Why do the political parties continue to spend millions of dollars on nominating conventions when the candidate has already been decided? Your response should draw on the Trent et al readings for this week and offer examples from media coverage of both the RNC and DNC.
These days, nominating conventions practically seem like just an excuse to throw a huge party. The conventions no longer contain any suspense or significance in nominating the presidential candidate, since they are basically already chosen. Yet, the conventions still hold a lot of importance in the minds of political parties, campaign managers, and news media. These gatherings are still being held because politicians rely heavily on their image. What they decide to show to the nation and how that is then interpreted is extremely important in gaining votes. When watching footage from the Republican National Convention that was held last week in Tampa, FL, one can see the extreme patriotism in the red, white and blue, as well as the fanfare of lights and signs. Politicians want a packed audience to show to the millions of people who aren’t attending the convention that they have numerous supporters and that they can rouse a crowd. The candidate is seen in a positive and popular light. By holding a week-long convention, both Republicans and Democrats can hold the media spotlight for a longer period of time and more pervasively than they otherwise would. The extended news coverage contributes to ideas becoming more permanently stuck in voter’s minds.
ReplyDeletePolitical parties still hold conventions to grab the attention of opinion leaders. Savvy campaign managers know that those who hold the most sway over their circle of acquaintances are the ones who are watching the footage. “Such people were perceived to be highly active, highly informed, interested in politics and therefore more likely than others to read or listen to media coverage of the campaign” (Trent et al 123). Opinion leaders have the ability to affect other people’s thoughts and decisions. By throwing a convention, political parties can use their gatekeeping abilities to highlight their strengths and stances succinctly for those opinion leaders. Those few are then responsible for dispersing the information to their communities. Unfortunately, opinion leaders are capable of gatekeeping as well and may hide certain topics to promote their own point of view. Still, political parties depend on opinion leaders to enjoy the spectacle of the nominating conventions to create local movements.
In Chapter Two of Jeffrey Jones’ “Entertaining Politics: New Political Television & Political Culture,” he says that “indeed, politics and pop culture are essentially the opposite sides of the same coin” (24). Just within the past week we can see how the convention has sparked numerous viral memes, such as Clint Eastwood’s empty chair and Ann Romney’s “I love women!” statement. While not always positive, conventions allow an ever increasingly internet-focused society to connect with candidates. They provide material for bloggers on Tumblr, comedians like Stephen Colbert, and traditional newspapers as well. By delving deeper into candidates’ lives and issues, conventions provide personal connections to swinging voters.
While it may have more weight this election season than previously, political parties hold nominating conventions to spread their influence and financial prosperity to American cities. In the article “Trouble for Dems in North Carolina as Convention Moves Into Full Swing” from FoxNews.com, it is reported that North Carolina is in an interesting position regarding President Obama’s reelection. While previously a Republican state, Obama turned it blue in 2008. Although recently, many residents are continuing to swing towards the Republican side on issues such as gay marriage. By holding the nominating convention in North Carolina this year, the Democrats are bringing their political message directly to its citizens, while also maximizing their profits. With the increase in visitors, Obama just may win votes simply by boosting the economy in the city of Charlotte. Nominating conventions allow for political parties to directly connect with the audience through television screens, pop culture references, and local residents.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNominating conventions begin the foundation of each presidential race. The conventions allow United States citizens to be introduced to each nominee - whether he or she is a current president or a new running candidate. They also influence political communication and discussion between candidates and voters. Most evidently, the conventions are a time for celebration and unity for each political party. During the RNC and DNC, we start to humanize the presidential nominees to understand them better. I noticed while watching the RNC this year, it allowed us to get to know the families of these candidates. For example, as I watched Ann Romney’s speech on ABC news, I noticed she became very personal in regards to her family and marriage to Mitt Romney. By sharing anecdotes of how Romney grew up as a family man, idolizing his business-driven father and his mother’s beliefs of women’s rights, while supporting Ann through her struggle with breast cancer and MS, we are now able to see Mitt Romney more personally. We will also be reminded of president Obama’s personality, as Michelle Obama is subject to discuss “who the president is, the values that drive him, what motivates him,” according to ABC news (Walter 1). With this, we begin to understand who the candidates truly are as politicians and people and what they have in store for their role as the next president of the United States.
