Have talk shows been an effective way
for the candidates and their surrogates to campaign during this election? If
you were a campaign strategist, would you suggest more or less use of talk
shows as campaign platforms? You should reference Jones Ch. 3 as well as at
least three media examples from this year’s campaign to support your answer.
Talk shows have definitely been an effective way for the Presidential candidates and their surrogates to campaign during this election. The first time a presidential candidate used a talk show to reach out to the public was, “the 1960 campaign between Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy on ’The Tonight Show’ with Jack Paar” (Bryan). This enabled the candidates to, “show their personality and character” (Bryan). Another example of a talk show or political talk that is still being used today is described by Jeffery Jones as "whereby one or two commentators hold a discussion (rather than an interview) with a guest, thus creating a context in which opinions are freely forthcoming, albeit connected to political actors of the day. Talk shows and political talk enable voters to get to know the candidates on a more personal level and see for themselves if the candidates are likable or not.
ReplyDeleteDuring this year's Presidential Election, the candidates have utilized talk shows very well. Three examples of this are: 1) When Donald Trump went on "The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon" where he spoke about all of the media coverage he had been receiving since becoming the Republican Presidential candidate and about how things have changed for him and his family since the nomination, 2) A great example of a "talk show" that Hillary Clinton went on was "Between Two Ferns with Zach Galifianakis". Now this isn't a serious/real talk show but, it's an example where Hillary put herself in front of a large audience and showed a softer side to her personality. I think this helped Hillary because a lot of people saw Hillary as a robot who spoke as if she was reading off a script 24/7. 3) Lastly, another great example would be when Hillary went on the "Jimmy Kimmel Show" and discussed her choice for her running mate, Tim Kaine. I think it gave her a chance to explain to an audience the reasons behind her choice, but at the same time showing that she has a comedic side when she told Jimmy Kimmel he was in the running to be her running mate (Not really).
After reviewing many examples of talk shows used by the candidates from this campaign, I would suggest doing as many as possible. I believe that it is a great medium to get in touch with potential voters and let them know more about yourself and more about what specifically you plan to do if elected. But as Uncle Ben from Spiderman said, "great power comes with great responsibility." What I mean by this is that talk shows are such a powerful means of communication that you need to be careful with what you say. If you slip up the slightest and say the wrong thing, that statement will turn into a sound-byte that will never go away. This is especially important for Donald Trump who has had problems with choosing his words carefully.
Works Cited
Bryan, Florence. "Presidential Candidates “get Chatty”: Campaigning on Talk Shows." Talking Politics. N.p., 2012. Web. 08 Oct. 2016.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Firstly, I believe that talk shows have been effective for the candidates and their surrogates during this election, however, when I say that I realize I am with a bit of bias. This is because it seems that a lot of the talk shows that candidates have targeted this go around are late night talk shows or satire talk shows, which have a specific target audience, which I am part of. For instance both candidates have been on Jimmy Fallon, and I can tell you as a fact neither of my parents watch Jimmy Fallon.
ReplyDeleteThat being said then, there are obvious pros and cons to going on talk shows for candidates and surrogates. A pro would definitely be that it can make the candidates look more relatable, and for this reason I think if I were a campaign strategist I would want my candidate to make a few appearances. In example, on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon, when he ruffled Trumps hair, although it was awkward it reminded people that at the end of the day Trump as of that interview was just a person like anybody else. Jimmy Fallon even mentioned that he wanted to do it them while “we’re just both civilians”. Similarly when Hillary was on Jimmy Fallon’s show it was to humanize her slightly. A major critique of Hillary Clinton is that she’s cold and doesn’t seem to show much emotion, however someone seeing her laugh along with Jimmy Fallon on the show might see her more as a happy type person who can be both serious and playful when the time is right.
That being said there are also cons to these talk show appearances. Firstly, as stated in From Insiders to Outsiders: The Transformation of Political Talk Show on Television by Jeffrey Jones, “the final and overriding conclusion that can be drawn from pundit television is that its reality belies the argument that those with high levels of political knowledge will offer the highest form of rational political discourse” (Jones 47). What this is getting at is people may see something calling itself a ‘political talk show’ and think it must know what it’s talking about when that’s not always the case. I’m not saying that to discredit any host who’s had them on their shows but at the end of the day with hosts like Jimmy Fallon or Stephen Colbert, they are also satire shows and just human and they might be prone to get more facts wrong then on say a journalistic news outlet.
Another potential downside to going on talk shows is backfire. This can be seen more with Donald Trump’s bombastic personality but sometimes he may say things on talk shows that his campaign may not have been okay with. For instance when he, failed to disavow David Duke in such a fashion as to say he didn’t know who the KKK is.
Lastly a problem with talk shows is the demographic they appeal to. The talk shows I watch aren't the same my parents watch by a long shot which I mentioned earlier. A candidate and their surrogates don't have the time to be on every talk show and thus must choice carefully the ones they do go one based on the demographic that they wish to appeal to the most.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
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.
I believe that talks show have been an effective way to campaign during this election season. Not only do talks shows, show a softer version of the candidate it is also a way for them to reach those voters who don’t follow the candidates in the news. In the Jones article he concludes with “what the history of political talk on television demonstrates is that the arbitrary boundaries between political experts and non-experts re now much more fluid” (Jones 61-62). Being able to see the candidates in a setting with a host who is not going to hound them on politics is refreshing for many views. Though not a candidate but a surrogate for Clinton, seeing Michelle Obama on the Ellen show recently (shopping at CVS) made her so much more real and likable.
ReplyDeleteDonald Trump on Jimmy Fallon was very interesting. Fallon is bubbly and comical, the opposite of Trump. Fallon kept an unbiased opinion on Trump throughout the whole interview and what I thought was very interesting was that Trump cracked little jokes here and there. Trump truly let a different personality shine in this interview, he laughed at Jimmy doing impressions of him and how his voice has changed over the debate, they talked about favorite fast food joints and board games. He also asked Trump if he could mess up his hair and after a little resistance he allows him! Very uncharacteristic of Trump, but Fallon create a very relaxed setting for Trump to feel like he could express himself a little more.
Clinton’s appearance on the Ellen Show also allowed her to show a more “fun” side of her. She owns up to her email, talks about Kanye running for president and dances with Amy Schumer on stage. I will say though that Ellen does show more bias than Fallon does, she announced how “the only person she can look at [for president] is you”. Clinton’s running mate Tim Kaine has also made an appearance on Stephen Colbert, which I feel is a good strategy considering he is not well known to the American public. Kaine seemed incredibly excited to be on the stage and discuss being the VP pick. He seemed very confortable and did a good job at defending his running mate and creating a positive image for her. I would advice the Trump campaign to get Pence out on the late night talk show circuit to show the American public more than just what they saw at the debate.
Overall, I think that doing talk shows is an effective way for candidates and surrogates to campaign because it is more accessible than rallies and appearances are. People are able to access them from their living room and from streaming services. Late night talk shows allow the candidates and surrogates to address the audience in a more relaxed setting.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Lewis, Hilary. "Clinton Dances With Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer." The Hollywood Reporter 9 Sept. 2016. Web.
Adalian, Josef. "How Does Jimmy Fallon’s Donald Trump Interview Fit Into Late Night’s History with Politics?" Vulture 16 Sept. 2016. Web.
During the 2016 election cycle, talk shows have contributed greatly to the effectiveness of each candidates campaign. I think that especially in this election with Donald Trump being such a celebrity presence himself, that talk shows are more important. In this sense, he has more of an advantage compared to Hillary Clinton because he commands such a charisma on screen and in interactive media settings. As Jeffery Jones writes in Entertaining Politics, “pundits are celebrity elites in their own right,” (47) and Donald Trump for sure can use that to his advantage whereas Hillary Clinton has to try harder to appear comfortable on talk shows. Surrogates can also enjoy this advantage of appearing on talk shows because the are able to offer their unique insight while also sending signals to allies and opposition as Jones asserts (46). I think that in this election, Hillary has exemplified the best use of surrogates with distinguished political elite in her corner. Jones writes, “Those with high levels of political knowledge will offer the highest forms of rational political discourse,” (47). Many of Hillary Clinton’s surrogates such as President and Michelle Obama, Bernie Sanders, her husband and other democratic elite are able to fulfill this role successfully. Trump has some active surrogates, such as Rudy Giuliani, who appear on these shows.
ReplyDeleteMost recently, Giuliani appeared on Meet the Press and The Week, defending the republican nominee after leaked footage of Trump making offensive and vulgar comments. Media criticized his appearance this week. NPR reports, “Giuliani has aggressively gone on offense in recent surrogate appearances, on Sunday he largely conceded the serious nature of Trump's statements during his latest round of interviews,” (Detrow). Not only are talk shows such as these fulfilling their journalistic, interrogational duties, but it also gives candidates and their surrogates an opportunity to appeal directly to the audience from a different perspective.
Appearing on talk shows is also a chance for the candidates to portray an image for themselves. Hillary Clinton made an appearance on The Ellen DeGeneres Show last September where she danced with Amy Schumer and Pink. According to Hollywood Reporter, “Hundreds of people watched Hillary Clinton learn how to do the Nae Nae in New York's Rockefeller Center on Tuesday,” (Lewis). While the Ellen DeGeneres Show has more of a reputation for comedy purposes, Hillary Clinton’s presence still allows her to discuss points of interest while portraying a relatable, likable side that the public may not see on pundit talk shows such as Meet the Press.
Lastly, when Donald Trump appeared on the O’Reilly Factor on Fox News in September, he was able to appeal to the republican base by using a conservative leaning network. It was definitely a great opportunity for Donald to respond to the criticism that many of his controversial statements had generated. Appearing on a long-standing cable news show that is known for its political commentary is an advantage for Trump because he is expected to frequent the syndicated talk show circuit. It can make him seem more presidential and serious in comparison to his already established image.
DeleteFor the remaining time in the election, if I were a campaign strategist, I would take different approaches for the different candidates. I would suggest that Hillary participate in more syndicated talk shows or avenues of comedy to soften her personality and make her more likable to the public. In comparison, I would suggest that Donald Trump do the opposite – mostly because he has a tendency to make unfiltered and controversial comments. Any news media broadcast where Trump is unscripted and live has the potential to be the next day’s attack headline.
Detrow, Scott. Donald Trump's Lone Surrogate On TV Struggled To Defend Him. NPR. 8 October 2016. Web. http://www.npr.org/2016/10/09/497270514/donald-trumps-lone-surrogate-on-tv-struggled-to-defend-him
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Lewis, Hillary. Hillary Clinton Dances With Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer. Hollywood Reporter. 9 September 2015. Web. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hillary-clinton-dances-ellen-degeneres-821297
ReplyDeleteTalk shows have increasingly become a more effective way for the candidates and their respective surrogates to campaign, especially throughout this campaign. Through these talk shows they’re able to reach various audiences. For instance, the undecided voter who doesn’t tend to focus their attention on the candidates or voting. Talk shows present an opportunity for guests to tell personal stories, and give humorous sound bites away from the more serious political debates and appearances.
Chapter three of Entertaining Politics,” discusses Vox Pop in the mid-1990s and what that shift was able to achieve. “What did occur in the process, however, is a reformulation by television producers and audiences of what counts as desirable and attractive political talk on television (Jones 62).” The focus on attractive political talk is what makes these talk show appearances successful. It’s a move away from the policy heavy discussions. Talk shows present new opportunities for the candidates based on the nature of the show and the hosts. The talk show circuit offers options for candidates in terms of audiences based on the programming. These shows are the epitome of attractive political talk.
If I was a campaign strategist for Hillary Clinton, I’d absolutely suggest her continued use of talk shows as a platform. It’s no secret that a topic at the forefront of this election is that Clinton faces an “image” problem. In the political arena she can seem like an ice queen, but on talk shows that hard exterior seems to melt away. Tina Daunt mentions this strategy that her aides have put in place in her article “Hillary Clinton Turns to TV to Remake Her Image,” “Hillary Clinton’s aides have argued for an an approach to campaigning that puts greater emphasis on the former Secretary of State’s “humor” and “heart” (Daunt 2016).” In the more relaxed setting of talk shows Clinton seems to excel and shows a more personable side. Her sense of humor and ability to come up with quick witted responses are qualities that have been talked about, but on talk shows they’re put in place. A perfect example of this is the Funny or Die segment where she participated in “Between Two Ferns.” Topics like the email scandal and gender inequality were brought up but in a humorous way. That segment showed an often unseen side of the candidate.
