Abstract
The paper begins with an acknowledgement of the fact that social media was a relatively new concept in American elections and offered unique opportunities to those who chose to embrace it. Thereafter, three theories are examined and they are then related to the Obama win. The first was the theory of hegemony which argues that mass media can dictate common views but these have to be done through consent. Additionally, the dominated class is often in a state of struggle. Obama won this election because he captured the inequalities brought about by the ruling class and marketed himself as a change agent through social media.
The second theory was the media influence theory where advocates claim that mass media dictates the most pressing social and political items. The theory related to the Obama campaign because he was able to capture these pressing needs in his campaign and offered solutions to them by articulating them through social media.
The third theory was semiotics which encompasses the creation of meaning through signification. The latter theory can assist one in understanding the 2008 election because through perfecting encoding and decoding of messages in social media, Obama was able to improve communication and to get his message across. All these aspects contributed to his triumph.
Introduction
President Barrack Obama was one of the most unconventional candidates to ever win a US presidential election and many reasons can be attributed to his success – one such reason is the role that social media played in his election campaign. The 2008 campaign occurred at a time when technology had been embraced as a real and relevant part of Americans’ communication strategies. Compared to the elections of 2004, social media in the 2008 election was no longer a reserve for teenagers or technology enthusiasts; it had become a crucial part of the day to day lives of Americans. In fact, statistics showed that seventy seven percent of the entire American population depended upon social media at the time of the election. However, the existence and popularity of social media may not necessarily imply that a candidate is assured of a win. There were still other social and political factors that came into play to catapult this Democratic Party candidate into victory and the best way to understand these factors is through theoretical analyses derived from mass media studies. (Cowell, 2009)The paper shall focus on three particular theories i.e. Marxist hegemony theory, media influence theory or media effects theory and semiotics theory and how these approaches interplayed or affected the election outcome.
Literature review
Antonio Gramsci was one of the pioneers of Marxist media theory in what he called hegemony. Hegemony refers to domination of one social class over another in the social arena, political arena and also in the way that class projects its views. Gramsci asserted that the dominated class usually accepts this method of living as being natural; however, this domination is never done forcefully in that the latter class must give consent to it. In fact, the process of seeking consent is what constitutes a struggle that is always a part of this system. (Chandler, 2005)
After understanding what constitutes hegemony in a more general perspective, it is essential to look into this term with reference to media studies. In media studies, hegemony refers to the manner in which media can be used to encourage people to accept power structures constituting the status quo. Gramsci further adds that media are a depiction of the nature of common reality. However, this reality often changes from time to time. Consequently, media may therefore be a platform for depicting these common perceptions, challenging them and changing them. In this regard, hegemony places the media at crossroads where it can become an agent of change or it can be used as a conventional platform. Therefore, in this paper, it shall be examined whether this form of media was being used as tool for struggle or whether it was used to reinforce conventional forms of power. In the former application, media is therefore seen as being counter hegemonic. (Terry, 2005)
In Marxism, it is believed that capitalism is the most critical problem in society and that oppression of the bourgeois is what often propels them to change such an oppressive system. However, in Italy, capitalism was overthrown by another regime that was equally oppressing i.e. fascism. Consequently, Gramsci deduced that the reason behind this was the ability of its leaders to get consent from the latter group. Usually, this is depicted and garnered through mass media. In fact, everyday activities are what keep leaders and other holders of power in place. For example, whenever people celebrate independent day or when they hang national flags on their roof tops, then these behaviors could be contributing towards maintenance of their leaders in power.
The media tends to support power structures and plays an important role in enforcing hegemony. Usually, this is not a direct strategy but is normally achieved through small hints and teachings from time to time. Not only do the media support political groups or persons, but it also renders its support for corporations (and capitalism in general) or patriarchal societies. For instance, whenever there is a newspaper report about a foreign policy issue held by the government, then that newspaper could be solidifying those views. Also, reality shows for home makeovers showing granite kitchen tops could be said to be promoting capitalism. The theory of hegemony is instrumental in understanding the relationship that exists between media and power as it can go a long way in reinforcing certain beliefs. This theory also indicates how the media may sometimes become a site for struggle where the dominated class airs out their discontentment with the status quo.
