Introduction Advertising has been a prevalent aspect of the United States political system since its introduction. Today it is not uncommon for presidential candidates to make nightly appearances during a campaign in the living rooms of the American public. In 1952 with no set precedent in presidential elections for the use of television advertising, Dwight D. Eisenhower used a series of short commercials entitled Eisenhower Answers America to distinguish his campaign from his competitor (Wood, 1990). From the earliest day of television research, the medium has been considered as having a strong potential to contribute to a more informed and inclusive community, a staple of a nonpartisan democracy (Gurevitch, Coleman, & Blumler, 2009). The …show more content…
The accusation of television shifting the focus of political disclosure from the issues to candidate personality has become more prominent, “policy issues and concerns are more often associated with the faces of political leaders rather than with their political, ideological, and philosophical underpinnings.” (Gurevitch, Coleman, & Blumler, 2009, p.166) Polls done in the year 2000 found that nearly sixty percent of the public was dissatisfied with how candidates conduct campaigns, siting the negativity associated with campaigns as cause for dissatisfaction (Geer, 2008). Since the focus has shifted to the show put on by candidates through their advertisements rather than the presentation of ideals, the educational value of electoral campaigns has diminished. Along with advertisements, the use of televised debates has become a battleground for physical style, moving American culture towards an alternate means of conducting important business (Postman, 2006). This shift in focus is blurring the already fine line between show business and political disclosure. While the entertainment value of campaign advertisement has increased, the perception of these ads is negative. American voters are inclined to see negative attack ads as an undermining factor of the election process and the …show more content…
The ability to advertise in the political realm has moved from print and television to the Internet. As with the introduction of television into politics in 1952, the 2004 presidential election pushed the standards of the use of the Internet as a tool for political communication. Campaign websites converted the traditional media of television advertisements, press releases, fliers, and brochures to a digital format (Lynda & Postelnicu, 2005). Through the new media of the Internet, Americans can be active participants in the political process in a greater way than was possible just a few decades ago. There is an increase in the ability to actively participate in the political conversation. With the most popular online political resource being blogs, comedy sites, government websites, candidate sites or alternative sites there are more ways for advertisements to reach a larger number of individuals (Gurevitch, Coleman, & Blumler,
Buying media slots for candidates, which used to be a small business just over half a century ago, has grown so that these companies manage “more than $170 billion of their clients’ campaign funds” (Turow 230). This fact about the growth of such an industry should at a minimum raise an eyebrow, as it characterizes the shift and importance this data analysis has become. It also serves as an important point because it fuels the common fear of corruption in politics, as this data essentially offers a window to the responses and how people think to what politicians say. This could lead to the next phase of the “polished politician” where candidates will say statements that statistically receive favorable responses from the population. This strong pathos is a central pillar of the argument Turow is trying to make, effectively playing the emotion of pity from the hypothetical family situation, and building it into a fear of the system and establishment. Such emotions are strong motivators, and this combination encourages the reader to take action, or at the very least inform someone they know about such issues they weren’t even aware were
In 1992, President Bill Clinton was a little known former governor from the poor state of Arkansas who thwarted President George H.W. Bush’s effort to be reelected and became the 42nd president of the United States. During the primary and general election, President Clinton’s campaign made extensive use of television to introduce himself and his ideas to the general public. Three examples were chosen as representative of the type of imagery seen during campaign. The first is a TV ad called “Hope”, the next is a picture from President’s appearance on the Arsenio Hall TV show and the last is a TV ad called “1988.” These examples serve to represent key moments that occurred during the presidential campaign.
In this article Mary Kate Cary opens up with the supreme court decision to not restrict the use of corporate funds in political advertising so that she can make her point that big money ads are not the most effective way for candidates to reach American constituents. She argues that social media is a new way for politicians to connect with citizens. Her five claim are that Americans can now, choose the media they wish to consume, share the media they choose the share, like posts they agree with and dislike posts they do not agree with, connect with others on social media, and donate to candidate campaigns online. With these claims she comes to the conclusion that politicians want to go around mainstream media so that they can connect directly with the voters.
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.
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.
As easy as actors put on clothes and become a different person to film a movie, successful politicians appear much more heartfelt and honest as they are in real life. This is backed by the idea posed by Chris Hedges that “political leaders…..no longer need to be competent, sincere, or honest. They need only to appear to have these qualities.” If a politician were able to appear honest and heartfelt in a campaign event, they would much more likely to appeal to the audience and be able to win their trust and vote in some cases and succeed in winning an election to the benefit of the politician and not the audience. . Similar, posed propaganda and social medias of today are often used to exploit the audience and give them poorly supported feelings of support and trust for these political leaders.
“ 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
In the current time, it seems like one cannot go a day without using at least one social media website. This might be especially true among groups of teenagers and young adults. Social media became a vital part of daily life that feeds people with several types of information constantly. Political news is a type of information that can reach the people through the means of social media. Since presidents are constantly seeking new strategies to increase their communication with the public in order to spread their political message, they utilize the different social media websites. Hence, social media became a platform to spread political message. It is not surprising that now the majority of political officials and candidates have social media accounts more than ever before, such as a Twitter account.
The aim of this paper is to look at the relationship between the mass media, specifically television, and presidential elections. This paper will focus on the function of television in presidential elections through three main areas: exit polls, presidential debates, and spots. The focus is on television for three reasons. First, television reaches more voters than any other medium. Second, television attracts the greatest part of presidential campaign budgets. Third, television provides the candidates a good opportunity to contact the people directly. A second main theme of this paper is the role of television in presidential elections in terms of representative democracy in the United States.
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.
The researchers present findings that indicate that a politician’s popularity in the voting booth may be related to the frequency with which the candidate is talked about on social media. The researchers goes on to discuss how further research may conclude that social media has a bigger impact on voting outcomes than traditional forms of media, and how that could potentially shape the future of voting.
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.
Schweitzer, E. J. (2012) The Mediatization of E-Campaigning: Evidence From German Party Websites in State, National, and European Parliamentary Elections 2002-2009, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17: 283-302.
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
Social media including Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Youtube, Flicker, internet websites, and blogs are becoming mainstream attracting a younger more technology savvy voter. Many candidates in the last elections learned to use these mediums so not to overlook tech savvy voters and learned how to use these to their advantage. Candidates took to the internet to raise awareness, state views, and even successfully raised donations. Social media was able to provide instant feedback on the standing of a candidate often days or weeks sooner than a more traditional poll.