ReplyDeleteThe beginnings of the conventions also start political discussion amongst Americans through new media forms. Since 1952, campaigns have depended on media, such as television, to broadcast to the masses (Trent 51). Over the past couple years, campaigns have had to adapt to new forms of media, such as internet social networking and YouTube, to reach even more masses. As Judith Trent writes, “…the Internet has been increasingly utilized because it is cost-effective and has high visibility, creating public awareness and support for presidential candidates and their platforms” (Trent 15). The candidates already utilize the internet to raise money throughout their campaigns; however, media can now be utilized to influence conversation, whether it is through blogging or tweeting about treading topics (“RNC,” “DNC,” Clint Eastwood”). For example, I noticed on the ABC news broadcast of the RNC, the network kept the hash tag “#2012GOP” on the bottom of its screen as it aired the conventions, as well as displaying posters with the hash tag “#ROMNEYRYAN2012” to encourage tweets on Twitter. Not only does this help increase awareness about the candidates, but it also gets people more interested in watching the conventions while not knowing what to expect. For example, it must have been quite the endorsement to have such a well-known celebrity as Clint Eastwood speak for Mitt Romney. However, was anyone aware that he was going to drag on his speech over twelve minutes and delay Romney’s acceptance speech? He was the first topic Jon Stewart later discussed on the Daily Show Friday night. Stewart jokes about the “Old Man and the Seat”, “Emerged in the night where it spent twelve minutes on the most important night of Mitt Romney’s life, yelling at a chair” (Daily Show).
(Griffin Cont.)
ReplyDeleteA final purpose for the conventions each presidential year is to unite each political party. For example, Democratic politicians such as Nancy Pelosi and Bill Clinton are scheduled to be guest speakers at the DNC this Wednesday, endorsing Barack Obama’s re-election, according to ABC news. This is a clear indication of how many leaders from each political party can come together to honor and support their fellow party members. Judith Trent discusses the previous presidential election, “…at the 2008 Democratic and Republican National Conventions, party themes did not differ substantially from those of previous years. The Republications celebrated McCain’s heroism as a prisoner of war…while the Democrats celebrated the values of diversity and new beginnings (Trent 62). In short, the conventions are a time of unity and celebration for each party, where Americans are introduced to their presidential candidates and can begin the political discussions leading up to election day.
Works Cited
"Daily Show: August 31, 2012." Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Comedy Central. 31 Aug. 2012. Television.
“Republican National Convention.” ABC News. 28-30 Aug. 2012. Television
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication:
Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Walter, Amy, and Michael Falcone. "Michelle: Barack's 'Character Witness' at Convention." ABC News.
ABC News Network, 04 Sept. 2012. Web. 04 Sept. 2012.
.
Matthew Harkins
ReplyDeleteNominating conventions are arguably one of the most important occurrences in a presidential campaign today. Although, when they are considered in the context of their initial purpose, the conventions could seem pointless because the candidates have already been decided, their importance comes from the media and its coverage on these events. Throughout the past as one influenced the other, media and politics have shaped how nominating conventions are run today and their key role in a presidential campaign. The campaigns see these conventions as one of their biggest chances to convey their message and convince Americans that their political parties presidential candidate is the right choice, which is why political parties invest so much money and place such importance on these conventions.
Within the convention comes the most important part, the nominated candidates acceptance address. These acceptance addresses are elevated to a high significance due to the media outlets that cover them. The addresses can be accessed by anyone in this modern age making them crucial but also something that needs careful thought. “Even state and local candidates must consider that their acceptance addresses may be carried in full, or quoted in part, by a variety of media outlets, and placed on Internet sites.” (Trent, 225) The exposure of an acceptance address leads to potential criticism of those who have influence on the general publics views, which is why they are a chance for nominated candidates to carefully craft an address that tries to persuade and appeal to as many voters as they can. “The audiences for the acceptance addresses of national figures number in the tens of millions.” (Trent, 225) Clearly the campaign would want to make sure something of such significance runs smoothly as it could shape the outcome of the campaign.
In the race occurring this year the RNC did its best to attack the current state of things due to Obama’s presidency, as well as to assure how under Romney’s presidency, he would make a better future. Clearly, the acceptance address was trying to persuade audiences toward Romney as their vote, and attack Obama’s campaign. Romney also used his speech to appeal to women voters, as another example of the candidates working to persuade their audience.
Nominating conventions know that they are going to be covered by the media, which is why they put so much effort into them. The conventions are basically a ritualized event and have more than just an acceptance address to worry about. Different keynote speakers write speeches throughout the conventions, which are also covered by the media. The political parties need to make sure that the speakers appeal and gain as many audiences as possible to want their candidate to win the election. The conventions need to compete with one another to persuade and win over as many demographics as possible. For example, the DNC being held this week is starting off with a keynote address from Julian Castro. A blog from NBC news highlights “The Obama campaign has watched Castro closely, made him a campaign co-chairman, and says he has been effective on the campaign trail for the president. In our August NBC/WSJ poll, Obama was leading Romney among Latinos, 63%-28%. But as mentioned above, just 49% of Latino voters were expressing a high level of interest in the upcoming election (compared with 82% for African Americans, 68% for whites, and 84% for seniors).” There is a clear strategy when it comes to these conventions, and it would show that if a campaign utilizes the convention correctly, it could have a significant impact on the outcome of the election.