It should be noted that the hegemonic system is unsustainable and that it propagates its own demise. The public’s discontentment with an oppressive regime often makes them work towards transformation into a more liberal system. In this regard, Marxist advocates normally assert that the ideal society is the Utopian one in which liberalism prevails. The latter element has been carried forward into the theory of hegemony where it is often asserted that the masses have the potential of creating an ideal state for themselves if they slowly challenge the conventional.
The theory of semiotics refers to the process by which meaning is constructed and understood through signification (signs). Semiotic interpretation of any concept refers to a deeper analysis of the structures that are related to culture. In order to understand this theory, it is essential to familiarize oneself with many key concepts involved in this theory, for instance, a code refers to those rules that assist individuals in being able to associate certain signs with certain meanings. It is a known fact that whenever a sender conveys information then it is must be encoded, however, for the receiver to get its full meaning then he or she must be able to decode it. Consequently, if a recipient does not understand a certain code, then communication will be impeded and the media platform will have failed in conveying its message. (Lidov, 1999)
Culture plays a fundamental role in semiotics owing to the fact that it is the generator of structuredness. In other words, it has the ability to create value, meaning, significance and other images and symbols that can go a long way in making shared meanings. However, these meanings often change from time to time and the media does play an important role in transforming culture. Therefore, different people have their own way of embracing culture and dealing with various codes. For example, some may decide to choose the dominant code, others may opt to modify the dominant code slightly while other may oppose prevailing codes altogether. In this regard, it is often common to find that the person involved has opted to question or demystify code creation. In other words, through irony and subversion, then one may be able to embrace a different code. Also, this is the basis upon which subcultures are created. In other words, by forging one’s own identity, then respective individuals may be differentiated from other forms of media. Usually such subcultures employ the use of music, the media and other images to portray and create their intended messages. (Hurwitz, 1993)
Visual images, language and narratives are the means with which the memory of culture is engrained in people’s heads. Selectivity of these concepts may sometimes be done through a series of ideologies. Therefore, cultural knowledge is often constructed and should not just be viewed as being natural. The significance of the latter ideas is in bringing out the fact that all ideas are born into cultures that keep changing over time and that these chances are independent of that respective individual.
The theory of semiotics would also not be complete without reference to the dialogic nature of communication. Many experts assert that media messages often make assumptions based on another person’s words. This means that the audience is almost always included in the message, medium or sign chosen. Consequently, conveyers of a certain message usually engage in a dialogue with their said audiences.
After understanding some of these key terms, one can therefore look at the actual meaning of semiotics. The latter term refers to the description of sign systems. In other words, this is a theory that facilitates the understanding of symbolic systems preset in cultural functions. The main assumption here is that the symbols are already complete in themselves at any one time. In order to interpret social values and ideologies of everyday life, then one ought to analyze these sign systems. Examples of sign systems include:
- Visual media
- Language
- Cities
- Infrastructure
Therefore, semiotics embraces the fact that meaning making is often constructed instead of just being natural. However, the frequent process of encoding and decoding information may not necessarily be adopted in the same manner among various members of a given culture. In fact, access to cultural aspects is a portrayal of one’s competence and not just their natural disposition. (Lidov, 1999)
Semiotics is particularly relevant in multimedia applications. This is because all the time, signs and languages are combined through different media platforms in order to create meaning. For instance, through web content, digital messages, music, media messages and movies, a certain meaning can be conveyed all at once. In other words, people rely on multimedia overlaps in order to construct meaning. For example, one may watch a television report that is only easily understood in a certain cultural context, then send email to his or her colleagues while at the same time listen to some music. By doing all this, then one carries the meaning depicted in one media platform onto another. Consequently, it can be said that there is semiotic environment that people are often affected by. Various semiotic influences are carried forward by the different types of cultures and they heavily influence how a specific message is interpreted or how meaning is constructed.
