Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Politics and Convergence
As the "old guy" in class, I have witnessed the differences in the political process, as it pertains to the media, over the years. I was probably about 9 years old when the Kennedy/Nixon debate happened. My parents were very much into what was happening in politics, and wanted my siblings and me to understand the importance of what was happening too. We watched the debate and I remember that I thought that Mr. Kennedy was more concerned with our situations and viewpoints than Mr. Nixon. We thought that he did the best in the debate. It was years later, as a high school senior, that I read that comparison between the television audience and the radio audience. While we thought Mr. Kennedy won, the radio audience thought that Mr. Nixon won. That was the first time that I realized there was a great deal of power in how the media was used to make a point, or get someone elected. I am not old enough to remember the legendary "Fireside Chats" that President Roosevelt held in the 30's and 40's, but my parents did. They could recall the utter confidence that everyone had in the President, and it was directly related to his using the (new media at the time) radio. Those traditional media were well controlled as far as content, but it wasn't really too necessary because people were more into manners and decorum in those days. Now, with the Internet, there is no control at all. I'm not an advocate of censorship, but I question if the Internet will ever be as credible as the traditional media for just that reason. It is true that for raising money for campaigns it is the new engine that will drive political fundraising in years to come, but it is also an open gate to even more corruption in politics and far more mean spirited commentary and deceptive content. A good example of that is the race between Bob Corker and Harold Ford, Jr. Ford had the experience and the connections and money, but with one mean, false ad Corker won the Senate seat. Hopefully, people in this new century who are aware of the Internet and the deceptions it can distribute won't be fooled and politics may change for the better.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Malvin, in my experience, there are always people who understand the foibles of the media and the majority who pretty much read along nodding their heads in agreement and talking about it later seem to think that because it was on the news, it must be correct. Its true there is not one news channel any longer, but most people want to believe what they read or learn and then go forth quoting it as if it were gospel. Particularly when it comes to politics, what people believe depends a lot on where they get their news. As Jenkins said about polarization on p247, it is possible "to choose communications channels that perfectly match our own political beliefs and assumptions."
ReplyDeleteBTW, is this the ad you were talking about?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/200601024_harold_ford_ad/
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOn the one hand, I agree. The internet is surely a good instrument for promoting corruption in politics and far more spirited commentary and deceptive content. But on the other hand, people from the whole world change their media habits, and without the Internet, a lot of people - especially younger audiences – wouldn’t realize anything concerning to politicians and their attitudes. They need the internet to keep informed.
ReplyDeleteMalvin, what a wide scope you have on media. I enjoyed reading your blog entry. It is so interesting to see how much credibility we give our own eyes and ears. When you mention the radio audience versus the TV audience and how they both perceived different outcomes for the race it made perfect sense. Some candidates are more appealing to the eye than others, the "look" trustworthy, are good public speakers, and some just have a commanding voice and mannerism that you want to trust.
ReplyDeleteAlso, We make decisions based on the inputs and the more inputs we receive with the same information the more we want to believe it is the truth. I think that is validated by Grace's comment on finding a place with the information we want to believe.
Bottom line, I want to believe everyone is honest, but that is just not the world we live in.
I also very much enjoyed your post and I agree with your point that even decades ago, presidents and other leaders made use of the media in very distinctive ways. Sometimes for the better, as when they were able to explain themselves or won through the better arguments. But from time to time, simply the craftier and shrewder candidate made the race. I guess this exemplifies that every medium has its logic. And whoever seems to have it figured out, has a little headstart..
ReplyDelete