Works Cited
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Todd, Chuck, Mark Murray, Domenico Montenaro, and Brooke Brower. "First Thoughts: The Enthusiasm Gap." First Read. NBC News, 04 Sept. 2012. Web. 04 Sept. 2012. .
Cara Gilmartin
ReplyDeleteEven though I lack sophisticated knowledge of politics, I found the Trent et al readings and the Republican National Convention to be extremely interesting. Truthfully, Mitt Romney’s acceptance speech was the first I have ever watched, so I did not really know what to expect. Based off of the Trent et al readings, I had an idea of some things that would be discussed and was curious to see if the conventions would meet their purposes.
In chapter 7, Trent discusses the purposes of address, saying, “the address is the means through which the candidate publicly assumes the role of a candidate/leader of the party…the address should generate a strong positive response from the immediate audience…it should serve to unify the party…it is partisan political address…” (Trent et al 224) After watching Romney’s speech, I believe all four purposes were met. However, are these purposes really necessary? Are national conventions for either party really necessary?
Romney’s speech began discussing the failures of Obama’s term early on, and as I sat and watched, I kept thinking to myself, “when is he going to start discussing the successes of his potential term?” Twenty-seven minutes into his speech, Romney finally brought up the fact that he has a plan to create 12 million new jobs in our country. It was then that I began to think, “I hope he has talked a lot more about these plans in other speeches that I just haven’t heard.”
The moral of the story is, political parties spend millions of dollars on these conventions to glamorize election season and grab attention of the media. Think of all the people who attend these conventions in support of either the Republican or Democratic candidate. We heard them cheer every time Romney said something they supported. The media is able to expose how many Americans are truly devoted to presidential elections.
Another reason the national conventions grab the attention of the media is because candidates rely heavily on image. In chapter 2, Trent says, “...all real decisions regarding the convention are made by the candidate, based on the advice of consultants.” (Trent et al 56) The consultants are hired to make sure the conventions run smoothly and that each candidate upholds a positive image, considering the media swarms each convention.
Personally, I thought conventions would be more informative considering so much time, effort, and money is put into them each election season. The media relies heavily on them and for someone who doesn’t follow politics, I thought these conventions would provide a little bit more information about the future plans of the candidate. The conventions seem only important in the sense that they glamorize presidential elections and give the media something to talk about.
“Republican National Convention.” ABC News. 28-30 Aug. 2012. Television
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Months prior to a convention, news organizations discuss the ways in which they predict specific candidates will present themselves throughout the convention, specific topics that will be discussed, and the overall way in which a public will perceive a candidate throughout the convention. Due to the news coverage that each of the candidates receives prior to, and during the convention, the public is made more aware of their name and their future political plans. In the book entitled Political Campaign Communication, the author discusses the types of advertisements used throughout political campaigns including, ID Spots, Argument Spots, Attack Spots, and Visionary Spots (Trent et. Al. 152). Each one of these political advertisements correlates to a specific aspect of a nominating convention. What is a nominating convention but a long-winded, highly televised, political commercial? The money spent on a convention is not spent in vain, for each dollar goes to the creation of a positive image for a candidate and his or her future political endeavors.
ReplyDeleteIf one were to compare the world of political advertising and that of commercial advertising, difficulty would be presented in telling the difference between the two. It only makes sense that the same monetary cost comes with political advertisements, as with those of commercial advertisements, whether they’re 60-second political advertisements or conventions that last for hours. Montague Kern, an author that studied political adds during the 1980’s, addresses the topic of the similarities between political and commercial advertising, stating, “the ‘world of political advertising absorbed its commercial counterpart and became as one’”(Trent et. Al. 151). Each political party is willing to suffer a significant monetary loss in order to achieve a significant boost in public opinion and awareness.
Additionally, the American public is always looking toward the future, and conventions give them a chance to do just that. American people are given the opportunity to peruse the different possible candidates for future elections and conventions allow them to mull over the ideas presented by said candidates throughout the term of their soon to be president. Adam Sorensen of TIME Magazine writes, “A party convention isn't just a chance to celebrate the current presidential candidate, it's where the search for the next one begins” (TIME). TIME even went so far as to publish a list of possible Republican prospects for future presidency, planting a seed into the heads of American citizens to continue to think of the ways in which they can continue to plan for the betterment of the future of the United States of America.
Work Cited
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
TIME Staff. "Grading Republican Prospects at the RNC." TIME.com. N.p., 31 Aug. 2012. Web. 04 Sept. 2012. .
The basis of nominating conventions, in ways, are similar to a giant pep rally before an important game. For example, a high school football team would hold a rally to gather up their fans, introduce their players and captains and express pride. Similarly, a convention is a way for a party to assemble their state representatives in one place to show support for the chosen candidate. Supporters watch as important representatives or celebrities speak on behalf of the candidate and develop a sense of patriotism in the party. Although there is no surprise to which candidate is chosen, the party is able to lay out important platform’s and goals if chosen into office.
