More handpicked essays just for you.
Impact of media in elections essay
The impact of media on elections essay a level
Mass media effects on electoral process
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Television has affected every aspect of life in society, radically changing the way individuals live and interact with the world. However, change is not always for the better, especially the influence of television on political campaigns towards presidency. Since the 1960s, presidential elections in the United States were greatly impacted by television, yet the impact has not been positive. Television allowed the public to have more access to information and gained reassurance to which candidate they chose to vote for. However, the media failed to recognize the importance of elections. Candidates became image based rather than issue based using a “celebrity system” to concern the public with subjects regarding debates (Hart and Trice). Due to “hyperfamiliarity” television turned numerous people away from being interested in debates between candidates (Hart and Trice). Although television had the ability to reach a greater number of people than it did before the Nixon/Kennedy debate, it shortened the attention span of the public, which made the overall process of elections unfair, due to the emphasis on image rather than issue. Television provided daily updates on presidential elections. Frank Stanton, president of the Colombia Broadcasting System described that “television with its penetration [and] wide geographic distribution…provides a new, direct, and sensitive link between Washington and the people (Campbell).” Stanton claimed that the connection between the people and the government had lost the feeling of direct contact, but because of television the people felt closer to what was happening. Although this statement is true, the link that was restored by television was based on popularity and idolization. Evidently,...
... middle of paper ...
...evision, viewership and ratings of presidential debates have been steadily decreasing over the past few years (Chart). According to Nelson Media Research, between 1960 and 1961 the ratings for presidential debates dropped from 59.5% to 31.6% and moreover dropped 62.4 million viewing to 46.1 million people viewing between the ’92 and ’96 elections alone (Chart). Individuals may believe this new exposure of political debates and facts about the candidates would help the public make an educated decision of their president. However, all of that television has done is turn the presidential debates into a popularity contest. Elections were based on image, charm and how the networks wish to have the candidates perceived. Televisions’ contribution to political debates only emphasized personality, visual image and emotion rather than ideas, issues and reason.
It is very common among the United States’ political sphere to rely heavily on T.V. commercials during election season; this is after all the most effective way to spread a message to millions of voters in order to gain their support. The presidential election of 2008 was not the exception; candidates and interest groups spent 2.6 billion dollars on advertising that year from which 2 billion were used exclusively for broadcast television (Seelye 2008.) Although the effectiveness of these advertisements is relatively small compared to the money spent on them (Liasson 2012), it is important for American voters to think critically about the information and arguments presented by these ads. An analysis of the rhetoric in four of the political campaign commercials of the 2008 presidential election reveals the different informal fallacies utilized to gain support for one of the candidates or misguide the public about the opposing candidate.
Voters’ pick as to who they feel is the best candidate leans heavily towards the candidate whose face they have seen most often on television. Politician commercials are created solely to get the candidate’s face out to the public. Commercials are also geared towards making the voter feel valuable. Influenced by capitalism,
In theory, political campaigns are the most important culmination of the democratic debate in American politics. In practice, however, the media shrouds society’s ability to engage in a democratic debate with unenlightening campaign coverage. Because of this, it is difficult—if not impossible—to have educated political discourse in which the whole, factual truth is on display. After years of only seeing the drama of presidential campaigns, the American public has become a misinformed people.
“Amusing Ourselves to Death” by Neil Postman is a piece that focuses on the effects that technology has on public discourse and politics. He believes that the development of the television has habituated us to constantly needing to be entertained, which changes the way we take in information. It is no longer the substance that we value but rather the entertainment value. An important point that Postman evaluates in chapter 9 is that politics has become similar to show business. With politicians paying more attention to their image than political issues the integrity of modern politics can only be questioned. To update Postman’s arguments, although the television has allowed political figures to present the image their audience wants to see the internet has allowed for all aspects of one’s life to be accessible, which changes the way we view their credibility.
"Kennedy, John F." Television in American Society Reference Library. Ed. Laurie Collier Hillstrom and Allison McNeill. Vol. 3: Primary Sources. Detroit: UXL, 2007. 65-76. U.S. History in Context. Web. 13 Jan. 2014. Source.
The Presidential election followed a political campaign in which the weapons of choice were partisan criticism and attack ads rather than details that illuminate the character of the candidates. What troubled me about these partisan attacks is that reporters and columnists are governed by the tides of events tending to be too laudatory about candidates on the way up and too critical of politicians on the way down. For example; the coverage of Howard Dean's presidential race.
