Social media – and particularly Twitter – has played a huge role in the 2016 campaign, and journalists now accept it as not only a news source but as an important way to brand themselves and their shows.

“I don’t view social media as [something I am pressured to do], I view it as part of my job,” said Chuck Todd, NBC News political director moderator of Meet the Press. “Part of my job taking over Meet the Press was to make sure it wasn’t just a Sunday brand anymore. Whether it’s pressure or not, we’re here to deliver information however people are going to get it. To me, these social media platforms are my opportunity to give Meet the Press a daily, hourly brand and at the same time make an impact with people who may never watch the show.”

Todd was on a Tuesday morning panel that included ABC’s Martha Raddatz and CBS’ John Dickerson and was moderated by Frank Biancuzzo, SVP, group head, Hearst Television at PromaxBDA Station Summit in Las Vegas.

Social media also has given presumed Republican nominee Donald Trump a platform on which to brand himself, with media organizations closely monitoring his social feeds.

“Would we have paid as much attention to Trump if he wasn’t on Twitter?” Biancuzzo asked the panel.

“What Trump does on Twitter is what he’s doing with the whole campaign. It echoes his whole strategy for campaigning,” said Raddatz, who co-anchors ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos and is ABC News’ chief global affairs correspondent.

“If he said it in a fax, we would still pay attention,” said Dickerson.

“We know that every Hillary [Clinton] tweet probably went through 30 people, while Trump’s are probably coming from him,” said Todd.

A big part of this election year have been the endless stream of political debates, and 14 of the top 15 highest-rated debates of all time occurred within this news cycle, said Biancuzzo. “We’ve never seen them more confrontational and full of personal attacks. It’s great TV, but have the debates lost their purpose?”

The candidates also used the primary debates – 14 of 15 of which were the most-watched political debates ever—to develop their personal brands with voters.

“Primary debates are different than general election debates,” said Raddatz. “Primary debates are tests. You just want to hear the candidates and how they perform in that venue.”

Todd felt like the debates were more important for the candidates than for the voter, who was unlikely to learn anything of value as the candidates mostly tried to shout each other down.

“There was not a single decent primary debate for the voter,” said Todd. “These bigger debates, in which there were 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 candidates – they weren’t of any use to the voters. The [smaller] forums did more to give voters information. I was much more fulfilled substantively in the forums that I moderated than in the debates.”

While the intellectual value of the debates might be in question, all three of the panelists said they thought 120 million or more people – roughly the size of a Super Bowl audience—will watch debates between the two presumed nominee, Republican Trump and Democrat Clinton. Whether Trump will actually agree to do any of those debates is in question, but typically there are three presidential debates during the general election campaign and one vice presidential debate.

In fact, Todd questioned whether Trump would even stay in the race, considering that his campaign is in disarray with one campaign manager fired and another one resigning, and that he has far less money and staffers than Hillary Clinton.

“Trump’s the one in panic mode right now,” said Todd. “The Democrats have a candidate who is very unpopular but the Democrats are rallying around her. They aren’t going to dump her. We’re now in a 10-day period in which we will find out if Todd can calm this uprising or if it will continue to grow.

“The fact is there is going to be intent to stop him in Cleveland. Will it be successful? That’s highly unlikely. But if I got a call in an hour saying ‘hey, the New York Times is reporting that Trump’s going to drop out,’ I wouldn’t be shocked. We’re in a weird phase with an unusual candidate who may choose quitting over losing. The party doesn’t know what to do.”

Asked how a Trump presidency might affect the U.S.’s brand worldwide, Raddatz said: “I’ve talked to a lot of people internationally and service members overseas about a Trump presidency. Internationally there’s concern from world leaders. How would the U.S. treat Muslim countries?

“I did a group session with a really bright group of young people in Abu Dhabi. I gathered a group of Muslim students, and while they were concerned, they all thought [Trump] was saying those things to get elected. But there is concern internationally.”

Todd went on to get the panel’s final word in, saying: “The real pessimism I have is no matter who wins, will they be able to govern? We’re so polarized right now. To me, the next president is doomed for failure – there’s an infrastructure reason [that explains] why we’re at where we’re at. Whoever is elected, there’s a big part of the country who won’t accept the results. And he or she will have a Supreme Court nomination to fight over for the first 100 days, so they won’t get anything done.”

[Image courtesy of Andrew Ros.]

Tags:


  Save as PDF