The early attraction of radio to politics was not immediately returned in kind by politics, as was evidenced in a comment regarding the 1924 election: "The effect of the election on radio was more important than the effect of radio on the election result" (Chester). However, a dependence on the new medium was soon to follow. Through a historical review of the election coverage on radio, this essay traces the role that radio played in the coverage of political campaigns and the early public dependence on the radio for election coverage.

Early Election Coverage

  The first political campaign in which radio played a major role was the 1924 presidential contest. Strategists for President Calvin Coolidge's reelection effort saw the immediate advantages of the medium for "silent Cal," who found radio's requirement of short and simple language more compatible with his own style than the traditional round of presidential candidate stump speeches. One campaign advisor noted, "Speeches must be short. Ten minutes is a limit and five minutes is better" (Chester).

     Campaign speeches and addresses by the candidates and other political advocates made up radio's major election coverage in these early days. The Republican Party even purchased their own radio station, on which they broadcast campaign addresses at all available hours in the day. This saturation sparked the Radio Corporation of America (RCA) to suggest that a limit of one hour per day be reserved for political address broadcasting and that such addresses be limited to 15 minutes each. The 1924 election coverage also included the first coverage on radio of the national party conventions. Both the Republican and Democratic conventions were carried to listeners across the nation. Although some political observers were sure that this marriage of radio and elections was a fad, those who predicted that political campaigns would never be the same were closer to the mark.

     By the 1928 presidential campaign, 40 million people were able to follow the election campaigns via the radio, which had become an integral campaign tool, so much so that a candidate's "radio personality" was a part of the election dialogue. Republican Herbert Hoover was not an exciting radio personality, but he was credited for not offending his audiences. Democratic opponent Alfred Smith, however, had an accent that tended to alienate voters from the Southern states that he desperately needed to carry. The 1928 campaign also saw the rise in coverage of radio campaign addresses by people other than the presidential candidates themselves. Republicans con­tinued to build on the perceived advantages of brevity in the new medium by creating 30 short speeches that covered the main points of Hoover's campaign. Lasting five minutes each, these were delivered by well-known local people over 174 local stations.

     By 1932, with radios in more than 12 million homes, voters witnessed new radio strategies in the presidential campaigns. Franklin Roosevelt established a new precedent in radio address, flying to Chicago to accept his party's nomination prior to the adjournment of the national convention and thus broadcasting his acceptance address by radio from the convention. Other changes in radio coverage evolved during this campaign cycle, with the Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) and the National Broadcasting Company (NBC) each allotting three periods a week for political addresses and refusing to sell airtime to either party before the parties had officially selected their presidential candidates. During the 1936 campaign, both candidates, Roosevelt and Kansas Governor Alfred Landon, toured the country with many of their speeches broadcast over radio. A unique variation of campaign speeches in the 19 36 campaign focused on foreign language broadcasts. Both parties produced radio messages in a variety of languages, with the Republicans using as many as 29 languages in numerous messages varying in length from 100-word spots to 30-minute talks. Although Landon enjoyed many powerful newspaper endorsements, many believe that Roosevelt's victory can be at least partially credited to his effective use of radio during the campaign.

     In Roosevelt's last campaign, in 1944, the press noted that Republican nominee Thomas Dewey, then-governor of New York, might be the first real competition Roosevelt had faced in radio performance. It was an unfulfilled prediction; a poll conducted by the American Institute of Public Opinion found that the attitude Dewey conveyed while speaking on the radio hindered audience approval, further underscoring the need for candidates to understand and develop successful radio communication strategies.

     During the 1948 election, Democratic incumbent Truman successfully developed his own approach to radio address. As opposed to Roosevelt's manuscript style of speech preparation, Truman found both success and effectiveness in extemporaneous speaking. Truman embarked on a successful "whistle­ stop" tour during the campaign, and by simply and consistently repeating his message throughout the tour, he inadvertently capitalized on the fundamental nature of radio by reaching masses of voters with the same message.

     Throughout the 1948 campaign, a larger percentage of President Truman's speeches were covered by local radio stations than were those of Dewey, again the Republican nominee. Whereas about 50 of the incumbent president's addresses were covered by radio, only about 34 of Dewey's were broadcast to voters. Also significant was the fact that most of Tru­ man's speeches carried on radio were broadcast from his whistle-stop tour, giving them a background of excitement and timeliness. The coverage of Truman's speeches was particularly important for him, because the Democratic Party had limited funds to pay for broadcasts. In addition, many of the "whistle stops" where the actual speeches were given did not have local radio stations, and national coverage was essential for his message to reach large numbers of voters. Truman's upset victory was due in part to radio.

     In the 1952 election, radio found a mass media partner as television made its first significant appearance in a political election. Although Eisenhower is credited for the first use of presidential televised spot advertising, surveys conducted after the election found that he made his greatest gains on radio (Chester). Nonetheless, the years when radio coverage would dominate elections were over.

Election Advertising

     Early in radio coverage of elections, the blending of straightforward coverage and party and candidate advertising in election campaigns was established. By the time of the 1928 election, candidates and parties were routinely purchasing time for the airing of their speeches and messages. Advertising expenditures in 1928 reached $650,000 for the Democrats and $435,000 for the Republicans, as radio stations began charging presidential candidates for airtime after they had given their nomination acceptance speeches. However, during the 1936 campaign, Republicans began to run shorter spot advertisements on behalf of Landon, including language-specific spots directed to the minority and immigrant votes.

