How has the 24-7 news cycle impacted
political communication? List at least two positives and two negatives of the
constant coverage of politics. Use examples to support your answer. For
readings, refer to at least one reading from this week and one of the class
readings from earlier this semester.
By: Taylor Popielarz
ReplyDeleteCable news has created what is known as the 24-7 news cycle. This cycle has become a vicious and hungry beast that craves content and scandal like no other. To say that this monster has impacted political communication is a sincere understatement. Cable news, and its unending cycle, has completely reformed and reshaped political communication. It has helped turn politics into an ever-publicized performance; a new type of theater. And to pinpoint how this all has happened, I place a spotlight on the leading cable news networks, CNN and Fox News Channel.
In Jeffrey Jones’ “Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture,” the lifetime of cable news and its never-ending cycle is analyzed. Jones takes a look at the good, the bad and the ugly of television news, and weighs in on whether or not television news is healthy and good for our political system. “From a cognitive perspective, Doris Graber mounts a defense of television news programming by arguing that audiovisual materials are quite important in individual learning about politics, and that citizens are therefore engaged with politics when processing political information that appears on television” (Jones, 22).
To think of two positives of the constant coverage of politics on cable news, I look at how journalism has become the true watchdog of political activity, especially in the United States. Though CNN and Fox News Channel sway in certain political directions usually, their unending coverage of everything political allows politicians to know that every one of their moves, both politically and personally, is being watched. I site this as a positive because it often allows faulty political figures to come down off their pedestal when something negative is unearthed about them. Whether you look at CNN’s Drew Griffin revealing the scandalous behavior going on in Veteran Affairs hospitals around the country, leading to a prominent resignation, or to the infamous Watergate Scandal, constant news coverage certainly holds political figures to a certain level of proper behavior. “In short, these pundits are not commentators on the system – they and their shows are the system” (Jones, 46).
A second positive example is the 24-7 news cycle’s way of keeping the average citizen and voter informed. It sounds cliché and somewhat cheesy, but always having content on television allows someone to watch, learn and become informed at basically any hour of the day. It allows a voter to feel as if they are a part of the political system, that their thoughts and vote matters. “…New media platforms such as social networking sites and massively multiplayer video games provide an important means through which media users now obtain the skills necessary to engage in cultural and political participating, crafting in the process what he calls a new form of ‘participatory culture’” (Jones 23). The 24-7 news cycle is offering viewers the skills necessary to engage in their community, and country, politically.
(Taylor Popielarz, cont'd)
ReplyDeleteBut, like most things, where there is a good side, there is a bad side. And cable news certainly has some bad sides to it. One negative of the constant coverage of politics is that the hungry beast that is 24-7 news sometimes is served a subpar meal. Take CNN or Fox News Channel, for example, when they can only discuss Hillary’s latest hairdo, or President Obama’s choice of suit color. It is moments like this when viewers realize that on slow news days, or weeks, a 24-7 news cycle will become desperate, and will fill your television with garbage.
Another negative of the 24-7 news cycle is the now pertinent desire to publicize and broadcast scandals. Though some scandals are certainly important and vital to our political system, cable news has refashioned scandalous behavior so that a sex scandal is now comparable to playing a round of golf on a Sunday. “The increasing visibility of political leaders creates conditions which increase the likelihood of political scandal. The more the lives of political leaders are made visible to others…the more likely it is that the previously hidden activities which conflict with the images that leaders wish to project will emerge in the public domain” (Thompson, 108). It is when the 24-7 news cycle resorts to this behavior that our political system is negatively impacted because of the substantial role it plays in politics. “Street contends that politicians not only use the arts and techniques of popular culture in instrumental ways, but that in doing so, politicians ‘are also being changed – in their language and their priorities, and in the way they are ‘read’ by their citizens’” (Jones, 24). Thanks to the power of the media, the way a politician is now read by their citizens essentially is up to how cable news and other forms of media choose to present that political figure.
Works Cited
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Thompson, John B. Political Scandal: Power and Visibility in the Media Age. Cambridge: Polity, 2000. Print.
In 1980, CNN was the first network to premier 24-hour news coverage. Since then others such as Fox have followed. Television was growing in popularity and 24-hour news coverage was a great was to keep people informed. Today 24-hour news may still be positive in some aspects but also is very negative.
ReplyDeleteLets start with the positive aspects of 24-hour news coverage. 24 hour news keeps viewers informed at all hours of the day, this may be important to people that don’t have time to keep on news during the day. This is especially important during election years. The information is constantly in your face giving you no choice but to pay attention to it. “Doris Garber mounts a defense of television news programming by arguing that audiovisual materials are quite important in individual learning about politics, and that citizens are therefore engaged with politics when processing political information that appears on television.” (Jones, 22). According to the Jones reading TV is important to teaching viewers about politics and I think that’s one of the few reasons 24-hour coverage is still around.
