I can no longer suppress the gnawing urge to share with you my
distress over the fact that Americans appear to be falling prey to
an almighty addiction of epidemic proportions ““ despite the
destruction it seems to be wreaking on our lives, both personally
and socially. I am talking about your television.
As we prepare for the onslaught of political ads that are about
to uninvitingly and unceasingly flood our eyes and ears until that
faithful day in November arrives, we should pay special attention
to campaign coverage. Because, I don’t know about you, but I
cannot refrain from wondering how many more smear ads I can stand
to watch before I will be forced to take refuge in some small cabin
deep in the Montana woods with only a typewriter to keep me
company.
You see, I can confidently say that I consider myself to be a
politically aware, concerned and educated citizen of this country.
But nonetheless, I must purge myself by admitting that I have never
voted in an election. And my main excuse for this sad cop-out: I
have a hard time getting excited about voting when it becomes
merely a process of choosing the lesser of two evils.
And you know what? I don’t think I am alone in this.
As we all know, there has been a trend of voter disenchantment,
apathy and cynicism, which began in the 1960s, and has intensified
with each following election. Some media scholars identify the
inception of this trend in 1964, when Lyndon Johnson’s
campaign team opened a can of worms every shark in D.C. could not
wait to sink his teeth into. And the can opener it used was none
other than the infamous “daisy ad.”
The ad opened rather picturesquely, with a little blonde girl
plucking the petals off of a daisy in synchronism with an adult
male voice counting down from ten. And once that voice reached the
end of his countdown, a delightful nuclear mushroom cloud then
greeted the viewers’ eyes as President Johnson’s voice
echoed in their ears: “These are the stakes. To make a world
in which all of God’s children can live, or go into the dark.
We must either love each other or we must die.” Quaint,
isn’t it?
Well, the audience who saw it when it was aired in 1964
didn’t think so, and this ad was immediately yanked from the
air. But the most darkly amusing part of the whole situation, and
probably the most patent evidence of the proliferation of attack
advertising in recent decades, is that audiences today
wouldn’t even flinch if at the “daisy ad.” I
mean, for God’s sake, nowadays we’ve seen more
disturbing attacks unleashed on effeminate purple creatures on
popular children’s television shows.
The plot then thickened in 1968 when the McGovern-Fraser
Commission changed the nomination system for presidential
candidates from the former system of private caucuses (where party
leaders chose who would be nominated to run for president) to the
present system of public caucuses and primaries (where candidates
are chosen by voters). Of course, in some ways this new system was
beneficial to the political process. For instance, virtual
“outsiders” now had the chance to get nominated and
sleazy back-room negotiations could be somewhat curtailed
(politicians … sleazy? Never!).
But there were also consequences. With the new system of
primaries and public caucuses, politicians have become incredibly
dependent on the news media to gather support, gain recognition and
rally for contributions. You see, what the members of the
McGovern-Fraser Commission failed to consider was whether the news
media were aptly suited to fulfill the new role that they had
acquired, as a conduit for political messages. This is a change
that inherently contradicts the media’s traditional role as
the “watchdog” of the government.
What the commission failed to really consider was the fact that,
in the words of the media genius Thomas Patterson in his book
“Out of Order,” “The press is in the news
business, not the business of politics, and because of this, its
norms are not those required for the effective organization of
electoral coalitions and debates. Journalistic values and political
values are at odds with each other.”
Aye, there’s the rub. You see, the news media industry is
a business, and a profitable one at that. And so, how can we really
expect the news media to cover elections responsibly? Responsible
is boring; we all figured that out in junior high. And boring just
doesn’t sell.
Then we come to two of the most defining and proud moments of
American politics: Watergate and the war in Vietnam. These two
events took place within a few years of each other, and both have
proven to have lasting significant effects on the political
attitudes of the American citizenry. And as Thomas Patterson
eloquently stated once again, “the deceptions perpetrated by
the Johnson and Nixon administrations convinced reporters they had
let the nation down by taking political leaders at their
word.” Much like a woman scorned, America the Beautiful has
had a hard time getting over this betrayal.
“So what is the point to this whole tirade,” you
ask? Don’t let the media inhibit you from exercising the most
basic right you were given as citizens of this country:
suffrage.
Because, as I seem to recall, this country was founded on some
silly little premise called democracy. And the fact is that a
democracy cannot exist without an active, informed and engaged
electorate. So before I part, please allow me to promise you that
there are ways around all of the superficial fluff which threatens
to transform us into a nation of tacit couch potatoes.
For instance, I have found that one way to avoid as much of the
BS that comes along with these elections as possible is to watch as
many of the televised debates between the candidates as you can.
Aside from the mud slinging and coy vagueness, this truly is one of
the best ways available to us as voters to find out what these
politicians are really all about.
If you wait to hear what the news anchors have to say about the
debates, I promise that you will know little more about the
candidates other than whether they appeared relaxed or combative,
tired or energized, bland or witty. Sometimes, after watching the
news wrap of these debates, I am forced to wonder whether these
media news analysts were watching the entire debate on mute.
So let’s all try to remember that many people fought very
hard and even lost their lives for you to have the right to walk
into that little booth and pull that little lever. At least, I
think you are supposed to pull a lever. But I wouldn’t know,
remember? I have never voted, either.
Alright, so to avoid being a complete hypocrite, here is my vow
to you: I will vote in the upcoming election. No matter how sick to
my stomach these election ads make me. Even if I have to wear flood
boots to wade through the cesspool of waffling platforms, mud
slinging, superficial campaign analysis and spin doctoring that may
threaten to keep me at bay. And I am expecting to see you there
too.