Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The role of the media in politics
Polarization in US politics
The role of the media in politics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Americans today will have no trouble recognizing the seemingly unmatched levels of political polarization present in the United States today; however, if asked, Americans would have a variety of different answers or explanations as to why they believe the political system has become so polarized. There are those who would take up the most direct explanation, the voters elect the representatives, and can choose whether to subscribe to particular agendas, issues, or rhetoric, so they are largely responsible for the state of political discourse. One might also point out the high degree of agency representatives and political elites are given, with their rhetoric being defended by a given side despite often being inflammatory or divisive. Others …show more content…
There are those that will take issue with this condemnation of the news media’s actions covering politics, and argue that while they certainly play a role in the debate, it is the electorate that chooses to watch and believe the images that are illustrated by the media. One might cite that the politicians and party platforms have not changed over the past few decades so it is up to the voter to come to that conclusion for themselves and might cite Abramowitz: “The large increase in partisan polarization on relative thermometer ratings of the presidential candidates between 1984 and 2012 is especially impressive given that the choices presented to the voters by the two major parties appeared to be no more polarized in 2012 than in 1984. It would be difficult to find evidence that Barack Obama was a more liberal Democratic candidate than Walter Mondale, who had a consistently liberal voting record during his years in the U.S. Senate, or that Mitt Romney was a more conservative Republican candidate than Ronald Reagan, who was widely regarded as
The book Culture Wars? The Myth of a Polarized America by Morris P. Fiorina, Samuel J. Abrams, and Jeremy C. Pope is a persuasive text regarding America and its division on political topics.
Increasingly over the past two decades and in part thanks to the publication of James Davison Hunter’s book, Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America, the idea of a culture war in American politics has been gaining attention. While the tension between conservatives and liberals is palpable, it’s intensity has proven hard to measure. However, it doesn’t seem that many Americans are polarized on the topic of polarization as most would agree that the culture war is real (Fiorina, 2005). This thinking is what prompted Morris Fiorina to write the book Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America. In it, Fiorina outlines an argument against the idea of a culture war by looking at party affiliation by states, how public opinion on hot button issues changed over time and various explanations for why Americans are so hung up on the topic of polarization. While Fiorina makes a good argument, the evidence supporting the culture war is too powerful to explain away.
Although, in recent years it is seen that consumers are less likely to subscribe to newspapers and/or watch the daily news. This is due to the fact that they are typically bias in their opinions, and are seen to lack the whole story when presented. Rise in polarization in the media is due to a new found competition between news networks, which was not present sixty years ago. Wilson says, “the news we get is not only more omnipresent, it is also more competitive and hence often more adversarial”. The media outlets are fighting for views, and are willing to do whatever it takes to get them. Which leads to them configuring the stories to what people want to here. Thus making their viewer ratings higher. It is known that certain news stations get more views depending on the political party. “Those who watch CNN are more likely to be Democrats than Republicans; the reverse is emphatically true of Fox”. The media has more outlets to reach their viewers to maximize the effectiveness of their biased
In this essay, I will explain why Texas should retain the partisan election of judges. Texas is one of the few states that elect their judges using a Partisan voting method. Partisan elections can be unfair and can misinform the voter. A high legal position such as a judge should never be chosen in such a manner. Partisan elections often cost more than nonpartisan elections in campaigning. Partisan elections are also more likely to lead to straight ticket voting or mindless voting. Partisan elections also lead to more campaign contributions and can increase the power of constituencies. Lastly partisan elections can cause an imbalance in equal represent the population. Therefore, Partisanship voting does not belong in the courts of Texas and
In Sinclair’s analysis, voters, political activists, and politicians all play significant roles in creating and enforcing the ideological gap between the two major parties in Congress. This trend of polarization is rooted in the electorate
Americans have become so engrossed with the rhetoric of political parties that many are unable have real discussions about “freedom, fairness, equality, opportunity, security, accountability.” (Lakoff p.177) The election of 1828 gave birth to the “professional politician” it demonstrated how “ambivalence” on issues, how image and the right language or narrative can influence voters. Partisanship did increase competition and empower voters to a greater degree, but it has also divided Americans and obstructed communication. As one historian declared the “old hickory” killed the ideal of nonpartisan leadership. (Parsons p.184) For better or for worse American politics were forever be changed in 1828.
Political Polarization is one of the most widely accepted causes of political gridlock, as the two sides continue to drift further and further apart. But why does the chasm keep growing? A few different theories call out the masses and the elites as being the principal actors in driving polarization. Fiorina says that the masses, or just average people, are not the ones that are polarizing. In fact she thinks that it is the elites who are driving polarization as they attempt to stay as far away
Whether political polarization is good or bad for the nation is still up for debate, but the general consensus is it exists due to a variety of reasons. From the construction of our Constitution, it is clear that the intent of our founding fathers was to create opposition in order to prevent tyranny from prevailing. Polarization is a result of the dividing of a nation into political parties. Though polarization has fluctuated throughout the years, it has caused a great deal of trouble in regards to passing legislation and has resulted in a gridlocked Congress. Even though some fear congressional polarization is destined to get worse, “it is mathematically impossible for congress to get much more polarized” than it is now.
