Why does stump campaigning remain an
important part of the political process? How would you characterize the media
coverage each campaign is generating from their cross-country travels? Refer to
at least two of the class textbook readings for this week to support your
response to the first question and offer examples of media coverage of both the
Clinton and Trump campaigns when answering the second question.
Stump campaigning remains an important part of the political process because it allows a candidate to highlight the important goals of the campaign while still being in control of the message and image they portray. In order to appeal to the public through the use of stump campaigning, it is suggested that the material should be “persuasive, likable, upbeat, able to be understood by “average folks”, quotable and able to be used again and again,” (Trent et al. 146). This type of campaigning is particularly important because it permits the candidates to communicate on a more personal level with voters. Candidates are able to reach out to supporters through these stump speeches and appear to be relatable. Stump speeches allow the candidate to target certain demographics as the topics discussed “are usually generated by survey and poll results,” (Trent et al. 146). According to Trent et al, it is imperative to determine just what attributes voters believe are ideal for the office and attempt to illustrate that the candidate possesses these qualities (50). Delivering specific stump speeches are effective in doing so because using the demographics and keeping a consistent message are likely to persuade voters and garner supporters.
ReplyDeleteHillary Clinton’s campaign is coming under harsh scrutiny for her reluctance to speak to the press, however; her campaign fired back she has given over 350 interviews. Among these interviews, it was found by NPR that most were television or radio shows (Folkenflik). The use of television or radio interviews is an opportunity for candidates to use pre-set speech modules. On TV or radio shows, the candidate is likely to do well because these speeches are well prepared and controlled by the candidate. “They can be certain that their remarks will be consistent with those they have made throughout the campaign,” (Trent et al. 146). Hillary’s inclination to appear on talk shows, television programming and radio shows, clearly demonstrates her strong control over the image and messages she shares with the public. According to these findings by NPR, her reluctance to engage in follow-up questions or lengthy interviews, can determine her hesitation to speak to the public without prepared material. NPR also reports, "She does interviews when it suits her," said Martin, who now hosts a podcast for Bloomberg Politics. "When they have a message that they want to get out there, they have a point they want to make, then she will do interviews,” (Folkenflik).
Nisa Villareal Continued
ReplyDeleteAccording to Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, “Television contributed directly to the decline of issues and the rise of personality and individual character as a decisive factor in U.S. elections,” (Semiatin 130). Clearly, Hillary Clinton is dependent on the use of television to focus on reinforcing her image as the most qualified candidate and maximize on the fact she has the calm, decisive personality fit for a president. Such instances like this illustrate that when the media is reporting on the candidate during their cross-country travels, the coverage is evolving into more news regarding personality rather than qualifications. The general themes of the campaigns are communicated early and clearly, like Trump’s ‘Make America Great Again,” however; the media coverage has shifted to cover his larger than life personality. Trump’s decision to ban media outlets demonstrates his own disgust with the news and ability to control his own image, yet his personality is reflected in his choices. One report in particular highlights how his decision translates into his presidential personality. Katherine Miller of Buzzfeed is quoted by the Washington Post as saying, “I think if there’s an element most worth concern, it’s the opaqueness of that process,” she said, “and what it portends for how a President Trump would deal with issues like this, ¬whether they concern the media or any other function of that office.” (Farhi). In conclusion, media coverage has shifted greatly to focus on the personalities of the candidate and stump campaigning does a successful job in controlling that focus. Just as Campaigns on the Cutting Edge points out, “The more access we have to the personalities and personal conduct of our leaders, the greater the likelihood we might vote on such ephemera as appearance and personality,” (Semiatin 138).
Works Cited
DeleteFarhi, Paul. “No, There’s No Rhyme or Reason to Trump’s Ban on News Organizations,” Washington Post. 25 August 2016. Web.
Folkenflik, David. “Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press? “ National Public Radio. 26 August 2016. Web. http://www.npr.org/2016/08/25/491311747/tallying-hillary-clintons-appearances-with-the-news-media
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
The preamble to Chapter 6 in Political Campaign Communication states that “Politics, in general, is primarily a communication activity (Trent et al 139).” I think that stump campaigning remains an important part of the political process because it is a chance for candidates to maximize communication with voters. This also means that candidates have to master the art of public speaking, if not they are subject to constant criticism.
ReplyDeleteOne of the main functions that I think stump campaigning has transitioned into that social media can’t help with is that a traditional stump speech though very strategic helps to get the candidate’s personality across. As a society, we tend to judge based on personalities instead of merit. The emphasis on media has helped to fuel this. In the reading it is stated that “The mainstream media is not disappearing, but the Internet is having a profound effect on the superficiality of campaign news coverage, promoting emphasis on personality, rumor and infotainment (Mayer et al 142).” A stump speech can show personality, how well a candidate is at public speaking and his/her ability to move a crowd. All integral parts of campaign communication strategies in the age of mass communications. These aspects surrounding the speech are ones that will be critiqued on news sites and morning roundtables.
This can hurt or help a campaign. Hillary Clinton herself has recently commented that she isn’t the best public speaker, in more distinct terms she mentioned that she isn’t her husband or President Obama when it comes to speaking. While many Donald Trump supporters say they like the fact that he speaks off the cuff and unscripted. Major news channel have discussed these facts to no end throughout the summer, especially after the conventions.
When it comes to the media coverage of the two candidates this election year, there is less focus on what they say in their stump speeches (unless it was unusual or controversial) but more about the buildup to speeches. Even more so the focus is on their social media, for instance CNN will hold roundtable discussions about Donald Trump’s latest tweet. In Campaigns On the Cutting Edge, just how large the scope of press coverage has become since social media and web use has become more prevalent is discussed. “In a world with increasing social media where blogs and tweets opine on daily issues at a moment’s notice, the shape and scope of reportage can change instantly (Mayer et al 127).” In most cases no longer do journalists have to race and dig to get the latest campaign scoop, they just can access a candidate’s twitter. This shows how much technology has taken over when it comes to a Presidential candidate communicating with the public. Stump Speeches used to be one of the only methods used for a candidate to get their point out, now they just have to pick up their smartphones.
Works Cited
Mayer, Jeremy D., Richard J. Semiatin and Joseph Graf. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. 3rd ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2008. 127-142. Print.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
According to Political Campaign Communication, the purpose “served by news conferences is to establish and improve relationships between the candidate and individual members of the media. The more efficiently run the conference is, the more prepared and responsive the candidate is, the easier the job of the reporter becomes.” (Trent et al, 182) Stump campaigning, as Clinton has stated, allows her to have a deeper connection with the journalists and residents of the area she is visiting. In the article “Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press,” by David Folkenflik, Clinton states that she believes that “she picked up valuable clues about a region's concerns from talking to local reporters. “They will actually say, 'Well, you know, this is a problem that we're having. What do you think about it?' " Clinton said. "So there's actually a conversation that goes on.’” Therefore, stump campaigning has given Clinton an opportunity to speak directly to the demographics she hopes to win over in the polls, while also allowing them to vocalize their very real issues. Trump has also been fully participating in stump campaigning; however, Trump has been banning journalists from his stump speeches, particularly because of his distrust of the media and how it “manipulates” the news, as according to “No, There’s No Rhyme or Reason to Trump’s Ban on News Organizations” by Paul Fahri, Trump “has made no secret of his dislike for the news media, which he has variously labeled with the three D’s (“dirty,” “disgusting” and “dishonest”). But some media outlets clearly are worse than others to Trump, who has banned nearly a dozen of them from his campaign rallies and public events.” Furthermore, the Time’s editor Dean Baquet feels the ban is unfair, as “he has certainly been critical of us,” and “the paper’s coverage ‘appropriately questioning.’” (Fahri).
ReplyDeleteMedia coverage seems to tell an interesting story for the women of the 2016 campaign season. As stated in “Campaigns on the Cutting Edge,” by Richard J Semiatin, Clinton “got in front of media comments about fashion choices and used humor to turn her trademark pantsuits into a positive symbol.” (Semiatin, 183) Clinton has been criticized as stiff and cold throughout this campaign season, and her campaign has had to go to unconventional lengths to battle this. She spoke with Humans Of New York, a candid blog run by Brandon Stanton. Clinton explains why she feels she seems stiff, and it is because "I know that I can be perceived as aloof or cold or unemotional. But I had to learn as a young woman to control my emotions. And that's a hard path to walk. Because you need to protect yourself, you need to keep steady, but at the same time you don't want to seem 'walled off…you have to communicate in a way that people say: ‘OK, I get her.’ And that can be more difficult for a woman. Because who are your models? If you want to run for the Senate, or run for the Presidency, most of your role models are going to be men. '" (Stanton, Humans Of New York). Melania Trump, on the other hand, has been criticized as “unfit” to be the first lady. According to the article “No, There’s No Rhyme or Reason to Trump’s Ban on News Organizations,” it seems that “Britain’s Daily Mail tabloid hasn’t been banned, although it was threatened with a lawsuit this week from Trump’s attorney after it published an article suggesting that Melania Trump was a call girl before she met Donald.” Unfortunately, however, according to Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, this is a common media strategy, as “campaigns promote appearances or female candidates, party leaders, and surrogates with celerbrity status (whether spouses, family, friends, or Hollywood.” (Semiatin, 186) Rather than focusing their attention on the candidate, the media is so focused on criticizing Melania Trump’s past, her speeches and whether she plagiarized them, what she chooses to wear, etc.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteSources:
DeleteFolkenflik, David. "Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press?" National Public Radio, 26
Aug. 2016, www.npr.org/2016/08/25/491311747/
tallying-hillary-clintons-appearances-with-the-news-media. Accessed 12 Sept. 2016.
Trent, Judith, S, et al. Political Campaign Communication. 8th ed., New York, Rowman and Littlefield, 2016.
Semiatin, Richard, J, editor. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. 3rd ed., Thousand Oaks, SAGE
Publications, 2016.
Farhi, Paul. "No, There’s No Rhyme or Reason to Trump’s Ban on News Organizations." Washington Post
[Washington, DC], 25 Aug. 2016.
Stanton, Brandon. Weblog post. Humans of New York, 8 Sept. 2016, www.humansofnewyork.com/post/
150136510691/im-not-barack-obama-im-not-bill-clinton-both. Accessed 12 Sept. 2016.
A candidate must be able to articulate their issues and appeal to voters on a day-in-day-out basis. It can be boring, but it makes the candidate look good if they can look good on the stump. The most important reason candidates stump is because of time. “Time must be used wisely. Decisions to use the candidates’ time for public speeches are made out of self-interest, as the candidates attempt to influence the maximum number of voters.” (Trent et al 2016). The timed stump speech can be said in an amount of time to help the candidate plan their trail.
ReplyDeleteDuring the primary season I was able to see the candidates on the stump multiple times thanks to the Presidential Elections course last fall. I was able to see how the candidates were on the stump and it felt in the room. For the candidates I saw speak multiple times, their stump speeches became boring (there were only so many times I could hear Sen. Sanders talk about the average donation of $27 and Clinton shouting Deal Me In!) To the room though, it worked. Having the crowds be able to recite lines from the speech definitely looks good on camera. It is perfect sound bite to be played in Ads or during the news later that night.
It is difficult to get your stump speech on television though, and that is one of the problems Sec. Clinton is having. On her stops she is making the same speech almost every night, and even though ones that are going to be different still don’t get as much play as Trump’s in the news. Trump has figured out how to get free publicity on television and it is changing the way campaigns are run forever. “The impact of television on campaigns has been vast and goes beyond makeup and hairstylists. It focused attention on image and sound, and less on logic and thought.” (Semiatin 2016). If both Clinton and Trump are going holding rallies on the same night, Trump is getting more play because his stump speech is still freestyled. You know the main themes (Muslim ban, Build The Wall) but you have no idea how he is going to present them. He goes off the cuff and the media eats that up. Clinton on the other hand is having a much more difficult time. She also has a stump speech that is much more thorough. She gives much more detail to her plans, she lays out her resume, and now she attacks Trump somewhat. This isn’t enough to get her in the news. She literally has to almost pass out to get her name mentioned.
