As the Presidential election comes closer, more and more political commercials and publications are introduced into the media. Each one of these ads contribute to the reputation of either candidate weather it is good or bad publicity. As this publicity spreads throughout the population the candidates turn from political entities to pop culture icons. Although they are not the same type of pop culture icons as actors and musicians, their every move is still viewed by the public and plastered all over the media. Usually these publications have nothing to do with the true character and intentions of the candidate and somewhat undermine what is really at risk: democracy.
As the media turns our politicians into pop culture icons it takes away from the true meaning of the elections. As an avid TV viewer I see more adds about the faults and negatives of each candidate than the good. Unfortunately these ads tend to focus on unimportant items and usually create logical fallacies in the process. This turns the elections into a he said/she said game along with many of the ads dealing with true pop culture icons. It is rare to hear a commercial or statement that has anything to do with the plan each duo has for our country. These types of publicity are what generate opinions for voters however they have nothing to do with the actual democracy of our country.
In my opinion, this pop culture fix on our government has a great effect on what decisions are made. Each candidate and government official is watched over ever so carefully by the media, and in turn the entire nation. Every decision they make proves to be very influential on their reputation. Being in the public eye may change the mind of how a candidate votes on certain influential documents, especially so close to an important Presidential election. They will fear the negative publicity that an unfavorable vote may cause, even if this decision is for the good of our country.
As voters make their ways to the polls this year they will most likely not remember important factors when choosing a president but rather the silly things such as Barak Obama being compared to Paris Hilton or how Sarah Palin having a pregnant teen daughter. As our world becomes more technologically advanced, future presidential elections may become even more intertwined with pop culture. It is important however to remember when you are at the polls this year: vote not for your favorite pop star, but vote for who can create a promising future for our democracy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Excess Washington
Every four years, a group of politicians take the media by storm. Democrats, Republicans, and even the exceptional Independent, emerge from their respected niches and begin the race to run the free world. Ignoring the obvious pressures such a job would have, these men are subject to a new kind of attention, something presidents of the past did not have to worry about. Besides the old, lackluster news forums controlling all of the political conversation, pop culture shows, which cater to the young voter, are beginning to have more than a minuscule effect on the popular vote.
With many different television programs and news channels dedicated to either popular culture or political news, elections find a common ground and get twice the attention. Depending on the type of attention being received, this unconventional source of election media can be your best friend one moment and completely turn on you the next. A common notion when thinking about this is, “does the convergence of politics and popular culture undermine democracy?” Although there is no objective answer to this, you can separate the important from unimportant themes to the democratic process.
Democracy can be thought of as a government by the people, not for the people. Is our own blended creation of pop culture and politics stabbing us in the back? Emily, a member of my cohort mentioned, “As the media turns our politicians into pop culture icons it takes away from the true meaning of the elections.” If the true meaning of the elections is two old guys, that most just recently heard of, ranting and raving about political issues then YES!! For the love of god, please put these people back into their dull, one-dimensional world. Or, is generalizing their fame a good thing? In order to appeal to the masses, most people want more than two debates and a town hall meeting to figure out who to vote for. Outside sources, such as The Dailey Show and The Colbert Report give humor and insight, appealing to the younger, more unconventional voter and giving them more incentive to become involved in the political process. This change is unappealing to those who think the election process should be immune to change, however, the effect it is having on voter turnout is substantial. During the last primaries, voters from the ages 18 to 24 have doubled their turn out and are no longer a non-issue in the election. More than likely, this is due to the convergence of pop culture and politics. Marketing slogans appealing to the youth such as, “Rock the Vote,” and “Vote or Die,” have old-school politicians paying attention to the once muffled voice of the new voter.
Any reason, no matter how small, an individual has to get themselves to the polls should be considered patriotic. It is what our democracy is made of, people voting for their leader. So getting rid of a device, even though it is far off the beaten path of our fore fathers, would be unpatriotic. The new age of “pop politics” is here to stay.
I could not agree more that the election process is becoming more sensationalized. A few common terms which many have probably grown tired of are hockey moms, joe the plumber, and joe 6pack. It makes sense to question what relevance (if any) using terms like these have during an extremely important presidential election to elect the 'leader of the free world'.
On the other hand, I can definitely see why those running for office would use tactics like these, and that is because you can actually win different groups of voters by using various tactics. Sarah Palin probably won the vote of some hockey moms.
Is it right for political candidates to emphasize things unrelated to the major issues at hand to try to win a presidency? The verdict is still out and I am not sure there is a right answer to that question. Granted that the war in Iraq, dependency on foreign oil and abortion are all relevant issues, but if people can be swayed by other means can you really fault politicians for attempting to use those means?
It should prove interesting in the coming weeks to see what final tactics the McCain and Obama camps use to try to win the election.
Post a Comment