Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Talk Shows - October 24th
Have talk shows been an effective way for the candidates and their surrogates to campaign during this election? If you were a campaign strategist, would you suggest more or less use of talk shows are campaign platforms? You should reference Jones Ch. 3 as well as your media sources in your response.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Stephanie Griffin
ReplyDeleteOver the course of the last thirty years, talk shows have been utilized to serve as a way for audiences to become personalized and informed about political candidates. Originating from the roots of journalism, Jeffrey Jones describes why these pundit talk shows exist and have such influence on audiences watching. Jones describes the people hosting these talk shows act as journalistic who interview government officials, which could include political and surrogates (Jones 44). In addition, commentators hold a discussion rather than an interview to expose of opinions and issues (Jones 45). Furthermore, with the changes of cable television and contexts of programming during the nineties, these programs are targeted for individuals- in a sense that candidates and their surrogates can go on these shows to talk directly to audiences in a different way than they would delivering a pre-written speech (Jones 48). Thus far during the 2012 presidential campaign, we have see both candidates, along with their surrogates make guest appearances on many talk shows. These appearances certainly are an effective way for the candidates and their surrogates to “advertise” their campaign themes and help promote why their person is the winning candidate.
Over the course of cable changes, television show styles have adapted in a world of competition to attract audiences by their “viewing pleasures” (Jones 52). For example, there are many different types of talk shows to deliver political information, whether it is through a serious news perspective or satirical news perspective. For the people who enjoy watching political satire shows, like me, they can also consider the shows like Jon Stewart to be political talk shows. Jon Stewart had President Obama featured on his show this past Thursday for a different type of interaction with the president. According to the Carol Hartsell of the Huffington post, this was Obama’s sixth appearance on the show- so it has certainly shown to be effective (Hartsell). By coming on to The Daily Show, a show known for its political satire mix with common sense to politics, Obama is allowed to interact with a younger demographic that is usually watching the Daily Show. As Hartsell writes, “While Stewart has always insisted he is a comedian not a pundit, the president clearly respects his role as a satirist and his ability to reach young people, a crucial demographic in this election. In an interview with "Rolling Stone" in April, Obama said, "I think Jon Stewart's brilliant. It's amazing to me the degree to which he's able to cut through a bunch of the nonsense – for young people in particular, where I think he ends up having more credibility than a lot of more conventional news programs do” (Hartsell). Therefore, when having to attract certain demographics, the candidates turn to people who are credible as well as respectful to the extent of coming onto their talk shows to discuss current issues and their role in politics.
Griffin Part 2-
ReplyDeleteObama was also on the talk show The View with his wife, Michelle, last month. Certainly, The View attracts a different type of audience than The Daily Show; therefore, it is only effective for these candidates and their surrogates to go on different types of talk shows to attract different types of demographics watching. Similar to Obama’s many visits to The Daily Show, Devin Dwyer of ABC News notes this would be Obama’s fifth appearance on The View (Dwyer). This indicates becoming guests on these talk shows are part of a campaign strategy for the candidates and can be effective. Romney as well planned to come onto the show with his wife, Ann. However, Ann Romney went on the show alone last week, as Russell Goldman of ABC news writes. The benefit for Ann to go on the show as a surrogate allows her to talk about issues and respond in ways her husband, Mitt, could not as a presidential candidate, as well as attract the woman vote- a key demographic for the Romney campaign. As Goldman states, “As the race tightens and focuses on women, new attention is being paid to Mitt Romney’s evolved position on abortion, but the woman who knows him best — his wife Ann – emphatically stated her own stance on the topic today, saying: ‘I am pro-life.’ Ann Romney, an influential surrogate for her husband who often takes his place on daytime talk shows with large female audiences, typically avoids any comment about policy or her own politics. But today she told the hosts of “The View” that she, like her husband, is opposed to abortion” (Goldman). In other words, having surrogates come on these shows can be just as effective- even without the candidate present, because having more people promote the candidate’s messages, goals, and themes can influence voters to choose that candidate.
Finally, I would certainly suggest having the candidates as well as their surrogates go on these talk shows to interact with the hosts and commentators of the shows. As Jones writes, “[the talk show] links conversation, the interpersonal-the pre-modern oral tradition-with the mass-mediated spectacle born of modernity…there is space for the creation of multiple points of audience identification, as well as the opportunity for programmers to ‘refresh’ the televisual landscape” (Jones 54). In other words, these talk shows allow us to witness conversations between people and the present, rather than watching them deliver a speech. It allows the candidates, along with their surrogates, to become personable and could increase their likability (as long as they know how to answer the questions given and do not seem uncomfortable being there). Furthermore, by appearing on different types of talk shows (as Obama has shown with The Daily Show and The View), the candidates are allowed to talk in front of different types of audiences and expand their targeting voters. In short, these talk shows will evidently be an effective strategy for the candidates’ campaigns to maintain a specific image, echo campaign themes and goals, and become a likable candidate for the voting population.
Works Cited
Dwyer, Devin. "President Obama, First Lady to Appear Together on ‘The View’." ABC News. ABC News Network, 20 Sept. 2012. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. .
Goldman, Russell. "Ann Romney Tells ‘The View’ ‘I’m Pro-Life’." ABC News. ABC News Network, 18 Oct. 2012. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. .
Hartsell, Carol. "Jon Stewart Opens Obama Interview With Debate Jab: Shows President Photos Of Michelle's Reactions (VIDEO)." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 19 Oct. 2012. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. .
Jones, Jeffrey P., Entertaining Politics: New Political Television & Political Culture 2nd ed. (Lanham, MD Rowman & Littlefield, 2009).
Talk shows provide a diverse platform for candidates and their surrogates to campaign during election season. They are able to discuss important issues while simultaneously humanizing themselves to the audience. Jones explains how “it links conversation, the interpersonal – the pre-modern oral tradition – with the mass-mediated spectacle born of modernity” (54). When candidates appear on talk shows, they can reach out to voters who may not be as dialed-in as political junkies. Talk shows provide a common format for candidates and their surrogates to discuss politics without it being a formal or debate-like atmosphere. In doing so, they come down to the level of the average American, often targeting certain demographics like stay-at-home moms or working professionals. For example, President Obama made an appearance on “Late Night with Jimmy Fallon” over the summer to “slow jam the news.” He sang along with Fallon and his band about his views on current events. This video immediately went viral over social media, connecting with and scoring votes among a lot of college-aged students. For candidates to appear on talk shows, they are able to directly connect with a group of potential voters who may not have been interested or educated previously.