If I was a campaign strategist for Donald Trump, I’d suggest that he also continue to make talk show appearances. A Hollywood Reporter article was titled “Jimmy Fallon Helps Donald Trump Play Nice on The Tonight Show,” following Trump’s appearance on that talk show. The words “Play Nice” work in the candidate’s favor. “It was a kinder, gentler Donald Trump who showed up on the nation's television screens on Thursday (Scheck 2016).” When Trump went on Jimmy Fallon, the talk show host asked if he could mess up Trump’s hair. By Trump agreeing to this he was showing viewers that he could be a good sport. Earlier that day Trump appeared on the Dr. Oz show to discuss his health. Even in that interview when the topics weren’t as humorous, Trump showed off a less abrasive personality. He made jokes and would smile throughout the interview.
Talk shows appearances by candidates and surrogates have been used as a political tool for years. These appearances are effective and some go viral, giving candidates a chance to appeal to different voters and convey their personality.
WORKS CITED
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Scheck, Frank. "Jimmy Fallon Helps Donald Trump Play Nice on 'The Tonight Show.'" The Hollywood Reporter 15 Sept. 2016. Web.
Weprin, Alex. "Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Take the Campaign Back to Late Night TV." Politico 12 Sept. 2016. Web.
Daunt, Tina. "Hillary Clinton Turns to TV to Remake Her Image." The Hollywood Reporter 8 Sept. 2016. Web.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Jeffery Jones, author of Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture puts the effectiveness of talk shows in the best terms: “What pundit television has clearly shown is that more often than not, their public presentations are pure spectacle…most pundits, regardless of the program on which they appear, have learned the lessons of what makes for good television…their banter ultimately limits its audience appeal beyond those who can both keep up with the demands of insider knowledge yet also stomach the bellicose displays of showmanship.” Although talk shows do allow candidates to show the public a more seemingly candid side to them, most talk show hosts aims to satisfy their viewers, and doesn’t do too much in order to sway watchers on topics of policy or ideology. This is because “for new and existing cable channels, the challenge was to provide some level of interesting and attractive content that would draw viewers away from other cable competition… as with the Vox Pop era, here too the networks’ primary political voices are defined by political outsiders.”” (Jones, Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture)
As highlighted in the CNN article “Hillary Clinton goes Between Two Ferns: 'I really regret doing this'” by Dan Merica, Clinton has used her talk show appearances to “show a funnier, softer side of the former secretary of state. Led by Kristina Schake, Clinton's deputy communications director, the effort has seen Clinton do a number of non-traditional interviews like the one with Galifianakis.” Clinton had also made an appearance on the popular blog Humans of New York which, although not a talk show, was also a sort of non-traditional news source she had worked with. Clinton “was introduced as ‘Had Pneumonia’ at the start of the video, plays along with Galifianakis’ off-color humar and shows a bit of comedy herself.” This again plays into her attempt to show a softer side of herself, while also trying to reach the off the beaten path crowds and those who don’t particularly associate with mainstream media, such as millenials and likely independents. Those who watch Galifianakis’ show are looking for a candid comedy, and Clinton capitalized on that opportunity.
In another attempt to seem candid and “cool,” as seen in the article “Hillary Clinton Dances With Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer” by Hillary Lewis, Clinton appeared on DeGeneres’ popular daytime TV show Ellen, where “DeGeneres' DJ taught her how to do the popular dance (Nae Nae), which she did alongside DeGeneres.” This allowed Clinton to, again, show a warm, funny side to herself that can be presidential but also have fun and enjoy popular culture (noticeably similar to Barack Obama,) while also address hot topics of her campaign. Clinton, in reference to her emails, stated "I made a mistake, and I'm sorry for all the confusion that has ensued," Clinton said. The Democratic front-runner also promised to fight for equal rights as president, recalling how after she got married she applied for a credit card but was told she couldn't have one of her own. She also used it as an opportunity to emphatically state, "The way I look at it, I would be the youngest woman elected president." This was a very smart move on her campaigns part, as she appears next to Amy Schumer, who has become somewhat of a modern feminist figurehead, and Ellen DeGeneres, a very outspoken personality for feminists and the LGBTQ community.
DeleteTalk shows also play an interesting role for the GOP candidate, Donald Trump, as highlighted in “Jimmy Fallon Helps Donald Trump Play Nice on 'The Tonight Show'” by Frank Scheck. Scheck notes that we saw a “kinder, gentler Donald Trump,” who demonstrated some “mellowness and equanimity that indicated either a newfound discipline or a dramatic shift in mood-altering medication. Either way, it was profoundly disturbing.” This came across as “disturbing” because it wasn’t the Trump America had been seeing, which may have been the aim of his campaign in having him go on a fairly liberal show such as The Tonight Show. Trump went on to deliver “such banalities as "I love people and I want to do right by people." He complained about the "grueling" process of campaigning; joked that he wanted to be president because "I'm looking to make a lot less money." According to the article, however, the “most groan-worth moment” was when Fallon asked about Trump’s for-sale childhood home. Trump “seemed to almost get teary, before reverting to his usual instincts and saying that he wanted to buy it.” Fallon then asked if he could tousle Trump’s hair, and “Trump looked truly horrified.” I believe the appearance was a smart attempt at gaining some undecided undecided Democrat voters, but I think it ultimately came across as forced and awkward, as it wasn’t the usual Trump. In working so hard to control his demeanor to appeal to a new crowd, his appearance had adverse affects.
If I were a strategist for either campaign, I would tell them to continue to appear on as many talk shows as they can; reach out to Americans, give them something candid to watch in the midst of all of the debate uproar. However, stick to partisan television. Trump has no business being on traditionally liberal networks and vice versa for Clinton. They need to reinforce trust within their own party, especially Trump after his current hot-mic scandal from 2005. Both have had a difficult time getting their parties to get behind and stay behind them, so these next few weeks are the time to really appeal to their party’s viewers and listeners.
Sources:
ReplyDeleteJones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Scheck, Frank. "Jimmy Fallon Helps Donald Trump Play Nice on 'The Tonight Show.'" The Hollywood
Reporter, 15 Sept. 2016.
Mercia, Dan. "Hillary Clinton goes Between Two Ferns: 'I really regret doing this.'" CNN, 23 Sept.
2016, www.cnn.com/2016/09/22/politics/hillary-clinton-between-two-ferns/. Accessed 10 Oct.
2016.
Lewis, Hillary. "Hillary Clinton Dances With Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer." The Hollywood Reporter,
9 Sept. 2015, www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hillary-clinton-dances-ellen-degeneres-821297.
Accessed 10 Oct. 2016.
Television as a medium for communication has transformed political campaigning, once less-relevant factors such as appearance, tone of voice, and charisma matter far more in the modern age than they did before the advent of television (Trent et al 56). Perhaps the first most observable instance of this newfound obsession with appearance and charisma can be seen in the 1960 United States presidential election between Democratic nominee John F. Kennedy and Republican nominee Richard Nixon, in a televised debate that was received far differently through the radio than through television. Historians assert that the minority that listened to the debate on the radio thought Nixon won, while those who saw it on television and witnessed Nixon’s nervous, sickly appearance and sweating were sure that the young, good-looking Kennedy had won (Webley).
ReplyDeleteWhen Nixon ran in 1968 he knew that having a favorable public image was crucial to his chance at winning The Oval Office, so he briefly appeared on the popular sketch-comedy show Laugh In, and awkwardly increased his likability among voters (Murray). Former President Bill Clinton understood the importance of image-making as well, making an unprecedented appearance on The Arsenio Hall Show to play his saxophone before winning the 1992 election (Braswell).
Former President Clinton’s decision to appear on a live talk show added a new element to Presidential elections, and most candidates since have adhered to the necessity of getting their faces on late-night television (Martinez). Talk shows in the 2016 election have been important for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, who needs seem more human and likable than Republican nominee Donald Trump, whose appearance on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon has caused Fallon’s contemporaries to condemn him for even considering such a guest (Lewis).
Mr. Trump’s appearance on Fallon’s show was not a total failure, watching the candidate poke fun at himself probably did a little bit to soften his image, but Mrs. Clinton has done far better job shaping her image to voters on talk shows so far. Her appearance on Zach Galifinakis’ web show Between Two Ferns aided in softening her public image the same way that Mr. Trump’s sketch with Jimmy Fallon did, except more effectively (youtube.com).
Mrs. Clinton’s serious demeanor during the short interview in addition to her comment, “I already regret agreeing to do this” showed voters that she was as human as they are, as she gave the comedian dirty looks while he mercilessly poked fun at her (youtube.com).
Her appearance on The Ellen DeGeneres Show achieved the same goal, but focused more on her image amongst female voters more likely to watch the show. Dancing with comedian and actress Amy Schumer and host Ellen DeGeneres helped make Mrs. Clinton look like she was actually capable of having fun, alongside two figures with massive female audiences (Lewis).
Some seasoned campaign advisors would advise both candidates to stay away from talk shows, at least in the wake of the second debate, as both would have too much explaining to do and could likely do more harm than good to their respective images.
Works Cited
DeleteSemiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Webley, Kayla. "How the Nixon-Kennedy Debate Changed the World." Time. Time Inc., 23 Sept. 2010. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.
Murray, Noel. "Nixon Gets Socked in Laugh-In's Most Famous, and Influential, Five Seconds." Nixon Gets Socked in Laugh-In's Most Famous, and Influential, Five Seconds · A Very Special Episode · The A.V. Club. AV Club, 13 Sept. 2012. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.
Braswell, Sean. "Bill Clinton's Great Sax Appeal." OZY. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.
Martinez, Jack. "A History of Politicians on Late Night." Newsweek. Newsweek, 18 Apr. 2016. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.
Lewis, Hillary. "Watch Jimmy Fallon Impersonate Donald Trump During Republican Front-Runner's 'Tonight Show' Interview." Billboard. Billboard, 9 Dec. 2015. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrkPe-9rM1Q
Lewis, Hilary. "Clinton Dances With Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer." The Hollywood Reporter 9 Sept. 2016. Web.
Though both candidates have taken the traditional route this year, like appearing on “The Tonight Show”. They both have done appearances on non-traditional media sources. Hillary has had much more appearances on shows than Trump this year, however Trump’s might be more memorable. Though his tonight show appearance was traditional at first, it quickly became an awkward experience when Jimmy Fallon messed up Trump’s hair just a little too much. This was a great example of how a seemingly harmless appearance can become negative news in the era of 24-hour news. This is why choosing appearances are a difficult decision. You don’t want to take your candidate out of the public sphere, which is why I believe Trump has been on less nontraditional sources then Hillary. Hillary made an interesting appearance on Zach Galifianakis’ show “Between Two Ferns”, her appearance on a comedy-oriented show was an interesting move by her campaign. I believe that the strategy here was to make Hillary come across as a funnier, more retable candidate. There is also an appeal to a younger demographic on appearing on a show like this. This stunt paid off, because the day after this episode surfaced, the interview appeared as the most watched video on YouTube for that day. This is a great example of how appearing on shows in a segmented age can appeal toward niche audiences. Finally perhaps one of the more memorable television appearances of the year was when Trump appeared on “The Dr. OZ show”. This appearance was after the fallout from Hillary’s pneumonia scare, a incident that many people started to blow out of proportion. Trump felt like adding to that stories narrative, by appearing on Dr. Oz to show the country that he was perfectly healthy. The stunt was clearly jabs at Hillary’s health and Trump trying to kick her while she was down. However the most interesting factor here is that Trump turned to Dr. Oz to affect a campaign. Johnson perfectly sums up this scenario in his article “The Transformation of Political Talk on Television.” He states that “the history of political talk on television demonstrates is that the arbitrary boundaries between political experts and non-experts are now much more fluid” (Johnson 61). The fact that the opinion of Dr. Oz can have impact on a campaign, shows that everyone in the public sphere can have input and influence on the campaign. With the expansion of niche markets and cable have added many more voices to the political world. We continue to see that traditional and non-traditional television can greatly enhance certain aspects of the campaign.