The media influence theory involves a study of the relationship between the mass media and the way audiences behave or think. Mass media can play a fundamental role in shaping public opinions. However, this relationship may be more complex than meets the eye as there are several factors that come in the way of interpreting such messages. A number of cultural influences can go a long way in determining how certain types of messages are interpreted. (Gauntlett, 2005)
The media influence theory propagates the fact that the society’s cultural and social aspects are highly impacted by the media. This is largely because messages being conveyed can reach a vast number of people. In fact advocates of this theory assert that sometimes the relevance of a message is not assessed by the actual content of the message by how well that message was distributed. People’s ways of lives are often influenced by these media platforms. However, it should be noted that traditional media are radically different from present media because the latter form largely disseminates messages from one group while leaving out those of others. On the other hand, new media allows audience participation thus improving one’s social, cultural, political opinions.
Media influences can be carried out through three ways i.e. primary, secondary and tertiary. The first occurs when an audience focuses on taking up the messages being portrayed, the second occurs when an audience is dealing with two issues at once i.e. the message being conveyed as well as something else and the third is when the audience is not focusing on the medium at all but the medium is still somewhere in their environments. The existence of primary, secondary or tertiary messages influences depends on the needs of the audience. For example, primary instances occur when there is a need to relate to other roles and identities prevalent in the media so as to gain confidence in oneself. Primary, secondary or tertiary media influences can also occur when there is need to intermingle with other people. In certain situations, these influences may be affected by the need to be more informed about one’s surroundings. Sometimes, this may be because one longs for entertainment.
Perceptions of audiences are highly framed by the media according to adherents of the media effects theory. The media are highly capable of organizing what the public understands. For example, many analysts often cite the coverage of the UK miner’s strike of 1984 that was depicted as being violent. The public believed that this was the case yet the facts on the ground show that the opposite may have in fact occurred. The media are highly capable of setting up a certain agenda and this is often felt in the political arena where voters tend to concur with the media about which issues are important and which ones are not. (Mcluhan & Quentin, 1999)
Adherents to the media effects theory also claim that mass media can sometimes become the object or actual message being conveyed. In order to support this notion, they cite several Asian countries that have rapidly westernized because of exposure to several media outlets. Aside from that, it is possible to find that media are often preoccupied with the very messages that other media are conveying and this creates a situation in which truths are exaggerated or realities are inflated. Perhaps one the most interesting ways in which the media has overemphasized certain subjects in recent times is through new media platforms such as the internet. This particular mode has drawn a lot of attention owing to the fact that it facilitates two way interactions between the media and its audience. (Mcluhan & Quentin, 1999)
There have also been assertions that mass media does play a role in enforcing social control. This is usually eminent in certain societies where there is transition from traditional to modern societies. There seems to be a link between urbanization, standard of living as well literacy levels. And all these are often associated with a high degree of exposure to various forms of mass media.
Media effects theory adherents have credited structural transformations in society owing to mass media exposure. The latter group state that the advancement of mass media created a scenario in which a public sphere was created where different citizens could gather together and talk about the most important issues affecting them. The main result of the growth of a public sphere is that the public grows more interested in the affairs of its government and it also looks towards replacing an oppressive regime with a more liberal one.
