This is the class blog for Dr. Lisa Burns' MSS 349/PO 348 Fall 2014 Political Communication course at Quinnipiac University.
Tuesday, October 21, 2014
Politics & Celebrity - October 28th
How important is a candidate’s family when it comes to
shaping a candidate’s public image? What role should political spouses play both on the campaign trail and in the White House today?
A candidate’s family is extremely important when it comes to shaping his or her public image. The importance lies within the final word in the previous sentence, image. Image has evolved to become the most important aspect of American politics. From the way a politician looks, to the way he or she dresses, to what he or she eats is analyzed nearly in full by our unending 24/7 news cycle. And because image has become the spotlighted focus of political figures, a politician’s family is also thrust into that spotlight, warranting the same level of critique.
Take a look at Vice President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden. The youngest of the Biden family, Hunter recently made national headlines after being discharged from the Navy due to the fact that he tested positive for cocaine. Though news about the vice president’s son was few and far between before this revelation, Hunter was soon on the fronts of newspapers, and in the opening lineups of network newscasts the moment he was discharged. I use this example because this perfectly spotlights how important a candidate’s family is when it comes to shaping that person’s public image. Hunter Biden’s struggle with narcotics is not national news, nor does it impact any of the foreign policy, economic or systemic problems our great nation is currently facing. But because Hunter Biden is the son of our nation’s VP, any faulty move he makes is automatically catapulted into the public eye because the media feels it is important to know how Joe Biden’s family is doing. It ultimately is reflective of how the Biden family is run, how the Biden family is doing, and it could easily bring to the minds of many Americans the thought of Joe Biden being a faulty parent, and then a faulty leader (this is pure speculation, but I wouldn’t be surprised if someone out there saw the story of Hunter and automatically changed their opinion of the vice president and his family).
The point being is that families are vital to the crafting of a healthy public image for any political candidate. In America, one of the most impactful familial roles within politics is that of the country’s first lady. Now, because we have yet to experience a female vice president or president, I will use the term first lady to encompass the discussion of what role political spouses should play both on the campaign trail, and in the White House today.
Being the first lady in America is both a privilege, and a very confusing headache. As Lisa Burns dissects in her book First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives, holding the position of first lady in America’s White House comes with very few actual guidelines, and more legacy-driven standards. “The position of first lady is not outlined in the Constitution, yet it has been a part of the American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the first lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations” (Burns, 3).
No set rules or guidelines. So how is America’s first lady figuring out her unofficial job title? “Therefore, while the position has been shaped by the words and actions of each first lady, those in the role have never had total control over their performance because of historical, social, and political constraints” (Burns, 4). Essentially, each new first lady inherits the “yes” rules and the “no” rules from their previous first ladies, and they then base their principles and actions off of society’s current, and historical, political views.
With all this in mind, I think it’s only right to point out that the role a political spouse should play both on the campaign trail and in the White House, in today’s standards, is that of a supportive, non-groundbreaking political onlooker, if you will, who’s main priority is to elevate their spouse’s political presence in every way possible. Do I personally think this is right? No. I think political spouses should share the power their counterpart comes into as campaigning and assuming political office ensues. I think first ladies offer a lot more than what Lisa Burns says they are basically barricaded into pursuing. “Press framing of the first lady institution still places the first lady at the heart of women’s public culture, yet it continues to consign her to the periphery of U.S. political culture” (Burns, 162). Based on history, the first lady is generally an onlooker, a political observer, who is handed certain small projects to accomplish while living in the White House, but who generally lingers in the background in an effort to not stir up any controversy.
As Scarlett Neath points out in an article regarding the importance of the first lady, the role any first lady takes on is truly a gamble depending on how much criticism that woman is willing to take on. “Michelle Obama’s career as a Harvard-educated lawyer and her near-perfect performance on the campaign trail made her appear poised to be able to hit that very narrow target of being an effective—but not overreaching—first lady” (Neath, 1). But why does it have to be that complex? Why do first ladies have to hit a narrow target that is subject to scrutiny and disdain if they don’t hit it perfectly? This is where I find it difficult to explain what role a first lady should play both on the campaign trail and in the White House.
I think first ladies should have the power to equally contribute to their husbands’ policy and productivity if they want too. No first lady should be subject to simply representing homebody images befitting of a 1950s stereotype. “When their [first ladies] influence seemed to trespass into the male political reserve, the media coverage exhibited a rhetoric of containment that suggested the political activities of certain first ladies violated the gendered boundaries that the press erected” (Burns, 155). I think first ladies should contribute to the campaign trail by speaking on behalf of their husbands, and by instilling values based on principle and policy that not only aide their spouse’s campaign, but helps elevate their relevance as a political figure themselves. I think once in the White House, first ladies should take on what they want too, like Lady Bird Johnson had. It is only once a first lady is pursuing political endeavors that she is happy and passionate about her job, making it worthwhile. I think first ladies offer a whole lot more than they are given the chance to show, and I think in our ever-evolving democracy that political wives/women should work side-by-side with their spouse, rather than be an onlooker who is barricaded by the media and by gender stereotypes.
Works Cited Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008. Neath, Scarlett. "What's the Point of a First Lady?" The Atlantic. 6 Oct. 2014. Web.
Since the beginning of time a candidate’s family has been very important. Most importantly being the first lady. Since I was little I heard all kinds of quotes, such as “Behind every great man is a great woman.” I could not find who had said this quote but my mom had always said things like that. And first ladies are proof that this quote is true. “The position of the first lady is not outlined in the Constitution, yet it has been a part of the American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the fire lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations.” (Burns, 3). This quote just reiterates how important the first lady is.
I believe that a candidate’s family is important because if their family wasn’t there to support them then why would anyone else want to support them. Many people believe that family is the most important thing in life and they come before anything. If a candidate’s family is a part of their image it makes them more relatable to voters. Even for women and children they might see that the candidate has a wife and kids that support him which could ultimately lead to voting for that person because of that.
I don’t recall any presidents that I learned about not being married. Although many times politicians are involved in scandals they are still married like we talked about earlier in the semester. Many times even after a scandal the candidate’s wife still stays with them because they are such an important role.
One thing that bothers me about candidates’ families is how the media gets so involved in them. The focus is turned away from candidates and onto their family. “Media coverage of first ladies has evolved over the years and has played a significant role in shaping publics expectations regarding the performance of the first lady position.” (Burns, 6). I’m going to focus mainly on the first ladies or candidates’ wives because we often hear about them more than the rest of their families. But I think that the media butts into candidate’s family life more often than not and I think that it is important to know their family supports them but the media often shows the good, bad and the ugly. Some things should be able to be kept between a family; if politicians are just normal people they should have some privacy just like everyone else does.
The media criticizes everything that first ladies and candidate’s wives do. For example, in class we talked about how Michelle Obama got criticized for wearing shorts on a tour of the Grand Canyon. I think that is a little much and is so unimportant. I think that candidates wives and families only importance during a campaign is so show they support their spouse that is running and to be looked up to by people around the United States. I don’t think they should be criticized for every little thing they do and I think they should be able to have a private life just like anyone else. They are not the person running for office and they don’t really have that much of a say in what happens so we shouldn’t butt into their lives the way we do. I believe they are just there to support their spouse or parents and we shouldn’t bother to get into their business or criticize them for supporting someone they love.
Works Cited: Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Neath, Scarlett. "What's the Point of a First Lady?" The Atlantic. 6 Oct. 2014. Web.
Image is everything in the political world. One important aspect of a politician’s image is their family and the actions and representation of their family. The politician’s family not only provides a support system, but they also play a role in the media’s interpretation and portrayal as well.
As political campaigns start up, “candidates try to introduce themselves — or reintroduce, as the case may be — to voters. And amid a panoply of negative spots, image mavens and ad wizards have found a way to try to help their politicians cut through the clutter: family, family, family” (Parker 1). This aids in humanizing candidates and telling voters that they are average people and come from great, supportive families. Displaying a politician’s upbringing allows for voters to connect with the politician in a more unique way as opposed to sharing the same beliefs on a particular political policy.
Bringing in the family to a political campaign also adds the authenticity factor. An example of a politician who had his family involved was Ben Sasse, the Republican Senate nominee in Nebraska. “The ad has all the markers of a cute kid commercial — talk about praying for their father’s opponents at breakfast, a playful request for a horse at the end — but it also has this insight about Mr. Sasse’s opinion on Mr. Obama’s health care overhaul: “He despises it,” the younger girl says” (Parker 1).
Ultimately, what it boils down to with including a candidate’s family in the campaign trail is authenticity and humanizing the candidate. At the end of the day, the candidate is an average individual just like everyone else and he/she wants to demonstrate to voters that family is important; which is a common belief everyone can relate to despite political views.
While the politician’s family is essential in creating their image, a politician’s spouse is even more essential in the role they play. It is known that the political world is mainly dominated by men; especially in the White House. So, this means that first ladies have a significant impact. “The position of first lady is not outlined in the Constitution, yet it has been a part of the American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the first lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations” (Burns 3).
First ladies are expected to play several roles. They are expected to provide a quality image of themselves and to aid in providing a quality image for their husbands; the Commander in Chief. If they are a mother, they must demonstrate qualities that deem them as providing for their children. As wives, they must demonstrate qualities such as caring, love, and support for their husbands. First ladies can also serve their communities and demonstrate devotion to volunteering. Potential first ladies must exhibit these traits on the campaign trail, as well.
“First ladies have been routinely positioned by the press to be role models for American women, which resulted in their emergence as public women, political celebrities, political activists, or political interlopers. Such publicity made first ladies some of the earliest and most visible public women, which legitimized ordinary women’s political activity and influence” (Burns 154-155).
In addition, a politician’s family has a meaningful impact on their image as well as campaign. Voters want to see a politician’s family and understand a politician’s upbringing. Yes, candidates’ policies and viewpoints are important but knowing the politician as an average person is essential as well.
Sources:
1. Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008
2. Parker, Ashley. "I Approved This Message; My Family Delivered It." The New York Times. The New York Times, 06 June 2014. Web. 27 Oct. 2014.
In the twenty first century, a political candidate’s family has become increasingly important to the candidate’s public image. As the 24/7 news cycle continues and politician’s move to a celebrity status in the public’s eyes, their families have been subject to the same type of media exposure. While although I do not believe a candidate’s family should be subjected to the same press and public scrutiny as politicians, it is an unfortunate fact they will be. A candidate’s family could either be glorified or torn apart by the press, depending on the family members past and current actions in the public light. Lisa Burns wrote in an article on the first ladies and how they are perceived in the public, “One outgrowth of the media’s fascination with first ladies is what some scholars refer to as the first lady’s ‘cult of celebrity’.” (Burns, 6). First ladies, as with a candidate’s family, are put in a celebrity position by the journalists who cover them. A candidate’s family members every move, every action taken, will fall under press scrutiny only because the press creates a following of this individual in the public. The way the press covers a politician’s family creates a ‘cult’ like following of them, and as a consequence, there is a market of people who honestly care what the president’s daughters are wearing to school. If the press covers the candidate’s family in a negative light, unfortunately, there will be damaging repercussions of the family’s image in the candidate’s political career. “Journalists play a significant role in the shaping both cultural and political norms”, writes Burns (Burns, 159). As politician’s families have been covered by the press for decades, some more than others, but certain norms or expectations have been set for the ideal “politician family”. These norms are created by how journalists cover the family, either positively or negatively. Comparing families is an unfair judgment for any type of person, not just a politician, but with the politician’s stature in the public eye, they are subject to more press coverage than your average American family. The comparison of families is comparing apples to oranges, there are so many different factors that go into how a family is made up, and not one family is exactly like another. The number of family members, the age differences in family members, the gender differences in families, or if a family member has a disability, are just some differences can change the dynamic of a family and in a case-by-case situation, comparing families is a very difficult task. However, as Burns points out, “these mediated memories then set both historical and contemporary standards for judging current and future first ladies.” (Burns, 159). What is unfair about a politician’s family and their press coverage is not that they are subject to the same press and press scrutiny, but it is the way the press covers them. With certain expectations and norms set by past political families, it is difficult and unfair to hold one family accountable to the same standards as past families. The importance of a candidate’s family when shaping the candidate’s public image is of great importance. The image the public has of the candidate and the image the public has of their family seemingly go hand in hand. A negative image of the candidate’s family will take away from the candidate’s overall image the public has of them while a positive image of the candidate’s family will help the candidate’s public image. Should politician’s family members be subjected to the same press as the candidate? No. However, as time has shown us, being a politician in the twenty first century, the individual has to understand that being in the public light comes with the job. And coming to this understanding will make it easier for you and your family to adjust to the press coverage and scrutiny.