ReplyDeleteWork Cited.
FJPorrini. "Dr Oz and Donald Trump, Full Review Trump's Medical Records - Dr Oz Says Trump Is Healthy 9-15-16." YouTube. YouTube, 15 Sept. 2016. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.
FunnyorDie. "Between Two Ferns With Zach Galifianakis: Hillary Clinton."YouTube. YouTube, 22 Sept. 2016. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Latenight. "Donald Trump Lets Jimmy Fallon Mess Up His Hair." YouTube. YouTube, 15 Sept. 2016. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.
Works Cited
ReplyDeleteJones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Talk shows have been a crucial tool in modern politics—especially in presidential election cycles. Talk shows span from late night programs such as The Tonight Show and The Late Show to Sunday morning news programs such as Meet the Press or Face the Nation. Not only is having a candidate or pundit on a program topical and current, it serves as a platform for the campaign to reach an extremely wide demographic of voter in what is usually a lighthearted manner (at least late night programming).
ReplyDeletePresidential candidates have been stopping by The Tonight Show dating back to Richard Nixon. It is virtually expected that both candidates make appearances during the campaign season. These late night shows have historically boasted impressive viewership, and although live viewership is not as strong as it was in the twentieth century, the content takes on new life the day after on the internet and social media. For example, this September Jimmy Fallon messed up Trump’s hair and the video has garnered over 8 million views on YouTube. Although the conspiracy of Trump wearing a toupee has been put to bed, Jimmy did expose what actually is an abhorrent comb-over on national television. Trump is certainly not camera shy, and has appeared on a variety of soft medium including the Howard Stern Show, Late Night with Colbert, and Jimmy Kimmel Live.
Hillary had an equally talked about moment with a web-based talk show. She recently appeared on Between Two Ferns with Zach Galifianakas. This scripted show is notable for being awkward and critical of its guests (in a humorous way), but is also memorable for its one-liners and the straight face of its host, Mr. Galifianakas. Hillary’s appearance was viral for a few days last month, and was an opportunity for her to appear less stiff and “robotic.” Comedy is certainly a way to connect with people, and making appearances on talk shows can be a free way to get publicity for a day or two and appear more likeable.
News talk shows are a little bit of a different story. I’ve personally noticed that nominees in particular avoid making appearances on major news networks, or news focused talk shows like Real Time with Bill Maher. The reasons for this may be obvious. Every word that a candidate utters during election season is subject to relentless media analysis and scrutiny. A candidate does not want to be caught off-guard or say something that they didn’t mean and become the center of controversy for three days thereafter. This is why campaigns employ surrogates or pundits to speak on their behalf. As Jeffery Jones writes in Entertaining Politics, “pundits are celebrity elites in their own right (47).” This couldn’t be more true. Kellyanne Conway appeared on Bill Maher’s program last week and spoke competently on Trump’s behalf. She is actually better suited to speak for Trump than Trump himself. Conway has been a conservative pollster and pundit for decades and is well-known in the media. Having her managing Trump’s campaign and speaking for him day in and out is a major benefit to him. Corey Lewandowki, Trump’s former campaign manager, has been infamous for defending Trump this election season, and was paid a handsome salary from CNN for being a regular pundit.
If I were a campaign strategist, I would urge for the most talk show/media appearances as physically possible. This is a nation that does not like to read, and most Americans ingest their information from internet videos or from television. For that simple fact alone I would suggest employing an army of pundits, and only pulling out the nominees for “soft” appearances—especially late in the campaign season.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
DeleteFor candidates and their surrogates, talk shows are a powerful and important campaign tool. There are both pros and cons when campaigning through this medium, but overall more good is done. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have the opportunity to reach larger audiences who may not be necessarily as politically engaged, they can reach a target demographic like woman or teenagers, and humanize themselves by talking about themselves, family, and giving humorous anecdotes. But none of this would be possible without the birth of Vox Pop Programming. Created in the mid 1990s, it gave birth to a handful of channels offering programming featuring audience centered political talk. “They paved the way for the acceptance of entertaining political programming as a meaningful and alternative form of audience engagement with politics” (Jones 62).
ReplyDeleteBy campaigning through daytime and nighttime talk shows, the candidates have an opportunity to reach out to large audiences who may not be as politically engaged. For example daytime and nighttime talk shows such as The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon, The Ellen DeGeneres Show, and The Dr. Oz Show reach millions of viewers per day. People of all ages and genders tune in to watch these shows, clips on Youtube, or teases on social media. Plus not only do they air on the television but they also live on websites, Youtube, and Social Media generating even more traction. Next, each show has a targeted demographic so if a candidate needs help connecting to middle aged white woman, going on “The View” may help reach out to those woman. Going on certain late night shows will help the candidates demographic with teenagers. Personally, I know I watch a ton of talk show clips on Youtube when my favorite celebrities are being interviewed. From there I may search their name and try to find other appearances they did. So it’s this never-ending cycle of exposure. Also going on these shows the candidates also have an opportunity to discuss things in a manner they wouldn’t normally discuss if they were on a show like Fox News. The host’s have a comedic background letting the candidate loosen up showing a more authentic, sincere, fun, and goofy side.
There have been three appearances that I feel stood out the daytime/late night talk show lineup. The first one was when Donald Trump appeared on The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon. When talking with Jimmy Fallon, Trump got nostalgic thinking about how his childhood home and how it is up for sale. Some say he even got teary eyed. Next Fallon asked Trump, "Could I mess your hair up?" Trump’s willingness to comply showed us that he could let loose and not be so uptight despite his best efforts to keep a smile on his face (Scheck). You know that would never fly on Fox New Channel. The whole time they would talk policy or just gang up on Trump. Fallon also asked chatty simple questions that you know audience members care about in a manner we all can understand. I think Trumps image was softened a little bit. When Hillary Clinton was on The Ellen DeGeneres Show she learned how to do the Nae Nae with Ellen and Amy Schumer. This showed her fun carefree side. Clinton is known for being ridged and not connecting with her audience. She not only connected with Kanye West fans during her time on Ellen, but also with her political fans as she said, “ The way I look at it, I would be the youngest woman elected president” (Lewis). That was a surreal moment when she said that if she does become president. Lastly, Hillary Clinton appeared on Jimmy Fallons show. A consultant said, “Six months in and they’re finally doing talk shows” (Daunt). Some say that it was to late for Clinton to start the circuit, but I feel it wasn’t because this image of her dancing or saying what she says is what we remember not that she started late in the game.
DeleteOverall, I would suggest the use of talk shows more. Talk shows are a unique platform as they, “…seek to entertain their audiences by offering “fun,” human interest- oriented interviews with high profile individuals; candidates covet an opportunity to present themselves in a positive light, without having to face hostile questioning from jaded political reporters” (Baum). Also given the demographic and interest of most talk shows, the hosts are unlikely to ask tough questions instead asking questions that show the candidates personal qualities.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
DeleteLewis, Hilary. "Clinton Dances With Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer." The Hollywood Reporter 9 Sept. 2016. Web.
Scheck, Frank. "Jimmy Fallon Helps Donald Trump Play Nice on 'The Tonight Show.'" The Hollywood
Reporter, 15 Sept. 2016.
Baum, Matthew A. "Talking the Vote: Why Presidential Candidates Hit the Talk Show Circuit." American Journal of Political Science 49.2 (2005): 213-34. Web.
Daunt, Tina. "Hillary Clinton Turns to TV to Remake Her Image." The Hollywood Reporter 8 Sept. 2016. Web.
Talk shows have definitely been a positive way for both of the candidates to campaign especially since they are given the platform directly to be able to address both the pros and cons of their views. The point of these talk shows are so that the candidates can share their stances and the insider knowledge they have to gain voters. One point I have to agree with is when Jones says, “the airing of political talk on television has always assumed one crucial point: that those doing the talking should have direct ‘insider’ knowledge of what they are talking about” (Jones 43). To be frank though this year’s election has had no clear concise voice of insider knowledge. Both Hillary and Trump have spoken in circles about what they want for this country but neither of them have ever explained how they are going to fix what is wrong. If either of the candidates were aided by talk shows it would definitely have to be Donald Trump. He most always says the wrong thing but the funny thing is his normal self actually helps his campaign. People believe he is so arrogant, stupid, and misogynistic that they are entertained enough to make his campaign succeed. Donald Trump has been on many different talk shows most specifically on Dr. Oz and The Tonight Show. According to Frank Scheck, “the Republican presidential nominee projected a mellowness and equanimity that indicated either a newfound discipline or a dramatic shift in mood-altering medication” (Scheck). Although, it was mildly disturbing watching Trump being nice it was refreshing and helpful to his campaign in the long run. I am by no means a Trump follower but he does know how to use talk shows to his benefit. Even when Trump decides to be a jerk and attack Hillary for her health scare his campaign was still being talked about showing that he was still relevant. According to The Hollywood Reporter, “He talked about how important health is when you are running for president, saying, ‘I think you have an obligation to be healthy. I don't think you can do the work if you're not healthy. I don't think you can represent the country properly if you're not healthy’” (The Hollywood Reporter). Here we have Trump attacking Hillary but yet his campaign continues to benefit from it. That brings us to the age old saying is all press good press. Because in the case of Trump bad press doesn’t matter and that in his case bad press is good press. Talk shows continue to give good press for both Trump and Hillary. In this case Hillary becomes more personable with people as she has fun with Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer, and Pink. According to Hilary Lewis, “Hundreds of people watched Hillary Clinton learn how to do the Nae Nae in New York's Rockefeller Center on Tuesday” (Lewis). When you see a candidate having fun and dancing with other celebrities that brings a sort of personality and homey feel to the campaign. Being more of a person the country can relate to Hillary used talk shows to her advantage. Talk shows aid in campaigns but if they aren’t played right they could always go wrong.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
Jones, Jeffrey P. Entertaining Politics: Satiric Television and Political Engagement. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010. Print.
@THR. "Critic's Notebook: Jimmy Fallon Helps Donald Trump Play Nice on 'The Tonight Show'" The Hollywood Reporter. 15 Sept. 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.
@THR. "Donald Trump Seems to Take Subtle Digs at Hillary Clinton's Health on 'Dr. Oz'" The Hollywood Reporter. 15 Sept. 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.
@THR. "Donald Trump Seems to Take Subtle Digs at Hillary Clinton's Health on 'Dr. Oz'" The Hollywood Reporter. 15 Sept. 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.
This campaign season has been filled with presidential candidates and their surrogates utilizing the talk show circuit. This is used as a strategic platform to reach potential voters through a channel that is sometimes more accessible than social media. This technique takes advantage of reaching out to an older audience who tend to watch the late night talk shows after their local news.
ReplyDeleteClips between the talk show host and the candidate always seem to become viral the next day raking in millions of views and shared amongst various forms of social media, “Pundits are celebrity elites in their own right (Jones 47).” This is a strategic form of advertising their campaign. If a candidate says something funny or does something unexpected, it forces the viewer to look at the candidate in a different light, something that could be beneficial for them. When the candidate portrays a comfortable or laid back vibe, voters view them as normal people who like to laugh and have a good time. Talk shows allow candidates to humanize themselves, and make the viewers think, “I would hangout with this person.”
The opportunity to be the latest guest on a late night talk show also allows candidates to strategically make light or a joke of a serious issue or topic that surrounds their campaign, such as Hillary Clinton’s health scandal. When Clinton was a guest on the “Tonight Show With Jimmy Fallon” he welcomed her out with a surgical mask, Clinton immediately laughed and high fived Fallon. By Clinton making jokes about her health, it downplayed and devalued the story circulating that something was medically wrong with her. This helps to make the viewer believe that the scandal is not a big deal and to regard it as ridiculous. It changes the viewer’s perceptions in a positive way.
