In Mr. O'Connor's blog post, and in class, we have discussed the affect of media on the elections. The media makes every election seem like a horse race so that people continue to tune in. This way, the media companies will continue to make money and it will help their businesses. As seen in both of the poll photos in this post, the past three elections (including this year's) have been portrayed by the media to have been a neck-and-neck race. For example, in the pictures below, the difference between candidates is 1%, but that was most likely not really the case. I think it's fair to assume that the media pretty much always puts this spin on elections, and will continue to do so in the future.
I saw a discussion on the New York Times website that got me thinking about the question, "what would a presidential election be like if the media neither commissioned nor reported on any polls?" Maybe if this were to happen, elections would be completely different than what they are today. People would be able to make their own decisions, instead of having their ideas about what is going to happen in the race be shaped by news reporters and online poles. That said, if people already know that many times polls are just a way for media companies to make money, then why do so many still pay such close attention to them? The polls might not be the problem, it's just that many Americans have a constant need to anticipate what is going to happen, before it actually happens. What do you think elections would be like if there were no polls? |
No comments:
Post a Comment