The media has an incredible influence on society, especially in politics. Daily, people tune in to different types of media to listen, watch, and read the current events and political issues that are being covered. The media is a very broad category that includes TV, newspaper, online sources, social media, magazines and more. Television is a major source from which most people obtain political information, and the main topic in this essay. This topic is extremely prevalent because of the current presidential campaigns and the presidential elections coming up in 2016. According to an article that outlines positive and negative effects of the mass media, titled, How Mass Media Simulate Political Transparency, written by Jack M. Balkin of Yale University, "Television tends to convert coverage of law and politics into forms of entertainment for mass consumption," which is an issue when it comes to political education (Balkin). The media can cover the same story, yet, have a completely different report about it. Women in politics are portrayed differently in the media than men, which is an interesting topic to discuss, especially with the last couple elections which had more women participate than ever before. Television and politics is being redefined with late night shows which are currently in a transition period with a shift in the spectrum of late night. A study published in a scholarly journal gives interesting insight about the different effects that result in viewing The Daily Show verses traditional national news sources. For these reasons, the media does influence the public's perception of important political topics and alter their views by how they report on any given issue.

Fox News and CNN are two highly credible news sources on television and are generally very popular when it comes to political topics. Both sources, however, tend to have a slight lean off center on the political spectrum. Fox News tends to lean right towards being conservative, while CNN is pretty moderate with a slight left lean towards being more liberal. According to an article titled, The Impact of Media Bias: How Editorial Slant Affects Voters, "Voters often base their candidate evaluations on the issues emphasized in the news, and they form their opinions about events in ways that correspond with how the news frames those events," which is problematic because the media shapes the voters thought rather than then shaping it themselves (Druckman and Parkin). This is an issue when it comes to gaining political information because there is bias with either source and it is difficult to find a completely unbiased source. When looking at the same issue both sources had completely different reports. For example, Hillary Clinton's email scandal has been a major topic in the beginning of this election season. Fox News and CNN, obviously had to report on the issue and the outcomes were extremely different. The controversy lies with whether or not it was legal or appropriate for Clinton to use a private email server as opposed to a government approved server along with the debate about if the information in the emails was classified. After, reading both accounts it can be difficult to understand the full story and what is actually going to happen. It is important to not blindly listen to a source, but rather view all sources as unbiased as possible to try and get all the information. 

Fox News argues that Clinton's emails had information pertaining to secret government programs that were highly classified. The article, Inspector General: Clinton Emails Had Intel from Most Secretive, Classified Programs, explains that dozens of classified emails included specific intelligence, known as special access programs. The article goes as far to say that the information that was being handled was beyond top secret. Similar instances in the past were brought up and it was highlighted that Clinton signed a non-disclosure agreement which should hold her accountable. The authors explained that a federal investigation will be done and that Clinton's negligence was a threat to national security and attempted to dismiss her as a worthy presidential candidate (Browne and Herridge). Fox News has a strong stance on this issue and clearly wants to show the inappropriate behavior and lack of professionalism of Clinton. CNN, however, has a different account of the entire situation. 

CNN had a very different take on the same issue. Eric Bradner, author of the CNN article Hillary Clinton's Email Controversy, Explained, details the controversy of Hillary Clinton's email situation by breaking it down into who, what, when, where, and why. He explains that a privately owned server was used for convenience and her lawyers turned over 55,000 pages of emails to the State Department. The biggest discrepancy that is seen between Fox News and CNN is the debate over what was in the emails. CNN reports the emails they were filled with her schedule and normal, non-threatening, matters. The State Department reported that only about 125 were deemed classified. A law requiring officials to transfer emails from private servers to their government servers was not enacted until after Clinton left the State Department and Clinton claims to never have sent classified information regardless. While it was not smart for Clinton to use a private server and it was "out of step with typical government practice", the article outlines that it was not illegal (Bradner). CNN approaches the situation differently than Fox and after reading this article it may seem as though Clinton made a small mistake, but nothing more. The media can alter the public's view through wording and perspective as seen in these sources. It is important to approach every source as if it has bias and must not fully trust a source without doing additional research. 

