I was reading the Washington Post on Saturday when I came across this little piece by Democratic strategist Carter Eskew about the presidential campaign and its suddenly negative tone. Note this insight:
I once asked a famous commercial advertiser why he didn't attack his big rival, a competing laundry detergent--say that it "ruins your washing machine!" or "causes hives!" His answer: "Because I might gain temporary market advantage, but I'd devalue the whole category. Sooner or later, people would stop buying soap." That may be the main difference between political and commercial marketing: The political marketer is all about temporary advantage--the field of politics be damned.
Could the same be true of education? Is it possible that our field's endless squabbling is turning off the public? People often wonder why education is so low on the list of voters' priorities this election year. Yes, the fragile economy and war in Iraq have a lot to do with that. But I also suspect that Joe Sixpack is suffering from "education fatigue." Every election, politicians promise to fix the school system, particularly in the inner city, and as far as he can tell, nothing ever gets better. I suspect he's turning the channel. And arguing that "schools aren't the answer anyway" is hardly a way to win him back.
