Skip to Main Content

President and Communication Technology Handout

How have advancements in communication technology changed how the president communicates with the people?

President and Communication Technology Handout 

Guiding Question  

  • How have advancements in communication technology changed how the president communicates with the people?

Objective 

  • I can explain how the president uses communication technology to shape public views about policy goals.

Building Context

Technology might not be one of the first things that comes to mind when thinking of the office of the president. Advancements in communication technology, however, have brought the president into everyday life and changed the nature of the presidency. Communication technologies have helped transform the president into a national leader speaking directly to the American people. It has always been common for the president to discuss policy regularly with their executive cabinet. Also, Article II, Section 3, Clause 1 of the Constitution requires the president “from time to time” to give information about the country, commonly known as the State of the Union Address, to Congress. After all, if the president is going to win approval for certain policies, they need the support of Congress. Like the State of the Union, a president’s inaugural address is a way for the president to not only talk to members of the government but also speak to citizens. Both addresses have transitioned from print to live radio broadcasts, televised events, online streams, and engagement via social media. For many years, these pre-scheduled events were the main way citizens knew what was happening in the world of executive policymaking. This is no longer the case.

In addition to the more formal ways presidents speak, they also have other informal opportunities throughout their term to speak to Congress and the people. From Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address to George Bush speaking from atop a mound of rubble at Ground Zero, the “bully pulpit” has given the president a chance to reflect upon the conditions of the country, offer solutions to the nation’s problems, and shape policy agendas. Presidents are aware that these opportunities to share their visions for the nation, not just with Congress but with the American people, can be make-or-break moments to communicate priorities, encourage support of policies, and foster unity among the people. In more recent years, modern presidents are utilizing platforms such as YouTube and X (formerly Twitter) to connect with the people in new ways. Now that communication technologies provide around-the-clock access to the people, presidents can wield the bully pulpit in ways that have shifted from democratic persuasion through reason and deliberation to an appeal to emotions and passions to swiftly influence public opinion. 

Directions: Use President Obama’s YouTube and President Trump ‘s Twitter (now known as X) to complete the organizer.

 

Media Communication

Purpose

Meaning to/Reaction from the General Public and Constituents

Link to, screenshot of, or description of specific media communication

What was the president trying to communicate to or with the public?

How might the specific communication be received by people who cannot vote for the president?

How might the specific communication be received by people who can vote for or are directly represented by the president or by another branch of government?

 

Reflection Questions:

  • What positives and negatives have communication technologies brought to the political environment?
  • How have communication technologies changed the way that presidents speak to the American people?
  • How has around-the-clock connectivity between the president and the people changed the bully pulpit?
  • What has been the impact of presidential use of communication technology on the respect for the office?
  • How has the use of communication technology affected self-governance and relations between the different branches of government?
  • Has communication technology led to image and performative politics replacing substance and deliberation?