The viewers learn about politicians through 24-hour news. They share the candidate’s successes and downfalls in order to educate the viewer. 24 hour news cycles give you a chance to learn more about the candidate than their commercials tell you which we discussed in the blogs two weeks ago. If there wasn’t constant coverage I feel as though most Americans would base their opinions and votes off what they saw during the commercials of their favorite TV shows.
Slowly but surely I think that 24 hour news coverage on TV will decline, with access to internet everywhere you can it seems silly to constantly run news on TV. People can easily stay up to date on their cell phones without ever turning the TV on and I think that’s what many people do instead of watching the news. The Internet allows users to view content more quickly but only to access what they want too.
Some negatives of 24-hour coverage are that it is expensive and it gets repetitive. Like I said in the previous paragraph I think the Internet is slowly replacing TV news. I think networks are spending large amounts of money to have news covered 24/7 when it could easily be covered online for half the price. Of course people like to watch TV and videos but I think more busy Americans will go online for their news rather than watching it on TV.
I also think that 24 hour news coverage gets repetitive, they share the same stories over and over, I understand that different people may be viewing at different times but it’s still repetitive. What happens if no new stories break through out the day then they are forced to repeat stories or make small stories into something bigger than they are. I think this is part of the reason why there are so many scandals. Since news networks might not have anything big to report on there may report on small things that happen and make it a way bigger deal then it should be.
I think in the upcoming decade that 24-hour TV news will slowly diminish. There are so many other ways to get news that I think networks will switch to an easier and cheaper way such as the Internet.
Work Cited:
"Inside CNN." CNN. Cable News Network, n.d. Web. 11 Oct. 2014. .
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
It is clear that the 24/7 coverage of political issue affects the political process and political communication. Since television was introduced to the political sphere after the 1960 election between Kennedy and Nixon, the news has both helped and hindered the political process. Illustrated in Political Campaign Communication, “Not only is U.S. mass media consumption unequaled, but in no other nation is it so inextricably linked to the electoral process. Mass communication has become the center stage for all major political events” (Trent 118). This shows that the constant flow of media is directly correlated to the political process.
ReplyDeleteSome positive aspects of 24/7 news reports are that global issues are televised. Issues that affect the global communities are being viewed by the average American and politicians. Political official are forced to take action now more than ever. For example the genocide in Sierra Leone from 1991-2002 was an international event that affect many countries including the United States. People were being exposed to things that they were not aware of that was going on in the world. They were able to see the atrocities that were going on in the world around them. This issue became the topic of discussion in the United States; people wanted the United States to act. The public opinion is one of the most important parts of the political process, which is one of the many reasons why the United States and the United nations got involved in the conflict (Adam). The constant news coverage was crucial to the war genocide in Sierra Leone because it got other countries involved in a war they could not end on their own.
Constant news coverage is important now more than ever because it is a source of communication. Television, radio, newspapers are a way to communicate policies and ideologies to the mass. This is especially important during election time. This is the only way to reach everyone no matter the demographic. This is crucial because it is important for democracy. It keeps the public informed of the relevant and irrelevant issue that are going on in the government everything from what the president wore from what the president is going to do about ISIS. Regardless if you think it is important or not you can easily be informed about it by simply turning on the television.
On the other hand constant news can have a negative effect to political communication. For example, politicians are becoming celebrities because of the news. According to Jeffery Jones, “The same period also witnessed the fluidity between the fields of politics and media. The traditional revolving door between government and industry became much more high profile. Politicians who once garnered media attention while serving in some capacity as government officials or political candidates became media celebrities…”(Jones 49). This is bad because politician are losing their true motives for why they are doing what they are doing and what they are doing because they are preoccupied with the glam or being in the public eye. It takes away from the political process because many people like Rob Blagojevich let power and the limelight get to his head. Also reporting things like Obama shouldn’t wear a tan suit is making him seem like a celebrity because people are commenting on his wardrobe and lifestyle more than his political views.
Lastly reporters are starting to have no boundaries. They will get a story at any cost. This is connected to the idea that politician are now seen as celebrities; which give he reports the right to follow them around and pry in to their lives. For example, The Gary Hart scandal the reporters followed the mistress from throughout the country then reporter stayed outside of Gary Hart’s house. Although his actions were not moral, doesn’t he have the right to space and privacy? Main stream news outlets are starting to have tabloid tendencies.
ReplyDeleteOverall, news coverage is important to the political process, it helps the American people through the political process, which is the sole job of mass media.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 7th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011
Smith, Adam M. After Genocide: Bringing the Devil to Justice. Amherst, NY: Prometheus, 2009. Print.
Anne Noordsy
ReplyDeleteWe live in the “digital age” as well as a 24-7 news cycle. This has created positive and negative effects for political communication. The 24-7 coverage of politics has become an essential in our everyday lives. People can turn on the TV at anytime during the day or night and watch discussions about the elections, live-coverage of events or public debates over issues. As a society, we want immediate news especially covering politics and campaigns.