ReplyDeleteThe three-day long conventions shed light on each running mate as the public grasp a deeper meaning the candidate’s personality. For example during the Republican National Convention held last week in Tampa, FL, Ann Romney explained how her husband was a good spouse and father and a diligent worker that built a company (Marlantes 1). According to statistics, Mitt displays significantly lower likabillity ratings than Barack, so she made it her mission to humanize her husband and show he is a genuine, sensitive person. On the other side, Michelle Obama’s mission at the DNC is to try and persuade the voter’s not to abandon her husband. However, it is going to be more difficult for her because she had already given a similar speech four years ago. This time around, her heart warming stories will most likely be replaced by defending policies and future goals for the country (Marlantes 1). Although each woman has different goals for this election, they are there to fully support there husband’s image and agenda to capture America’s vote.
The media plays an enormous role in the conventions. In 1976, a study was conducted on television’s coverage of the campaign, showing that it significantly boosted the voter’s interest and attention, especially to those who were not strong in participating in politics (Trent 52). Since then, campaign coverages have reached nearly every major network including ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS and Fox, 1,500 television stations, and cable networks, making the conventions a “must-see TV” event (Trent 53). In the 2008 convention, “it has been determined that nearly two-thirds of all American households, or 120 million people, watched at least one of the conventions, while almost 40 percent of households watched both conventions” (Trent 53). With numbers like these, campaigns are forced to spend millions of dollars in advertisements and features leading up to the event including newspapers, television and the internet.
The underlying purpose of the convention is to boost America’s nationalism and confidence in their party. Campaigns find ways of doing this by having popular state representatives and celebrities speak. For example, the RNC featured world famous actor, Clint Eastwood. Eastwood made his point by sitting next to an empty chair and later explaining that this represented Obama not fulfilling his chair in office. Eastwood explained, “We own this country... Politicians are employees of ours... And we should not forget that. And When somebody does not do the job, we got to let them go” (Kadlec 2). The empty chair representation gained much popularity and public support, along with media attention. The DNR must find clever ways to gain voter support after an extremely tough act to follow. Although conventions can be extremely expensive and long, they are necessary in bringing political parties together, introducing their leaders and setting an agenda for the months to come.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
Kadlec, Charles. "In Their Own Words: The Essence Of The Republican National Convention." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 03 Sept. 2012. Web. 05 Sept. 2012. .
Marlantes, Liz. "Michelle Obama's Challenge: Persuade Voters Not to Fire Her Husband." The Christian Science Monitor. The Christian Science Monitor, 04 Sept. 2012. Web. 05 Sept. 2012. .
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Each year at thousands at high schools and colleges across the nation a tradition exists. It comes but once a year usually as the most “fan based” sport at the school is readying to start a new season. This event’s audience consists solely of men and women who are already fans of the school coming out and showing their support. Motivational speakers may be introduced and people will be reminded of why they supported a particular organization to begin with. This tradition is known as a pep rally.
ReplyDeleteBoth the Republican National Convention and the Democratic National Convention cannot help but remind me of a pep rally. In my eyes these conventions exist solely to help confirm people’s political ideologies and faith in a certain candidate for president. In the past these have helped to establish who would be the nominee for president within both political parties, but this is no longer the case. Nominees for president are determined through the primary elections within each party. There are many reasons why conventions no longer serve the purpose that they once did but on the contrary not many reason are viable as to why they remain feasible in campaigns today. “Where instrumental or pragmatic communicative functions were once the primary reason for holding party conventions, now the symbolic or ritualistic functions are, in most instances, the chief purpose.” (Trent 50) But now that these conventions are seen as simply tradition, why does each party continually spend money when it is unnecessary?
When thinking about this question I initially began to ponder both major political parties but then in more detail I began to think about people’s reactions to the Republication National Convention last week. On the first night of the convention, Ann Romney spoke about her husband not only as the presidential nominee but instead, as the man. One clear goal of Ann Romney’s speech was to get women on the side of the Republican Party. In my opinion, she in many ways did not succeed. In an article written by the Washington Post, “Ann Romney’s Ham-Handed Message,” the writer Ruth Marcus explains that while Ann was trying to connect to women, her message was easily seen translucent. (1) While the Republican party did take this opportunity of the convention to address certain topic that they may not have the majority vote of I believe the important thing to remember is that now in the 21st century there are many different media outlets that could have been utilized without being costly.
cont.