ReplyDeleteWhile the candidates themselves do not have an overwhelming amount of screen time on talk shows, their wives certainly do. Ann Romney has been on “Good Morning America” and “Live with Michael and Kelly.” Michelle Obama has made multiple appearances on “The Rachael Ray Show” and “Ellen.” There are many advantages that a campaign can gain from the wives talk show appearances. For instance, Ann Romney is able to reveal more about her family life, making her husband more likeable. However, in her “Good Morning America” segment, she didn’t once mention her husband. If the point of being a guest on a talk show is to address an audience about Governor Romney’s candidacy, then one would think it would be a more prominent subject. While Michelle Obama also doesn’t mention much about her husband’s politics, she does have the ability to demonstrate her accomplishments over the past four years. When she appeared on the season premiere of “The Rachael Ray Show” this fall, Mrs. Obama explained how she has changed physical education standards in American schools. Michelle Obama has a leg-up in the talk show circuit against Ann Romney because she can show voters what she has accomplished since President Obama’s swearing in.
I think that talk shows have been an effective way to campaign during this election season. They provide an informal platform that connects to more average Americans than stump campaigning or conventions. If I were a campaign strategist, I would suggest only slightly more talk show appearances by the candidates. It tends to show their casual side, making them seem less stiff and cold. However, the quality of shows needs to be considered in scheduling appearances. For example, President Obama was called in during a Miama radio show to give his opinion on the Nicki Minaj and Mariah Carey feud (FoxNews.com). Many media outlets and even the youth demographic he was trying to reach found this to be a bizarre and irrelevant topic. They were stunned that he was taking time out of his schedule to discuss a topic as unimportant as this, when more important and time-sensitive issues were occurring. Therefore, talk shows are certainly an instrumental part of the campaign trail during election season, but careful attention must be paid to the quality of show as well as the content covered. If a candidate can poke fun of himself while still conveying his views on “The Late Show with David Letterman” or if a potential first lady can connect an audience with the candidates’ family, then there can be success. However, if talk show appearances are used irrelevantly or without focus, then they may receive more backlash than thumbs up.
DeleteJeffrey P. Jones, Entertaining Politics: New Political Television & Political Culture 2nd ed. (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2009).
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/10/15/president-obama-weighs-in-on-mariah-carey-and-nicki-minaj/
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteMatthew Struzzi
ReplyDeleteBlog 7
Talk shows have been a very effective way to campaign for the candidates and their teams for this presidential election. The talk shows have become a very important source for connecting with a wider variety of the general public for the candidates. For instance, President Obama went on the popular comedy talk show called “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.” This was a really great and smart way to reach out to many voters. A lot of people watch “The Daily Show” and most of the people who do are young Americans. This was a great way to not only reach out to a huge group of people, but it was a great way to reach out to young voters who may not watch other news sources and talk shows and may have made them think about voting for him or at least supporting him. The fact that Jon Stewart is also a popular figure on television helps Obama get noticed more and helps Obama get more support as well. Talk shows are also a great way to reach out to people, because not all talk shows are political, and going on to non-political talk shows can also reach out to people who may not follow politics that closely. Although “The Daily Show” focuses mainly on politics, it does touch on other areas of television. Obama was smart to go on and talk with Jon Stewart. The author Jones talked about in his article how “Ross Perot used popular, nonpolitical talk shows as a primary means of communication with the general public during his political campaigns” (Jones, 48). As you can see, many candidates and politicians have been using talk shows as a way to reach out to the general public for a long time.
Also, talk shows have become a legitimate source of news, and people think and know that talk shows provide accurate key information on important issues, especially relating to politics. For instance, Larry King (a famous talk show host for CNN) has even been picked to moderate a third party debate in the upcoming weeks (Bakst, 1). This is probably greatly due to his high and popular status that he gained during his talk show years. Producers and other important campaign members know that not only will Larry King do a great job but will also reach out to more people. The author Jones discusses this idea in his article when he states, “The airing of political talk on television has always assumed one crucial point: that those doing the talk show should have direct ‘insider’ knowledge of what they are talking about. The assumption by television producers has been that “expertise” should be the defining aspect of who gets to speak – both by politicians that are directly involved, their handlers, or the journalists whose job it is to study and report on their activities. 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).
Matthew Struzzi
ReplyDeleteBlog 7 continued
If you were working on a political campaign, it would be a smart idea to use popular talk shows, whether or not they focus on politics, as a campaign platform. This idea of putting politicians on talk shows is very popular and common and like stated before helps a lot. For instance, it is so popular and helpful that news media such as MSNBC on television recently added another political talk show to the mornings on the weekend. A New York Times article discussed the new political talk show on MSNBC and stated, “Weekend mornings are a time when our audience wants intelligent political conversation, as the success of Chris Hayes has shown, in addition to coverage of all the headlines” (Stelter, 1). In conclusion, talk shows have become a very important part of the political campaign process and should be used by candidates and their teams.
Works Cited
Bakst, Brian. “Talk Show Icon King to Moderate 3rd Party Debate.” ABC News. N.p., 17 Oct. 2012. Web. 22 Oct. 2012. http://www.abcnews.com
Jones, Jeffrey. “The Transformation of Political Talk on Television.” Chapter 3. Pages 43-48. Blackboard class reading.
Stelter, Brian. “MSNBC Adding Another Political Talk Show on Weekends.” New York Times. N.p., 5 Jan. 2012. Web. 22 Oct. 2012. http://www.nytimes.com
I think that talk shows have certainly been a good tool that both sides have utilized throughout their campaigns. After every debate we have seen various people from both campaigns showing up on various talk shows. After both of the last 2 debates Paul Ryan and Joe Biden were both featured on “CBS This Morning” to discuss the debate. This is a good tactic because it allows for more extensive talk which comes from an official who is actually within the campaign, but it also allows for the VP candidates to discuss specifics about the debate, while really bolstering their candidate's performance. The strategy here is also interesting because both VP candidates were featured on the same show on the same day, which make sure that each campaign has a chance to get their voice heard so that they are not “forgotten” while the other campaign has a chance to speak. They are able to reach the same audience within the same show, and this is a key decision by the campaign.
