The media is usually the biggest source of information when elections come around, but it has the ability to shape the way we view the candidates. This is why we should acquire certain views prior to hearing name slandering, or virtue giving media coverage.
A voter should in fact have an all around knowledge of all the good and improvement the candidate could bring to his/her community. All that this candidate promises he/she can make happen, what issues he/she plans to cover, along with what the candidate is capable of. This information is usually provided by the media, and to the people, many would believe it is in fact the media's responsibility to give us information on the candidates at hand. This is important because I don't really see any other alternatives on information gathering that Americans will willingly partake in than reading the newspaper, watching T.V., or reading a magazine.
But when dealing with media coverage, media tends to focus on the candidates personal history, be it bad or good. They also will cover issues that the candidate bases his campaign on. Such as lower taxes, better social security, etc.
Candidates can find many ways to manipulate the media, it's not always a negative instrument. The can use the media as a tool to uphold their reputations. Showing up to charity events, etc. Whatever would get them coverage while making them look "better". Especially planning their events around what huge media event is taking place; this is usually a very successful way to get attention. Most of the time they achieve their goals, with ease I might add, of getting attention. Coverage would of course become centered on them (especially hungry reporters looking for a story) .
Mass media can improve coverage of campaigns but reaching the...