Media concentration allows news reporters to fall victim to source bias, commercial impulse, and pack journalism. Together, all three of the aforementioned factors become known as horse race journalism, a cause for great concern in campaign media. In complying with horse race journalism, media outlets exclude third party candidates, reinforce the idea that politics is merely a game, and dismiss issues that directly affect voters and their day to day lives. Through horse race journalism, the media is mobilized in impeding an active form of the democratic debate in American politics. Even across the wide range of human values and beliefs, it is easy to see that campaign media coverage must be changed, if not for us, then for our children. It is imperative that we discern the flaws of the media and follow our civic duty to demand better media
Everyone had that one friend in middle school that caused drama every day. This is what political parties are like today. There is that one person on the right who is convincing the person in the middle to pick a side of a story, and the person on the left who is also trying to convince the person in the middle to stick with their version of the story. Everyone is biased towards each other due to what side they choose. The middle man is always lost in the argument and the actual story is changed. Neither side will work it out and just in spite of the other side, they will deny whatever the other says without giving it second thought. Political parties have become this immature and polarized. There can never be a consensus because of the extreme
James Wilson, a political science professor at Pepperdine University in California, suggests that polarization is indeed relevant in modern society and that it will eventually cause the downfall of America. In contrast, Morris Fiorina, a political science professor at Stanford University, argues that polarization is nothing but a myth, something that Americans should not be concerned with. John Judis, a senior editor at The New Republic, gives insight into a driving force of polarization, the Tea Party Movement. Through this paper, I will highlight the chief factors given by Wilson and Judis that contribute to polarization in the United States and consider what factors Fiorina may agree with. James Wilson’s article, “How Divided are We?”
Many people believe that liberal media bias is very relevant in this day in age, but really it is just a myth. Conservatives, also known as republicans, tend to forget that most of the American media is influenced heavily by corporate business owners(Schaller 49). Topics such as issues of war and peace, taxes and spending, and government regulation are heavily favorable to the conservatives. A study done by Media Matter for America shows that over sixty percent of U.S. daily newspapers publish conservative journalists rather than liberal(Schaller 49). On the other hand, it is obvious that some hot topics in the news are liberally skewed.
Political Divide in the United States The political divide in the United States is very bad. The two main political parties are the democrats and the republicans. The two parties dislike each other and each other's views. Abortion is something that has been talked about a lot, some people find it good and others find it as a bad thing. Health care is another issue that is controversial. Another big issue is illegal immigration. The death penalty and euthanasia are also reasons the government is divided. The topic of the right to bear arms is also very controversial, especially with all the murders and riots going on. Global warming, even though it does not seem very political, is a topic that comes up a lot in political speeches and events. And lastly, the separation of church and state is another topic that gets in heated discussions in politics. Not all of these seem like they are political, but they have been made into be, even though they should not have, the United States is divided over them. The political parties have caused the country to be divided. Democrats and Republicans, also known as liberals and conservatives, most people do
We are so politically divided today that it can break friendships, marriages, etc. Has it always been that way? I used to find adults fighting like children over political parties amusing and entertaining. I always wondered why people fought so passionately over politics like their lives absolutely depend on it. I recently found out how America was born out of deeply divided opinion. A majority of people wanted to be faithful to the King while the other majority wanted the opposite. After gaining independence from Great Britain, Federalists wanted a strong central government while the Democratic-Republicans wanted a government where the majority has the say in the government (Democracy). In the election of President Abraham Lincoln, the country
In a country such as Canada where there is an immensely diverse population that holds different ideals, values, and beliefs, it is necessary to have various political parties to reflect such things. Political parties are composed of people who share common goals and values based on an understanding of what is beneficial for the country, as well as themselves. These people are devoted to a specific approach in governing, and their philosophy is expressed in their policies, or platform. For these members to gain a position in the House of Commons in Canada, they must persuade voters of their electoral district to support their party’s platforms. Voters select their choice according to which party fosters the ideals closest to which they wish to be governed by. It is not reasonable to expect that the entire population will agree on every matter, which is precisely why modern democracy is executed through representation by vote. In order for there to be a true democracy in place, there must be choices for the voter. These choices translate into a system of values and principles, which in turn translate to these organized entities that we call political parties. This paper highlights the functions that political parties serve in the House of Commons, and also argues that they diminish the democratic characteristics and responsibilities of the House of Commons.