Expensive Media Campaign Candidates example essay topic

MASS MEDIA POLIT U.S. ICAL CAMPAIGNS Summary: This is a 14-page paper that discusses the influence of mass media on the way political campaigns are run. It uses 7 references in MLA format. On the Monday when the United States Supreme Court issued its ruling on whether the deadline for certifying votes could be extended in Florida, there was an unsettling sight on TV. News correspondents came flying out of the court and stood, out of breath, before the cameras. Without having read the six-page ruling, reporters began to talk to millions of people about what the court had done. Some reporters got it flat wrong, saying the high court's ruling was in favor of George W. Bush and a defeat for Al Gore.

News wire services and several Web sites also incorrectly summarized the court's action. It was only later that the news media corrected itself by reporting that the court had simply sent the case back to the Florida Supreme Court and requested some clarification. Walter Cronkite, the living legend of TV news, has criticized his profession for having too much of an emphasis on getting the news out fast. And the Society of Professional Journalists has criticized the media in the aftermath of these events for failing to act independently in their reporting on the election... so what is the real role of the media in political campaigns? Does it report or influence? INTRODUCTION One of the most important aspects of political elections is its media presentation.

This is especially enhanced in the United States where the majority of the people are media thirsty. The important factor that plays on the electoral process is the ability to promote and set the agenda for the candidate. This comes from the outcome they want from their campaigns. Most candidates believe that their policy to promote their agenda at the beginning of the year is never effective because people eventually get tired of watching their faces and their biographies on the media channels and other mass media distribution. Hence, it acts negatively on the psychology of the people.

Therefore it is imperative that media must be used in a very contingent manner. Secondly, the image of the candidate presented in mass media is paid therefore they need to be effective. Candidates depend on the office of the campaigner to do this. The media for example gives the power to the candidate to create policy views in a realistic manner that is meant to attract the attention of the viewer. The imagery, the impression and the psychological connotation of the ads are all influential, if any of the elements were missing it would mean that the candidate would lose ground against his / her opponents (Lawrence 213).

Since most of the media are either free or lowly paid like the news, PR and general programs, candidates feel they are not presented correctly. IN an effort to bring up their status among their voters or potential voters, they need impressive ads on television or extensive campaigns on radio airtime. Therefore in view of their situation mass media is the best option (Lawrence 213). In this context the need to evaluate the effects of media, its analysis of the psychological validity as well as financial implication it has on the overall election result is important. For this purpose the researcher has posit the following hypothesis for discussion.

HYPOTHESIS STATEMENT The mass media (political cartoons, print, TV) influences the way political campaigns are run. Moreover, I believe the effect is more greatly felt in the earlier stages of campaigns, up to about 2-4 weeks before the election. DISCUSSION The following is a detailed investigation why mass media influence the way candidates run their political campaigns. Evolution of mass media in political campaigns The evolution of media as a way to inform voters has been age old. In the olden days when Abe Lincoln was fighting for his own camping it was the newspaper and the caricatures that attracted the voters most. His street speeches as well as personal relationship with his people of that time brought about public relation.

However, over the years these have changed in tactics along with technological development. The freedom of the press as well as the introduction of TV and radio has changed the way political campaigns are run. For example during the fifties the media form for political campaign was the radio and newspapers. While today it is satellite TV and the Internet. These have evolved into more dynamic mass media form but expensive one. In the olden days the cost of the campaign was important because fewer would be willing to donate to something that did not concern them except in changing their business forever.

Hence, political campaigns were constraint by budget and cost. Today the structure is totally different. The campaigners have the freedom to choose whichever the media they want because they know these very same media would effect the people who fund the campaign. Thus, in employing mass media they are in effect employing the source of funding. The more successful they are in creating content for media for presentation, the better their funding standing. That is why the major focus of the election camping is not about what outcome the camping will bring but how much money it would earn.

The impact it has on the overall camping is massive. First of all congressional election is no longer a free form of campaigning for the elective bodies and forming new legislative. In fact it has become one of the biggest race for funding rights and who would secure more funding from venture capitalists. Secondly it has changed the form of elective campaigns.