ReplyDeleteConventions were initially designed to help educate voters on the candidates for president, and while the introduction of television in 1952 to the election may have seemed beneficial to the campaign we know now that it helped in the demise of the convention’s credibility. (Trent 51) The thing that is now, in my eyes the most changing since introducing television is that now different news channels are able to determine what they believe to be important and they have the power to only air those programs. An example given in the book is in reference to the 1980 conventions where the networks decided to air interviews with candidate’s relatives rather that airing important debates regarding platform positions. (Trent 53)
Going back to the initial question asked, while in my opinion I believe the conventions are a waste of the party’s money they will continue to exist. With political campaigns, conventions are not the only area where money in used in excess in places that it is unnecessary. For example, commercial based solely on “bashing” his our her opponent is, in my opinion not good use of the money raised by either party. Yes, I believe they do not serve a purpose and should no longer be necessary in presidential campaigns but I also realize that they contribute no real harm. They will continue to be used as “pep rallies for presidents” for years to come.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Marcus, Ruth. "Ann Romney’s Ham-handed Message." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 30 Aug. 2012. Web. 05 Sept. 2012.
“Republican National Convention.” CNN. 28-30 Aug. 2012. Television
While national conventions are no longer a significant aspect of the actual selection of the presidential nominee for each party, they have taken on new roles in the national election and campaigning process. The conventions formerly introduce the candidate to the national audience. It gives the candidate the opportunity to modify how he wishes to be viewed by the public on a big stage, as well as clearly present his strategy or "an overall campaign style/plan they intend to follow" (Trent, 62) The nominee can do so with his acceptance speech, which is one of the most noted parts of the convention. NBC reiterates the importance of the speech with an article titled, "Mitt's Moment". The article argues what NBC reporters believe the Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney needs to accomplish, such as appearing more empathic towards voters, with his speech. Making claims that are familiar to the strategies addressed by Trent the article states that "he has to introduce himself to the America public" or utilize his biography. In a follow-up article titled, "What Romney Accomplished (And Didn't)" discusses how he was unable to present why he should be President with his employment of the strategy of lamenting about the present as to why Obama should not be President (Trent, 225). It is of note to remember the acceptance speech is usually saved until the final hour of the convention. It is the grand finale. NBC discusses and rates its success as if it is a performance. They use catchy slogans such as "nostalgic optimism" to describe the speech. NBC analyzes the success of the speech by how appealing the speech made Romney look in the eyes of the American public.
ReplyDeleteThe Washington Post meanwhile presents the speech in a different variety. While both media outlets analyze the speech, the Washington Post appears to have a more objective approach. It presents the facts in its articles before going into analysis. NBC seems to present a more subjective leaning analysis that is later followed with facts. For example in a Washington Post article entitled, "RNC boosts Romney among GOP women", the article cites poll numbers that say Romney increased his favorability amongst women by twenty points It uses polling numbers to rate Romney's speech. NBC also discusses Romney's push towards enticing women voters. It speaks of when Romney mentioned his mother and prominent Republican women in his speech and declares, "If you didn't think the Romney camp knows the gender gap is an issue, you know now..." This statement suggest that if the public felt Romney was unaware of the gender gap in his supporters, he understands it and is taking the time to address it. Just Obama and Romney will surely campaign in different ways for why they are the right man for President, the two media outlets use different ways to discuss the candidates’ strategy. While the two outlets do so differently, they both allow the reader to comprehend how Romney's acceptance speech sought to attract himself to the female voter.
The conventions provide the media with the opportunity to rank the candidate and his strategy moving forward. The fact that both media outlets discuss Romney and women shows that his strategy of enticing them as voters is crucial to his campaign. Most importantly it allows the public to comprehend how women voters are crucial to the election. The conventions are a way for the candidate to present their strategy but as seen from the analysis to "putting on the best show possible" (Trent, 55), as well as give voters a basic understanding of what issues are important to the election. In his speech Romney frequently mentioned working to help the America family economically saying, "President Obama promised to slow the rise of the ocean and to heal the planet. My promise is to help you and your family." Both NBC and the Washington Post note that Romney failed to mentioned the war in Afghanistan. This dismissal on Romney's part suggests that the issue of war is not a crucial point of this election. It is not only with the candidate's acceptance speeches that the conventions look to attract the public, but with speeches from other prominent party figures and endorsements. What else can explain why Clint Eastwood spent some of his speech talking to a chair where the audience was to imagine that President Obama sat? Overall, the conventions are now utilized as a type of a scripted reality show in which the party and the nominee seek to construct a positive image of itself moving forward into the campaign.
ReplyDeleteCohen, Jon, and Scott Clement. "RNC Boosts Romney among the GOP Women." The Washington Post. The Washington Post, 4 Sept. 2012. Web. 4 Sept. 2012. .
Todd, Chuck, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Brooke Brower. "First Thoughts: Mitt's Moment." First Read. NBC News, 30 Aug. 2012. Web. 03 Sept. 2012. .