Methodology
Through Marxist hegemony, one can be able to relate how the economic and political interests are perpetuated through mass media. One of the reasons why Barrack Obama was elected as president was the fact that he represented a new face of leadership. In other words, Americans were tired of their previous leader George W. Bush because the social and political situation in the country had deteriorated. These messages of inefficiency were all transmitted through the use of social media. In other words, it was through social media that the American people discussed social inequalities prevalent within their country under the Bush regime. They endorsed Obama as a viable solution to these inequalities thus contributing towards his popularity. (Rockler, 2008)
A number of analysts have asserted that no single presidential candidate in the US has ever aroused raw emotion from the masses as much as Obama. In fact, some even claim that he was given the title of a messiah. This presidential candidate had no solid background in politics and before 2004, no one had even heard of him. However, this did not stop him from projecting himself as a revolutionary leader or an agent of change. Through his charisma and great oratory skills, Obama challenged conventional wisdom and was able to triumph. In Marxist thinking it can be argued that the real reason behind this substantial support was the fact that the public was discontent with their prevailing circumstances. They therefore wanted s leader that could create change and end the oppressive systems of past regimes. Social media was able to project Obama as a revolutionary leader and this played a crucial role in his successful election to the White house.
The theory of media influence can go a long way in unraveling several reasons that could have caused Barrack Obama’s victory. First of all, the theory can be applied in terms of public sphere arguments. (Gauntlett, 2005) Social media played a role in creating a culture where there were several collective thoughts and premises that were generated in public sphere discussions. In the modern era, most people within the US were well informed through the media. Therefore, most electors who voted for Obama did so after analyzing critically the matters that he stood for. This theory is particularly useful in indicating how the social media was able to clearly outline the matters that were of interest to the public domain. Issues such as the economy, healthcare reform and the war in Iraq had a crucial role to play in understanding why so many people supported Barrack Obama. The media helped to curve out the matters that were most urgent to the people of the United States and one of the most pressing issues declared at that time was the economy. The US had already plunged into an economic crisis – a fact that the media pointed out time and time again. This therefore caused several debates concerning which candidate would be the most appropriate to get the country out of that crisis. Since a Republican candidate would merely represent what the nation had put up with for the past eight years, then they opted for change in the form of Obama.
The theory of semiotics can be applied in this situation owing to the fact that it places a lot of importance in the encoding and decoding of messages especially in light of the fact that culture plays an important role in these processes. It can therefore be argued that Obama utilized social media because he understood the changing codes prevalent within society. (Hurwitz, 1993)
The year of elections 2008 brought with it heated news about campaigning, debating, amongst many other things that make elections in complete. Media and politics have always gone hand in hand. This integration of roles has positively as well as negatively affected the entire political and election scenario since the beginning; and this trend has only been increasing ever since. There has of course been regular and twenty-four hour media and news coverage keeping everyone up to date with the minute-by-minute happenings. YouTube is one such medium that helps transfer videos to the general public, through user-uploaded recordings. This was the case in all the political candidate’s forthcomings and activities/ events, and debates and controversies that would immediately go up on YouTube for everyone to see. It could also be used as a very effective campaign tool henceforth also.
The Obama Mc-Cain presidential chase did raise the spectrum for the entire media to get their ratings high through “special appearances”, “first-in-line”, “most quick and effective” mediums; this was especially true of all television channels with respect to the political scenario and activities. Social networking websites were used as a strategy to get the presidential candidates to the younger generation. This was something that was widely used that time. Animated shows and impersonations have always been part and parcel of the political picture in America, and this humor can be due fully seen in animated shows like the Family Guy and also South Park, while many other non-animated shows make remarks/ statements much often so. A number of analysts have asserted that no single presidential candidate in the US has ever aroused raw emotion from the masses as much as Obama. In fact, some even claim that he was given the title of a messiah. The debate whether media and politics are interrelated or not is a long and hard one. What really is true is that everyone gets a good laugh out of all these shows, and news pieces, pictures etc. and many a times, all this political incorrectness gets in the way of making the ratings of these channels/ newspapers go very high. (Smukler, M. and Porst, J., n.d.) It was efforts like these helped Obama win people over with his charisma and mass appeal.