One negative aspect of constant news coverage of political communication is determining who is truly an expert on the topic of politics. News coverage with “political experts dominates both network and cable political programming” (Jones 2), however, during the 1990s, change came about regarding political news coverage. “In particular, that change has been associated with the addition of talk not by political insiders, but inclusive now of those who position themselves outside the conventional wisdom and sense-making of political elites” (Jones 2). The issue that arises here is that audiences cannot be sure of whom to trust regarding accuracy of news coverage. On one side, there are defined experts, but on the other side, there are people who claim they are experts. Who can audiences rely on to deliver factual information?
Another negative aspect of constant news coverage of political communication is “pundit television.” A pundit is defined as an expert in a particular subject or field who is frequently called on to give opinions about it to the public. It can be beneficial to have this outside source of information, however, a “conclusion that can be drawn from pundit television is that its reality belies the argument that those with high levels of political knowledge will offer the highest forms of rational political discourse. What pundit television has clearly shown is that more often than not, their public presentations are pure spectacle” (Jones 3). The conflict of reporters and experts or pundits being objective also comes into play. Discussing information on certain political topics is good, but it can be a challenge for reporters, experts, and pundits to present both sides. For example, this is a common difficulty with FOX news channel relaying news with a very conservative, right-winged attitude.
On the contrary, this 24-7 news cycle has benefits. Television has an impact on voter decisions. “Television may be more powerful in its campaign coverage than print media ever was because it can have a dramatic effect on voter choice” (Semiatin 141). In summary, this news coverage keeps audiences informed as well as active citizens therefore allowing viewers to be engaged politically. “Fundamentally, television put the media at the heart of political power in the United States by supplanting means of communication that favored political institutions such as parties, and by separating these institutions from their own elected officials” (Semiatin 142). Lastly, with political news being available 24-7, access is available at our fingertips. This is a positive quality because in modern society, not everyone has the time to watch or read the news at certain hours of the day. It is convenient that news is available, especially political news, 24-7.
24-7 political news coverage has its positives and negatives. It has defined voter decisions as well as aided in general comprehension of voters but there are also its drawbacks. Sometimes, this news coverage is merely a spectacle and sensationalism and sometimes the input from pundits, experts, and reporters are bias and not objective. However, where would politics be without this coverage?
Sources:
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Semiatin, Richard. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. USA: CQ Press, 2013. Print.
Lindsay Goldstein
ReplyDeleteThrough technological advancements, news has emerged as a 24-7 cycle. News is literally constantly at your fingertips, and cable is a major reason why. As Jeffrey Jones states in the chapter, “From Insiders to Outsiders,” “cable programmers offered new forms of political talk television,” (44). Jones specifically mentions the creation of two cable news channels, Fox News and MSNBC, writing that they both “lead the way in transforming cable news into channels that primarily feature ideologically driven forms of talk programming rather than older-style forms of traditional television news reporting,” (44). This transition has significantly impacted all forms of news, especially political news, and has both positives and negatives for our society.
Today, political news is 24-7, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. You simply can’t escape it; wherever you go, some sort of news is being shared. As a result, our society has become much more informed, which is definitely one of the biggest pros of the new 24-7 cycle. While you used to have to work to find political news, you now have to work to avoid it, because it is everywhere. If society is more informed, then they will elect the more deserving politician, which will ultimately benefit the public.
Another positive of the 24-7 news cycle is its accessibility. News is available through many different mediums, from television, the Internet, to newspapers and the radio. Since news is extremely accessible, it makes it possible for everyone, young and old, to gather the information. This contributes to the informed society that 24-7 news allows, and is another important benefit.
The constant sharing and accessibility of news is also a negative, as it allows negative aspects of politics to become very public. As bad as they are for campaigns in the first place, scandals, for example, are only made worse by the 24-7 news cycle. As Thompson writes in his text, “By virtue of their mediated publicness, the actions or events which lie at the heart of the mediated scandals are made visible to others who were not present at the time and place of their occurrence, and who may be situated in spatially distant locales,” (62). It doesn’t have to be a real scandal, either. Something as miniscule as a politician accidently flubbing their words during a speech will be replayed over and over again, becoming all that America sees, and potentially ruining the politician’s chances of victory, over one little, harmless mistake.
Another negative of the constant, 24-hour flow of news is that it can distract politicians from their task at hand. Joseph Graf and Jeremy D. Mayer write, “Television has forced politicians at all levels of American campaigns to pay more attention to their looks than ever before,” (qtd. in Semiatin, 141), which can take away from their responsibilies. If they know that speeches and appearances will be televised and aired constantly on the news, their focus could shift from that, to the actual news itself. Not only does their physical appearance and image matter greatly, but they also become high-profile, celebrity-like figures. Jones mentions the time in which politics and the media became “fluid,” writing that “The traditional revolving door between government and industry became much more high-profile,” 49). With the current 24-7 news cycle, politicians are becoming more concerned with their celebrity status and less about the politics, which is a major concern for the public.