Jimmy Fallon also had Donald Trump appear on his show. Trump was soft spoken and showed a more softer and playful side something usually not seen from him. He even let Fallon mess up his famous hairdo and the audience loved every minute of it. Trump was looked at as someone who can take a joke and doesn’t take himself too seriously. We also saw sincerity from Trump, when he talked about why he was to running for president. He wasn’t yelling but instead he was calm and it really seemed genuine.
Having surrogates appear on talk shows is also extremely beneficial for a candidate.
Majority of surrogates are respected and liked by the public. For example in June, Obama appeared on the “Tonight Show With Jimmy Fallon” and basically said that he feels bad for the Republicans and their choice, Donald Trump to be their nominee and that he supports the Democratic nomine Hillary Clinton to be president. When a viewer watches a surrogate have nothing but praise for one candidate and nothing good to say about the other it has an impact on undecided voters.
If I were a campaign strategist I would definitely suggest more use of talk shows as campaign platforms because it allows the candidates’ personalities to shine through, showing a different side, something rarely seen by the public because as politicians, they are seen as serious and not funny. This allows viewers and voters to relate to them on a different, more personal level.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
ReplyDeleteTalk shows have become a critical part of presidential elections in the United States because they allow candidates to get their face on television in a different way. Today’s candidates opt for late night comedy shows because they know they have to appear “comfortable and relatable, especially to young voters” (Martinez). Talk shows allow candidates to reach younger audiences who might not watch news on a regular bases and appeal to this demographic through their sense of humor (Weprin).
I think talk shows have been particularly effective for Hillary Clinton. She is typically perceived as a person who is stiff, serious and does not smile. By agreeing to go on certain talk shows, Clinton can demonstrate her personable and amusing sides of her personality. By doing the “Nae Nae” on Ellen Degeneres’ show, Clinton was able to appeal to younger voters and show a side of herself that we don’t typically see in the news media. She also appeared on the Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon this year and last year. During these two episodes, she let Jimmy Fallon touch her hair, she let him make fun of her for having pneumonia and she mocked Donald Trump. Talk shows are also important because they “communicate directly with ‘the people’ as well as to avoid the more confrontational questioning that typically occurred in forums with the press” (Jones 48). Clinton has had a reputation for avoiding the press, not holding press conferences and steering away from pressing questions. For her, talk shows allow her to get her campaign message out while simultaneously avoiding vicious questions from reporters.
As for Donald Trump, we saw a kinder, gentler side of the republican nominee on Jimmy Fallon’s show. Trump discussed how he loves talking about how well he does in the polls but ignores the polls he doesn’t do well in. Trump looked terrified when Fallon asked if he could mess up his hair, but still allowed him to do so. Trump also stated that he thought the media was getting “more and more vicious” on the show. Trump also went on a tangent about the dishonest media when he appeared on Dr. Oz’s show. During this show, Trump took it as an opportunity to explain to viewers how healthy he is and that he hasn’t stayed overnight in a hospital since he was eleven years old (The Hollywood Reporter Staff). He continued to explain how he never gets sick and how he has the temperament to be president.
If I were a campaign strategist, I would recommend both candidates to continue using talk shows as campaign platforms. Particularly for Clinton, to show her humor and emotion. It’s important for her to show less of her serious side and more of her amusing side to younger voters and audiences who might not watch the news on a regular basis. I would also recommend Donald Trump to continue making appearances on various talk shows. Through The Apprentice, Trump has experience with television and he knows how to entertain people. The talk shows also allow people to see a less angry and fired up side of Donald Trump, which may help him appeal to more young voters. Talk shows are successful campaign platforms for both candidates because they allow them to listen to discourse that is more “commonsensical than the highly cloaked and guarded language of spin offered in other venues” (Jones 49).
Works Cited:
DeleteJones, Jeffrey P. Entertaining Politics: Satiric Television and Political Engagement. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010. Print.
Martinez, Jack. "A History of Politicians on Late Night." Newsweek. N.p., 18 Apr. 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. .
The Hollywood Reporter Staff. "Donald Trump Seems to Take Subtle Digs at Hillary Clinton's Health on 'Dr. Oz'" The Hollywood Reporter. N.p., 15 Sept. 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. .
Weprin, Alex. "Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Take the Campaign Back to Late Night TV." POLITICO. N.p., 12 Sept. 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. .
In this year’s election, the talk show circuit has been affective for Trump while Clinton has not done as much of it. Trump has been able to use the talk show circuit as free publicity, which let him refrain from spending money on ads in the primary. Shows like NBC’s Meet the Press and CBS’ Face the Nation are weekly staples that give insight weekly to the game of politics, which make them important for the candidates to appear on. In 2016, there are daily talk show formats that are important to appear on to appeal to different audiences, like MSNBC’s Morning Joe or Fox News’ Fox and Friends. Each of the formats appeals to similar, but different audiences that can bring the candidate directly to different types of voters. These shows have a particular kind of audience but according to Jeffery Jones, “these programs probably do more in greasing the wheels of the establishment than in informing and educating an electorate,” (47). Though it may be a specific audience that watches these programs, these audience members are the ones who educate their less politically savvy friends.
ReplyDeleteFor Trump, he should keep making these morning talk show appearances. Both Morning Joe and Fox and Friends ask him questions that go along with talking points that he wants to hit. He gets to remain in his comfort zone by talking about his plans for stopping ISIS or how bad a job Hillary Clinton has done. One example would be from Morning Joe on May 20, 2016. On the phone interview, Joe Scarborough asks Trump questions based off his talking points. He talks about how he wouldn’t have entered Lybia like Clinton did, and the MSNBC hosts don’t fact check any of. This is a perfect way for Trump to hit his talking points and reach a more liberal audience on the MSNBC crowd.
Clinton doesn’t do the talk show circuit as nearly as much as Trump and probably for good reason. She has a tougher time coming off as personable to the audiences that have so many preconceived notions about her. She also doesn’t want to keep giving the same answers to questions about her emails. But not doing them makes it seem like she is hiding something, which isn’t a good look for the campaign. If I were advising her, I would tell her to try to hit a talk show at least once a week. This also isn’t that big of a priority for her because she is doing a lot more local interview pieces. It still is not a bad idea for her to make a presence on the national stage every so often, especially when her opponent is being talked about almost minutely. The only Meet the Press appearance I could find of her online was from back in May where she talks about Trump and Bernie Sanders. In the interview, she lays the groundwork for her attacks against Trump and is building towards the General Election. Doing more to get herself in the national conversation can only help her campaign.
As far as surrogates go, Trump needs to rein his in on these talk shows. Rudy Giuliani, for example, is out on these channels trying to defend Trump on everything he does. In an interview with Chris Wallace, Giuliani defends what Trump has said about women and what was said in the tapes. Instead of using Giuliani he himself should have a long sit-down interview to discuss what he said in these tapes.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
DeleteHillary on Meet The Press https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9t1d7moOULg
Trump on Morning Joe https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frvgZvy7lmc
Giuliani on Chris Wallace https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dacsPI1Cj8
Talk shows have been an effective way for each candidate and surrogates to showcase their personalities. They are a useful aid to a campaign, depending on what show the candidate is featured on and who the host is. Some of the hosts could enhance the candidate and even tarnish their image. Dating back to 1947, Meet the Press, which aired on NBC, was a place where journalists interviewed government officials (Jones 44). Although I believe that they are beneficial, talk shows have been vastly critiqued due to the fact that they are not the most accurate depiction of politics. Journalists give their opinions on issues that they are not the most reliable on; they are not “expert thinkers, just expert talkers” (Jones 45). Additionally, talk show hosts have become increasingly popular and obtain celebrity status, which attracts more buzz (Jones 47).
ReplyDeleteIf I were a campaign strategist, I would suggest using a balance of talk shows as campaign platforms, as well as other strategies. I would not suggest to go on all talk shows, but to utilize them to the candidate’s advantage. Talk shows tend to bring out more personality of a candidate and show a side of them they have not shown before. This election, talk shows have been influential and have targeted different voters.
Although it was delayed, Hillary increased her television appearance in order to seem more personable. She has been criticized for her lack of personality and dull demeanor, but television has improved her image and made her seem warmer (Daunt). In September 2015, Hillary made an appearance on Ellen DeGeneres’ show and danced with Ellen, Pink and Amy Schumer. She was shown attempting to do the popular dance, “the nae nae.” She looked fun and it was comical. By Hillary dancing with Amy Schumer and being called “Hill,” it appealed to not only the younger voters, but a variety of people, considering that Schumer attracts a wide audience. Ellen DeGeneres has a huge following and is liked by a myriad of people. It was brilliant for Hillary to go on to her show, which definitely lightened her up and made her seem more appealing. Hillary addressed her email scandal and apologized, which was not easy to do, but was necessary in order to win the votes early on of her supporters.
Talk shows are not only important for the candidates, but also for their surrogates. Bill Clinton was featured on the Daily Show during the time of Hillary’s pneumonia concerns. He clarified her health issues and also showcased his charming personality with balloons (Washington). During Bill’s appearance, Trump was busy trying to enhance his image and went on Jimmy Fallon. Jimmy Fallon is known as the “undisputed king of late-night TV,” which was a good strategy for Trump to go on such a popular show (Adalian). Throughout the show, Fallon poked fun at Trump and his hair, which was comical. However, Fallon ended up receiving criticism for “coddling a dictator in the making,” although Trump has been on his show previously. (Adalian). It was smart of Trump to go on his show, but he is already viewed negatively and it is hard for him to appear dynamic and warm. Trump has been featured on the O’Reilly Factor and Hannity, which has helped him clarify particular issues.
Even if people do not watch the talk shows live to see the candidates, they always go viral and are available all over the Internet. The appearance of the candidates create buzz and attract attention, which is why it is such an effective way to campaign. People will stop and watch on their cellphones just to see the clips they missed.
Continued
DeleteWorks Cited:
Adalian, Josef. “How Does Jimmy Fallon’s Donald Trump Interview Fit Into Late Night’s History with Politics?” Vulture. 16 Sept. 2016. 10 Oct. 2016. Web.
Daunt, Tina. “Hillary Clinton Turns to TV to Remake Her Image.” The Hollywood Reporter. 10 Oct. 2016. Web.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Lewis, Hilary. “Clinton Dances With Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer.” The Hollywood Reporter. 10 Oct. 2016. Web.
Washington, Arlene. “Bill Clinton Talks Hillary’s Health, Plays with More Balloons on ‘The Daily Show.’” The Hollywood Reporter. 15 Sept. 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.
For candidates, it allows them to be more personable and show multidimensional ability in the candidate. For voters who are unable to see the candidate in person, seeing candidates on television shows, or political talk shows is another way to view the candidate. Political pundit shows such as 60 Minutes is a great show to keep up with policy based issues or issues related in the political world. While Late night shows or, increasingly, web shows are a great way to see candidates in a light hearted, relaxed fashion that not many voters may not see form the candidate. For candidates like Hilary Clinton, it’s the best way to try to grab the attention of the 18-24 age group, a group she struggles connecting with. While Donald Trump is no stranger to talk shows and television shows, he can work it to his advantage and yet has done very few late night shows and political shows recently.
ReplyDeletePolitical pundit shows or political talk programming is a great way to tap into a particular political base, whether it be conservatives, liberals, moderates and undecided voters. These shows have changed dramatically from the last 30 years ago from shows that provided commonsensical viewing for audience members, allowing politicians become celebrities by hosting their own show with a particular audience, to a network dedicated to delivering news that are fit for particular audiences (Jones). There are many options for candidates to choose from in order to promote their campaign and platform.
For Hillary, her 60 Minutes segment with Tim Kaine was a great way to tap into moderate voters and gives her a space to explain specific policies in great detail. While it may be comfortable for her, she may need to continue to appear on programs catered to the 18-24 age group in which she struggles with. Her appearances on Late Night, Between the Two Ferns, Ellen Degeneres Show has helped her a lot recently in that group, and I’d advise to do one or two more appearances similar to that to consistently keep in touch with that group. Her surrogates should continue to do the same thing as well. Bill Clinton appearing on The Daily Show, Michelle Obama on the Late Late Show with James Corden, are Joe Biden on Late Show with Stephen Colbert all great examples of Hillary’s surrogates using late night to their advantage. Hillary Clinton herself should continue to go on Sunday talk shows like Face the Nation, Meet the Press and This Week to give herself a well-rounded opportunity to appear presidential, coherent in her policies and engage more with the press (Folkenflik).
