Role Of Media In Politics

 Role of Media in Politics

The majority of what citizens know about politics comes from the media. As soon as radio became widely available in the 1920s and 1930s, scholars began researching the influence of media messages on citizens' opinions and behaviors. The extent of media influence is important from both a practical and a normative point. Political  campaigns the origins and nature of citizens' preferences as the basis of democratic government, while political campaigns strive to understand how and when communications sent via the media impact individuals' opinions. Political scientists, sociologists, psychologists, communication scholars, economists, anthropologists, and others work in the topic of political media effects.

"‘Mass media’ as defined by Merriam means, "the main means of mass communication (broadcasting, publishing, and the Internet) regards collectively." Media plays a major role in the world we live in because it can be and is associated with many of our daily tasks. It is used in classrooms for educational purposes and living rooms for entertainment purposes. It has become a primary source of information for people all around the world. Mass media controls how the public creates and shapes opinions."

Perhaps more important than most people even realize. A free and independent media serves as a check on the government. If the government controlled the media, it could surely escape all accountability for any actions and would threaten the very principles of the free and democratic system we employ. However, as of late the media has not served its intended purpose, as an unbiased and impartial source of information. Instead, the media have become partial, one way or another, on the political spectrum and therefore skew the way the information they present is perceived. For example, FOX news, one of the most popular news stations, is generally thought of to be politically biased towards the Republican party, or at the very least presents a bias towards Conservative views. In turn, another hugely popular station, CNN is generally perceived to favor the Democratic party and the Liberal side of the political spectrum. This bias is not the end of the world, as long as people are aware of it. However, what it can do is continue to fuel the political polarization our country experiences. As people begin to understand the biases that each network presents, they can converge on the network that supports their own viewpoints. 

Therefore, they only experience media and viewpoints that confirm their preconceptions, never fully hearing a legitimate counterargument that would lead them to question or reconsider their political stances. This can contribute not only to political polarization, but also to the gridlock we have seen in decision making, as people are less likely to budge on their stances and more likely to simply seek out more like minded people to join their cause. 

Furthermore, the influence of media does not stop at political persuasion. In fact, it is even more broadly encompassing than that. This can be seen, perhaps most clearly, in the most recent election. Donald Trump used the influence that media can have on the public to fuel his eventually successful political campaign. He practically employed a strategy of “any publicity is good publicity”. Due to his scathing and often inappropriate remarks at the beginning of the Presidential race, he got more air time than any other candidate. This is what fueled his legitimacy as a candidate. It got to the point where one could not think of the Presidential race and its candidates without thinking of Donald Trump. By doing this Trump, once seen as a long shot to have any chance at winning the office, cemented himself solidly in the Presidential race based on mere media exposure alone. Trump himself bragged multiple times about how he was able to do this, stating that he spent no money on television advertising, and its true. The only pro-Trump ads that aired were at the hands of Super Pacs, who spent $8.2 on campaign ads. However this was dwarfed by the $37 million Super Pacs spent on Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Additionally, Clinton’s campaign spent another $52 million on ads. Again, Trump’s campaign spent $0 yet they won the Presidency. This shows the power of the role the media plays in politics.

Trump was able to obtain so much “free media” coverage, appearing on talk shows, coverage of his twitter account, debate on his public outbursts and politically contentious statements, that the value of the “advertising” he received for free is practically incalculable. The media stations did not do this on purpose. They were merely going where the story was, an Trump’s unusual demeanor and statements for a Presidential candidate were huge draws for the media and the public. However, by doing their job and covering the hot story, the media constantly put Trump, and in turn his Presidential campaign, in the spotlight. People were bound to associate Trump with the Presidential office just based on availability alone, giving enormous power to his campaign that was reflected in the results of the Presidential election.

In conclusion, New media have both expanded and undercut the traditional roles of the press in a democratic society. On the positive side, they have vastly increased the potential for political information to reach even the most disinterested citizens. They enable the creation of digital public squares where opinions can be openly shared. They have created new avenues for engagement that allow the public to connect in new ways with the government, and to contribute to the flow of political information. 

At the same time, the coalescence of the rise of new media and post-truth society has made for a precarious situation that subverts their beneficial aspects. Presently, it appears as if there are few effective checks on the rising tide of false information. Substituting scandal coverage for serious investigative journalism has weakened the press’ watchdog role. The ambiguous position of the media as a mouthpiece for politicians renders journalists complicit in the proliferation of bad information and faulty facts. It is important to recognize that American journalism has never experienced a “golden age” where facts always prevailed and responsible reporting was absolute. However, the current era may mark a new low for the democratic imperative of a free press.