Politics in primetime

Thousands of screaming fans. Paparazzi. Millions of dollars spent on lavish scenes. Social columns. Publicists. Guest appearances. Celebrity endorsements.

No, this is not the life of movie star Angelina Jolie or soccer icon David Beckham. This is politics — in the primetime!

It wasn’t that long ago when political junkies were the only Americans actively involved with the presidential election at this point in the race. From mega-spending to celebrity-like appearances, this election’s candidates have eclipsed the traditional political hotspots and enlisted mainstream attention.

Raising more money, using a host of new media outlets, and involving more walks of people, the presidential hopefuls have turned into a new kind of rock star.

A fundamental characteristic of superstardom is money. Just four years ago, the Federal Election Commission reported all candidates seeking their respective parties’ nomination to the highest office in the land received a combined $611.4 million from individual contributors prior to the party conventions held by late summer. Although this year’s hopefuls are still a few months away from either convention, individual Americans have already contributed over $823.5 million to the campaigns.

Even with the extra cash in the bank, candidates are spending as much or more than the actual cash they have on hand — often lending their campaigns millions from their personal wealth. When President Clinton ran for reelection in 1996, he and his opponent spent a combined $448.9 million. Twelve years later — with his wife a candidate — the bill has swelled to $910.1 million. Lest you forget, there are still five months to go before Election Day.

So what’s costing so much? Besides the $833,247 Sen. Obama has spent just on fine hotels, record-breaking numbers of television commercials have helped boost the bill. When he ran for president in 2004, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) placed 19,000 television commercials during the entire 2004 primary season. Four years later, Obama has already placed over 100,000 ads, costing upward of $60 million.

Although Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) aired only a fraction of what Obama has run, she still placed three times as many political ads as Sen. Kerry did one election cycle ago.

Not only is the number of ads placed increasing, but also, more of them are aired in primetime spots where average Americans are more exposed to them, rather than simply the political professional. So far this year, 40 percent of Sen. Obama’s and even 18 percent of Sen. Clinton’s television advertisement allotment went toward extravagant, primetime spots — a much higher portion than in previous elections.

This mega-stardom extends beyond fiscal flair. Traditional communication strategies are being stretched to the limits. For instance, the candidate’s press secretary used to only contact, or be contacted by, the media when the candidate said or did something newsworthy. This year, press secretaries hold daily press calls to update the national media on the whereabouts and opinions of the candidates, transforming themselves into minor luminaries.

Candidates moved past this traditional form of communication, utilizing all technologies and exposure opportunities. This really began to take off in the 2004 election, when late-night talk shows became an opportunity to put your name in the presidential candidate hat. In 2003, then-Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) officially announced his bid for the presidency on “The Daily Show” with Jon Stewart. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) did the same on “The Late Show with David Letterman” in early 2007. The growing trend of making key political announcements on late-night variety shows truly moves the political realm into every American’s home.

New venues also allow political candidates access to the next generation. Online video sources like YouTube have hosted debates; social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace invite politicians to have their own pages that are accessible to most college-aged Americans. Each candidate has links to many of these sites — Sen. Obama’s site actually links to 16 different social networking locations. Using the Internet for political campaigning is making voters under 30 more active and influential in the election than ever before.

The effects of primetime politics are still largely unknown. Thus far, it is evident by the dramatic increase in primary voter turnout that more people are participating. In many states, this year’s primary elections ushered in more voters than 2000’s general election.

Further, these candidates are attracting larger audiences than even President Bush himself. Obama regularly speaks to excited crowds of 10,000-plus while the president often addresses only a few hundred quiet individuals.

But does record-breaking participation mean a more knowledgeable voting demographic? Not necessarily.

Sure, more people can identify the candidates’ names by looking at their pictures, but many Americans are getting caught up in the glamour without delving into the issues. This year’s news has been filled with many more stories than just the hard-core political facts. For example, Vanity Fair recently featured a scathing, unflattering column about former President Clinton’s personal life, and at the worst time in the campaign.

Americans are still more informed about the social side than the policy side. A recent Pew Research Center poll found 84 percent of respondents knew talk show host Oprah Winfrey supported Sen. Obama while only half could identify what country Hugo Chavez was president of — illustrating that international politics and the core of issues still haven’t hit the American mainstream.

The millions of dollars, thousands of screaming fans, and hundreds of celebrity endorsements have changed politics. Candidates are more than just political figures — they are superstars proving one thing: Politics is as much about entertainment these days as it is about standard governing.

Williams is the CEO and founder of the Graham Williams Group and The Right Side Production Inc., an international public relations and media firm based in Washington. A political commentator in many venues, he is a regular contributor to The Hill’s Pundits Blog.