Works Cited:
Graf, Joseph and Jeremy D. Mayer. “Campaign Press Coverage – Instantaneous.”
Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. Ed. Richard J. Semiatin. Washington, D.C.: CQ,
2008. Print.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd
ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Thompson, John B. Political Scandal: Power and Visibility in the Media Age.
Cambridge: Polity Press, 2000. Print.
The explosion of 24/7 news media I believe has profoundly changed political communications. News media today is constantly searching for new content and information, thus it has forced politicians to focus more on image, provides more information to the public and has result in more pundits. As such, the 24 hour news cycle is both positive and negative for political communications.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I believe that 24/7 news is more positive for the average citizen while it can be more negative for politicians. The biggest positive of the 24/7 news cycle is that audiences can be more informed and are given a constant flow of information. Citizens no longer have to wait for the daily newspaper or nightly newscast to get the latest developments. Rather audiences can now follow stories practically in real time. This is a positive for citizens that wish to be as informed as possible and want to get as much information on political issues as possible. The 24/7 news cycle goes beyond just displaying news stories; the need for more content has led to news talk shows which feature pundits. In Chapter 3 of Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture Jeffery Jones describes how these news talk shows, such as Meet the Press, began in the late 1940s and similar shows have continued be used in programming into today. Jones states how these types of shows can be beneficial: “The show was based in the belief that because journalists are the closest independent observes of actions occurring in the political arena, they would offer the most informed yet impartial opinion of what was really going on.” (Jones, 45) In theory, the increase in newscasts and news talk shows allows audiences to have more information and also allows journalists to share more insights with their audiences. Another positive is audiences can potentially feel as if they have more access to politicians. Between constant television news and social media content, audiences are able to closely monitor politicians and candidates actions.
However, the 24/7 news cycle can also be negative as well. While news talk shows can provide new perspectives to audiences, they can also come at the expense of being biased or partial. Pundits on political talk shows can have a very specific ideology and thus can impose their opinion on an issue and also choose to ignore certain perspective or aspects of a story. Jones continues to describe the problematic nature of pundits: “critics contend that pundit programs are, in essence, somewhat dangerous, because these journalists tend to spout opinions on all sorts of issues and events that they generally have little knowledge of as reporters (hence they aren’t really expert thinkers, just expert talkers).” (Jones, 45)
Another negative of the constant news cycle is the necessity for politicians to focus on image. With more networks in need of content and searching for stories to attract larger audiences, media carefully scrutinizes politicians’ image and personal lives. Now more than ever politicians need to ensure that they have a positive image in the news media. One example of how news focuses on image is Obama golfing during on his day off last month. The story, while not a political issue, was covered extensively in news and was a hotly debated issue on talk shows. Judith Trent in chapter 3 states “Image should also be considered in terms of the impressions voters have-what they believe to be true or untrue”. (Trent, 72) Image in the 24/7 news cycle can be extremely important since small decisions, like Obama golfing, can have an impact on reputation and the public’s perception
Work Cited:
Delete•Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010
•Trent, Judith S.; Friedenberg, Robert V.; Denton, Robert E., Jr.. Political Campaign Communication : Principles and Practices. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2011. Ebook Library. Web. 22 Sep. 2014.
Television when it began was not something that everyone had access to. As the Depression ended, television began to be seen in every household in America. For politics, this became a new medium to present viewers with information. Channels began to appear that brought more politics to the people. The 24-7 news cycle impacted politics in both good and bad ways.
ReplyDeleteThe good impacts that 24-7 news cycles brought to politics were brought new ways to view politicians as well as bringing viewers more into the mix. The 24-7 news found news channels directed at bringing political news to the people. Taking vox pop programming: “‘outsider’ political voice in the mode of talk radio” (Jones 55), and bringing it to television. Broadcasting of political news used to run on the belief: “that those doing the talking should have direct ‘insider’ knowledge of what they are talking about… The assumption is built on the belief that such speech is designed primarily to inform or educate, not fulfill other functions of political communication” (Jones 43). As the 24-7 news’s casts became more about gaining viewers, the news programming changed: “a full-frontal attack on the long running understanding that television news should center on the reporting of information, doing so in a fair, unbiased, and nonpartisan manner” (Jones 59). Programming became more about spectacles to draw viewers in: “Fox News may operate under the label of ‘news’ but the excessive style of discursive spectacles and the alignment with and flattering of the viewing public is ultimately just political talk programming with a different name” (Jones 59-60). By making it about the audience, they bring in viewers by giving them programming about politics they like rather than push things they do not like.