For Donald Trump, he is very familiar to the media. He has appeared on more Sunday Talk shows than Hillary Clinton (Folkenflik). The challenge for Donald Trump is to make himself appear serious about his campaign and this election. By appearing on more serious talk shows like Meet the Press or This week, he has the chance to appear serious and in some ways presidential. He has the opportunity to go in depth with his policies. He has used obscure television formats to announce certain things for example the Dr. Oz appearance announcing his health results. While obscure, its viewers are mainly female, which is a demographic that Donald Trump (increasingly) is out of touch with. Many of his surrogates, like his political advisors, should continue to appear on political networks like MSNBC, CNN and Fox News, to try to support him and his policies. They can offer an alternative perspective or description of his policies can provide a different outlook.
Candidates should continue to use these media outlets as a way to create multidimensionality and showcase that to their voters or undecided voters. By the avoiding the media outright, it will have a negative impact on how voters and political pundits view the candidate. We had seen that with Hillary Clinton’s reluctance to the media before the DNC. Appearing on television news networks and late night shows may increasingly become traditional for candidates as years go on, seeming how vital it is it to one’s campaign or platform.
Works Cited
DeleteFolkenflik, David. "Has Hillary Clinton Actually Been Dodging The Press?" NPR. NPR, 26 Aug. 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.
Jones, Jeffrey P. "From Insider to Outsider." Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture. Vol. 2. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2005. 43-62. Print.
This election cycle in particular has shown the persistence and strategic use of talk shows for candidates and their surrogates. Going on a talk show is an effective campaign technique, especially with these two candidates, because they often cross over from the political arena into pop culture and celebrity culture. Trump is even more so embedded in the talk show circuit simply because of his past dealings with television. However, Clinton is no stranger to the limelight, serving as a public servant in the public eye for the last thirty years. Similar to the shift in politics and political culture as seen with Reagan in the 80s, we see one again today. More so than in the past, where the candidates were in large politicians, Trump seems to throw a wrench in the whole equation. Similar to the past we now see “fluidity between the fields of politics and media” (Jones 49). The traditional approach to politics is antiquated, especially “as public frustration with government increased” (Jones 49). The intermixing of celebrity and politics in the 80s and 90s would eventually give rise to our current state in which talk shows fuel a great deal. The public can see how the candidate interacts with the host and get to know them on a different level. In terms of Vox Pop era and transformed “news” networks, “in many respects, they paved the way for the acceptance of entertaining political programming as a meaningful and alternative form of audience engagement with politics (62). For example, “America’s Talking, National Empowerment Television, and TalkBack Live altered the landscape by insisting that the audience was not simply to be spoken to, but also to be spoken with” (58).
ReplyDeleteFrank Scheck of The Hollywood Reporter recently wrote an article in which he discusses Trump’s appearance on Jimmy Fallon’s show. While his Dr. Oz appearance was much more controversial, this showed a “kinder, gentler Donald Trump,” as he let Fallon mess up his hair. Fallon’s role in this matters as well as he is seen as “Mr. Nice Guy, the unthreatening ‘host next door” (Adalian). However, The Atlantic’s James Fallow declared Fallon’s “humoring of the candidate as a ‘bad move, a destructive and self-indulgent mistake’ (Adalian). I somewhat disagree with this statement because the same can be said about Clinton’s appearance on Ellen “in which DeGeneres’ DJ taught her how to do the Nae Nae” (Lewis).
In terms of the Clinton and Trump campaigns, it is extremely important to remain relevant to the people and to also develop a rhetoric and tone with them so that can participate in the conversation. As a campaign strategist I would suggest a bit more talk shows as campaign platforms. I believe that they can aid the candidate to seem more relaxed and relatable, rather than in a strict political setting, such as a debate. However, the talk show itself that the candidate goes on is also incredibly important. The late night talk shows with Jimmy Fallon, Kimmel, and others seem to be a good (and humorous) way to reach the public and appeal in a different way. Although candidates and surrogates may seem a little caught off guard at times, these shows are also a way to voice opinions on a different platform. Bill Clinton’s interaction with Trevor Noah focused on a few hot topics, but also kept with that comedic undertone, especially when the balloons fell from the ceiling. In all, I believe these appearances are important because they really emphasize just how relatable the candidates can seem.
Works Cited:
DeleteAdalian, Josef. "How Does Jimmy Fallon’s Donald Trump Interview Fit Into Late Night’s History with Politics?" Vulture 16 Sept. 2016. Web.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Lewis, Hilary. "Clinton Dances With Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer." The Hollywood Reporter 9 Sept. 2016. Web.
Martinez, Jack. "A History of Politicians on Late Night." Newsweek 13 Sept. 2015. Web.
Scheck, Frank. "Jimmy Fallon Helps Donald Trump Play Nice on 'The Tonight Show.'" The Hollywood Reporter 15 Sept. 2016. Web.
Washington, Arlene. "Bill Clinton Talks Hillary's Health, Plays With More Balloons on 'The Daily Show.'" The Hollywood Reporter 15 Sept. 2016. Web.
Presidential candidates utilize television opportunities to influence American voters. Candidates sought out television exposure since the 1960 election between Nixon and Kennedy. During the 1960 presidential campaign, Nixon attempted to appear more relatable to the average American by showing off his skills on the piano during the Tonight Show. These appearances can help or damage the image of the candidate, but the experience will draw attention and get people listening. President Obama read “Mean Tweets” on “Jimmy Kimmel Live”, to boost his image of a fun, likeable, relatable man. Critics may think that these shows are emphasizing an un-presidential impression on the general public, but in reality the exposure is so crucial for the candidates. This particular campaign season has had a plethora of candidates and their surrogates making use of talk show platforms on behalf of their campaign. Jeffrey Jones states that “Pundits are celebrity elites in their own right” (Jones, 47). Candidates are held to a different standard during campaigns, and all of their actions are condemned, or praised. Utilizing talk shows and late night appearances assist these candidates in trying to reach the general public through means of comedy, or being themselves. Clinton appeared on Zach Galifianakis’s show “Between Two Ferns”, and allowed the general public to see a more comedic side to the usually very stiff candidate. Trump appeared on Jimmy Fallon recently in order to “humanize” his appearance to viewers.
ReplyDelete(continued)
ReplyDeleteThese platforms have given candidates the opportunity to discuss serious policies and issues surrounding their campaign, in a more comforting setting than a debate stage. “It’s become part of a political campaign, and you do violence to your own campaign if you don’t try to take advantage of this opportunity,” Robert Lichter, co-author of the book “Politics Is a Joke!” (Johnson, Ted). After the Democratic National Convention, Clinton appeared on “The Tonight Show With Johnny Carson”, after days of Carson repeatedly verbally bashing Clinton. She appeared on the show, and was able to emphasize her persona. If I were a campaign strategist, I would suggest appearing on numerous talk shows and late night television series, because image is crucial for a candidate. I would emphasize damage control, especially if I were advising Trump after his latest comments about women, or Clinton after labeling a majority of Trump supporters as “deplorables”. I believe the best way heal a candidate after a public relations nightmare is to apologize on live television, and humble themselves in order to relate to the common American. Exposure is crucial for a campaign, and the more exposure the candidate receives (whether positive or negative) the more people visually see them and they leave an impression to the general public. The media shapes the perception of candidates and their campaigns, and it is the candidates responsibility to prove themselves to potential voters on these talk shows what type of person they may or may not be voting for.
Work Cited
ReplyDeleteJones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Johnson, Ted. "PopPolitics: Why Politicians Need Late-Night Talk Shows (Listen)." Variety. N.p., 14 Mar. 2015. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.
James Conway
ReplyDeletePO348 Blog: Talk Shows
10/10/16
Talk shows have an extremely underrated impact on modern Presidential Campaigns. Just this week in Professor McLean’s Political Psychology class, we looked at a graph that displayed where most modern Americans get the majority of their political news compared to people in the late 1970’s. Newspaper readers have gone from the majority of Americans in all major age groups to nearly nonexistent, yet that wasn’t even the most interesting statistic. What I felt was the most eye-opening, was that a majority of young Americans today are getting nearly ALL of their political news from talk shows. With young people having such a large impact on Presidential elections here in the United States, it is easy to see just how important this was.
The Jones reading touched on many important and unique aspects of these political talk shows but maybe the one I agree with the most was his point on page 57. He writes:
“Indeed, holding political discussions in the presence of audiences – who naturally laugh, jeer, cheer, applaud and occasionally heckle both guests – adds a powerful dynamic to the televised sense making of politics.” (Jones, 57)
Live audiences are a tricky concept to figure out and with one poor wording of words or controversial comment, they could totally turn against the public figure being interviewed. This is why I am sure so many Trump supporters were nervous when he went on Jimmy Fallon a month ago. Hillary Clinton had literally just gone on the same kind of show (Jimmy Kimmel) and had taken pretty good advantage of it. In her segment she attempted to read Donald Trump quotes without breaking a straight face and it really got the audience going. On top of that, it further separated the two candidates who are often grouped together into one basket of “the worst two candidates this country has ever seen”. She also used the opportunity to clear up anything about her health concerns with the debates approaching. Yet, as good as one may think Hillary did, I feel like Trump did even better since he had so much more to lose. On Fallon Tonight, Trump is asked “Why should kids wants to run for President in the future?” He calmly answered that the best part of being President would be helping all the people who had supported him thus far. It was a genuine, non-scripted answer that earned Trump a massive roar of applause in the crowd. He also let Jimmy Fallon mess up his hair, an act that some of Trump’s closest advisors probably never saw coming.
Even with the classic Fallon and Kimmel tonight shows, modern candidates cannot afford to stop there when it comes to talk shows. During the 2012 Presidential Campaign, President Obama attended a talk show that was considered far less mainstream. It was called “Between Two Ferns” and was hosted by the up and coming comedian from ‘The Hangover’, Zach Galifianakis. This talk show was different from the mainstream ones because, as Alex Weprin writes for his Politico article titled “"Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Take the Campaign Back to Late Night TV”, this show presented “a chance to showcase their sense of humor and to poke fun at themselves.” (Weprin, 1) The show humoursly investigated Obama’s policies and even gave Obama the opportunity to crack some jokes and go back and forth with a person young people really gravitate towards. When I saw that Hillary was going to do the same show, I was genuinely nervous for her. Her personality just seemed too business-like all of the time and I was scared that she would end up leaving that show having hurt her national perception. Again, I was wrong. Hillary killed it and even got more talking points in than Obama. She had some jokes, talked policy and was even afforded an opportunity to talk about her opponent. I think I speak for everyone in our class when I say it was brilliantly effective.
DeleteAs one can see, talk shows provide Presidential candidates with opportunities no other form of media can. Newspapers quotes and radio interviews cannot embody a candidate’s personality unless the quote is monumentally moving. Debates often get too tense for non-sarcastic humor. Interviews with news outlets need to be taken more seriously. These reasons plus all of the reasons I have given in this blog prove that talk shows offer huge payback to candidates who can find the balance between offering political policies and connecting with a national audience through laughter. With around a month to go, it’ll be interesting to see just how much more these interviews are utilized.
Delete- Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
- Weprin, Alex. "Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Take the Campaign Back to Late Night TV." Politico 12 Sept. 2016. Web.
I think talk shows have been an effective way for the candidates and their surrogates to campaign during this election, and I would suggest that talk shows be used as a tool in campaign platforms most definitely! Jack Martinez from Newsweek said it best, “If there’s one thing that’s important in modern politics, it’s getting your face on TV.” (Martinez) Tim Kaine took this to the next level, scheduling one of his first individual interviews with Telemundo, a Spanish television network. (Konerman) Presidential candidates have access to a prime slot that targets a specific type of people, those who are looking for a more relaxed feel from the fast paced news programs and wanting to unwind and listen to conversations, and possibly get a laugh out of the day. One specific example of the advantage of a talk show slot is that talk shows are often the show of choice for doctor’s office televisions. Those waiting for their appointments mindlessly watch the program that is on, as we are often bored of the drab wallpaper in the office. The talk show is the most visually active thing in the room and will have the attention of almost everyone.