ReplyDeleteIf I was running the campaigns I would most certainly make sure that I went on talk shows because if you don't it can truly limit your means of communication with your public. From a public relations perspective, the talk shows allow for the candidates to truly build on your relationships with various publics. A key example is Obama and Clinton both making Daily Show appearances. Younger generations surely view the Daily Show more than they view other news programs, so it is a key show for Democrats to make an appearance on in order that they may strengthen their base. Both came off as very likeable in their appearances, with both able to take advantage of the relaxed nature of the Daily Show due to their personalities. Obama was truly able to talk about what he does and doesn't want to do when he fielded a question from Stewart on whether he thought he had a stronger positive case for him winning or a stronger negative case against Mitt Romney. When Obama answered this question he was able to mention a plethora of issues which are important to younger voters, ranging from LGBT issues to college loans to energy policies.
While the Daily Show appearances are certainly interesting in their own right, and a good resource that the Democrats have taken full advantage of, the showings on CBS this morning and other mainstream outlets should not be discounted. The day after the second debate Paul Ryan appeared on “CBS This Morning” and discussed the debate and some of the key issues which were presented in the debate including Obama's response to Libya. Ryan took this opportunity to further criticize the administration's response and say “Why take two weeks later to claim that it's a terrorist attack? Why go on Univision and The View and not claim that it's a terrorist attack?” While this line of thinking may not fully work, as the President was still sorting out the facts during this time Paul Ryan was able to make these remarks in an unfiltered way that Romney was not able to during the debate. I think that this is why the talk show appearances are so important, because they allow for another place to clarify points and to elaborate on things which have been said during the debates or during the campaigns.
DeleteWhen Biden appeared on “CBS This Morning” after the last debate he said “he basically, as recently as my debate with congressman Ryan he had a very different take on Romney foreign policy.
All the criticism we've been hearing......didn't hear any of it, all I heard was this mad rush to as quickly as he could agree with the policies of our administration.” Again, we see that Biden has a forum in which he can say anything unfiltered about what happened in the debate and use the talk show as a resource to relay feelings about what was said during the debate.
Work Cited
Jeffrey P. Jones, Entertaining Politics: New Political Television & Political Culture 2nd ed. (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2009).
Barack Obama Pt. 1. Perf. Barack Obama, Jon Stewart. The Daily Show. Comedy Partners, n.d. Web. .
Biden on Debate: All I Heard Was Romney Agreeing with Our Policies. Perf. Joe Biden, Norah O'Donnell. CBS News. CBS Interactive, n.d. Web. .
Ryan: Romney's Libya Answer "not the Weakest Moment" Perf. Paul Ryan. CBS News. CBS Interactive, n.d. Web. .
Matthew Harkins
ReplyDeleteI absolutely think that talk shows have been an effective way for candidates and their surrogates to campaign during this election. These shows are a platform for strategic campaign placement. By having appearances on these shows campaigns can humanize their candidates and make them relatable, reaffirm campaign themes and ideals, as well as clarify rumors and debunk myths. The issue is, these shows have an incredible influence on informing the public, and the campaigns need to carefully place their moves accordingly either paralleling good coverage or pundit analysis or combating negative coverage. Because of this I would not encourage suggest more or less use of these shows, but use them when the opportunity is right and beneficial to a campaign.
“Since 1996, Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC have been the leading networks featuring political talk programming on cable.” (Jones 59) The popularity of these programs is undeniable. They are the networks where do people go to get their political information. Campaigns know this, and cannot ignore it. If campaigns were to ignore news talk shows, they would be running blindly through a field of trees. Instead, campaigns and news talk shows feed off of one another. Campaign events will be covered, pundits will talk about the events in an opinionated fashion, thus setting the stage for the campaigns next moves. If most of the population gets their news from these networks, the campaigns have to play along with the coverage they are getting.
Unfortunately, in today’s society, competition between media outlets to attract and appeal to audiences grows. There seem to be three popular news outlets with political talk in which the general public interested tune into to get their information on campaigns. As mentioned before, those networks are Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC. Each of these networks has their own agenda and opinions, and its no real secret. In an explanation of Fox News, “Featuring overtly conservative talk shows and ideologically biased news reporting, the network nevertheless branded itself ‘Fair and Balanced.’ The network also retained its alignment with ‘the people…by using slogans such as ‘we report, you decide’ in its promotional materials.” (Jones 59) Today, networks can clearly get away with biased, opinionated reporting, but just as one network leans left, there is competition leaning right.
Harkins Cont.
ReplyDeleteHow can campaigns use such polarized and opinionated political talk to their advantage? Well that’s where surrogates and renowned, like-minded pundits play their role. On CNN’s The Situation Room, we can see a recent example of campaigns using surrogates to talk and defend the candidate they are associated with. This segment was geared toward talk over the September attack in Libya in which four Americans were killed. The surrogate for the Obama campaign was General Wesley Clark and Romney’s campaign foreign policy advisor, Richard Williamson. I won’t go into specifics, but the purpose of the segment was to present two sides of the issue brought up in the second presidential debate this year. This could be considered campaign maintenance strategy, where two surrogates had to defend an occurrence that stirred journalistic attention.
Finally, Obama appeared on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. This appearance allowed Obama to restate his ideas and policies brought up at the end of the second debate, as well admit to his off night in the first debate. In an article from the Wall Street Journal quoting Obama on his appearance on the show, “If four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal,” he said. “We’re going to fix it, all of it. And what happens, during the course of a presidency, is that the government is a big operation and any given time something screws up. And you make sure that you find out what’s broken and you fix it.” Obama also said he had an “off night” on the first debate.
Clearly, campaigns use talk shows as opportunity to further, mend, or exploit their campaign to their benefit. As to how much should a campaign do this, I would not recommend more than necessary to keep up with your opponent. You don’t want the media and the public to get sick of your campaign and its candidate.