The focus of the camping is no longer on wining and securing the seat through strategy. Hence, the direction of the camping has also changed as well. TV campaigns that were supposed to be about information, today it is about feeding the information to the voters. That is why one would see the evolution of TV talk shows like Jerry Springer and short programs on the candidates that are meant to degrade the other opponents, bringing out the bad secrets of their personal lives then about merits of the candidate and his integrity in becoming a successful candidate. For example "It was in this 9-a. m. -to-10-a. m. slot that Republican presidential candidate Malcolm S. 'Steve' Forbes Jr. chose to sprinkle four of the new, positive advertising spots designed to rescue his sagging campaign in New Hampshire. Juxtaposed between the hoots of the Springer audience, the tears of the girls' mothers, and the embarrassed looks of their older lovers, viewers saw Forbes standing with Ronald Reagan, helping crumble the Berlin wall, and designing New Jersey's popular tax cut".

[FITZGERALD, 1996, PP a 14]. While in the latest political campaign it was about how Al Gore and Bush were campaigning against each other. Al Gore was portrayed to be a hip person who cared for every other person on the street, bringing to mind the boy next door that could do anything for the voters. Bush on the other hand, was presented as a conservative who was serious about what his ideology.

Neither party wanted to lose face against the other hence they spent billions of dollars into the camping and donation to the causes that their campaigners believe. From the viewpoint of the financing party, the popularity of the candidates was only a dilution that has "perpetrated by the popular media". For instance the TV, Internet, press and periodicals all were transmitting the same message "vote for this candidate". Voters may not be convinced by being drilled the name of the candidate day in and day out but they were bound to remember them perhaps out of irritation and think of choosing them in the last moment. While on the other hand, from the politician's point of view, mass media has given cause for progressing something that he would have had to do at his own expense if he were back in time. This is a way to expand his campaigning horizon.

However, as one commentator says: "The popular media offer a no-win situation for candidates. If a candidate escapes the media, he becomes a nobody. If a candidate goes on television answering questions as a blameless, non-Beltway innocent, he appears naive, fawning, and politically green. If a candidate adopts a line to evade character probes, he seems shifty".

[HANSON, 2000]. In the end the party that has the money wins. FUNDING AND AGENDA SETTING Where funding is concerned, election campaigns are perhaps the most expensive in the world. Wealthy candidates coupled with coalition of various industrial leaders work toward one goal - to achieve publicity in the right direction.

The inclusion of unions, businesses and individuals in election campaign is common. Various supporters from key funding sources pool in to finance the campaign. These are called soft money, which in effect has no limitation because the contribution is generously donated with an ulterior purpose - to spend and enhance the donator's position. The issue of mass media is related to this kind of funding. Campaigning of election takes a long time for agenda setting and utilizing of resources to progress the candidate's viability as a congressional member.

This entails extensive further funding and donation to the various organizations that would demonstrate the candidate cares about his people. For example during the 1996 election, the amount collected was about $1.6 billion in funding. However, the candidates utilized most of it on issues like education, welfare reform, paying off the national debt, social security, and medical research etc. At the end of the election cycle, it was seen that $3 billion was spent on advertising (Masterson 1).

This indeed is a large amount for ads campaigns alone. EFFECTS ON AGENDA According to one commentator [Kindl, 2000] "media does not have the same effect on all members of society for a variety of reasons. Their research indicates that media significantly impacts those who have a high need for orientation. There are two factors that influence a persons need for orientation - relevance and uncertainty. Basically, a person will be influenced by the media if the issue being discussed is relevant to their life (affects them in some way), and they are unsure about their position on the issue (uncertainty)". What then motivates political leaders to spend almost one fourth of their funds on advertising and mass media?

One of the reason is that people are influenced by media in varying degrees but nevertheless affected. The contingency of this scale is the wideness of the degree to the lowest degree and the purpose is to engage in a media that would cover them all. Media affect people because it addresses issues but political campaigners view this as a means to channel, their messages laced within the issues. Research show that at specific instances the category of the issue in accordance with the time and place has more effects on the viewer then it does in other time. For example in an election campaign people are more curious to know who would provide them with the best educational benefit. Media tend to direct their attention in this area to provide information that the viewer wants to watch.

If the same thing were to be announced in some other time of the year, like ABC politician had donated funds into the school would not make an impact. In this regard, agenda setting is imperative. For the political campaigners, agenda is set with the view that it would catch the voters in a vulnerable time. In doing so they could psychologically change the attitudes and decision of the voters for them. For example framing of questions in TV programs that would lead the viewer to believe that the candidate was "volunteering" information that were private and secret that he had always loved Kentucky and plans to develop it now that he has a chance [an example]. But in reality the questions were orchestrated and the viewers, even if they did not want to believe it so, would be bound to be influence to some extent.