Works Cited: Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
While you technically only elect one single person to become the President of the United States, in reality, you’re choosing an entire family. From the spouse, to the children and even pets, the president’s public image is shaped by their family, in both positive and negative ways. As we’ve learned, image is crucial in a successful campaign and presidency, specifically the image of a family man in the White House. What happens when the family isn’t necessarily portrayed in a positive way? A family can literally make or break a politician’s political career, as evidenced by Sarah Palin.
Palin and her family are the perfect example of how significantly a politician’s family can shape their public image, in her case, negatively. During the presidential campaign in 2008, in which Sarah Palin was running for Vice President, she was in the news constantly, but very rarely was it for her politics. Instead, the press would report on her pregnant teenage daughter and the baby’s father, for example.
Even today, the family is in the news for the wrong reasons, about the brawl that involved many of Palin’s family members, including her daughter Bristol. Even after years in politics and a very public vice presidential campaign, Palin is known more for her family drama than anything else, proof of the importance that a candidate’s family plays.
While entire families play a role in a candidate’s public image, the spouse has become an essential piece of the puzzle. First ladies, in particular, have become increasingly important figures in presidential campaigns and in the subsequent terms that presidents serve. Dr. Lisa Burns writes, “The press and the American people have been fascinated by the first lady since the beginning of the nation’s history,” (3).
The role of a spouse, or more specifically, a wife in office is a complicated one. Dr. Burns points out “The position of first lady is not outlined in the Constitution, yet it has been a part of the American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the first lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations. It lacks a clear job description, but being first lady is a matter of tradition probably more than any other U.S. institution,” (3). These high expectations mentioned include being her husband’s counterpart, the female face of all of the people in the country.
“First ladies have been routinely positioned by the press to be role models for American women, which resulted in their emergence as public women, political celebrities, political activists, or political interlopers,” (Burns 155). Those are a lot of responsibilities for these women, who’s husbands are the ones running the country. Yet, their status doesn’t come with as much power as that makes it seem. Burns continues, “However, while their status as public women and political celebrities resulted in both access to and influence within U.S. political culture, first ladies remained on the fringes, with their influence limited largely to domestic matters and women’s issues,” (155)
Thus, their role has become that of a supporter and the president’s biggest fan. When her husband is elected into office, the first lady’s own identity tends to disappear, as she becomes the president’s wife, instead of her own person. They, too, are constantly working, putting their best foot forward and always looking and acting put together, because their image directly affects the image of their husband.
I believe that first ladies should be given a more important role in office today because they have earned it. Throughout history, they have sat back and watched their husband get the credit (and the blame) for shaping the country, when in fact, they too have a lot of responsibility in the status of the nation. The role of the first lady in politics is undeniable, but like Scarlett Neath points out in the article, “What’s the Point of a First Lady?” the responsibilities come with very few rewards. She writes, “A better question is how much we can ask presidential spouses to do that when the position itself isn’t official, much less paid,” (Neath 1). Since first ladies are so important to their husband’s public image, they should also be considered important in the White House.
Works Cited
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Neath, Scarlett. "What's the Point of a First Lady?" The Atlantic. 6 Oct. 2014. Web.
All facets of a politician’s life are now very closely scrutinized and their families are no exception. In many cases a political figures’ family and personal life can be seen as a reflection of that individual and therefore the media and public takes into account all of these details. Consequently a politician’s family is vital to their image. This is especially true on the campaign trail and for relatively new candidates. In addition it seems apparent that the politician’s spouse plays a very important role even if it is not entirely defined and varies by the situation.
Part of what makes the role of a political spouse so difficult is that it is filled with expectations; however, it may not be clearly outlined. Professor Burns in her introduction of First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives alludes to this difficult circumstance: “The position of first lady is not outlined in the Constitution, yet it has been a part of the American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the first lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations.” (Burns, p.3)
Debatably the most important and primary role of a political spouse or the first lady could be simply to support the politician regardless of the situation. The obvious reason is that a political spouse is the closest (in theory) individual to the politician and how they act, react and support their spouse on the trail and through tribulation can speak volumes about the candidate or their position. A political spouse can be seen as, even if it is a completely unfair characterization, an extension of the politician. Ann Romney appearing on The View is an example of this. In this case, because Mitt declined to go on The View, Ann’s appearance on the program can be seen as her being sent as an ambassador for her husband. In this case she has to stand by all of his opinions and political stances to make it clear that she represents him. Furthermore, this can be a very high pressure role because many of the same, if not more strenuous, responsibilities of a candidate fall on the spouse particularly while on the campaign trail. Because of this, a political spouse can often affect a politician’s image.
However, the role of a spouse can be hard to define as Professor Burns suggested earlier. This consider, it is difficult to pinpoint exactly what the spouse or first lady’s exact role should be, however, it is clear that their reaction, especially in times of crisis and scandal is securitized and can have an impact on the political process. Michelle Cottle in The Real Running Mates states how being the first lady goes beyond simply supporting: “Standing beside your man with an adoring gaze remains a part of the job, only now you need to exhibit goals and interests of your own—a passion if not exactly a portfolio.” (Cottle)
One thing for sure is that political spouses are very important during the campaign. As Cottle explains, the role of the first lady or spouse while running is also incredibly important in the campaign process and that, while the role of the running individuals spouse has possibly changed over the years, it has continued to be role which remains highly scrutinized today especially during a period where all aspects of candidate are inspected. (Cottle) She describes this intense speculation: “While senators’ and governors’ wives can lead relatively normal lives, aspiring first ladies face a level of scrutiny so brutal it would reduce Simon Cowell to sobs” (Cottle)
The family plays a major role in the political image of a candidate. Candidates run on the image of being a family man, with a wife and children and even sometimes a dog. The reason they do this is because they reflect the desire for the “American Dream”; a part of this American dream is having a family with typically two kids and a dog. The first family has to reflect the desires of the country. The people want to see a well put together family leading the country. A family is a direct reflection of oneself. It is where you receive and implant your own morals. Family is important to the image of a candidate because it also shows dedication and loyalty. This is usually the only time you see a candidate showing love and compassion to his spouse and children. The family is the “soft side” of the president and Americans like to see all sides of a candidate, especially in this day and age. The spouse plays an important role on the campaign trail and the white house today. Woman, since there has been only male presidents, are seen as protectors and providers of the family. Their duties usually consist simply of focusing on her husband and her children. For example, according to Scarlet Neath, Mrs. Obama had to sacrifice her career to focus on her husband’s career and appear to be like a more stay at home mom, “Once in office, though, she visibly played it cautious, working only two of three days of the week and sticking to the traditional woman’s and children’s-interest advocacy role” (Neath). The First Lady also has to advocate for the political views of her husband and even can represent all woman in America, according to the article titled, What’s the Point of a First Lady by Scarlet Neath, “President Obama recently made an offhand comment during a conversation about the need for equal pay where he uses Michelle’s name to represent all woman…”(Neath). This shows that often the First Lady takes on the role on representing a whole race of women. The First Lady is often idealized by women because her life is glamorized by the media and makes her more of a celebrity rather than a political figure. According to Lisa Burns, “One outgrowth of the media’s fascination with first ladies is what some scholars refer to as the first lady’s cult of celebrity. Journalists have positioned the first lady as a media celebrity, as the embodiment of a cultural ideal of American womanhood. For the press, in some ways the first lady functions as barometer of women’s social and political status…” (Burns 6). The First Lady is the direct connection between the demographics of women in America and the white house. She is important in the white house and to American politics. Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008. Neath, Scarlett. "What's the Point of a First Lady?" The Atlantic. 6 Oct. 2014. Web.
While the structure of campaigns continues to evolve to meet modern-day expectations, the portrayal of the quintessential American family remains. In turn, the candidate’s family largely influences their public image on the campaign trail, with great focus on their marriage. Once in office, the role is just as, if not more, rigorous. The media have crafted an image of politicians eliciting a set of expectations among the American people—further emphasizing the role of the candidate’s family on the national stage.
The American people do not want anything other than the average family representing their country, whether it is realistic or not. 24-hour news networks need to fill time combined with a continued shift toward invasive entertainment news has placed an especially critical focus on every aspect of political families. Barrack Obama would not have been successful in his run for the presidency if he did not have an attractive wife and children, although there was a deep look into his life with a single mother and absent father. On the other side of the aisle, the McCain campaign experienced some challenges for the negative media attention of running mate Sarah Palin’s daughter. For the Obamas, Michelle’s fashion even became commonplace for media attention, alongside questions about their daughters Sasha and Malia. The media have no boundaries when presenting the candidates’ families, making the campaign even more strategic in shaping their image.
The wife of the candidate cannot be underestimated in the campaigns efforts to shape their image. The role they play on the campaign trail humanizes the candidate and becomes a direct reflection of the candidate. For a position as great as the presidency it is simply a requirement. In regards to the wife’s role once in office, First Lady Michelle Obama appears to serve primarily for ceremonial purposes. As Lisa Burns illuminates in her work, it is not as much the case in actuality as it is the media’s framing of the role. She writes, “Just as first ladies are bound by a tradition dating back to Martha Washington, journalistic practices rooted to a great extent in nineteenth-century gender prescriptions continue to define media coverage of first ladies” (Burns 162). Therefore, Michelle Obama’s work to get American children to be active and healthy is only highlighted during traditional activities that warrant her organization, such as the Easter Egg Roll on the South Lawn. In every action of the First Lady she must fit that prescription.
America does not want someone to be anything greater than that ceremonial role, due to its portrayal in the media. The First Lady cannot do anything politically influential. As Baker addresses in his article, “Their mission, of course, is not especially controversial in the American political context, and so it is easy ground for them to make common cause” (Baker). Therefore, they cannot make an impact because their actions are purely viewed as ceremonial and warrant no true media attention. The Let’s Move initiative is not a source of political tension. Barbara Bush’s push to get children to read was not either. No matter what is happening in the country, their role is to stay very much the same.
Yet there is still a purpose to their expected actions. As Burns acknowledges, “Progress over the past century is visible as first ladies’ participation in public life is normalized, and even anticipated” (Burns 162). With this, the gendered role of First Lady has become extremely important, and a direct reflection of the country. If Bill Clinton becomes the First Man in the White House and wants to partake in political activity, there is going to be harsh criticism. The spouse should of course play a role in the campaign and in office, however their involvement in the true political activity of the President should be limited. Deeply rooted in tradition, their actions are not just crafting an image of the President, but of the nation.
