Votaries of the US pdwellntial argue – including many of our anciaccess politicians – may want to hanciaccess their horses. The first pdwellntial argue between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, after all, has not turned out to be the symposium of policy and polity ideas that some hoped it would be. It certainly was massively amengageing. Nobody still understands who will be the next pdwellnt of the United States in November or what their structure of action will be at home and in the world. One is forced to dispenseigate, therefore, whether the purpose of these pdwellntial argues is amengagement – poli-tainment.
The Post-9/11 Television
Interestingly, the Trump-Harris argue was telecast dwell on the eve of the 23rd anniversary of the 9/11 attacks – an event that set a novel tone for decades to come for not equitable the US set upment but the media as well. Let’s retriumphd to 2001. The television ably helped the military-industrial intricate of the United States in the project of what Noam Chomsky calls manufacturing consent. This consent was built not equitable around military action on foreign land but also heightened security meacertains wiskinny. This was done via ‘militainment’ – cultural products revolving around the military. Think in terms of all the war films Hollywood churned out each time the US sanciaccessiers comprised in military action on foreign soil. Post-9/11, the television brawt all the battling to the American living rooms with a renoveled vigour. Heightened consciousness of the enemies of the United States uncomferventt a better chance of convincing Americans about their rulement’s decision to proceed battling them. And it was being done ostensibly under the garb of amengagement.
Politainment, on the other hand, aims to serve amengagement in the name of politics. Entertainment standardly equivalents commercialism, and there seems to be no other create of amengagement hugeger than the pdwellntial polls in the US at the moment. The hugegest names in the amengagement world have joined the fray, the tardyst being Taylor Swift, the hugegest artist in the world of 2023, with her finishorsement of Kamala Harris. Like TV, with a minuscule hiatus in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, jumped right back into commercial programming and tagled it “uncover service,” pdwellntial polls become the uncover service events for artists and platcreates every four years.
Is It Time To Retire The Debate?
The televised US pdwellntial argue, begind by the most showman-appreciate of all American pdwellnts, John F Kennedy and Ricchallenging Nixon, also turns sixty-four this month. Is it now time to withdraw it? The aiders uphanciaccess it as the democratisation of political alertation. But what does it reassociate uncomfervent in terms of electoral participation and outcome? Scholars appreciate Markus Prior have exhibitd that “Cable TV and the Internet incrrelieve gaps in understandledge and turnout between people who prefer novels and people who prefer amengagement”.
Political scientists have already analysed the Trump-Harris argue threadnaked. Precious little has materialized about the policy honestion that the most strong country in the world will consent in the next four years under a novel pdwellnt. Instead, it spawned industrial supplies of highly produceive amengagement products appreciate memes, parodies, and social media videos. Multimedia satisfyed creators are probable to have produced substantial wealth thanks to this argue, which was pretty low on political alertation. Even if it were high, there is no evidence that this argue would have liftd the unrelabelable levels of political understandledge in the American population. Sure, Kennedy won the election after his super prosperous mhelpen argue with Nixon, but was it not otriumphg more to his personality cult than any of his policy positions?
Demagoguery 101
These days, one almost senses sorry for the necessitatey television. It tries to do a firmrope walk between uncover service and amengagement. In the US, television is constantly trying to reprieve its admireable status as a regutardyd personal industry originassociate thought to function for the vague welfare. It is also torn in the opposite honestion by capitaenumerate motives of profit maximisation. Events appreciate the pdwellntial argues permit television to produce the two finishs greet.
Scholars appreciate Roland Barthes have disputed how history and memory produce and further national narratives. Television serves as not equitable a creator but also an watchr and a repository of both history and memory. At contransient, the national psyche of the US-bifurcated aextfinished party lines – lfinishs itself to being take advantage ofed by television for the creation of a national narrative of fractured firmarities and policy disorder. There are presentant disconsentments among both Reuncoveran and Democrat aiders. Ongoing foreign wars have distilled these disconsentments.
The fact that both Trump and Harris were unable to propose any policy structurelabor during the argue and mounted only personal attacks aobtainst each other exits a discerning audience with a sense of impfinishing doom. Politics of publishs has been firmly pushed into the background while emotionassociate indictd demagoguery consents centre stage.
(Nishtha Gautam is a Delhi-based author and academic.)
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25657766/ChatGPT_canvas_editing_interface.jpg "ChatGPT’s ‘canvas’ interface originates it easier to write and code")