ReplyDeleteJones cites in the chapter “From Insiders to Outsiders,” Ronald Reagan’s Hollywood and political career. “As a Hollywood celebrity, he maintained the credentials to effectively communicate his outsider status and his conservative populist mantra that government is not part of the problem—rather it is the problem.” (Jones, 48). Being a man who can control the political spectrum and the people who try to make a show out of it is commendable. Donald Trump could be labeled a modern day Ronald Reagan, due to his Hollywood personality and political endeavors. In fact, I’d go out on a limb to say that most of this campaigning that has been done by both candidates thus far requires a Hollywood personality.
Hillary Clinton needs the media to help her escape the e-mail scandal, and I’d also say that she needs the media to help her escape the history of her husband, Bill Clinton, to some extent. “In the public eye, Bill Clinton always was the likable—if somewhat raffish—partner in the marriage.” (Daunt) Talk shows, for Hillary, would be beneficial and have been beneficial. The host(s) of the talk show can open up a dialogue that would not be present at a rally, allowing Clinton to show a more personable side of her so that those same people who like her husband Bill, can realize the positive aspects of her. Her appearance on “Between Two Ferns” does just this, it highlights the fact that she can be funny and stray away from scripted statements. It would be wrong to leave out the fact that Hillary Clinton also learned how to do the Nae Nae with Ellen last September. (Lewis) Not only can she have comedic conversation, but she also knows how to relax and be “trendy.”
Appearing on television on a show that is moderated by a host or hosts can also open up a candidate to comment on things that they wouldn’t themselves initiate. “Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and her running mate Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia tell Scott Pelley they will not engage in the type of insults hurled at Clinton from rival Donald Trump.” (60 Minutes) Candidates can claim that they didn’t know this topic would be discussed on the show.
Works Cited:
Delete60 Minutes. "Clinton-Kaine Say They Won't Sling Mud at Trump." 60 Minutes. 24 Jul. 2016. 11 Oct. 2016. Transcript.
Daunt, Tina. “Hillary Clinton Turns to TV to Remake Her Image.” The Hollywood Reporter. 08 Sept. 2015. 11 Oct. 2016. Web.
Jones, Jeffrey P. Entertaining Politics: Satiric Television and Political Engagement. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010. PDF.
Konerman, Jennifer. "Tim Kaine Talks Trump, Hillary Clinton's Health and "Stepdad" Memes With Stephen Colbert." The Hollywood Reporter. 25 Aug. 2016. 11 Oct. 2016. Web.
Lewis, Hillary. "Hillary Clinton Dances With Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer." The Hollywood Reporter. 09 Sept. 2015. 11 Oct. 2016. Web.
Martinez, Jack. "A History of Politicians on Late Night." Newsweek 13 Sept. 2015. 11 Oct. 2016. Web.
As we look at communication in political campaigns, the role of television is undoubtedly a very important one to take into consideration. Starting with the Kennedy vs. Nixon debate in 1960, television has not only effected but ultimately shaped the way political campaigns plan their communication strategies. Looking at this year’s presidential elections, it is easy to spot how television has had an undeniable effect on the selection of party nominees. But there are different functions that both political analysts and candidates use television for, and talk shows have proven to be a rather effective one in the last two decades surrounding political campaigns. Looking at how candidates have used TV throughout it’s dominance of political campaigns, we see that there’s been a shift from them appearing in heavy, political and serious settings alongside other party members towards appearing as individuals in less serious and more trivial settings. Jones relates this to the growing distance between public and the political parties, and their “frustration” with the government. “Politicians distanced themselves from traditional political structures, posturing as “outsiders” not beholden to any interest except the mandate of the people” (49) Jones maintains, and thus, gives us a hint as to why candidates are appearing in talk shows more often.
ReplyDeleteIn this year’s campaign, I definitely think that Hillary Clinton’s appearance in talk shows has been tremendously helpful in her reaching out to younger voters. Doing shows like Between Two Ferns with Zach Galifianakis has definitely given her a more positive image that college-aged voters can relate to easily. It has also helped her erase the image of her being portrayed as cold, scripted and boring, one that’s been unfortunately following her around for years. “Hillary Clinton’s aides have argued for an approach to campaigning that puts greater emphasis on the former Secretary of State's “humor” and “heart” through her doing talk shows. Her appearance on Jimmy Kimmel Live discussing her health openly and joking about it has definitely lightened the tensions on her pneumonia. Her opening a jar of pickles on TV had a comical effect that humanized her in the eyes of the American voters and certainly swayed some towards her candidacy.
Trump, on the other hand, has also done several talk shows in the past months. However, I don’t believe that his appearance has had any swaying effects throughout the voters. Anyone who was inclined towards Trump was definitely positively effected by seeing their candidate on screen in a relatively more relaxed setting than usual, but overall, Trump’s presence in talk shows didn’t necessarily add anything to the character that we saw at rallies and debates. Compared to Clinton, Trump adopted a more defensive and still dominant approach when appearing in talk shows. His appearance in The Late Show with Stephen Colbert where Colbert gives him an open opportunity to make an apology, and Trump responds that he has nothing to apologize for, really doesn’t portray a different candidate than the one we see on the podium in terms of humility and likeability.
If I were the campaign strategist for the Clinton campaign, I would definitely encourage her to do more talk shows as this helps her appear more likeable and less scripted, which are the two things that her campaign struggles with. If I were advising Trump, while knowing that his method of portraying himself during talk shows isn’t necessarily helpful, I would advise him to keep doing them just to keep on the same level as his opponent and keep his image refreshed in his supporters’ eyes.
Works Cited
DeleteDaunt, Tina. "Hillary Clinton Turns to TV to Remake Her Image." The Hollywood Reporter. N.p., 8 Sept. 2015. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.
Jones, Jeffrey P. Entertaining Politics: Satiric Television and Political Engagement. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010. PDF.
Talk shows have definitely been a huge factor in this years election. It allows each candidate to show their true personalities. Especially on late night television like Jimmy Fallon and SNL. It also allows for their surrogates to further show their support for their candidate as well. Candidates on talk shows has been a crucial part of campaigning. Jones suggests, "The airing of political talk on television has always assumed on crucial point: that those doing the talking should have direct "insider" knowledge of what they are talking about" (Jones 43). This is saying that because the hosts of the show are speaking directly to the candidates in a somewhat candid way, what the candidate is saying is clearly coming from them.
ReplyDeleteIn this years election, both candidates have utilized many of the same talk shows to show a different side of themselves. Both candidates have appeared on The Tonight Show starring Jimmy Fallon. We all know Jimmy Fallon is a goof so I think for both candidates, it allowed them to show a sillier side of themselves. The candidates know, they have to reach a younger audience when on late night tv, "Today’s candidates choose the late-night comedy circuit because they know they have to appear comfortable and relatable, especially to young voters" (Martinez). When Donald Trump was on Fallon, Jimmy Fallon asked if he could mess Donald Trumps hair up and Donald's reaction was somewhat comical (he did let Jimmy mess up his hair). In the strangest way, I almost enjoyed watching Trump on Fallon. It's no surprise that I'm not a Trump supporter but watching him on Fallon made me like him in the tiniest of bits. Fallon also asked why kids should want to grow up to be president. Whether or not Trumps answer was written for him, the fact that he said, "because you want to help people. You want to help people with the tremendous problems in this country and around the world" I thought this was a great answer and showed almost a compassionate side of Trump. Something we haven't really been exposed to in this years race.
As for Hillary, when she was on Fallon, she asked Jimmy if he's every touched Trumps hair and Fallon said no. In a joking way she was like, "well ok do you want to touch mine?" and of course Jimmy did. For Hillary, being fun and carefree is really important for her image. We all know she's a very "by the book" kind of person and being personable is something she's struggled with. Being on Fallon, I think it showed America that she can be fun and have a good time.
Hillary Clinton also appeared on the Ellen DeGeneres show. After her appearance, the clip of Clinton learning how to Nea Nea went viral (Lewis). Not only was it incredibly awkward to watch, since it was so awkward, it made it funny. Clinton was able to show her funny side, yet again. I think one of the main things Hillary is trying to accomplish on these talk shows, is showing her personable, humble, and funny side. It's been mentioned in the media all throughout the race, how serious she is. So I genuinely think, being on these shows is helping her a lot.
Trump was the host of SNL, I can't decide if I liked his monologue or not. Watching it back, it just seemed strangely rude. I know it's scripted but it was just a strange feeling. Again though, I think the purpose of the him hosting was to show a fun side of him. A side, that isn't making fun of Hillary on twitter.
At the end of the day, being on talk shows, late night shows in particular, I think really helps the candidates reach the an audience that doesn't watch the debates or some of the more serious interviews that the candidates do throughout the election year.
DiModugno Continued:
DeleteWorks Cited:
Jones, Jeffrey P. "From Insider to Outsider." Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture. Vol. 2. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2005. 43-62. Print.
Lewis, Hilary. “Clinton Dances With Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer.” The Hollywood Reporter. 10 Oct. 2016. Web.
Martinez, Jack. "A History of Politicians on Late Night." Newsweek. N.p., 18 Apr. 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016
Your average voter is most likely going to get most of their information on the debate from the television. Even though the internet is a booming industry majority of older Americans still sit down at night and get their daily burst of news and entertainment from their television. This election is straying far from policy and more toward personality and the best way for a candidate to show their personality is to go on a talk show. In the reading the author quotes Alicia Mundy on the importance of Sunday morning talk shows. She states, “these shows aren’t mere entertainment, nor are they simply commentary […] today, politicians use these shows to make news and to make waves” (Jones 46). This does not simply apply to just ‘Sunday morning’ talk shows. Politicians use all kinds of talk shows to get the media to focus on them. With the current election late night TV has become one of the main stages for the candidates. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have both already made appearances on the “Tonight Show” and are expected to appear on other late night shows.
ReplyDeleteThe “Tonight Show” appearance by Donald Trump definitely “trumped” Hillary Clinton’s appearance. Jimmy Fallon made Trump look human and even friendly. This can really help his campaign because Trump comes across as mean and unsettling to most, but on the watching him on the show made you think twice. Forget policy, this election has been focused on the candidate's relate-ability and personality. Once Jimmy Fallon tussled Trump’s hair he looked like a guy you would want to hang out with. It was a great decision to go on the “tonight show” for Trump.
Comedians seem to be taking the political world by storm. Again personality is important and in the current societal norms humor is related to a good personality. Basically if the candidate can laugh and find humor they seem like normal humans. Less robotic. If anyone’s image needs to be revamped its definitely Clinton’s. The public wants her to be humanized so appearing on Ellen and participating in a dancing alongside celebrities like Amy Schumer and Pink really helped her image. She even tried to be hip and discussed Kanye West as a running mate if she were running for a re-election. Ellen even endorsed her as the most qualified candidate. People watching these shows are influenced by Ellen. Most of these comedians don’t know much about politics but the public values their opinions so seriously.
One of the main issues of the campaign has been health. Are the candidates healthy enough to last four years in office. However, Trump’s appearance on Dr. Oz was probably a bad idea. He used his time on the show to take digs at Hillary Clinton and but hardly discussed his own health. He even dodged questions about how his temperament will affect his health in the long run. This interview seemed have no effect on his campaign either way her pneumonia was going to effect the polls.
What is interesting about this current election is that celebrities’ opinions matter. Less people are paying attention to well-known political talk shows like CNN and Fox News and more are watching late-night TV. Humor sells. Especially with the internet the clips of the candidates on funny talk shows are circulating through social media like wild fire. This is definitely a good way for candidates to help increase their likability.
Jones, Jeffrey P. Entertaining Politics: Satiric Television and Political Engagement. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010. PDF.
DeleteLewis, Hilary. “Clinton Dances With Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer.” The Hollywood Reporter. 10 Oct. 2016. Web.
