Television Influence On Presidential Elections

As the television was brought in to homes across America, it was evident how incredibly engaging and extremely influential this . For example, television was live and the people were able to see the events that were being broadcasted. Compared to the older forms of technology like newspapers and radio, the television was much more powerful in the way that it allowed peoples to physically see events occurring rather than to read about them or listen to them. Moreover, the characteristics of the television played a huge role in politics throughout the United States.

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 brought our nation closer together than before and that more people of the American Society can also be a part of the political movement. Also in Source A, “Not even the sky’s the limit” according

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

Over time, TV lost its viewers and ratings because people turned away from politics. In order for the television stations to gain back viewers and ratings, the stations “dumbed down the issues by forcing the candidates to respond instantaneously” (Source C). This made the debates more interesting, boosting ratings and viewers. This also provided less information about the politicians. Dumbing down the information has turned the debate into game making it less about the politicians content and more about arguing over pointless things and ratings. However this has furthermore decreased the interest in politics. Even the stations that dumb down content “are failing, more often than not, to get good ratings”(Source

In chapter two, Wattenberg discusses television broadcasting and its impact with news networks such as NBC, CBS, and ABC. He quotes a 1972 study by Patterson and McClure in which they believed that although broadcasting allowed for Americans to see the campaign, it did not help teach voters anything of importance (32). TV news has become increasingly directed towards the elderly, with young people elsewhere or watching something else when politics are broadcasted (33). He illustrates this point with an example of the types of commercials aired for medications that while are suited for any age group, they are remedies for maladies or health concerns that older generations experience more than younger ones. Today, there are multitudes of television channels available for specific topics such as sports and music rather than the general topics the original major networks broadcasted, making it easier for young people to avoid the political events that once captivated the attention of Americans in previous generations. One study found that 21% of respondents under 30 years of age learned about the Presidential campaign or candidates from a comedy show instead of from newscasts (40). Although some find information indirectly through entertainment TV, a 2004 survey proved that 7% of respondents who followed the campaign closely enjoyed it and were familiar with facts heavily relied on cable news channels as a source of information, proving that if

Presidential candidates have power over how they’re shown in TV, whereas before TV they didn’t have much choice but to show up and campaign to just be the best leader they can persuade others that they’ll be. Source A explains the immediate contact the media can give, it can penetrate people’s mind and get viewers like never before, but just because that’s available doesn’t mean it’s the best option on how to portray our presidential elections. If anything, maybe television made the viewers feel closer a few decades ago, but now it’s nearly a barrier we can’t get past, so instead the television‘s impact on showing presidential elections has given the elections a negative impact. No one wants to watch short answered arguments where quality of imagine does better than the impact of your real words and actions. All the TV has done is go for someone’s image, quick answers, and the unfocused aspect of what truly matters, if your president is who will make your world a better place or

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 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

Media is known as the “king maker” for many reasons, such as shaping candidates in audience’s perspective. Television has been a big influence in shaping voters choice and labeling political parties, even though some believe media information can be scant in regards to candidates. Media can be anything from television to social media networks and how many people think that media is a great influence, some also think it can be a problem. “It only takes 140 characters to damage a political campaign” in which Smith is referring to social media as being a problem. (Smith, K. 2011. Pg. 9) At the state and local levels party affiliation remains the most important. “In television age, journalist became the chief influence in the selection of candidates

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.

In sharp contrast to past elections when candidates campaigned in-person, the 2016 election has been significantly mediated through mass media. With such a large influence on voters, the media not only determines which issues and events are salient in voters’ minds, but also how voters evaluate candidates. Moreover, media coverage, depending on its content, can influence whether voters think about candidates in terms of campaign issues or candidate attributes.

Between 1960 and today, there have been many milestones in mass media and the way it has been presented to us. In the 1960’s television sets were becoming very popular in many households across America. The first televised presidential debate took place on September 26, 1960. “1963: Polls show more Americans report that they rely on television rather than newspapers as their primary source for news.” (“1963: Polls show…” PBS, n.d.) With the television becoming the new medium for people to gain information, this was a major milestone in how information was gathered and perceived. Also in the 1960’s the first stages of development of the internet began. Early computers were also being produced. This had set the stage for upcoming years in technology that would affect the experience of presidential elections by all.