Discussion
Marxism and hegemony have gone a long way in highlighting some of the values that the people of the US had taken for granted. This means that media messages are being placed in a social context through this theory. Also, hegemony plays an important part in making sense of whose reality is being viewed. (Chandler, 2005) In this regard, it can be asserted that all members are not autonomous and that there are several influences that contribute towards common perceptions
It can be argued that the social media perpetuated Barrack Obama’s election through the circulation o a number of ideas that may perpetuate hegemonic power. For instance, free speech was a useful campaigns strategy in Barrack Obama’ platform where he asserted that the Nation’s founding fathers had this concept in mind and that it would remain that way once he was elected. Numerous social media outlets frequently conveyed this message from time to time. However, the underlying fact that most people were unaware of was that they had very little power in what they voiced.
The media also portrayed an image of individuality. In other words, Obama made it seem as though each and every person has unique choices that marked their respective personalities. In this regard, he put out the message that one had to project those personal choices by electing him and hence bringing out the concept of fairness at all costs. The major problem with such an approach was that it perpetuated the hegemonic concept. In other words, this ideology of individuality was being perpetuated in the media concerning the voter but in essence what it was doing was reinforcing power through Obama.
It can be said that the Marxist theory of mass media studies can be applied to Obama’s case owing to the fact that the latter individual presupposed a certain meaning for his messages. Thereafter, he looked for a way of making these key messages accepted among the populace. The social media was treated in such a manner that it was meant to heighten the willingness or the ability of the masses to give consent to Obama’s messages and thus place him in power. (Rockler, 2008)
In the media effects theory, studies have shown that there can be very effective ways of reaffirming an individual’s political opinions by understanding some of the messages that mass media could be conveying. While some individuals have asserted that mass media propaganda can directly change a voter’s perceptions, researches have shown that this is usually not the case in modern day politics. Instead, mass media propaganda can go a long way in reaffirming previously held views and perceptions. This is the reason why President Obama may have had success in this election. Many individuals assert that this candidate was quite unconventional as his race and political experience were not favorable. However, because of the maturity and advancements in people’s thinking, then the time was ripe for election of a black and inexperienced President. The social media may not have created such mature views but it can be argued that it reinforced these perceptions thus contributing towards the election of this candidate.
The media effects theory is also essential in understanding the Obama win owing to the fact that it provides a sound explanation for the issue of inequality in society. As it has been stated earlier, mass media had a heavy influence on the public sphere yet the latter group is a setting against which dominant views are expressed while the subordinate ones are forgotten. In other words through social media Obama’s principles became the dominant ones in the public sphere while those held by his opponents became subordinated and this eventually led to greater support for this presidential candidate. (Cowell, 2009)
Through the media influence theory, one can understand how public sphere issues are identified. There is no written rule that clearly outlines what issues fall under the public domain and those that qualify as being private. However, through the social media, the most important public issues affecting Americans were clearly outlined and the debate concerning them was therefore propagated. Examples of some of the issues included healthcare reform, the economy, the war Iraq and others. Obama happened to articulate his agenda on these issues quite well through social media thus explaining why he could have won the election quite well. The Republican candidate who was opposing Barrack Obama was also at a disadvantage owing to the weariness that US citizens has grown accustomed to when it came to conservatism. (US Senate, 2009)
The media influence theory puts forward the notion that distribution of a certain message is sometimes more important than the actual content of the message when communicating. This principle is what one can use in understanding why Obama won the 2008 election. Media experts have asserted that he understood the role of media (especially new media) and the kind of effects that it could have upon people’s live. This was especially amplified in terms of internet media. A survey carried out after the 2008 election indicated that the internet had become 200% more important than radio and equal to newspapers for information regarding the election. Obama understood this factor and maximized it to the fullest. Obama combined the following aspects in order to take advantage of media influence on people’s lives:
- Conversation building
- Bottom up strategy
- Spheres of cross influence
- Speeches
