|
Television has its disadvantages. Primarily, the problem is that television is a unidirectional technology. Television is exclusively "viewed," rather than "used." The distinction is great, because using a technology means that the participant is involved in what happens, rather than just watching someone else make use of it. In the case of television, candidates have always used it for debates, press conferences, and advertisements. However, what single concerned voter that is not part of a larger, more influential group can make use of television to express his or her opinions? What voter can use television to mock the opposing candidate? What voter can attempt to swing people's votes with their own informational resources? The answer is, of course, no voters. Television's unidirectional nature means that voters sit and watch while candidates and other groups do the talking. However, since 1960 was the first year that presidential debates were televised, voters who perhaps never had the chance to meet the candidates in person had the opportunity to see and hear the candidates for the first time. This was a significant improvement, but many people who probably did not have the chance to meet the candidates- such as minorities and poor people- still did not own television sets and if they did there were not many programs that were targeted towards them. In 1960, 91% of respondents saw both Nixon and Kennedy on television (8). Television was used for campaign information by a much higher percentage of people than any other type of media, but rich white people were still the target audience. In 1960, 76% of whites and 99% of high income people watched a program about the presidential campaign on television (9). Compare this with 52% of blacks and 67% of low income people watching election coverage (9). Although all categories show a majority of people watching television for political news, there is a significant gap between whites and blacks, rich people and poor people. So how could voters in 1960 take advantage of this technology, which was so critical to the 1960 election? They couldn't. As one of the three main groups associated with an election, the voter is left quite powerless by television. Even with a newspaper, a voter can write to the editorial staff and get his or her opinions published in written form for others to read. Television affords no possibility of this nature for the masses. Even considering the many advantages of TV, including live broadcasts, newspaper still exceeded TV in terms of popularity, with 60% of people saying that they got most of their news information from the paper (6). While TV in the 1960 election may have started a revolution of sorts in campaigns for candidates, particularily on a presidential level, there was no definative upside for the average voter.
[ Home ] [ 1960 ] [ 2000 ] [ Comparison ] [ Timeline ] |
[