The media, specifically television, uses wording and perception to also influence the way women are portrayed in politics. Lindsay Vandivier explains that while sexism is less overt, there are still barriers that women in politics face. In politics, women are identified by their gender first and see as candidates second. In the 2008 presidential election this type of discrimination was very evident because of two front running candidates. Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin, and Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton were in the spotlight during the entire election season. They were constantly casted in the media by their appearance and their families and not as political candidates.

Sarah Palin was dismissed as a respectable candidate immediately when the media tagged her as a sex object and highlighted her participation in beauty pageants and cheerleading. The press would constantly ask her about her appearance and wardrobe. A spokesperson from CNBC described Palin as a sexy woman, women want to be her; men want to mate with her, which is completely inappropriate and unprofessional. Palin was also attacked by the media about her role as a mother. The media questioned Palin about how she was going to balance her family life and her career while men would never be asked about such topics. For example, in the 2008 campaigning season Palin was asked if she has ever had a breast augmentation or how she will have time to care for her children while Barrack Obama was asked about his foreign policy and tax breaks (Vandivier). This is evidence that men are portrayed very differently than women and that is affecting the public views on women in politics. Perhaps, if the media focused on the candidate's platforms regardless of gender then voters could make more accurate political opinions. 

Hillary Clinton was running for the presidency and unlike Palin had years of experience as governor and first lady. Regardless of Clinton's experience, the media labeled her as old, worn down, and less attractive than Palin. Clinton' powerful presence brought a much different take on her appearance. She was labeled as not lady like and lacking femininity. She was described as manly and overbearing while for similar characteristics in a man might be described as powerful and a leader (Vandivier). Her family and marital status were also attacked, like Palin, which included her husband's sex scandal in 1998. She was also criticized her for exploiting her daughter and characterized Clinton as a scolding mother. This proves that women are portrayed negatively by the media and this can affect the public's view on women. This type of media promotes personal image and character rather than focusing on the issues at hand. 

Even when the media discusses political issues the media tends to ask them about social issues such as health care, education, child care, and environment issues, as if they can only handle such issues. Men are generally asked about military, business and technology (Vandivier). The media also shows the political hard news like topics about war and the economy more often than social issues. This leads to women getting less representation than their male counterparts based on the sole reason that the media chooses to ask women different questions. This issue is obvious and is becoming more of a problem due to an increase in women in politics. It is important to talk about women and men equally and give all candidates equal questions and air time regardless of gender, because politics is changing.

In addition to more women representation, another change includes late night hosts. They are changing the way presidential campaigns are going. Previously, there was only one news station and it would come on once a day to give the evening news. Now, news runs 24/7 and is everywhere, especially with late night emerging as a news source more and more. Studies of political news have documented significant changes about the news media and their coverage of political issues, affairs, and campaigns. (Vreese and Elenbaas). Generally, late night hosts act as a messenger to the public about politics, but sometimes they can skew the information based on their own political values. Late night shows are a new form of campaigning for candidates. Actor Arnold Schwarzenegger used the Tonight Show to announce he would seek the Republican nomination for governor of California in 2003 (Blake). Many strategists say that it expands the reach a candidate has is very smart politics to go to a late night show. A 2012 Pew Research Center survey found that more Americans turned to "Saturday Night Live," "The Daily Show" and "The Tonight Show" than to national newspapers for information regarding campaigns. (Blake). The political landscape is much different than it used to be and is still continuously changing. 

However, there is a transition period going on with all late night shows. The newer generation of late night hosts are less political than their predecessors. Jay Leno, David Letterman, Stephen Colbert, and Jon Stewart all centered their satire around politics. Jay Leno was very popular in late night because he was different than the usual left-leaning late night. He attracted a bipartisan audience and his ratings responded to that (Blake). The new hosts such as Jimmy Fallon and Seth Myers are not as political. Compared to Letterman or Leno, Fallon had about half as many political jokes and that has been the trend since he became host. (Blake). Stephen Colbert, for example, is one of the most politically overt hosts and is leaving The Colbert Report and going to another show with a very different atmosphere. With this shift in late night, it highlights the influence that late night has in politics. Even with less discussion of politics all these shows still act as both pop culture and public affairs update (Holbert et al.). Fallon and Myers have both had political guests on their show and still do not talk about politics. 