The bad aspects of the 24-7 news cycles are that often times they are pushing the same thing over and over again and that a channel’s decision to focus on one party can cost its viewers important aspects of the campaign. Similar to advertisements, 24-7 news cycles often berate candidates through an interviewer. These shows are similar to assault advertisements: “those directly assaulting the character, motivations, associates, or actions of an opponent” (Trent 153). Television channels began to make themselves dividable. Viewers know which channels aim to be more of a Republican channel or Democratic channel. Fox and MSNBC are two of those channels. Viewers know Fox to be more Republican aimed and MSNBC to be more Democratic: “MSNBC and Fox had become opposite sides of the same coin in featuring ideological talk that flattered their audience by tending to the audience’s emotions” (Jones 60). The seen biases of the networks have caused issues because the other parties do not want them to host things: “Democrats refused to allow Fox News to host a Democratic Party debate due to its perceived biases. Similarly, delegates and party officials at the Republican National Convention openly lashed out at NBC by arguing that it was tainted by the same liberalism that dominated the cable network” (Jones 60).
The 24-7 news’s casts caused both good and bad aspects of politics. While it found many ways to draw in viewers, viewers often gained biased views. In many ways, television continues to be a crucial aspect of politics. Candidates bring their ideas to the voters by going on talk shows, giving debates, advertisements and so much more.
Works Cited:
ReplyDeleteJones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Trent, Judith S. "Communicative Types and Functions of Televised Political Advertising." Political Campaign Communication: Principles & Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. 145-174. Print.
Emily Fagan
ReplyDeleteIn the past 30 years, 24-7 news has impacted the way we view political communications. To the politicians today, the never ending new cycle is a way to make their voices heard. “Todays politicians use these shows to make news and make waves. They use them to send signals to their allies and to the opposition. And they use them to evaluate their own packaging and marketing efforts” (Jones 46).
Something positive that can come out of the constant coverage of politics is that the voter is always updated. When it comes to elections, the voter wants to know everything about a candidate to make their decision. But without the never-ending news, they wouldn’t be able to. The September 11th terrorist attacks were something that will never be forgotten. When it happened, America was looking for answers. Fox News became the rating leaders after the attacks because they kept the viewer updated. “The political mood of the country had changed from one of the know-it-all viewers in a robust America to a public desperate for answers after one of the most puzzling and disturbing events in American history. Placing American flag banners in the corner of each screen, Fox embraced the flag and its own patriotic hubris to establish an emotional connection with viewers by cheerleading the Bush administration’s ‘War on Terror’…” (Jones 59). Fox News was very supportive and gave the country comfort in a time of need.
Another positive of constant news is that it helps voters who may not be educated on certain subjects. Even if the voter cannot be at a television watching the news, the new media that is in place today can help voters be even more informed; there are always updates you can get on you phone with just the tap of a button. “Speed is the most obvious but far from the only change that the Internet is making upon the way campaigns appear to the American public- and the Internet is now an indispensable part of news coverage. Given the declining ratings for national news networks and the even more rapid decline in newspaper circulation, campaign news has begun to go online all the time” (Graf 139). For voters who may not have the time to watch television or read the paper, the Internet is always around you. Whether they are on the phone, or as their work computer it makes it easier for them to be informed.
Fagan contin...
ReplyDelete24-hour programming can also be a negative thing. There is not always something to report about all the time, so what’s the point? News networks need to cut the fluff and just stick to the important stuff. Fox News, CNN and MSNBC are among the top news channels. They are all fighting to be the best station, which means that they are trying to get the most coverage. “Though broadcast network historically absorb new programming costs, cable news network don’t have that luxury. Hence, as competition between the three quickly ramped up, the networks turned to talk as cheap means of filling a 24-hour programming schedule. In short what has occurred is that these ‘news’ channels actually program more hours of talk shows than news” (Jones 59). These means that the people are not getting the right information that they need, which no longer allows them to be educated on the subject matter.
Another negative can be that there are too many options on certain topics. Political Pundits can be a great way to get information, but they can also be unreliable. There are a lot of Pundits on television and social media today. So it is hard to figure out which on you should listen to. “Rather than simply an annoying gadfly role, critics contend that pundit programs are, in essence, somewhat dangerous, because these journalists tend to spout opinions of all sorts of issues and events that they generally have little knowledge of as reporters (hence, they aren’t really expert thinkers, just expert talkers)” (Jones 45). Pundits, although helpful and somewhat informative, can be harmful to the voters thought process.
24-7 news has impacted political communications in a multitude of ways. For the most part it can be extremely helpful, it can also be extremely hurtful to the viewers perception of today politics.