From the campaign stops with the candidate’s spouse speaking on their behalf, to the South Lawn of the White House during the annual event, the political family is expected to fit into the mold that others have shaped before them. The influence of they have in American politics is largely stigmatized and extremely gendered. Over the years, the media have continued to cast the spouse in the same light as the last. This is why Americans have become so naturally critical of the family, and why the campaign must be sure that their actions are never seen as anything other than the norm. The candidate’s family is just another pawn for the media to do with what they please, and has hence elevated the amount of influence the family has on public image.
Works Cited
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Baker, Peter. "2 First Ladies Share Tales of Budding Partnership and Life in the Spotlight.” New York Times. 6 Aug. 2014. Web.
Jack Holiver Blog 9 10/28/14 Recently, I began the series, House of Cards. Naturally, Hollywood embellished a bit with many aspects of the show. However, one thing I noticed, that many others may have missed, is that it is unlikely to hold a high public office without a family. The main character, Frank Underwood, would have a tough time being elected to Congress in reality. He only has a wife and the couple are childless. Many voters would see this as a hard obstacle to overcome due to the fact that many voters have kids and Underwood would not be able to relate to them. Although, I have found that a spouse has a significant influence in helping their loved one become elected. Therefore, family is very important for a candidate’s image. It was not until the 1960s that Lady Bird Johnson became the first time a first lady ran her own campaign without being by her husband’s side. “A 1964 Time cover story quoted Robert Kennedy as admitting, ‘Lady Bird carried Texas for us” in the extremely tight 1960 election. Yet the same article also said “her nose is a bit too long, her mouth a bit too wide, her ankles a bit less than trim, and she is not outstanding at clothesmanship’” (The Atlantic). In some cases, the public will prefer the spouse over the candidate running for office. One example of this was John Edwards. Although it didn’t come out until after he lost the race for Vice President in 2004, the public grew a hatred towards him after finding out he cheated on his terminally ill wife. In addition to this, his wife was an icon for many women throughout the country. The wife of past presidents tend to hold a higher approval rating than their husbands. According to Quinnipiac University, Michelle Obama’s approval rating was at 60% favorable when lasted polled while the President sits at 40% approval. I believe this is because the first lady tends to take on issues that are generally not controversial. Michelle Obama is pushing for better food in schools and trying to promote healthier lives for children. Laura Bush focused on higher quality education, Hillary Clinton was the founder of a program that increased funding to the perseveration of historic items and sites, etc. “Starting with the coverage of Martha Washington, the relationship between nineteenth-century first ladies and the press varied widely, in part because there were no guidelines for either side to follow” (Burns, 4). There are times when a family is subjected to too much media coverage. An example that comes to mind is Dick Cheney’s daughter. During the debate between Cheney and John Edwards, Edwards mentioned Cheney’s daughter due to the fact that she is gay. Even though Cheney brushed off the comment, the audience could tell he was obviously very angered by this very personal comment. After this debate, media coverage shifted and began to focus about this “low blow” given by Edwards. Therefore, as a result, Cheney’s daughter became a talking point for a short while during the campaign. I find this to be unacceptable and unwarranted. Works Cited: Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008. Neath, Scarlett. "What's the Point of a First Lady?" The Atlantic. 6 Oct. 2014. Web.
In today’s political world, image is everything. The right candidate for the position cannot just be politically qualified anymore; he also needs to be a family man in order to impress the public.
A candidate’s family is extremely important when it comes to shaping their public image, because the press is always present. The image of a “family man” is something that is crucial to the voters. Family is something that Americans think highly of because it shows how loyal you are, and if you are loyal to your family, you can be loyal to the country. A candidate usually has a hard exterior, but showing that they have family values makes he/she look more approachable and is just like everyone else.
Although the role of family is important, the role of the spouse is even more important. First ladies “…have been asked to live their private lives in the glare of the public spotlight, their every move subject to scrutiny” (Burns 3). There was a time when we looked to the first lady as a trophy wife, someone to stand there and look pretty, “Parts of the role remain as they ever were: A political spouse should be poised and gracious and able to smile benignly for 16 hours straight while wearing pumps and panty hose in 100-degree heat. She should make frequent mention of how much she cherishes her role as wife and mother” (Cottle). First ladies, just like their husbands, are always in the public eye. “Coverage of first ladies’ public activities both normalized women’s place in the sphere yet also worked to establish boundaries that restricted women’s political influence to domestic matters” (Burns 158).
The role of the political wife is no long just to stand next to her husband, look pretty and take care of the children; these new first ladies have substance, and have a voice in the political world. “Some first ladies represented the domestic empowerment of women, particularly as consumers. Both Harding and Roosevelt, for example, promoted women's consumerism as an act of citizenship. Both Barbara Bush and Laura Bush promoted literacy and educational programs. Clinton worked to reform not only health care but also the foster care and adoption systems in the United States. Clinton and Laura Bush used their celebrity abroad to support programs benefiting women and children around the world. By lending their names to causes and by advocating social reform, first ladies expanded upon the tradition of upper-class women's volunteerism.” (Burns 157-158). It all depends on the approach the role they give to themselves, and how well they use this power that they now have. They are the first ladies; they have a wealth of recourses to make a difference in the world.
First ladies should not just stand in the shadows of their husbands. We live in a world were gender equality is still a problem, and having these women take a stand for their beliefs reflects highly on them. This is not a time to be a homemaker, yes they can still have the duties of a mother, but they can also have the power of a political figure.
Work Cited Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Cottle, Michelle. "The Real Running Mates: The State of the Political Spouse." Newsweek 15 May 2011. Web.
Personally, and I think the media also would agree, that the presidential candidate's family plays a huge role in the campaign process. When we are making a decision that will affect the next 4 years of our lives and electing someone that will be making the tough decisions for our country of course we are going to want to know who they personally decide to spend their time with and how their own children are being raised or have turned out in some cases. Because, although, a Presidents family isn’t directly related to governmental obligations they give a real indication into the candidates character and personal beliefs. It is hard to define the role the first lady is supposed to play since there is no formal definition for one, “The position of first lady is not outlined in the Constitution, yet it has been a part of the American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the first lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations” (Burns, 3). We see most first lady’s standing quietly by his side and working with educational programs behind the scenes but when we are presented with a first lady like Hillary Clinton it’s like all hell breaks loose, “When their [first ladies] influence seemed to trespass into the male political reserve, the media coverage exhibited a rhetoric of containment that suggested the political activities of certain first ladies violated the gendered boundaries that the press erected” (Burns, 155). Hillary Clinton broke the mold for the first ladies just standing and nodding their heads, Do the first ladies deserve to be just as scrutinized as the President? Maybe not to the same extent but they are definitely vulnerable. After all, we elected her as well, didn’t we? We trusted her when she told us that her husband was the most wonderful man in the world and that he can solve our problems. In “The Real Running Mate” the author describes the publics reaction to her 21st century ways, “After all, didn’t Hillary (Rodham) Clinton get thoroughly bloodied—and traumatize half the electorate—wrestling the institution toward modernity two decades ago? Screw the cookie baking. Save the world. Change your name and hairstyle if you must, but don’t let the boys put you in the corner (Cottle, 2011).” It will be extremely interesting to see what kind of scrutiny the first ladies are put under in this upcoming election with everything going on with feminism. She will have the walk the line of being a strong woman…but not too strong of course.
Work Cited Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Cottle, Michelle. "The Real Running Mates: The State of the Political Spouse." Newsweek 15 May 2011. Web.
A candidate’s family can absolutely make or break an election. In many cases, people look to relate a candidate to their own personal lives as much as they possibly can, thus seeking similarities in their family units as well. The American public wants to see a family that thrives together and gives new families the perfect role models to aspire to. If a candidate makes a campaign tour and his wife is absent, it can severely damper his public image.
The most important of the family positions in regards to politics is the candidate’s wife, or the potential first lady. These are truly remarkable women. They are by no means politicians but must go through the same trials and tribulations that their husbands do during the election season. “Parts of the role remain as they ever were: A political spouse should be poised and gracious and able to smile benignly for 16 hours straight while wearing pumps and panty hose in 100-degree heat. She should make frequent mention of how much she cherishes her role as wife and mother. And she should strive to look the part. Pretty is a plus. Sexy is a no-no. Packaging is key” (Cottie 2). I political first lady who I think covered each aspect of that description was Mrs. Laura Bush. During her eight years as our country’s first lady she adequately supported her husband and her efforts, all while maintaining a positive public image as a mother and an activist. A candidates entire family is also vital to their future success. By having children, their parents, even an all American god by their side, it creates an image that is comforting and as I mentioned before, relatable.
The saying “Behind every great man is an even greater woman” I feel is most applicable to our Presidents and First ladies. They all play pivotal roles in changing cultural aspects of America that they find fit, no matter how different their ideologies are. “They are certainly a pair of opposites, one a daughter of the Texas plains who became a teacher and librarian, the other a product of the South Side of Chicago who earned a law degree from Harvard. Mrs. Bush, now 67, married into one of the nation’s most prominent political families. Mrs. Obama, 50, married a fellow lawyer who went onto great heights. And yet neither seems especially enamored of politics, and each has carefully tailored her public role to suit her own priorities and tastes” (Baker). Both Mrs. Bush and Mrs. Obama have been able to have significant political and social impact in our country simply by doing what they feel is right. By taking the role of activist and role model, the First Lady’s position in the white house becomes almost as important as her husbands, if not more in some ways. Often times the First Lady is the more “humanized” of the two, attending more public forums and not appearing as business oriented all the time. If the First Lady can succeed at being liked by the public, both she and her husband can anticipate success during their presidential term.
Work Cited
Baker, Peter. "2 First Ladies Share Tales of Budding Partnership and Life in the Spotlight." New York Times 6 Aug. 2014. Web.
Cottle, M. (2011, May 15). The Real Running Mates: The state of the political spouse. Newsweek.
To be noted as a “family man” in any circumstance would never be a bad thing. In politics being a “ family man” is an especially good thing. Because of how much a candidate’s image is important to the campaign nowadays everything with positive benefactors helps.
Personally, I think a candidate’s family is extremely important to his image. Many people can relate to one being a family man and I’ve seen first hand how a politically involved family handles themselves. My good friend’s father worked as a councilman and currently works as the Vice Chairman of the Board of Freeholders. Everyone in town knows them and loves them because they uphold their image better than some other families in the town. My friend always makes sure we’re never doing something that could potentially harm his father’s image so I can only imagine how other children whose parents are involved in politics think about their image. Position’s such as a Governor, Senator even the President, their family image is even more crucial especially during the time of a campaign. The amount of press that surrounds a candidate during a campaign makes it the perfect time to show the public and potential voters how dedicated one is to their family. If a candidate shows that he is a devoted and hard-working family man than I think they will do a good job in connecting with the public and becoming more approachable.
