Two weeks ago I read an article in the Washington Post announcing Linda McMahon's bid to run for a senate seat in Connecticut, replacing Chris Dodd. I wasn't that interested until we recently watched the WWE video in class, featuring her family and the industry that she represents. Linda McMahon is the CEO of WWE (world wrestling entertainment) and wife of Vince McMahon, the chief producer and promoter. I was pretty appalled while watching the video in class at how many blatantly wrong messages the wwe promotes. And I'm sort of surprised that Linda McMahon, the woman who biult this business and is at the forefront of its procedures could stand a chance in a political arena.
John Story, a cultural studies author believes that "those who attain the power in a culture are those who are the most aggressive and wealthy". He believes that if you aggressively fight to get your message out, and you have the financial backing, anyone can attain power, reguardless of the value of their message. I think this might be a prime exapmle of that. Simply because Linda McMahon has the wealth to run for office (she has promised to spend $50 million of her own money for her bid for senate), that gives her the ability to get her message out.
In her tv ads McMahon boasts that she isn't going to accept campaign donations as if she is being noble in doing so. Howver she has millions of dollars! She doesn't need a penny. If she really wanted to "change washington" maybe she would use the exact same amount of money for her campaign that her compeditors have on their budgets, putting everyone on an equal playing field.
Watching some of her campaign ads on you tube, I actually agree with many of her views. I know these ads are meant to attract and make you want to agree, however when reading her policy proposals I found my political views often aligning with hers. She is also a good business woman and has become massively successful. However even given all of that, I couldn't ever imagine myself being able to vote for her because of the WWE industry that she represents. She contributes to and profits from an industry that promotes many of the values and behaviors that I would want a senate candidate to create programs to prevent. It will be interesting to see how Conneticut public responds. I think the public's response may be a good signifier of how much power money can buy. Here is McMahon's campaign ad, and the second vidoe is a parody of the first- kind of funny.
">
">
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
McMahon is the physical description of a govenrment representative, she is white, wealthy, a private business owner and has the ability to run for a government position. Arnold Schwarzenegger was once in the entertainment business and played roles that many would have found not ideal for a government representative, yet he is governor of California. This is America where situations such as this are possible. If she meets the criteria of the people of Conneticut and is capable of completing such tasks set before her then more power to her. I may not absolutely agree with the WWE and the form of entertainment that it represents, however in America some entertainment is higher paid than some doctors. Saying that we pay more to be entertained than we do for our personal health. McMahon is apart of our social development that allows her to run a successful business and run for poitical office. Now that the economy is weak and society is looking for change her chances are higher, because she is publicly known. So given the situation what does that say about our country?
ReplyDeleteMcMahon is just one example of wealthy Americans using their personal fortunes to run for office. Luckily (?) it doesn't always work. Mitt Romney and Ross Perot are not president even though they spent millions on their own campaigns. It doesn't seem to just be personal wealth that propel people into power, but also the business connections that they have build over their careers. Candidates usually do need additional support from individuals and/or businesses. The recent Supreme Court ruling that takes away all limits on the amounts that businesses can contribute to political candidates means that we are likely to see more and more candidates who are the products of businesses, not individual citizens rallying together (the pharmaceutical companies can work together to support a candidate, oil companies, etc.). Hopefully Americans will to try to come to their own decisions, not just listen to campaign ads and biased media reports, when voting.
ReplyDelete