First of all, Obama got the conversation building through several current media platforms such as emails, sms and social networking lists where he used his position to spread information surrounding his life. The use of social networking websites was particularly instrumental in his election victory because it allowed the public to engage with like minded individuals, it provided them with a voice and a channel against which they could voice their opinions or their concerns in general. Secondly, the Obama campaign had a bottom up strategy. Through online media, the Obama campaign team recruited numerous volunteers who organized door to door campaigns for their preferred candidate. Aside from that, he often talked to the general public through several speeches which were broadcast in a number of internet websites and other traditional media platforms. This candidate also organized some spheres of cross influence. (Shipman, 2009)
The semiotics theory can also assist in demystifying the Obama success in this election. For instance, this theory often postulates that encoding and decoding processes of messages must be done properly for communication to be effective. Obama understood these aspects and perfected it through new media. The Obama campaign team hired experts in media analysis who were able to track every media endeavor that they had made and the success rate of that effort. In this way, the campaign team could find out what they had done wrong and improve it as soon as possible. Consequently, it would change the way it endorses its information and hence affect the way the message was decoded so as to make the most of their prevailing circumstances. As the campaign went on, it was found that his email strategies had drastically improved. The need to constantly adjust and change the way he communicated contributed to his success. (Hurwitz, 1993)
Obama was also able to enter into the Whitehouse owing to the fact that he had understood cultural dynamics. As asserted earlier in the theory of semiotics, a communicator must be in a position where he or she understands that codes are engrained in certain cultural aspects and that these aspects change with time. Obama realized that Americans were at a point in their history where they could no longer identify with conventional codes. He responded to this need appropriately by embracing new and fresh media platforms that reflected prevailing cultural sentiments and this secured him his place within the Whitehouse.
Brief on Importance of media in the Presidential Elections 2008
Media coverage generally can be said to be very high and varied in terms of accessibility and availability; instead of constant critique against one candidate while open support for the other, the entire media this time showed much neutrality. Social media perpetuated Barrack Obama’s election through the circulation of a number of ideas that perpetuate hegemonic power. Hence, as application to the Hegemonic theory, we see that there was something quite new to the political scenario that time (with exceptions of course). Because of an increment in the types of media now available to people including visual radio, print etc., and setting up of many local and private news channels and networks, the entire coverage level of these elections was very high. However, print ads and newspapers still had open disregard for the candidates in many cases as compared to television channels and television shows which covered for diversity and the most that happened was humour and mimicry of the candidates. (Ponder, 2001)
As far as the comparison between private and public media goes, the formers coverage despite of being high was less as compared to public media coverage. Also, whenever the campaigns happened. It was also found out that the performance of public owned television channels became even better as time passed by. This could be illustrated well by an example that initially, all TV channels allocated equal time to all candidates campaigning, which led to abatement in the strength of candidates in the elections. (Ponder, 2001)
A study found that out of all the stories relating to the 2008 presidential elections, at the beginning sixty-three percent of the stories were political aspects of the candidate’s campaign. Seventeen percent formed up the personal backgrounds of the candidates as reported by the media, fifteen percent about the candidate’s policies, and one percent about the past performance in public of the candidates. (Journalism.org, 2008)
As an application to the Mass Media Influence theory, Democrats in general received more coverage in comparison to the Republicans. And also that the coverage that Democrats received was overall more positive as compared to the coverage received by Republicans. There were significant differences in media also. As found out by the study, newspapers were generally more positive than other types of media including television networks, television channels and television shows, including animated as well as non-animated shows. Radio, generally was much more negative than positive about all candidates, the study found out. Also, network television channels and shows made sure that they had the best and most comprehensive coverage of the personal backgrounds of the political candidates, in comparison to any other types of media. These findings also suggested that the most positive coverage in general was hard to find, and it was termed as a “horse race”. According to the media, moreover Obama’s polling and fund-raising was more dominant to people, than McCain’s similar efforts. (Journalism.org, 2008)
Barack Obama’s Infomercial and the Media
Hegemony, we see played a huge role in Obama’s campaign. Obama produced and got a half an hour long infomercial aired of him on seven networks in America, to “sell himself” to the prospective voters or the general public of America. His main aspect of this was his “promise to change” things, issues, and times, for the better.