A spouse’s role when it comes to politics is always interesting to hear or read about. I think it is particularly important that the spouse of a candidate upholds their image positively. I also think it’s important for one to not become an essential part of politics. What I mean is that if the spouse works as a teacher or stay at home mom/dad then they shouldn’t get involved in the political aspect of things. It’s okay to show up to events and be supportive but I don’t think it is their obligation to help during a campaign as much as they’ve once been asked to. “Media coverage of first ladies has evolved over the years and has played a significant role in shaping public expectations regarding the performance of the first lady position” (Burns 6). The fact that the press makes a big deal and is able to judge the performance of a first lady is a little ridiculous to me. I get it when it comes to cases like Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton and how playing the role the right way has only benefited to their careers but once again, if the spouse isn’t involved with politics I don’t think it is their job also, I don’t think they have anything to prove to the media that their doing a sufficient job. I tend to disagree with the mold of what a political family is supposed to be and how involved a spouse should be but if it’s the first lady and they want to be involved than I think it is only right for them to be given a larger role. If their image is so important to their husband’s image than it’s only fair that they see their role in politics increase.
Work Cited Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Commentary on framing- “ it shapes all elements of the story, fitting them into a tidy package that audiences can quickly comprehend, since people are familiar with the conventions,” (Burns, 7). Framing is used to familiarize the audience with the information they are receiving. One convention that every American is familiar with is the perfect family. Whether you grew up in one or not, the image of the perfect family and fine trim lawn either relates to or is revered by the average citizen. This is why I would focus a lot of resources on molding this image as much as possible if I were a candidate. On top of the American media is always looking for easy stories that get viewers to pay attention. The First Lady has been a symbol for all women to look at, scrutinize or sympathize with. Just as with female athletes much attention is paid to the appearance, and adherence to the tradition of the First Lady. The first lady must quit her job, if she didn’t there would be an outcry by the news media for breaking the tradition, (Neath). The news media acts in self-interest and wouldn’t want to miss out on all the interesting, easy coverage of The First Lady. What can this relationship between the news media and the first lady do for The White House? It gives the opportunity for airtime, coverage and the following conjecture by pundits. The First Lady is excellent way to push certain issues, that relate to woman and children like school nutrition and child care. Like I stated in the intro, everyone has some sense of family life and these issues are relevant and important. The First Lady should be used as an arm of The White House because of her appeal to the press and news making ability on important issues that can be targeted to woman, children and people who care about families. On the campaign trail The First Lady should be used as more than an arm, Neath refers to the excellent work that Michelle Obama did on the campaign trail for her husband, as well as the work done by Ladybird Johnson, (I was very impressed at what she had to say about Mrs. Johnson). The role would be different for a progressive White House than a conservative White House. Whereas Michelle Obama’s base would want her to make changes and progress, a conservative White House might want to portray more of the “Laura Bush Traditionalist” role. This would be a more traditional role, but still one of involvement. “Over in deep-blue Massachusetts, Ann Romney’s achingly perfect, super-traditional momness was a turnoff for voters early in Mitt’s political career. It wasn’t until her 1998 MS diagnosis that she became a sympathetic and relatable figure,”(Cottie, 3). The fact that the First Lady role is not an elected or paid position says everything you need to know about it. It is solidified and carried on by tradition, as well as the actions being dictated by tradition. It still plays an important role due to the press appeal associated with it. The role should be used as an instrument of The White House, just as a press secretary or other members of the staff. For conservatives, they should play to the base and have a woman that resembles the Laura Bush Traditionalist (haven’t done the research on what that entails). For progressives they should play to their base and follow the example of woman like Eleanor Roosevelt and Michelle Obama. Everything in politics should be a play to the base.
-Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
-Cottle, M. (2011, May 15). The Real Running Mates: The state of the political spouse. Newsweek.
-Neath, Scarlett. "What's the Point of a First Lady?" The Atlantic. 6 Oct. 2014. Web.
Image is one of the most important parts of a political campaign. It can often times say a lot about a canidates personality and priorities, but it doesn’t just stop with the them. Perhaps just as important as a candidates imagie is the image of his family. Nearly every candidate tries to perceive their family as the perfect American nuclear family because its relatable to voters and shows good character. The most important image besides the candidates is his wife. “ The position of the first lady is not outlines in the Consitution, yet it has been a part of American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the first lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations.”(Burns, 3) Highlighting the importance of first ladies, Burns mentions that the position has been part of the presidency since inception, and he’s right. Every president that has been in office has had a wife. The first lady has several important roles, even if they’re not “required”. They help appeal to female voters and even work first hand with white house charities. They’ve gone from classic housewife to an empowering figure for women with their own goals and jobs. “Standing beside your man with an adoring gaze remains a part of the job, only now you need to exhibit goals and interests of your own, a passion if not exactly a portfolio.” (Cottle) First ladies can even help difuse a tense political scandal. Take Bill Clintons Lewisnsky scandal. When it first was “Uncovered” many people believed Bill when he said nothing happened, partially because of Hillary. He told her that nothing had happened and she began sharing that message and her support on various talk shows. Women across America saw that Hillary believed him so they chose to too ( even if he admitted to later). While family image is a crucial and important part of the campaign, there have been such extreme instances of image control in politics that cross the line of ethics. One instance in particular is the story of Rosemary Kennedy. One of JFK’s younger sisters, Rosemary was given a Lobotomy when her father feared she would ruin the Kennedy image with her behavior.(El-Hai) The lobotomy that failed rendered Rosemary “mentally retarded” where she was then sent to a mental home. During JFK’s campaign for presidency, he seldom mentioned his sister, and in the few times he did so he claimed she was busy helping teach mentally challenged children (El-Hai). It wasn’t until after he was elected president that JFK mentioned that Rosemary herself was actually mentally retarded, with no mention of the lobotomy. This was all done to try and “Maintain” the Kennedy image, and when it went wrong, the family stuffed it all under the rug to not ruin any future political careers. This family put their image before their own health and each other which to me is incredibly ethically wrong, but in the game of politics is not very suprising.
Works Cited: Cottle, M. (2011, May 15). The Real Running Mates: The state of the political spouse. Newsweek.
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008
El-Hai, Jack. "The Exiled Kennedy." The Independent. Independent Digital News and Media, n.d. Web. 27th Oct. 2014.
A candidate’s family is extremely important to a candidate’s image. The American people, whether they admit it or not, expect their leader to perfect, or at least, they want them to be perfect. With that comes the expectation of the perfect family. I think a lot of this also comes from Kennedy. I think the Kennedy’s being the image of a perfect family and being the first first family of the television era created a standard that candidates nowadays have to live up to. I also think the faults in a candidate’s life make the voters question their ability to lead. I think many voters see a candidate with an imperfect family and say to themselves “if they can’t take care of their own family, how can they take care of the country.” As for what role should the spouses play in campaigns and in the White House today, I believe it should be different than it actually is today. When I say “different”, I mean that they should be interpreted differently in the media and by the public. I think that the media and the voters pick apart the spouse too much. Looking at what they’re wearing and how they act. It’s too superficial and it’s unfair in my opinion. It’s just wasting time talking about things that do not make a difference, especially considering that we do not elect the spouse, we elect the candidate. “However, celebrity can also be limiting because the individual is often lost in the image. A celebrity ‘represents something other than itself. The material reality of the celebrity sign—that is, the actual person who is at the core of the representation— disappears into a cultural formation of meaning.’ Such is the case with first ladies, who are often reduced by journalists to representations of American womanhood through the practice of personification framing.” (Burns, 11) That’s what happens when we talk about what the first lady is wearing. We limit them to their image and we make them a celebrity. This transitions well to my position on their role in the White House. In the White House, I generally agree with the First Lady’s role today where she usually has her own issue that she is fighting for. I think that this is a good role but the difference I envision is to just strengthen this role. This again goes back to the press. Make her less of an image based social figure and more of “a legitimate voice on cultural and political issues.” (Burns, 11) I think a lot of times today, whatever the First Lady’s initiative is, is treated like a afterthought. With being the First Lady comes a certain amount of social power that can be utilized to do a lot of good. But I think that we generally fall into gender stereotypes. “Yet, because press coverage often focused on first ladies as wives, mothers, and homemakers, the same stories that constructed these women as public figures simultaneously reinforced the idea that women's primary domain continued to be within the home.” (Burns, 7) Its been a long time since the Kennedy’s gave us the image of the perfect family, and I think it’s time that we all stop expecting candidate’s to have them nowadays, especially knowing that the Kennedy’s weren’t so perfect. With this, we also need to drop our expectations of spouses. Let them decide. Whether they want to be just a wife and mother or if they want to be more of an issue leader, it should be their choice. Our media and society should be accepting enough to allow that.
Works Cited: Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Even if you don’t think political spouses should be important, there is undeniable public interest. Lisa Burns argues that “Media coverage of first ladies has evolved over the years and has played a significant role in shaping publics expectations regarding the performance of the first lady position.” (Burns, 6). In response, politicians and the consultants who run their campaigns make the first lady’s and their family’s part of the campaign.
One of the biggest talking points for democrats this election cycle is that Republicans are conducting a War on Women. Meanwhile Florida congressman Alan Grayson is in the middle of a very messy divorce.
Lolita Grayson claims her husband physically abused her. Alan Grayson says she's lying. He claims his wife, originally from the Philippines, was already married when they tied the knot in 1990. She says she was divorced at the time, had signed divorce papers in 1981. She claims she threw him out of the house in January because he was cheating an accusation to which he has not responded publicly.
The details on the divorce are not as important as the effect the process is having on Alan Grayson’s character.
After 24 years of marriage, the millionaire Orlando congressman is looking for a loophole. He's looking to lawyer his way out of any obligation to pay a dime of alimony or child support to his wife with whom he has five children.
Grayson’s behavior is not much better than 2012 primary candidate for president, Newt Gingrich, who in the early 1980s tried to discuss divorce terms with first wife Jackie Battley while she was in the hospital battling cancer. And while that was going on, he was cheating on her with his second wife, Marianne Ginther. I know that in Gingrich's case, polling experts always maintained the callous treatment of his ex-wives cost him votes.
Some people might argue that the reason Romney and Ryan lost the elections was because their wives were portrayed in a role that many modern American women could not relate to. Both women were soft spoken stay at home moms at a time when half of today’s law students are women and nearly a quarter of married women out earn their husbands, the lives of First and Second ladies rarely reflect the real lives of American women.
Not all political wives are just people in the background many have a major effect on campaigns. Burns notes that, “The position of first lady is not outlined in the Constitution, yet it has been a part of the American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the first lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations” (Burns 3) A first lady who has exceeded expectations has to be Michelle Obama. Michelle often offers her opinion about issues that affect her personally, such as being a working mom and overcoming obstacles, which plays well with key voting groups like working women and minorities.
The role of spouses in presidential politics is evolving, from one of smiling wife to visible partner complete with appearance schedule, entourage and opinions. With this, though, comes greater potential to be either an asset or a liability. Consultants should exercise caution before making family an essential part of their campaign.
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Edelman, Adam. "Florida Rep. Alan Grayson Accuses Wife of Bigamy in Divorce Papers." NY Daily News. N.p., 29 Apr. 2014. Web. 28 Oct. 2014
Bobic, Igor. "Florida Congressman's Messy Divorce Gets Messier." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 16 Oct. 2014. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.
Ross, Brian, and Rhonda Schwartz. "Exclusive: Gingrich Lacks Moral Character to Be President, Ex-Wife Says." ABC News. ABC News Network, 19 Jan. 2012. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.
Bellware, Kim. "Michelle Obama Hits Midwestern States To Rally Young Voters, Women And Minorities." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 08 Oct. 2014. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.
By: Taylor Popielarz
ReplyDeleteA candidate’s family is extremely important when it comes to shaping his or her public image. The importance lies within the final word in the previous sentence, image. Image has evolved to become the most important aspect of American politics. From the way a politician looks, to the way he or she dresses, to what he or she eats is analyzed nearly in full by our unending 24/7 news cycle. And because image has become the spotlighted focus of political figures, a politician’s family is also thrust into that spotlight, warranting the same level of critique.
