In any democracy, including that of the USA, the press will end up choosing the leaders because the media is the vehicle of free expression. The press reflects the voice of the people and they depend on it, in turn, for their advice and information. So it is not so far fetched to say that the media chooses the president because indirectly it does, through its power, expertise and influence.

1. The press, by virtue of the awesome publicity it generates, has the power to make or break a candidate simply by focusing negatively or positively on them at any time. For example, Barack Obama, the young and enthusiastic presidential hopeful, is enjoying a honeymoon period just now where most of his coverage has been positive, while his more experienced opponent, Hillary Clinton, with a known history behind her family, has been having mixed exposure, some of it not so complimentary. But come 2008, when things get really upfront and personal, expect something different. Thus the press has the power to at least keep its choice at the forefront of the debate for the people to consider and to vote for. It often uses this influence unashamedly to change the fortunes of the candidates and that is why they have to take notice of the press and always try to be overly accommodating to get the most favourable or sympathetic coverage.

2. The press is known for its expert writers and journalists who can analyse a person’s suitability rather clinically for this top job. With such a reputation for investigative journalism, the public tends to take note of what is published, especially if they are loyal readers/viewers/listeners of a particular medium. They come to trust their source of information and often remain floating voters until they see which way the press coverage is going. In this regard, one can say that the press often does a valuable job in unseating insincere candidates who might not be consistent in stated policies or who have a dodgy public background. However, some members of the press have abused this position by deliberately giving negative publicity to those who might be competing too closely with their favourites by dredging up unsavoury things from their past or spreading questionable gossip.

3. The press has the capacity and means to affect the public perception of who is the best potential president and often manipulates that perception to suit their ends. Public perception is often fickle and highly changeable, depending on its knowledge and information, and the press enjoys the best position to alter that perception at any given time, especially when it suits their purpose to do so.

In the UK, the press has always dominated the selection of our leaders. In fact, one of the first persons to be called to Downing Street after Tony Blair won office was Rupert Murdoch, the media giant. His papers had sided with the Labour party in the election and that did make a difference to how Labour was perceived as ‘electable’ after their 18 years in the political wilderness.

Last 5 posts by Ms Cyprah

• 5 Key Ways to Boost Self-Esteem and Personal Success - August 20th, 2007
• Why Happy People Are More Productive People - August 20th, 2007
• 4 Main Ways to Face Personal Challenges - August 20th, 2007
• The Power of Personal Perception - August 20th, 2007
• Reflections - Early Personal Perceptions of England - August 20th, 2007