Throughout history the news media has an important role in society by providing information for the general public and each individual. Regarded as the "fourth branch" of government, the influence that media has on political affairs is extremely powerful because it enable citizens to form opinions on certain issues. To many politician, media is an instrument of manipulation and enables them to persuade large masses of people. With power follows responsibility, which the public believe it is the responsibility of the press to "accurately" inform the populace. The public believe that an ideal relationship between the media and government is with checks and balances, therefore insuring a functioning democracy. However, over these past few decades…
For instance, many media outlets are seeking economic gain instead of seeking the truth. Daniel Sutter illustrates this point in his research, showing how the media is focused on generating revenue (402). Consequently, the media is encouraging bias in order to attract and maintain a loyal following and source of revenue. In fact, through the use of the internet, alternative news sources are able to produce news that is usually “not fact-checked or is simply false” (The President and the Press 21). In order to stay competitive many mainstream sources are then forced to publish more biased articles. This increase in the publication of biased articles among mainstream sources is now allowing the media to clarify the facts and then formulate the facts into opinions. All in all, this is greatly affecting politics by forcing citizens to rely on the media to form their opinions (Perse 82). For example, Gregory Martin and Ali Yurukoglu reveal how the increase of bias in the media creates a polarization in the political parties (37). As noted by Martin and Yurukoglu, “the increase in polarization depends critically on the existence of both a persuasive effect and a taste for like-minded news” (4). They also observed that by watching certain news sources like “FNC increases the probability of voting Republican in presidential elections” (Martin and Yurukoglu 37). Beyond that there are several examples of the media affecting political decisions. In particular the birther issue of Obama’s 2008 election showed how a blatant lie spread by the press caused many voters to reconsider their decision (Lewandowsky 118). In brief, the media is seeking greater success and therefore misinforming many…
Walton, D. N. (2007). Media Argumentation : Dialectic, Persuasion, and Rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.…
The central arguments of the debate were over how accountability, education, socioeconomic status, genetics, and fast-food played into the topic of if obesity is the personal responsibility of the individual. The argument of accountability was carried through out the debate. The proposition argued that it was self accountability led to personal responsibility in the aspect of consciously deciding on how much to eat, the choice of what, and where. This argument wasn’t necessarily dropped, but instead in a way morphed into the over topic and the teams choose to focus on other aspects such as education. The opposition brought this point up in their first speech and carried it throughout using it as one of their staple arguments. They argued that americans could not be held accountable for what they consumed because they lacked the knowledge on food and…
The effect that the media has on voters can be extremely diverse. From entirely formulating an opinion to strengthening an existing one, the media has the ability to do both but not to every type of individual. In order to understand how various citizens are influenced by media messages, Philip Converse et al. (1966) separated voters into three distinct groups: those with the highest levels of political awareness and understanding, those with the lowest levels and those of moderate understanding. In alignment with this, Graber (1984) theorised that a voter’s predispositions are the vital determinant when examining how effectively the media’s messages can sway opinions. It is therefore voters’ prior knowledge and understanding of political happenings that formulates the foundation for their decisions and thus their naivety of such happenings that allows them to be swayed by media messages.…
IN the past several decades, the country has seen some presidents win second terms by margins previously believed to be unattainable, yet has witnessed defeats of more incumbents then at any time in our national history. These outcomes are directly related to the presence of television and to the changing nature of the men in office. Source B addresses this subject, "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."…
Through the years, society has come accustomed to channels such as CNN, Fox News, ABC News, etc. People have been given the chance to watch debates unfold without actually attending and witnessing such discussions live. However, these television networks hold more power than expected as they can control what the people see and almost always of what you see is what you believe. With that being said, Television can help shape ones opinion on who should be elected. This in turn leaves politicians to focusing more on how they are being portrayed, subsequently creating crooked politicians who’s only focus is looking good and tarnishing the reputation of their competitors. Television has had a both negative and positive impact on presidential elections…
Television cheats the voters of their participation in elections. Before television man people had to go to debates and speeches in person to get the know their candidates. Now as Hart and Triece say, “Because of television’s sense of intimacy the American people feel they know their presidents as person and hence no longer feel the need for party guidance” (par.1). This proves voters fell they do not need to go anywhere else or read anything else on the candidates since they feel they know the candidates as people. This can eventually lead to even more important problems because they voters should know the candidates as leaders they…
The development of television decreased ratings of both the candidates and the presidential elections because of an increase in commercialism and superficiality. Ratings of the presidential debates have decreased 27.9% from 1960, between Kennedy and Nixon, to1996, between Clinton and Dole (Source D). Americans see the frivolity of the elections how absurd some of the image-centered actions are. Before TV, when there was only the radio as means of hearing…
There has been much discussion about how mass media presents and can determine the outcome of presidential elections. The media has been accused of focusing on subjects such as the politician's personal life and their characteristics rather than looking at the political issues of the election. The voter's views can also be altered by political advertisements that do not focus on issues. This can cause the voters to believe that certain issues are important when in reality they are trivial concerns. Elections often become popularity contests because of the polling that is done by newspapers and TV news programs prior to the actual voting. Politicians then can have a difficult time guiding voter's opinions on their concerns.…
Political advertisements have been a pervasive part of politics in the United States since the dawn of television. Presidential candidates have been making an appearance in the living rooms of Americans since Dwight D. Eisenhower introduced a series of short campaign ads to the world of television during his presidential race (livingroomcandidate.org par.1, 2012). From the beginning researchers regarded television as a medium that had the potential to allow people to become more informed, and therefore more included leading to a nonpartisan democracy (Gurevitch, Coleman, & Blumler, 2009). Individuals who, in the past, had limited access to current affairs…
However, the major media outlets of yesterday have lost much of the influence they once enjoyed, because of the reduced audience that they now reach(Patterson,p.260). In the busy world we live in today we have multiple media outlets that constantly bombard the airwaves with information about social events or events occurring in our neighborhoods, state and from around the world. These additional outlets can be found on cable,satellite and internet twenty-hours a day,seven days a week and three hundred sixty-five days a year. This access has allowed many to avoid the major television networks news cast and the audience an ability to find a news source that they agree with politically. Unfortunately even with all the…
While the media and its bias have had an effect on elections for decades, in the more recent elections its influence has increased exponentially. With the development of new technologies, the media has expanded and its presence has become very major. The media nowadays plays a key role in our everyday lives. It has become so important to us that it has started to affect us, the human race, negatively, especially during the most recent election, the election of 2016.…
I tend to as a whole see serious problems with mass media, how more and more the "truth" is brought to us by fewer and fewer companies. How more and more our choices are being made for us, our options distilled to us. Over 20 people ran for mayor in the last Baltimore City Election only three got any airtime, only three were distilled to the people as true contenders. An election before the election, where the media decides for you the eligibility of candidates. Needless to say the candidates without airtime were disadvantaged, they became non-entities, and whether their message was good or bad we'll never know. We'll never know. Democracy is not supposed to work like that.…
There is an overwhelming public response that political campaigning is more negative and unethical than it has been throughout our history. Voters are not happy with today’s political candidates and their campaign tactics. Whether this is just an opinion, true or not, it is a discussion of debate. Negative campaigns, and the methods used to deliver them, have been around as long as the country. The First Amendment that supports both freedom of speech and freedom of the press is used as a crutch to mudslinging. Is the general public influenced by the messages they see in negative campaigning?…