Who elects the President Part II
Mar. 11th, 2004 09:15 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
richardf8Here is an Excerpt from an article discussing the first televised Presidential Debate, between John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon:
In August, Nixon had seriously injured his knee and spent two weeks in the hospital. By the time of the first debate he was still twenty pounds underweight, his pallor still poor. He arrived at the debate in an ill-fitting shirt, and refused make-up to improve his color and lighten his perpetual "5:00 o'clock shadow." Kennedy, by contrast, had spent early September campaigning in California. He was tan and confident and well-rested. "I had never seen him looking so fit," Nixon later wrote.
In substance, the candidates were much more evenly matched. Indeed, those who heard the first debate on the radio pronounced Nixon the winner. But the 70 million who watched television saw a candidate still sickly and obviously discomforted by Kennedy's smooth delivery and charisma. Those television viewers focused on what they saw, not what they heard. Studies of the audience indicated that, among television viewers, Kennedy was perceived the winner of the first debate by a very large margin.
The full text of the article can be found here
Now, with that bit of background under our belts let's turn our attention to this article, in the New York Times, by Maureen Dowd. Her stated purpose in this article is to pose questions to Kerry designed to provoke emotional responses so that she can discern whether or not he is using Botox.
With all the fuss about the 60-year-old John Kerry going from Shar-Pei to whippet, I figured a physiognomic quiz might be in order. The candidate's more serene visage has spurred rampant speculation that his attractive 65-year-old wife, Teresa, a Botox aficionado, turned him on to the wrinkle diffuser, which paralyzes the muscles that deepen wrinkles.
Note that this is the same Maureen Dowd who hamstringed the Dean campaign by casting aspersions on his wife, and who has confessed to thinking that W. looks hot in a flight suit.
As was the case with the NYT/CBS debate that posed questions like "what are your religious beliefs?" and "do you think you have enough 'Elvis' to beat Bush?" this is about 700 words devoted to something that has no bearing on Kerry's ability to govern. What's worse it is a mere accusation, impossible to prove within the context of Dowd's poorly designed experiment. Ultimately it is little more than an ad hominem attack on Kerry without any real purpose. Even if this accusation is true, no crime has been committed, no wrongdoing
The reason I'm bringing this up is to call attention to the fact that a presidential campaign is something that takes place within an environment that is wholly controlled by the press. The Kennedy/Nixon debate cited above demonstrate the power of appearance. The Dowd article focuses again on appearance and perception. And I think that in the televised debate, we can expect to see a red spotlight on Bush, making him appear robust and healthy, while a green spotlight trained on Kerry confers upon him that Nixonian pallor that served Kennedy so well in 1960. I also expect that questions will be posed to Bush in a respectful manner while Kerry is treated as a hostile witness, in order to decrease his discofiture.
This tight control that the media have over our perceptions should worry us, especially in an era of unprecedented media consolidation fostered by a sympathetic administration.
In August, Nixon had seriously injured his knee and spent two weeks in the hospital. By the time of the first debate he was still twenty pounds underweight, his pallor still poor. He arrived at the debate in an ill-fitting shirt, and refused make-up to improve his color and lighten his perpetual "5:00 o'clock shadow." Kennedy, by contrast, had spent early September campaigning in California. He was tan and confident and well-rested. "I had never seen him looking so fit," Nixon later wrote.
In substance, the candidates were much more evenly matched. Indeed, those who heard the first debate on the radio pronounced Nixon the winner. But the 70 million who watched television saw a candidate still sickly and obviously discomforted by Kennedy's smooth delivery and charisma. Those television viewers focused on what they saw, not what they heard. Studies of the audience indicated that, among television viewers, Kennedy was perceived the winner of the first debate by a very large margin.
The full text of the article can be found here
Now, with that bit of background under our belts let's turn our attention to this article, in the New York Times, by Maureen Dowd. Her stated purpose in this article is to pose questions to Kerry designed to provoke emotional responses so that she can discern whether or not he is using Botox.
With all the fuss about the 60-year-old John Kerry going from Shar-Pei to whippet, I figured a physiognomic quiz might be in order. The candidate's more serene visage has spurred rampant speculation that his attractive 65-year-old wife, Teresa, a Botox aficionado, turned him on to the wrinkle diffuser, which paralyzes the muscles that deepen wrinkles.
Note that this is the same Maureen Dowd who hamstringed the Dean campaign by casting aspersions on his wife, and who has confessed to thinking that W. looks hot in a flight suit.
As was the case with the NYT/CBS debate that posed questions like "what are your religious beliefs?" and "do you think you have enough 'Elvis' to beat Bush?" this is about 700 words devoted to something that has no bearing on Kerry's ability to govern. What's worse it is a mere accusation, impossible to prove within the context of Dowd's poorly designed experiment. Ultimately it is little more than an ad hominem attack on Kerry without any real purpose. Even if this accusation is true, no crime has been committed, no wrongdoing
The reason I'm bringing this up is to call attention to the fact that a presidential campaign is something that takes place within an environment that is wholly controlled by the press. The Kennedy/Nixon debate cited above demonstrate the power of appearance. The Dowd article focuses again on appearance and perception. And I think that in the televised debate, we can expect to see a red spotlight on Bush, making him appear robust and healthy, while a green spotlight trained on Kerry confers upon him that Nixonian pallor that served Kennedy so well in 1960. I also expect that questions will be posed to Bush in a respectful manner while Kerry is treated as a hostile witness, in order to decrease his discofiture.
This tight control that the media have over our perceptions should worry us, especially in an era of unprecedented media consolidation fostered by a sympathetic administration.
