There was once a time when a politician was much more approachable. You could really talk to them with out them seeming like movie stars, but like real people. Do you think that television has changed politics and politicians for the better or worse? What effects has television had on our connection with our government?

I think it has been for the worse.

Politicians rarely speak WITH their constituents anymore, they speak TO them, usually via TV. Although much of this is done in front of a live audience, the politician doesn't really interact with the public.

I think is a negative trend to put politicians up on some sort of pedastel. These people are supposed to work for us, not the other way around.

TV has been a vast waste land for a long time, so I doubt that politics can make it worse, or that TV can make politics worse. It does seem to help them keep their distance from us. I emailed all my senators and representatives, federal and state, concerning an issue related to vehicle emissions testing, and only one replied. Tried just the federal guys on an IRA issue, none replied.
I am thinking of switching parties to see if the democrats are more willing to talk to the voters.

Well, I have to use the argument, "would Americans have voted for a man in a wheelchair had television been around when FDR was running for president?" Though television has its advantages, it certainly has its disadvantages when it comes to politics. Yes, the American people stay informed constantly with channels such as MSNBC AND CNN, but there was a time when society was just as well informed, if not more so, by a little thing called the newspaper. I think television has made a complete mockery of politics in this country. The Clinton sex scandal for example. Was it really necessary for the media to sensationalize that in the way that they did, simply to get a story? And, how can we forgot a certain major news network calling the 2000 election a tad bit early? While more and more people find it easier to get their information from television, I believe that, overall, the effect that it has had on politics is for the worse.

I think television, as it is now, has definitely worsened politics.

There isn't enough time given for serious discussion of the issues. If you'll notice, newstalk journalists continually interrupt the people they are interviewing so it becomes difficult for them to respond to the questions being fired at them. As a matter of fact, some of these TV journalists take obvious pleasure in asking a provocative question and then cutting the responders short so they cannot defend their positions.

In addition, there is the whole political commercial thing. Disguised as a public service announcement, the fifteen second or so message accuses or implies that a candidate or a party is doing something horrible and morally disreputable, and then the spot is over. Want to respond to those allegations? Raise enough money (if you can), produce a spot, contact the broadcaster, haggle for the right time spot, then maybe the same people who watched the slander (libel?) can see your defense.

It's obviously hit-and-run politics, devoid of substance, rife with damage.

And the independent candidates can't even afford to join the game, in most cases.

(edited for spelling)

TV was responsible for Kennedy's election. 'Nuff said.

Those aren't journalists, they are pundits, antagonists, jerks, and so on til you get to the really bad words. The news media COULD serve as an extra check or balance within the government by being the big snitch that tells the public what is really going on, but I am afraid that they have joined the dark side of politics and are just helping to keep us in the dark. The whole thing seems orchestrated to me, but that may just be paranoia on my part.

One of the worst things television has brought to the political realm (and the rest of the news) is reducing everything to the soundbite. Politics is cheapened and our collective ignorance is raised by having to construct policies and arguments that sound like ad copy and are less than 20 seconds long.

Television has also made the physical aspects of the president more important. How many presidents of the past could have been elected today, having to parade in front of the lights and the cameras? Certainly not FDR, not Taft, perhaps not Lincoln. The possible good the television brings us (more people are made aware of the political process) is mitigated by the fact the message has become pablum.

TV causes voters to focus more heavily on appearance and image than necessarily on the qualification of the candidate.

If you look bad on TV your chances of being elected in spite of being qualified are significantly lower.

I remember from US history class learning that Thomas Jefferson didn't have a particularly good speaking voice and probably wouldnt have been elected in our time. Many of the old presidents would not have been contenders.

FDR had to go to great lengths to hide his disability from the public. In a time like ours where TV is such a huge part of the public's life this might have been a more difficult task.

Nixon didnt look particularly good on TV either, he went to great efforts to clean up his appearance the second time he ran for president. Has anybody seen the Nixon/Kennedy debates? Here's an interesting link:
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/K/htmlK/...nnedy-nixon.htm

TV has its good and bad aspects. I think that there are definite pros and cons to the fact that we can get news quick (practically instantaneously) and mustnt do as much work to get it.

That's another problem with news today that isn't limited to only TV news. There aren't very many "reporters" any more. They all want to be the one who catches the candidates in a lie or exposes the next big scandal.


The problem with TV politics is that it is all about image and soundbites, but some of the blame for this lies with the people. Too many people are impressed by flashy images and witty catchphrases. Too few people are willing to sit through a speech that lasts for more than a few minutes. TV politics has gone along with this and taken it even farther, leaving us with the zoo what we have during every election season now.

TV makes politicians act like robots. They can't make any mistakes, or even say something that can be miscontrued as questionable. Being under a constant microscope [the media] forces them to be so politically correct that it is hard to get a feeling for any of them.

CP

Television has ruined politics and made it so only wealthy individuals or those beholden to the people writing the fat checks can get elected.

Here in Ohio, the Democratic candidate for governor had NO money for anything but a few smattering of ads on late night television. He tried to run ads on the Internet, but that was more out of desperation than inspiration.

TV is the tail that wags the dog now. Candidates don't talk about how many people they can reach by stumping across the state, knocking on doors or getting people out to rallys and debates. They try and figure how many 30-second commercials they can create to say how great they are and how their opponent is a slimeball.

This is one of those issues that cuts across the usual party and political lines. I don't see how anyone could be happy with the way poltical races are waged (and won) today.

Add to that that candidates must be telegenic or forget about it.

http://www.theemailactivist.org/Blackout.htm

I posted this in the Clear Channel thread, but it belongs here, too.

Moving right along...

And, in the "beating a dead horse category":