The Media Decides Critical Thinkings Examples

The Choice 2008 and The Choice 2012 both expose America's last presidential elections by investigating candidates' trails in respective campaigns. Historically, America's media has played a major – and controversial – role in tipping election balance for one candidate or another. However, if anything, presidential campaigns of 2008 and 2012 witnessed unprecedented media focus not only for candidates' highly controversial background but also for media's rising role as a voter-for-voter, so to speak, in America's campaigning efforts and election processes. This paper emphasizes media's strong influence on America's presidential elections in 2008 and 2012.
In 2008, voter's dilemma – largely shaped by media's (re)presentation – was centered on one main question: who can make real progress, Obama or McCain? Yet, given huge political experience gap between Obama and McCain media's obsession was in fact on both candidates' projected image and personal background. Indeed, Obama's The Audacity of Hope came to be more of a flashing banner of electoral populism than an actual political agenda of a startup candidate. The language employed by commentators – as well as of media in general – was one of branding and marketing. McCain is reputed and self-dubbed as a maverick. He was branded as a candidate representing independence, pragmatism and bi-partisanship. To complicate matters, recurring controversies, such as racism, were evoked over and again and hence maintained myths and realities of media alike. That way, media directed course of 2008 presidential campaign.
In 2012, specific issues were visited or re-visited which further emphasized media's influence as a voting process major force. In primaries, Mitt Romney's opponent, Ted Kennedy, "looked bad, sounded bad," an indication of how a candidate should look and act. Kennedy's defeat appeared attributable to his physical appearance and personal conduct. Likewise, media's attention was focused on Obama's Hawaiian looks and son-mother relationship. As an actual representative of America's family values, Obama – as opposed to Romney, a Mormon – was at a better position, according to media accounts, to outperform Romney on family values. Typically, as well, media's obsession with scandals was a deciding factor in Romney's decision to ponder running for presidency in aftermath of Salt Lake City's scandal. Romney, according to media accounts, was set to reclaim true American values. Then again, recurring issues were revisited now more intensively for ObamaCare plan. By raising fears against Obama's socialist leanings, media's coverage of healthcare issues was decidedly powerful in stirring American public opinion against Obama and hence decreased his ratings. The socialist streak in Obama's presidency was once again raised for his decision about covert, drone strikes. Thus, unlike pronounced pro-war presidents, Obama was determined to set America on a deadly path.
In retrospect, media's influence over voters' decisions cannot be overemphasized. This is particularly true given Obama's reliance on social media as a major factor in his win in 2008. The organization efforts seemed, more than anything else, to decide how, where and when votes would swing, rather than actual political influence exercised by one candidate or another and/or crafted processes.
In conclusion, media played a major role in Obama's victories in 2008 and 2012. By mobilizing younger generations using social media, voters were more quickly lured into Obama's sphere and were subjected to more organized efforts of political campaigning at McCain's expense whose conventional, steadfast, pro-war politics ran against America's electoral mood back then. Likewise, in 2012 media's dismantling of Mitt Romney's image as a corporate man was powerful enough in an America which was still reeling from a Great Recession since late 2008, notwithstanding Obama's so-called social leanings.