Works Cited
"The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - Political Comedy - Fake News | Comedy Central." The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - Political Comedy - Fake News | Comedy Central. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Oct. 2012. .
Jones, Jeffrey P., Entertaining Politics: New Political Television & Political Culture 2nd ed. (Lanham, MD Rowman & Littlefield, 2009).
"Obama Pressed on Benghazi on Daily Show." WSJ.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Oct. 2012. .
"VIDEO: Surrogates Spar over Libya." – CNN Political Ticker. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Oct. 2012. .
Kimberly Rizzitano
ReplyDeleteIn a political campaign the candidates use several means to get their face and their message out to the public. As technology and the ability of media have grown, talk shows have taken television by storm and have become an important part of a campaign. Jones’ first point in the reading is that “…those doing the talking should have direct “insider” knowledge” (Jones, 43). Jones mentions that the guest should have expertise on the campaign and so are such people like important members in the campaign team, or the candidate themselves. Using such people allows the talk show to function as a source to educate the public on the campaign and the issues at hand. Another benefit is that it allows the candidate to talk openly in more of a discussion format rather than an interview. It creates the opportunity for the candidate and their surrogates to speak more directly toward the audience (Jones, 48). In the 2012 presidential race we have seen Barak Obama, Mitt Romney and their surrogates make time for talk shows in order to effectively reach out to voters on a more casual platform.
Implementing talk shows as an important tool, Obama took to the set of The Daily Show recently. It being one that is based in political satire Obama was able to reach out to the younger voters as well as an audience that may not tune into the political debates or serious news networks. Jones supports this idea noting “Audiences therefore tuned in to politicians on entertainment talk shows precisely because these shows did not produce the traditional staid political talk to which they had grown accustomed,” (Jones, 49). This appearance overall was an effective use of a talk show because Obama was able to be seen as relaxed and engaging while still appealing as a political figurehead. However, like with media resource there can be negatives. One issue that arose from this appearance was a conservative uproar over a comment Obama made about the deaths of Americans in Libya. The Los Angeles Times reported “Obama said that it was “not optimal” that four Americans were killed in Libya – a detail many conservatives seized upon as evidence of his apparent indifference to the attack,” (Los Angeles Times). Newsweek also picked up the story, highlighting that Obama’s words “may not be the optimal choice” either (TheDailyBeast.com) Though Obama was restating what John Stewart had said this is a prime example of how talk shows can create a stir and conversation over campaigns. Another way Obama has been able to use a talk show effectively is by means of his wife appearing on such shows like Ellen. If I were Obama’s campaign strategist I would think this was a wise move to have his wife appear on his behalf because it shows him as more than just the president. He becomes Obama the family man. She is able to speak freely and relaxed therefore displaying her admiration for her husband and his cause and allow the audience to see him as more than just his title as president. As a strategist this is wise because it makes him much more personal and humanizes him to voters.
CONTINUED
DeleteLikewise, Ann Romney has attempted the same with her appearances on shows like The View. She is there to represent her husband and to bring Romney into the minds of an audience that may not being seeking out political information. However, as a strategist for the Romney campaign I would caution speaking about such topics like Ann did on The View about the issues of pro-life and pro-choice. Fox News reported “Whoopi Goldberg barely let Ann Romney settle into her seat on ABC's "The View" before pouncing on the first lady hopeful, asking why Mitt Romney didn't serve in Vietnam…” (FoxNews.com). This shows one of the risks of appearing on talk shows because the candidate or the surrogate is in front of a live studio audience answering questions that can be challenging to sum up in simple brief responses. Newsweek also mentioned her saying that Romney would not run again if he were to lose (TheDailyBeast.com). If I were the strategist of the Romney campaign, I would have previously cautioned her. It appeared as if she may have been taken off guard by such serious questions being asked. I would have had her answer the question and then steer the conversation away and attempt to paint an image of Romney as a loving caring family man since one issue Romney has faced is that many seeing him as robotic and a little unemotional in comparison to Obama.
In all, the use of talk shows is important in the campaign because regardless of the possibility of backlash like both parties have faced with appearances. They still allow a candidate’s image to be promoted to a base of voters who otherwise may have not gotten to know them as well due to lack of political involvement.
Works Cited
"Ann Romney: If Mitt Loses, We're Done." The Daily Beast. Newsweek/Daily Beast, 18 Oct. 2012. Web. 23 Oct. 2012. .
Blake, Meredith. "Jon Stewart Says Conservatives Have 'Barack-tose Intolerance'" Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 23 Oct. 2012. Web. 23 Oct. 2012. .
Jones, Jeffrey P. “Chapter 3.” Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civil Culture. 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowen and Littlefield, 2009. 43-62. Print.
Miller, Joshua R. "'View' Takes Religion, Military, Abortion Shots at Ann Romney after Playing 'romantic' Softball with Obamas." Fox News. FOX News Network, 18 Oct. 2012. Web. 23 Oct. 2012. .
"Obama: Libya Deaths 'Not Optimal'" The Daily Beast. Newsweek/Daily Beast, 18 Oct. 2012. Web. 23 Oct. 2012. .
The idea of talk shows mixing with politics became increasingly popular in the 80s and 90s and has since taken off. In Jones’ reading “From Insiders to Outsiders, Jones writes, “Audiences therefore tuned in to politicians on entertainment talk shows precisely because these shows did not produce the traditional staid talk to which they had grown accustomed. Instead, audiences now found that they too were allowed to ask questions of the candidates, and that responses came in a language that was more accessible and commonsensical than the highly cloaked and guarded of language of spin offered by other venues.” (Jones 49)
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, the idea of candidates and surrogates appearing on these entertainment talk shows is for two main reasons. The first reason is to reach out to the American voters who are not obtaining information regarding politics in any other way. These are the Americans who are not up to date on the latest campaign information, simply because they do not care as much to search for it. These are the Americans who are more consumed in celebrities and entertainment news. Being so aware of that, I think that is definitely why politics heads to these talk shows and basically gives its viewers no other choice but to watch and learn, or turn off the TV.