From what I saw during the primary I thought being able to go cross-country and shake hands and kiss babies, was important. Being to listen to the people’s problems and say your going to do something looks really good. From my time in New Hampshire, the most fun and effective event was the Chris Christie town hall event I went to. He was able to talk directly to voters, and even presented his fun, joking side (I’m from New Jersey so I am not fooled by it). At the event people talked directly to him and it felt important to have a candidate talk directly to the people. At the root of it that is exactly what the campaigns what to portray. Their candidate is going to be the one to listen you when he or she is in the Oval Office.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
DeleteTrent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Stump speeches remain an important part of the political process because it gives the candidates the opportunity to give the public a controlled explanation of their campaign. It's said that political speeches should be, "persuasive, likable, upbeat, able to be understood by "average folks", quotable, and able to be used again and again" (Trent et al 146). Stump speeches generally follow these same guidelines. Most stump speeches open with "a joke usually a hit on the other side" (Trent et al 147). Having a speech open like this will definitely make people laugh and it will lighten the mood so that viewers understand how the rest of the speech is going to be set up. The rest of the speech includes the "candidates accomplishments, problems with the other side, solutions, inspirational example or vision of success, call to action, and will end with a clincher" (Trent et all 147). The outline of the speech is something that will be easily understood by the public and that's important because a lot of "average" people don't understand political jargon, so having a speech they can understand will make them want to vote and get behind the candidate.
ReplyDeleteFor the media coverage of the two candidates this year, the media isn't focusing so much on their policies or speeches. The media is particularly interested in the things they're not doing or saying. For example, it was noted that Hillary Clinton wasn't around much this summer, "Mr. Trump has pointed to Mrs. Clinton’s noticeably scant schedule of campaign events this summer to suggest she has been hiding from the public" (Chozick & Martin, New York Times). Rather than focusing on the things Hilary did do this summer like having Warren Buffet give a speech on her behalf in Nebraska. It's also been suggested that Clinton is avoiding the press as well, "Hillary Clinton has not held a single press conference since the start of 2016, triggering charges that she's trying to duck questions from reporters on the campaign trail" (Folkenflik). According to her team, this accusation is absurd. It just goes to show that the media are more focused on the things she's not doing, rather than what she is doing and saying.
As for Trump, the media are more focused on what he says, because half the time it's so absurd. The media isn't interested in his policy (not that he's spoken much of it). Trump openly doesn't like the media, labeling them as "dishonest, dirty, and disgusting" (Farhi). Trump himself has banned several media groups from his campaign rallies and events. The media is concerned with who isn't allowed at Trumps events, "There is little rhyme or reason to the way Trump has gone about punishing disfavored journalists and news organizations" (Fahri).
In conclusion, it's clear that the media is more concerned with the candidates do and don't do, along with their personalities and demeanor.
Works Cited:
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Folkenflik, David. "Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press?" National Public Radio, 26 Aug. 2016, www.npr.org/2016/08/25/491311747/tallying-hillary-clintons-appearances-with-the-news-media. Accessed 12 Sept. 2016.
Farhi, Paul. "No, There’s No Rhyme or Reason to Trump’s Ban on News Organizations." Washington Post [Washington, DC], 25 Aug. 2016.
Chozick, Amy, and Jonathan Martin. "Where Has Hillary Clinton Been? Ask the Ultrarich." The New York Times. The New York Times, 03 Sept. 2016. Web. 12 Sept. 2016.
The basic idea of stump campaigning is that when a candidate is running for public office, he or she will schedule many appearances and prepares a short speech that is repeated at each appearance before they open the floor to questions. Utilizing the stump campaigning strategy allows the candidate to highlight the important factors of their campaign, which is important in any race for elected office, but it also allows the candidate to control the image as well as the message that they attempt to portray to the public. When candidates are trying to figure out what topics to focus on in their stump speeches, they use “survey and poll results,” (Trent et. al. 146). I also think stump campaigning is an important part of the political process because it keeps candidates focused on the message of their campaign rather than changing their message every time they travel to a new precinct to make a speech. It’s important to make sure that the speeches made by the candidate are likeable otherwise there would be no point in using the same speech at each new location. According to long-term speechwriter Robert Lehrman, “political speech material should be persuasive, likeable, upbeat, able to be understood by ‘average folks,’ quotable, and able to be used again and again,” (Trent et. al. 146).
ReplyDeleteHillary Clinton has not had the best relationship with the media during her campaign. According to Brian Beutler of New Republic, “Clinton’s distrust of the press invites added scrutiny, which at times proves unwarranted, and thus breeds more distrust. As we’re seeing this week, breaking the cycle would require Clinton to do things she’s unwilling to do, and the press to do things it is institutionally incapable of doing. The relationship is beyond repair,” (Beutler). Additionally, I’ve noticed over the last couple of months that Hillary is terrible at answering questions from the press if they are on the spot. She needs to have a lot of control on the questions asked to be successful when the media is covering her campaign. I think it would be great if Clinton used speech modules because due to the “proliferation of all-news cable stations such as Fox News Channel, MSNBC, CNBC, the opportunities for such appearances have increased dramatically for major candidates,” (Trent et al. 146). Modules would enable Hillary to “accept such invitations with a minimum of preparation and be confident that they are unlikely to be caught ill-prepared,” (Trent et al. 146).
ReplyDeleteTrump on the other hand has been very focused about his presentation throughout his campaign and according to Campaign’s on the Cutting Edge, “looking as good or as powerful as possible, on television, has been a vital part of every modern U.S. campaign since the Kennedy and Nixon campaigns of 1960,” (Semiatin 130). I believe that Trump’s relationship with the media has not been great throughout his campaign. According to Kenneth T. Walsh of USNews, “Donald Trump is lashing out at the media again, trying to discredit his journalistic antagonists and undermine their attacks on his credibility,” (Walsh). I don’t think that attacking the media is in Trumps best interest because according to Semiatin, “The media also helps set expectations, which can make winners of losers and losers of winners,” (Semiatin 130). This shows the impact that the media can have on the success on the candidate. On the other hand I think that the media has helped Donald Trump show the American people, according to Campaign’s on the Cutting Edge, that his, “2016 campaign was focused on his controversial persona of being a politically incorrect doer,” (Semiatin 138).
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
ReplyDeleteBeutler, Brian. "Hillary Clinton’s Relationship With the Press Is Broken—and It Can’t Be Fixed." New Republic. N.p., 25 Aug. 2016. Web. 11 Sept. 2016.
Semiatin, Richard J. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. 3d. ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2008. Print.
Trent, Judith S., and Robert V. Friedenberg. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 8th ed. New York: Praeger, 1991. Print.
Walsh, Kenneth T. "Donald Trump's Campaign Against the Media." The Politics of Intimidation. N.p., 1 July 2016. Web. 11 Sept. 2016.
For this weeks blog post the question posed first was “why is stump campaigning still relevant?” First I actually had to search what “stump campaigning” is. I learned that back in the day stump campaigning was used so that the candidates who were giving speeches in rural areas would be able to stand on a tree stump so they would be able to address the crowd they were speaking to. Nowadays stump campaigning mostly means a speech that persuades the people of the nation to vote and give campaign donations. One of the biggest reasons why stump campaigning is so important to even campaigns today is that, “most candidates hire specific staff members to write and refine speeches, and use a substantial portion of campaign funds to support stumping trips” (McMahon, “In Politics, what is Stumping”). At least the candidates hire a writer to write and refine speeches for them because if not could you imagine what all these candidates would say. Without the writers and constant donations candidates would most likely speak their minds and I can honestly say it would put many of their campaigns to bed. Not just Hillary or Trump but also the candidates who have come before them. Now to address the second question, I believe each of the candidates have been doing a wonderful job keeping up with the demands of the public regarding speeches and showings. Many people believe Hillary has been hiding from the spotlight because of all the allegations against her but according to David Folkenflik, “Clinton cannot be said to have ducked public questioning. She has indeed done 350 interviews in the first seven months of the year” (Folkenflik, “Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press?”). I can even attest to the fact that Hillary Clinton has not been hiding because back at the end of June I saw her appearance at the Gay Pride Parade in NYC. Hillary has been struck many times over the last year and she continues to get back up and show up. Donald Trump has been hit just as hard as Hillary and he continues to have a following just as big as hers. Although, Trump has made himself completely accessible to the media. According to Jim Rutenberg,
ReplyDelete“Mr. Trump maintains a blacklist of reporters who are banished from the media plane that follows him; has refused to match Mrs. Clinton in sharing his tax returns; and has proposed loosening libel laws to make it easier for public figures to sue journalists, which is about as troubling as it gets. Yet he has been far more personally accessible than Mrs. Clinton. This worked to his advantage during the primaries and now is working against him in the general election” (Rutenberg, “Plane Rides and Presidential Transparency”).
No one could have said that any better. Trump has an interesting way of intriguing his following. He continues to bash reporters causing uproar but that is what people like about him most right now. Trump is in the media always. While it might not all be good press, it is in fact press. Which leads me to the question, “is all press good press?” In the case of politics, good publicity and bad publicity is a fine line and both Trump and Hillary have been dancing around it.
Works Cited
DeleteFolkenflik, David. "Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press?" NPR. NPR, 26 Aug. 2016. Web. 12 Sept. 2016.
McMahon, Mary, and O. Wallace. "In Politics, What Is Stumping?" WiseGeek. Conjecture, n.d. Web. 12 Sept. 2016.
Rutenberg, Jim. "Plane Rides and Presidential Transparency." The New York Times. The New York Times, 28 Aug. 2016. Web. 12 Sept. 2016.
Stump campaigns remain an important part of the political process because it showcases the candidate’s public speaking ability and knowledge about their campaign. The topics are usually “generated by survey and poll results” (Trent et al, 146) and are the same topics spoken about at ever event but more tailored to that particular area. This allows the candidates to connect on a personal level with the audience and help them understand where their needs fit in, in the campaign. For example, the candidate can campaign in Detroit about creating more jobs and speak specifically on jobs in the car manufacturing industry. Stump speeches also allow the audience and voters to see the candidate’s public speaking abilities. According to Trent et al the speeches need to be “persuasive, likable, upbeat” and easily understandable. There is nothing better than an inspiring speech to get you revved up for the election.
ReplyDeleteMany people have said that Hillary Clinton has been hiding from the press. According to NPR, Clinton has not had a single press conference since the beginning of the year (Folkenflik, “Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging the Press?”). Clintons campaign fired back stating she gave over 300 interviews this year alone. Personally, the media coverage I see of Clinton is mainly her making appearances and not directly addressing the press. I don’t often see her speaking at a news conference, on a talk show etc. In an interview with NPR Betsy Fischer Martin states that Clinton “does interviews when it suits her…when they have a message that they want to get out there, they have a point they want to make, then she will do interviews” (Folkenflik, “Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging the Press?”). She definitely does not take after her husband Bill who during his campaign played the saxophone on The Arsenio Hall Show.
Clinton did recently get a bigger plane in order to travel with the press during her campaign. Typically the press rides with the candidates, but for the majority of her campaign Clinton rode in a separate plane. Trump followed Clinton’s action and spoke to the press on his plane as well, but is still not allowing them to fly on his plane (DeSoto, “Clinton Invites Press On New Campaign Plane Instead Of Press Conference”). This is a big change from past presidential campaigns “traditionally reporters have been allowed to travel on presidential campaigns airplanes, giving them potentially greater access to not only the candidate, but his or her staff” (DeSoto, “Clinton Invites Press On New Campaign Plane Instead Of Press Conference”). Both parties have been scrutinized for being secretive towards the press, especially Clinton, so opening up her plane to the press is a big step towards gaining public trust back.
Trump is going to get media coverage regardless of what he does: plain and simple. He is a media icon, the press loves to cover him with whatever he does. This is a big part of his campaign strategy. The media gives him free publicity and all he has to really do is speak his mind and say outrageous things. For the longest time Trump had a press blacklist but it was just announced that Trump campaign was removing press from organizations such as Buzzfeed and the Washington Post from his blacklist stating “I figured they can’t treat me any worse!” in a statement to CNN (Stelter, “Donald Trump Ending Press Blacklist”) . The whole idea of a blacklist is absurd and in a way looks bad for that candidate. If a candidate can’t speak to every member of the press, regardless of views and opinions then they certainly aren’t fit to run a country.
