Pundits and politicians have been racking their brains over why the news media is giving so much exposure to Donald Trump’s campaign for President.
Many politicians, who are considered more viable long-term candidates, can’t land a sound bite and are totally frustrated.
On the other hand, Trump is in the enviable position of letting media outlets know which ones he will approve for an interview. It’s all-Trump all the time.
For years candidates have bowed down to the Des Moines Register, Iowa’s largest newspaper, hoping for an endorsement or even some positive publicity. Trump didn’t like a recent negative editorial about him so he took the unheard of stance of banning them from covering his campaign (LINK).
According to CNN, “Trump wasn’t done bashing the Register.., taunting the “ultra liberal” paper for “begging” his campaign for the credentials. The ultra liberal and seriously failing Des Moines Register is BEGGING my team for press credentials to my event in Iowa today-but they lie!”
How can he do this? Very simply he is in the enviable position of NOT needing the news media for coverage. His personality and sometimes outrageous messages are so compelling that the news media cannot NOT cover him.
He doesn’t beg them for coverage. They beg him. This may be a first for a candidate in political history.
Why is he in this position? The answer is simple: He knows how to bring media outlets readers, viewers and listeners. He says outrageous things. When attacked he responds with an attack. While other candidates measure each and every word they utter, he has no filter.
And Trump’s act means he brings big bucks to the news media covering him. Ad Age notes he might be able to revitalize TV and networks are fantasizing about potential record numbers for a Saturday Night Live appearance or a Trump-Hillary Clinton debate.
There is no doubt that because of Trump the Republican primary debate drew a record 24 million viewers to the Fox Network. It was the most viewers ever for a primary political debate (LINK) with 16% of U.S. homes with TV sets tuning in.
On top of that 7.9 million of the total viewers were in the coveted advertising demographic of 25 to 54 year olds. Not only did he draw eyes to the debate. He drew the right eyes for advertisers.
Update: CNN has increased its ad rates by a phenomenal 40 times for its upcoming debate on September 16.
The liberal Huffington Post made it very clear early in the campaign that it despised Trump. In July HuffPo even boldly announced it would not cover his campaign as part of its political coverage.
“We will cover his campaign as part of our Entertainment section,” noted the Post. “Our reason is simple: Trump’s campaign is a sideshow. We won’t take the bait. If you are interested in what The Donald has to say, you’ll find it next to our stories on the Kardashians and The Bachelorette.”
While the Post declaration sounded very journalistically lofty, it still has continued to cover Trump on a daily/hourly basis. Why? Because HuffPo is owned by media conglomerate AOL and a Trump candidacy is great for business.
In fact, the news aggregator site is even coming across as jealous that Trump is ignoring it (LINK).
People often overlook the fact that media outlets are businesses and often part of very big conglomerates. While they may be perceived by some as “Guardians of Freedom” and such, their main goal is to make a profit. No profit, no business.
The reality is Trump brings in revenue. Media outlets will continue to ride that money slide as long as they can. They have no choice.











TOUCHED BY DOLLAR SIGNS
Dear Mr. Landsberg: As you so often do, you hit the nail on the head. Yes, the media is a business-and in almost all cases the “bottom line” trumps (pardon the pun!!) ideological agendas. My favorite example of the networks allowing the bottom line to triumph over ideological concerns is the show “Touched By An Angel.”
The critics hated this show-when it was announced a poll of TV critics announced that it was the show most likely to fail. Instead, it became quite popular and was on for ten years. And, as the network execs were well aware, the true audience of “Touched by an Angel” was even larger than its quite high Nielsen ratings-I personally know lots of evangelicals Christians who watch little TV-but would always be sure to watch “Touched By an Angel.” Since these people watch little TV, they would never be part of a Nielsen survey-but that does not mean that they were not watching this show.
So, the TV critics could get as enraged as they wanted to over “Touched By an Angel”-but the network kept it on because it has extraordinary ratings. Sincerely and Respectfully, Ernest Evans