The second reason I believe politics has become a major topic during election years on these talk shows is to stress the fact that the people running for the office of President are simply that: people. They’re humans. Sometimes they are so highly regarded and in the limelight, we as Americans lose sight of the fact that they are just citizens of our country, too, seeking change in our nation.
CONTINUED
ReplyDeleteThroughout his 2008 campaign and his past four years as president, Obama has appeared on “Late Night with Jimmy Fallon,” “The Daily Show,” “The Late Show with David Letterman,” “The Oprah Winfrey Show,” and many others. Tonight, Obama is scheduled to appear on “The Tonight Show” with Jay Leno. According to Jennifer Epstein’s Politico news article, “Obama to chat with Leno on Wednesday”, “Obama was last on NBC's signature program nearly a year ago, on Oct. 25, 2011. Though Jay Leno isn't known for grilling his guests, the host did push the president in that interview to discuss the killing of Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi, which happened just days earlier.” (Politico) So, in his appearance almost one year ago to date, President Obama was given the opportunity to discuss current pressing issues, allowing important information to really getting out there via these talk shows. I believe the same will happen on tonight’s episode, with the current pressing issues being reelection, the recent debates, and I’m sure the economy will get talked about at some point.
During this campaign, President Obama and First Lady Michelle appeared on “The View” in late September. This was their first combined appearance on a talk show, and the content of the segment consisted mostly of information about their relationship and marriage. In another Politico news article, “I’m ‘eye candy’ for the women of ‘The View,’” Josh Gerstein writes, "The View" program the Obamas taped Monday is set to air Tuesday, taking the first couple in front of a politically-coveted heavily-female audience six weeks before the November election.” (Politico) The topic of women is one of the most talked about topics this election and he appears on this showed with his beloved, strong and powerful wife just six weeks before. This is easily a way to gain the vote of women voters, because he’s appearing “human.”
At one point, Jones bring up the point that it is difficult to find and create these entertainment talk shows cheaply while still being effective and popular enough to clearly express the current political issues. He writes, “disillusionment in politics leads to hopeful answers in technology and news media; frustration with government finds an outlet in culture, including the primary in popular culture of “celebrity…” (Jones 51) Why not use culture in order to be effective during a campaign? If I were a campaign strategist, I think I would utilize these talks shows probably the same amount as they are being used, if not a little bit more during this election because of how prevalent social media, the Internet, and television have become in the 2012 campaign. The only reason I wouldn’t utilize them a lot more is because I would not want to take the chance of crossing the fine line between professionalism and ignorance.
Works Cited
Epstein, Jennifer. “Obama to chat with Jay Leno on Wednesday.” Politico. 21 October 2012. Web. 24 October 2012.
Gerstein, Josh. “I’m ‘eye candy’ for the women of ‘The View.’” Politico. 24 September 2012. Web 24 October 2012.
Jones, Jeffrey P., Entertaining Politics: New Political Television & Political Culture 2nd ed. (Lanham, MD Rowman & Littlefield, 2009).
Talk shows have been very effective for candidates and their surrogates within the past few years. Jeffery Jones talks about the first types of talk shows used to discuss a campaign. He comments on pundit talk growing from journalism by saying, “The earliest manifestations of this on network television were the shows Meet the Press on NBC(1947) and Face the Nation on CBS (1954), where newspaper and broadcast journalists interviewed government officials and news makers of the day” (44). These shows helped inform people of the political issues and actions ,and both are still around today. Other pundit shows developed, such as roundtable discussions among journalists and commentator and guest discussions. Regardless of the format, these shows have given exposure for the candidates and their audiences.
ReplyDeleteLater in time, we found ways that different types of talk shows emerged. Jones says that during the 1980s and 1990s, there was “an intermixing of celebrity and politics, the appeal to commonsensical ways of talking and thinking about politics, and a concurrent upsurge in populist anti-politics” (49). These type of shows became popular among the people because they felt like they were involved in the show. Jones goes on to say, “audiences now found that they too were allowed to ask questions of the candidates, and that responses came in a language that was more accessible and commonsensical than the highly cloaked and guarded language of spin offered in other venues.” (49). If an audience member wasn’t particular interest in politics or was unaware of a candidate’s views, they could attend or watch these talk shows to get answers that were easier to understand. These shows put the candidates in a more relaxed setting, showing that he/she is a normal person, too.
One of the talk shows that has become popular over the years, is The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Although this show is mostly known for its humor and satire about politics, it has also become a successful show for candidates to appear on. Obama has appeared on The Daily Show six times, and this gives Jon’s audience a chance to hear from the President himself. Stewart has criticized and poked fun at both candidates during the debate this year, but he does it to be humorous, yet informative. His show attracts a lot of viewers because of the way the information is presented. When he has Obama as a guest, Obama is able to advertise for his campaign as well as addressing issues that are prevalent. In his most recent appearance on the show on October 18th, Obama “faced repeated questions about his administration’s shifting accounts of what led to the Benghazi attack and the appearance that the White House and the State Department were not on the same page” (Lee). By delivering these questions, people are able to see a serious side of the show. According to the Wall Street Journal, Obama’s appearance set the foundation for his upcoming debate. Lee says, “The president’s answers offer a potential preview of how he’ll field such questions on Monday during his final debate with Republican Mitt Romney.”
Another talk show that has become popular is The View. It is a morning talk show that attracts a large women audience. They feature many guests, and Barack and Michelle Obama have most recently appeared on the show. According to the article “On ‘ The View,’ Obama discusses Mideast Unrest,” Obama addressed the anti-Islamic video. “In an interview taped Monday to air Tuesday “The View,” Mr. Obama said the best way to “marginalize” the inflammatory remarks in the anti-Islamic video is to ignore it” (Favole). By commenting on the video and other matters, The View’s female audience is able to see the President’s stance in what they consider a familiar setting. Mrs. Obama also joined her husband on the show, which “allowed for some lighter moments” (Favole). They asked her if the president ever gets angry, which helps to convey to the audience that they are a real couple and family, even though they are always in the spotlight. This helps Obama’s image by making him more relatable by being able to sit back and have some laughs.
