I’ve heard a lot of controversy over whether Putnam and the “Bowling Alone” thesis is right. Is our civic disengagement a point of agreement?
Much of the controversy surrounding “Bowling Alone” the article concerned the fact that the article focused significantly on group memberships and also focused on memberships in specific organizations (the Elks, bowling leagues, the PTAs). Three key criticisms were: 1) that it didn’t include informal schmoozing; 2) didn’t include new more innovative organizations; and 3) didn’t look at the full range of political forms of participation. Professor Putnam knew at that time that these other forms of social capital were equally important, but couldn’t find reliable data source(s) that would tell us about these civic trends over the last 2-3 decades. Since then, he accessed data from the Roper Organization and learned about and got access to the DDB Needham Lifestyle database. Both of these massive data sets, asked of tens or hundreds of thousands of Americans over the last 25 years, directly answer these earlier criticisms and show that these trends of civic disengagement extend both to or
Related Questions
- I ve heard a lot of controversy over whether Putnam and the "Bowling Alone" thesis is right. Is our civic disengagement a point of agreement?
- I’ve heard a lot of controversy over whether Putnam and the "Bowling Alone" thesis is right. Is our civic disengagement a point of agreement?
- I’ve heard about women having 2 or 3 lumpectomies, one right after the other. What’s that about?