Work Cited
Graf, Joseph. Mayer, Jeremy D.. “Campaign Press Coverage- Instantaneous.” Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. Ed. Richard J. Semiatin. Washington,
D.C.: CQ, 2008. Print.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 20
Jack Holiver
ReplyDeleteBlog 6
10/14/14
At 1:30 in the clear morning of March 8th, 2014, air traffic controllers lost verbal communication with Malaysia flight-370, a Boeing 777 carrying 239 people on board. This was the beginning of one of greatest and most disturbing aviation mysteries since Amelia Earhart disappeared over the Pacific Ocean in 1937. Perhaps the most disturbing details of the missing flight-370 was the fact there are no details. So little is known as to what happened that people speculate we will never find flight, which presumably landed somewhere in the Indian Ocean. One news source that couldn’t cover this story enough was CNN. Jon Stewart said it best when ranting about the poor journalism coming from CNN’s reports on the missing airliner: “It [the news coverage] was an accurate and humble assessment from CNN. Until they realized, ‘oh [explicit] we still have twenty-three hours and fifty-nine minutes left to fill… [Explicit] lets go nuts’” (Stewart, 2014). There has never been a period of time where I have seen such speculation come from a news media outlet. Despite there being virtually no information at the time, CNN continued their around-the-clock coverage, tainting what little facts we had.
In a more political sense, 24-hour political coverage has watered down the excitement of breaking news. It’s almost impossible to go anywhere without being in the presence of a TV. In people’s homes, restaurants, offices, etc. TVs are everywhere and if they are not tuned into sports, they’re tuned in on the news. In “Rethinking television’s Relationship to Civic Engagement,” the author agrees on the effects TVs have in politics: “in the era of media convergence…the conception that television is synonymous with passivity is no longer tenable” (Jones, 25). Another story that was over-covered by all the news outlets was the 2012 election. Several months before the election took place, various news stations were lionizing the candidates they endorsed with such depth they delivered false information including biased polls. Special Report with Bret Baier asked viewers to weigh in on who would win over the state of Ohio, President Obama or Mitt Romney. While majority of polling institutes had Obama at a slight lead, Fox reported Romney would win with 90% of votes in favor of the republican candidate.
During the start of his presidency, President Obama made his first bad remark when he commented prematurely on the actions of police officers responding to a potential break-in at a Harvard University professor’s house. When asked by a reporter what his response is, Obama claimed the police officers acted “stupidly.” As mentioned in “Campaigns on the Cutting Edge,” people tend to focus more on personality rather than issues because of television media: “Television contributed directly to the decline of issues and the rise of personality…” (Graf and Mayer, 141). He then quickly retracted these statements and invited both the officer and professor to the White House for a cordial meeting that became known as the Beer Summit. Because of this constant coverage, the president of the U.S. was kept in check and reminded how much of an effect his comments have on citizens.
The second example of a time when 24/7 news was beneficial is during the night of an election. Many election results, including the presidential election, may not provide an answer until late at night, when most non-twenty-four hour news sources are offline. Because of the constant coverage, we are able to receive the breaking news updates and become informed as soon as possible as to who the winning candidate is.
Works Cited:
John Stewart, The Daily Show, March 24th, 2014
"New Poll Shows Romney, Obama Appear Tied in Ohio." Fox News. FOX News Network, 28 Oct. 2012. Web. 14 Oct. 2014.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
"New Poll Shows Romney, Obama Appear Tied in Ohio." Fox News. FOX News Network, 28 Oct. 2012. Web. 14 Oct. 2014.
As the world of politics has rapidly evolved, so has the world of news and political media coverage. “Cable television in the mid 1990’s gave birth to a handful of programs and channels offering an eclectic array of programing featuring audience centered political talk. NBC, multi media/Gannett, CNN, C-SPAN, and the Free Congress Foundation all constructed programs or entire cable channels dedicated to offering an “outsider” political voice in the mode of talk radio” (Jones 55). The world of 24-hour television has grown this development even further. The 24-hour news cycle offers a constant opportunity for the public to become informed on a variety of issues, both American and worldly. This constant news cycle however has some doubting what is now defined as political news or what is strictly tabloid.
ReplyDeleteThe availability of the 24-hour news cycle has had a variety of positive impacts in regards to political communication. One of the biggest advantages that the 24-hour news cycle provides to political communication is coverage during a campaign year. At any given time on any day of the week an American citizen can turn on a cable news network and be informed of the Presidential candidates and where they currently stand. The networks work round the clock to try and provide the most comprehensive coverage of the whereabouts of both candidates and how their progress is coming along. In many ways however, this can be a tremendous disadvantage to the candidates. “ And in the 2008 early campaign, it may well be that such mainstream news coverage of “interesting” verses “important” stories, the obvious partisanship of cable news networks such as Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC, as well as the increased dominance of popular culture media, had contributed to a growing public skepticism about the trustworthiness of the press.” (Trent 81). The 24-hour news cycle in many ways generates a large variety of issues with the public, being that they cannot tell if something is being broadcasted because it is legitimate news or it is just a story being used to fill gaps of time. Another glaring disadvantage to the 24-hour news cycle is the tendency to lean one specific way politically. What I mean by this is that due to a need to fill time and the constant political conversation, 24-hour news cycles tend to lean to one side, the prime examples being Fox News as conservative and MSNBC as liberal. The fact that they in many ways affiliate with a specific party can easily turn off views and to some people give them what is to be considered as a diluted opinion.