Folkenflik, David. "Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press?" NPR 26 Aug. 2016. Web.
DeleteRutenberg, Jim. "Plane Rides and Presidential Transparency." New York Times 28 Aug. 2016. Web.
DeSoto, Randy. “Clinton Invites Press On New Campaign Plane Instead Of Press Conference.” Wester Journalism. N.p., 05 Sept. 2016. Web. 12 Sept. 2016.
Shelter, Brian. “Donald Trump Ending Press ‘blacklist’”CNNMoney. Cable News Network, 7 Sept. 2016. Web. 12 Sept. 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Stump campaigning is both an important and relevant part of the political process and also not important nor relevant. They’re not important in the sense that many people are very unaware that they happen, and even if they are they don’t know them by name. As stated in class once there is a large proportion of voters that don’t even start paying attention to the election till the conventions.
ReplyDeleteIn the past the purpose of a stump speech was for a candidate to get the same information about their stances or policies to as many people as possible. However, now to do that it isn’t necessary to give the same speech in as many states as possible, one just needs to tape the speech and upload it to the internet. As Jeremy D. Mayer, Richard Semiatin and Joseph Graf stated in chapter 9 of the book Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, edited by Richard Semiatin, “In the 21st Century, [the] news is transmitted in more ways than ever before- in print, on the air and on the Web, with words, images, graphics, sound and video” (Mayer, Semiatin, Graf 127). With that being true, it gives people who could not attend stump speeches the next best thing. They can still see the candidate speak via video, they can see their speech style, see how they moves their hands when they talk and they can hear the tone of their voice as compared to reading the speech written out. It’s truly the next best thing to being there.
That being said, stump campaigning and stump speeches are still very important to the political process in a similar fashion to how Conventions are still relevant. They provide a sense of continuity for voters, as this is the way things have been done since the 19th century. Further it provides a chance for someone who may attend a stump speech a chance to really connect with their candidate. This is similar to watching a hockey game on TV versus going there. While the outcome is the same and you may even see things better on the TV, but there’s a certain je ne sais quoi about attending a hockey game that can’t be replicated on the TV.
Further in this election it’s possible that stump campaigns have gained more of a spotlight because of the media coverage they have received. In Political Campaign Communication it is states that one of the purposes of a campaign is to, “…improve relationships between the candidate and individual members of the media. The more efficiently run the conference is, the more prepared and responsive the candidate is, the easier the job of the reporter becomes” (Trent et al, 182). Keeping this in mind it is easy to see how Trump is not making the job of the reporter easier, and he is not improving his relationship with members of the media. Presidential candidate Donald Trump has been placing arbitrary bans on certain news outlets. In the article No, There’s No Rhyme or Reason to Trump’s Ban on News Organizations, author Paul Farhi states, “There is little rhyme or reason to the way Trump has gone about punishing disfavored journalists and news organizations” (Farhi). In this sense there were quite a few eyes at the Trump stump speeches just to see what news organizations would show up. For instance people watched to see in the New York Times would be able to show up to the Connecticut rally.
Farhi, Paul. "No, There’s No Rhyme or Reason to Trump’s Ban on News Organizations." Washington Post 25 Aug. 2016. Web.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Stump campaigning remains an important aspect of campaigns, especially as it gets closer to Election Day. As the polls come back candidates can construct their speeches to address the strengths and weaknesses of their campaigns. The construction of the stump speech is based off the overall theme from their convention speech. However the stump speech acts as a skeleton for their cross-country campaigning. In the speech “A few overall themes may vary with attention to context and audiences” (Trent, Friedenberg and Denton Jr. 146). The “attention to context and audiences” is extremely important in the modern campaign process due to increased media segmentation. In the audience specific portion of the speech the candidate is able to tap into a specialized group of people. This can be beneficial as interest groups that cover topics that concern these people will pick up your speech and increase your reach in the media. In the past news outlets have had large budgets to cover these speeches, but due to technological advances and the downsizing of historic media goliaths the game has changed. Media outlets have to acknowledge “a more diverse marketplace and segmented audiences, or their revenue will turn from black to red” (Semiatin 133). Campaigns have to adapt similarly or they will see their success dip. This is why candidates have to still preform the stump campaign practices. They must appeal to the individual cities and groups as they continue down the campaign trail.
ReplyDeleteCurrently the campaign of Hillary Clinton has hit some of its darkest day. Clinton collapsed at the 9/11 memorial on Sunday, having what appeared to be a seizer. People at the scene leaked images and videos of Clinton collapsing and appearing to have a seizer. With the help of the Internet, rumors of a seizer spread like wildfire. However Clinton’s aides stated that she was suffering from pneumonia. The concern here now “is the manner in which Mrs. Clinton’s illness became public… it’s revived concerns among supporters, and criticism among her detractors, about her seemingly reflexive tendency to hunker down and hoard information, often citing a ‘zone of privacy…” (Chozick and Healy 1). I believe this quote hits the nail on the head, because there is now a pattern of distrust. Her opponent will go after her health after this incident, but the larger concern is now that she holds on to private information that is vital. She is attempting to do the impossible by making her weaknesses private in a era where nothing is private. Trump has been largely overshadowed by the implications of this event. He has demanded that Hillary apologizes for her “Deplorable” remark at the end of last week. Clinton claimed, “half of Trump's supporters were deplorable -- including calling them racists, xenophobes and Islamophobes” (Diamond and Wright 1). Trump wasted no time in turning this into a anti Clinton Ad, claiming that “Clinton is ‘viscously demonizing ‘ the American Voter” (Kurtzleben 1). Trump appears to be maximizing on a disastrous weekend for Clinton, adding this to the burden of her health concerns.
ReplyDeleteWork Cited
ReplyDeleteChozick, Amy. "Hillary Clinton’s Campaign to Release More Information on Her Health." The New York Times. The New York Times, 12 Sept. 2016. Web. 12 Sept. 2016.
Diamond, Jeremy, and David Wright. "Trump Wants Apology for Clinton 'deplorables' Remark." CNN. Cable News Network, 12 Sept. 2016. Web. 12 Sept. 2016.
Kurtzleben, Danielle. "Here's What Trump Was Up To Amid News Of 'Deplorables' And Pneumonia." NPR. NPR, 12 Sept. 2016. Web. 12 Sept. 2016.
Semiatin, Richard J. Campaigns On The Cutting Edge. 3rd ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2008. Print.
Trent, J. S., Friedenberg, R. V., Denton Jr., R. E. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
The most significant thing about stump campaigning is that it creates a more personal image for the audience. In Political Campaign Communication, they state “All candidates, whether they campaign using the strategies of incumbency or those of the challenger, must do and say whatever it is that will enhance the voter perception of them. They are concerned in other words, about their image.” (Trent et al. 71) Any voter can watch Trump or Clinton speak on CNN or read their social media accounts but none of it feels direct to the voter. Of course some issues may pertain more towards some people, but again, there isn’t a lot of personal connection there. When a candidate uses stump campaigning, they’re traveling throughout the country to speak in person on different issues and they’re focus if they were elected to office. The more campaigning and traveling they do, obviously the more people will get to see them in person and gain a more personal connection to. Without this, voters rely on news coverage as well as social media accounts of candidates. News coverage is often twisted but social media allows ordinary citizens to “become agents of political change.” (Mayer, Semiatin, Graf) While this may be true, this type of campaigning allows is for candidates to speak of issues that pertain more to certain areas of the country where they may gain more support and establish a more personal relationship with these voters and speak to some individually. Different areas of the country have different demographics and different people with different beliefs and those running for office take note for when they’re campaigning about the country. “Images should also be considered in terms of the impressions the voters have- what they believe to be true or untrue, desirable or undesirable about the candidate and the campaign.” (Trentet al. 72) These candidates know they need to look appealing to as many voters as possible that’s why this stump campaigning allows them to go to different locations to promote themselves and create a more personal image to the people in these areas by speaking more directly to them in a sense.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, it seems as though the majority of images both presidential candidates for this year have been making for themselves has been through controversy. It’s not even necessarily their fault (well maybe not) but the media coverage for both campaigns has definitely been focused more on controversy with the two. Trump has even gone to lengths of banning certain media outlets from covering his press conferences and interviewing him which he recently he lifted. While this is an attempt to stop the negative coverage of Trump overall, it’s only created more controversy around the presidential candidate. As the Chicago Tribune stated, “Although the restriction had created an inconvenience for reporters, forcing them to seek general-admission tickets to his rallies and to fly on commercial flights, the affected news organizations did not deter them from covering Trump.” (Farhi) Hillary Clinton’s media coverage has still had it’s fair share of controversy, but that’s been more focused in her lack of campaigning. There’s been controversy with the candidates lack of press conferences, especially compared to her opponent. Clinton has often been criticized for her public speaking, or lack there off, but resorts to other forms of media such as radio and individual interviews in her campaigning travels.
Semiatin, Richard J. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. 3d. ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2008. Print.
ReplyDeleteTrent, Judith S., and Robert V. Friedenberg. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 8th ed. New York: Praeger Print.
Farhi, Paul."Donald Trump lifts ban on blacklisted media outlets at campaign events". Chicago Tribune. 07 Sept 16. Web. 12 Sept 16.
Stump campaigning remains an important aspect of the political process, it gives candidates and their teams the opportunity to be in control of what kind of message they want to put out to the public and to channel what an audience wants to hear. It allows the candidates to connect with potential voters on a more personal level with campaigns that are aimed at certain demographics, stump campaigns are “persuasive, likable, upbeat, able to be understood by ‘average folks’, quotable and able to be used again and again” (Trent et al 146). Candidates also use stump campaigning to go more in depth and emphasize their objectives to the country, “ politics in general is primarily a communication activity” (Trent et al 139).
ReplyDeleteDonald Trump and Hillary Clinton are both two unpopular candidates, so they want to control how the media portrays them to potential voters. In the media, Trump has definitely been depicted as the villain of this election, with each tweet that he puts out and every TV show that he calls into, the media eats it up. There is not a day that goes by where Donald Trump’s face is not plastered on some sort of social media with negative commentary. He has claimed that there is severe media bias in favor of Hillary Clinton. However, these past few days has not been Clinton’s week in the media, which is harmful for her campaign considering we are in the homestretch of the election. She has withheld from holding a press conference for 278 days, which she has been bashed for in the media already but when she held one on September 9th, she received major backlash for comments that she made about Donald Trump supporters. Saying, “To just be grossly generalistic, you can put half of Trump supporters into what I call the ‘basket of deplorables.’ Right? Racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic, you name it” (CNBC). Clinton got tons of criticism from the media and both parties, with Donald Trump firing back saying, “When you are president, you are president of all people.”
Also this week, the secrecy of Clinton’s health has come under fire in the media. Clinton has not been forthright with her health issues, which has caused many concerns for voters, because they don’t want to elect a candidate who is sick and is not fit to stand as president. On Sunday when Clinton passed out during the 9/11 ceremonies, the topic of her health came back up in the media. After the news broke, that she fainted while trying to get into a van, her team said it was from the heat but later came out saying that she had phenomena, this caused an up roar due to her lack of transparency. The media has come out demanding to know why she has been lying about her health issues and not being straightforward. With Clinton receiving criticism, Donald Trump on the other hand has received praise for his tight-lipped comments about Clinton, saying that he hopes she gets well soon. The media commended his behavior, which is rare for Donald Trump.
Works Cited
Trent, Judith, S, et al. Political Campaign Communication. 8th ed., New York, Rowman and
Littlefield, 2016.