This infomercial had much emotional appeal attached as he set down to explain how he had aims of achieving for America “power of the status quo”. This he added shall be done as “one nation, one people”, so to have a better history. This highly talked about infomercial was aired on seven networks, and that is when we say that media and the public in the political scenario comes in (McAuliff, 2008). This infomercial was directed towards all classes, demographics including gender, age, religion, etc. It has been said that around $4 Billion was spent on this advertisement across all the six networks. These networks all being television channel based, included Univision, NBC, CBS, Fox, BET, TV One and ABC. However, here ABC withheld the infomercial and showed it later gaining an even greater revenue and publicity share. As far as the newsprint is concerned, Washington Post was the first to inform its readers about this ad that would be broadcasted and aired by Univision; and was announced by the Mayor of Miami. (Goetzl, 2008)
This act as carried out six days before elections was done to fight off many rumors about Obama not being directly related to the land of America; to him being anti-America, even, and hence being ruled by a list of foreign dictators. Moreover, this infomercial did what it aimed to do, and depicted Obama as an American as “American as a Chevy”. (Pallasch, A. 2008) The media coverage of this infomercial was such that it was viewed by thirty million plus people who had access to television clearly shows how very well was this entire “media event” documented and broadcasted as far as its publicity before, while and after viewing goes. (Wotnews, 2008)
Semiotics was particularly relevant in the elections 2008, for Obama’s campaign. When semiotics are used we see signs and languages combined through different media platforms in order to create meaning. For instance, through web content, digital messages, music, media messages and movies, a certain meaning can be conveyed all at once. In other words, people rely on multimedia overlaps in order to construct meaning. This was done by the infomercial and eventually also when Washington Post, after being the first to talk about this gave way to other Arizona based news media, where in one Robert Robb also placed remarks on the infomercial. While Washington Post had very nice words to say for it which also helped in increasing the political persona of Barack Obama. The Associated Press was also said to claim that, however Obama was very straightforward in telling people about the cost of his agendas and what kind of pressures, budgetary and financially shall be faced by him in office, which was very commendable of him. The New York Post and L.A. Times followed suit in describing and analyzing this infomercial, where the talk of media and publicity goes. (Gerber, 2008)
From my vantage point, henceforth, Barack Obama’s infomercial was classy and it displayed much about his having the motivation to succeed while delivering himself to the resolution of America’s problems. More specifically, my being a student and belonging also to the middle class shows that I could be very much so the center of attention where the topic of tax cuts in the new budget is concerned for all those families earning less than $200,000. An ad having clear and precise clippings, from his classroom, to his daughters, to his life before; from his Florida’s debate to his kitchen and what not was concluded to be quite precise and full of impact. Any mimicry and ridicule for this infomercial would be shameful. I also believe that the power articulated by this infomercial covering such a huge audience of around 33.6 billion people or viewers, meant a very comprehensive outlook as posed by Barack Obama. Similarly, on November 8, 2008, the radio address was amusingly covered well, as millions stood by listening to Obama’s speech. (Angelou, n.d.)
Since the elections began, across America, it was researched and documented that Obama related headlines in newspapers hit record high levels. When the election time neared, The Los Angeles Times for instance published around forty thousand to forty-five thousand copies more than it usually does, and reports say that all these sold out next morning as Obama won the elections. The newspapers today in America, in order to meet the new and increased demand for newspapers, have increased their production by around 30,000 copies. And a huge number of people stood and lined outside the Los Angeles Time’s office wanting copies eagerly (Angelou, M., n.d.). This also now stands true for other newspapers besides the Los Angeles Times. The Chicago Tribune and New York Times both have been reported of printing around fifty thousand more copies of their newspapers, whereas Washington Post was reported to have printed more than one hundred and fifty thousand more copied of the “election result day’s” paper; here the Chicago Tribune was reported to doing so on the same day distribution of two hundred thousand more copies. EBay also showed historic patterns of old papers sold off for collection purposes, where people had bid for higher amounts than usual to get a copy of New York Times for The Day, for instance. (Angelou, n.d.)
