Examples Of Parasocial Contact Hypothesis

“Since media are part of the political class and talk mostly to the political class, the myth of popular polarization took root and grew.” (Fiorina, Abrams, Pope, 2005, p. 167). Recently media has played a huge role in the country’s politic; they share information, report events, and frame opinions.

Many historians have written about the use of propaganda over the centuries, but very few have written about how the effects of mass media has affected the American publics opinion of the government during times of war. Historians have written a lot about how mass media has increased over time, yet they have not made the correlation between the effective use of propaganda and public favor, or the ineffective use of propaganda and public distrust. The types of mass media articles that will be investigated will be articles on print media (magazines, pamphlets), posters,

The broadcast of television and its contents have influenced society as a whole. Whether it being commercials or news incidents, the television covers it all. With the vast amount of information being introduced to a wide span of audience, the television has altered the way a person takes in the given info. Despite all the advantages of the television, it generates bias amongst its viewers and converts their attentions on a certain issue, such as politics, for better or for worse. Although the invention of the television ventures to address political issues to the world, the television manipulates information so that a negative outlook would be pronounced on a particular candidate for a presidential election.

The media has always played an important role in the President’s relationship with the public, but just what kind of affect does it really have on the executive office? The first televised presidential debate in 1960 between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon marked the beginning of a new era – the inaugural shift of the media’s role in politics. Since that time, the media has continued to transform the way the president is perceived by the public through print, broadcast, and more recently, social media. All of said outlets have played vital roles in not only a president’s campaign, but also in their presidency and likability throughout their time in office. While the White House is still the source of most presidential news, the media are the shapers of the story and can frame it pretty much any way they want. There used to be limits on certain issues or realms of the presidency that were to remain untouched, however, first amendment freedoms take precedence over almost any restriction the government could try to place on the media. The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between the media and the president throughout recent years, looking briefly into the past to establish the scale of the dramatic change, and to study their reciprocal connection of how each utilizes the other.

The contact hypothesis (Allport, 1954) is a technique that is used to produce a more broad-minded society. Work carried out on this field has shown that contact hypothesis has the potential to reduce on prejudice. According to Pettigrew and Tropp (2006) Contact is the solution to prejudice and it works best when it happens in common environment, where other issues have no influence. Two model that been influenced by the contact hypothesis are “the mutual differentiation model” and “the decategorisation model”

With the impending election looming closer and closer, the approach of the presidential throne seems to elicit a plethora of opinions on who is the most viable candidate. However, the candidate that has caused controversy at every angle possible is none other than Donald Trump. Famous for his extreme affluence and most notably his TV drama, The Apprentice, President-elect Donald Trump has integrated his unctuous persona into his campaign. The San Diego Union Tribune’s article on Donald Trump, “…Great Power and Greater Irresponsibility”, introduces us with the possibility that Donald Trump is not the “Make America Great American” man he claims to be, and in fact he is the exact opposite. While for some Americans, his aversion to political correctness is admirable and induces a strong support; many are adverse to his social conduct and view his idiosyncrasies polar to the fabric of the Constitution. The article brings forth a target audience of both non-supporters and supporters alike in grave attempt to eradicate this supposed allure of Trump.

If non-committed voters are persuaded to stay home, the influence of the dedicated and party loyal voter is increased. This helps to keep small majorities in positions of power. The authors state that there has not been an increase in the negativity of elections, but there is problem with how they define this. If we look at the severity of the comments uttered during campaign season, then no. There has always been crude vulgarity in politics since, “Andrew Jackson had to endure attacks by his political opponents that his deceased mother was a prostitute” (114). But if frequency is the dependent variable, I believe there is notable rise, due to increase in time we spend in front of a screen. We see these negative messages more often, and memory is based on intensity and

In Michael Nelson’s Why Americans Hate Politics And Politicians, the author presents some very compelling evidence as to why Americans generally detest modern government. He cites several historically recent political scandals as potential explanations for the public’s mistrust of politicians. He blames the modern American political culture as well as the various public media hosts who frequently diabolize politicians and denounce their political actions. He also alludes to the common American theme of displacing blame from oneself, onto another group of individuals serving as political scapegoats. I felt that his arguments were thoroughly grounded in facts, as well as the various statistical poll results that he presents. I also feel that his arguments are still relative to the political world of today, as public opinion has not changed that much since this essay was published. Americans still share a general hatred for politics, even though the American public is often to blame, and not their elected officials as they wish to believe.

