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.
Researchers tend to hold one of three views about television's influence on voters. Some believe that television affects voters in the short run, for example in an election campaign. Another group of researchers believes that television has a great influence on voters over time and that television's impact on voters is a continuous process from one campaign to the next. Others stand between the two views or combine both.
In the last three decades, polls became an important instrument for the media, especially television networks, to determine who wins and who loses the election. Caprini conducted a study about the impact of the early prediction of a winner in the 1980 presidential race by the television networks. He observed that, shortly after 8 p.m. Eastern standard time, NBC announced that, according to its analysis of exit poll data, Ronald Reagan was to be the next president of the United States (Caprini, 1984, p. 866). That early call was controversial because the polls in many states were still open at the time and, in some of th...
... middle of paper ...
...ory and criticism of Presidential campaign advertising. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Katz, Elihu, and Jacob J. Feldman. (1962). The debates in the light of research: A survey of surveys. In The Great Debates, ed. Sidney Kraus. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 173-223.
Kraus, Sidney. (1988). Televised Presidential debates, and public policy. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lowi, Theodore J. (1985). The personal President: Power invested promise unfulfilled. Ithaca, New York: Cornell
University Press.
Mcginniss, Joe. (1969). The selling of the President 1968. New York: Trident Press.
Mickelson, Sig. (1989). From whistle stop to sound bite: Four decades of politics and television. New York: Praeger.
Wattenberg, Martin P. (1986). The decline of American political parties 1952-1984. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Lofgren, Mike. The Party Is Over: How Republicans Went Crazy, Democrats Became Useless, and the Middle Class Got Shafted. New York: Viking, 2012. Print
398).It is also stated that news divisions reduced their costs, and raised the entertainment factor of the broadcasts put on air. (p. 400). Secondly, the media determines its sources for stories by putting the best journalists on the case and assign them to areas where news worthy stories just emanates. (p.400). Third, the media decides how to present the news by taking the most controversial or relevant events and compressing them into 30 second sound-bites. (p.402). finally, the authors also explain how the media affects the general public. The authors’ state “The effect of one news story on public opinion may be trivial but the cumulative effect of dozens of news stories may be important. This shows a direct correlation between public opinions and what the media may find “relevant”. (Edwards, Wattenberg, Lineberry, 2015, p.
The first political parties in America began to form at the end of the 18th century. "The conflict that took shape in the 1790s between the Federalists and the Antifederalists exercised a profound impact on American history." The two primary influences, Thomas Jefferson a...
Rosenstone, Steven J., Roy L. Behr, and Edward H. Lazarus. Third Parties in America. 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996.
Since the advent of television networks, Americans have relied on local and national newscasts to inform them of the world’s happenings. In the 1950’s there were no other mass informational outlets besides the network news and newspapers. Today we have the internet, which allows independent research, but the majority of Americans still depend on network and cable newscasts for their local, political, and foreign news. With the responsibility and power of informing an entire country, are television newscasts as reliable as most Americans assume them to be? Most Americans don’t consider where their news is coming from or who is producing it. Network and cable news are owned and operated by people and thus are not as objective and unbiased as we would like to think. In light of the war in Iraq and the most recent presidential election, critics of television network administration are voicing their concern for today’s presentation of the news. Increasingly more Americans are demanding a rehabilitation of newscasts, starting with ownership.
Today, political parties can be seen throughout everyday life, prevalent in various activities such as watching television, or seeing signs beside the road while driving. These everyday occurrences make the knowledge of political parties commonly known, especially as the two opposing political parties: the Republicans and the Democrats. Republican and Democrats have existed for numerous years, predominantly due to pure tradition, and the comfort of the ideas each party presents. For years, the existence of two political parties has dominated the elections of the president, and lower offices such as mayor, or the House of Representatives. Fundamentally, this tradition continues from the very emergence of political parties during the election of 1796, principally between Federalist John Adams and Anti-federalist Thomas Jefferson. Prior to this election people unanimously conformed to the ideas of one man, George Washington, and therefore did not require the need for political parties.1 However, following his presidency the public was divided with opposing opinions, each arguing the best methods to regulate the country. Ultimately, the emergence of different opinions regarding the future of the United States involving the economy, foreign relations, ‘the masses,’ and the interpretation of the Constitution, led to the two political parties of the 1790s and the critical election of 1800.
For over 60 years, presidential campaigns have used television ads to communicate ideas and campaign plans to the American people. With hopes of influencing people to vote, politicians have used various tactics and strategies to persuade. After observing television campaign ads throughout the years, a few themes are observed.
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.
Over the last few years polling has become a vital part of the United States election process. The media as well as the voting population take into consideration the results of various political polls, but in most cases the polls do not accurately represent the views of a population effectively. The media’s failure in presenting polls through television broadcasting has led to distorted data, and an overflow of political polls in America. The inclusion of media to presidential elections has allowed many political leaders to undermine their competitors, and bolster their chances of winning by falsely representing themselves to the many American viewers. Despite the many advances in the polling techniques, and the increasing role of the media in elections, the polls conducted do not accurately represent the views of Americans.