Jamieson, A. (2016, September 10). Hillary Clinton: Half of Trump supporters belong in a
basket of deplorables. Retired from http://www.cnbc.com
Stump campaigning continues to be an integral part of the political process today. Stump campaign [speech] is loosely referred to as any standardized speech prepared by the candidate's side that contains reoccurring themes and is paraphrased or repeated at conventions, speeches, and other public appearances. Stump speeches typically contain the incumbent's history, what they can do for the public, and how policies or initiatives may be advanced. The text highlights that, “Politics, in general, is primarily a communication activity,” and that communication is often, “… the vehicles for action – both real and perceived” (Trent, et al. 139). A stump speech allows the candidate to retain control over the listeners while simultaneously highlighting the important themes that drive an individual campaign. Trent also related that political speech material, “… should be persuasive, likable, upbeat, able to be understood by ‘average folks,’ quotable, and able to be used again and again” (146). Candidates use this vehicle to their advantage by altering certain themes in virtue of context and the audiences – while overall selling points remain (146). Since, “The topics are usually generated by survey and poll results,” candidates have a greater ability to respond to concerns from both the press and the public as time passes (146). This is of importance to those running because it helps [them] keep the public and the media focused on their chief messages. Through repetition, these repeated ideals will become synonymous with the candidates themselves.
ReplyDeleteThe media coverage Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have been receiving throughout this election trail differs greatly. It also, has very much to do with whom you ask. In general, Democrats and Republicans take different avenues to garner media attention, as well as historically focusing on certain issues more than others, respectively. The right leaning media has been hammering Clinton and her team over her almost reluctance to take a more involved approach with the media. Similarly, NPR highlighted that: “Hillary Clinton has not held a single press conference since the start of 2016,” which triggered charges from many that she is hiding from the press (Folkenflik). Her team responded by saying she has, “… done nearly 300 interviews,” thus far (Folkenflik). This charge may have been true at some time, but she continues to show an appearance of ‘ducking’ the media. She prefers local news stations and does not give long nor deep interviews. A survey of her, “…interviews found most hovered between about three and eight minutes” (Folkenflik). There is enough fair cause in the arena to state that Clinton does not want to get deep when talking to the media – it is not a revelation that she is not a great public speaker as her husband is.
Donald Trump is very confident, loves talking, and garners significant media attention. “Television contributed directly to the decline of issues and the rise of personality and individual character as a decisive factor in U.S. elections” (Semiatin 130). Trump used being politically incorrect as a way to generate significant attention [albeit free]. Michael Savage and Fox might think Trump is the answer meanwhile Sarah Silverman and MSNBC might love Clinton. Regardless, “The more access we have to the personalities and personal conduct of our leaders, the greater the likelihood we might vote on such ephemera as appearance and personality” (138). The media and candidates alike play into this directly. Social media use by both candidates [Twitter/E-mails] has also embellished feelings. “The mainstream media is not disappearing, but the Internet is having a profound effect on the superficiality of campaign news coverage, promoting emphasis on personality, rumor and infotainment” (142).
Works Cited
DeleteFolkenflik, David. “Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press? “ National Public Radio. 26 August 2016. Web.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
To begin with the question “why do stump campaigns still remain an important part of the political process,” it is important to know the origin of such campaigning. Stump speeches were used in the early days of political campaigning when a candidate would address a crowd on top of a tree stump and would attempt to sound as though they were in common with the public. They would include lower election candidates and local references to sound appealing to the audience. Today, stump speeches have changed, for the most part, but serve a similar purpose in modern campaigning. This kind of speech can be used many times for different sets of crowds and can pertain to a certain demographic with moderate changes. They are more than often written to be "persuasive, likable, upbeat, able to be understood by ‘average folks’, quotable, and able to be used again and again" (Trent et al 146). Not only is it set up to sound relatable to voters, but also to keep a main focus on their overall message and political foundation.
ReplyDeleteNational media outlets usually tend to veer away from these types of speeches from candidates because they aren’t meant to create any real news. The local media are the ones who usually address these stump speeches to broadcast to their local areas. Relating to the question of how to characterize the media coverage that each campaign generates from their cross-country travels, each candidate has their own way of dealing with reporters. Hillary Clinton’s campaign provides two planes for her nation-wide travels. One is for herself along with her team, the other allows for photographers, reporters, and anyone else who creates media buzz about Mrs. Clinton to follow her to her every stop. She uses television and radio as her media outlets with the American public. The basis of this being that the Clinton campaign wants to allow the media to capture her every political move, even with the restriction of having separate planes. In the past, other notable political figures allowed for reporters to be placed on the same plane as the candidate. In an article written by Jim Rutenberg for the New York Times, it proves how necessary it is to have the press so close. “Imagine if reporters had not been on Air Force One when Lyndon B. Johnson was sworn in after John F. Kennedy’s assassination, or on 9/11, when it became a flying, wayward bunker for President George W. Bush” (Rutenberg). From this statement alone it shows how invested the American public is with their elected officials. They want the insight to every event that happens during any kind of outbreak.
DeleteFor Donald Trump, on the other hand, he allows for no media to track his every move while traveling the country. His main media outlet is more focused on the internet using Facebook and Twitter. For him, live tweeting and status updates are the closest you could get with voters in helping them witness his traveling occurrences. Unlike Clinton, Trump has managed to pick and choose the media that gets to cover his events. He’s kicked some stations out and allowed others to come back for more, all depending on how they cover him. The Washington Post explains just some of Trump’s attitude toward the American media with an example stating, “Trump has singled out the newspaper for criticism multiple times, even branding it ‘the failing New York Times.’ Among other stories, Trump has objected to a Times article published this month that portrayed his aides as exasperated and his mood as ‘sullen and erratic’.” (Farhi). Although Clinton has been criticized for not holding enough press conferences for the media over the summer of 2016, Trump still seems to openly share his hatred for American media, even when holding political events to be broadcasted. Two completely opposite political candidates for the presidency should make this upcoming election one to remember, especially with the help of American media outlets.
DeleteWorks Cited
DeleteFarhi, Paul. "No, There’s No Rhyme or Reason to Trump’s Ban on News Organizations." Washington Post 25 Aug. 2016. Web.
Rutenberg, Jim. "Plane Rides and Presidential Transparency." The New York Times. The New York Times, 28 Aug. 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Stump campaigning remains an important part of the political process because it allows for each candidate to get closer to the people on a personal level. It allows them to really focus on the focal points of their campaign and lay out ambitious goals and plans for the future if nominated. The key points of the stump speech are usually the same but often focus on certain demographics. “The topics are usually generated by survey and poll results,” (Trent et al. 146). The stump often times starts off with a joke toward the other side to set the mood for the rest of the evening. Setting the tone of the night by using a joke that hopefully the viewers will enjoy is just the first step of the stump process. According to long-term speechwriter Robert Lehrman, “political speech material should be persuasive, likable, upbeat, able to be understood by “average folks,” quotable, and able to use again and again” (Trent et al. 146). As I said earlier, stump speeches provide the opportunity for the candidate to gain more knowledge of his/her demographics. However, it also allows the voters to learn the candidates true personality. We live in a nation where personality is key and find ourselves looking more into personality rather then the accomplishments that follow a person. “The mainstream media is not disappearing, but the Internet is having a profound effect on the superficiality of campaign news coverage, promoting a greater emphasis on personality, rumor, and infotainment” (Semiatin 142). Providing a strong stump speech will continue to keep the candidate aimed toward his certain demographics and gain relationships with voters on a personal level.
ReplyDeleteMedia coverage has been the most controversial, yet beneficial point in Donald Trump and Hillary Clintons respected campaigns. Since the start of the primaries Trump and Clinton have taken the media by storm. Donald Trump managed to find his way on talk shows to gaining almost half of the talking time in primaries with 14 others on stage. He continues to take both negative and positive coverage just to keep his name a top the political media. Hillary Clinton manages to keep her head above water by doing the bare minimum of talk shows and interviews. Both of these candidates have kept the media on their toes since the start.
Donald Trumps largest media coverage is his media blackout, which the Washington post calls it a “Trump Blackout.” Trump stated that he had taken away the press credentials from the post. “Trump announced that he is barring post journalists from his events along with reporters from Politico, Huffington Post, BuzzFeed, Gawker, Foreign Policy, Fusion, Univision, Mother Jones, the New Hampshire union Leader, and the Daily Beast,” (Milbank, Washington Post). Putting a ban on these media outlets seems like a odd move for Trump given that the media is what took made him the GOP’s candidate, so why ban them? Trump actually benefits by doing this because it allows him to plant falsehoods with little risk of follow-up, according to Dana Milbank of the Washington Post. Media outlets have covered Trump since day one and will continue to do so throughout the rest of the presidential race.
ReplyDeleteThe Republican National Committee has put Hillary Clinton on blast, after not hosting a single press conference since the start of 2016. Clinton is not that great of a speaker as Trump is and it’s a known fact. She often fumbles a lot on stage and has been reluctant to do press conferences because of it. However, according to the NPR “In late May, for example, Clinton told CNN's Jake Tapper she had already done nearly 300 interviews. Last Sunday, campaign manager Robbie Mook told CBS's John Dickerson, "She's been in more than 300 interviews with reporters this year alone." 300 interviews in a year seem like a significant amount and more then enough in a 9-month span. Hillary will continue to take scrutiny as her race for President continues. As we grow closer and closer to Election Day, we will see how Clinton handles the adversity and shows why she belongs as president.
Works Cited
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Folkenflik, David. "Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press?" NPR. NPR, 26 Aug. 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Milbank, Dana. "The Right Response to Donald Trump? A Media Blackout." Washington Post. The Washington Post, n.d. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
The most essential communication practice in any campaign is public speaking (Trent et al. 139) Stump speeches and stump campaigning are a critical part of the political process because candidates can give well-thought out messages continuously over the course of a campaign. Stump speeches allow candidates to address the same key issues and selling points though themes may vary according to different audiences (Trent et al. 146). Stump campaigning allows for a basic speech to be sued with some adjustments throughout the campaign. This type of campaigning is used by major national and statewide candidates who make hundreds, if not thousands of speeches during a campaign (Trent et al. 144). Stump speeches follow a general outline and should be “persuasive” and “quotable” (Trent et al. 146). They should also contain information that can be easily understood by “average folks.”
ReplyDeleteHillary Clinton has a reputation for avoiding the press throughout her campaign so it’s no surprise that her campaign trail reporters fly on a different plane than her. Clinton has received much criticism for not being “transparent” with viewers and readers. Though she has traveled the country extensively, Clinton has not given a traditional, national news briefing in nearly nine months (Jim Rutenberg, New York Times). It has been said that Clinton does interviews when it suits her and when she has a message she wants to get out to the public (Folkenflik, NPR). Of the interviews she has given, they have been typically only a few minutes long, which limits how deep a journalist can drill her with questions. Clinton also has her own podcast now, which makes it easy for her to answer questions she’s comfortable with and highly likely knows in advance. Media coverage of Hillary Clinton has been particularly negative these past few days after she revealed she has pneumonia. She has had to cancel campaign events and now she will be under the media’s scrutiny even more as people question whether or not she is healthy enough to serve as president.
Over the past few months, Trump has made it clear (particularly through Twitter) how much he dislikes the media. Despite the fact that he has received so much free coverage from the media, Trump continuously attacks journalists. This is part of his strategy to manipulate the public and garner even more media attention. He rarely gives clear and specific answers to questions especially when they relate to foreign policy. Just recently, Matt Lauer was heavily criticized for being too soft on Trump during a forum. This campaign season has showed that the media has struggled with how to report on Trump. Trump doesn’t allow reporters to fly on his plane and he even maintains a blacklist of reporters who are banished from the media plane that follows him (Jim Rutenberg, New York Times). At the beginning of his campaign, people did not expect Trump to receive the Republican nomination. However, I think he has managed to get this far primarily because of the massive amount of attention the media has given him.
Works Cited:
DeleteFolkenflik, David. "Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press?" NPR. NPR, 26 Aug. 2016. Web. 12 Sept. 2016.
Rutenberg, Jim. "Plane Rides and Presidential Transparency." The New York Times. The New York Times, 28 Aug. 2016. Web. 12 Sept. 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 2016. Print.
