Political Communication

“Since media are part of the political class and talk mostly to the political class, the myth of popular polarization took root and grew.” (Fiorina, Abrams, Pope, 2005, p. 167). Recently media has played a huge role in the country’s politic; they share information, report events, and frame opinions.

This underscores why politicians have long perceived mass media as a veritable channel of disseminating an ideology so that the society can mirror itself against what the media feeds it and thus be manipulated. This further begs the question of whether the media is a contributor or otherwise to societal problems in the face of political ideological dissemination.

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.

The media has always played an important role in the President’s relationship with the public, but just what kind of affect does it really have on the executive office? The first televised presidential debate in 1960 between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon marked the beginning of a new era – the inaugural shift of the media’s role in politics. Since that time, the media has continued to transform the way the president is perceived by the public through print, broadcast, and more recently, social media. All of said outlets have played vital roles in not only a president’s campaign, but also in their presidency and likability throughout their time in office. While the White House is still the source of most presidential news, the media are the shapers of the story and can frame it pretty much any way they want. There used to be limits on certain issues or realms of the presidency that were to remain untouched, however, first amendment freedoms take precedence over almost any restriction the government could try to place on the media. The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between the media and the president throughout recent years, looking briefly into the past to establish the scale of the dramatic change, and to study their reciprocal connection of how each utilizes the other.

Media plays a huge role in today's society. Media, in its many forms, can be very persuasive and can change how people view a certain topic. The past few years, media has greatly affected how people feel about topics such as: gay rights, abortion, racism, and anything political. Depending on what site, or source you are on, media can depict the topic you research however it wants. It has been argued that there are political bias in media, which is not wrong. You can find just about anything in whichever political view you want. When talking politics, there are multiple media outlets that are party-based. Even in print, you can find just about anything in favor of what you believe if you look for it. Media does a fantastic job of manipulating people to believe certain things without the audience realizing it. The media provides constant information about politics, and in more times than not, political rather than professional. In this lesson, we learned about liberals and conservatives and how political parties can be affected through media bias and public opinion.

Media has completely evolved from what it was twenty years ago and now the media plays an extremely large role in politics. Mass media refers to the means for communicating to audiences. In the past, mass media would be considered newspapers, radios, and television announcements. Now, there are social media platforms and apps that deliver news and information to the people wherever they are. Even the current President has no qualms using such platforms as he is a frequent, and not so loved, user of the Twitter app. Almost every government agency and organization has their own website, or even their own twitter/instagram account. This provides the public easy access to information and updates regarding who they follow and what party they identify with. However, this leads to the problem of “newsworthiness”. Newsworthiness is the degree in which a story will likely appeal to the public. This can have very negative consequences as many journalists will write their pieces biasedly to attract the attention of fellow supporters. They will forgo the facts and instead, pick and choose what they want to include in their articles. This leads to a misinformed public, as they never receive the full

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.

Television has been a part of American presidential elections since its introduction in the 1960’s. The first debate featured president Kennedy and future president Nixon in not only a battle of words but also looks, which would turn elections on their head. Yet television has had a negative impact on presidential elections due to an image over ideals mindset, nationwide consensus, and thirst of ratings from broadcasters. These changes has led to television creating a false image upon which the presidency projects itself towards the American public.

Political scientist, journalists, and politicians alike often discuss the role of the news media’s place in affecting campaigns, and voter perceptions. Claims of media bias in political news coverage have risen over the past two decades. Scholarly research has explored concerns that broadcast and print media shape voting decisions in democratic processes.

On a July day in 2015, reality television star and real estate mogul Donald Trump announced his candidacy for President of the United States in the 2016 election. Following his announcement, the mainstream media openly mocked Trump, and some found great humor at the idea of his campaign, wondering how long it would take before he dropped out of his “doomed before-it-began campaign,” as many called it. By being openly dismissive of Trump’s campaign, the media did not remain non-partisan. Despite the media’s bias, Donald Trump is within single digit percentage points of being the next President of the United States, and no one in the media is laughing at him now. The media in the United States can influence many things, especially politics. Different forms of media all take different angles and at times will morph a story to fit their perceived narrative, and that is a problem.

When you think of politics today in America, what is the first thing that pops into your head? If you’re like me, your first thought was about Hilary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Donald Trump. Your second thought might be about the major hot button issues in the United States today, such as Health Care, Immigration Reform, and Gun Control. Whether you’re like me or not, I’ve noticed one thing during this presidential race that cannot be avoided: media biases. The media today is a major part of politics, and often times is who we look to when deciding what candidate we want to vote for. Media biases involving politics, in my opinion, should not exist because it is unethical.

The media, a powerful source of information but what are the affects? While the media is seen by many as a vital source of information offered through a variety of different outlets, the theoretical underlining affects of the media demonstrates how stories from within it can influence society. The imprtance of not only recongnizing but understanding the media’s affects remains a vital priority in all forms of information today in how it is received and interpretated by different audiences. The level of effect of the media however, has been disputed heavingly, as with different forms of media such as online have developed a different affect for the mass media consumer. When regarding the level of effect the media holds, the 2016 Presidential campaign presents a prominent case study that shows a limiting affect of the mass media that

The media has always had a powerful impact on public opinion in Britain. With several different types and means of communication, such as TV, newspapers, social networking and radio, it is difficult for the public to not be even slightly impacted by the opinion of thousands that surrounds them every day. However, with newspapers spinning stories to promote the party they favour (such as the Daily Mail in favour of Conservatives or the Mirror in favour of Labour ) or to disparage the opposition, is it clear there is any obvious influence from the media towards the public in relation to reporting on British Politics?

How has media influenced public perception of political figures, issues, and institutions? Through agenda setting and framing, media has the power to set the agenda for political discussion by providing public attention to political figures, issues, and institutions. In addition, the media can frame political agendas by influencing public perception and interpretation. (Ginsberg, Lowi & Weir, 1999)

The media and the public have had a relationship that has existed for centuries. Through the media, people become aware of events and issues occurring around them. As a result, they make educated decisions. Therefore, the media serve as witnesses of the events happening within our societies and then report them to us. That said, could journalism have a significant political impact in our societies? It is through the media that governments and their citizens communicate. For instance, people communicate by protesting and voting, governments respond by amending the issues affecting the public. It is also through the media that potential political leaders gain recognition. Therefore, the answer is yes, because, journalism causes the spread