One advantage that the 24-hour news cycle provides is that because it is constantly on, it does an excellent job at tackling breaking news and how politicians react to it. For example, within the past few weeks, the terrorist group ISSIS has been a major threat to the safety of America. When President Obama ordered that airstrikes were performed on ISSIS, not only did CNN have immediate coverage of this action, but they had in depth comprehensive coverage for the rest of the night into the morning as well. This type of coverage provides the public with a good opportunity to stay informed with issues currently at hand and informing them on how their politicians are handling it.
Works Cited
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 7th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011
The 24-hour news cycle has completely changed politics and political communication. One major affect has been the increased demand for news stories and increased speed with which they are reported. Politicians and their staffs must be on constant alert for any stories.
ReplyDeleteIn the days before cable news, reporters would often times protect the secrets of politicians. For instance, White House reporters knew about FDR’s polio but never reported it. Reporters also knew about JFK’s philandering. Both cases involve stories that reporters would not shy away from today. The 24-hour news cycle has created a competition between news networks for viewers because of money. Therefore, reporters are always looking for that scoop that will bring viewers to their networks. Political communications professionals now have to be aware of all these secrets and work to keep the press from finding out because the press will not protect politicians like they did in the past.
Some positives regarding the constant coverage of politics are that it keeps politicians honest about what they are doing and it also provides the public with the constant coverage that is well suited for the various schedules people keep. One example of how media keeps politicians honest is fact checking, particularly during debates. During debates, candidates used to be able to frame facts in order for the facts to support their overall point. This cannot happen anymore because many organizations have now begun to fact check candidates during a debate. If a candidate throws out a fact that they have framed in a specific way, these organizations will expose that and inform the public on the truth. The 24-hour news cycle also has so much potential in being able to engage and involve the voters in different ways. The 24-hour news cycle has lead to the development of social media has a place for voters and campaigns to interact about issues. “In Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, Michael Turk says, “Nowhere is the power of the empowered voter more apparent than in the rise of social networks. Social networks and social sharing sites allow influential voters to curate their own content – creating, aggregating, and disseminating news and information to their circle of friends and contacts. (Turk, 58)
(cont.) However, some negatives are that the 24-hour news cycle is requires constant content and it also has made campaigns less about policy and more about image. With news, candidates may only get a quick sound bite of only a few seconds each day to make a statement to voters. There’s not time to get into details about policies. It’s all about how they look on camera and how well they speak. According to Graf and Mayer in Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, “The more access we have to the personalities and personal conduct of our leaders, the greater the likelihood we might vote on such ephemera as appearance and personality.” (Graf & Mayer, 150) The other negative I mention is the amount of content required. When that content is not there, when there are no stories, cable networks turn to discussions that occasionally over sensationalize certain stories. “Since 1996, Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC have been the leading networks featuring political talk programming on cable, largely depending on talk to support the bottom line. The reason, of course, is that hard news reporting is expensive to produce…Hence, as competition between the three quickly ramped up, the networks turned to talk as a cheap means of filling a 24-hour programming schedule. In short, what has occurred is that these ‘news’ channels actually program more hours of talk shows than news.” (Jones, 59)
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
Graf, Joseph & Mayer, Jeremy D. "Campaign Press Coverage – Instantaneous." Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2008. Print.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Robinson, Piers. "Media as a Driving Force in International Politics: The CNN Effect and Related Debates." Globalpolicyjournal.com. Global Policy Journal, 8 Oct. 2013. Web. .
Turk, Michael. "Social and New Media – An Evolving Future." Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2008. Print.
Part One
ReplyDeleteThe 24-7 news cycle that the television has inherited has made those that watch it 24-7 well informed and those that only catch a minute of it panic-stricken. Thus, there are both positives and negatives to this format. A positive being that it forces people to become more involved in what's going on in the political spectrum because it is constantly being talked about, "Politics occurs for many people in what one author calls our "media surround": the forms, types, places, and contexts in which media are inserted into our lives" (Jones, 24). Although, with information constantly being seen and heard, a negative comes into play when misrepresentation of the politician is created, "Street contends that politicians not only use the arts and techniques of popular culture in instrumental ways, but that in doing so, politicians "are also being changed--in their language and their priorities, and in the way they are 'read' by their citizens" (Jones, 24). Another negative is presented with citizens that do not have the time or energy to gather new information and thoughts as it pertains to politics, "Monitorial citizens scan (rather than read) the information environment in a way so that they may be alerted on a very wide variety of issues for a very wide variety of ends and may be mobilized around those issues in a large variety of ways"(Jones, 260). In the instance of being informed on politics quantity is not better than quality because it leads to misinterpretation and those that are seeing the media but in not great detail are only assessing small bits of information.
