HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Oct. 21, 2004 Back in 1900, when the Republican McKinley-Roosevelt ticket won strictly on party lines, the focus on the White House was muted. The media would interview candidates every once in a while during the race, and the President would hold small group meetings (it is hard to call them legitimate ‘press conferences’ by today’s standards) to appease the journalists. The Presidency, to say something of governing as a whole in the early twentieth century, was a laid back affair. The type of media bombardment we see today - rarely a day passes when a member of the Bush Administration or the Kerry team are not taking up the airwaves - was virtually unheard of 100 years ago. Some would say this is based on the availability of media, but that argument ignores the linotype, which transmitted written media much like the AP Wire does today. When Theodore Roosevelt ascended to power after the death of President McKinley, his schmoozing with the media was seen as a major watershed. Few Presidents had invested as much time in cultivating the media as Roosevelt did during the first months of his Vice Presidency and in the early months of his Presidency. Roosevelt invested so much time in the media not for his own pleasure, but because he saw what Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton saw: influencing the media into supporting his polices was the quickest route to gaining public support for his policies. It was through strong allies in the media that President Roosevelt secured support for his conservation efforts - an area of politics that barely registered with voters before Roosevelt’s Administration took it up. One of President George W. Bush’s major flaws is his lack of networking within the media. Bush has held fewer press conferences than any President in the last twelve years, and has missed vital opportunities to court the media over into agreeing with some of his more controversial policies. The sad effect of this? Whenever President Bush gets in front of an uncontrolled group of reporters - take his April press conference or the first debate - he ends up turning off more Americans than he pulls in. Republicans will say that President Bush does not need to be the lapdog of the media, that his policies and projects are correct regardless of public opinion. Some of this may stand true, but it must be remembered that catering to some of the Washington media circle from time to time does not signal a weak policy; on the contrary, it symbolizes a President shrewd enough to buttress good policy with the support of public opinion. In pushing policy, the President’s main duty - like it or not - is to persuade Congress to pass his legislation. In a friendly Congress such as this most recent term’s, it is easy to see why President Bush would not need to do a lot of political step-work with the media. However, that does not excuse the fact that it is the duty of the President to inform the people of what he intends to do, and if used correctly, bolster support among the constituents of those he intends to put the legislation in front of. Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, all of them were experts with making the press feel like their personal advisors. In return, the media was more than happy to overlook mistakes and missteps from time to time; after all, Reagan came off as a friendly grandfather, and Clinton as an old college buddy. Republicans wonder why the media has been so harsh to President Bush. It is because he has given them no reason to overlook his flaws. In the end, Republicans may still see it as pandering to the liberal media, but it is a kind of pandering that is essential to getting support behind policies in a Democracy. Being nice, even in vain, never hurt anyone - especially when policies and public opinion are on the line. Public opinion should not mean everything to a President, and with President Bush it is evident that it does not mean much. He would be surprised at how much easier it would be to get those Ohio votes, those Florida votes, those Iowa votes, if he had just smiled a little more. If President George W. Bush had come off more as the leader who is still in connection with the people who elected him, and less as the leader who will follow his will regardless of what people ask or say, he would not be this close to being booted out by a man who hit’s the mark. ------------ About the author: Max Burns is a 17-year-old conservative Democrat, writer, pollster, pundit and aspiring Indiana politician. He currently is an intern (unpaid) with Indiana Democratic Party and writes for The Progressive Voice). Read the fantasy-fiction novel "Alcardia". Email: DeMBurns@gmail.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