Conclusion
The media effects theory puts forward the notion that media can dictate how one perceives important matters within their public sphere. When applied to the Obama campaign it can be argued that social media was able to articulate the most important items of the elector’s agenda. Obama understood these items and articulated them well.
Politics and media go hand in hand. Their relationship is such that has been going on for centuries now, and is growing stronger. However, when the whole issue of managing all this political information is concerned, it is the responsibility of the media people to broadcast, publish, air this political information well. It is their duty as practitioners to ensure that the materiality of media deliverance goes through in the correct manner. This obviously includes the entire encoding and decoding process of political information. But, politics is a field where an insightful look and analysis is placed on all the kinds of political information that the news channel / newspaper / radio / print ad / television show/ infomercial/ spokesperson/ newscaster can put its hands on. Originality is the key to success, which pertains to the presentation rather than the actual content of information being mentioned. All types of media yes are interrelated and there is always a critical analysis being formulated at the back of the main scenes, which takes its real form later but surely does so. The form with which media discusses politics can be seen when materialization of this information takes place in the community itself, to academic institutions, class rooms from board rooms, television stations, radio stations, studios, etc. (Smukler & Porst, n.d.)
The hegemony theory holds the notion that the media is used as an instrument in propagating the reality of the ruling class through continuous consent, however, the dominated are always struggling to upset the status quo. Obama won this election because he used social media as a site for social struggle embracing the inequalities that Americans had been subjected to in the past. Lastly, the theory of semiotics emphasizes the fact that codes are often affected by culture and culture is dynamic. When applied to the Obama win, it can be argued that this presidential candidate was able to adapt quickly to the changes in media platforms. He made social media work for his campaign by continuously analyzing and upgrading so that the encoding and decoding processes were more efficient thus securing the election.
Neutrality, in the end, is the key to success, while adding humor as written above can score up the ratings for humor and wittiness of a television show for instance. The truth of the matter is after all; it is all about being politically correct where politics goes! (Smukler & Porst, n.d.)
References
Angelou, M. (n.d.) Top of the ticket. [Internet].
Chandler, D. (2005). Gramsci and hegemony. Web.
Cowell, J. (2009). Obama speech draws praises from the world. The Guardian.
Gauntlett, D. (2005). Media effects and beyond. London: John Libey Press
Gerber, R. (2008) From ‘poetic’ to ‘schmaltzy’, media reviews Obama commercial. [Internet]. Web.
Goetzl, D. (2008) Obama infomercial to air on Univision, NBC, CBS and Fox. [Internet]. Web.
Hurwitz, W. (1993). Semiotics and communication. Hillsdale: Erlbaum Press
Journalism.org (2008) The invisible primary- Invisible no longer. [Internet]. Web.
Lidov, D. (1999). Elements of semiotics. New York: St Martin’s Press
McAuliffe, M. (2008) Barack Obama goes primetime with half-hour infomercial. [Internet]. Web.
Mcluhan, M. & Quentin, F. (1999). The Medium is the Message. San Francisco: Hardwired
Pallasch, A. (2008) Obama’s 30-minute commercial covers all bases. [Internet]. Web.
Ponder, S. (2001) Recent Presidential Election dramatizes role of media. [Internet]. Web.
Rockler, N. (2008). Hegemony and media studies. New York: Routledge
Shipman, T. (2009). How Barrack Obama won the US election. The Washington Post.
Smukler, M. and Porst, J. (n.d.) Mediascape. [Internet].
Terry, F. (2005). Technology, industry and culture in new media. Oxford: Oxford University Press
US Senate (2009). About Barrack Obama. Web.
Wotnews (2008) Obama ratings hit with infomercial [Internet].