The Impact Of New Media On Politics

Technology has forever changed the way we receive our news and has irreversibly changed the landscape of the media. The growth of cable television and the shift from television to the internet have facilitated the growth of both infotainment and narrowcasting. The main question that we’re asking today is how both infotainment and narrowcasting have an impact on politics in America. To better understand this question, we must first know what infotainment and narrowcasting are.

Television in today’s world is vital for more than one type of situation. These situations can be an addition to entertainment, news, as well as politics. This combination, though, can have its faults as well as benefits. Television channels are owned by different brands of people such as democrats, republicans, and more. Media in politics can become biased based on the channels being viewed, or the commercials being distributed into the public. Due to this, television has made the presidential elections more unfair than just. As television introduces the image of the presidential candidates rather than their told plans and goals, we can gain a better understanding on their personal image rather than the principal of their reason for presidency.

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.

How presidential candidates present themselves in the media can be proven to impact election results dramatically. Political figure using social media did not start to become more common until after the 2008 election because Twitter and Facebook were just recently created, but by looking at data from the past two elections it shows that the news presidential candidates put on their social media can correlate with how people will decide to vote. After researching what topics political candidates post and how they present themselves in the media with election results it can be established that a candidate’s presence in social media can have an impact on how people might vote in an election. “By 2008 candidate websites were standard and campaigns

The media is important for us the people to inform us about our government. In this paper I will show the relationship between the media and Congress. There are many forms of traditional media newspapers and magazines and TV news programs. Until recently people got most of their information and news from traditional sources. I would agree with scholars who argue that the media plays a major role as an agenda setter by focusing the public’s attention on a few issues. Public opinion is shaped in large part by people’s exposure to the media. There are two main areas of media agenda setting the first is reporting the news the second is telling us how to view the news.

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.

Television has been influential in America’s elections since the 1960’s, and as TV continues to grow, so will the influence it has over the people. Many people believe whatever comes on their television screen, and don’t think twice to counteract the information. As America continues to televise presidential elections and politics pertaining to that, the elections will be frequently unfair and biased, the candidates won’t be able to completely focus on what’s important, like their imagine instead of their ideas. Television may give more substantial access to millions of more people, but that could change that end result of the presidency for better, or for worse.

Television is one of the most influential technological development of the 20th century that allowed society to be more accessible to information and to be more communicative between people. By the 1960s, television has reached politics in the United States, greatly impacting its presidential elections. Although, it has served as an effective media stimulating political interests of the Americans, it has brought many more negative impacts on American politics; Not only does television distort images of the candidates and legislators, it also, distracts people away from politics. Thus, television, a mere tool that commercialism employs, producing no politics, but “cotton candy for the mind”, has no beneficial , if not degrading effect on America’s presidential elections.

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.

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.

Voters now felt that the candidates were more accessible and almost personally knew the contenders as “friends” rather than barely known voices on the radio. Politicians were now transformed from well dressed old men to rock stars and movie stars that spread their ideas and candidacy propaganda. Informality with television brought more unique and newer strategies to the living rooms of America; for instance, when Bill Clinton talked about his underwear on national TV in April 20, 1992 (Hart and Triece). Clinton’s opponents like George H.W. Bush and Ross Perot this as a major blunder for his candidacy while younger voters interpreted this instance that Clinton was much more easygoing, relaxed, and unconstrained. Clinton ushered in a new tactic of visual politics which was if one was seen as more unconventional and laid back that this made the candidate more trustworthy and approachable. Although the television has revolutionized the way Americans got news and received political updates, the invention of the internet, mobile phone and social media platforms remolded the blueprint that television created. The continuing growth of consumer technology will forever take modern America on a roller coaster of information of who can get the news the fastest and how accurate the pieces are. However, with constant political updates in the pocket of every American, it seems that Washington is along for the

However, it seems that new media has created the opposite effect. The media is now characterised by self-interest, overwhelming advertising, as well as heavily managed and sorted information. Most notably, the shift from what used to be in the interest of the ‘public good’ to what is now largely for ‘private benefit’ (Jones, 2012, p. 15). This shift has contributed to the oversimplification of political news and policies. It has enforced a celebrity, cult like online culture, which often leads to the demise of important political figures.

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

Appearances on entertainment shows, gives candidates an escape from the highly critical national press to a much more friendlier environment for them. A great example would be interviews on Comedy Central’s The Daily Show or Colbert Report. Another beneficial outlet for campaigns is social websites that were mainly used in the 2008 election and continued through 2012 elections. “For example, nearly six million people viewed the New York Time’s posting of the first Obama-Romney debate on YouTube”. (Dunaway & Graber. 2009. Pg. 316) In 2012 the Obama campaign turned to Twitter to target direct messages to voters and contributors, they also had more than sixteen million e-mail addresses. Others sources of direct social media that campaigns use are candidate-sponsored websites, campaign websites, and special interest pages for groups such as senior citizens, veterans, college students, or young

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.