Todd, Chuck, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Brooke Brower. "First Thoughts: What Romney Accomplished: (And Didn’t)." First Read. NBC News, 31 Aug. 2012. Web. 03 Sept. 2012. < http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/31/13589600-first-thoughts-what-romney-accomplished-and-didnt?lite?ocid=twitter>.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Recently I was given the unique opportunity to experience a convention from inside the convention halls, and after years of studying the political process and reading about conventions in books, I was surprised to see all that books cannot teach you. Political campaigns have shifted from their intended purposes into over-dramatized reality shows, perfectly scripted and precisely planned.
ReplyDeleteJudith Trent and others contend in their book, Political Campaign Communication Principles & Practices, that, “although a majority of citizens regularly tell pollsters that they would prefer some other method for nominating presidential candidates, the national party conventions remain as they have since their inception: the bodies that make official presidential and vice presidential nominations for the Republican and Democratic Parties.” (Trent, 50) Trent clarifies, “the convention stage is an important and distinct period in the four-step process because of the symbolic functions it provides.” I have to disagree in part, though. Not only do conventions serve as the official selection of presidential nominees for each major party, but also the convention allows citizens to feel engaged for a short period of time. The convention gives the illusion that our political selection process is still one derived from the needs and wants of the people. Yes, there are specific actions that must be taken during a national convention in order for a candidate to officially be placed on the ballot in each state, and yes the acceptance speech is the culmination of the primary season work and convention preparation but what does that have to do with the people of the United States?
In my opinion, the bottom line is that conventions are still relevant because people are still watching, In life, money talks; conventions make money. Between the money generated by the host city to the network profits for viewership every aspect of a convention is generating conversation. During the Republican National Convention 2012 there was 24-hour news coverage presented by multiple networks. There was a hurricane that was making landfall in the U.S. and still networks were airing the convention, and people watched. CNN is arguably the only competitive station that broke from political jargon to cover Hurricane Isaac with appropriate sensitivity and respect. While Anderson Cooper and Soledad O’Brien reported from the ground in Louisiana, Bill O’Reily continued his praise of the convention while MSNBC big-timers persisted in their assault on the GOP. Why would we expect parties to abandon conventions when they generate obscene amounts of conversation and even contributions?
When you search “Republican National Convention” on thedailybeast.com you are returned with over 7000 matches. 7000! When you do the same with the “Democratic National Convention” the sigh brings you to a section of the news site dedicated solely to convention coverage. Parties invest in conventions because conventions are successful in generating conversation about their candidate. Television viewership may have dropped, according to Huff Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20120903/us-cvn-convention-viewers/) but where television is falling short Twitter and other social media networks are gearing up. Huffington Post suggests that even with a 23% drop in convention viewership 30.3 million viewers were still tuned in. Conventions spend millions because that is what they stand to make – millions.
National conventions don’t serve the purpose of “breaking news” but their well-scripted speeches in conjunction with their meticulously planned stages make for great television. The balloon drop, the roll call, the matching outfits, the jumbo-trons and the complete lack of surprise endings make for great movies with happy-endings. News stations make money, candidates generate contribution spikes and newspapers sell out copies as long as they are equipped with the perfect picture on the cover. The speeches are erroneous, the voting is practically null and void and the all the attendees do noting but highlight the successes of the man of the hour, the nominee.
ReplyDeleteConventions are money makers and in a capitalistic society that’s all we need to keep the tradition alive. The candidate may be decided way in advance but without money or media coverage he will never win – that’s why we still bother with the smoke and mirrors of conventions.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/search.html?q=republican+national+convention&_charset_=utf-8&type=&time=&order=relevancy
http://www.thedailybeast.com/features/2012/09/the-democratic-national-convention.html
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
The national conventions of our nation’s respective parties will never lose their value in American culture. While the conventions still have a very serious significance for a presidential candidate and his or her party the reasoning for that significance has shifted. In the past the Republican and Democratic National Conventions were a time and a place for a party to announce who would (hopefully) be leading their beliefs into the coveted oval office for the next term. It was the general public’s first chance to meet the candidate who was fronting the party that they believed in. It was exciting because it was new information, and if there is anything we can understand from our current campaign strategies it is that the general public loves new information, from every angle, all the time. Although they are technically “announced” the general voting American public knew who the candidates were months ago, yet we still have multi-million dollar political festivals for a week to build up to these moments. And while the information being relayed to the people may be stale, the presentation and delivery is not.
ReplyDeleteNational conventions have grown along with modern technology and society. They still exist and still have intrigue for the general American public which means that have been able to maintain a tradition while becoming current enough to matter. Conventions have become a week of attention and publicity for the chosen candidates and in this day and age there is nothing better. “Presidential campaigns are supposed to be the greatest show in American politics --- infused with big ideas and historical imports” (Byers 1). We live in a time wear short attention spans and entertainment rule and the current use of national conventions has followed suit. The national conventions of our time have moved their focus to entertainment not unlike most of our society. Many individuals especially the younger voters live in a culture where the norm is to not only informed constantly, but entertained constantly. If candidates want the attention let alone the vote from many Americans they have to not only tell them something that they want to hear, but also how and when they want to hear it. “As a matter of fact, the political campaign has undergone such a radical transformation that those principles and practices accepted by practitioners and theorists even fifteen years ago are in many respects largely irrelevant today” (Trent 4). If the national convention had not morphed into the show that it has become, the ‘official’ announcement of a parties candidate that everyone already knew about would be nothing more than a tweet, email blast, or a story at the bottom of any given news organizations website the day it happened.
