Voter Apathy and The Role of The Media
“Vote early and vote often”. At the time these words were first uttered they were meant as a joke. Today, however, they are anything but funny as the number of people registered to vote seems to drop every time an election draws near. Anytime an election comes around one is sure to hear about the effect voter apathy can, and sometimes does, have on an election. But what exactly is voter apathy? What causes this strange phenomenon? Is there anything that can be done about it and if so what? These are the questions that will be explored, and hopefully answered, within these margins.
Voter apathy is basically when one does not utilize their constitutional right to vote for whoever they feel is the best candidate in any given elected position for one reason or another. These reasons are many but, for lack of time and space, not to mention the already decreasing attention span of modern Americans, we will concentrate on what I feel are the big two.
In my opinion, the two biggest factors that contribute to voter apathy in America are: 1) The media’s insistence on covering the candidate’s personal lives and all of the garbage that goes with them as opposed to reporting on what a particular candidate brings to the table; 2) The general publics willingness to accept this as the standard by which a candidate should be judged. These two obviously go hand in hand so this is almost a “which came first, the chicken or the egg?” scenario. Let us first answer this question and in the process maybe some other key issues will come to light. In order to do this, though, we will need to start at the beginning.
The Essay on Why Elections Are Bad for Democracy
So, the question asks are elections good for democracies? When I analyze this question, I immediately think about the word democracy and the type of democracy that is implemented within the U.S. The website “whatisdemocracy.net” describes democracy as the government by the people. The website also explains how people should be able to have their say in one way or another in everything that affects ...
In early campaigns, voter turnout was scarce just due to the fact that only white males were allowed to vote. These men were usually wealthy, well educated, and had at least a working knowledge of the way politics and society worked. As the country grew, however, so did the number and diversity of those allowed to vote. This new group of voters included women, the poor, and minorities. These newcomers to politics were obviously not as informed as their white male counterparts, who had been voting for some time now, and because of this they turned to the print media for help.
The print media obliged with articles and stories explaining the candidate’s views on different issues and their political platform. This was fine except that many people were either illiterate or did not receive these papers and magazines to begin with and, as a result, did not vote at all or voted the way their friends and relatives did. This problem continued, as we fast forward through time and space, until the 1950’s when an amazing invention known as the television was released on the unsuspecting American population.
The television set allowed candidates running for election to reach voters that, up to this point, were out of their reach either due to campaign time restraints or the inability to get the “word” out to them altogether. Candidates quickly jumped on this opportunity to make themselves and their ideas known to as many people as possible. Newscasters were the candidate’s biggest ally, presenting stories and features on the candidate’s views and beliefs. Things were going great except for one small problem; no one was listening.
Television brought with it an escape from the mundane world where things did not always work out in the end and offered in its place a world of excitement and intrigue. A place where a guy could be more than a factory worker, he could be a cop on the mean streets of San Francisco or an explorer of space, the final frontier. Next to all of this, politics, believe it or not, was boring.
The general public’s interest was no longer held by stuffy men bantering on about deficit this and embargo that. As great of an idea as television was it would eventually prove to be one of the biggest hurdles modern day politicians would have to get over in order to get elected.
The Essay on People often complain about life in the U.S.
People complain when most of their needs are not met. The irony of it lies when complaints are just piled up without any further insights on how to solve such problems. In the long run, complaints become a part of the lifestyle of people who are good at pointing at the loopholes most especially of the government, and of the leaders. As there would always be a reason for every action that is done, ...
In response to this lack of interest showed by the public in regards to politics and politicians the networks and their news anchors decided they needed something a little more snappy to hold the attention of its viewers. After all, what is more appealing to viewers of make-believe drama than some honest to goodness real-life drama as portrayed by candidates running for office? Everyone already knew that most candidates came with some dirty laundry anyway, so why not air it out on national television and give the people what they want? Maybe it will make them feel better about their own lives and if nothing else the ratings will be better. Well…it worked.
People all over the country were now spell bound by the goings on of its elected leaders and couldn’t wait for the next candidate to stumble and fall or put his foot in his mouth. The only problem with this is that eventually it became impossible to get any kind of useful information about the candidates and what they stood for. If one wanted to know which candidate was cheating on his wife or who had a drinking problem or which one was in trouble with the IRS all one had to do was turn on the t.v. But if one wanted to know where a candidate stood on abortion or tax cuts or anything else of real importance they were simply out of luck.
As a result of this, people were now less informed about politics than they were two hundred years ago. They felt ignorant of the facts and utterly unprepared to make any kind of educated decision as it related to voting and finding competent leaders for their country. Because of this they stayed at home on Election Day, opting instead to sit at home and complain after the fact about the way the decisions their elected officials made were negatively impacting their lives. Therefore, in answer to the “chicken and the egg” question posed earlier, I would have to argue that the responsibility for the American people’s apathy toward voting lies with themselves. This brings us to the final question left to be answered. “What can be done about voter apathy?” The solution, I’m afraid, is a little more complicated and time consuming than one might think.
The Term Paper on Life, Death And Politics
LIFE, DEATH, AND POLITICS A run-down of the abortion debate. Few issues have fostered such controversy as has the topic of abortion. The participants in the abortion debate not only have firmly-fixed beliefs, but each group has a self-designated appellation that clearly reflects what they believe to be the essential issues. On one side, the pro-choice supporters see individual choice as central ...
First of all, people will need to start looking past a candidate’s personal life and instead concentrate on the important issues. This is not to say that a candidate’s character and value system is not important, just that these things are not as important as how well this candidate will represent his or her constituency. If this idea is not clear, think instead of the star player for your favorite sports team. You do not necessarily care how he or she carries themselves off the field as long as they continue to win games. Of course it would be nice if the athlete in question were as great a person as they were a star, but this is really secondary to seeing your team win the championship.
Secondly, young people need to be involved, and educated, as early as possible in government and politics. With a better understanding of the way the government works and how politics really do effect them they will hopefully be able to make better-informed decisions when it comes election time. No longer will they care about the meaningless aspects of the candidates lives, choosing instead to focus on what issues are important to them and which candidate they feel most represents their interests.
Lastly, now that the general public is no longer concerned with the daily goofs, gaffs, and blunders that seem all too common in candidates these days, maybe the media will once again pick up on their viewers preferences and turn again to the issues, leaving drama for prime time writers and big network executives.
As I stated earlier, these are just a couple of the problems and possible solutions as I see it that lead to voter apathy. With out a doubt there are many more problems related to voter apathy that need addressed before a total solution can be found. I’m reminded, however, of a quote from one of my favorite movies, The Shawshank Redemption. In the movie, Andy, the character Tim Robbins portrays, speaks in reference to his desire to be free of the walls of Shawshank prison. While talking to Red, Morgan Freeman’s character, Andy says that it is time for him “to get busy livin’, or get busy dyin’”. To the non-voters out there I would say, “get busy votin’, or keep busy complainin’”.
The Essay on The Best Candidate For The Presidency
As this election 2000 is coming, each candidate is working very hard. They are doing debates, electoral campaigns all over the country in order to get more popular votes and therefore get the electoral votes they need to be the next president of the United States. In all of the inquiries that the media did in most of the states, Al Gore seems to be the favorite one, because he knows what he is ...