Take a look at Vice President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden. The youngest of the Biden family, Hunter recently made national headlines after being discharged from the Navy due to the fact that he tested positive for cocaine. Though news about the vice president’s son was few and far between before this revelation, Hunter was soon on the fronts of newspapers, and in the opening lineups of network newscasts the moment he was discharged. I use this example because this perfectly spotlights how important a candidate’s family is when it comes to shaping that person’s public image. Hunter Biden’s struggle with narcotics is not national news, nor does it impact any of the foreign policy, economic or systemic problems our great nation is currently facing. But because Hunter Biden is the son of our nation’s VP, any faulty move he makes is automatically catapulted into the public eye because the media feels it is important to know how Joe Biden’s family is doing. It ultimately is reflective of how the Biden family is run, how the Biden family is doing, and it could easily bring to the minds of many Americans the thought of Joe Biden being a faulty parent, and then a faulty leader (this is pure speculation, but I wouldn’t be surprised if someone out there saw the story of Hunter and automatically changed their opinion of the vice president and his family).
The point being is that families are vital to the crafting of a healthy public image for any political candidate. In America, one of the most impactful familial roles within politics is that of the country’s first lady. Now, because we have yet to experience a female vice president or president, I will use the term first lady to encompass the discussion of what role political spouses should play both on the campaign trail, and in the White House today.
Being the first lady in America is both a privilege, and a very confusing headache. As Lisa Burns dissects in her book First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives, holding the position of first lady in America’s White House comes with very few actual guidelines, and more legacy-driven standards. “The position of first lady is not outlined in the Constitution, yet it has been a part of the American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the first lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations” (Burns, 3).
(Taylor Popielarz, cont'd)
ReplyDeleteNo set rules or guidelines. So how is America’s first lady figuring out her unofficial job title? “Therefore, while the position has been shaped by the words and actions of each first lady, those in the role have never had total control over their performance because of historical, social, and political constraints” (Burns, 4). Essentially, each new first lady inherits the “yes” rules and the “no” rules from their previous first ladies, and they then base their principles and actions off of society’s current, and historical, political views.
With all this in mind, I think it’s only right to point out that the role a political spouse should play both on the campaign trail and in the White House, in today’s standards, is that of a supportive, non-groundbreaking political onlooker, if you will, who’s main priority is to elevate their spouse’s political presence in every way possible. Do I personally think this is right? No. I think political spouses should share the power their counterpart comes into as campaigning and assuming political office ensues. I think first ladies offer a lot more than what Lisa Burns says they are basically barricaded into pursuing. “Press framing of the first lady institution still places the first lady at the heart of women’s public culture, yet it continues to consign her to the periphery of U.S. political culture” (Burns, 162). Based on history, the first lady is generally an onlooker, a political observer, who is handed certain small projects to accomplish while living in the White House, but who generally lingers in the background in an effort to not stir up any controversy.
As Scarlett Neath points out in an article regarding the importance of the first lady, the role any first lady takes on is truly a gamble depending on how much criticism that woman is willing to take on. “Michelle Obama’s career as a Harvard-educated lawyer and her near-perfect performance on the campaign trail made her appear poised to be able to hit that very narrow target of being an effective—but not overreaching—first lady” (Neath, 1). But why does it have to be that complex? Why do first ladies have to hit a narrow target that is subject to scrutiny and disdain if they don’t hit it perfectly? This is where I find it difficult to explain what role a first lady should play both on the campaign trail and in the White House.
I think first ladies should have the power to equally contribute to their husbands’ policy and productivity if they want too. No first lady should be subject to simply representing homebody images befitting of a 1950s stereotype. “When their [first ladies] influence seemed to trespass into the male political reserve, the media coverage exhibited a rhetoric of containment that suggested the political activities of certain first ladies violated the gendered boundaries that the press erected” (Burns, 155). I think first ladies should contribute to the campaign trail by speaking on behalf of their husbands, and by instilling values based on principle and policy that not only aide their spouse’s campaign, but helps elevate their relevance as a political figure themselves. I think once in the White House, first ladies should take on what they want too, like Lady Bird Johnson had. It is only once a first lady is pursuing political endeavors that she is happy and passionate about her job, making it worthwhile. I think first ladies offer a whole lot more than they are given the chance to show, and I think in our ever-evolving democracy that political wives/women should work side-by-side with their spouse, rather than be an onlooker who is barricaded by the media and by gender stereotypes.
Works Cited
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Neath, Scarlett. "What's the Point of a First Lady?" The Atlantic. 6 Oct. 2014. Web.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSince the beginning of time a candidate’s family has been very important. Most importantly being the first lady. Since I was little I heard all kinds of quotes, such as “Behind every great man is a great woman.” I could not find who had said this quote but my mom had always said things like that. And first ladies are proof that this quote is true. “The position of the first lady is not outlined in the Constitution, yet it has been a part of the American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the fire lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations.” (Burns, 3). This quote just reiterates how important the first lady is.
ReplyDeleteI believe that a candidate’s family is important because if their family wasn’t there to support them then why would anyone else want to support them. Many people believe that family is the most important thing in life and they come before anything. If a candidate’s family is a part of their image it makes them more relatable to voters. Even for women and children they might see that the candidate has a wife and kids that support him which could ultimately lead to voting for that person because of that.
I don’t recall any presidents that I learned about not being married. Although many times politicians are involved in scandals they are still married like we talked about earlier in the semester. Many times even after a scandal the candidate’s wife still stays with them because they are such an important role.
One thing that bothers me about candidates’ families is how the media gets so involved in them. The focus is turned away from candidates and onto their family. “Media coverage of first ladies has evolved over the years and has played a significant role in shaping publics expectations regarding the performance of the first lady position.” (Burns, 6). I’m going to focus mainly on the first ladies or candidates’ wives because we often hear about them more than the rest of their families. But I think that the media butts into candidate’s family life more often than not and I think that it is important to know their family supports them but the media often shows the good, bad and the ugly. Some things should be able to be kept between a family; if politicians are just normal people they should have some privacy just like everyone else does.
The media criticizes everything that first ladies and candidate’s wives do. For example, in class we talked about how Michelle Obama got criticized for wearing shorts on a tour of the Grand Canyon. I think that is a little much and is so unimportant. I think that candidates wives and families only importance during a campaign is so show they support their spouse that is running and to be looked up to by people around the United States. I don’t think they should be criticized for every little thing they do and I think they should be able to have a private life just like anyone else. They are not the person running for office and they don’t really have that much of a say in what happens so we shouldn’t butt into their lives the way we do. I believe they are just there to support their spouse or parents and we shouldn’t bother to get into their business or criticize them for supporting someone they love.
Works Cited:
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Neath, Scarlett. "What's the Point of a First Lady?" The Atlantic. 6 Oct. 2014. Web.
Anne Noordsy
ReplyDeleteImage is everything in the political world. One important aspect of a politician’s image is their family and the actions and representation of their family. The politician’s family not only provides a support system, but they also play a role in the media’s interpretation and portrayal as well.
As political campaigns start up, “candidates try to introduce themselves — or reintroduce, as the case may be — to voters. And amid a panoply of negative spots, image mavens and ad wizards have found a way to try to help their politicians cut through the clutter: family, family, family” (Parker 1). This aids in humanizing candidates and telling voters that they are average people and come from great, supportive families. Displaying a politician’s upbringing allows for voters to connect with the politician in a more unique way as opposed to sharing the same beliefs on a particular political policy.
Bringing in the family to a political campaign also adds the authenticity factor. An example of a politician who had his family involved was Ben Sasse, the Republican Senate nominee in Nebraska. “The ad has all the markers of a cute kid commercial — talk about praying for their father’s opponents at breakfast, a playful request for a horse at the end — but it also has this insight about Mr. Sasse’s opinion on Mr. Obama’s health care overhaul: “He despises it,” the younger girl says” (Parker 1).
Ultimately, what it boils down to with including a candidate’s family in the campaign trail is authenticity and humanizing the candidate. At the end of the day, the candidate is an average individual just like everyone else and he/she wants to demonstrate to voters that family is important; which is a common belief everyone can relate to despite political views.
While the politician’s family is essential in creating their image, a politician’s spouse is even more essential in the role they play. It is known that the political world is mainly dominated by men; especially in the White House. So, this means that first ladies have a significant impact. “The position of first lady is not outlined in the Constitution, yet it has been a part of the American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the first lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations” (Burns 3).
First ladies are expected to play several roles. They are expected to provide a quality image of themselves and to aid in providing a quality image for their husbands; the Commander in Chief. If they are a mother, they must demonstrate qualities that deem them as providing for their children. As wives, they must demonstrate qualities such as caring, love, and support for their husbands. First ladies can also serve their communities and demonstrate devotion to volunteering. Potential first ladies must exhibit these traits on the campaign trail, as well.
“First ladies have been routinely positioned by the press to be role models for American women, which resulted in their emergence as public women, political celebrities, political activists, or political interlopers. Such publicity made first ladies some of the earliest and most visible public women, which legitimized ordinary women’s political activity and influence” (Burns 154-155).
In addition, a politician’s family has a meaningful impact on their image as well as campaign. Voters want to see a politician’s family and understand a politician’s upbringing. Yes, candidates’ policies and viewpoints are important but knowing the politician as an average person is essential as well.
Sources:
1. Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008
2. Parker, Ashley. "I Approved This Message; My Family Delivered It." The New York Times. The New York Times, 06 June 2014. Web. 27 Oct. 2014.
In the twenty first century, a political candidate’s family has become increasingly important to the candidate’s public image. As the 24/7 news cycle continues and politician’s move to a celebrity status in the public’s eyes, their families have been subject to the same type of media exposure. While although I do not believe a candidate’s family should be subjected to the same press and public scrutiny as politicians, it is an unfortunate fact they will be. A candidate’s family could either be glorified or torn apart by the press, depending on the family members past and current actions in the public light.
ReplyDeleteLisa Burns wrote in an article on the first ladies and how they are perceived in the public, “One outgrowth of the media’s fascination with first ladies is what some scholars refer to as the first lady’s ‘cult of celebrity’.” (Burns, 6). First ladies, as with a candidate’s family, are put in a celebrity position by the journalists who cover them. A candidate’s family members every move, every action taken, will fall under press scrutiny only because the press creates a following of this individual in the public. The way the press covers a politician’s family creates a ‘cult’ like following of them, and as a consequence, there is a market of people who honestly care what the president’s daughters are wearing to school. If the press covers the candidate’s family in a negative light, unfortunately, there will be damaging repercussions of the family’s image in the candidate’s political career.
“Journalists play a significant role in the shaping both cultural and political norms”, writes Burns (Burns, 159). As politician’s families have been covered by the press for decades, some more than others, but certain norms or expectations have been set for the ideal “politician family”. These norms are created by how journalists cover the family, either positively or negatively. Comparing families is an unfair judgment for any type of person, not just a politician, but with the politician’s stature in the public eye, they are subject to more press coverage than your average American family. The comparison of families is comparing apples to oranges, there are so many different factors that go into how a family is made up, and not one family is exactly like another. The number of family members, the age differences in family members, the gender differences in families, or if a family member has a disability, are just some differences can change the dynamic of a family and in a case-by-case situation, comparing families is a very difficult task. However, as Burns points out, “these mediated memories then set both historical and contemporary standards for judging current and future first ladies.” (Burns, 159). What is unfair about a politician’s family and their press coverage is not that they are subject to the same press and press scrutiny, but it is the way the press covers them. With certain expectations and norms set by past political families, it is difficult and unfair to hold one family accountable to the same standards as past families.