Following the substantial changes in technology and the way we get our news, the way that political campaigns communicate with the voters has also altered distinctly. Parts of campaigns that were once imperative for the process have now become obsolete, and new ways of reaching the public are still being invented. However, the term of stump campaigning has long dominated political campaigns, especially for presidential elections. Candidates use stump campaigning to persuade voters to support them, and show their political reach across the nation. “Even if the contributors do not reside in the candidate’s state, the fundraising pitch requires that the candidate make contact with a wide array of people.” (Semiatin, 23), which is why candidates travel across the country and visit anywhere from big cities to smaller towns, striving to reach that point of personal connection with voters that are potential contributors of small yet necessary donations to the candidate’s campaign. Small contributions to campaigns have particularly become more important compared to the past, because “now, donors have far more control over how their money is spent.” (Semiatin, 21) Candidates also like to brag about the amount of small donations that their campaign has received from ordinary Americans, as this draws an image of them as being the “underdog” and winning the support of the everyday Americans; not just lobbyists and super-PACs. In the 2008 elections, it was the first time that donations from individuals so strongly emphasized, which installed a sense of empowerment to the people, and made them feel like they were an integral part of the process. As Boatright suggests in his article, “the rest of the world has caught up with Obama’s methods of raising money from smaller donors” (Semiatin, 11) and this is a major focus point of today’s ways of stump campaigning.
ReplyDeleteAs much as it is about humanizing the candidate and building that personal connection, stump campaigning also unveils a more politically aggressive side of the candidate and may portray them positively as a “go-getter”. As can be seen in any good stump speech in history, the concept of stump campaigning is also about getting attention from the media as a means of reaching out to voters. Looking at Trump’s 2016 campaign, there are countless examples of him delivering stump speeches, and creating material for the media to pick up, and assign him more coverage than his opponent. Trump’s campaign understands what our textbook emphasizes about stump campaigning, “…television covers only those events it decides are important. … [networks] are very selective in what they cover” (Trent et al. 37) and as Paul Farhi argues he now “realizes that banning news organizations [in the past] has played badly with the public” , which is why no one has been added to his blacklist in months. He so blatantly puts the goal of receiving media coverage at the center of his campaign, and pushes policy and everything else to the background.
Clinton’s media coverage throughout her campaign has also gathered a lot of criticism in the sense that she isn’t personally accessible enough, which greatly affects her image in the public and certainly doesn’t help erase her image as a “liar”. Rutenberg criticizes her distant approach towards the media in his article, drawing connections between her relationship with journalists and her transparency and honesty as president with the people of America.
Stump campaigning, much like the political conventions of today, has clearly evolved throughout the years, along with technology and ways of communication. However, it remains to be an incredibly important part of political campaigns, as it serves to establish a personal connection between the candidate and the voters, stirs up individual contributions and earns the them media coverage, which ultimately determines how successful the campaign proves to be.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteWorks Cited
DeleteFarhi, Paul. “No, There’s No Rhyme or Reason to Trump’s Ban on News Organizations,” Washington Post. 25 August 2016. Web.
Rutenberg, Jim. "Plane Rides and Presidential Transparency." The New York Times. The New York Times, 28 Aug. 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Stump campaigning continues to be a vital part of the political process because it is used as a tool to persuade the audience and better communicate with them. According to speechwriter Robert Lehrman, the goal of stump speeches is to be “persuasive, likeable, upbeat, able to be understood by “average folks,” quotable, and able to be used again and again” (Trent et al 146). Essentially, political speeches help make or break a candidate’s reputation. Each comment that the candidates say affects their image, reputation and future. Stump speeches allow the candidate to bring their personality to the table. President Barack Obama is an excellent public speaker and showcases his personality through his tone and passion whenever he delivers a speech. Additionally, First Lady Michelle Obama carries herself with poise and is a dynamic speaker as well. They appeal to the American public and are captivating individuals. Stump campaigning greatly helped President Obama and allowed him to attract a wide audience and better communicate with the public.
ReplyDeleteThe current election is unique partly because Clinton is the first female to become a presidential nominee. According to Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, female candidates want the media attention to be focused on what they stand for and not their looks; they want to focus the attention on the issues they want to be solved (MacManus 179). Although women could struggle with having everything focused on their looks, stump campaigning helps the candidate further discuss their goals and qualifications. It provides each candidate with an opportunity to be presented however they choose to be (MacManus 179).
The media coverage of each campaign is significant and drastically swaying the public’s opinion. Between Donald Trump’s negative remarks on Hillary Clinton, and Hillary responding back to him, the public has been engaged and fully informed on each negative aspect on the opposing candidate. Each campaign is using particular tactics that have not been used as frequently in the past. For instance, Donald Trump’s use of Twitter, let alone his lack of a filter, is unlike any other candidate or politician. He used Twitter to captivate his audience and for attention. Not being a politician himself, he has set the stage for an approach that does not follow the norm.
Additionally, news outlets and cable stations such as CNN, NBC, Fox, the New York Times and the Washington Post all have a different spin on each candidate. CNN, NBC, New York Times and Washington Post tend to favor Clinton and focus on the negatives aspects of Trump. On the contrary, Fox is extremely conservative and highlights the negative aspects of Clinton. During the controversy between the Khan family and Trump, Sean Hannity from Hannity, danced around the Trump controversy and focused more on the Clinton email scandal and her potential health threats. In addition, it is more common now for candidates to appear on cable television shows (Trent et al 146). Trump has made appearances on Fox and knows exactly how to properly place himself in the media. On the contrary, it has been said that Clinton could be “dodging the press” because she has not made as many appearances (Folkenflik). According to the National Public Radio, Clinton has failed to have a press conference since the beginning of the campaign (Folkenflik). Both candidates are generating unique media coverage for each campaign, which is only going to continue to get more interesting. In essence, the media is capable of spinning each campaign, which is what makes this particular election so captivating.
Works Cited
DeleteFolkenflik, David. "Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press?" National Public Radio (Morning Edition). 12 Sept. 2016.
MacManus, Susan. “Women and Campaigns- Generation-Based Microtargeting and Tackling Stereotypes.” Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. 3rd ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2016 Print.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 8th edition. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 2016. Print.
Stump campaigning remains important because the general message of has to be understood by many “average folk” throughout the country (Trent 146). The stump speech allows the candidate to condense the most valuable points in his/her platform. State by state, the speech can be modified to fit state culture. In can be as serious as mentioning an issue that fits the candidate’s platform or light hearted by mentioning the love of a states food specialty. Issue speeches can help make his/her campaign more personal in different regions and towns. It makes the candidate seem more concerned to the issues at hand.
ReplyDeleteIt would be redundant for the news media to focus on every speech that the candidate makes on the road. Which is why the media currently focuses on sound bites from those speeches. Any slight variation of their stump speech will become the highlight of campaign news coverage. Candidates need to make sure that their seven minute speech is promising for a six second sound bite. With the increase of social media in campaigns, campaign news coverage can become “even more superficial and the seven second sound bite will be even more important.”(Semiatin, 140).
The campaign coverage this election cycle has been a little different. Not only are stump speeches given by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, Trump has extended his platform by directly talking on the internet in a multifaceted way. The news not only follows the speeches he makes, they follow every tweet he makes as well. He may not even be using stump speeches on his campaign trail. He may be using speech modules, adjusting his platform everywhere he goes. The flexibility of a speech module allows the candidate to adapt to different situations (Trent 145). The benefit of doing this is that the news media assumes a new sound bite every day therefore leading the way in campaign coverage.
As opposed to Hillary Clinton, who has other people controlling her social media accounts and focuses on her traditional stump speeches mostly. It is only now in the campaign she began to vary her stump speeches to have a sound bite attacking Trump, his campaign and his supporters. Last weekend, Clintons attempt to attack Donald trump and his supporters backfired. She had described that half of Donald trump’s supporters were in a “basket of deplorables” in an attempt to be shocking and aggressive towards the trump campaign. (Chozick, 2016). Trumps response? “Wow, Hillary Clinton was SO INSULTING to my supporters, millions of amazing, hard working people. I think it will cost her at the polls!” (Chozick, 2016). It’s seemingly out of Clinton’s character to try to insult Donald Trump and her attempt backfired, leading to an apology.
Stump speeches have served an important function to the election process but it is seemingly changing as more social media comes into play. Social media has added a dynamic in this year's campaign that will affect future campaigns to come.
Chozick, Amy. "Hillary Clinton Calls Many Trump Backers ‘Deplorables,’ and G.O.P. Pounces." The New York Times. The New York Times, 10 Sept. 2016. Web. 12 Sept. 2016.
DeleteMayer, Jeremy D., Richard Semiatin J., and Joseph Graf. "Campaign Press Coverage--Changed Forever." Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. Ed. Richard J. Semiatin. 3e ed. Washington, D.C.: Sage, 2016. 127-44. Print.
Trent, Judith S., and Robert V. Friedenberg. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 8th ed. New York: Praeger, 2016. Print.
If you see a political candidate speaking on the news either, in real time or just highlighted coverage, they’re usually giving a stump speech. Stump campaigning and speeches are a large portion of political races for office. In the book Political Campaign Communication the authors explain, “The stump speech is the one used by candidates most of the time. A few themes may vary with attention to context and audiences. However, the key issues and selling points largely remain the same” (Trent 146). Stump speeches allow for their candidates to push their issues but adjust their focus points depending on where they are speaking. Different demographics focus on different issues during elections. Stump speeches allow for the candidates to expand on certain issues while still pushing their main objectives and missions as a potential elected official.
ReplyDeleteBoth the Democratic and Republican campaigns are generating different kinds of media coverage in VERY different ways. We see a more traditional approach by the Democrats and a newer less politically correct or non-traditional approach by the Republicans. We see the Hillary campaign handling issues or media in the traditional press release/conference formats and PR standpoint but Trump’s campaign, well, Trump is looking to Twitter. Trump tweets what he wants and says what he wants. Hillary is more like your traditional politician. With media advancing the candidates are forced to handle it all differently and quickly. Arguably part of the reason Trump has gained as much traction is because of his conventional way of getting attention from the public and media. In Campaigns on the Cutting Edge the authors bring up the point that “the Internet has opened up U.S. politics to a new set of players without discarding the old power structure…. candidates and media have to traverse this landscape, which continues to change and lacks the stability and predictability of the past” (Semiatin 141).
Even the way the two avoid the media are vastly different. A story by National Public Radio, talked about how Hillary is “Dodging the Press.” They started the story with, “Hillary Clinton has not held a single press conference since the start of 2016, triggering charges that she's trying to duck questions from reporters on the campaign trail” (Folkenflik). An article was released by the Washington Post, about Trump’s ban on some news organizations. It started with, “Donald Trump has made no secret of his dislike for the news media… But some media outlets clearly are worse than others to Trump, who has banned nearly a dozen of them from his campaign rallies and public events” (Farhi). Trump is clearly using a new and generally frowned-upon way of dealing with the media. Banning media isn’t exactly a tactic used by politicians past, if it was it was not nearly as direct as this way. Politicians have been avoiding the media for decades, all using different tactics. Some have surely used Clinton’s tactic, or her accused tactic of not holding any press conferences so she’s not giving any stump speeches nor taking any reporters questions. Trump needs that media time so instead of avoiding it he’s regulating it. True or not, both are not ideal things to hear about your potential President of the United States.
Farhi, Paul. "No, There’s No Rhyme or Reason to Trump’s Ban on News Organizations." Washington Post 25 Aug. 2016. Web.
DeleteFolkenflik, David. "Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press?" NPR 26 Aug. 2016. Web.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Stump campaigning remains an important part of the political process because it tackles, at its root, one goal. That one goal is to communicate with voters. “Politics, in general, is primarily a communication activity” (Trent 139). Any form of communication that candidates can have with their voters is good communication. Even if something negative circulates as a result of the stump campaign, it still gets that candidates name out to the public and makes their opponents have to make a move to capitalize and possibly turn it in to a positive for them. As evident in our class, if an opponent does not capitalize on a mistake or bad press of the other candidate, we start to question. We had a class discussion on whether or not Trump should make comments about Hillary Clinton’s campaign advisor’s former husband, Anthony Weiner. There are however, some unprecedented moves taken by this year’s presidential candidates with regard to media when stump campaigning. “Trump banned the Des Moines Register last summer after it published an editorial that urged him to drop out of the race” (Farhi). Keep in mind, the Des Moines Register is not a national newspaper, rather, it is a local one. Trump, by doing this, might’ve turned many voters in Des Moines, Iowa and the surrounding area against him.