DeleteI think that if I was a campaign strategist, more talk shows would be used as a campaign platform. Most times, more college students/young adults are tuning into talk shows – rather than a candidate’s speech or debate. If a person is a true fan of a show, it could be beneficial for a candidate because they will reach an audience that they wouldn’t in any other way. A talk show is really helpful because main points are addressed, and questions of other natures help to humanize the candidate.
Works Cited
Favole, Jared A. "On 'The View' Obama Discusses Mideast Unrest." The Wall Street Journal. N.p., 24 Sept. 2012. Web. 24 Oct. 2012. .
Jones, Jeffrey P., Entertaining Politics: New Political Television & Political Culture 2nd ed. (Lanham, MD Rowman & Littlefield, 2009).
Lee, Carol E. "Obama Pressed on Benghazi on Daily Show." The Wall Street Journal. N.p., 18 Oct. 2012. Web. 24 Oct. 2012. .
Talk shows in the United States created another unique platform for politicians to get their agenda across to a diverse and different audience. The original purpose of political talk shows was made for political experts to give their authoritative opinion. This all changed with creation of cable television. The reading by Jones explains,” The decade of the 1990s ushered onto the stage new programming and cable channels that explicitly offered new forms of and approaches to political talk on television” (Jones 44). This new type of television show allowed for an entirely new method of television shows that did not have just experts explaining and discussing politics. This new realm of television not only opened up options for the media and broadcaster, but for political candidates themselves.
ReplyDeleteBoth candidates in this election period, their vice presidents, and their delegates have all appeared on talk shows to get their particular message and view across in hopes to ultimately drum up more support from voters they may not have reached in other ways. The candidates or an extension of them, are strategically placed on certain shows at specific times for a reason. A great example of this was yesterday when Paul Ryan appeared on the CBS morning show to discuss the third presidential debate, and to reiterate Mitt Romney’s point of view, and to help Romney in parts where he was weaker. For example, the comment that Obama made about the bayonets, really took off on twitter and the in media. It made Romney look foolish, and out of touch. On CBS Ryan gave his opinion on this issue saying, “The president was being petty: "To compare modern American battleships and Navy with bayonets - I just don't understand that comparison.” ( CBS Interactive). Paul
Ryan used being on CBS news to his advantage. His purpose for being on the morning show was to reassure the audience of Mitt Romney’s point of view, and to clear up any points that may have gotten over looked during the actual debate. This is crucial to the campaign, because there is a great chance that there were people who tuned into CBS news in the morning that did not watch the debate the night before, and listening to Paul Ryan’s version of the debate may have swayed their opinion on who came off better.
ReplyDeleteBarack Obama and his campaign also planned for Obama and his delegates to appear on talk shows. In an article from ABC news from September 20th , explains how both Barack and Michelle Obama would appear on the daytime talk show The View. The television show The View is a great example of what Jones speaks about in the reading in regards to changing the relationships between audiences and the television process. The text explains,” Shows from the start are from the start defined by, and pitched at niched audiences who are flattered by claims of difference and distinction.” (Jones 52). The television show The View was specifically created for women, and to discuss issues that pertained and were important to women. ABC news reported what type of an interview would be conducted explaining,” The first couple will together take questions on their relationship, family life inside the White House and the 2012 presidential race from the program’s five female hosts” (Dywer). This is a perfect set-up for the President. Since women voters are a huge demographic, especially in this election. Since the target audience of the television show The View and the questions will be issues that women are interested in. Also, Barack and Michelle together will really be able to get across the image of family first, and other values that women find important in a candidate.
Talk shows are an excellent venue for candidates to appear on during their election campaigns. The reason for this is the ability of television to reach such a huge demographic of people, that may not be reached on the campaign trail. Along with, these televisions shows talk shows are also reaching people who are not particularly engaged in politics. It is likely that many people who do not care to keep up on the candidates, or even watch the debates will at some point still be tuning into morning news shows and talk shows like The View. With this reasoning, the candidates will be able to introduce themselves to the American people who wanted to avoid politics. Since, talk shows usually portray a better side to the candidates this will ultimately turn out in their favor to appear on talk shows.
Works Cited
CBS Interactice. "Ryan: "I Just Don't Understand" Bayonet Remark." CBSNews. CBS Interactive, 22 Oct. 2012. Web. 24 Oct. 2012. .
Dwyer, Devin. "President Obama, First Lady to Appear Together on ‘The View." ABC News. ABC News Network, 20 Sept. 2012. Web. 23 Oct. 2012. .
Jones, Jeffrey P., Entertaining Politics: New Political Television & Political Culture 2nd ed. (Lanham, MD Rowman & Littlefield, 2009).
During this campaign talk shows have been a tool for both sides of the campaign. While President Obama and his surrogates have been making the rounds appearing on late night and day time talk shows, on the Romney campaign it has been more focused on his surrogates. “Like her sons, Ann Romney has used her campaign appearances to vouch for her husband’s character. She’s become a regular on the talk-show circuit, appearing on “The View,” ‘’The Tonight Show” and even co-hosting “Good Morning America” (Asoociated Press 1). It is not to say that Mitt has not been on any talk shows, but it is to say that Ann Romney has been on more.
ReplyDeleteTalk show appearances have incredible ability to create media buzz about a candidate. For Mitt Romney some of the buzz that has been created is more about him not showing up. “David Letterman has taken a glimpse into Mitt Romney’s future, and if the GOP candidate doesn’t appear on “The Late Show” soon, Letterman predicts that he’ll be dancing with the stars before he’s running the country” (McGlynn 1). Talk shows give the candidates a chance to sit down and talk to someone; it can humanize them while still being a platform to promote their stances. The general public has heard the stump speeches and seen the debates. In those platforms the candidates are trying their best to deliver their message in a way that reaches anyone and everyone. When they appear on a talk show, they are answering questions to one person. Even though an audience member is not that person, the answers can come across as more real. That is a tool that any candidate can use. Mitt Romney has been criticized for not being warm and fuzzy, and not much of a smooth talker Barak Obama is it is not easy for the general public to relate to a man who is referred to as Mr. President.