Scheck, Frank. "Jimmy Fallon Helps Donald Trump Play Nice on 'The Tonight Show.'" The Hollywood Reporter 15 Sept. 2016. Web.
The Hollywood Reporter Staff. "Donald Trump Seems to Take Subtle Digs at Hillary Clinton's Health on 'Dr. Oz'" The Hollywood Reporter. N.p., 15 Sept. 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. .
Weprin, Alex. "Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Take the Campaign Back to Late Night TV." Politico 12 Sept. 2016. Web.
After reading Jones’s chapter entitled, Rethinking Television’s Relationship to Civic Engagement, one may question the importance of television in a political campaign. However, whether or not television is a form of civic disengagement when it comes to politics, we have already come so far with the use of it and have seen its effectiveness in today’s age that without it, candidates would not have a chance at making it to the White House. That being said, I definitely think talk shows have been an effective way to campaign during this election season. Appearing on various types of talk shows ranging from Meet the Press to Late Night with Jimmy Fallon has become a vital part of a major political campaign, especially the latter. “If there’s one thing that’s important in modern politics, it’s getting your face on TV. But it’s usually not enough just to make it into the living room. Today’s candidates choose the late-night comedy circuit because they know they have to appear comfortable and relatable, especially to young voters,” (Martinez, Newsweek.com).
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 3, The Transformation of Political Talk on Television, Jones opens by discussing how political talk has always assumed the crucial point that whoever is doing the talking should have ‘insider’ knowledge. “The assumption is built on the belief that such speech is designed primarily to inform or educate, not fulfill other functions of political communication,” (43). However, the evolution of talk shows (from Late Night to Between Two Ferns) has made way for candidates to use television as another way for a variety of voters to connect with them on a more personal level.
Many have said that Hillary Clinton is too uptight, robotic and somewhat boring as she has gone through her campaign. She was able to squash these allegations a little when she appeared on Zack Galifiniakis’s show, Between Two Ferns. In his satirical talk show with an interview-like format, he sets interviewees up with bizarre, inappropriate, or insulting questions. Clinton appearing on his show showed voters that she was funny and knows how to take a joke. It also knocked her down a few pegs and put her more on the same level of us common folk, creating a more personal relationship with voters. Another instance in which she tried to come off as a more easy-breezy type personality was when she appeared on The Ellen Show. During the show, Clinton was able to touch on her emails while also being fun and light hearted. She apologized for the email scandal, but also spoke about Kanye West’s intent to run in 2020. Clinton learned how to do the Nae Nae and was seen dancing with Amy Schumer and P!nk in photos that surfaced on social media.
Another example of this would be when Donald Trump appeared on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon. He appeared on Fallon and seemed much kinder and gentler than usual, which may have made the whole appearance a little awkward, but he was trying to show voters another side of him rather than the usual, brute Donald J. Trump. During the interview, Fallon asked Trump if he could mess his hair up, Trump agreed and the awkward, unsettling interaction followed. Now did this moment necessarily help Trump? This question is still to be answered, however, it was vital for him to try to come off to voters as someone who knows how to chit chat and be civil.
As a strategist, I would suggest that each candidate continue to do what he or she is doing. It’s giving them the additional coverage that they need and a nontraditional way to reach nontraditional voters.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
DeleteLewis, Hilary. "Clinton Dances With Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer." The Hollywood Reporter 9 Sept. 2016. Web.
Martinez, Jack. "A History of Poiticians on Late Night." Newsweek 13 Sept. 2015. Web.
Scheck, Frank. "Critic's Notebook: Jimmy Fallon Helps Donald Trump Play Nice on 'The Tonight Show'" The Hollywood Reporter. N.p., 15 Sept. 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.
I believe talk shows have been an very effective way for candidates and their surrogates to campaign during this 2016 election. These talk shows, whether news television based or nightly entertainment shows, give these candidates a different way in promoting themselves to a different audience. Undecided voters who simply may not be too interested in politics can get a sense of a candidate by simply tuning into their favorite talk show. In this year’s election, Trump himself has been noted as more of a celebrity than a political candidate almost the in the same aspect of when Ronald Reagan ran for president back in the 1980’s. It was around that time that audiences began to see politicians in a different way through these various talk shows where they all could almost be viewed more as celebrities. As Jeffrey Jones states in Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, “The decade of the 1980’s and early 1990’s witnessed an intermixing of celebrity and politics, the commonsensical ways of talking and thinking about politics, and a concurrent upsurge in populist anti-politics by a public that was increasingly finding the political arena repugnant. (49) This intermixing is even more relevant in today’s pop culture simply due to the popularity of many of these talk shows and the growth of the television industry. In looking at the 2016 election, we can note several examples of these presidential candidates and their surrogates campaigning in this format. Earlier in this year, Clinton appeared on Ellen Degenres’ daily talk show, ‘Ellen’. It’s no secret that the majority of viewers as well as audience members are women and so here we see Clinton stepping into a comfort zone of sorts and being able to further promote herself to undecided women voters. Not only this, but Clinton was able to show a different side of herself through dancing with Ellen and playing a game of “Who’s You Rather?”, in deciding on a vice presidential candidate. In looking at the other side of the election, early last month we saw Trump make an appearance on ‘The Tonight Show’, hosted by Jimmy Fallon. Similar to Clinton’s appearance, Trump was able to talk politics in a more comedic manner with such a host as Fallon. Not only this, but Trump also was able to show us a lighter side of himself by performing in one of Fallon’s skits and letting Fallon also mess up his signature hairdo. But it’s not just the candidates themselves making these talk show appearance, many of their surrogates have also used this method for campaigning for their candidate as well. Earlier last month, Bill Clinton appeared on ‘The Daily Show’, a late night talk show known for it’s political satire. At the time, Hillary was recovering from pneumonia and so Bill was able to successfully campaign for her on this show by talking about her recovering health as well as give his thoughts on the presidential race. While these talk show appearances won’t necessarily make or break the election, if I was a campaign strategist, I would still definitely recommend them. As Jones states, “Audiences therefore tuned into politicians on entertainment talk shows precisely because these shows did not produce the traditional staid political talk to which they had grown accustomed.”(49) These shows, such as the ones we’ve seen this year, allow the candidates to show a different, less-political and more comical side of themselves.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
DeleteJones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Talk shows have been a part of presidential election cycles as far back as the 1960’s, when John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon were the first candidates to appear on Late Night (Jones). There was a lull for 20 years before former President Ronald Reagan, the most screen-ready president to date, really captivated the country by use of talk shows. Bush didn’t get the memo by Bill Clinton that comedy shows make you more likable and appeal more human. Talk shows allow for an interactive opportunity for candidates that grant allowance to give audience members at home [around the country] a different view. Historically there has been some confusion over the prevalence or practicality of candidates going on talk shows and discussing policy, personal events, or otherwise. The Jones reading concluded that, “The assumption is built on the belief that such speech a designed primarily to inform or educate, not fulfill other functions of political communication” (Jones). It cannot be ignored that this is a, “product of a political culture with expectations … of a time in which social scientists, journalists, and even philosophers had[sic] a more prominent place in the national political dialogue conducted in the press and through mass circulation[sic]” (Jones). This can be related to popular culture as many individuals take political advice from leftist ‘sources’ such as “Buzzfeed” and “NowThis,” where they cut & paste in order to make ordinary, damming.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to how effective or non-effective talk shows have been for either candidate, well, the results vary. For Donald Trump, he lives for television – just look at his resume. He is very comfortable on television and has much experience doing so. His running mate Mike Pence also seems very comfortable on television and appears more mature/reserved/well-spoken when discussing policy implications. Hillary Clinton is less appealing in person and especially on television – you can feel it when she stutters in her speeches or debating. Still, she appears as a mature individual and always looks very serious/no nonsense. Her running mate Tim Kaine is not bad for television but from little exposure, seems more personable.
Modern times are not much different than our history; varying candidates have been implementing talk show appearances into their ‘spread the word’ outreaches. This is wise given that talk shows are mutually beneficial: "… talk shows seek to entertain their audiences by offering ‘fun,’ human interest -oriented interviews with high profile individuals; candidates covet an opportunity to present themselves in a positive light, without having to face hostile questioning from jaded political reporters" (Jones). Hillary Clinton when on “Between Two Ferns” [an online talk show] hosted by Zach Galifianakis. This is was an interesting appearance because she took the brut of all jokes given by Zach. The show in meant to be awkward humor but I’m not sure if viewers at home really understood the dry-humor/no rebuttal reactions given by Clinton [which was very unlike Obama’s visit]. Hillary Clinton also went on “The Jimmy Kimmel Show,” in which she discussed her running mate choice and answered a few questions in the short take. Donald Trump went on “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon,” to discuss how the media is reacting to his antics and shed light on his relationship with the RNC. Donald Trump also went on “The Dr. Oz Show,” in order to release and discuss a letter from his primary care physician following a successful physical examination. As a strategist, I would tell Hillary Clinton to be wary and would allow Trump to continue to show his nice side.
DeleteWorks Cited
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Talk shows could be considered a slippery slope for candidates running for office. Talk shows are a test for a candidates likeability on a personal level. Studies have shown people are most likely to vote for the candidate they could picture themselves having a beer with. Talk shows test a candidates ability to be cool and casual while also coming off as capable in office; it’s tough. If a candidate messes one thing up it could be game over, hence the slippery slope.
ReplyDeleteDuring this campaign both candidates have used talks shows or similar things to help their campaigns. In “Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture,” they quote from a Media Week reporter Alicia Mundy who says. “These shoes aren’t mere entertainment, nor are they simply commentary…. Today, politicians use these shows to make news and to make waves. They use them to send signals to their allies and to make opposition” (Jones 46). Trump is one of the major examples of this. He’s always trying to make the news. When appeared on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon he was said to be “kinder, gentler” and “projected a mellowness and equanimity” in a Hollywood Reporter article covering the event (Scheck). Trump was questioned about his tendency to say shocking things and responded, “’I'm trying not to, anymore,’ and you could feel the effort he was putting in ” the same article said (Scheck). Trump’s propensity to say shocking things makes his appearances on these kinds of shows a coin flip; will he say something stupid or not?
Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, has used these talk shows to mainly benefit her. Clinton has been criticized in the past for her umemotional and bland persona. She’s very serious and people don’t see much of a personality. She’s waited fairly late in the game to start doing talk shows but thus far, it’s worked out for her. The Hollywood Reporter published an article saying “Over the next week, Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton will be doing evening news interviews and making day and nighttime appearances on popular talk shows in an effort to show her warmer side to win over voters” back in September of 2015 (Daunt). The article also said that, “on the charm side of the equation, Clinton plans to showcase her spontaneous and humorous sides with appearances…” (Daunt). Clinton moving to make herself more warm and fuzzy is a good move. She danced on Ellen DeGeneres with Amy Schumer. The Hollywood Reporter covered it as well and said, “Hundreds of people watched Hillary Clinton learn how to do the Nae Nae in New York's Rockefeller Center on Tuesday” (Lewis). Sometimes, it makes her look a little dated but being more personable will help her. Whipping and nae naeing maybe not so much. Overall, her appearances, I think its make her more likeable. People need to see that side of her because it’s a reason a lot of voters will like her as we’ve seen in the past.
In Clinton’s case, pushing her to be more like her husband and more personal on more talk shows is the way to go. That will help her. But for Trump, it’s still a coin toss. Nobody knows what could happen, not even his staff. His unpredictability is his downfall. Clinton’s downfall is her blandness. Both can use talk shows to benefit themselves if they remember to calm, cool, collected, and themselves! (Unless you’re Trump, then maybe be less yourself because you have a tendency to say BAD things.)
Daunt, Tina. "Hillary Clinton Turns to TV to Remake Her Image." The Hollywood Reporter 8 Sept. 2016. Web.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Lewis, Hilary. "Clinton Dances With Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer." The Hollywood Reporter 9 Sept. 2016. We
Scheck, Frank. "Jimmy Fallon Helps Donald Trump Play Nice on 'The Tonight Show.'" The Hollywood Reporter 15 Sept. 2016. Web.