ReplyDeleteThe variance in location of stump campaigning can help keep a candidate sharp, as they tailor their speech to their location and the demographic that their campaign thinks will attend. “We tend to think of it as a speech that is delivered time and time again, with little change. However, candidates do not give an identical speech time after time, irrespective of the audience, occasion or actions of their opponents” (Trent 145). Nate Silver from FiveThirtyEight.com cited Schoolhouse Rock and the face that the United States is composed of 50 states. One national campaign speech can not possibly get to people who are potential supporters across those 50 states.
Clinton seems to get that, with 181 of her interviews (compiled from information in Rutenberg) being with local radio and television networks. Clinton in particular needs these stump campaigns to try and make her more relatable. Chozik writes of Clinton beginning her campaign via a van ride to Iowa from New York, hosting round table discussions with “a handful of what her campaign called ‘everyday Americans’ in Iowa and New Hampshire” (Chozick). When I read this, at least, I recall the mindset that used to exist in stories about having a family road trip across the country to see the sights.
“Some of the closest relationships Mrs. Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, have are with their longstanding contributors” (Chozick). Trump already has the vote of millionaires, Clinton needs to tackle those that can’t relate to the financial status of Trump, and that’s done on the local interaction level.
Chozick, Amy, and Jonathan Martin. "Where Has Hillary Clinton Been? Ask the Ultrarich." The New York Times. The New York Times, 03 Sept. 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
DeleteTrent, Judith, Robert Friedenberg, and Robert Denton. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. Rowman & Littlefield, 2016. Print.
"No, There's No Rhyme or Reason to Trump's Ban on News Organizations." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 25 Aug. 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
A great campaign needs to have a comprehensive strategy. In fact, any candidate who’s running for a position needs to understand whom they are trying to reach and how to reach them. It is expected of a candidate to give stump speeches throughout their campaign. These are important because these speeches are going to shape how the media portrays a candidate. In order for the campaign to be both efficient and effective, the candidates will only visit “precincts where their party traditionally runs well, those where elections are likely to be close, and those where ticket-splitting commonly takes place” (Trent 179). Time is money and it cannot be wasted in places where their appearance would make no difference.
ReplyDeleteOur current presidential prospects have been making their rounds in crucial areas. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the most historically disliked candidates in a presidential election, both have the difficult task of humanizing themselves and convincing the public they are the right person for the job. Hillary, as the first woman presidential nominee, also has the burden of proving she is capable of the job. “It’s tough for women to come across as strong as men. Their voices are higher pitched, their features are softer, their mannerisms are not firm, and if they are, people are turned off because it’s not feminine” (Semiatin 180). The media and her opposing candidate are intentionally focused on her looks and mannerisms.
Donald Trump is also struggling to prove that he is qualified for the job. He may not always be succeeding in the media, but he draws major crowds from his base at his rallies. He understands what his audience wants to hear and he delivers his unorthodox speeches. Trump, unlike other candidates, is mostly in control of the media. He clearly believes that "any press is good press" as he has made inflammatory statements in the media time and time again. Tailoring his speeches to draw responses in the media has been his go-to tactic for his campaign.
This is the last leg before the election and the candidates need to be on their toes. Influencing supporters is more critical now then ever. The candidates are taking different approaches. “Clinton's campaign has been heavily courting those voters with a robust ground operation focused on engaging supporters and getting them to cast their ballots before Election Day” (Rafferty). Trump is taking an approach that is currently unknown. They need to be able to stand above the public and convince voters through their speeches that they will be the best candidate come election day.
Semiatin, Richard J.; Semiatin, Richard J. (2016-01-29). Campaigns on the Cutting Edge (p. 180). SAGE Publications. Kindle Edition.
Trent, Judith S.; Friedenberg, Robert V.; Denton, Robert E., Jr. (2011-08-16). Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices (Communication, Media, and Politics) (p. 179). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Kindle Edition.
Rafferty, Andrew. "Clinton and Trump Begin Last Leg in Race for the White House." NBC News 5 Sept. 2016. Web
Stump campaigning is an important aspect of both political parties because it focuses on the themes, key issues, and selling points of each candidate (Trent et. al. 146). This persuasive, comprehensible style of public speaking should target the “average folks” and have the ability to be repeated verbatim to each target audience for the candidate (Trent et. al. 146). Time is of the essence for presidential candidates, and stump campaigning allows them to relay their message in a timely fashion to a vast majority of voters. Delivering stump speeches and clearly communicating their stances on issues is crucial for the nominees. Keeping a consistent mantra or theme throughout the campaign for both parties such as Trump’s “Make America Great Again” and Clinton’s “Stronger Together” is crucial, if it has the ability to “capture a mood of the country, a quality of the candidate, and a promise to the country” (Tompkins, Al). Campaign slogans are essential to distinguishing between the parties.
ReplyDeleteThe media during presidential campaigns plays a massive role in the portrayal of each candidate to the general public. According to Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, the power and impact that television has on representing the image and personality of the candidate is enormous (Semiatin, 129). Semiatin states that “television contributed directly to the decline of issues and the rise of personality and individual character as a decisive factor in U.S elections” (Semiatin, 130). Donald Trump’s over the top, no-filter personality has granted him an abundance of media coverage over the past year. His controversial tweets fuel the media fire, enhancing his public appearance. Public relations stunt or not, media exposure, no matter the reason, is a brilliant strategy to get the candidate out there to the world. The candidates have the power to control the media, and what messages are relayed to audiences. Clinton, although rarely appears on filmed interviews or live news networks, has some of the most influential television, radio, and social media advertisements, in my opinion. This is a tactic her campaign has created to manage what is being communicated to her target audiences. How both parties handle the media is strategic to their campaign.
Lindsay Rhys (Continued)
ReplyDeletePolitical Campaign Communication discusses the value that stock speeches have on the audience the candidates are hoping to win over. The book mentions the 2008 and 2012 Obama campaigns, and how his speeches mentioned key issues, the goals of the party, and the major concerns of constituent groups in the Democratic party (Trent el. Al. 45). This type of campaigning, hitting target audiences and speaking on the issues important to them, has been proven successful. When stump campaigning, the candidates must consider the demographics of where they are traveling during the campaign. States that are notoriously red are going to be challenging for Clinton to win over voters, and vice versa with Trump, so they must use the media to their advantage in those states. Both candidates have been using the media during this campaign season to their advantage. In the end, the candidate with the ability to persuade the electoral college and the majority of the people through stump campaigning, media, and overall image will win this upcoming election.
Work Cited:
ReplyDeleteSemiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Tompkins, Al. "How Important Are Campaign Slogans?" Poynter. N.p., 27 July 2004. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Stump campaigning is essentially the act of traveling around the country and delivering the same speech over and over again to different people (Parry). While it may seem tedious for candidates to repeatedly deliver the same speech that (in theory) anyone could find online after the first time it’s given, Stump speeches do serve a great deal of value to the political process. One of their more important roles is that they serve fundamentally as sales pitches to inspire voters and get them to the polls (Parry). When politicians deliver an effective speech, a candidate “can weave promises and attacks, lay out ambitious plans, and connect with voters on a personal level” (Parker). This idea of stump speeches being sales pitches is even supported by Trent and her co-writers, when they say that the decision “to use the candidates’ time for public speeches are made out of self-interest, as the candidates attempt to influence the maximum number of voters” (Trent et al 2016). By traveling and giving the same speech to different people around the country, voters also gain more access to the candidates, and “the more access we have to the personalities and personal conduct of our leaders, the greater the likelihood we might vote on such ephemera as appearance and personality” (Semiatin 138). Another reason why stump speeches are still an important part of the political process is their ability to keep the candidate’s platform consistent. Politicians actually have a term for straying away from their platform during a speech, which is known as “going off message” (Parry). “Going off message” and straying away from a stump speech can cause politicians to enter uncharted territory. If a politician tries to be spontaneous and ends up going flat, that’s what is going to be the item on the national news and not, for instance, a policy item that is far more important (Parry).
ReplyDeleteThe media coverage for Trump has been extremely oversaturated. According to The Atlantic’s daily media tracker, journalism’s obsession with Trump had totaled the equivalent of about $2 billion in free media as of March. Hillary Clinton had garnered about $746 million in free media during the same time period (Lafrance). News outlets have been covering Trump so aggressively for a variety of reasons. Trump’s availability is one of them, but mostly it’s because of his penchant for the outrageous and nonconventional that makes him so attractive to the media (Shafter). On the other side of the election, Hillary Clinton has had an uneasy relationship with the media. Hillary Clinton has been fairly hesitant when it comes to holding press conferences this past summer. At this point, however, it might have been a wise move to of avoided them. According to Brain Beutler for New Republic, the “near-daily stories about how long it’s been since she’s held a press conference are almost preferable to the feeding frenzy that would follow an actual press conference” (Beutler). Her absence from press conferences has caused many to believe that reporters have fallen short recently of their institutional duty to accurately inform the public about the stakes of the election (Beutler). Even statistics can show that the amount of news coverage Clinton has received is far less than that of Trump. Drawing from more than 50 newspapers in Nexis’s archives, there are 18,640 articles about Hillary Clinton over a 13-month period in 2015 and 2016, and a whopping 29,019 stories about Trump during the same time period (Lafrance).
Works Cited
ReplyDeleteBeutler, Brian. "Hillary Clinton’s Relationship With the Press Is Broken—and It Can’t Be Fixed." New Republic. N.p., 25 Aug. 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Beutler, Brian. "The Media Coverage of Hillary Clinton Is Out of Whack." New Republic. N.p., 07 Sept. 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Lafrance, Adrienne. "Trump’s Media Saturation, Quantified." The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, n.d. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Parker, Ashley. "Anatomy of a Stump Speech." The New York Times. The New York Times, 02 Jan. 2012. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Parry, Tom. "Canada Election 2015: What Exactly Is a 'stump' Speech?" CBCNews. N.p., 8 Sept. 2015. Web.
Semiatin, Richard J. Campaigns On The Cutting Edge. 3rd ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2008. Print.
Shafer, By Jack, By Lind Michael, By Adams Mason, By Kruse Michael, By Graff Garrett M., and By Goldmacher Shane. "Did the Media Create Trump?" POLITICO Magazine. N.p., 2 Mar. 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Trent, J. S., Friedenberg, R. V., Denton Jr., R. E. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Stump campaigning has proven to be a fundamental part to the political process because it serves as a cohesive way to carry a certain message(s) or theme(s) throughout the entire campaign. In more specific terms, a stump speech “is the one used by candidates most of the time…[in which] a few themes may vary with attention to context and audiences” (Trent et al 146). Furthermore, these “topics are usually generated by survey and poll results” (Trent et al 146). These results prove to be easy ways for the candidates to grab the attention of the public, simply because they are based on actual data rather than hypotheticals. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, much like candidates in the past, have used these stump campaigning tactics to focus in on “key issues and selling points” (Trent et al 146).
ReplyDeleteAs they travel cross-country these unfavorable candidates create buzz in their wake. Trump, due to his outlandish accusations and rough commentary style, is never far from a headline. Paul Farhi of the Washington Post even attempts to dissect Trump’s dislike for the news media. You can also say that there have been weak links between parties and newspapers in the past. At the national level “the strong linkage between parties and newspapers in the campaigns began to weaken in the late nineteenth century with the rise of the mass media” (Semiatin 129). It has also been said “during political campaigns, newspapers become more like referees in a boxing match, rather than the cheering supporters they had been in the partisan press era” (Semiatin 129). Perhaps Trump’s need for the latter is part of why he has shown such a dislike for the press throughout this election.
Trump’s decision in the past to ban certain news outlets has only created more buzz as to why he is making such moves. Farhi goes on to say “Trump’s habit of banning new outlets isn’t just unprecedented for a presidential candidate—it also seems entirely arbitrary” (Farhi). While his candor and transparent feelings toward the news media are entirely his own, he is also suggesting how he might be if elected.