On a chilly November Tuesday in 2016, the United States made history. Following a divisive year and a half of vitriol, mudslinging, rallies, and protests which occasionally teetered into violence, an exhausted American people elected a president fundamentally different than any who had come before. The forty-fifth president has historically low favorability ratings, and is one of the most distrusted and disliked figures in contemporary American politics. I am talking, of course, about Donald Trump.

Between 1988 and now, at least one media outlet has reported during each political campaign “This is the nastiest campaign we have seen yet.”1988- New York Times, 1992-Los Angeles Times, 1996-CNN, 2000-Baltimore Sun, 2004-Boston Globe, 2008-Washington Times... so on and so on. Political Discourse in the United States have not changed much, Society has. Social Media, and yellow journalism have had an influence over the voters. People who voice their conflicting views may be subjected to ridicule from friends, family and in some cases strangers.

Currently, the media’s coverage of Donald Trump has become one of the most debated topics of the 2016 campaign. The debate centers on how, and how much, media coverage helped Trump as he rose the top of the polls and became the president of our nation. While Donald Trump may have received both positive and negative feedback throughout the course of the election he apparently has had a particular disfavor for negative criticism regarding his viewpoints concerning our country. Often it has been stated by Trump that he views traditional news outlets to be the “most dishonest human beings on Earth” and has exchanged many negative comments regarding their coverage.

In lieu of the recent election, wherein Republican candidate Donald Trump ran against Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, it is wholly irrefutable to deny the significance of television and media in propelling the elections into a precedent of informal undertones, as the election itself marked uncharacterized, incomprehensibly belligerent rhetoric. In the eyes of public scrutiny, the election proved holistically to be that which Americans chose between the “lesser evil”--Trump: the demagogue, known to bolster a corrupt financial agenda along with bigoted convictions versus Clinton: the liar who wrongfully used a private email server to handle official emails while Secretary of State and allegedly perjured under oath, yet who so easily evaded punitive ramifications.

A commonality among the American public is the negativity and pessimism that floats in the atmosphere of the United States government, although, what many fail to do is act on the change they wish to see. In this, millions of Americans confide on representatives and government officials–the most popular being the President–to in hopes restore the complications they perceive as important. In this 2016 presidential election, individuals in rural and Rust Belt America found Donald Trump, acclaimed entrepreneur and hater of political corruption, found him best fit as an outside source to mend the issues the US faces today. Bringing in the outside, yet strange power of Donald Trump brought new ways in how people viewed social media, press, and

Social Penetration Theory (STP) explains the process of how relationships develop through self-disclosure. (Griffin, Ledbetter & Sparks 2015) Through self-disclosure, closeness develops as the relationship continues to grow. To present Social Penetration Theory, I am choosing to write about a personal experience on how my best friend Taylor and I became close. I will be explaining on how Taylor and I developed our relationship overtime through self-disclosure and personality structure. As Taylor and I’s relationship grew, I continued to get to know her until we reached a deeper level through observation. I will explain through terminology, steps and concepts on how Taylor and I’s relationship grew overtime.

Everyone goes through situations in which they form new relationships with people they previously did not know. For example, when a student moves onto a college campus for his or her freshman year, the student will have to go through the process of making new friends and getting to know his or her roommate. The social penetration theory of communication explains how new relationships form and the levels a relationship must go through before it can be described as being friends.