Today in class, we learned about John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon's relationship with the press. We saw that Kennedy came off as an extremely charming, charismatic candidate, while Nixon came off as clumsy, awkward, and uncomfortable. For several reasons, Kennedy went on to win the election. However, this made me think, how much of an influence does mainstream media have on politics? Kennedy may have come off as an extremely charismatic person, but how much of that was because the media and press portrayed him to be that way? Currently, President Trump seems to think of the media as a threat, but how much of that is because the press doesn't seem to like him? If the influence that the press makes was inconsequential, then President Trump wouldn't think of it as much of a problem.
Six ways the media influence elections: https://journalism.uoregon.edu/news/six-ways-media-influences-elections
According to this article, there are several ways that the outcome of an election can be affected by the media. First, the press gets to choose how much of a certain candidate they want to cover. If a candidate is rarely covered by the media, then people would probably be less likely to know who they are. Next, the bias of the writer has a huge impact on the way the candidate is portrayed. Small details like the adjectives used to describe actions have a large influence on the way that the article is perceived. The photos that the press chooses to publish also has a large role in the perception of candidates and politicians. The media gets to choose which photos they want to print, and the size of the photo that they choose to print. These are just a few of the ways that the media has been able to influence elections. I personally can completely see how the media could change the outcome of the elections, but should they? I personally believe that the role mainstream media plays in politics is much too large. Because of the way that the news is reported, articles and reports have a bias, and often times people read these articles as facts, and not as opinions. The way that the journalist chooses to portray a candidate can have a widespread influence on its readers, and it makes it difficult for readers to form their own opinions on politicians.
I agree with your final opinion that the media plays too large of a role in elections. Not only does it skew the way the public will view candidates, it also places a burden on the candidates to try and make themselves "look good" to the media. However, as Mr. Stewart was saying in class today, a big part of politics is sales and appearances. So when people decide to go into politics, they have to accept that catering to the media and the press is a part of the job. Naturally, it seems reasonable to try and reduce the influence the media has, but the press is important because they help the nation get to know the candidates. Of course, the coverage and articles will be biased, but that's why conventions and debates are in place; they allow the citizenry to directly listen to what the candidates have to say.
ReplyDeleteReporters and journalists hold a lot of power in the portrayal of political candidates because they are one of the few information outlets concerning the candidates. The average American is not able to physically meet and interact with the candidates of an election so a major factor in the development of their opinions on certain candidates will come from what they read about them. In addition, it is many, but not all, people's tendency to go along with what the majority believes so if the media does not favor a political candidate, like in Richard Nixon's case, that will have a big impact on how the people view that candidate. Unfortunately, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to reduce and eventually eliminate bias in the press. We can only hope that Americans will learn to vote for candidates for their ideals rather than for their other superficial qualities (although those can still have a small effect). Great post!
ReplyDelete