Do political conventions bore us more than they did our ancestors?

There was considerable confusion in 1956 about exactly how many people were watching. Trendex and Sindlinger, two research companies, were giving different figures. But in a story published Aug. 28, 1956, CBS calculated “the average audience watching the politicians at any given moment constituted about one-fourth or one-fifth of all TV homes,” which was roughly 30 million viewers.

Remember, in those days networks covered hour upon hour of the conventions, starting in early afternoon and going through the evening hours.

Interestingly, Broadcast Magazine in 1956 said the public didn’t want that much coverage. “The ratings of both convention prove this,” it said. “Important keynote addresses, yes, Balloting on nominations, yes. But the sameness of artificially stimulated demonstrations and dull-as-dishwater speeches drives audiences away.”

My guess is people today feel about the same as their parents or grandparents did then, despite how popular it is to complain that networks ought to provide more coverage.

This week, news services reported that Nielsen Media Research found 20 million Americans watched on Tuesday night when Ann Romney spoke. Following the advice of Broadcast Week in 1956, networks are providing only one hour of coverage a night.

But that’s an old-fashioned way of looking at it. Americans have many more choices today. People are following on Twitter, Facebook and on YouTube channels, including the GOP’s own live-streaming channel, which Reuters says attracted 292,000 views from Monday through Wednesday this week. The Twitter Political Index can measure how people feel about speakers as they speak. Cable news networks are providing their own coverage with their own political slants.

Certainly, 20 million regular TV viewers today is far less than 30 million in 1956, when fewer Americans walked the continent. But it’s much harder to know exactly how many people today are tuned in using various Information Age devices. Back then you had only a few station choices, or you could do yard work or read a book.

A much better question is whether the viewing audience today is more or less politically open-minded than in the past — or are people tuning into the channels and connecting on social media only with those who are guaranteed to reinforce their own biases?

That, perhaps more than apathy, may be the biggest challenge for the republic in this age.

Categories: Campaign 2012

About the Author

Jay Evensen

Jay Evensen is the Senior Editorial Columnist for the Deseret News. He has 32 years of journalism experience covering politics and a variety of other assignments at news organizations ranging from United Press International in New York City to the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the Deseret News, where he has worked since 1986. During that time, he has won numerous local, regional and national awards. Most recently, he was given the Cameron Duncan Media Award, given annually in Washington, D.C., by the advocacy group RESULTS, to the journalist judged to have done the most to further the cause of the world's poorest people.

Leave a comment encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.