Although Campbell may believe in the positive impact television has on political electorate, he is wrong. Television has the ability to hinder political issues. Television has not fulfilled its early promise completely. Yes it does inform, but it does not stimulate the political interest of American electorate, in fact, it has done the opposite. From 1960 -1996 television ratings for presidential debates has gone down. In 1960 the rating was approximately 60 million views, but in 1996 the rating went down drastically to approximately 30 millions views (Source
People say television has increased people's awareness of politics to make elections more fair and accessible. However, I think TV has had a negative impact because it promotes a superficial image and provides content that will give the TV station good ratings.
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.
How has media influenced public perception of political figures, issues, and institutions? Through agenda setting and framing, media has the power to set the agenda for political discussion by providing public attention to political figures, issues, and institutions. In addition, the media can frame political agendas by influencing public perception and interpretation. (Ginsberg, Lowi & Weir, 1999)
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 at first allowed a new era of public communication which sparked its popularity among the nation. “As Frank Stanton, president of the Columbia Broadcasting System, put it: ‘Not even the sky is the limit.’ (Source A).” This quote tells us how television has vastly expanded public communication and that with it we can achieve so much more beyond our limitations before this invention. The main reason television was considered to have a positive effect on presidential elections was due to the fact that
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.
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.
Political impact of television, In 1960 Presidential Debate between Republican Vice President Richard Nixon and Democratic Senator John F. Kennedy was the first to be televised. “Television gave elected officials and candidates for office and unprecedented way to speak directly to millions, face-to-face”. The increasingly negative tone of ads and political commentary has driven many to abandon interest in politics. Television lets the viewers see what is going on in a political race, debate, and the polls as it is happening, and the viewers will make their minds up by what they see and hear. This is more expensive for the candidates, because they have to pay for air-time. The TV networks usually let you see what they want you to see, during a broadcast, especially when they cut to a commercial often.
There are only a few restrictions and boundaries that affect the role of television in the political process. One such regulation was the Federal Communications Act of 1934 which contained the idea of Equal Time Provision– obligating radio and television stations that give or sell time to one candidate to do the same for all candidates running for that same federal office.
When a person watches television specifically a news network, they will become politically informed. “Without reading a daily newspaper, watching the TV news, or otherwise following current events, even the best-educated people will probably not pick up much knowledge about the political world.” (Page-69, IVYP) Media on television is constantly reporting what the President or other political figures are doing. Usually the media is criticizing politicians for statements or decisions they made. The problem with the media being critical to politicians all the time is that the negative news coverage is unappealing especially to a young voter like myself.
How much does the media effect your choices in voting? When we first ask this question, we think of the obvious. The media informs us of canidates, their personal backgrounds, their ideology, their stances on issues, things they do in the community they represent, and the platform on which they plan to run. However, once they get past the initial introduction, they "tend to be highly critical of politicians; they consider it their job to find inaccuracies in fact and weakness in argument." (Janda et al., 192) They force the faults of politicians on us, seldom speaking of the positive aspects from that point on. This, in turn, gives the voters a negative vision of their representatives as leaders. If faults are constantly being pointed out, voters begin to think that all politicians are incompetent and unable, and therefore see no need to vote. The media does not intentionally force these negative views upon the mass public; rather they point out the faults because it makes a better story. Although the media does not directly create or change opinions, it tells the public what to think about. By using priming