John W. Carlin and Civic Leadership
Join the Conversation:
  • Home
  • About John
  • Blog
  • Leading and Learning Moments
  • Leader Corner
  • Resources
    • Feedback

The National Press, the 2016 Presidential Campaign, and Money

11/3/2015

1 Comment

 
In this Presidential campaign there has been lots of talk and publicity about the influence as well as importance of money with much of it tied to the Supreme Court decision on Citizens United and all the billionaires that are now key players. The recent attention to the quarterly numbers for all the candidates, what has been raised and money on hand, leads to drawing all sorts of conclusions as to what those numbers mean. Who will be next to drop out? How much do each have in Super PAC dollars and are those numbers going to grow?  What is the trend in their individual fundraising?

On that money front, what I think has been missing is how money influences big networks’ coverage and attention in both the Democratic and Republican primary races. Networks want a horse race in both parties because they just like it and it sells advertising. Who is going to put up big dollars for debates that are not going to be exciting and hopefully controversial? Helping properly educate the public is too often lost to what will increase viewership and bring in the money.

Look at the Republican field of 15 or so and the considerable variance in coverage. Early on Donald Trump, with no public service experience and, for mortal candidates, major flaws, received huge free publicity because he was being so outrageous. Governor Kasich of Ohio, strong resume at both the National and State level, a true conservative but pragmatic in taking the Medicaid dollars, apparently doesn’t have the flair necessary to sell ads, for his coverage has been minimal. On the Democratic side, it appeared they needed Vice President Biden to get in the race to accelerate excitement, delaying obvious issues that they would bring up just as soon as he announced.

There are candidates who are getting nowhere and their dropping out would be a significant public service. But narrowing attention and in-depth coverage to too narrow a field is not in the country’s interest either. Today there are, in my opinion, three Democrats (have had two drop out in each party) and eight or nine Republicans that have earned the focus and attention and should go into 2016 with all of us learning more about them and their strategy to be a successful President. I also know that the networks have bottom line issues too, but surely there could be a little more balance as well as providing some information about how they would “do” the Presidency.
1 Comment
JAMES MARPLES
11/4/2015 08:47:36 pm

I agree. The lagging candidates should drop-out....yet have enough for balance. Personally, I wish they had CROSS-PARTY DEBATES (now). Gov Carlin is right...we need to see how they would "do" the Presidency. ---I'm Independent. But I'm not so much interested in their charms, backgrounds, and tear-jerking stories...as I am how they will DISCHARGE THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENCY...and the circle of advisers they tentatively would like to lean-on for advice. To me, that ---is much more important

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Author

    John W. Carlin​—​61st Speaker of the Kansas House, 40th Governor of Kansas, 8th Archivist of the United States, and student of leadership

    Categories

    All
    Agriculture
    Budgets And Taxation
    Capital Punishment
    China
    Civic Engagement
    Drinking Age
    Education
    Election 2016
    Election 2018
    Election 2020
    Election 2022
    Election 2024
    Environment
    Health Care
    Higher Education
    Historical Perspective
    Infrastructure
    Judicial System
    Leadership
    LGBTQ Rights
    National Archives
    Research
    Teaching

    Facebook

    John W. Carlin

    Twitter

    Tweets by @johnwcarlin

    Subscribe

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    RSS Feed