On the other hand, while Clinton is less overtly outspoken, she is still incredibly disliked due to her cold exterior and lack of charisma. When dealing with the press, Jim Rutenberg brings up a few essential points in his article, “Plane Rides and Presidential Transparency.” When Clinton flew to Reno, Nevada she used two planes, “one was for [her] and her entourage [and] the other was for the reporters, photographers and videographers assigned to follow her every move—which, of course, is impossible when she’s not physically on the same aircraft” (Rutenberg). Rutenberg goes on to say that this is about much more than “eyewitness accounts and plan rides,” it is about the “candidate’s plans for the White House, and how open and accessible we want them to be as president.” (Rutenberg). For both candidates, it’s ultimately “about whether we truly believe in the premise that transparency is vital for democracy” (Rutenberg). This is an interesting point to think about because both Clinton and Trump have proven to be less than transparent at times. In the past week Clinton’s health has taken the forefront in the news because of speculation and withholding of information. I now question the role of transparency in democracy, if it is vital, and if we only see some type of manufactured truth created by either campaign.
Works Cited:
Farhi, Paul. "No, There’s No Rhyme or Reason to Trump’s Ban on News Organizations." Washington Post 25 Aug. 2016. Web.
Rutenberg, Jim. "Plane Rides and Presidential Transparency." New York Times 28 Aug. 2016. Web.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
A candidate who wants to be successful in their election is going to have to appeal to their constituent’s wants and needs. Stump campaigning allows them to do that exactly; it puts the candidate in a position to tell the people what they want to hear, and to strengthen their message. The speeches will usually feed off polling results and will appeal to an issue that the crowd is passionate about, making them more effective and memorable by design (Trent et al. 146). No smart candidate would make two stump speeches identical, however they are often very similar in their content. Speechwriter Robert Lehrman, believes that most stump speeches should follow an outlined format, with the content being “persuasive, likable, upbeat, able to be understood by ‘average folks’, quotable, and able to be used again and again” (Trent et al. 146). Especially in swing states, this direct communication between the candidate and the voters can provide a much needed bump in popularity and support. People are much more likely to be influenced by a live speech then a TV add, especially if the speaker is charismatic and likable. This certainty helped Bill Clinton more than is doing for Hillary, as a speech can only be as effective as the candidate delivering it is. Hillary’s weakness in public speaking is no doubt something that the campaign has worked hard to address. By having talented speakers such as Bill Clinton, Obama, Elizabeth Warren, and Joe Biden assist with campaigning, Clinton’s own shortcomings can be less of a vulnerability. In fact, Clinton has been criticized by Trump for having so few campaign events compared to himself. Trump isn’t wrong, Hillary’s summer schedule was not all about the public events and speeches. Instead she seemed to be working hard at fundraising among the upper class. The New York Times reported “while Mrs. Clinton has faced criticism for her failure to hold a news conference for months, she has fielded hundreds of questions from the ultrarich in places like the Hamptons, Martha’s Vineyard, Beverly Hills and Silicon Valley” (Chozick, Martin). Hillary has not been generating massive news coverage at large campaign events, at least not to the extent that her opponent has. She has however raised about $143 million in the month of August alone (Chozick, Martin). So while Trump remains the constant center of attention, Hillary has been using her finances to bombard the country with things like TV ads. As of mid-August, Trump had still not spend a penny on TV ads, compared to Clinton’s $52 million (Smith). Quite simply, Trump doesn’t need the ads nearly as much as Clinton does. The media feeds off of his personality, and millions of people see him plastered all over social media. The effectiveness of Trump’s message traveling over social media has no doubt greatly helped his campaign. While reputable networks are likely to attempt to check his claims and calm his rhetoric, social media shows it exactly how Trump wants it to be shown. Just as the text pointed out, seeing content on social media can end up “preempting any desire for the recipient to seek out news from traditional sources” (Semiatin 139). However, social media is not held to the same standard as established journalism. There are no ethics rules, and nothing in place to stop misinformation or blatant lies, such as those we have seen in the past from both candidates to some degree.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
DeleteChozick, Amy, and Jonathan Martin. "Where Has Hillary Clinton Been? Ask the Ultrarich." The New York Times. The New York Times, 03 Sept. 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Smith, Allan. "$52 Million to $0: That's How Much Hillary Clinton's Campaign Is Outspending Donald Trump's on TV Ads." Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc, 10 Aug. 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Major changes in media coverage and technology are constantly altering the landscape of political campaigns, especially the ways in which candidates are communicating with their potential constituents. That being said, while many aspects of campaigns have been discarded or replaced, stump campaigning has been around for decades and continues to serve as a “vehicle for action” (Trent, 139) for nearly every candidate. The content of a speech depends on the audience and while candidates are often giving speeches to the national audience, stump speeches are an opportunity to connect more with small, local populations. This opportunity allows candidates to study the demographics of that smaller community and adjust their speech to offer solutions to the problems being faced in that particular area. In the David Folkenflik article, “Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press?”, Clinton states that “she picked up valuable clues about a region's concerns from talking to local reporters. "They will actually say, 'Well, you know, this is a problem that we're having. What do you think about it?’ So there's actually a conversation that goes on." (Folkenflik, 2) According to longtime speech writer Robert Lehrman, successful stump speeches should be “persuasive, likable, upbeat, able to be understood by ‘average folks’, quotable and able to be used again and again. (Trent, 146). By following the outline Lehrman suggests in the textbook, candidates can maintain the skeleton of the stump speech every time they give it while at the same time, can offer personalized points to local populations depending on the problems they are facing in their specific communities. This allows the candidate’s speech to maintain consistency but also shows the candidates awareness that not every community faces the same hardships.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThroughout this Presidential campaign process, Hillary Clinton has been constantly chastised for not giving nearly as much time to the media as her counter part, Donald Trump. People are accusing her of avoiding interviews and press conferences in order to dodge questions but Clinton and her team have vehemently denied these accusations. I do not find these to be quite fair either because as Semiatin mentions in “Campaigns on the Cutting Edge”, “television contributed directly to the decline of issues and the rise of personality and individual character as a decisive factor in U.S. elections,” (Semiatin 130) The difference between Trump and Clinton is just that. Where has Clinton has done hundreds of short, local interviews discussing issues and her potential solutions, Trump has basically found a second home in the American media, constantly pushing his personality rather than diplomacy. How could Trump seemingly not be chastised by the media as consistent as Hillary? Because the media needs a personality like Trump far more than they need solutions to our nation’s problems from Secretary Clinton. Clinton is clearly the more qualified candidate and more time on air might further confirm that, but it might also further confirm that her personality, or lack there of, is mildly concerning due to the importance of the job she is auditioning for. Trump is having trouble with the media but for nearly opposite reasons. His personality is the media’s baby and they will cover it until the day he wins or loses but by banning certain journalists from his campaign events, he is making his diplomacy look nonexistent. In his article for the Washington Post titled “No, there’s no rhyme or reason to Trump’s Ban on News Organizations”, Paul Farhi quotes a Buzzfeed writer who suggests that the real issue isn't necessarily Trump’s dismissal of the media as a candidate, but instead, how scary it would be if the pattern continued if he is elected: “I think if there’s an element most worth concern, it’s the opaqueness of that process,” she said, “and what it portends for how a President Trump would deal with issues like this, whether they concern the media or any other function of that office.” (Farhi, 2)
DeleteAll in all, in a nation where the media has a massive impact on the success of Presidential Candidates, stump campaigning has become almost even more important to counter the media’s obsession with ridiculous personalities and focus on seemingly anything but solutions to our world and our nation’s problems.
Farhi, Paul. “No, There’s No Rhyme or Reason to Trump’s Ban on News Organizations,” Washington Post. 25 August 2016. Web.
DeleteFolkenflik, David. “Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press? “ National Public Radio. 26 August 2016. Web. http://www.npr.org/2016/08/25/491311747/tallying-hillary-clintons-appearances-with-the-news-media
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Stump campaigning involves reciting pre-written speeches one after another to multiple audiences. These speeches are typically slightly tailored to appeal to each individual audience; for example, a speech given to a specific religious group may frequently refer to that particular group’s system of beliefs while a speech given to small business owners may be more centered around the economy (Trent et al 145). These speeches, often given to many small audiences in succession, become increasingly important to candidates as elections begin round their final stretches.
ReplyDeleteIn these speeches candidates tend to speak simply with great emphasis on buzzwords in order to appeal to specific audiences. These buzzwords such as “terrorism”, “economy”, “safety”, and “fairness” are often included and emphasized to make stump speeches seem relevant and memorable, as well as to attempt to set an agenda for prospective media coverage.
Stump campaigning is a vital part the presidential campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, each of whom have been touring the country in attempts to convey their messages and curry favor to specific audiences. Both candidates have received mixed reactions from audiences following their speeches, followed by very predictable reactions from media outlets.
Hillary Clinton, for instance, has put great emphasis on appealing to groups that have been alienated by Donald Trump’s campaign including Muslim, female, and Hispanic voters, though she has spent a great deal of the last few weeks campaigning to affluent voters who may benefit from Mr. Trump’s tax plan (Chozic and Martin).
While she has spent a lot of time and resources campaigning to the wealthy elite Mrs. Clinton has not failed to reach the American people, conveying several messages vital to her platform via campaign speeches including asserting that she is far more qualified for the position as President than Donald Trump, continually stating that Trump should release his tax returns to the public, and perhaps most importantly reacting to Trump’s many controversial statements.
Mr. Trump however has found himself tasked with pleading forgiveness for some of his previous statements as minority voters become more and more important. He has appealed wonderfully to the large population that is dissatisfied with the status quo, but that population is almost exclusively comprised of white men. The best way for him to appeal to minority groups could be by acknowledging some of Hillary Clinton’s many flaws such as the fact that most Americans polled claim not to trust her or that a great deal of the media seems to be on her side, making the race more about not voting for her than voting for him.
The media reactions both campaigns are generating from their cross-country travels have been very predictable; CNN, MSNBC, the Washington Post and other left-leaning news outlets have almost universally praised all of Mrs. Clinton’s better speeches and condemned Trump’s more destructive ones, while more conservative outlets like Fox News have praised Trump’s successes and condemned Clinton’s failures.
What is more interesting, however, is the lack of negative coverage the candidates receive from the media outlets on their side of the political spectrum. For example, Mrs. Clinton’s recent “basket of deplorables” gaffe was covered very briefly on CNN while Mr. Trump’s many controversial statements in the primaries are very rarely mentioned on Fox News (once he became the Republican nominee).
Overall, the media coverage each campaign has received has been simple and predictable, as liberal and conservative outlets alike have been not so subtly aiding in the campaigns of their ideological matches.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
ReplyDeleteTrent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton. Political Campaign Communication:8th Revised Edition: Principles and Practices. Lanham, MD: ROWMAN & LITTLEFIELD, 2015. Print.
Chozick, Amy, and Jonathan Martin. "Where Has Hillary Clinton Been? Ask the Ultrarich." The New York Times. The New York Times, 03 Sept. 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Stump campaigning, though a strategy that has been around for quite some time, continues to be a vital component in the campaigning process. As stated in the introduction of chapter 6 in Political Campaign Communications, “Politics, in general, is primarily a communication activity… a political campaign is fundamentally a communications exercise about choices between the aspirants for public office and the audience of voters,” (Trent et al. 139). Stump campaigning allows candidates to do just this and more. Candidates can target specific demographics and areas and talk with them about issues that pertain to said demographics and regions. According to Trent et al., It is suggested that stump speeches, “ should be persuasive, likeable, upbeat, able to be understood by “average folks,” quotable and able to be used again and again,” (146). With speeches like this, candidates are able to speak with voters on a personal level. They are able to show voters that they care about the same issues and are looking to change or maintain things voters care about.
ReplyDeleteAnother reason stump campaigning still remains an important piece of the political process is the fact that the expectations have already been set. Since this strategy was largely in effect as television and media were growing, the expectation was created and is still there today. In chapter 9 of Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, Mayer et al. touches on this saying, “The media also helps set expectations, which make winners of losers and losers of winners,” (130). Candidates are expected to travel the country and speak in front of large crowds of voters. Not doing so would only hurt them.
