In the early 1940’s television was introduced and it bridged the gap in communication between the people and the government. Since then, it has played a detrimental role in United States elections since the 1960’s. According to some, television has tainted it’s real purpose. These individuals concur that televised debates are more so about image, instead of the quality of the debate. These speculators would be correct on this topic for the sole purpose that when on television appearance is appealing to the younger generations that can vote.
The first example of debates being tainted occurred in the election of 1960, when Nixon and JFK had their first televised debate. Those who watched the debates said that Kennedy won by a landslide. On
After losing the election, Nixon learned the value of pathos. This paper will comprehensively discuss the rhetorical devices employed in his farewell speech to the sixty-million Americans who had tuned in, revealing how he skillfully manipulated his language to convey one message while achieving a different effect. “One of the most discussed issues with the 1960 debates was the notion that people who listened to the radio were more likely to vote for Nixon while people who watched the debates on television were more likely to vote for Kennedy,” (Purdue 3) “One of the explanations to this phenomena was presidential candidates physical appearances during the debates with Kennedy appearing better on television than Nixon.” (3) In the above citation, the analysis states that between radio and television, both candidates seemed to have had a better outcome through using specific technology.
The September 27, 1960 New York Times reported about the first televised presidential debate. The vice President Nixon and Senator John F. Kennedy face each other. About 70 million American viewers
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
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.
The invention of the television has changed the world and especially the US tremendously. What once was just a dream became a reality; people could be together watching the same event in real time, something that could never be achieved before. Although this invention of the television had many great aspects and improvements in the lives of the American people, it also changed the political landscape negatively, making image over substance important in Presidential elections, creating an intimacy with leaders and celebrities like never before, as well as giving rise to the credibility of influential media. One major impact of television on the political landscape was the shift of focus from political issues to the image and appearance of the candidate. As seen in Source C, the Kennedy-Nixon debates, one of the first debates shown on television, clearly was influenced by TV and the images created by its invention.
On September 26, 1960, John Fitzgerald Kennedy met Richard Milhous Nixon in the first nationally televised presidential debate in American history. The candidates clashed on a variety of domestic issues, including education, infrastructure, health care, and economic policies. The audience was unprecedented in size. Approximately seventy million Americans watched the debate. By the end, Kennedy was a star. Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike lauded his poise, confidence, and charisma. On the other hand, viewers criticized Nixon’s haggard expression and sweaty countenance. As it turns out, television had the greatest influence on these perceptions. Those who watched the debate overwhelmingly asserted Kennedy’s clear victory, while
Print does not have these characteristics, therefore making it easier for the reader to comprehend and analyze the topic at hand. Because America has shifted from the printed word to television, a visual medium, being the dominant medium, political discourse has become largely unserious and incoherent, giving rise to the concept of image politics. America has made a
Television uses the issues debated and discussed and focuses on the way the candidates respond to issues. There is an increasing focus on why a candidate is saying what they are saying rather than the actual content of their policies or ideas on an issue. This focus is used to formulate an image of an individual candidate, which tends to have a bigger impact than the politics itself. For example, in the most recent election, there was a focus on Clinton’s speech because it was presumed that she was just trying to protect herself and hide her emails. In document A, the author states, “One of the great contributions expected of television lay in its presumed capacity to inform and stimulate the political interests of the American electorate.”
Before televised debates, presidential candidates were assessed on their campaign slogans, individual plans to better America, and their moral character. Consequently, the September 26, 1960 Kennedy-Nixon debate forever changed the way Americans would assess their future President of the United States of America. The Kennedy-Nixon Debates
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.
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
In order to have a government that is run by people; specifically, people that must choose a candidate to vote for, its seems fit that it would be important that there be adequate means of illustrating each candidate’s positions on all of the issues that the constituents care about. Presidential debates are the means of showcasing a candidates’ policies to the nation and at the same time they allow the citizens in the democratic society to make a more informed decision about their vote than they otherwise would have without a debate.
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 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
Despite its relatively short length this piece on the influence of appearance on political elections was shocking. Studies showed that not only were voters more likely to select a candidate who appeared more assertive and leader-like but they did so in spite of party affiliation or campaign platform. At surface value this is not entirely surprising, I can freely admit that I take into account a person’s appearance when developing a first impression of them, and am more likely to make a favorable one when they have a visually pleasing appearance. That being said our current election process is heavily reliant on the media, we almost never meet our elected official in person and as such are dependent on the perception we get from TV and newspapers. Given how close our most recent elections are often being decided by only a handful of percentage points, the 12% swing theorized in the article could actually be the deciding factor in elections. It is therefore up to us to further examine whether a candidate’s appearance is really enough information with which to choose our elected officials.