Tv in Presidential Elections

613 Words3 Pages
Television has allowed events and people to be more accessible, even if the audience is hundreds of miles away. This has not necessarily had a positive impact. Since the 1960s, American presidential elections and events surrounding the elections have been broadcast on television. Although this allows for more of an audience to be politically active, as a result, images have become almost as important as a person’s actions. Through television, an authority figure has the power to manipulate public opinion or change the complete truth to something more suited to his viewpoint. Television is dangerous. It is historically evident that during a presidential campaign, a candidate will discuss a subject that relates to the audience around him. A candidate will not get into a debate about retirement funding if he is speaking to an audience between the ages of 18 and 30. Instead, he will discuss a topic that his audience has an interest in. In this way, he can gain support from many ages and groups. Through television, this method could lead to comments about topics other than politics. When discussing his underwear preference in a political campaign for an MTV audience, Bill Clinton was focusing on his image, not the issues at hand. The members of the MTV audience that could relate to him and voted for him were not voting completely about Clinton’s take on the issues but on his image. During the election of 1960, those who listened to the presidential debates over the radio felt that John F. Kennedy did not do as well as those who watched the debates on television felt he did. This evidence shows the “distorting effects of television” (source C) in its emphasis on image. By using television as a key in presidential campaigning, a certain percentage of voters are basing their votes on image and personality instead of the political issues at hand. Television
Open Document