2008 Woodie Awards
Conventions more than just hype
Keith Sullivan
Issue date: 10/21/04 Section: Viewpoint
- Page 1 of 3 next >
Many American citizens hold to the contention that most major political events, no matter which party hosts them, are in large part some kind of political stunt or attempt to capture media attention. This perhaps well-founded view has been echoed by students that attended the political conventions this year and found a scripted and controlled political environment.
Such an environment did not always exist however, and as some might remember, conventions used to be the place that the presidential candidate was finally chosen. It was at the Convention that each state would announce the winner of their primary or caucus, and when the candidate was announced, he really was accepting the political party's nomination for president (without prior knowledge of it).
Unfortunately, for all the political thrill-seekers out there, the last time a party was truly unsure about its nominee prior to the convention was arguably 1960 when the Democrats nominated John F. Kennedy. There may have been some confusion among the delegates at conventions after this, particularly at the DNC in 1968. However, after 1960 the party elite had an essentially scripted program from start to finish. Conventions passed, and the scripting and certainty only became worse as the ability of the media to cover such events improved.
Leaving some of the history behind for the moment, many people might wonder what the National Conventions might mean to them. Far more likely, most individuals have already determined that National Political Conventions are of no interest to them, and serve no valuable purpose to a majority of the population. All the scripting and standard formatting of the events have surely led to a certain disdain by most people, and Conventions are now primarily written off as events that are only useful and noticed by politicians and academics who concern themselves with such things. This view is highly flawed however, and apparently indicative of the common stance of the masses towards politics today.
Such an environment did not always exist however, and as some might remember, conventions used to be the place that the presidential candidate was finally chosen. It was at the Convention that each state would announce the winner of their primary or caucus, and when the candidate was announced, he really was accepting the political party's nomination for president (without prior knowledge of it).
Unfortunately, for all the political thrill-seekers out there, the last time a party was truly unsure about its nominee prior to the convention was arguably 1960 when the Democrats nominated John F. Kennedy. There may have been some confusion among the delegates at conventions after this, particularly at the DNC in 1968. However, after 1960 the party elite had an essentially scripted program from start to finish. Conventions passed, and the scripting and certainty only became worse as the ability of the media to cover such events improved.
Leaving some of the history behind for the moment, many people might wonder what the National Conventions might mean to them. Far more likely, most individuals have already determined that National Political Conventions are of no interest to them, and serve no valuable purpose to a majority of the population. All the scripting and standard formatting of the events have surely led to a certain disdain by most people, and Conventions are now primarily written off as events that are only useful and noticed by politicians and academics who concern themselves with such things. This view is highly flawed however, and apparently indicative of the common stance of the masses towards politics today.