I will be comparing and contrasting 2016 US election and the presidential debates, the audience's view on this and how the media covered the debates and discussing whether or not this coverage was fair and equal and how this may influence the voter. When it comes to the American electoral process media coverage is crucial to candidates from both the major parties. Presidential debates are held in the late electoral cycle when both parties have chosen their candidates. Candidates from the two main parties (Republican and Democrats) meet in front of a live audience and debate the most pressing and controversial issue and pitch their party's policy on how to deal with these. The debates target undecided voters who may want to find out more about each candidate's policy and attitudes towards being president and because of this the debates can be a game changer in the presidential race. Therefore the media coverage that these debates receive is very important.
The first presidential debate of the 2016 election took place on Monday the 26th of September and whilst tickets were extremely limited the media coverage was huge. As long as you had access to a TV or even the internet you could watch it, it was broadcast live on all cable news channels including CNN, Fox News, Fox Business Network and MSNBC as well as being live on C-SPAN, ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC. Not only was it on every channel you could think of but it was also broadcast free live on YouTube and twitter.
Each news outlet has a different audience with different views to one another, in order to accommodate these views news outlets may not cover the electoral debates equally meaning that viewers who are on the fence may be influenced by coverage that is not impartial. For example media outlets such as Fox news, the New York post and the New York Observer have all been accused of being ‘pro Trump’ rather than being impartial. Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly who are both presenters on Fox News are known Trump supporters, Trump was endorsed by the New York post back in April of this year and the New York Observer is owned by Donald Trump's son in law. The fact that all of these outlets have an association with Trump may affect their ability to be impartial thus presenting unbalanced information onto their audiences.
Donald Trump is known to have old fashioned far right views that are very conservative in nature, many whom are against Trump have accused him of being out right racist saying things such as ‘They're bringing crime and they're rapists’ when talking about the Mexican people. Fox news’s producers may be aware that certain views will appear more to their audiences because of their demographic. According to Nielsen TV data the average age of a Fox news viewer is 68 which the majority of them being conservative and white. Only 1.1 per cent of Fox viewers are black. This means fox may tailor their political coverage in favour of Trump in order to keep their audience happy, an audience who predominantly share similar views to Trump being far right and conservative.
On the other hand Trump and his views have gained a huge amount of media coverage due to their controversy. Everytime Trump makes a controversial statement the media blows up. Every single outlet covers it because something that is controversial and offensive draws in viewers. Audiences (especially ones who aren’t that interested in politics) engage with stories that are controversial as everyone wants to share their opinion on the subject matters that have been addressed. News sources than are supposedly impartial or even Pro Hillary can end up benefiting Trump's campaign by giving it exposure, they say all publicity is good publicity, and this may be the case for the Trumps 2016 presidential campaign. Trump is so far right and so controversial that he is always in the media's eye and this may actually be a strategy of his. Even if the media are slatting him he is still getting TV time, he is everywhere and viewers are constantly exposed to his views and this may actually sway them in his favour.
Hillary Clinton and her campaign are viewed as less controversial, while Hillarys views may be safer and more PC they do not gain as much media traction due to the fact that she is overshadowed by Donald Trump, with him dominating the headlines Hillary may be in danger of being forgotten about as her views are not getting as much exposure as Trumps. His effects the audiences as it means that voters who are undecided may not be sure on Hillary's policies meaning they are unlikely to vote for her. Although some of Trumps views may be scary he represents change, by playing it safe Hillary Clinton and the Democrats risk losing touch with a large part of America. Trumps target audience is the largest part of America, those with working class lifestyles whom live in southern states around the so called bible belt. By targeting this large unhappy area of America and pandering to their belief system Trump can guarantee that a majority of Americans are on his side even if these Americans are out of the way of the media's eye.
In Conclusion Trumps media domination may be Hillary's downfall, pro Hillary news outlets may actually be helping Trump by giving him so much exposure and the media themselves should be careful about how they present their information in order to stay morally correct they should not try and effect the opinion of the viewer and just present them with information from things such as the debates.
No comments:
Post a Comment