The importance of a candidate’s family when shaping the candidate’s public image is of great importance. The image the public has of the candidate and the image the public has of their family seemingly go hand in hand. A negative image of the candidate’s family will take away from the candidate’s overall image the public has of them while a positive image of the candidate’s family will help the candidate’s public image. Should politician’s family members be subjected to the same press as the candidate? No. However, as time has shown us, being a politician in the twenty first century, the individual has to understand that being in the public light comes with the job. And coming to this understanding will make it easier for you and your family to adjust to the press coverage and scrutiny.
Works Cited:
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Lindsay Goldstein
ReplyDeleteWhile you technically only elect one single person to become the President of the United States, in reality, you’re choosing an entire family. From the spouse, to the children and even pets, the president’s public image is shaped by their family, in both positive and negative ways. As we’ve learned, image is crucial in a successful campaign and presidency, specifically the image of a family man in the White House. What happens when the family isn’t necessarily portrayed in a positive way? A family can literally make or break a politician’s political career, as evidenced by Sarah Palin.
Palin and her family are the perfect example of how significantly a politician’s family can shape their public image, in her case, negatively. During the presidential campaign in 2008, in which Sarah Palin was running for Vice President, she was in the news constantly, but very rarely was it for her politics. Instead, the press would report on her pregnant teenage daughter and the baby’s father, for example.
Even today, the family is in the news for the wrong reasons, about the brawl that involved many of Palin’s family members, including her daughter Bristol. Even after years in politics and a very public vice presidential campaign, Palin is known more for her family drama than anything else, proof of the importance that a candidate’s family plays.
While entire families play a role in a candidate’s public image, the spouse has become an essential piece of the puzzle. First ladies, in particular, have become increasingly important figures in presidential campaigns and in the subsequent terms that presidents serve. Dr. Lisa Burns writes, “The press and the American people have been fascinated by the first lady since the beginning of the nation’s history,” (3).
The role of a spouse, or more specifically, a wife in office is a complicated one. Dr. Burns points out “The position of first lady is not outlined in the Constitution, yet it has been a part of the American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the first lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations. It lacks a clear job description, but being first lady is a matter of tradition probably more than any other U.S. institution,” (3). These high expectations mentioned include being her husband’s counterpart, the female face of all of the people in the country.
Lindsay Goldstein, continued
ReplyDelete“First ladies have been routinely positioned by the press to be role models for American women, which resulted in their emergence as public women, political celebrities, political activists, or political interlopers,” (Burns 155). Those are a lot of responsibilities for these women, who’s husbands are the ones running the country. Yet, their status doesn’t come with as much power as that makes it seem. Burns continues, “However, while their status as public women and political celebrities resulted in both access to and influence within U.S. political culture, first ladies remained on the fringes, with their influence limited largely to domestic matters and women’s issues,” (155)
Thus, their role has become that of a supporter and the president’s biggest fan. When her husband is elected into office, the first lady’s own identity tends to disappear, as she becomes the president’s wife, instead of her own person. They, too, are constantly working, putting their best foot forward and always looking and acting put together, because their image directly affects the image of their husband.
I believe that first ladies should be given a more important role in office today because they have earned it. Throughout history, they have sat back and watched their husband get the credit (and the blame) for shaping the country, when in fact, they too have a lot of responsibility in the status of the nation. The role of the first lady in politics is undeniable, but like Scarlett Neath points out in the article, “What’s the Point of a First Lady?” the responsibilities come with very few rewards. She writes, “A better question is how much we can ask presidential spouses to do that when the position itself isn’t official, much less paid,” (Neath 1). Since first ladies are so important to their husband’s public image, they should also be considered important in the White House.
Works Cited
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Neath, Scarlett. "What's the Point of a First Lady?" The Atlantic. 6 Oct. 2014. Web.
All facets of a politician’s life are now very closely scrutinized and their families are no exception. In many cases a political figures’ family and personal life can be seen as a reflection of that individual and therefore the media and public takes into account all of these details. Consequently a politician’s family is vital to their image. This is especially true on the campaign trail and for relatively new candidates. In addition it seems apparent that the politician’s spouse plays a very important role even if it is not entirely defined and varies by the situation.
ReplyDeletePart of what makes the role of a political spouse so difficult is that it is filled with expectations; however, it may not be clearly outlined. Professor Burns in her introduction of First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives alludes to this difficult circumstance: “The position of first lady is not outlined in the Constitution, yet it has been a part of the American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the first lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations.” (Burns, p.3)
Debatably the most important and primary role of a political spouse or the first lady could be simply to support the politician regardless of the situation. The obvious reason is that a political spouse is the closest (in theory) individual to the politician and how they act, react and support their spouse on the trail and through tribulation can speak volumes about the candidate or their position. A political spouse can be seen as, even if it is a completely unfair characterization, an extension of the politician. Ann Romney appearing on The View is an example of this. In this case, because Mitt declined to go on The View, Ann’s appearance on the program can be seen as her being sent as an ambassador for her husband. In this case she has to stand by all of his opinions and political stances to make it clear that she represents him. Furthermore, this can be a very high pressure role because many of the same, if not more strenuous, responsibilities of a candidate fall on the spouse particularly while on the campaign trail. Because of this, a political spouse can often affect a politician’s image.
However, the role of a spouse can be hard to define as Professor Burns suggested earlier. This consider, it is difficult to pinpoint exactly what the spouse or first lady’s exact role should be, however, it is clear that their reaction, especially in times of crisis and scandal is securitized and can have an impact on the political process. Michelle Cottle in The Real Running Mates states how being the first lady goes beyond simply supporting: “Standing beside your man with an adoring gaze remains a part of the job, only now you need to exhibit goals and interests of your own—a passion if not exactly a portfolio.” (Cottle)
One thing for sure is that political spouses are very important during the campaign. As Cottle explains, the role of the first lady or spouse while running is also incredibly important in the campaign process and that, while the role of the running individuals spouse has possibly changed over the years, it has continued to be role which remains highly scrutinized today especially during a period where all aspects of candidate are inspected. (Cottle) She describes this intense speculation: “While senators’ and governors’ wives can lead relatively normal lives, aspiring first ladies face a level of scrutiny so brutal it would reduce Simon Cowell to sobs” (Cottle)
•Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008
Delete•Cottle, M. (2011, May 15). The Real Running Mates: The state of the political spouse. Newsweek.
The family plays a major role in the political image of a candidate. Candidates run on the image of being a family man, with a wife and children and even sometimes a dog. The reason they do this is because they reflect the desire for the “American Dream”; a part of this American dream is having a family with typically two kids and a dog. The first family has to reflect the desires of the country. The people want to see a well put together family leading the country. A family is a direct reflection of oneself. It is where you receive and implant your own morals. Family is important to the image of a candidate because it also shows dedication and loyalty. This is usually the only time you see a candidate showing love and compassion to his spouse and children. The family is the “soft side” of the president and Americans like to see all sides of a candidate, especially in this day and age.
ReplyDeleteThe spouse plays an important role on the campaign trail and the white house today. Woman, since there has been only male presidents, are seen as protectors and providers of the family. Their duties usually consist simply of focusing on her husband and her children. For example, according to Scarlet Neath, Mrs. Obama had to sacrifice her career to focus on her husband’s career and appear to be like a more stay at home mom, “Once in office, though, she visibly played it cautious, working only two of three days of the week and sticking to the traditional woman’s and children’s-interest advocacy role” (Neath). The First Lady also has to advocate for the political views of her husband and even can represent all woman in America, according to the article titled, What’s the Point of a First Lady by Scarlet Neath, “President Obama recently made an offhand comment during a conversation about the need for equal pay where he uses Michelle’s name to represent all woman…”(Neath). This shows that often the First Lady takes on the role on representing a whole race of women. The First Lady is often idealized by women because her life is glamorized by the media and makes her more of a celebrity rather than a political figure. According to Lisa Burns, “One outgrowth of the media’s fascination with first ladies is what some scholars refer to as the first lady’s cult of celebrity. Journalists have positioned the first lady as a media celebrity, as the embodiment of a cultural ideal of American womanhood. For the press, in some ways the first lady functions as barometer of women’s social and political status…” (Burns 6). The First Lady is the direct connection between the demographics of women in America and the white house. She is important in the white house and to American politics.
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Neath, Scarlett. "What's the Point of a First Lady?" The Atlantic. 6 Oct. 2014. Web.
While the structure of campaigns continues to evolve to meet modern-day expectations, the portrayal of the quintessential American family remains. In turn, the candidate’s family largely influences their public image on the campaign trail, with great focus on their marriage. Once in office, the role is just as, if not more, rigorous. The media have crafted an image of politicians eliciting a set of expectations among the American people—further emphasizing the role of the candidate’s family on the national stage.
ReplyDeleteThe American people do not want anything other than the average family representing their country, whether it is realistic or not. 24-hour news networks need to fill time combined with a continued shift toward invasive entertainment news has placed an especially critical focus on every aspect of political families. Barrack Obama would not have been successful in his run for the presidency if he did not have an attractive wife and children, although there was a deep look into his life with a single mother and absent father. On the other side of the aisle, the McCain campaign experienced some challenges for the negative media attention of running mate Sarah Palin’s daughter. For the Obamas, Michelle’s fashion even became commonplace for media attention, alongside questions about their daughters Sasha and Malia. The media have no boundaries when presenting the candidates’ families, making the campaign even more strategic in shaping their image.
The wife of the candidate cannot be underestimated in the campaigns efforts to shape their image. The role they play on the campaign trail humanizes the candidate and becomes a direct reflection of the candidate. For a position as great as the presidency it is simply a requirement. In regards to the wife’s role once in office, First Lady Michelle Obama appears to serve primarily for ceremonial purposes. As Lisa Burns illuminates in her work, it is not as much the case in actuality as it is the media’s framing of the role. She writes, “Just as first ladies are bound by a tradition dating back to Martha Washington, journalistic practices rooted to a great extent in nineteenth-century gender prescriptions continue to define media coverage of first ladies” (Burns 162). Therefore, Michelle Obama’s work to get American children to be active and healthy is only highlighted during traditional activities that warrant her organization, such as the Easter Egg Roll on the South Lawn. In every action of the First Lady she must fit that prescription.
America does not want someone to be anything greater than that ceremonial role, due to its portrayal in the media. The First Lady cannot do anything politically influential. As Baker addresses in his article, “Their mission, of course, is not especially controversial in the American political context, and so it is easy ground for them to make common cause” (Baker). Therefore, they cannot make an impact because their actions are purely viewed as ceremonial and warrant no true media attention. The Let’s Move initiative is not a source of political tension. Barbara Bush’s push to get children to read was not either. No matter what is happening in the country, their role is to stay very much the same.
ReplyDeleteYet there is still a purpose to their expected actions. As Burns acknowledges, “Progress over the past century is visible as first ladies’ participation in public life is normalized, and even anticipated” (Burns 162). With this, the gendered role of First Lady has become extremely important, and a direct reflection of the country. If Bill Clinton becomes the First Man in the White House and wants to partake in political activity, there is going to be harsh criticism. The spouse should of course play a role in the campaign and in office, however their involvement in the true political activity of the President should be limited. Deeply rooted in tradition, their actions are not just crafting an image of the President, but of the nation.
