees who are truly valuable rather than simply impressive.  Business leaders and non-profit directors are becoming less impressed by an Ivy League diploma or a straight-after-graduation master’s degree.  Instead, they are looking for real competence, relevant experience and honest enthusiasm in young people who know how to get things done with limited resources.

Prestige is losing its power. We’re entering an era with a renewed emphasis on the value of practical skills, a can-do attitude, and no excuses.  Leaders will look for those who have had nothing handed to them and will handpick employees—and future leaders—who know how to scramble.

I’m betting on those who are hungry—for learning, for experiences, and for personal development and success.  The scramblers have been responsible for the success of our nation throughout history, and their counterparts in India, China and elsewhere are driving the explosion in innovation and collaboration abroad.  Those who have had no choice but to use their creativity and talent rather than their connections or family funds to get ahead will be perfectly positioned to seize the most thrilling and fulfilling opportunities in the 21^st-century global economy.

Watch the scramblers—and see where they lead us.

ZogbyFeaturedContributor Uncategorized economy, education, future, history, international, summer

According to a Zogby International poll conducted in August 2005, 87% of Americans agreed that the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001 was the most historical event of their lifetime and that our culture, how we all live together in America, and how we as Americans view the world will never be the same. And nearly four years after the tragic day, over three fourths (76%) of those surveyed claimed the events still affected them emotionally, and nearly 70% personally thought about the attacks at least once a week. Among First Globals™ (18-29 year olds), 60% said their memories of the attacks were as emotionally vivid and dramatic in 2005 as they were in 2001. Over one fourth of those surveyed (26%) knew someone who had a family member killed or injured during the attacks of September 11th.

Concerning memorials, 21% of respondents stated that a permanent memorial has been created in their community. However, after 8 years, the reconstruction of the World Trade Center site in New York City is incomplete. Did you think it would be completed sooner? Do you think the length of time will lessen the impact when the memorial is complete, or will it add to the significance of that day?

ZogbyFeaturedContributor culture, politics culture, first globals, history, international, politics, zogby

A college degree doesn’t come cheap. When you add up the cost of tuition, room and board, books, and various fees, many of today’s college graduates (and their parents) can look forward to years of hefty student loan payments. Not such a big deal for those who have degrees in high-paying fields who are able to quickly find employment. But for those who graduate and have a tough time finding a job in their desired field or who take a job in a field with a low salary, crushing educational debt can make it hard to get ahead. A recent article in USA Today highlights the struggles of college students trying to get the best educational bang for their buck – including abandoning their expensive “dream schools” and giving a hard look at the option of attending less expensive state schools and community colleges.

While most agree that a college degree is worth the cost, we were surprised to find a new Zogby-Scoop44 poll showed that among those with college degrees, 25% don’t think a degree is worth it today given the high price of attendance. That’s a pretty significant number coming from those who know first-hand about the costs and benefits of having a college degree. But it’s also important to note that we asked about the cost and benefit of a college degree today – many respondents likely earned their degrees when the cost to attend college was much less.

Over at Scoop44, Alexander Heffner gets the perspective of some current college students and professors on the subject of today’s high college costs including, Patricia Graham, a longtime professor of history and education at Columbia University’s Teacher’s College, who cautions: “Making more money, though, is not the only reason to go to college.”

Making more money certainly isn’t the only value in earning a college degree, but as college costs continue to rise and the overall economy struggles, many prospective college students may be doing the math to determine if a high-priced degree is worth the expense. Do you think a college degree is worth it today? At what point, if any, do you think a college degree becomes too costly and do you think college costs will ever reverse the trend and become more affordable?

Steph education economy, education, employment, history, recession, war, zogby

Some media outlets have recently reported that conservative groups have been more successful in utilizing twitter than liberal groups. This comes in contrast to recent history, where liberal bloggers and online communities have been thought to have played an instrumental role in the election of President Obama. On this view, the success of a political platform is, at least to some extent, due to new technology.

However, one can look at this from a different angle: the recent success of conservatives tweets may be due to a consolidation of conservative opposition to the administration policies. Likewise, it was a wide discontent with the Bush administration that lead to victory for Democrats, and the effects of new media were incidental to those more fundamental changes.

What is your view of the role of technology in political change? Are new technologies primarily a cause or effect of the rise and fall of political ideas?

Zeljka future, internet, media, politics, technology history, media, Obama, technology, twitter

For the generation born from 1945-1964, the Vietnam War was the tumultuous event which divided this group more than any other.  And while many were appalled before, and especially after the results of Woodstock, the three-day music festival was the one event during this era which best captured the zeitgeist of this time- rebellion- and whether boomers agreed with the war or not, many could relate to that on some level.  However, the aftermath of the festival still revealed a stark divide amongst this age cohort.

Naturally I ponder similar questions for my generation born from 1979-1990; what is our definitive era, what is the big day that had a profound impact, and did it divide us or unite us?
For First Globals™, our era is no doubt defined by the telecommunications revolution that started in the 1980s and advanced into the 1990s so that a near majority of homes had cell phones, internet, or both. 

But unlike the Vietnam War for our parents generation, the T.C. revolution brought us closer to each other both within our regions and to some degree around our country (think chat rooms for special interests, instant messaging- thus the greater possibility to network outside of our high schools and cities).  And it was this era of networking and keeping in touch which many of us spent much of our teenage years engaging in, that prepared us for the day that shook us just like our parents had been shaken by various shocking events of the 1960s and early 1970s- that day for us was 9/11.

