Even old traditional networks like CBS made election coverage into a video game. Viewers were treated to a virtual reality-type backdrop as Harry Smith pointed to maps that weren't really there and explained graphs he couldn't see. All he needed was a disco ball and some platform shoes, and he could've had himself a rave.
MSNBC gave the "torn-between-my-TV-and-my-hard-drive" groupies lots of pretty graphics that were, for the most part, unintelligible: "So, let me get this straight: The red is up by some number of - are those votes or percentage points? - and the blues of - is that Minnesota or Montana? - are down because voters didn't understand the issues. I can't even understand the damn graph! Clarity! Clarity! Please!"
CNN ran an ESPN, "The Bottom Line"-type system for giving state-by-state results for the Senate and House races, ballot proposals and presidential percentage breakdowns. It wasn't exactly as much fun as waiting for college football scores, but it was still a pretty good system. And bar-bet cheering was still possible: "Go Rivers! Wooo hoo! You owe me 50 bucks, Kirk!"
Election '96 coverage matched the presidential race itself - flashy campaigns, pretty pictures and lots of sleight-of-hand-type tricks. For all of the bells and whistles and zippity-do-dah coverage, though, nobody showed up at the polls to show their appreciation. Election Day in other countries is usually a national holiday and usually required some kind of civil war to secure voting rights. In the United States, we can't even get the majority of the voting age population to stand in a line and check some boxes. How sad.
The U.S. presidential election drew only 49 percent of the voting-age population to the polls. That low showing is abysmal, but not surprising. National statistics for the 18- to 24-year-old population tend to be a little better, but not by much.
Lately, its become very hip to take an active interest in politics, but I have to wonder if political activism will be as cool among the 20-somethings once the "Choose or Lose" bus runs out of gas. MTV stirred up a visible, loud drive for young voter registration, but I don't know if anyone caught on that there are better reasons than Tabitha Soren and "Rock the Vote" to take an interest. Once MTV abandons its self-serving campaign, will young voter activism halt, too? No more snazzy rock star commercials, no more free T-shirts and bumper stickers, no more like, ah, "you hear it first, dude" updates. What will we do?
Here's an idea - let's take an interest for ourselves. Not for colorful graphics, not for glib political analysts and certainly not for Tabitha Soren, but for tangible issues and the small matter of our future.
The state of California dropped the ball - voters there succumbed to Republican Gov. Pete Wilson's national temper tantrum over affirmative action and voted Proposition 209 into reality. In doing so, they voted affirmative action out of California. The fight for affirmative action is worth more attention than 20 "Choose or Lose" buses - but all those who proclaimed their dedication to saving affirmative action in California somehow let their votes wander away.
A CNN news report predicted a "record showing" in the state of Minnesota to decide a close Senate race. "The polls expect a 70-percent voter turnout," the reporter gushed.
So what? What does 70 percent mean? That means - for all the media attention, for all the millions of production dollars and campaign dollars, for all the issues at stake - only 70 percent of the voting age population bothers to show up and vote. This is cause for excitement?
It doesn't matter how pretty the presentation is if it only disguises chronic apathy. America better wake up and pay attention - lest we start believing in a place called Hopeless.
- Erin Marsh can be reached over e-mail at eemarsh@umich.edu.