CONT.
ReplyDeletePresidential candidates may be in an exclusive competition for the American vote, but they are in a much broader competition for the attention of the American voters. The parties are given the chance to entertain through their national convention. The Republicans and Democrats get to put on a show, and create a star. “Among 18-34-year-olds, however, Comedy Central was the No. 1 source of RNC news, Tuesday through Thursday nights, besting even Fox News Channel, Comedy Central bragged” (de Moraes 1). National conventions have long lost their original intention of informing the American public. To inform the American population is so accessible in this day and age a lot of information is simply shared through social media sites. “In short, the mass media have had a profound impact on the electoral process by connecting citizens and candidates” (Trent 118). But while advances in technology have dismissed the original intention of national conventions, it has not even come close to striking the conventions incredible value to a party and its candidate. Conventions give the parties a week of press, a week of being primetime television, and a week of creating a spectacular image for their candidates through carefully planned speeches. “The surprise nature of the appearance would make Portman, Johansson and Washington the Democratic equivalent of Clint Eastwood, who was the ‘mystery speaker’ at last weeks Republican National Convention” (Robillard 1). The value placed on celebrity speakers alone reveals the conventions true significance in the general campaign. While nothing new is learned from conventions, a lot is said and more importantly a lot is listened to. Conventions have not lost purpose because they no longer announce a candidate; the purpose has merely been modified to fit into a modern election. Campaigns spend millions of dollars trying to reach voters; national conventions are no exception to this.
Works Cited
Byers, Dylan. "Reporters: We Loathe 2012 Campaign." POLITICO. N.p., 03 Sept. 2012. Web. 05 Sept. 2012. .
Moraes, Lisa De. Washington Post. The Washington Post, 05 Sept. 2012. Web. 05 Sept. 2012. .
Robillard, Kevin. POLITICO. N.p., 05 Sept. 2012. Web. 05 Sept. 2012. .
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
The purpose of nominating conventions is to help voters get a deeper understanding of who each candidate is and what they represent. It resembles that of a high school pep rally, cheering on the team that you are a part of. It gives people the opportunity to see how well a candidate handles situations and acts with their party in a large setting. Also, it allows other political figures and the first lady to boost the morale of their candidate. Finally, it gives the voters a clear understanding of what the candidate would do to try to resolve issues in the U.S. and internationally.
ReplyDeleteAt the 2012 Republican National Convention, Ann Romney spoke of her life with Mitt, the battles they faced together, and the hard worker that he is. Ann's purpose was to sway the women voters by humanizing Mitt, though she could have swayed more people if she had given specific examples of how Mitt has been a hard worker and specific situations. On Fox News.com, Juan Williams talks about how the Ann should have just acknowledged their wealthy lives and moved on. He says, "It does not make sense to me to talk about that couple having struggles similar to most Americans. They never had to live with economic fear of being laid off from a job or losing their health insurance." In this sense, Ann possibly might have pushed voters away because of her false claims of their so-called American struggles. Despite peoples' opinions on the speeches, it is an opportunity to hear about the personal lives of the candidates and how they would be an asset to the country. Whether or not the speakers successfully do that is up to a voter, but regardless it gives the speakers and candidate an extravagant way to persuade the public.
According to Trent et al, the nominating conventions act as the third political stage. The first national convention was held in 1832, but some changes have been made to the conventions since then. Until 1972, "The conventions served important pragmatic or instrumental functions in that presidential and vice presidential nominees were selected, the platforms were determined, and even the tone or "battle posture" for the general election campaigns were established" (Trent et al 50-51). Although the pressure of the campaign remains the same today, three factors have significantly changed to benefit each party.
The use of television became a major improvement that spiked public interest. People at home could watch the conventions and follow every event and speech that took place. This started to give people visuals of the candidates by seeing how they acted on interviews, how they addressed common issues, and a glimpse at their personal lives. As mentioned by Trent et al, "Television gave the public a sense of involvement in the conventions, and as many delegates and reporters covering the convention soon discovered, the television viewer could see more and know more of what was going on than the persons who were on the floor of the convention hall" (51).
A second factor that has changed is the use of primaries. Primaries are now used to determine which delegate will be sent to the national conventions. This could be seen as a good thing or just a waste of money. The suspense of which candidate will be chosen at the convention is no longer there. Millions of dollars are spent on these conventions to promote a single candidate for each party. It narrows down the focus to lead voters in a specific direction.
