Thursday, August 12, 2010
Reach Out and Elect a Movie Star?
In chapter nine of Amusing Ourselves to Death, Postman talks about how Politics have also been polluted by the show business, and how politics have been transformed by the television into a form of entertainment. He also writes about how television persuades people to vote for a canditate running for office even though they might not be the most qualified for the position. I think the perfect example for this would be when Arnold Schwarzenegger, a previous movie star, ran for Govenor and won in 2003 on October 7 defeating California State Treasurer Phil Angelides.Not every one might agree, but i personally believe that a state treasure is more qualified to be Govenor than a movie star, but thats just me.I personally believe that he was only elected for his well known career as a movie star, not because of his knowledge of what would be reguired as Govenor, or his qualifications. My question for you guys is if you feel as though Schwarzeneggar won this race fairly or merely because of his extensive movie career? Also, do you agree with Postman that politics have been persuade by media ?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with you Rickell. And to answer your two questions...
ReplyDeleteOne: I think he won because of his popularity status. It's sad, but true. Many people don't even take job qualifications into consideration when voting. If he was running for an acting position, sure, I would vote for him- not Angelides. But considering the fact that Angelides has much more experience with politics, I STRONGLY believe he is better for the title as governor. It only makes sense.
Two: Absolutely! Television has definitely changed the face of politics. Right now (I'm being honest) I don't know much about Meg Whitman and her scenario. But I do know that people are bashing her with negative names and such. Is that really fair? Media has a way of deceiving us. Now, I see commercials saying vote for her, and on the next commercial break they say she's a bad candidate. It makes me want to throw my shoe at the television screen. Too much confliction! The problem is deciphering who's right.
I suppose some things aren't "as seen on T.V."
Allow me to provide another example. Ronald Reagan was a movie star before being elected as Governor. AND later President. While his popularity as a movie actor must have helped, his formidable political skills must have also played a role in his election.
ReplyDelete*wink wink, Mrs. Fletcher*
I belive that Schwarzenagger won because of his acting career, I did not know who the other canadate was but when I heard Schwarzenagger was going to run the first thing I thought was his slogan should be "Vote for me if you want to live" (terminator I think I just remember he said something like that)
ReplyDeleteI badgered my dad to vote for him, but it wasn't nessacary he was going to vote for him also.
The media does play a huge part in politics, like Postman said I believe it provides us with disinformation. The information we recive is misleading, irrelevant, fragmented or superfical. Providing us with the illusion of knowing something but which in fact leads us away from knowing.
I don't no anything about the canadates except that meg whitman was once a ceo of google. Thats about it.
Thats funny, because I considered myself well informed.
I would like to point out several things. No offence intended, but I do not quite understand what you mean by a "fair race".
ReplyDeletePolitics is very much a game of deception. The goal? How many lies can one fabricate that would be accepted by the "people"? Many would disagree, but most, if not all, politicians have lied to their people. Even Nelson Mandela plays this deception game. I remember reading an article about him in the Time magazine and one line stated "embracing his rivals was a way of controlling them."
The point I am trying to make is that fair is a very subjective term. If I was to judge "fair" by politician standards, I would say that yes, our Schwarzenagger deserved to win. If I was to judge by standards held by the common people as "fair" then no, he used his popularity to attain office and therefore is undeserving of it.
This also acts as proof for my answer to the second question: politics are influenced by media, perhaps far too much. That can not be avoided either way, as television is the main medium of communication.