[shortcake27]

What makes you so sure the data in your study is truly representative of gen z?

A few months ago a study was posted on HN which claimed 30% of gen z supported police cameras being installed inside homes to protect against domestic violence.

Meanwhile, in Dunedin, the number of cameras on the street was reduced in consultation with university students (aka gen z).

How can both of these statements be true? The answer is, they aren’t- the study posted on HN was fearmongering, manipulated data, trying to discredit the younger generation, to get older people to vote a specific way.

I’m a millennial but I’m sick of this rhetoric that gen z are stupid / oblivious / complicit etc. They aren’t.

[abduhl]

It’s 30%: https://www.cato.org/blog/nearly-third-gen-z-favors-home-gov...

[shortcake27]

Thank you, I was looking for this but couldn’t find it. My comment has been corrected.

To anyone downvoting my original comment, take a look at CATO, the style of writing used in their blog posts, their other studies, and their mission statement, and decide for yourself - are they trying to accurately represent gen z, or are they pushing an agenda?

It seems like far-right-wing organisations are expending extensive effort in an attempt to discredit gen z as a generation who are happy to have all their rights sold away and/or eroded. Yet if you speak to a young person today, it doesn’t line up.

“I read a study that said X about gen z” isn’t evidence that gen z believes / does those things.

[abduhl]

Cato is no doubt biased but your comment is the thing with FUD, not the study. They post exactly the question they asked in their study: do you favor or oppose the government installing surveillance cameras in every household in order to reduce domestic violence, abuse, and other illegal activity.

Regardless, the study highlights exactly the difference the GP was saying: gen z is much more likely to be okay with the surveillance state. Even if the study question is worded in a way you disagree with or that you think is biased, you’ve presented no argument for why gen z would be disproportionately made to over-respond.

[shortcake27]

> the study highlights exactly the difference the GP was saying: gen z is much more likely to be okay with the surveillance state

You admit to CATO being biased but you still believe their studies are concrete proof of a hypothesis?

> you’ve presented no argument for why gen z would be disproportionately made to over-respond.

I don’t see why it’s relevant to prove the mechanism CATO uses to get its results, when their data doesn’t line up with the real world.

I’m still looking for the exact link which has details/numbers (I’m currently on my phone on patchy 4g) but my counterpoint to CATO is that in Dunedin, either the University or DCC wanted to install surveillance cameras, and after consulting with the students, the number of cameras was reduced. So in this scenario, you have an older generation wanting more surveillance and the younger generation pushing back. This is not only completely opposite to CATOs study, but is also real opposed to hypothetical.

[abduhl]

No, in your Dunedin scenario you have an authority figure wanting to install more authoritarian measures, not an older generation.

[ClumsyPilot]

Authority figure belongs to an older generation, quite obviously!

[tapland]

It was interesting because acceptance of surveillance in public was increasing with age, aside from GenZ > GenY.

It was apparently part of the Swedish Internet Foundations yearly survey ( https://svenskarnaochinternet.se/english/ ).