Word in Edgeways

Civics

Dino Rossi is governor of Washington, and a Democrat to boot. Or so I learned in Portland over the weekend. Inside the Discovery Channel store in the brittle, glitzy Pioneer Place mall, I picked up a book based on the questions asked in the citizenship test given to people seeking to become Americans. Proceeding on the not unreasonable assumption that many of questions would stump native-born Americans, the book was compiled to answer them all, and flesh out the history behind the posers assigned to each batch of new citizens. “Who,” went one question, “heads the executive branch in the states?” Why, the governor, of course! Not content with a few paragraphs of explanation, the book helpfully went on to list governors for all states as of December 2004. For those who have not been following politics in the great state of Washington recently, Rossi is not our governor, although that has only been unequivocally decided – after several recounts and a court battle – in the past few weeks. But if Rossi were to experience a pang on reading his name in this book’s list of governors, he would I’m sure he would be even more distressed to see his party affiliation changed from Republican to Democrat.

Mistakes, as we all know, are made every day. And in response, hours and hours of time are spent – or wasted, depending upon your point of view – nitpicking, critiquing, and blooper-spotting the myriad media products of our information-rich culture. Does a goof like this really matter?

Maybe not, since no-one taking the citizenship test will be asked to describe the blow-by blow struggle for the Washington governorship in this electoral round; if they know what a governor is, and what a governor does, or if they get lucky and plump for the correct multiple choice answer, all well and good.

But when a country decides to apply a test of knowledge to potential citizens, or when someone decides to write a book about that test, it really isn’t acceptable to make a mistake. If it’s lamentable, yet true, that the average man or woman on the street would make a sorry showing on the citizenship test, how much worse is it that the supposed experts screw up? And we’re not talking just about books here; I have, over the years, taken two online sample tests at the government’s immigration and naturalization home page. On both occasions I came across one question where I knew that the “correct” answer was wrong.

Computer glitch? Faulty input? Who knows? And who cares?

Well, someone should care. It’s one thing to acknowledge that humans make mistakes; it’s another to conclude that since they’re going to happen, it’s not worth trying as hard as possible to avoid them. This kind of “creep” has been going on in, say, local news broadcasts for a while. Counting up spelling mistakes, factual errors and illogically-told stories on the evening newscast almost turns the viewing experience into an interactive one.

Yes, well, there are perhaps more important things to get worked up about, although I wouldn’t think it would be too much to ask the purveyors of “information” to concern themselves with little things like, you know… knowledge and accuracy. How many of you would be upset to get a glaring “incorrect” message if a citizenship test question asks whether being foreign-born disqualifies you from seeking the presidency, and you respond “yes”? (Or have the Schwarzenegger partisans already been fiddling with the answers?)

posted by Sylvie @ 10:51 AM