Thomas Chamoun
ReplyDeleteThe 24/7 news cycle has effected politics greatly, it’s impact has been both positive and negative. Positives are more connectedness and more zealousness in politics that is created by TV news. The negatives are the narrow-mindedness that comes with zealousness and the conflation of entertainment with information.
Putnam argues that TV has led to less connectedness in our society; I disagree with this and believe that it has created more connectedness. With the TV new cycle controlled by the major media companies, affiliated with a certain agenda they can easily reach people in their living room with a message. This creates more connectedness and a single message across all the people watching the news in their living room. Critics of this would say that people will believe whatever the journalists or news anchors say creating an uninformed citizenry. Thalens study on this suggests opposite, “TV viewers examine content to test its plausibility, see if it rings true with their previous understandings,” (Jones, 32).I see it as a positive that information about a subject is put in an area for people to see and then they can discern for themselves.
The next point is both a positive and a negative. In the 24-hour news cycle the programming has becomes more entertainment than informative. Big media companies have used synergy to promote their entertainment through the news station, and also to fill content requirements. This has led to the conflation of pop culture and news. Also the partisan nature of entertainment news has created emotional investment. “Many manifestations of mediated politics occur through our relationship with pop culture, and it is with pop culture that citizens are emotionally invested,”(Jones, 38).
This is a negative because citizen can become narrow minded in their emotional investment. They can believe everything that is said by their favorite icon and not discerned what to believe like Thalen says most normal people do. This is a positive though because democracy is encouraged through zealousness of politics. That is the number one problem in our democracy, no one votes. So if the news is making people vote that is something that is good.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Late-night comedy and satire shows have gained more in more momentum in the political sphere. With the continued rise of pundits it seems as though our nation’s political news is being glossed over with comedy and vivacious personality. However, there are benefits to this effect. Candidates can utilize these shows as a means to connect to the general population in ways they never could before. Although it opens this door, maneuvering through the world of political comedy and satire shows can be challenging for a campaign team. I would certainly recommend that my candidate appear on a political satire/comedy show, although I would err on the side of caution.
ReplyDeleteThe greatest advantage for the candidate is that they can be viewed as more personable within the comfortable environment a comedy show provides. This allows them one of the few spaces that they can be seen in this light during the campaign. The candidate laughing and talking about his or her everyday life makes them more likable. It is truly that simple. It should be acknowledged that this type of focus appeals to a certain type of audience though. Therefore, it is purposeful that a candidate uses these shows in order to appeal to a younger demographic. The viewers of these shows want to see the candidates in this way. Here, you are given the opportunity to give your voters what they want, and potentially mobilize the younger population. These shows can even do this without the candidate expecting it. As Jones claims in discussing John Kerry’s appearance with John Stewart, “The truth comes to light very clearly for viewers when the matter is something as trivial as reflecting upon the relationship with ones daughters” (Jones 173). In this case, it can really delve deeply into the personal lives, and draw out even more of the human aspect that the candidate may have anticipated.
With this advantage of a more likable candidate can also come the potential for lines to be blurred between their personal and professional life. For example, “SNL, during Reagan’s second term of office, focused even less on politics in favor of more sketches ridiculing the Reagan family” (Matviko 341). In this situation, the focus is more so on the personal side. Which of course is going to happen when appearing on these shows, or when these shows take hold of your candidate. The instance with John Kerry’s daughters on John Stewart is an example of this. Especially with national news covering the candidate’s appearance on these shows, the push to humanize can go too far. The message then becomes increasingly difficult to control, as the target audience changes. The challenge is for the candidate to carefully portray both sides strongly. With the increase in online content this becomes more challenging. If the show takes over the message and the image, the campaign must be prepared to respond appropriately.
ReplyDeleteOverall a candidate must tackle the world of political satire and comedy shows with caution. While the candidate can be humanized and targeting the hard-to-reach younger demographic, they can also lose control of the message and blur the lines between their personal and professional lives. As Jones asserts, “media serve as conduits for false information and image management, and how it would be easy for citizens to become the unthinking drones and robots that such unquestioned lies and manipulative imagery could lead them to become” (Jones 180). It is important that the campaign realizes this potential. As beneficial as political comedy and satire shows can be to present a lighter image, it must be done so with careful intent and a strong purpose on the side of the campaign. Otherwise, the pundit and personalities will take over the message and the image, and skew it in a way they campaign never expected.
Works Cited
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Matviko, John. Television Satire and The Presidency: The Case of Saturday Night Live. Hollyood’s White House. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky. Rollins & O’Connor, 2003.