What may be the biggest struggle of talk show appearances for the candidates are the talk show hosts themselves. Talk show hosts have no investment in being objective, but they do have an investment in their target audience whom they have built a relationship with. “In short, they are the visible face of political opinion, and as a result have a vested interest—as all celebrities do—in maintaining that image by staying within the bounds of celebrity system that created them” (Jones 47). The candidates are aware and take the precaution of trying to appear where they have some support from the host.
If I were to be a campaign strategist I would push my candidate to go on as many talk shows as they could fit into their schedule. Today where you can tweet at your favorite celebrity and follow politicians on instagram, the general American population values a direct connection to a candidate over many things. They wants politicians who understand the average person so well that their policies will actually make a difference to them, a difference that they can see and feel. If you listen to stump speeches and debates apparently all Romney and Obama want is a strong middle class, no matter what the subject being discussed may be (foreign policy debate I am looking at you). In his appearance on “The Daily Show With Jon Stewart” Barak Obama had to first answer a question about which debate two photos of Michelle Obama were from (one she looked mad the other happy). Bringing the president to the level that so many Americans understand, such as having an angry spouse, could only be done on a talk show. Talk show appearences give candidates the unique ability to present their same platform in a way that seems less calculated, and that makes them look significantly more human and there are a lot of voters that would rather vote someone they can relate to into office over someone who seems distant.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
Jones, Jeffrey P. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civil Culture. Lanham, MD., Oxford: Rowen and Littlefield, 2005. Print.
McGlynn, Katla. "David Letterman Warns Mitt Romney: 'Late Show' Appearance Could Decide The Election (VIDEO)." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 10 Oct. 2012. Web. 24 Oct. 2012. .
Press, Associated. "From Springsteen to Romney Sons, Campaigns Dispatching Surrogates to Help Shore up Support." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 23 Oct. 2012. Web. 24 Oct. 2012. .
Yahr, Emily. "Mitt Romney Cancels ‘View’ Appearance, Has No Plans to Reschedule." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 15 Oct. 2012. Web. 24 Oct. 2012. .
In the chapter Jones discusses how during the 1990s there was a change in the television environment. One change that took place and that has had a lasting effect is the view of the television as a social tool. Jones says, “This is a social environment where communication technologies offered hope and optimism for overcoming one-way flows of communication from distant forces of bureaucracy and control, thereby giving people greater, voice, access, and choice” (Jones, 51). Television is most certainly a social tool today and is still where many Americans get their information about the election and the candidates. As began in the 1990s and continues to today, television viewers now how numerous choices on where they get their information. In regards to talk shows not only are there the traditional late night staples such as Jay Leno and David Letterman, there are also talk shows aimed at women during the mid-afternoon, such as the View, there are political Sunday talk shows, such as Face The Nation, talk shows that are partisan tailored, such as the Rachel Maddow Show, and shows that mix comedy with talk, such as the Daily Show. With this plethora of options, the television viewer can choose a show that is specifically aimed at their demographic and therefore provides information about the election and candidates that is related to him or her. While having numerous options is good for the audience in the way that it does not force them to be stuck with the information that the campaigns and candidates only release, it is not a perfect system. Many of these talk shows do not just provide information, but opinion. For the conscious viewer these opinions can help him reflect on his own opinions and beliefs. It can be push the viewer to think about things differently and arrive at new conclusions. But if the viewer is not conscious that much of what is said on talk shows are opinions, and then we wind up with viewers believing what is meant to be discussion or theory to be fact. While this viewer may have more information about the election and candidates, it is only from a very specified viewpoints.
ReplyDeleteThis election season the candidates and their surrogates have utilized televisions programs as a way to get their message across. Candidates, like viewers, often pick shows that add up with their beliefs. They tend to go on shows where they will not receive much criticism. For example it would be unusual to see President Obama on Fox News speaking with Bill O’Reilly. As a Obama is a Democrat it would be an odd and probably unwise choice to go on a conservative network with one its most bombastic and outspoken talking heads. Instead Obama has stuck with shows that suit him. For example he recently was on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Stewart’s show has a younger audience and many of Obama’s supporters are from younger generations. Obama also has this image of being “cool” so going on the Daily Show helps with his “cool factor”, as it is one of the more trendy talk shows out there.
Recently Romney did not go on The View in fear of criticism. He was scheduled to appear on The View shortly after the 47 percent video was leaked. His spokesperson said it was a scheduling conflict, but many believe that Romney would not be welcomed by some of the more liberal ladies of The View (Shapiro). I believe this was the right choice for Romney to make. If there had been any type of verbal attack, it would have made its round on the regular news as well as the internet. At that point in the campaign Romney did not need any more bad press, and not going on The View prevented another possible press problem from happening.
As a campaign strategist I would have the campaigns focus on more of the late night staples at this point in the campaign. I feel as if many of the issues have been beaten to death and most Americans know where they stand with them. The people that are undecided may want to see more of the candidates’ characters. Late night talk show staples are the perfect place for them to do so. For example Ann Romney was on Jay Leno about a month ago where she was able to discuss numerous things, such as her family, the stress of the campaign, and Governor Romney’s dancing skills (NBC News Staff) Interviews like these make it appear as if the candidate or surrogates are speaking to directly to the viewer and the topics normally stray away from politics. Right now it seems that people are deciding which candidate they like more (or less) and the late night shows are the place where they can go to boost their likability factor.
DeleteWorks Cited
Jones, Jeffrey P. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civil Culture. Lanham, MD., Oxford: Rowen and Littlefield, 2005. Print.
NBC News Staff. "Late Night: Stewart Interviews King of Jordan, and Ann Romney Talks Mitt's Dance Skills." NBC News Entertainment. N.p., 26 Sept. 2012. Web. 23 Oct. 2012. .
Shapiro, Rebecca. "Mitt Romney 'View' Appearance: Republican Presidential Candidate Cancels On ABC Talk Show (VIDEO)." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 15 Oct. 2012. Web. 22 Oct. 2012. .