From the campaign stops with the candidate’s spouse speaking on their behalf, to the South Lawn of the White House during the annual event, the political family is expected to fit into the mold that others have shaped before them. The influence of they have in American politics is largely stigmatized and extremely gendered. Over the years, the media have continued to cast the spouse in the same light as the last. This is why Americans have become so naturally critical of the family, and why the campaign must be sure that their actions are never seen as anything other than the norm. The candidate’s family is just another pawn for the media to do with what they please, and has hence elevated the amount of influence the family has on public image.
Works Cited
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Baker, Peter. "2 First Ladies Share Tales of Budding Partnership and Life in the
Spotlight.” New York Times. 6 Aug. 2014. Web.
Jack Holiver
ReplyDeleteBlog 9
10/28/14
Recently, I began the series, House of Cards. Naturally, Hollywood embellished a bit with many aspects of the show. However, one thing I noticed, that many others may have missed, is that it is unlikely to hold a high public office without a family. The main character, Frank Underwood, would have a tough time being elected to Congress in reality. He only has a wife and the couple are childless. Many voters would see this as a hard obstacle to overcome due to the fact that many voters have kids and Underwood would not be able to relate to them. Although, I have found that a spouse has a significant influence in helping their loved one become elected. Therefore, family is very important for a candidate’s image. It was not until the 1960s that Lady Bird Johnson became the first time a first lady ran her own campaign without being by her husband’s side. “A 1964 Time cover story quoted Robert Kennedy as admitting, ‘Lady Bird carried Texas for us” in the extremely tight 1960 election. Yet the same article also said “her nose is a bit too long, her mouth a bit too wide, her ankles a bit less than trim, and she is not outstanding at clothesmanship’” (The Atlantic).
In some cases, the public will prefer the spouse over the candidate running for office. One example of this was John Edwards. Although it didn’t come out until after he lost the race for Vice President in 2004, the public grew a hatred towards him after finding out he cheated on his terminally ill wife. In addition to this, his wife was an icon for many women throughout the country. The wife of past presidents tend to hold a higher approval rating than their husbands. According to Quinnipiac University, Michelle Obama’s approval rating was at 60% favorable when lasted polled while the President sits at 40% approval. I believe this is because the first lady tends to take on issues that are generally not controversial. Michelle Obama is pushing for better food in schools and trying to promote healthier lives for children. Laura Bush focused on higher quality education, Hillary Clinton was the founder of a program that increased funding to the perseveration of historic items and sites, etc. “Starting with the coverage of Martha Washington, the relationship between nineteenth-century first ladies and the press varied widely, in part because there were no guidelines for either side to follow” (Burns, 4).
There are times when a family is subjected to too much media coverage. An example that comes to mind is Dick Cheney’s daughter. During the debate between Cheney and John Edwards, Edwards mentioned Cheney’s daughter due to the fact that she is gay. Even though Cheney brushed off the comment, the audience could tell he was obviously very angered by this very personal comment. After this debate, media coverage shifted and began to focus about this “low blow” given by Edwards. Therefore, as a result, Cheney’s daughter became a talking point for a short while during the campaign. I find this to be unacceptable and unwarranted.
Works Cited:
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Neath, Scarlett. "What's the Point of a First Lady?" The Atlantic. 6 Oct. 2014. Web.
Emily Fagan
ReplyDeleteIn today’s political world, image is everything. The right candidate for the position cannot just be politically qualified anymore; he also needs to be a family man in order to impress the public.
A candidate’s family is extremely important when it comes to shaping their public image, because the press is always present. The image of a “family man” is something that is crucial to the voters. Family is something that Americans think highly of because it shows how loyal you are, and if you are loyal to your family, you can be loyal to the country. A candidate usually has a hard exterior, but showing that they have family values makes he/she look more approachable and is just like everyone else.
Although the role of family is important, the role of the spouse is even more important. First ladies “…have been asked to live their private lives in the glare of the public spotlight, their every move subject to scrutiny” (Burns 3). There was a time when we looked to the first lady as a trophy wife, someone to stand there and look pretty, “Parts of the role remain as they ever were: A political spouse should be poised and gracious and able to smile benignly for 16 hours straight while wearing pumps and panty hose in 100-degree heat. She should make frequent mention of how much she cherishes her role as wife and mother” (Cottle). First ladies, just like their husbands, are always in the public eye. “Coverage of first ladies’ public activities both normalized women’s place in the sphere yet also worked to establish boundaries that restricted women’s political influence to domestic matters” (Burns 158).
The role of the political wife is no long just to stand next to her husband, look pretty and take care of the children; these new first ladies have substance, and have a voice in the political world. “Some first ladies represented the domestic empowerment of women, particularly as consumers. Both Harding and Roosevelt, for example, promoted women's consumerism as an act of citizenship. Both Barbara Bush and Laura Bush promoted literacy and educational programs. Clinton worked to reform not only health care but also the foster care and adoption systems in the United States. Clinton and Laura Bush used their celebrity abroad to support programs benefiting women and children around the world. By lending their names to causes and by advocating social reform, first ladies expanded upon the tradition of upper-class women's volunteerism.” (Burns 157-158). It all depends on the approach the role they give to themselves, and how well they use this power that they now have. They are the first ladies; they have a wealth of recourses to make a difference in the world.
First ladies should not just stand in the shadows of their husbands. We live in a world were gender equality is still a problem, and having these women take a stand for their beliefs reflects highly on them. This is not a time to be a homemaker, yes they can still have the duties of a mother, but they can also have the power of a political figure.
Work Cited
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Cottle, Michelle. "The Real Running Mates: The State of the Political Spouse." Newsweek 15 May 2011. Web.
Personally, and I think the media also would agree, that the presidential candidate's family plays a huge role in the campaign process. When we are making a decision that will affect the next 4 years of our lives and electing someone that will be making the tough decisions for our country of course we are going to want to know who they personally decide to spend their time with and how their own children are being raised or have turned out in some cases. Because, although, a Presidents family isn’t directly related to governmental obligations they give a real indication into the candidates character and personal beliefs. It is hard to define the role the first lady is supposed to play since there is no formal definition for one, “The position of first lady is not outlined in the Constitution, yet it has been a part of the American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the first lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations” (Burns, 3). We see most first lady’s standing quietly by his side and working with educational programs behind the scenes but when we are presented with a first lady like Hillary Clinton it’s like all hell breaks loose, “When their [first ladies] influence seemed to trespass into the male political reserve, the media coverage exhibited a rhetoric of containment that suggested the political activities of certain first ladies violated the gendered boundaries that the press erected” (Burns, 155). Hillary Clinton broke the mold for the first ladies just standing and nodding their heads,
ReplyDeleteDo the first ladies deserve to be just as scrutinized as the President? Maybe not to the same extent but they are definitely vulnerable. After all, we elected her as well, didn’t we? We trusted her when she told us that her husband was the most wonderful man in the world and that he can solve our problems. In “The Real Running Mate” the author describes the publics reaction to her 21st century ways, “After all, didn’t Hillary (Rodham) Clinton get thoroughly bloodied—and traumatize half the electorate—wrestling the institution toward modernity two decades ago? Screw the cookie baking. Save the world. Change your name and hairstyle if you must, but don’t let the boys put you in the corner (Cottle, 2011).” It will be extremely interesting to see what kind of scrutiny the first ladies are put under in this upcoming election with everything going on with feminism. She will have the walk the line of being a strong woman…but not too strong of course.
Work Cited
ReplyDeleteBurns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Cottle, Michelle. "The Real Running Mates: The State of the Political Spouse." Newsweek 15 May 2011. Web.
A candidate’s family can absolutely make or break an election. In many cases, people look to relate a candidate to their own personal lives as much as they possibly can, thus seeking similarities in their family units as well. The American public wants to see a family that thrives together and gives new families the perfect role models to aspire to. If a candidate makes a campaign tour and his wife is absent, it can severely damper his public image.
ReplyDeleteThe most important of the family positions in regards to politics is the candidate’s wife, or the potential first lady. These are truly remarkable women. They are by no means politicians but must go through the same trials and tribulations that their husbands do during the election season. “Parts of the role remain as they ever were: A political spouse should be poised and gracious and able to smile benignly for 16 hours straight while wearing pumps and panty hose in 100-degree heat. She should make frequent mention of how much she cherishes her role as wife and mother. And she should strive to look the part. Pretty is a plus. Sexy is a no-no. Packaging is key” (Cottie 2). I political first lady who I think covered each aspect of that description was Mrs. Laura Bush. During her eight years as our country’s first lady she adequately supported her husband and her efforts, all while maintaining a positive public image as a mother and an activist. A candidates entire family is also vital to their future success. By having children, their parents, even an all American god by their side, it creates an image that is comforting and as I mentioned before, relatable.
The saying “Behind every great man is an even greater woman” I feel is most applicable to our Presidents and First ladies. They all play pivotal roles in changing cultural aspects of America that they find fit, no matter how different their ideologies are. “They are certainly a pair of opposites, one a daughter of the Texas plains who became a teacher and librarian, the other a product of the South Side of Chicago who earned a law degree from Harvard. Mrs. Bush, now 67, married into one of the nation’s most prominent political families. Mrs. Obama, 50, married a fellow lawyer who went onto great heights. And yet neither seems especially enamored of politics, and each has carefully tailored her public role to suit her own priorities and tastes” (Baker). Both Mrs. Bush and Mrs. Obama have been able to have significant political and social impact in our country simply by doing what they feel is right. By taking the role of activist and role model, the First Lady’s position in the white house becomes almost as important as her husbands, if not more in some ways. Often times the First Lady is the more “humanized” of the two, attending more public forums and not appearing as business oriented all the time. If the First Lady can succeed at being liked by the public, both she and her husband can anticipate success during their presidential term.
Work Cited
Baker, Peter. "2 First Ladies Share Tales of Budding Partnership and Life in the Spotlight." New York Times 6 Aug. 2014. Web.
Cottle, M. (2011, May 15). The Real Running Mates: The state of the political spouse. Newsweek.
ReplyDeleteTo be noted as a “family man” in any circumstance would never be a bad thing. In politics being a “ family man” is an especially good thing. Because of how much a candidate’s image is important to the campaign nowadays everything with positive benefactors helps.
Personally, I think a candidate’s family is extremely important to his image. Many people can relate to one being a family man and I’ve seen first hand how a politically involved family handles themselves. My good friend’s father worked as a councilman and currently works as the Vice Chairman of the Board of Freeholders. Everyone in town knows them and loves them because they uphold their image better than some other families in the town. My friend always makes sure we’re never doing something that could potentially harm his father’s image so I can only imagine how other children whose parents are involved in politics think about their image. Position’s such as a Governor, Senator even the President, their family image is even more crucial especially during the time of a campaign. The amount of press that surrounds a candidate during a campaign makes it the perfect time to show the public and potential voters how dedicated one is to their family. If a candidate shows that he is a devoted and hard-working family man than I think they will do a good job in connecting with the public and becoming more approachable.
A spouse’s role when it comes to politics is always interesting to hear or read about. I think it is particularly important that the spouse of a candidate upholds their image positively. I also think it’s important for one to not become an essential part of politics. What I mean is that if the spouse works as a teacher or stay at home mom/dad then they shouldn’t get involved in the political aspect of things. It’s okay to show up to events and be supportive but I don’t think it is their obligation to help during a campaign as much as they’ve once been asked to.
