Matthew Struzzi
Blog 1
Political parties continue to spend millions of dollars on nominating conventions when the candidates have already been decided, because the nominating conventions nowadays serve as a symbolic event with a lot of power to help the candidates win votes from the public. In “Political Campaign Communication,” the authors state:
Because of the influence generated by television coverage, presidential primaries, and campaign specialists, the overall function of the national nominating convention to the campaign has been changed. In its place is a new function. The primary significance of the modern nominating convention is symbolic – and as such, it serves four important communication functions – reaffirming and legitimizing the electoral process, legitimizing the party nominees, showing party unity, and introducing the candidate’s campaigns themes and issues (Trent et al, 56-62).
Further, the nominating conventions are broadcasted on all types of mediums, most importantly the television. As stated in “Political Campaign Communication” “Television gave the public a feeling 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 could the persons who were on the floor of the convention hall” (Trent et al, 51). Therefore, it is more than reasonable that political parties spend a lot of money on the nominating conventions. Political parties want their candidates to get a lot of attention and make as likable of an image as possible to as many people as possible. Also, “It was discovered that television coverage of the conventions boosted voter interest and attention to the campaign, especially among those who were not strong political partisans” (Trent et al, 52). This means that these conventions not only make the people who are already interested in politics and the campaign more interested with them but also makes people who might not be so interested with politics and the campaign more interested with them, which is a really great thing, especially because it is something that is done so easily.
The fact that the nominating conventions have so much power as just mentioned, influences and legitimizes the reasons that spending a large amount of money on an event that could possible go as far as make or break a candidate’s campaign is a great idea and a smart strategy, especially since it is one of the last parts of the process before the election that people will most likely remember the most.
This means that candidates are not only going to spend a lot of money on the nominating conventions but also a lot of time and effort on it too, promoting their answers to important issues. For instance, in the New York Times article “Romney Adopts Harder Message for Last Stretch” the author states, “Mitt Romney is heading into his nominating convention with his advisors convinced he needs a more combative footing against President Obama in order to appeal to white, working-class voters and to persuade them that he is the best answer to their economic frustrations” (Zeleny and Rutenberg, 1). The article also says that “Romney will be using other conservative speakers to amplify the conservative arguments against the president, will be using important cultural themes” to appeal to voters, and “Showing people that he will look out for their interests” at the convention (Zeleny and Rutenberg, 1). Therefore, Romney’s RNC focused on helping the public and doing things Obama did not do and this was shown and proved by the media (mainly and probably most effectively by television) coverage of the RNC. Obama is using the DNC to attack Romney and Romney’s character and what Romney stands for on important issues such as abortion and gay rights, and the media will also cover this very closely which will also help Obama’s campaign (Calmes, 1).
In conclusion, all of these reasons show why not only that candidates do but should spend money on the nominating conventions, because it reaches out to many people due to all of the media coverage and is one of the last big things that a candidate can do to move ahead or stay ahead in a campaign.
Works Cited
Calmes, Jackie. "Obama Team Sharpens Attacks on Rival's Character." New York Times. N.p., 30 Aug. 2012. Web. 3 Sept. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/31/us/politics/obama-moves-to-speak-on-romneys-character.html>.
Trent, Judith S., and Robert V. Friedenberg. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Zeleny, Jeff, and Jim Rutenberg. "Romney Adopts Harder Message for Last Stretch." New York Times. N.p., 25 Aug. 2012. Web. 3 Sept. 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/us/politics/mitt-romneys-campaign-adopts-a-harder-message.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all.
No comments:
Post a Comment