In fact 9/11 was an existential moment for many of us.  Some of us started attending church services and looking inward, while many did the exact opposite and found meaning by looking outward- hence the explosion in college students majoring in International Studies, East Asian Studies, Middle Eastern studies, and traveling abroad.

In short, 9/11 was the event in our short-lived history that ultimately defined us as a Global Generation because it allowed us to apply our networking and ultra-inclusive communicative skills learned through texting, instant messaging, and chat rooms, and apply them on an internationally practical level.  This is why we see countless members of the First Global™ generation who have made friends abroad and maintained through various social networking sites. 

Furthermore, 9/11 was the event that ultimately put the final nail in our parochial coffin and helped usher many of us to be more active in something more powerful than we had previously ever known- the global exchange of ideas.

While many Baby Boomers get much slack for continuing their indulgent behavior into their mature adult years; what are the behavioral tendencies of the Global Generation and are they likely to tarnish their image down the line, or have they already?

Jeremy first globals communication, evolution, first globals, history, international, internet, middle east, music, travel, war, work

We’ve heard about the Greatest Generation. Now we seem to have the most hated generation: Baby Boomers.

Maybe that is an exaggeration, but our recent interactive poll  of 4,811 U.S. adults found 42% saying Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964) will be remembered for “ushering in an era of consumerism and self-indulgence.” The other choice we gave respondents was to say the Boomer legacy will be “helping to bring lasting change in social and cultural values and ending a war.” That more favorable description is believed by 26% of our sample. The remaining 32% chose “nothing at all” some other legacy or just weren’t sure. (You can read John Zogby’s analysis of this poll at Forbes.com.)

I’ll drop all pretense of objectivity and say that I am part of the Woodstock generation. I was born in 1948 and am a writer at Zogby, with a background in newspapers and advocacy. 

I even went to Woodstock, and wrote a God awful piece for my local paper with a lead that read: “I was there.” So I will readily admit we thought we were special, and that we could change the world. That notion was short-lived.

So I refuse to silently take this generational bad rap. Generations don’t consciously decide how they will react to the world. They play the hand they are dealt, with human nature in control.  

Hardened by the Depression, the Greatest Generation was faced with fighting a just war against fascists who wanted to dominate the world. The survival instinct produced brave warriors and self-sacrificing civilians. They won the war, and the U.S. emerged prosperous and powerful. Mass media and modern advertising started to dominate the culture, ushering in the consumer age.

Still in survival instinct mode, the Greatest Generation sent  Baby Boomers to fight a misguided war that could not be won, and as history played out, wasn’t even worth winning. We now buy clothes from Vietnam. Our nation fissured over the war. At the same time, African-Americans justly demanded equal rights. Women went to college in much greater numbers, and they too expected equal pay and status. The post-war prosperity bred indulgence in the form of drugs and looser sexual mores. In short, all Hell broke loose.

The nation, and the Baby Boom generation itself, have been split ever since along those 1960s fault lines. Despite all that, normalcy goes on across political ideologies. People continue to work, raise families and want the best for their children. Human nature prevails.

What do you think about Baby Boomers and their legacy?

Paul Uncategorized, culture culture, drugs, Generations, history, John Zogby, media, war, work, zogby

Is the Obama Presidency changing our attitudes about race? A recent poll reported in the New York Times may shows that is happening.

According to the newspaper’s article on the NY Times/CBS News Poll: “Barack Obama’s presidency seems to be altering the public perception of race relations in the United States. Two-thirds of Americans now say race relations are generally good, and the percentage of blacks who say so has doubled since last July, according to the latest New York Times/ CBS News poll.

In Salon, Gary Kamiya writes: “We are a country used to talking endlessly about race but not doing anything about it. Obama is doing exactly the opposite. He is not talking about race, but that very fact, combined with his high popularity, has advanced racial harmony more than any utterance could do…But Obama’s silence about race, and the positive consequences of that silence, could also be the harbingers of a subtle but fundamental movement away from America’s dominant approach to race, one based on the idea that ‘we have to take race into account in order to get beyond it.’ “

However, Obama’s Attorney General and the nation’s first African-American to hold that post, Eric Holder, seemed to take the opposite tack when he said in February that we are “essentially a nation of cowards” when it comes to race relations. He, told Justice Department employees that “this nation has still not come to grips with its racial past” and suggested Black History Month could be used to spark more candid discussion of racial issues. “This will be, at first, a process that is both awkward and painful, but the rewards are, I believe, potentially great,” Mr. Holder said. “The alternative is to allow to continue the polite, restrained mixing that now passes as meaningful interaction but that in reality accomplishes very little.”

How has the Obama Presidency impacted race relations? Do his actions speak louder than words, or should we increase dialogue about race?

Paul culture, elections, politics, race history, Obama, politics, race, war

A common assumption about crime is that it is caused by poverty. This is based on a compelling argument that if people can’t afford a certain level of living, they are tempted to turn to crime to obtain it. However, a relatively high level of white-collar crime as well as low levels of crime in some disadvantaged groups throughout history has shed some doubt over this question.

Our data show that there are generational differences as well. Of all age groups, First Globals™ are most likely to agree that poverty causes crime — 79.1 % of First Globals™ strongly or somewhat agree that poverty causes crime, the highest percentage of any age group. Those over 65 were the least likely of all age groups to believe that poverty causes crime, but still a majority think poverty causes crime, with 64.7% of this age group agreeing.

The relationship between poverty and crime is constantly debated and is unlikely to be definitively settled any time soon. What do you think are the main causes of crime? And why do you think First Globals™ are more likely to agree that poverty causes crime?

Zeljka crime, economics, first globals crime, first globals, history