“Media coverage of first ladies has evolved over the years and has played a significant role in shaping public expectations regarding the performance of the first lady position” (Burns 6). The fact that the press makes a big deal and is able to judge the performance of a first lady is a little ridiculous to me. I get it when it comes to cases like Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton and how playing the role the right way has only benefited to their careers but once again, if the spouse isn’t involved with politics I don’t think it is their job also, I don’t think they have anything to prove to the media that their doing a sufficient job.
I tend to disagree with the mold of what a political family is supposed to be and how involved a spouse should be but if it’s the first lady and they want to be involved than I think it is only right for them to be given a larger role. If their image is so important to their husband’s image than it’s only fair that they see their role in politics increase.
Work Cited
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Thomas Chamoun
ReplyDeleteCommentary on framing- “ it shapes all elements of the story, fitting them into a tidy package that audiences can quickly comprehend, since people are familiar with the conventions,” (Burns, 7). Framing is used to familiarize the audience with the information they are receiving. One convention that every American is familiar with is the perfect family. Whether you grew up in one or not, the image of the perfect family and fine trim lawn either relates to or is revered by the average citizen. This is why I would focus a lot of resources on molding this image as much as possible if I were a candidate.
On top of the American media is always looking for easy stories that get viewers to pay attention. The First Lady has been a symbol for all women to look at, scrutinize or sympathize with. Just as with female athletes much attention is paid to the appearance, and adherence to the tradition of the First Lady. The first lady must quit her job, if she didn’t there would be an outcry by the news media for breaking the tradition, (Neath). The news media acts in self-interest and wouldn’t want to miss out on all the interesting, easy coverage of The First Lady.
What can this relationship between the news media and the first lady do for The White House? It gives the opportunity for airtime, coverage and the following conjecture by pundits. The First Lady is excellent way to push certain issues, that relate to woman and children like school nutrition and child care. Like I stated in the intro, everyone has some sense of family life and these issues are relevant and important. The First Lady should be used as an arm of The White House because of her appeal to the press and news making ability on important issues that can be targeted to woman, children and people who care about families.
On the campaign trail The First Lady should be used as more than an arm, Neath refers to the excellent work that Michelle Obama did on the campaign trail for her husband, as well as the work done by Ladybird Johnson, (I was very impressed at what she had to say about Mrs. Johnson).
The role would be different for a progressive White House than a conservative White House. Whereas Michelle Obama’s base would want her to make changes and progress, a conservative White House might want to portray more of the “Laura Bush Traditionalist” role. This would be a more traditional role, but still one of involvement. “Over in deep-blue Massachusetts, Ann Romney’s achingly perfect, super-traditional momness was a turnoff for voters early in Mitt’s political career. It wasn’t until her 1998 MS diagnosis that she became a sympathetic and relatable figure,”(Cottie, 3).
The fact that the First Lady role is not an elected or paid position says everything you need to know about it. It is solidified and carried on by tradition, as well as the actions being dictated by tradition. It still plays an important role due to the press appeal associated with it. The role should be used as an instrument of The White House, just as a press secretary or other members of the staff. For conservatives, they should play to the base and have a woman that resembles the Laura Bush Traditionalist (haven’t done the research on what that entails). For progressives they should play to their base and follow the example of woman like Eleanor Roosevelt and Michelle Obama. Everything in politics should be a play to the base.
-Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
-Cottle, M. (2011, May 15). The Real Running Mates: The state of the political spouse. Newsweek.
-Neath, Scarlett. "What's the Point of a First Lady?" The Atlantic. 6 Oct. 2014. Web.
Image is one of the most important parts of a political campaign. It can often times say a lot about a canidates personality and priorities, but it doesn’t just stop with the them. Perhaps just as important as a candidates imagie is the image of his family. Nearly every candidate tries to perceive their family as the perfect American nuclear family because its relatable to voters and shows good character. The most important image besides the candidates is his wife. “ The position of the first lady is not outlines in the Consitution, yet it has been a part of American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the first lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations.”(Burns, 3) Highlighting the importance of first ladies, Burns mentions that the position has been part of the presidency since inception, and he’s right. Every president that has been in office has had a wife. The first lady has several important roles, even if they’re not “required”. They help appeal to female voters and even work first hand with white house charities. They’ve gone from classic housewife to an empowering figure for women with their own goals and jobs. “Standing beside your man with an adoring gaze remains a part of the job, only now you need to exhibit goals and interests of your own, a passion if not exactly a portfolio.” (Cottle) First ladies can even help difuse a tense political scandal. Take Bill Clintons Lewisnsky scandal. When it first was “Uncovered” many people believed Bill when he said nothing happened, partially because of Hillary. He told her that nothing had happened and she began sharing that message and her support on various talk shows. Women across America saw that Hillary believed him so they chose to too ( even if he admitted to later).
ReplyDeleteWhile family image is a crucial and important part of the campaign, there have been such extreme instances of image control in politics that cross the line of ethics. One instance in particular is the story of Rosemary Kennedy. One of JFK’s younger sisters, Rosemary was given a Lobotomy when her father feared she would ruin the Kennedy image with her behavior.(El-Hai) The lobotomy that failed rendered Rosemary “mentally retarded” where she was then sent to a mental home. During JFK’s campaign for presidency, he seldom mentioned his sister, and in the few times he did so he claimed she was busy helping teach mentally challenged children (El-Hai). It wasn’t until after he was elected president that JFK mentioned that Rosemary herself was actually mentally retarded, with no mention of the lobotomy. This was all done to try and “Maintain” the Kennedy image, and when it went wrong, the family stuffed it all under the rug to not ruin any future political careers. This family put their image before their own health and each other which to me is incredibly ethically wrong, but in the game of politics is not very suprising.
Works Cited:
Cottle, M. (2011, May 15). The Real Running Mates: The state of the political spouse. Newsweek.
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008
El-Hai, Jack. "The Exiled Kennedy." The Independent. Independent Digital News and Media, n.d. Web. 27th Oct. 2014.
A candidate’s family is extremely important to a candidate’s image. The American people, whether they admit it or not, expect their leader to perfect, or at least, they want them to be perfect. With that comes the expectation of the perfect family. I think a lot of this also comes from Kennedy. I think the Kennedy’s being the image of a perfect family and being the first first family of the television era created a standard that candidates nowadays have to live up to. I also think the faults in a candidate’s life make the voters question their ability to lead. I think many voters see a candidate with an imperfect family and say to themselves “if they can’t take care of their own family, how can they take care of the country.”
ReplyDeleteAs for what role should the spouses play in campaigns and in the White House today, I believe it should be different than it actually is today. When I say “different”, I mean that they should be interpreted differently in the media and by the public. I think that the media and the voters pick apart the spouse too much. Looking at what they’re wearing and how they act. It’s too superficial and it’s unfair in my opinion. It’s just wasting time talking about things that do not make a difference, especially considering that we do not elect the spouse, we elect the candidate. “However, celebrity can also be limiting because the individual is often lost in the image. A celebrity ‘represents something other than itself. The material reality of the celebrity sign—that is, the actual person who is at the core of the representation— disappears into a cultural formation of meaning.’ Such is the case with first ladies, who are often reduced by journalists to representations of American womanhood through the practice of personification framing.” (Burns, 11) That’s what happens when we talk about what the first lady is wearing. We limit them to their image and we make them a celebrity. This transitions well to my position on their role in the White House.
In the White House, I generally agree with the First Lady’s role today where she usually has her own issue that she is fighting for. I think that this is a good role but the difference I envision is to just strengthen this role. This again goes back to the press. Make her less of an image based social figure and more of “a legitimate voice on cultural and political issues.” (Burns, 11) I think a lot of times today, whatever the First Lady’s initiative is, is treated like a afterthought. With being the First Lady comes a certain amount of social power that can be utilized to do a lot of good. But I think that we generally fall into gender stereotypes. “Yet, because press coverage often focused on first ladies as wives, mothers, and homemakers, the same stories that constructed these women as public figures simultaneously reinforced the idea that women's primary domain continued to be within the home.” (Burns, 7)
Its been a long time since the Kennedy’s gave us the image of the perfect family, and I think it’s time that we all stop expecting candidate’s to have them nowadays, especially knowing that the Kennedy’s weren’t so perfect. With this, we also need to drop our expectations of spouses. Let them decide. Whether they want to be just a wife and mother or if they want to be more of an issue leader, it should be their choice. Our media and society should be accepting enough to allow that.
Works Cited:
Burns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Even if you don’t think political spouses should be important, there is undeniable public interest. Lisa Burns argues that “Media coverage of first ladies has evolved over the years and has played a significant role in shaping publics expectations regarding the performance of the first lady position.” (Burns, 6). In response, politicians and the consultants who run their campaigns make the first lady’s and their family’s part of the campaign.
ReplyDeleteOne of the biggest talking points for democrats this election cycle is that Republicans are conducting a War on Women. Meanwhile Florida congressman Alan Grayson is in the middle of a very messy divorce.
Lolita Grayson claims her husband physically abused her. Alan Grayson says she's lying. He claims his wife, originally from the Philippines, was already married when they tied the knot in 1990. She says she was divorced at the time, had signed divorce papers in 1981. She claims she threw him out of the house in January because he was cheating an accusation to which he has not responded publicly.
The details on the divorce are not as important as the effect the process is having on Alan Grayson’s character.
After 24 years of marriage, the millionaire Orlando congressman is looking for a loophole. He's looking to lawyer his way out of any obligation to pay a dime of alimony or child support to his wife with whom he has five children.
Grayson’s behavior is not much better than 2012 primary candidate for president, Newt Gingrich, who in the early 1980s tried to discuss divorce terms with first wife Jackie Battley while she was in the hospital battling cancer. And while that was going on, he was cheating on her with his second wife, Marianne Ginther. I know that in Gingrich's case, polling experts always maintained the callous treatment of his ex-wives cost him votes.
Some people might argue that the reason Romney and Ryan lost the elections was because their wives were portrayed in a role that many modern American women could not relate to. Both women were soft spoken stay at home moms at a time when half of today’s law students are women and nearly a quarter of married women out earn their husbands, the lives of First and Second ladies rarely reflect the real lives of American women.
Not all political wives are just people in the background many have a major effect on campaigns. Burns notes that, “The position of first lady is not outlined in the Constitution, yet it has been a part of the American presidency since inception. There are no set rules or guidelines, yet the first lady assumes important duties and faces high expectations” (Burns 3) A first lady who has exceeded expectations has to be Michelle Obama. Michelle often offers her opinion about issues that affect her personally, such as being a working mom and overcoming obstacles, which plays well with key voting groups like working women and minorities.
The role of spouses in presidential politics is evolving, from one of smiling wife to visible partner complete with appearance schedule, entourage and opinions. With this, though, comes greater potential to be either an asset or a liability. Consultants should exercise caution before making family an essential part of their campaign.
Works Cited
ReplyDeleteBurns, Lisa M. First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Edelman, Adam. "Florida Rep. Alan Grayson Accuses Wife of Bigamy in Divorce Papers." NY Daily News. N.p., 29 Apr. 2014. Web. 28 Oct. 2014
Bobic, Igor. "Florida Congressman's Messy Divorce Gets Messier." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 16 Oct. 2014. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.
Ross, Brian, and Rhonda Schwartz. "Exclusive: Gingrich Lacks Moral Character to Be President, Ex-Wife Says." ABC News. ABC News Network, 19 Jan. 2012. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.
Bellware, Kim. "Michelle Obama Hits Midwestern States To Rally Young Voters, Women And Minorities." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 08 Oct. 2014. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.