Currently, the office of the United States Presidency is one of the most powerful positions in the world. The President has the power to influence Congress, the nation and the free world. However, the US Media, which is also the freest and most powerful press, has had control over the presidency. The advent of CNN, ABC, NBC and others has had the effect of being able to sway the population of the United States, either garnering support for a president or destroying his credibility. The media has permitted the spread of information, allowing the people to take a more active role in politics making the general will better known, but it has also made politicians and the public hostage to the ideas and opinions of reporters, who are often only after a gripping story and a large profit. The media has the power to sway the American public by reporting favorably or with disfavor on a candidate, thus making a presidential candidate the prisoner of entertainment companies. Thus it could be said that the American people lose their ability to truly know a candidate because of the media. Instead they vote according to what they are told by major publications rather than what they believe. In this paper, I will explore whether the Media is a valuable resource or a does it have an undue influence over the President and the American public?
Influence; it is an essential force inherent to all decisions, mindsets, and values. Sometimes influence, be it intentional or not, is easy to uncover, but other times it goes unnoticed despite the great impact it can have. Influence can come about in many forms, be interpreted in multiple fashions; it all contributes to the idea that the roots of influence are not always necessarily clear. This is increasingly the case with the effects of the Canadian media on politics as more people continue to consume additional media on additional platforms at additional convenience. Essentially, it is easier to consume media than it has ever been before. On the aggregate, the Canadian media is able to impact a larger audience while inducing additional influence on Canadian elections as a consequence of a meager regulatory board resulting in media corporations holding too much influence in Canadian elections.
of a political campaign, to hit hardest at those who are in power or running
Television is a vital source from which most Americans receive information. News and media delegates on television have abused theirs powers over society through the airing of appealing news shows that misinform the public. Through literary research and experimentation, it has been proven that people's perception of reality has been altered by the information they receive from such programs. Manipulation, misinterpretation, word arrangement, picture placement and timing are all factors and tricks that play a major role in the case. Research, experimentation, and actual media coverage has pinpointed actual methods used for deceptive advertising. Television influences society in many ways. People are easily swayed to accept a belief that they may not normally have unless expressed on television, since many people think that everything they hear on television is true. This, however, is not always the case. It has been observed that over the past twenty to thirty years, normal social behavior, even actual life roles of men and women and media, regulatory policies have all been altered (Browne 1998). Media has changed with time, along with quality and respectability. Many Americans receive and accept false information that is merely used as an attention grabber that better the show's ratings and popularity. Many magazines and Journal reviews have periodically discussed the "muckraking" that many tabloid shows rely on to draw in their viewers. This involves sensationalizing a story to make it more interesting, therefore increasing the interest of the audience. "Along the way, all sorts of scandalous substance and goofy tricks appear, but not much mystery in the logic," (Garnson 1997). People often know that these shows aim to deceive them, but still accept the information as truth. Many times, people have strong opinions on certain topics. Yet, when they are exposed to the other side of the argument, they may be likely to agree with the opposite view. As Leon Festinger said, "If I chose to do it (or say it), I must believe in it," (Myers 1997). This is an example of Festinger's cognitive dissonance theory, which pertains to acting contrary to our beliefs. Television influences many people to change their original beliefs. It has the viewers think that the majority of other people hold the contrary idea. Once these views are presented, people have the option to hol...
Media also influences the thinking of people and society in general through entertainment as well as advertising and marketing campaigns. It is the creative ideas and boost to the imagination that people get once they watch a television show, movie, commercial or listen to a certain song. The impact any of these forms of media can have on an individual’s thinking can change in that most of them view the various stars in the movies, TV or the music industry as role models and as a result, they start imitating them. This type of influence oftentimes will influence the way someone views a political
The current role of mass media in politics has definitely played a significant role in how view and react to certain events and issues of the nation. Newspapers, magazines, television and radio are some of the ways information is passed onto many of the citizens. The World Wide Web is also an information superhighway, but not all of the sources on the Internet are credible. Therefore, I will only focus on the main three types of media: written, viewed, and audible, and how they affect whether or not democracy is being upheld in the land of the free. The media includes several different outlets through which people can receive information on politics, such as radio, television, advertising and mailings. When campaigning, politicians spend large quantities of money on media to reach voters, concentrating on voters who are undecided. Politicians may use television commercials, advertisements or mailings to point out potentially negative qualities in their opponents while extolling their own virtues. The media can also influence politics by deciding what news the public needs to hear. Often, there are more potential news stories available to the media than time or space to devote to them, so the media chooses the stories that are the most important and the most sensational for the public to hear. This choice can often be shaped,