Lance Holbert, Jennifer Lambe, Anthony Dudo, and Kristin Carlton did a study that was published in the Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media which examines effects from viewing CNN television relative to The Daily Show on political gratification associated with both types of information sources. The study was done over three weeks and had students all of age to vote complete a pretest questionnaire to provide demographic information and viewing habits. Participants were then put into three groups, the first viewed The Daily Show first then traditional news, the second viewed traditional news first and The Daily Show after and the third was a control group. The results were interesting because those that were most affected by what they watched first had lower self-efficacy. This means that they feel as though they are not empowered in the political process (Holbert et al.). Those with low self-efficacy who watched The Daily Show first tended to think less of traditional national news sites (Holbert et al.). Those who viewed traditional news sources and the control group had similar results as those with high self-efficacy who viewed the late night show first. This can be a reminder to always check your sources and never be completely trusting in one source. This study shows that whichever source is shown to you first has more of an influence over your political opinion. 

An article published in the Washington Post, titled The Political Media's Declining Power, gave a counterargument to this topic and discussed how the media has declining power over politicians. This article states that the media is acting more like megaphones rather than presenting new information about candidates. The media's role as a source for statements has decreased since 2000 all the way up to 2012. The article explained that with new and upcoming technology such as social media campaigns are moving away from the mainstream media. The second reason as to why the media has less influence is because there are simply fewer reporters than there were a decade ago due to contraction of news businesses (Maraniss and Samuels). The article states that campaigns and candidates have more power than ever to frame their narrative and attack their opponents. It points out that because of these statements are becoming much more negative. 

First, the article is still saying that the media influences politics. Campaigns and information have been more widespread than just on television; however, this does not take away from the influence of television. Mainstream news sources such as CNN and Fox News are still reporting about the important political issues, there is just more access to this information. The statement that newspaper newsroom reporters are decreasing is misleading. Mainstream media is becoming different than it has been in the past. Late night shows such as the Colbert Report and Tonight Show are becoming mainstream and a source of political information. These reporters may not be labeled as newsroom reporters, but they continue to be a large source of information for voters. 

Television has an important influence on politics. People gain information from bias sources which lead them to certain political views based on these sources. It is evident that the same topic can be construed into two totally different stories. CNN and Fox both cover Clinton's email scandal; however, both sources state very different information and depending on what article you read, your viewpoints could change. Women in politics and portrayed very differently than men. This is highlighted in the 2008 elections with Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton. They are often depicted based on their appearance and their family skills and are only able to cover soft social issues. On the other hand, men deal with the hard political issues and always discuss their platform and are seldom questioned about such trivial matter like what they are wearing. Late night talk shows and the Daily show have changed where society gets their political information from. Late night talk shows have become mandatory shows for candidates to appear on. Jay Leno, David Letterman, and other hosts used political satire as the foundation of their shows. It is evident just how much influence they have in political issues. Even now, with a change in hosts with less of a political agenda it is still evident the effects late night has on politics. Some argue that the media has declining power because of technology and decrease of mainstream reporters, but it is clear that mainstream media is shifting and people are still getting their information from these sources. When finding information about politics it is important to fact check and always do additional research, particularly when that information comes from the television

Finally, as food for thought, it is important to consider the changing nature of media. Jon Caldara, during his video broadcasting segment, Devil's Advocate, spoke about politics and social media. He and guests discuss the changing culture of politics and go as far to say that television is getting out of date. He explains that people are now getting information from social media (Humphrey, Caldara, and Chapin). With social media emerging more as a campaign tool, as Caldara outlines, it is important to also verify the credibility of the source. Social media may change the political landscape; however, the way the public should view them should be entirely similar to television. 