The would try to find out the origin of the candidate, their educational background, their political standing and what kind of programs they will promote once they are elected. When voters do so, sure enough the information is as presented on TV or radio [again orchestrated]. This so-called truth about the candidate is bound to slouch the voter towards him even if they did not want to make such a decision. This is why the agenda is about taking charge of a plan that would work in a cohesive manner, coordinating all medium to be directed towards one goal - influencing the voter to vote for the candidate.

Agenda setting is a long process, which includes a host of staffs. There are three approaches to agenda setting. Kudo [2000] points out "the first theory states that which stories are reported on is decided by a 'media elite,' the group of high-powered (mainly Caucasian males) executives of the leading newspapers, networks, and news magazines. The second theory holds that the individuals involved are in charge of which issues are reported on, especially in the case of political candidates. Thirdly, issue salience can be determined by groups who demand attention be paid to the one issue that they feel most strongly about (such as antiabortion activists)". According to the above definition of agenda approaches, the development of a media plan therefore is effected by the way the candidate view his camping.

For instance when President Bush was campaigning for his election he was held the tax reduction as the main focus of his campaign. However, his agenda was also to track down the business elite to take part in the campaign by directing his media campaigns at business leaders who would be willing to contributing their votes so that their business could run more effectively. The salient feature of the groups was the educational one where Texan schools as well as Colombian schools were restructured so that there were lesser school violence. According to republican campaigns here, the concern is to direct his agenda from all three aspect covering a wide area of voters. Now comes the issue of buying and developing a media plan that would be based on gross rating points and which would cost the least. Ofcourse there is no such station or channel that would cost "the least", hence the politician would have to choose one that has the highest rating in viewers and the type of viewers that would be interested in ad campaigns.

The calculation of ratings per programs that is further coupled with the necessary gross rating points is the best way to give an estimate of how the camping would cost. The gross ratings can also allow the campaigner to gauge how much advertising time it has on the network or spot television. Spot television allows the politicians to campaign in the last minute, thereby allowing to catch audience attention on a wide viewing time period. While network television allow the campaigner to schedulize his ads. For example one day on a comedy channel another on the news channel.

Alternating advertisement would allow the political campaigner to cover viewers that the ads may have missed at first. As a general rule, a political campaigner must have 100 gross ratings on average TV viewers from the commercial in order to secure one viewing. Hence, he would actually have to spend 100 times more in order to secure more then one viewing. If a politician were to use mass media to make an impact he would have to be willing to pay for higher gross ratings.

Tobe Berkovitz [1996] says "A minimal threshold must be achieved for advertising to have an impact on the audience. For spot television buys, the average target voter should see a commercial at least five times in a week, i.e. the spot should achieve 500 GRP's, for it to have the potential to influence the voting decision. 650 gross rating points is considered a substantial buy for one week. Many campaigns run over 1,000 points per week during saturation media buys.

For network television buys 200 GRP's is considered light, 300 medium, and 400+ a heavy buy". Similarly it is expected that the time of media buy and campaigns is also applied in radio stations and newspaper as well. In radio for instance the time to buy is dependent on the time slot that is available for the election camping. There is a difference here between the TV ads and the radio ads. The political decision maker would have to be more careful in choosing the time he wants to buy to air his camping that would offer listeners opportunity to "hear out" his camping.

This is again dependent on the types of listener whether they are prime time, early morning or afternoon as well as at the beginning of the camping or during the campaign. The trick is to be able to secure the attention of the listener and not become lost in the series of ads that usually airs during a commercial break. Other politicians prefer to have exclusive programs that would allow them to air their views, their propaganda and what they aspire to do in the future if and when they become successful. Candidates who have more funding are able to secure this while others who want to conserve would rather pursue each media in a mediocre manner.

Media buys do not guarantee an audience, which has been discussed earlier. In fact at times the message just slip by the audience without even considering what was on TV, radio or newspaper. Thus one gross point is lost. The media could only be cost efficient one if it targets the audience and be able to channel its message to the audience. The capability of the media is therefore dependent on the plan and the content of the message. Expensive costing media does not mean it would secure the votes.

That is why for this reason, most of the politicians believe in hiring the best staff to plan the agenda, unfold the plan and get action from the voters. Certain key areas are noted when this is done. First of all the audience demographics and their media consumer behavior. Targeting would be easier if for example the candidate is trying to separate his messages for the different ethnic background then merely covering the whole crowd as one. Secondly, there are voters out there that does not need to be pointed who the candidates are but who to vote. They are undecided in their decision and just need more convincing at the core level.

