NEWS

Candidates under media microscope

Be honest. What do you really know about the 2008 presidential race? While political news is all over television, Internet, radio, newspapers, and magazines, a common teen reply to this year’s contest is, “I don’t really pay attention to politics.” However, there are teens who are not only aware of politics but also informed about the biases that can be part of the media coverage. James Fitzpatrick, 17, of Boston, says: “Media outlets are almost universally biased...these biases affect [teens] who view them.”

The media permeates the political climate, and tells most people, teens included, everything they know about politics and politicians. Of course, this means media has a huge effect on the knowledge of the average American and on the way she or he votes. Media has shaped much of the dissatisfaction young people feel with the current administration. With a presidential election coming up, it’s important to examine the effect the media will have on the November race for the White House.

Media coverage of the presidential race is less focused on issues and more on candidates, according to Melissa Threadgill, director of communications for MassEquality, who spoke with T.i.P. in a recent phone interview. “They don’t spend nearly as much time on the actual issues. They cover the races in terms of campaigns, not substance.”

With cameras present everywhere the candidates travel, media images play an important role in the way a candidate is perceived, and actual issues seem to be placed on the back burner when compared with how a candidate looks on TV. Television made this the new reality in 1960, when the public saw a handsome, calm John F. Kennedy debate a nervous, sweaty Richard Nixon. The election went to Kennedy; many believe the media has had a huge influence on politics ever since.

“The media’s portrayal of presidential candidates, or any person of political power, has always been a way of distorting [them] into images that the public either wants or doesn’t want,” says Zach Page, 17, of Boston.

This kind of publicity is comparable to the publicity given to someone like Britney Spears. Even with her name all over the tabloids, the sales of her latest album were disappointing in comparison to her former efforts. This can happen in politics, too. In 2004, when former Vermont governor Howard Dean became overzealous during one of his presidential campaign speeches and made an unusual noise during his speech, the cameras caught it and played it frequently, until it essentially ended his shot to be the Democratic nominee.

Threadgill says because the media is always there, “Things like that happen in any race and these things get magnified. [Candidates] gain more attention. People hear more about them.” And when media is present, all publicity does not turn out to be good.

The media can create a mold of someone’s identity without their control, but candidates, like pop stars, can use the cameras to their advantage. When Spears wants to sell perfume, she shoots a commercial and makes sure it is aired on heavy rotation on several TV channels. Candidates do the same thing, buying heavy blocks of advertisements so they can criticize their opponents. Some candidates choose not to run negative campaigns but they are in the minority.

Another component of media’s effect on politics is polling and publishing the results. “[The media] focuses on what’s known as the horse race, or who’s up in the polls,” says Threadgill. But sometimes the polls are wrong. For example, polls predicted that Hillary Clinton would lose the New Hampshire primary, but she ended up winning. When Clinton abandoned her usually stoic persona and began to cry while the cameras were rolling, pundits were sure it would cost her the primary.

“The first major piece of media that was involved was when Clinton had her sensitive moment,” says Derrick Jackson, columnist with The Boston Globe, who has covered the campaigns of many presidential candidates during his career.

Despite the media’s power, people tend to be more affected by meeting candidates or attending their speeches. “For many people, the deal was sealed by the last candidate they saw. The more that there is human contact, the less often that someone’s pre-set stereotypes come into play,” says Jackson.

The catch, of course, is that most people don’t end up meeting candidates in person. The impression voters have of candidates is formed mostly by their media image.

As in the entertainment world, where everything we know about celebrities is based on what the media captures, adults and teens who follow politics are growing more dependent on the media for information.

artwork by Artists for Humanity