I would argue that up to this point in the election talk-shows have certainly been effective ways for the candidates and their surrogates to campaign for the presidency this time around. Both Hillary and Donald have made personal appearances on talk shows this election cycle that has benefited their image. Whether it was Trump getting his hair tuft by Jimmy Fallon or Clinton’s dancing escapades with Ellen DeGeneres and Amy Schumer the candidates seemed more likeable. Today, entertainment-based talk shows allow for campaigners to have a non-partisan place to show off their personalities to the American people. This has become increasingly more important to a successful campaign over the years. The Tonight Show and Ellen, simply, do not have a stigma for being biased towards one political ideology more than another the same way programs on Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC do because these shows operate outside of politics; these shows highlight a candidate’s celebrity, rather than their policy. This is especially important this election cycle when we consider how much of the debate amongst voters has been about the character of the two party-winners more than their policy in the 2016 election. Media Week reporter Alicia Mundy contests that, “Today, politicians use these shows to make news and to make waves. They use them to send messages to their allies and to the opposition. And, they use them to evaluate their own packaging and marketing efforts.” (Jones 46) We saw Trump prove Mundy right not too long ago with has recent appearance on Dr. Oz when he made the statement that he was in perfectly fine physical condition while at the same time forcing Hillary’s hand. He made her have to address all the questions about her health following her pneumonia incident on September 11th. Following the second debate, the Trump video scandal, and the constant threat to the Clinton campaign of what will be released by Wiki-Leaks each passing day I would recommend all the more talk show press that shows off the human side of each candidate. Clinton has begun using new media and appearances of what would be alternative media for a presidential candidate to appeal to various audiences. The more Clinton can use appearances like her recent appearance on comedian Zach Galifinakis’s show Between Two Ferns the better. They make her seem much more likeable to the viewer, and people will be much more willing to vote for somebody they see as having a sense of humor about herself. For Trump I would also recommend he make more appearances showing off some likeable qualities for damage control. If he can demonstrate that he is a reasonable likeable person consistently he may be able to turn a few heads and stop a few people from jumping ship. For now, appearing on talk shows and late night is the best way for a candidate to connect with an audience on a human-to-human level. And, both candidates should make sure to use these opportunities to address any issues that the American public may have with them so that voters will be more willing and proud to give them their vote.
ReplyDeleteWork Cited:
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Politicians have used talk shows for decades as a tool for campaigning. Candidates have appeared on late night talk shows as early as the 60s when John F. Kennedy was a guest on Jack Paar’s “Tonight” show, however, it wasn’t until the 90s when Jay Leno and David Letterman began using political humor and looked to book politicians (Johnson). In recent elections, the use of talk shows for campaigning has greatly increased. In the 2008 election cycle, politicians logged more than 100 appearances on late night TV (Johnson). Talk shows are effective for a variety of reasons when used for campaigning. In many ways, talk shows “pave the way for the acceptance of entertaining political programming as a meaningful and alternative form of audience engagement with politics” (Jones 62). Whether a candidate is promoting a policy item or doing some damage control, talk shows have proven to be an effective medium for campaigning, even in the 2016 election.
ReplyDeleteOne talk show in particular that stands out was Hilary’s appearance on “Between Two Ferns” hosted by Comedian Zach Galifianakis. “Between Two Ferns” is a web-based comedy talk show that parodies daytime-television talk shows, and has had extremely famous guests such as Justin Bieber and President Barack Obama. The Hillary Clinton episode, however, had outperformed all of the previous episodes of the show by attaining over 30 million views on the first day, making it the highest first-day viewership for any video in the history of the show’s publisher, Funny Or Die (Rottenberg). This episode proved to be an extremely effective campaign strategy. As previously stated, the episode became the most viral in the show’s history. This video only adds to the already saturated news coverage of the election and increases Hillary’s relevancy. Since Hillary is seen as a stingy politician, the fact that she appeared on a comedy show makes her seem more personable and down to earth. Even Host Galifianakis said, “I don’t think you can get as far as she has in American politics without a sense of humor…she definitely has a sense of humor” (Rottenberg). How people perceive your personality is essential to gaining votes, and by appearing on this show, Hillary invited America to laugh with her, which further developed her likeability.
In addition to self-promotion, talk shows can be used for offense as well. A great example from this campaign would be Trump’s appearance on the Dr. Oz show. His appearance on this particular show could not have been more calculated. In the week leading up to his appearance, Hillary’s collapse video was circulating the Internet, causing voters to question whether Clinton is healthy enough to be president. By booking an appearance on Dr. Oz, Trump seized this opportunity to deliver his health records nationwide in an attempt to prove to voters that he is healthy enough to run the country (Vox). Furthermore, the show also allowed Trump to “connect with Dr. Oz’s mostly female daytime audience calmly and comfortably” (Vox). This appearance was a highly successfully move for the Trump campaign. Another show that Trump appeared on was the Jimmy Fallon show. This appearance is a good example of how talk shows can humanize a candidate. At the end of the show, Jimmy Fallon asks Donald if he can mess up his hair, to which he agrees. This moment in particular is memorable because Trump’s hair has become somewhat of a trademark or icon, and by allowing someone to mess it up on live TV shows voters a more personable side to Trump.
DeleteAs a campaign advisor, I would use talk shows very strategically but try to have my candidate appear on them as much as possible. Far too often, we see our politicians in extremely formal settings. While formality is seen as presidential, voters often don’t get the chance to really learn about the personality of the candidates. That’s what is so effective about talk shows – it gives the candidate a less formal setting to provide voters with dialogue that is more “commonsensical than the highly cloaked and guarded language of spin offered in other venues” (Jones 49). This is where I see the benefit – voters will be able to relate and connect more to a candidate when they can be seen as personable.
Works Cited
Johnson, Ted. "PopPolitics: Why Politicians Need Late-Night Talk Shows (Listen)." Variety. N.p., 14 Mar. 2015. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Rottenberg, Josh. "Zach Galifianakis on Hillary Clinton's 'Between Two Ferns' Comedy Chops and Donald Trump's 'psychosis'" Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 24 Sept. 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.
Vox, Ford. "Trump and Oz: A Match Made in Tv Heaven." CNN. Cable News Network, 18 Sept. 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.
Talk shows have definitely been an extremely effective way for candidates and their surrogates to campaign. In this election cycle the Trump campaign has taken advantage of talk shows at every chance possible, and he has gained massive exposure from it. Trump is extremely good at earning media time, and his non-stop calling into news stations was one of the biggest factors towards the estimated $2 billion in free news coverage that Trump earned in the primaries alone (Confessore). Every network was, and still is, eager to get one of the candidates on the air because they know that it will get them more views than the competition, this is especially true of Donald Trump. People are drawn into the controversy that he creates, so naturally they want to tune in when he is on the air. As Jeffery Jones writes in Entertaining Politics “for new and existing cable channels, the challenge was to provide some level of interesting and attractive content that would draw viewers away from other cable competition” (Jones 2010). It is safe to say that Trump’s constant presence in the media is major factor of his success, and because of that it is unlikely that he will slow down. As long as the media keeps on talking to him he will, and should, keep calling into and appearing on as many platforms as possible. He can also use this exposure to try and fix his image after the devastating blow to his campaign caused by the leaked audio tapes last week. Hillary Clinton has definitely used TV programming to try to fix her image. She is not an excellent speaker and many people see her as cold and un-relatable, with a large portion of the population finding her untrustworthy. By appearing in a talk show format she can appear more normal, engage in casual conversation, and show a different side than the cold politician that people are used to seeing. Speaking on Clinton’s relative absence from TV early in her campaign, a Los Angeles Democratic Consultant said “Her staff is so afraid to expose her, and I don’t quite understand it. Let her be herself. Let her show off. Let us get to know who she is” (Daunt). People got a chance to get to know her when she made appearances on The Tonight Show, ABC News, and Ellen. These programs give her more exposure than a short add, are free, and put her in front of millions of Americans watching TV at home. This allows her to show a humorous side, and even mock the rhetoric against her by the republicans. This was seen when Jimmy Fallon greeted Clinton wearing a mask, making a joke out of the “Hillary’s Health” controversy that Trump has been pushing. In fact, Trump used a talk show to fuel that controversy when he appeared on Dr. Oz and discussed his own health while taking jabs at Clinton. I would advise both campaigns to use talk shows as much as possible in the next month. Clinton needs to establish herself as qualified and levelheaded compared to Trump, and Trump needs to do major damage control and win back his republican base. The personal touch and wide exposure gained by talk shows cannot be matched with any sort of conventional advertising.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
DeleteConfessore, Nicholas, and Karen Yourish. "$2 Billion Worth of Free Media for Donald Trump." The New York Times. The New York Times, 16 Mar. 2016. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.
Daunt, Tina. "Hillary Clinton Turns to TV to Remake Her Image." The Hollywood Reporter 8 Sept. 2016. Web.
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Dating back to the 1960’s election between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, talk shows have been an effective source of Campaigning. It provides a better opportunity for the candidates and surrogates to show their personality outside of politics and to show that they can have fun as well. "These shows give candidates the chance to show off their humanity, and it's a way of introducing themselves to people who don't watch the news," said Robert Lichter, a professor at George Mason University who studies politics and late-night humor. In order to gain the voters who are on the fence and don’t know who to vote for, the candidate must show their true colors.
ReplyDeleteAs we have seen in this Campaign Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are effectively using talk shows to gain interest from voters. This also can get a chance to reach a certain demographic; “they present a chance to reach a younger audience that may not watch much TV news, and a chance to showcase their sense of humor and to poke fun at themselves”(Alex Weprin, Politico). In this election the younger demographic is essential to win come Election Day. Speaking from an 18 year-old new voter, I would love to see something other then just politics out of Clinton and Trump. Besides all the corruption and vulgar remarks it is nice to see their sense of humor outside of debating and rallies.
Hillary Clinton has been on and has done a better job at strategically placing her self on talk shows. She has used Between Two Ferns in which she was hilarious in; she has also incorporated SNL when appearing as “Val” the bartender. Hillary showed that she isn’t always a stiff who talks as if she’s a robot that was programed to say things. If I were helping Clinton strategize more I would just keep telling her to keep her surrogates out and about such as President Obama, First Lady Michelle Obama and her Husband Bill Clinton. These three are some of the best speakers that political history has seen. We know how great Bill was during the 90’s as well as Obama in his two terms, but Michelle Obama gave the best speech at the DNC. If I were Hillary Clinton’s strategic planner, I would keep up on using late night shows for her and all her surrogates because if she maintains this ethic of work, Trump cannot stop her.
Donald Trump has used late night talk shows to discuss more political views and more or less celebrate his nominee as the republican candidate. He has taken a different approach then Hillary, like I mentioned earlier she used joking shows to get her personality out their and get closer with a younger demographic. Where as Trump has been seen on Jimmy Fallon talking about his media coverage and not so much joking about himself, showing that he does have a good sense of humor, however, he did let Fallon mess his hair up which was rather comical. Despite his rare appearances on late night shows I feel as though he needs to do a better job.
DeleteTrump now more then ever needs help. After his most recent video leaked with Billy Bush in an interview back in 2005, Trump has lost many Republican endorsements and has seen himself fall drastically In the polls. His surrogates (Rudy Giuliani) are even taking scrutiny when trying to defend their candidate. If I were Trumps planner I would have him utilize shows like “Between Two Ferns” and “SNL” so that he can allow for younger people to see he doesn’t mean all business and can take a joke… or 10.
The great thing about late night talk shows is not only its audience, but “That it is fake news and fake pundit talk would turn out to be perfect means for addressing and critiquing the excess of cable news”( Jones 62). Meaning that despite it being fake talk, it allows for the candidates to use joking comments and just about get away with it because of the circumstances they are in.
Works Cited
Jones, Jeffrey. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture, 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Rafferty, Andrew. "2016 Candidates Flock to New Class of Late-Night Show Hosts." NBC News. Andrew Rafferty, 7 Sept. 2016. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.
Alex Weprin. "Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Take the Campaign Back to Late Night TV." POLITICO. Alex Weprin, 12 Sept. 16. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.