For example if a group is undecided because they are atheists then, the politician cannot include his camping to cover religions people only. It must also show how it would affect neutral groups as well. How the campaigner would find about these niche group is through extensive research which again requires funding. For example "In primetime, upscale programs such as ER, NYPD Blue, and Chicago Hope, as well as sitcoms focused for adults like Fraser and Mad About You could be rotated into the buy to expand the reach of the campaign's message. ABC Monday Night Football has a high quality audience, as do primetime newsmagazine programs such as 20/20, 60 Minutes, and Dateline NBC. The high cost per thousand for these shows is a direct result of the concentration of upscale viewers" [Berkovitz, 1996] CONCLUSION - EFFECTS ON POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS Public pressure, including that emanating from citizen and grass-roots organizations, also grows.

Thus the government feels there is an urgent need to instill good governance, considered one foundation of an honest and transparent society. The public also hopes that good governance will serve as a preventive measure to avoid future crises and mitigate negative impacts should they occur. The essential and proper role of the media is to hold governments and would-be governments to account, to act as an unofficial opposition to all political parties. The energetic debate of political issues through the media is one of the essential checks and balances in a democracy.

What this boils down to is that television in this country has totally abrogated its responsibility to act as a guardian of democracy, by providing a vehicle or vehicles for the in-depth examination of political issues and the holding to account of our political masters and mistresses. Why mass media effect the way political campaigns are planned is also due to the apprehension politicians have when they are without media help. For example, one commentator noted for the camping of Mayor Sue Bauman's reelection " 'What if they gave a primary... and nobody came?' ' It's a legitimate question. Barring an unprecedented outbreak of citizenship, turnout in today's Madison municipal primary election will be worse than dismal.

Despite the fact that voters face a four-way mayoral race and several hotly contested City Council contests, a 10 percent turnout would be considered a triumph". [Nichols, 1999]. This low percentage of outcome from their other campaigns lead to the conclusion that politicians must resort to mass media if they were to cover massive groups of people to become their voters. Whether this is radio, TV, newspaper cartoons or simply talk shows, they have to make a choice earlier on in order to set the budget. Since the budget is high, most politicians would like to start their campaigns earlier on then at the later stages of the election.

This is because they want to present their "product" so that the funding parties would be convinced they are to benefit in the event the candidate wins. By the time the election is near the end funds level has also increased thereby allowing the campaigner to stretch their plans to include all types of media to contribute to its camping. This is also the stage where the candidate decides if its project's viability has a chance of wining or not and if they want to further their camping or not. That is to say if they were of the impression that they would lose out in the end, they would not like to deplete the profits that they get from the pool of funds. Hence they cut off their media campaigns to half or fewer. On the other hand if it is indicated that the candidate has a higher chance of wining then the race for mass media is enhanced.

It is at this period that the implication of the importance of mass media is outlined. In the race against time, politicians are likely to try to get the most airtime as opposed to their opponents. By buying as much airtime as possible they will be assured that they will limit viewers of opponent camping. Instead they would be able to present their case much better. The higher the coverage the higher the number of votes. Although this equation does not necessary work, nevertheless most of the campaigners usually believe so.

That is why they would prefer to keep the most expensive part of their campaign till the last few weeks of the election. By adopting expensive media campaign candidates can psychological influence people to believe that the candidates are true to their campaigning. Even if they were losing against the main opponent, they are still willing to fight till the last moment because what they believe is concrete. This creates a ripple effect on the voters, thereby compelling them to make decisions for the candidate. Those who drop out earlier on do not get the benefit of last minute decision-makers.

Bibliography

1. John Nichols, STAVE OFF THE PREDICTED LOW: VOTE TODAY., Capital Times (Madison, WI), 02-16-1999, pp 8 A.
2. Lawrence, David. America: The Politics of Diversity. United States: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1999.
3. Masterson, Karen. "Campaign 2000: Businesses Feel Strains of Political 'Shakedown'".
The Houston Chronicles. October 19, 2000, Star Edition.
4. The Case Program, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University 19965.
TOM FITZGERALD, AIR WARS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE., The Record (Bergen County, NJ), 02-16-1996, pp a 14.
6. BERTIE HANSON, 'Fixing' Campaign Spending. Vol. 15, The World & I, 03-01-2000, pp 32.