“Since 1996, Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC have been the leading networks featuring political talk programming on cable.” (Jones 59) It is clear why these particular programs are the leaders in political news, but there is one thing in common among all of these programs – they attract virtually the same demographic across the board. In addition, these programs are generally structured in a way that leaves little room for laughter or personal anecdotes. The beauty of talk shows is that voters, outside of the percentage that tunes into one of the aforementioned networks, can see a different side of a politician. News programs have the specific duty to inform whereas, talk shows have the flexibility to provide varied information while fulfilling their purpose of light entertainment. I think talk shows are a great way for candidates to express themselves in a more natural way, which resonates with the people on a greater level.
ReplyDeleteJones seems to agree when he suggests that, “Audiences therefore tuned in to politicians on entertainment talk shows precisely because these shows did not produce the traditional staid talk to which they had grown accustomed. Instead, audiences now found that they too were allowed to ask questions of the candidates, and that responses came in a language that was more accessible and commonsensical than the highly cloaked and guarded of language of spin offered by other venues.” (Jones 49)
For example, during this campaign cycle Michelle Obama made an appearance on Steve Harvey’s new daytime talk show and even Harvey confessed he learned a great deal about the first lady and the president. The Daily Beast reads, “On the episode, which airs Wednesday, the Obamas’ 20th wedding anniversary, the first lady reveals details about the couple’s early courtship. ‘We talked about stuff that I never knew: about her husband, their relationship, whether he was romantic or not, the kids one day dating, where they first met, where was the first date,’ Harvey says. ‘We got pictures of where the first kiss was.’” Yes, these issues are not significant in the scheme of an election- no voter is going to cast a ballot depending on who had a better first date Romney or Obama- but what is important here is the way a voter relates to a candidate. Everyone has had a first date. Children are an important topic in American households. The First Lady discussing issues of life that extend beyond economic classes, geographical boundaries, or other identifying groups are conversations that make her husband more reliable and trustworthy in the eyes of American voters. I think it’s great that Michelle has made so many appearances on talk shows, and I think America agrees.
Furthermore, talk shows provide a venue for positive conversation about the candidate as opposed to news programs which often spark argumentative discourse. William Benoit, in his book Campaign 2000: a Functional Analysis of Presidential Campaign iscourse examines the style and use of talk shows during a campaign and offers that, “the candidates devote most of their utterances to acclaiming (91 percent).” (Benoit, 225) This means that talk shows are more positive in conversation and are used to promote a candidate as opposed to bas an opponent. Benoit continues to explain, “talk shows are a primarily positive venue, and the candidates lively viewed excessively attacking the other candidate as inappropriate.” (Benoit, 225) I think this might be the reason that this campaign has been less fought on the stages of daytime talk and perceived as much more negative in it’s tone.
DeleteI think it is important to note that Michelle is not a candidate, she is a surrogate. I personally believe that candidates should limit their appearances on talk shows for fear of appearing weak, unfocused or too caught up in the celebrity of it all. I think a few appearances are fine but I think any more than what we have seen in this campaign or the campaigns in 2008 would be too much. The position of president is a serious matter and should be treated with the respect and caution it deserves. As Benoit noted, the talk shows are a very positive venue and being too chatty can seem to be a lack of focus or understanding of the seriousness of the job at hand. I think Michelle and Ann should stick to Ellen and Oprah while Barack and Mitt chat it up with Anderson and Soledad.
Jones, Jeffrey P. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civil Culture. Lanham, MD., Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005. Print.
DeleteBenoit, William L.. Campaign 2000: A Functional Analysis of Presidentail Campaign Discourse. Rowman & Littlefield, 2003. E-Book.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/10/03/steve-harvey-on-hosting-michelle-obama-his-new-talk-show-more.html
ReplyDeleteTalk shows have become an important source of information for voters and an effective way for candidates to relay messages. Talk shows allow candidates to get on a more personal level with the public by answering questions generated by the public. Jeffrey Jones’s Entertaining Politics explains why these talk shows are effective in influencing the people watching. The talk shows are able to interview the candidates rather than hear the same speeches they conduct all over the country and voters are able to have some information regarding their beliefs, attitudes and value orientations. For instance, in an interview with Chris Wallace on “Fox News Sunday”, Romney explained how he planned to position himself as “a champion for the middle class by pushing tax cutes for the wealthy, spending cuts for the poor and rolling back regulations that help protect people and the environment” (Parker 1). While effectively relaying his political message, he was exposed to other subjects such as standing with his wife as she got her multiple sclerosis diagnosis. He explained the horrors of this event and how it had effected him. The public was able to see a more personable side to Romney.
Over the past two decades, “appearances on late-night talk shows have become a staple of US presidential campaigns, offering candidates the chance to exchange batter with the hosts and display spontaneity often lacking from highly choreographed campaign events” (Novisti 1). In this election, we have seen candidates appear on many different types of talk shows from “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart” to the “View”. To gain the majority of the vote, candidates have been using entertainment talks shows to appeal to all types of voters (Jones 49). For instance, in an interview, Romney explained how it is crucial to take advantage of these shows explaining he’s “been on Letterman a couple times... and I’ve been on Letterman more than a couple times” (Novisti 1). Obama is no stranger to talk shows either making his seventh appearance on Letterman’s show, while having appeared on many other shows in the past several months. While the conversations are typically light on these types of shows, candidates are still able to touch upon serious issues. For instance on The Daily Show, Obama was asked about the deadly attack on the US embassy in Libya.
If I were a campaign strategist, I would suggest the use of more talk shows. Talk shows are a way to reach out to all sorts of people. Many Americans that do not follow politics are able to see the candidate on their favorite talk show and actually learn something. This is a great way to influence people to get out and vote. Also, talk shows are extremely useful in showing different sides of a candidate. When in the conversation style interviews, they can show more emotion and compassion within their answers. Also, with late-night talk shows, people are able to see a funner, more personable side of them, showing that they are not just political robots. Talk shows are the most effective ways of allowing the public to see the true character of the presidential candidate.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
Jones, Jeffrey P., Entertaining Politics: New Political Television & Political Culture 2nd ed. (Lanham, MD Rowman & Littlefield, 2009).
Novisti, Ria. "US Candidates Hit TV Talk Show Circuit." The Turkish Weekly. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Oct. 2012. .
Parker, Ashely. "Mitt Romney Makes a Rare Sunday Television Show Appearence." The New York Times. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Oct. 2012. .