"Kennedy, John F." Television in American Society Reference Library. Ed. Laurie Collier Hillstrom and Allison McNeill. Vol. 3: Primary Sources. Detroit: UXL, 2007. 65-76. U.S. History in Context. Web. 13 Jan. 2014. Source.
When examining Joyce’s decision making in terms of who to vote for in her towns election it is important to analyze the amount of time Joyce spends watching television each day. Although she may agree with the candidate more willing to spend funds on education, she views the world as a place filled with violent crime therefore she can’t help but be more inclined to vote for the nominee who promises to fight violence. This subconscious feeling of fear can be directly related to the amount of television she watches. Television is a form of media like no other; it has the power to entirely shape people’s perspectives on the outside world whereas other forms of media such as radio or the internet cannot produce the same effect on people. Television
Television acts as a medium to bring contact between public and president again. Television not only reestablishes that connection the public had to candidates but it also provides a platform to candidates to articulate their views and values. People being able to view possible government figures and figuratively have them in their homes (on their TVs) builds a relationship; this bond is needed for people to place their trust in a stranger who would assume control of their life and rights (as a resident of the country). It is often beneficial for presidents or presidential candidates to present themselves in a more casual and relatable manner; this allows the public to understand and relate to the candidates. Some may see this as a hinderance to Presidents and presidential candidates’ role and image as government officials, an earnest and pensive job.
“ Television often provides politicians with more attention turning them into more celebrity than politician” (Hart). This holds some truths in some situations television does over publicize some politicians , but this always is not a bad thing. The modern day politician is suppose to receive a plethora of attention due to their important public figure. Some television networks do sway towards parties , but not all of them. If anything a viewer can watch the network that reports exclusively on his or her interest rather than the interests of the people from another political party. When placed under this public spotlight the true character of the politician is revealed , and the public can get to know them in depth. “Politicians have the choice to abuse their public figure to derive attention or use it for acts of good” (Bazalgette) . This ultimately comes down to the morals of who we chose to represent us. Television plays an important part but at the end of the day if a politician is gonna mislead the public he will do it. Television acts as a checker to make sure the public cannot be fooled so easily. Above all television has helped propel our modern day society into realms that were before thought to be impossible to
Television can be viewed as the medium between the public and candidate. It is the source that allows the public to know what is going on with the candidate and vice versa. As Frank Stanton, president of the Columbia Broadcasting System put it, “The sky is the limit.” Before television, candidates would travel the country, meeting voters and gaining supporters. But they were not always able to meet everyone, which hindered their process of achieving support for their campaign. With the invention of television, direct contact between the candidates and the public has been restored.
The main aim of this report is to analyze the impacts of changes in the media concerning the societal and individual view of politics and politicians. The report also describes significant milestones in mass media since the year 1960 and examines the impact of mass media on how people think politically. The report then considers the effect of technological advancements in mass media and the effect on the results of elections. The use of mass media has increased over the last fifty years in that it is a primary medium through which supporters of various campaigners share their ideas and views concerning politicians and different political parties. Through social media, behaviors and performance of several activists have brought
Prior, Markus. "News vs. Entertainment: How Increasing Media Choice Widens Gaps in Political Knowledge and Turnout." American Journal of Political Science. 49.3 (2005): 577-592. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
Mass media has come a long way since 1960. President Nixon first used the media to present himself to the United States citizens. The history channel stated, “The Kennedy-Nixon debates not only had a major impact on the election’s outcome, but ushered in a new era in which crafting a public image and taking advantage of media exposure became essential ingredients of a successful political campaign.” (A&E Television Networks, LLC)
President Franklin D. Roosevelt held a series of thirty evening radio addresses between 1933 and 1944 dubbed “fireside chats”. These fireside chats were the first media development that allowed for direct communication between the president and the citizens of the United States. Roosevelt spoke with a smooth demeanor in these chats, and “millions of people found comfort and renewed confidence in these speeches,” (“The Fireside Chats”) skyrocketing his popularity. On air, “he was able to quell rumors and explain his reasons for social change slowly and comprehensibly,” (Yu, 2005). Especially useful for Roosevelt, the radio helped him to hide his polio symptoms help...