How Does Television Influence Presidential Elections

Tvs regularly broadcast information and short clips or even live interviews of the candidates, giving people more and more useful information about who their possible new president could be. It gives you their ideas and goals for the future and their view on the current standing of the nation. It also gives you an understanding of who the person really is. Source B provides information of how Bill Clinton spoke openly about his underwear. His objective was not to let everyone know he wears boxers, but to give them a general idea of himself and personality. Although it is important to understand what the candidates have planned for the future, it is also important to understand who the person is. Tvs do that all the time by broadcasting a variety of things said and done by the

This quote explains how candidates should worry more about their image rather than what issues they are trying to mend for the country for its benefit. Although it is convenient to get an insight on the personal image of a presidential candidate, we have to understand that it is not crucial for knowing. The role of presidency is to have a broad understanding on what needs to be restored for the people of the country as well as the issues being prolonged. According to Source B, “because of television’s sense of intimacy, the American people feel they know their Presidents as persons and hence no longer feel the need for party guidance”. This quote supports the claim that television has its negative effects on society and how we view the presidential elections. The American people feel the need to now look back into the candidate’s life and focus on their faults over their high-minded actions and ideas on how to fix the nation and America as a

In the United States, television has been influential in presidential elections since the 1960’s. Television has a way of “turning away from policy sphere,” it judges candidates based on their appearances, not their message. Television has shifted the key point of presidential debates: from pursuing issue to pursuing image. Therefore, television is misleading, having a negative impact on presidential elections.

Television has been influential in United States presidential elections since the 1960’s. But just what is this influence, and how has it affected who is elected? Has it made elections fairer and more accessible, or has it moved candidates from pursuing issues to pursuing image? The media only impacts the American Society, especially for the presidential election as it increases the talks in politics and gives the president a higher role to follow. The television race captures more popularity than what a citizen is actually voting for.

I do believe that television has had a positive impact on presidential elections. In modern times there is a need for television for these types of events. The authors mentioned agreed with the fact that television has had a positive impact on presidential elections. One source, Source D, is a chart of the ratings for presidential debates. I believe that television has had a positive impact on presidential elections because the world has changed in recent years, the people have changed, there is a trust in the people who are on television, and there is a more honest aspect when someone sees it themselves.

Television promotes candidates’ image over their policies. Instead of the candidates discussing what they are going to do for the country, they simply argue why they are better than each other. The candidates being televised gives the audience a sense of knowing them, which causes them to lose the audience's interest in political ideals and to be “judged by standards formerly used to assess rock singers and movie stars”(Source B). Instead of the candidates

Television promotes the candidates’ image over their policies. Instead of the candidates discussing what they are going to do for the country, they simply argue why they are better than each other. The candidates being televised gives the audience a sense of knowing them, which causes them to “no longer feel the need for party guidance”(Source B). In other words, the audience no longer feels the need of the politician's policies due to basing their judgments on the superficial characteristics. In a recent political debate, candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton argued that their images weren’t very presidential. It started off with Trump saying Clinton didn’t have the looks and the stigma of a president and she quickly fired back that Trump didn’t have the temperament. Instead of discussing how they were going to run the country they just bickered about appearance. The

In fact, television makes impossible the determination of who is better than whom…” p.133. Postman continues, arguing that television does not allow us to choose the “best man” who is, “more capable in negotiation, more imaginative in executive skill, more knowledgeable about international affairs…” p.134. He talks about how the candidates try to change their image to the image of the leader we need, even if they are not actually that person. I completely disagree with this argument. One reason why I disagree is because the politicians running for president are constantly fundraising and speaking in front of crowds and even if they are pretending to be someone they are not, how could they do that for years and years without anyone finding out? I truly believe that television does help a lot when it comes to learning about politicians because every single person is so opinionated and when you hear many different opinions about a person it starts making you think more and more about what is true and what is not, causing you to do more research and be more careful. The presidential debates also really help when it comes to choosing our presidents. During the debates the candidates are asked so many questions and asked to respond so quickly that they do not really have much time to think about what they should and should not say. Those are the times

The political debates amongst Nixon and Kennedy assume a gigantic part in TV history, and the historical backdrop of America. It formed the way that we run our political races today. The politics debate being aired on television enabled individuals to see the character and activities of both candidates. During these televised debates, various viewers saw Kennedy's self assurance and how well put together he was. But then on the other hand, Nixon had a harder time and gave off a frightful vibe to the viewers who were watching the debated. Individuals who watched it on TV felt Kennedy won the debate, while the individuals who tuned in to the radio felt Nixon won. This point is important, essential, and identified with television

Television is a form of communication that can be used to transfer information to the general public, and its full value and effects can be seen at all times, especially during election seasons. To some extent, this medium has helped people make informed decisions on which candidate is suitable to be president. However, this positive influence could distract people from focusing on policy and turn the election into a popularity contest.

Television has been a part of American presidential elections since its introduction in the 1960’s. The first debate featured president Kennedy and future president Nixon in not only a battle of words but also looks, which would turn elections on their head. Yet television has had a negative impact on presidential elections due to an image over ideals mindset, nationwide consensus, and thirst of ratings from broadcasters. These changes has led to television creating a false image upon which the presidency projects itself towards the American public.

Presidential election has evolved significantly over the course of time. In the past, presidents like Andrew Jackson had to travel around the country and physically share his ideal through speaking with others. In modern day, presidents like Bill Clinton had the option to sit in a room and portray his ideals to the audience through the television. Well, what’s the difference? First, the invention of television has improve the relationships between the president and its citizens.

These debates stand out in history as the moments that changed the nation’s politics. This is due to two facts. The debates propelled an otherwise unlikely candidate into the spot of the presidency, and it turned television into an easily accessible medium during the electoral process. In the nineteenth-century, the people of the United States of America would commute to presidential candidate’s houses to inquire about problems with America and how he would remedy them. This was no longer necessary, and lead Charles Kuralt of CBS News to declare that Kennedy’s presence on television changed this medium into the nation’s new “front

The invention of the television has had an impact on all aspects of American's lives. It has affected how we work, interact with others, and our foreign relations. One part of American society that it has especially affected is presidential elections. Television has impacted who is elected and why they were elected. Since the 1960's television has served as a link between the American public and presidential elections that allows the candidate to appear more human and accountable for their actions; consequently this has made television a positive influence on presidential elections. But it has also had a negative affect on elections, making presidential candidates seem like celebrities at times and making it easier to publicize mistakes

Since 1952, television has played a major role in presidential elections. Television allows candidates to reach a broad number of people, and personalities, to help push along their campaigns. Campaigns help the candidates just as much as the voters. The candidates get to be identified, and known to the voters, and the voters get to hear and see how a specific candidate identifies with their needs and wants. The best way to get this information out there is through the most used form of media, television.