A third factor is the use of campaign specialists. These campaign specialists use their knowledge to help create a good show for the millions of viewers at home. They advise the candidate on what decisions would be best for the campaign, including songs, speakers, and issues debated.
CONT
ReplyDeleteToday, the conventions represent a symbolic ritual. They reaffirm the American dream by the various speeches, music, and demonstrations. They legitimize the nominee for their party. They strive for party unity, showing that they support their nominee without any tension. Finally, during the candidate's acceptance speech, he outlines his plan for the future (Trent et all 56-62).
Since the functions have changed from years before, the national conventions act as promotional events for the potential president. The multiple speakers serve to promote the candidate, while also getting nationally exposed. Posters, signs, buttons, and other promotional items are used to show which party people represent. It resembles that of a concert. Everyone listens to the people in the spotlight, invest a lot of money to attend, and spend money on making posters and other things to show their support. Although it could possibly be a waste of money, it could also act as a deciding factor for a voter based on how well each convention went and what was said.
Works Cited
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Williams, Juan. "Ann Romney, me and her Convention Speech"" Fox News. Fox News Network, 29 Aug. 2012. Web. 04 Sept. 2012. .
Modern day political conventions do not hold the same meaning as their original purpose. As stated in the reading the initial reasoning behind conventions was rooted more in practical reasoning. Trent explains, “The conventions served as important pragmatic or instrumental functions in that the presidential and vice presidential nominees were selected, the platforms were determined and even the tone of “battle posture” for the general elections campaigns was established “ (Trent page 50). In todays world the Republican and Democratic Conventions have much more of a symbolic purpose. The main drive behind modern day conventions are to really try and introduce the candidates to the American people, and bring their focus to the upcoming elections. Before the Republican National Convention, Barack Obama was quoted in an article on politico.com saying “This week in Tampa my opponents will offer you their agenda. It should be a pretty entertaining show”. Although this was meant as a jab at the Republican Party, Obama truly summed up the purpose of what conventions really are. Both the Republican and Democratic Conventions strive to create a line up of people, speeches, and events that are going to capture the attention of the American people. This way of thinking about conventions came to be at the same time that televisions were growing popularity in the United States. Trent elaborates by saying, “ The new medium brought a different dimension first to the primaries and then to the conventions, by dramatizing suspense, conflict, and excitement, as well as projecting a visual image of the candidates that had never before been possible” (Trent 51).
ReplyDeleteThrough the creation of television candidates and their political parties are able to project a calculated image to the American people, and try very hard to play up the image to the audience that they intend on targeting. One image that the Republican Party strove to get across was the appeal and empowerment of women. It was very clear and obvious before the Republican Convention that Mitt Romney did not have strong numbers with women voters. Since women as a whole are large portion of voters, the Republicans agenda was to create likability between women in our country and Mitt Romney. This is a very evident concept when you look at the speeches at the Republican National Convention. For example, during Mitt Romney’s acceptance speech he spoke about his time as governor of Massachusetts. He spoke about how he appointed a woman Lieutenant Governor, along with a woman chief of staff. His reasoning for sharing this with the American people was to remind them that he firmly believes in woman as equals. He was conveying the message that women are just important as men and hold great importance and significance in our country.
The Democratic National Convention has a very different agenda that the Republicans. The focus of the Democratic Convention is to reiterate the belief that America once felt for Barack Obama. Last night, Michelle Obama took on the nation by delivering her speech to the United States. She spoke about all the great people and qualities that our country possesses. She explained to us her strong belief in American, but most importantly she spoke about her confidence in her husband. Michelle Obama did a great job on focusing what exactly she was supposed to do, which was remind us why we all stood behind and originally believed in Barack Obama. She talked about his determination to do what was right for our country whether or not it politically the best decision. The purpose and reason for her speech was to remind the American people all the good things that he has done for our country these past years, and attempt to make them forget the problems that still exist in our nation.
One uniting theme that both parties try to convey is unifying feeling through out the party. Both the Democratic and Republican Conventions attempt to get across the point that everyone in the party, including political people who once said negative things about the candidate stand behind their nominee. In the text it explains, “ Thus, even when tension below the surface is strained, the political parties strive for the appearance of the unity during their convention.”(Trent 59). This was specifically important for the Republican Party who had just come out of a very heated primary. It was important for the party to show a sense of togetherness for Mitt Romney.
ReplyDeleteEssentially, the reasoning that political parties choose to run extravagant and grandiose National Conventions is to convey a message to the American people. Conventions are intended to be entertaining and capture the attention and hearts of the people of the United States. The media and the political parties together create a huge stage for both Democrats and Republicans to show the country exactly what they want the people of the United States to see about their party.
Works Cited
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Slack, Donovan. "POLITICO." POLITICO. N.p., 28 Aug. 2012. Web. 04 Sept. 2012. .
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete