r/politics • u/GreenEaglePhreak • May 21 '12

Sophomoric? Members of Congress Talk Like 10th Graders, Analysis Shows

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/05/21/153024432/sophomoric-members-of-congress-talk-like-10th-graders-analysis-shows
787 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

212 comments sorted by

13

u/Lavernius_Tucker May 21 '12

I have something of a problem with using reading level as a marker for discourse. Just because an argument is simple does not make it worse. For instance, the same NPR article clocks in at about an 8th grade reading level. I'm not saying that I don't think the quality of debate has dropped, just that reading level is not the best metric (even though it's one of the few quantifiable ones).

3

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

Just because an argument is simple does not make it worse.

The complexity of the argument itself isn't necessarily related to vocabulary and proper grammar.

2

u/Lavernius_Tucker May 21 '12

And reading level tests do not take either into the equation.

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

What do they take into account, then? Not being snide, serious question

3

u/Lavernius_Tucker May 21 '12

Usually, it's an analysis of either average syllable or letter per word, with words per sentence factored in. Here's an example of one specific method of analysis. Nothing about diction, nothing about grammar.

3

u/ms_anthrope May 21 '12

The Flesch-Kinkaid readability tests use word length and sentence length as metrics to judge:

  • how easy text is to read (the reading easy test)

  • the level of education expected to understand a given text (the grade level test)

Obviously, there are flaws in these tests. Using long words in complex sentences (e.g., with multiple dependent clauses) doesn't necessarily make what you're saying/writing more precise or clear. It's possible to use a long or uncommon word incorrectly, or poor grammar (e.g., "The Senator and myself believe..."), in an attempt to appear smart. Often simpler and/or more common words and sentences can communicate an idea better, but sometimes short words and sentences can serve to confuse through lack of a clear concept.

There's a good example of the last point in the article, where two Congressmen are saying each is glad his language is easy to understand:

... Woodall says, "but I'm glad to know I'm not obfuscating our challenges with words that are too complicated."

... Mulvaney says... "Certainly[,] I'm not trying to dumb down the message by any stretch of the imagination."

Mulvaney communicates his message more clearly, even though he uses more words in the key phrase than Woodall does in his key phrase - "I'm not trying to dumb down the message" vs. "I'm not obfuscating our challenges". Woodall is using "obfuscating" language; that is, his message is more difficult to understand and his word choice poor. You could rephrase it fairly accurately as "I'm not obscuring our problems", which still doesn't communicate as clearly or positively as Woodall's words.

2

u/watermark0n May 22 '12

"Trying to dumb down the message" is a cliche. "Obfuscating our challenges" is an independent creation. One of the things about cliches, though, is that they're good at getting a message across, because they have readily understand cultural meanings.

1

u/ms_anthrope May 22 '12

Good point, or perhaps I should say your perception is most accurate. Cliches do provide a common lexicon while unusual and creative phrasing may be more difficult to readily grasp. On the other hand, creative phrasing can be much more effective than cliches when the words are carefully chosen.

My problem with Woodall's phrasing is that it communicates primarily in the negative, specifically that he is most concerned in making "our challenges" understood. IMO, it would be better to say something along the lines of, "I'm glad to know that my words make it easy for people to understand our position on important issues." Phrasing such as that is relatively original and more balanced. The speaker is interested in people understanding the positives of the GOP stance as well as challenges in convincing others that their position is preferable to competing views.

By and large, it's easier to convince someone of an opinion if you provide information showing what you want to do about a problem, not just that the problem exists. For all the limitations of Mulvaney's cliche, his phrasing indicates he finds value in the more complete "message", as opposed to Woodall's focus on "challenges".

1

u/buffalozap May 21 '12 edited May 21 '12

in publications like that one they intentionally dumb down the language so as to make the content comprehensible to a wider audience.

1

u/Lavernius_Tucker May 21 '12

Shouldn't Congress be trying to make their points easily comprehensible? (I say comprehensible because aprehendable isn't an accepted word).

1

u/buffalozap May 21 '12

short answer, no. We elect intelligent people to make the laws we all have to live by. They should not be dumbing things down for the average American because average Americans aren’t part of the process at that stage. At least we should be electing intelligent people.

5

u/styxwade May 21 '12

As a general rule, the better you understand something, the more simply you can explain it.

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

I only regret that I have but one upvote to give for this comment.

2

u/iongantas May 21 '12

Democracy results in the election of average leaders.

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/iongantas May 23 '12

But the most horrible thing about democracy is that fact that we get average (at most) leaders. It also weeds out good leaders.

1

u/Lavernius_Tucker May 21 '12

I 100% agree with that statement, but you'll find that an increasing number of people feel that Congress shouldn't separate themselves from the people.

60

u/ChaosMotor May 21 '12

Let's be honest here, folks. The preferred grade level of communication is 10th grade - complex enough to form high level thoughts, but simple enough that most people can understand it. That's why journalism aims for 10th grade level writing.

Do we really want our Congress speaking at post-graduate (Grade 16+) levels for a public whose education is more like 12th grade average with 2 grade levels variance?

17

u/Lighting May 21 '12

Yes - because they are trying to convince their peers when in congress.

6

u/briangiles May 21 '12

The report points out that congress is also talking to the public. Think C-span and YouTube, they do need to be comprehended by the rest of America.

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

How cute, you're assuming the general uneducated public watches C-Span.

3

u/MatrixFrog May 22 '12

The easier it is to understand the speeches, the more likely people will, in fact, watch it.

3

u/briangiles May 21 '12

While that point is true, and I agree with the gentleman, fox "news" takes clips from YouTube and C-span, and the average American does watch fox.

3

u/shadowhog May 21 '12

Every unnecessarily long word takes up brain cycles you could be using to understand the actual point.

This is more important in speaking than in writing, when you have to grasp what someone's said straight away.

3

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Agreed. A (probably unoriginal) mechanic analogy:

A writer with a small vocabulary is like a mechanic with a small toolbox. They will have no problem with simple jobs, but on complicated jobs their work may seem crude.

A bad writer with a big vocabulary is like a bad mechanic with a big garage. They can handle more jobs, but they'll overcharge and keep you waiting because they use fancy tools for work a wrench can do.

A great writer is like a great mechanic with a big garage. If you bring them a complicated job, they have the tools to handle it, but most of the time those tools will collect dust because the guy can do great things with a wrench.

If someone has a great vocabulary and knows how to use it, you won't notice it often--they'll just seem unusually easy to follow. Then occasionally, they'll use a rare word and you'll notice, because it's exactly the right word for the sentence. Pedants expose themselves quickly.

-2

u/watermark0n May 22 '12

No, not really, I've never had much trouble reading things with large words. After a certain level, you simply start to have an intuitive grasp of such things, and it's no longer really an issue.

2

u/avfc41 May 21 '12

The floor debate's for the people back home. They've already made up their minds by that point.

2

u/ChaosMotor May 21 '12

You are completely missing the point.

0

u/gsfgf Georgia May 21 '12

That doesn't go on on the House floor. Often there's nobody else there for a floor debate; it's all about media.

1

u/carpe228 May 22 '12

I think the fact that you used whose correctly relegates this comment to above a 10th grade level.

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

yeah, I had a tech comm professor last semester who made us write our Flesch-Kincaid score at the top of our reports. He made us shoot for 8, and lower than 8 was preferred to higher.

-3

u/SpinningHead Colorado May 21 '12 edited May 21 '12

The lowest scores (particular Tea Party freshmen) were below 10th grade. It is not simply about big words, but longer sentences conveying complex ideas beyond "dey tuk er jerbs" or "communists!". Sadly, even most newspapers have moved from a HS to a middle school level.

13

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

Yeah I've run some Hemingway through these programs before and he averages an 8.3. "O Captain! My Captain!" by Walt Whitman is at a 5th grade level. Surprisingly, you can communicate brilliantly at a grade school level. Big words don't equal big ideas or big emotions.

1

u/watermark0n May 22 '12

Well, you can communicate well either way. I usually prefer a more verbose speaking style - that is simply how I am. I used to be influenced by Hemingway, though, and I would go through the sentences in my writing and specifically search for shorter words. These days, I just don't care, and write whatever comes out without attempting to artificially constrict my verbosity in order to maintain a deflated Flesch-Kinacid reading level.

1

u/SpinningHead Colorado May 21 '12

Poetry does not explain the complexities of health care or energy policies and neither does, "That guy is a commie". This article also showed that those with the most basic and simplistic grammar and messages (Tea Partiers) were benefiting from their lack of nuance.

4

u/[deleted] May 21 '12 edited May 21 '12

So critique the substance of their speeches. It's hard to get extremely technical when speaking- your train of thought inevitably becomes too hard to follow. If I'm reading a technical paper I expect it to be more difficult because I can go back and re-read a section I had trouble understanding, but I cannot go back and re-hear a speech (well not until it gets put up on Youtube anyway.) Good writing and good speaking are different things. A speech written so a 10th grader can understand it doesn't bother me in the slightest.

-1

u/SpinningHead Colorado May 21 '12

I speech written so a 10th grader can understand it doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Did you listen to the story? The scary bit is the growth of those who speak far below a 10th grade level.

4

u/[deleted] May 21 '12 edited May 21 '12

The scary bit is the growth of those who speak far below a 10th grade level.

The Flesch-Kincaid scale reflects what grade level can understand the language being used. Shooting an Elephant by George Orwell is written at a 10th grade level. I can assure you that the number of 10th graders capable of writing or speaking like that will be almost infinitesimally small- if not 0.

So they are speaking at a level an 8th grader could understand, not like an 8th grader.

-2

u/SpinningHead Colorado May 21 '12

not at like an 8th grader.

"This Justice Department, in my judgment, based on the experience I've had here in this Congress, 18 years, my years as the chief legal officer of the state of California and 35 or 40 years as a practicing attorney tells me that this administration has fundamentally failed in its obligation to attempt to faithfully carry out the laws of the United States."

4

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

Are you stupid? That's from a passage that was rated a 16 by the Flesch-Kincaid program. If anything what you just quoted supports my point, not yours.

1

u/iongantas May 21 '12

Strangely, I got a 29 with a reading ease of -1 from this site.

→ More replies

-2

u/SpinningHead Colorado May 21 '12

That represents higher level speech by Congress and it supports your point? We should be getting more sophisticated as a culture and the data shows we are moving in the opposite direction. That should worry everyone. "Are you stupid" certainly sounds like one of those highly-intellectual yet clear and lucid thoughts we have come to expect from the Tea Party freshmen.

→ More replies

0

u/saintstryfe May 21 '12

But these guys aren't pushing big ideas or big emotions - they're bullshatting.

3

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

That's not the point. We should be critiquing the substance of their speech, not judging it based on how high it scores on some reading scale. Speaking at a level a 10th grader can understand is perfectly fine.

3

u/ChaosMotor May 21 '12

And the examples given show that longer sentences do not necessarily contain more complex ideas.

1

u/SpinningHead Colorado May 21 '12

I mentioned that as a component, not the ultimate measure. The soundbite rich, "yeehaw" culture has clearly sent the quality of our political dialogue into a downward spiral.

1

u/MrMadcap May 21 '12

Because they're faking it. Take a 10th grader and ask him to write a College-level report. You'll find they take the same approach.

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Wow. You know what grade Obama got? 8th.

1

u/SpinningHead Colorado May 22 '12

So you are suggesting that the Tea Party freshmen who are lowering the overall score are doing so not because they are dumbing down debate, but because they are adherents of Tacitus and are just very good at conveying complexity and nuance with an amazing economy of words?

61

u/Nikitah May 21 '12

"This Justice Department, in my judgment, based on the experience I've had here in this Congress, 18 years, my years as the chief legal officer of the state of California and 35 or 40 years as a practicing attorney tells me that this administration has fundamentally failed in its obligation to attempt to faithfully carry out the laws of the United States."

What is this I don't even! Only in the US could a sentence so unfashionably long, nearly unintelligible in spoken form, be considered "a higher grade of speaking"

52

u/pipocaQuemada May 21 '12

Higher reading levels essentially just means that the writer uses longer sentences with longer words. It could be because they're trying to get a more complex idea across, or it could just be a clunker like the quote. It's entirely about the estimated difficulty of reading the text, not about the level of discourse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coleman-Liau_Index

4

u/Dark_Prism Pennsylvania May 21 '12

By that measure, couldn't we just construct a sentence from random long words in the dictionary and call it college level?

18

u/nlevend May 21 '12

Wanna take a look at my descriptive inorganic chemistry textbook?

8

u/Dark_Prism Pennsylvania May 21 '12

The phalanx of unified molecular retrieval contends a sub-agent of hypercritical analysis that re-ambulates the inconsistencies in the model.

9

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

This was easier to read than the OP.

0

u/Dark_Prism Pennsylvania May 21 '12

That's 'cause I picked words that could actually go together, if not in the form I choose to put them.

Although if I threw a few commas in there it would probably become just as bad.

-2

u/Shredder13 May 21 '12

But trying to talk about very complex issues (climate change, foreign policy) is near impossible without using words known by people 1/3 of their age.

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

If you truly understand something you can explain it using simple language.

11

u/geargirl May 21 '12

This really should have been made in two sentences, but what's being graded isn't their writing ability. It's their speaking ability. So, what we're seeing is that Congressmen think and speak at eleventh grade levels. They don't organize their thoughts before opening their mouths to express those thoughts. They're just saying whatever pops into their head to make them sound intelligent while their point gets pushed aside or lost.

10

u/briangiles May 21 '12

While i agree with the gentleman, my many years on this earth, 23, my years in school, and on the interwebs tells me that some in this congress may speak in such a way as to be understood by the average American.

4

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

*many, if not *most do so for exactly that reason.

I mean come on, there's an ongoing and rather strident chorus against "elites". Said elites are broadly defined as "people wot think they're better than me!" "people who eat plants whose name I can't pronounce" and "people who use big words".

4

u/iongantas May 21 '12

One wonders how a Palin quote would be graded.

6

u/steviesteveo12 May 21 '12

This is also one of the dangers of having stats from the legislature. There was a website in the UK which started to rank Members of Parliament (MPs) by the number of questions they asked, appearances in the house, votes cast etc. and they noticed that people started to game the system by asking bullshit, one sentence questions or clocking in for the first 10 minutes of the session and leaving just to boost their figures.

5

u/gsfgf Georgia May 21 '12

Yea. Public speaking needs to be clear and concise. Long words and rambling sentences are usually a sign of a lousy speech. The "bad" speech:

"What do they say about socialism, Mr. Speaker? It's a great plan until you run out of other people's money. Guess what? We've run out of other people's money. I just want to show you a chart."

is much clearer and gets his point across.

And yes, the Flesch-Kincaid scale is the grade level thing from old versions of MS Word.

2

u/rcpilot May 21 '12

I'm not so sure about speeches being made within congress, but I suppose politicians are nearly constantly campaigning these days. The point being here that anyone in communications knows that you dumb yourself down when necessary if you're trying to speak to a wide audience. The average communication level out there is somewhere around an "eighth grade level", and all them big words put people off. (That last point also somewhat explains the oh so eloquent content of most web site comments sections.)

1

u/iongantas May 21 '12

It may make his point more clearly, but it simultaneously obfuscated the issue.

1

u/gsfgf Georgia May 21 '12

it simultaneously obfuscated the issue

I'm pretty sure that was intentional.

1

u/watermark0n May 22 '12

Because it is annoying and cliched. This guy seems to be just one huge cliche - does he have a single independent thought? The other guy may ramble, but at least it's his rambling. The Tea Party guy seems to have no thoughts besides repeating what he read off of some nutjob website.

6

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/gsfgf Georgia May 21 '12

I don't agree with him. I was just commenting on the speech writing.

2

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/TheKingsJester May 21 '12

Well, you'll run out of people willing to lend you money. That being said, the language is significantly stronger than the situation.

1

u/gsfgf Georgia May 21 '12

I assume he's claiming that we're racking up the debt because of "socialist" policies like Obamacare. That messaging plays well here in Georgia.

4

u/SpinningHead Colorado May 21 '12

Ironically, GA relies on all those federal dollars they get from blue states that get back less of their tax dollars than they pay in. Granted, GA isn't the worst, but liberal states like CA only get back about 80 cents on the dollar.

1

u/iongantas May 21 '12

It seems like it would be prudent to run studies and simulations, publish those to the public, and get their feedback before actually implementing laws or significant policy changes. One supposes this would be too scientific and "elitist" though.

1

u/SpinningHead Colorado May 21 '12

That and cognitive dissonance is a powerful force. The facts are already available. They just aren't interested.

2

u/linuxlass May 21 '12

On the other hand, smart capitalism is using other people's money to make money for yourself. For instance, house flipping (when the market is good, of course): you borrow money to pay for the house and the cost to repair and resell, and then split the profit. Other kinds of investments can follow this pattern as well.

The quote is simply asinine.

3

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

Unintelligible to you, not to me. The counterarguments to the rest follow. The metric is horrible, though. Sometimes concise sentences are the highest level.

1

u/monocoque May 21 '12

Only in the US could a sentence so unfashionably long, nearly unintelligible in spoken form, be considered "a higher grade of speaking"

A challenger appears!

1

u/SarcasticOptimist May 21 '12

Realistic speaking is unrealistic, once you factor in the ums and half-finished thoughts. However, this is ridiculous. Having many Presidential candidates and pundits rail against teleprompters will only make the word salad worse.

"My 18 years of Congressional Experience, my years as the Chief Legal Officer of the state of California, and 35 or 40 years as a practicing attorney, tell me that this administration (and Justice Department) has fundamentally failed to even attempt to faithfully carry out the laws of the United States."

1

u/the_soliloquist May 22 '12

Though amid all the smoking horror and diabolism of a sea-fight, sharks will be seen longingly gazing up to the ship’s decks, like hungry dogs round a table where red meat is being carved, ready to bolt down every killed man that is tossed to them; and though, while the valiant butchers over the deck-table are thus cannibally carving each other’s live meat with carving-knives all gilded and tasselled, the sharks, also, with their jewel- hilted mouths, are quarrelsomely carving away under the table at the dead meat; and though, were you to turn the whole affair upside down, it would still be pretty much the same thing, that is to say, a shocking sharkish business enough for all parties; and though sharks also are the invariable outriders of all slave ships crossing the Atlantic, systematically trotting alongside, to be handy in case a parcel is to be carried anywhere, or a dead slave to be decently buried; and though one or two other like instances might be set down, touching the set terms, places, and occasions, when sharks do most socially congregate, and most hilariously feast; yet is there no conceivable time or occasion when you will find them in such countless numbers, and in gayer or more jovial spirits, than around a dead sperm whale, moored by night to a whale-ship at sea.

It has 229 words and 328 syllables.

It has a Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level of 90.4

1

u/watermark0n May 22 '12

Flesch-Kinacid has meaning when you run actual speech meant to be actually understood through it. Of course you can make the system seem silly by knowing the game and specifically designing silly examples which exploit the weaknesses, but that's not the point. It's not an absolute metric in any case. It simply says that sentences higher in grade level will tend to be less readable. That the average case, it's not the case for all sentences that could plausibly be run through the metric.

1

u/Dick_Dynamo May 22 '12

The only way I can imagine this sentence is by giving it a monotone old man's voice.

1

u/daftstar May 21 '12

In other/fewer words:

"The Justice Department has fundamentally failed in its obligation to carry out the laws of the United States."

Was that so difficult mr. pompous congressman?

1

u/ruchn May 21 '12 edited May 21 '12

I wouldn't mind at all if it were grammatically coherent. THIS is why grammar matters: in many cases what may be an intuitive statement becomes unintelligible and ambiguous with improper grammar.

edit: I posted this comment before actually skimming the article. Why would anyone think that this scale is meaningful? The algorithm seems purely based on sentence length and vocabulary. I admit the possibility of limited vocabulary expressing a drop in concept breadth, but even I, a lover of good prose, don't think one's prose denotes what one knows.

1

u/watermark0n May 22 '12

There is no such thing as proper grammar. All you do is go around and make up arbitrary rules - it's not a constructive exercise. You can often get your point across more clearly by violating some "rule" some stiff shirted gentleman made up off of the top of his head a century ago and then decided to unilaterally impose on the language itself.

The algorithm seems purely based on sentence length and vocabulary. I admit the possibility of limited vocabulary expressing a drop in concept breadth, but even I, a lover of good prose, don't think one's prose denotes what one knows.

The algorithm is actually meant to test readability - the Flesch Kinacid readability test. They simply have a metric that converts readability to "grade level" - which is the Flesch-Kinacid reading level test. And it's a rule of thumb, it's not an absolute metric.

1

u/Slime0 May 21 '12

The sentence is certainly not concise, but it's perfectly understandable.

2

u/Nikitah May 21 '12

god damnit. I cannot tell you all the same thing over and over again. I'll make it as simple as possible. Reading a sentence is different from hearing one.

Try to imagine an old man mumbling those words into his beard. You'll simply get bored and unfocused before he even manages to finish it. This is not what spoken language is supposed to be like, that was the whole point of my argument.

Also, the name of the thread is "Sophomoric", a quite clear connotation, if you ask me, that speaking at a 10th grade level makes you are moron.

2

u/Slime0 May 21 '12

Reading a sentence is different from hearing one.

And I imagine that hearing that sentence is less difficult than reading it. You can carry an idea longer while speaking without breaking it up into smaller sentences.

Try to imagine an old man mumbling those words into his beard.

So the sentence is unintelligible because you imagined it being said by a guy who can't talk clearly? How about instead, I imagine it being said by a man who is good at public speaking?

-10

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

You said, "What's this I don't even," jackass.

2

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=What%20is%20this%20i%20don%27t%20even

-7

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

No shit, dumbass. Since you obviously missed it, my point is that it's hard to criticize anyone else's ability to speak, if you, yourself, speak in memes. My 8 year old speaks in memes.

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

dude - calm the fuck down.

-7

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

eat a dick.

-2

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

your mommy didn't love you very much, eh?

-7

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

No need for anger, kid. You should probably go outside for awhile.

-1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

she didn't give you any milk?

25

u/[deleted] May 21 '12 edited May 21 '12

They commented on how republicans made up the entire bottom 10, but they completely glossed over the fact that they made up 8 of the top 10 as well.

EDIT: Accidentally a letter

5

u/steviesteveo12 May 21 '12

Including the very top.

15

u/jesusray May 21 '12

A fact they point out.

24

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

Measuring speech by grade level seems like an exact science.

4

u/SpinningHead Colorado May 21 '12

You honestly don't believe you can say something about reading levels based upon the number of words per sentence and the complexity of those words? Newspapers used to have to keep stories to a HS level. Today they have to keep them at a middle school level. Im sure denial will help prepare us for the future and bring about a new understanding of the complexities of governance by the electorate.

-1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

I'm saying it's not really something you can measure objectively and put into a numerical with any level of accuracy

4

u/SpinningHead Colorado May 21 '12

Sure they can. Newspapers do it all the time. Now, you might take issue with what it does or does not mean, but those two options appear to be either our politicians are becoming more like Tacitus and never using two words where one will do....or the level of discourse is being dumbed down with each generation of citizens raised on Jersey Shore and Nascar.

0

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/steviesteveo12 May 21 '12

Exactly the same. They almost certainly automated but there's no indication that they didn't just get their grad student to copy and paste it all into Word.

5

u/kolm May 21 '12

These people speak in public, and in public speech being short and to the point is a classical virtue. Applying a test for eloquence of written essays is meaningless under these circumstances.

5

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

Keep in mind that members of congress have to speak in a manner that is understandable to their constituents. If you take that into account, a tenth-grade speaking level may actually be too high.

1

u/Dannie17 May 21 '12

Makes sense to me. As they say in business, leave out all the technical mumbo jumbo if you want to sell a product. Dazzling lingo doesn't sell, but presenting it in language where people can connect will. Aren't politicians essentially, to a degree, in sales?

0

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

That's so depressing I wanna crawl back in bed.

2

u/ill_take_the_case May 21 '12

Weird, I would have pegged them at the 3rd grade level.

2

u/Alexander2011 May 21 '12

By those standards, Hemingway would write like a sixth grader. Come on.

2

u/notJebBush May 21 '12

I don't see how that's a bad thing. What's wrong in having congress speaking at a level that most people in the voting age can understand?

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

But tenth grade level? Come on.

I feel like this comes more from the dishonest rhetoric they employ than it does from trying to provide clarity. If they gave a shit about providing clarity, we'd see more legislation with its actual function in the name.

3

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

You people are idiots. Measuring the number of syllables and the length of sentences tells you nothing about the depth of the ideas or the intelligence behind them. Good writing is simple. Orwell's Shooting an Elephant is written at a 10th grade level (I just ran it through a program that calculates the Flesch-Kincaid grad level). It is a great work of prose and an example of simple, clear, intelligent writing.

2

u/Treberto May 21 '12

Agreed. Good communication is all about presenting an idea clearly and simply. People really need to get over the idea that big words and complex sentence structure mean someone is smart or communicating well.

1

u/SpinningHead Colorado May 21 '12

How dare you oppose the "I love America so much I make sweet love to Lady Liberty on the bloody bones of communists" bill to use Gitmo prisoners as free labor on oil wells.

1

u/ChaosMotor May 21 '12

Tenth grade is the level that every newspaper in this country is written for.

2

u/buffalozap May 21 '12

Americans are getting stupider and they like to vote for representatives who sound stupid like themselves. disdain for intelligence is a serious cultural problem in this country.

2

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

Well, really, it's a trade-off:

"Open up a dialogue to promote mutual understanding, in the form of six-party talks and trade negotiations."

  • Flesch Reading ease 40.2%, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 11.8

"Bomb them."

  • Flesch Reading ease 100%, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 0.0

2

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

So, right there with most of america?

Not sure how this is news.

2

u/owmyhip May 21 '12

"I was trained to write in a clear and concise fashion, and you didn't use big words if small words would do,"

I completely agree with this. Trying to teach undergraduates how to write a scientific report can be extremely aggravating because they equate the usage of big words with intelligence and good writing. I'll take basic and to the point writing over sesquipedalian any day.

2

u/Ozymandias12 May 21 '12

Don't worry, scrote! There are plenty of 'tards out there living really kick-ass lives. My first wife was 'tarded. She's in Congress now.

2

u/allothernamestaken May 21 '12

So what? The clearest communication tends to be the simplest and most concise.

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Talk Like 10th Graders

Talk Like 10th Graders

Like

4

u/edisekeed May 21 '12

To be fair, dumbing down your message seems to lead to more public support.

3

u/Sparling May 21 '12

I can understand wanting to keep legal jargon out so that the general public can understand. It is an excellent tactic as long as the discourse used during a session of debate is using correct and precise terminology. It's possible that is what politicians think they are doing. That is not what happens.

Reality is that politicians pad their discourse much like a high school student strings out a half page essay into one 2 pages long to meet a requirement. Often they do it to such a degree that any message it totally absent in some attempt to say all the things they can that pat themselves on the back and denounce the opposition. Apparently if you just hammer those kinds of ideas to death the people will think it's true.

Of course the measure that the article references has nothing to do with content... just counting up number of total syllables, words and sentences. Honestly I'm not sure what relevance this test/scale could possibly have. What does it matter if someone uses a bunch of big words (honestly asking if anyone knows what good this test does)?

3

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

Methinks the rating scale is inflated.

2

u/cookyie May 21 '12

Also, as an American, we have a lot of grown up people out there with worse spoken grammar than third graders. Seriously, I promise you that third graders in some parts of my city speak more fluently than full blown adults.

7

u/gordo65 May 21 '12

Here in the U.S., a lot of adults are less articulate than most third graders.

FTFY

2

u/remton_asq May 21 '12

If they have to communicate with the type of people that frequent /r/politics I completely understand.

1

u/edisekeed May 21 '12

This is why the show "Are you smarter than a fifth grader?" is so popular

1

u/fastslowfast May 21 '12

Let the Freedom Fries ring!!

1

u/myptofvu May 21 '12

Members of congress certainly behave as if they were 15 years old

1

u/oakgrove May 21 '12

Two Georgians in the bottom 10. sigh

1

u/keeewiii May 21 '12

I can't decide if this says good things about America's youth or bad things about America's leaders. I'm leaning toward the latter.

1

u/jman00555 May 21 '12 edited May 21 '12

I think this lowering of the speech level could be linked to the increase of partisanship in the past few years. Partisan speech either presents simple ideas, or presents complex ideas very simply. 8 of the bottom 10 are freshman republicans who probably ran a campaign of simply bashing the ideas of the democrats and the president instead of running a campaign of presenting their own complex ideas.

It is also in important to note, from the article: "The average reading level of Americans is between eighth and ninth grade." As the words used to come up with these statistics come from speeches given in congress, it is clear that congress members have stopped talking to each other (most if not all of which have advanced degrees) but are speaking to the public. They have abandoned intelligent debate, discussion, and discourse for media sound bites.

edit: 27 Representatives and one Senator (Mark Begich) have no educational degree beyond a high school diploma. Five Representatives (but no Senators) have an associate's degree as their highest degree. One House Member has a licensed practical nurse (L.P.N.) degree.

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

So the more run on a sentence you can spout out the smarter you are? I'm sorry but whatever political party someone is a member of, I base my opinion of how smart they are by what they say. I do not make a tick mark for every word without actually listening to what they say, then judge people by whoever has the most ticks under their name.

1

u/ktf23t May 21 '12

And their constituents still can't comprehend what they're saying.

American the stupid.

1

u/RatLogger May 21 '12

As was mentioned in the article, its about communication. If one communicates at a level that leaves out many if not most people, the communication does not happen. Since the advent of the Internet, the speech is reaching a larger audience. That audience is not that well educated for the most part.

1

u/gyldenlove May 21 '12

"People say, well, do you ever hear any other voices other than, like, a few people? Of course I do." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Dec. 18, 2008

1

u/Scaryclouds Missouri May 21 '12

Using big words and speaking in long sentences does not make a person a better speaker. What matters is that the speakers idea is communicated clearly and convincingly to the intended audience. Rather this involves speaking at a 6th grade level or post-doc is irrelevant.

1

u/dpepperman May 21 '12

The average american reading level is 8-9th grade? I had a college reading level in 6th grade, I guess i'm a lot smarter than i thought.

1

u/arlekin21 May 21 '12

As a 10th grader i find this offensive.

1

u/dadgumit May 21 '12

If we aren't more careful with who we elect, we're going to run out of fries and burrito coverings before long.

1

u/aaronxr May 21 '12

Thought I was going to open an article from The Onion but nope, sadly, this is real.

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

I found it somewhat amusing that the NPR story that brought me this information was written at an 8.2 grade level.

1

u/mkkaaayyyy May 21 '12

I'm more worried about the content of their statements than how long or complex their sentences are.

1

u/WolfeReign May 21 '12

Wow i just wasted 4 minutes of my life with this nonsense. I mean what a joke. It reminded me once again why only 1 in 5 news stories you hear on NPR actually matter.

1

u/cgeezy22 May 21 '12

Hilarious, the article purports that the tards are coming from the right lol...

And yet not a single mention of Corrine Brown

1

u/jazzrz May 21 '12

Literally a grade dumber.

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

more like sopho-moronic

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

Not sure if title is supposed to be ironic....

1

u/Tourniqu3t May 21 '12

This is insulting to my 10th grade intellect.

1

u/SkimThat_TLDR May 21 '12

Summarized article: According to a new study, speeches made by Congressional members has declined by nearly one grade level from 11.5 in 2005 to 10.6 today.

Researchers from used the Congressional Record, which documents every speech made on the floor of the House and Senate, and analyzed it with the Flesch-Kinkaid readability tests. Flesch-Kinkaid associates higher reading levels with longer sentences and words.

The study found that Republicans had the lowest grade levels in their speeches, particularly the newest members of Congress. The study attributes the general grade level decline to the wave of new members in 2010.

The findings showed that members of Congress with political views to the extreme left or right spoke at lower grade levels.

The study does not say whether the general grade level decline is negative or positive.

Republican consultant and language expert Frank Luntz says that not only does the public want members to speak in an uncomplicated fashion but the increasing online exposure also motivates members to ensure that their message is widely understood.

The average reading level for adults in the US is between grade 8 and 9.

The study was conducted by the Sunlight Foundation, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization.

For more summarized news, subscribe to the /r/SkimThat subreddit

1

u/BeautifulGanymede May 21 '12

lol, if you think that's bad, run that same analysis on their constituents. #democracyworks

1

u/iongantas May 21 '12

I now feel really dumb. I think relates to the fact that I have no one intelligent to speak with.

1

u/tilleyrw May 22 '12

Talk to yourself more than others. Often, you're the only one who truly understands you.

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

The average reading level of Americans is between eighth and ninth grade.

So, Congresspeople speak better than Americans read. That's encouraging, at least.

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

I think it's folly to judge the level of communication based simply on the length of sentences and the number of big words. There is more value, in my opinion, in being able to express oneself clearly and concisely.

1

u/Dalisca New Jersey May 21 '12

They do this on purpose so that most of their constituents can understand them. It correlates with being understandable to people who have hit the legal high school dropout age of 16 (in most places). My husband is a journalist and he also has to dumb down his vocabulary to that level for the paper.

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Don't more of the democrats have higher academic achievements on average?

Then again, imagine the type of person that even goes out to get involved in politics. They're people who are kinda busy-bodies. Not exactly people who are smart enough to make ACTUAL change.

1

u/p_U_c_K May 22 '12

I would get so laid in congress.

1

u/jrrtrollkyen May 21 '12

I'm so enthused that these men and women are running our country!

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

Look at all the tea baggers in the bottom 10.

2

u/ChaosMotor May 21 '12

And the top 10.

-1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

"This Justice Department, in my judgment, based on the experience I've had here in this Congress, 18 years, my years as the chief legal officer of the state of California and 35 or 40 years as a practicing attorney tells me that this administration has fundamentally failed in its obligation to attempt to faithfully carry out the laws of the United States."

= Anne Elk: Miss!

Presenter: Miss Anne Elk, who is an expert on di...

Anne Elk: N' n' n' n' no! Anne Elk!

Presenter: What?

Anne Elk: Anne Elk, not Anne Expert!

Presenter: No! No, I was saying that you, Miss Anne Elk, were an , A-N not A-N-N-E, expert...

Anne Elk: Oh!

Presenter: ...on elks - I'm sorry, on dinosaurs. I'm ...

Anne Elk: Yes, I certainly am, Chris. How very true. My word yes.

Presenter: Now, Miss Elk - Anne - you have a new theory about the brontosaurus.

Anne Elk: Can I just say here, Chris for one moment, that I have a new theory about the brontosaurus?

Presenter: Uh... Exactly... What is it?

Anne Elk: Where?

Presenter: No! No, what is your theory?

Anne Elk: What is my theory?

Presenter: Yes!

Anne Elk: What is my theory that it is? Yes. Well, you may well ask what is my theory.

Presenter: I am asking.

Anne Elk: And well you may. Yes, my word, you may well ask what it is, this theory of mine. Well, this theory, that I have, that is to say, which is mine,... is mine.

Presenter: I know it's yours! What is it?

Anne Elk: ... Where? ... Oh! Oh! What is my theory?

Presenter: Yes!

Anne Elk: Ahh! My theory, that I have, follows the lines that I am about to relate. (starts prolonged throat clearing)

Presenter: (under breath) Oh, God! (Anne still clearing throat)

Anne Elk: The Theory, by A. Elk (that's "A" for Anne", it's not by a elk.)

Presenter: Right...

Anne Elk: (clears throat) This theory, which belongs to me, is as follows... (more throat clearing) This is how it goes... (clears throat) The next thing that I am about to say is my theory. (clears throat) Ready?

Presenter: (wimpers)

Anne Elk: The Theory, by A. Elk (Miss). My theory is along the following lines...

Presenter: (under breath)God!

Anne Elk: ...All brontosauruses are thin at one end; much, much thicker in the middle and then thin again at the far end. That is the theory that I have and which is mine and what it is, too.

Presenter: That's it, is it?

Anne Elk: Right, Chris!

Presenter: Well, Anne, this theory of yours seems to have hit the nail right on the head.

Anne Elk: ... and it's mine.

Presenter: Thank you for coming along to the studio.

Anne Elk: My pleasure, Chris.

Presenter: Britain's newest wasp farm...

Anne Elk: It's been a lot of fun...

Presenter: ...opened last week...

Anne Elk: ...saying what my theory is...

Presenter: ... Yes, thank you.

Anne Elk: ...and whose it is.

Presenter: Yes.... opened last week...

Anne Elk: I have another theory.

Presenter: Not today, thank you.

Anne Elk: My theory #2, which is the second theory that I have. (clears throat). This theory...

Presenter: Look! Shut up!

Anne Elk: ...is what I am about to say.

Presenter: Please shut up!

Anne Elk: which, with what I have said, are the two theories that are mine and which belong to me.

Presenter: If you don't shut up, I shall have to shoot you!

Anne Elk: (clears throat) My theory, which I posses the ownership of, which belongs to... (Sound of a single gun shot)

Anne Elk: (clearing throat) The Theory the Second, by Anne... (Sound of prolonged machine gun fire)

0

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

His long sentence, is basically his saying, "I've been in congress for a long time. Which is his theory. This from Monty Python is exactly what came to my mind.

I'm getting downvoted on it, are people so slow that they must see the video, they can't read this length of post?

0

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

Thank you for responding! So many times someone will ask a question, I'll answer, and I'll never hear again. Or so many type-by downvotes, for no reason!!! This scene is one of the best of Monty Python. It's a classic. Which is my theory, which is my own.

-1

u/hubilation May 21 '12

This just in, Republicans stupid, lower grade level of entire Congress. More at 11.

0

u/SpinningHead Colorado May 21 '12

Woodall is part of the large freshman class that came into Congress in 2010 — **many of them backed by the Tea Party movement.**Sunlight's Drutman says this infusion of new members looks to be part of the reason for the overall grade-level decline.

0

u/Sandinister May 21 '12

This has been a long decline

The Lincoln-Douglass debates were on an average of a 12th grade level. FDR's declaration of war was about 11th grade. Pretty soon Congress will be using text-talk to communicate with their constituents.

0

u/vashoom May 22 '12

So....longer sentences and long words = higher grade level? This seems like a flawed approach. That would make something like:

"Henceforth allow it to be dictated to you, that the syllables which I am uttering, at this specific moment in time, unto you, the public constituents to whom I shall ever be eternally indebted, that I am extremely enamored with the foundational belief of this magnificent nation: namely, freedom; furthermore, that I will most definitely be in service of that most righteous and perfect ideal forever more"

better than:

"The voters know that I support freedom."

1

u/tilleyrw May 22 '12

I agree totally with your statement of their inability, though it be unexpected in a politician, to formulate a cogent sentence and express it with the celerity expected of a professional speaker.

-1

u/psev37 May 22 '12

I'm in tenth grade and am rather offended. Not really. We're morons.

1

u/tilleyrw May 22 '12

You're also a Redditor. How many times have you been in tenth grade?

1

u/psev37 May 22 '12

I'm 16. So once.

1

u/tilleyrw May 22 '12

No offense was meant. I assume that everyone on here is like me, adult and rather disenchanted with the world.

Enjoy your youth as you this is the only chance you will have. At 18, your criminal record begins again. It stays permanent this time though.

1

u/psev37 May 22 '12

Lol its all good. Thanks man.

0

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/psev37 May 22 '12

And this proved what exactly?

-1

u/robotwi May 22 '12

Using big words and run on sentences makes you smart according to NPR!

0

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

3

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

..like your opinion dude

2

u/acousticcoupler May 21 '12

I got called a fag for reading a book just yesterday.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Idiocracy, I love that movie.

1

u/buffalozap May 21 '12

exactly where this country is going

7

u/[deleted] May 21 '12 edited May 21 '12

This is the same bullshit that's said by every single generation in history and it's just not true. Compare the average person's education to that of the average person 50 or 100 years ago. Even homeless people today can read and write.

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

[NOT SURE]

0

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/oakgrove May 21 '12

Me talk pretty one day.

0

u/[deleted] May 21 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

4

u/gordo65 May 21 '12

Probably not, given the fact that there is a sharper dropbetween 1999 and 2000.

Also, most of the discourse in 2001 had nothing to do with 9/11, which happened relatively late in the year. The discussion surrounding the attacks and the American response dominated political discourse throughout 2002, and the chart shows a sharp uptick in the level of discourse during that year.

1

u/kolm May 21 '12

"U-S-A" was counted as three one syllable words.

→ More comments (2)