It is also a way to reach the smaller backpack journalists and up and coming bloggers that are setting the stage in the news, “Reporters face competition from anyone with a laptop and Internet access, and that can matter in a campaign,” (Mayer et al. 134). These, “outsiders,” are growing more and more and gaining popularity over mainstream news. The old model of campaign coverage is gone. Journalists are no longer the interpreters for the masses, “ and… the new model is more chaotic and interactive,” (Mayer et al.) As I have stated earlier, stump campaigning is way to connect with voters on a personal level; it is a way to interact with them. Voters have become more interactive; especially when it comes to forms of media, so having the interaction has become vital.
I haven’t been following the campaign trails as much as I would like to, so my characterization of the media coverage comes mainly from the snippets I see on twitter. I feel that the coverage has been very much based on the fluff and frill of an election. Its more about the personalities and personal lives of the candidates. I’m always hear something about the way Trump talks or how Clinton was holding herself at her latest event; is she healthy or isn’t she? The coverage has been more about the candidates and what they are doing rather than what they are saying. Granted we’ve heard a few main points, i.e The Wall, Minimum wage, but very little on policy. The coverage has been mainly focused on personality and looks. The media has been running this like a reality TV show.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Stump campaigning is vital to the success of any presidential campaign. Stump speeches are important because your average American is not going to understand a lot of political jargon and policy talk. Robert Lehrman, a political speech writer, suggests that the outline for a stump speech have an intro that includes a joke, an attention getting address, and praise for the group or groups of people you’re speaking to. A body to talk about your accomplishments and qualifications, failures of your opposition, and some solutions. And finally, a conclusion where you give inspiring historical examples of achievement and prosperity and propose a call to action (Trent 146-147). This basic outline is like a formula to campaigning and it is more important now than when candidates were actually standing on stumps because you can easily reach millions of voters with modern technology. Furthermore, it is an essential part of fundraising for any campaign. Since the 1960’s, it has been proven that you need to raise a substantial amount of money in order to compete with your opposition in a national election. The way that you garner funds is the same way that you garner votes. By making yourself out to be the best candidate possible. Money plays a powerful part in politics and if your stump campaigning is successful you could be rewarded with two different scenarios or a variation of the two. You could receive a whole lot of small donations as was the case for Bernie Sanders during the democratic primaries. Or, you could receive a handful of large donations from very wealthy individuals the way that politicians like Hillary Clinton has over the years of her career (Semiatin 22-23). In this election cycle, Donald Trump has managed to spend significantly less money than he normally would because of the way that he has campaigned and the massive media coverage that he has gotten as a result. It is estimated that Trump has gotten roughly $2 billion in free media coverage. Unlike most successful political candidates, he does not have a super PAC and he spends very little on campaign advertising. Most presidential candidates who have the capital spend millions upon millions of dollars on advertising alone. However, Trump hasn’t needed to spend that kind of money because the media coverage that he has been getting over the last 18 months is all free. However, it is certainly not all positive media coverage. A good chunk of that coverage is negative press that potentially hurts Trump's presidential hopes. The same goes for Hillary Clinton. Some of the things that have come up about her the most in the media this election cycle have been about her scandals. Coverage about Benghazi and her many emails during her time as secretary of state have garnered quite a bit of negative media attention as well (Confessore).
ReplyDeleteWork Cited
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Confessore, Nicholas, and Karen Yourish. "$2 Billion Worth of Free Media for Donald Trump." New Yor Times. N.p., 15 Mar. 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Stump campaigning remains an important pat of the political process to this day because it is designed to persuade audiences to support a candidate, through voting and campaign donations. A professional speechwriter said, “ Political speech material should be persuasive, likable, upbeat, able to be understood by “average folks,” quotable, and able to be used again and again” (Trent et al 146). These speech traits often will grab a potential voter, interlocking that integral relationship the candidate needs from a not so involved voter. Reeling the voter in can be developed in one simple sentence during the candidate’s speech, according to Ron Faucheux. “ …A sentence or short paragraph that summarizes the reason why voters should elect you, while keeping in mind your strengths, the oppositions weakness, and your points of inoculation” (Trent et al 147).
ReplyDeleteThis election in particular is interesting. Hillary Clinton is the first female presidential candidate and Donald Trump has no political background. News outlets and the media have shaped both nominees drastically in positive and negative ways during their cross-country travels. The Democrats and the Republicans have been handling issues differently. The Clinton campaign usually goes the more traditional route while Trump is a powerhouse on Twitter. He speaks directly to the people and has gained more of a following because social media plays such an adamant role in not only politics but also life in general. According to Campaigns in the Cutting Edge the campaign press and coverage has changed forever. “ In a world with increasing social media where blogs and tweets opine on daily issues at a moments notice, the shape and scope or reportage can change instantly” (Semiatin 127).
Another interesting factor is how both nominees have been dodging the press. For Trump he had a hiccup when it came to stump campaigning regarding local newspaper. “Trump banned the Des Moines Register last summer after it published an editorial that urged him to drop out of the race But the Wall Street Journal suggested something similar in an editorial earlier this month — with no reaction from Trump” (Farhi). I think this has to do with the Wall Street Journal is national while the Des Moines Register is local and doesn’t gain that much traction According to the National Public Radio she also has been dodging the press. “Hillary Clinton has not held a single press conference since the start of 2016, triggering charges that she's trying to duck questions from reporters on the campaign trail” (Folkenflik). She has had a total of 350 interviews, but half the interviews were from people that aren’t even journalists. Overall, stump campaigning plays a very powerful role in the election process. Both candidates path’ are very unique and I think it has to do with how they are as people, their temperament, and personalities. It will only get more interesting here as the last leg for the race for the White House begins.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
ReplyDeleteSemiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Farhi, Paul. “No, There’s No Rhyme or Reason to Trump’s Ban on News Organizations,” Washington Post. 25 August 2016. Web.
Folkenflik, David. "Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press?" NPR 26 Aug. 2016. Web.
Campaigning is largely a numbers game as a candidate only has so much time leading up to the election, and he/she has the entirety of the United States to sell his/herself to. Stump campaigning allows for candidates to tackle certain demographics and regions they need to win in order to take the election. According to Judith S. Trent et al, “In recent presidential campaigns, both Republican and Democratic candidates have targeted about ten to fourteen states and directed most of their campaign efforts, including speaking, to those states,” (Trent et al. 141). By focusing on battleground states a candidate is building upon his voter-base rather than catering to the voters he already has. This is why a candidate puts so much emphasis on statistics regarding voter demographics and regional voting patterns. By pairing this with modular speeches a candidate can, as Judith S. Trent et al. put it, “can vary their subject matter to ensure they are addressing the major concerns of the groups to whom they are speaking,” (Trent et al. 143). This rings no more true than now as we live in an era in which female voters are microtargeted based on generation, region, ethnicity, and religion just as male voters have been for decades (Semiatin 178). With just too many demographics out there to all be catered to it is essential that a candidate takes his campaign on the road and targets the groups that will be most beneficial for them to go after.
ReplyDeleteAs far as characterizing the media coverage each campaign is garnering form their cross-country travels I would consider it unfavorable. This may be a result of the relevance, and the immediate open forum structure of new media. Oftentimes no-matter what either candidate does they receive some form of negative attention. Hillary Clinton is often criticized for dodging the media and interviews even though this is not necessarily the case as she has taken nearly 300 interviews this year (Folkenflik). And it seems that nearly every time that Trump makes a public appearance there is some sound byte or statement that makes it into headlines for all the wrong reasons. Trump seems to be immune to negative attention as his numbers tend to be unaffected most of the time when something he says is plastered all over television and the web. While Clinton, on the other hand, seems to be leading polls in spite of negative press. She is often criticized and considered untrustworthy due to her email server scandal, and the DNCs leaked emails regarding the Sanders campaign. Both Clinton and Trump have the worst Gallup-poll ratings of any presidential candidate since Barry Goldwater, who ran on a segregationist platform in 1964. According to Gallup’s website, “Trump and Clinton are currently among the worst-rated presidential candidates of the last seven decades according to Gallup's long-term "scalometer" trend. In the race to the bottom, however, Trump's 42% highly unfavorable score easily outpaces Clinton's 33%. Prior to now, 1964 Republican nominee Barry Goldwater had the highest negative score, with 26% rating him highly unfavorably in October 1964,” (Saad).
Folkenflik, David. Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press? NPR. 26 Aug 2016. Web. 12 September 2016
Saad, Lydia. “Trump Leads Clinton in Historically Bad Image Ratings.” Gallup. n.d. Web. 12 Sep. 2016
Semiatin, Richard J. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd Edition. CQ Press, 2017. VitalSource Bookshelf Online.
Trent, Judith S. et al. Political Campaign Communication: Principles & Practices. 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Stump campaigning is integral to American politics. This practice is related to last week’s concept of staging spectacular and expensive party conventions when they technically serve no working purpose. There seems to be nothing easier than filling up an arena with your most dedicated supporters and proudly boasting your campaign’s jargon for half an hour. The question of course remains, why is this style embraced by both major parties?
ReplyDeleteThe answer is not so much that the candidates enjoy speaking to their adherents that are physically present, it’s that they know the 24-hour news outlets will be covering their every move. If they utter something flamboyant or moderately memorable, it can be a talking point on CNN for an entire hour. “The focus becomes less on reporting the news than on personality. Some candidates such as New Jersey Republican governor Chris Christie encourage it (Semiatin, 399). ” Indeed, it is this very practice that keeps stump speeches alive. They’ve certainly always been around in one way, shape, or form throughout American history, but never before have they been such a crucial component of a presidential campaign.
Stump speeches serve many clear purposes. They give the candidate press exposure on a daily basis—especially in the heat of election season. The candidate usually takes no questions, and can speak (without opposition) to a large audience, and exponentially more people on television and the internet. These stump speeches also serve as a terrific forum to bash your opponent to roaring applause. These statements can become signature for the campaign. Trump has been saying “crooked Hillary” for more than six months at most of his rallies.
These appearances also allow the candidates to speak to their constituents, but not typically the press. This is something Mrs. Clinton has come under fire for from both sides. “But Mrs. Clinton has been more than accessible to those who reside in some of the country’s most moneyed enclaves and are willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to see her (Martin, NYT, 9/3/16).” For this reason, Hillary has been called out of touch and has been suspected pandering to America’s elite. Donald Trump however, has been equally criticized for his total lack of small-town, burger-eating appearances that most candidates on the campaign trail have embraced in the past. Even Richard Nixon managed to visit all 50 states in 1960. Trump has made more press appearances and has answered more question than Hillary, but he is perhaps the most critical candidate of the press in modern American history. Trump has even gone as far as banning media outlets from his campaign events entirely. He hasn’t done this since the early summer however. “One theory circulating among journalists is that Trump has realized that banning news organizations has played badly with the public, especially after he declared The Post verboten in June. He hasn’t banned another news outlet since (although he did call reporters “the lowest form of humanity” at a rally this month) (Farhi, Washington Post, 8/25/16).” Trump adores being praised and can’t stand to be criticized, and he has been very vocal about this facet of himself.
As far as the types of coverage each candidate is receiving, there’s no doubt that Trump is dominating the airwaves. His borderline outrageous commentary is candy for cable news networks and online publications alike. This appears to be Trump’s strategy. He has managed to make headlines without discussing core policy which has made his road to being nominated and subsequent run for the White House very easy.
(part 2) Clinton’s strategy, in my opinion, is to let him take up most of the coverage, at least for now. When it boils down to the debates, Clinton probably expects to trample Trump and flaunt her knowledge and experience about governing. Hilary’s scandals have also been covered extensively this season. The media’s job is to “stir the pot” and create an illusion that there’s more conflict than there may actually be in reality. Both candidates have received their share of flak from the press, but Donald takes the cake for the candidate who embraces the media, either positively or negatively.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
DeleteChozick, Amy, and Jonathan Martin. "Where Has Hillary Clinton Been? Ask the Ultrarich." The New York Times. The New York Times, 03 Sept. 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Far, Paul. "No, There's No Rhyme or Reason to Trump's Ban on News Organizations." Washington Post. The Washington Post, n.d. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Semiatin, Richard J. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2008. Print.