     In the 1944 presidential election, both parties employed short, one-minute radio spots. The Democrats sought to remind voters that they should blame the Republicans for the Depression with quips such as "Hoover depression," and the Republicans sought to tie the Democrats to the war with slogans such as "End the war quicker with Dewey and Bricker." Testimonial five-minute spots were also employed by the Democrats, with speakers such as Vice President Henry A. Wallace and vice presidential candidate Truman.

     During the 1948 presidential election, Dewey declined the use of five-minute spot announcements, feeling confident that he was ahead in the polls. The Republican national committee instead made use of 30- and 60-second spot ads to urge the people to vote Republican; the Democrats made very little use of spot announcements. Instead, Truman concentrated on reaching the voters through political speeches broadcast from his whistle-stop tour.

     With Eisenhower's introduction of televised political spot ads in r 95 2, radio advertising began to take a back seat to the advertising dollars spent on television. However, as radio stations grew in popularity and number, candidates began to use the target marketing of certain radio stations to reach particular types of voters. The increasing numbers of radio advertising dollars in presidential candidate budgets in the seven decades from 1928 to 2000 is noteworthy. Radio advertising expenditures topped $650,000 in 1928, and by 2000 both parties were spending several million dollars each on radio advertising. A major reason for the resurgence of interest in radio advertising in the 1980s and 1990s has been the ability of radio to target increasingly diverse and segmented audiences.

Election Debates

     An idea that was ahead of its time, a proposal for the first presidential debate to be broadcast on radio was actually put forth as early as the 1924 election campaign. Two decades later, radio hosted a 1948 Republican primary debate held in Portland, Oregon; the debate was a forerunner to the famous Nixon-Kennedy debates of 1960. The choice of the issue about which both the leading Republican candidates, Thomas Dewey, governor of New York, and Harold Stassen, former governor of Minnesota, were in complete disagreement set the stage for a traditional, non-moderated debate. The debate topic focused on whether the Communist Party should be outlawed in the United States. Stassen took the affirmative, and Dewey supported the negative. Although Stassen entered the debate with a slim lead in the state of Oregon, shortly thereafter (and strongly linked to his performance during the radio broadcast debate), he ultimately lost both his lead in Oregon and the Republican nomination.

     The first Nixon-Kennedy debate in 1960 has been considered an important turning point in the presidential election. The debate aired on both television and radio. Interestingly, although the television appearance both hindered Nixon and fundamentally affected his future campaign strategies, his radio ratings from the debate were notably positive. Not only did Nixon seem to come across far better than Kennedy, but those who heard, rather than viewed, the debate chose him as the winner by a substantial margin. Debates before and for many years after 1960 were scarce because of the FCC's regulatory view that required all candidates to be included-or given equal time. This gradually changed in the 1970s and 1980s, leading to almost regular presidential candidate debates.

     To this day debates make up a significant amount of the election coverage available to voters, and many debates are covered simultaneously by radio and television stations. However, so much more attention goes to the television medium that radio coverage of debates does not attract much attention in the modern political system.

Assessment of Modern Election Coverage on Radio and Its Impact

     From its beginnings as the medium that brought election returns into the homes of Americans in 1920, radio coverage has evolved into a medium whose significance in American political coverage is quite limited. As television supplanted radio in the second half of the 20th century, radio's role in election coverage maintained some significance only in lower-level elections, in state and local contests where candidates were unable to expend major resources on television coverage.

     Exceptions to the general trend of reduced radio coverage of elections can be found at the national level in the aggressive coverage of the National Public Radio (NPR) system and state public radio outlets. The growth in the 1970s of all-news radio stations in some communities also brought a renewed interest in covering election matters in state and local communities. The all-talk radio formats of the 1980s and 1990s also heightened radio coverage of and concentration on political and election matters.

     The impact of radio election coverage is not easy to measure. However, by 1944 a Roper survey reported that 56 per­ cent of those interviewed felt they received the "most accurate news" about the presidential campaign from the radio. Although Roper surveys from 1959 to 1980 indicate that the American people's reliance on radio as a news source decreased from 34 percent in 1959 to 18 percent in 1980, American radio listeners' use of this medium to acquaint themselves with local candidates ranked even lower from 1971 to 1984. In 1971 6 percent of the respondents to a Roper survey indicated that they became acquainted with local candidates through the radio. Although the percentage rose to ro percent in 1976, from 1980 to 1984 the percentage remained stable at 6 percent. During the presidential election years of 1973, 1976, and 1984, 6 percent, 4 percent, and 4 percent, respectively, indicated radio as a source through which listeners became acquainted with candidates for public office. However, in 1987 46 percent of the respondents to a Roper survey indicated that the radio was a "somewhat important" source of information for learning about presidential candidates, and 19 percent indicated radio as a "very important" source. This increase probably stemmed in part from the rise in popularity of political talk radio.

     More recent polls from the 1990s have reflected the increased attention radio election coverage has received from voters. A Roper survey conducted from May to June 1992 suggested that 18 percent of respondents gathered information about the 1992 presidential election campaign from the radio, with a decrease to 12 percent by November 1992. However, a November 1996 Roper survey found that 19 percent of the respondents indicated that they gathered information about the 1996 presidential election campaign from the radio. Most recently, a November 1998 Roper survey reported that 23 per­cent of the respondents indicated that they gathered information about the 1998 off-year election campaigns in their state and district from the radio.

     Although radio began its political coverage by broadcasting presidential election results, recognition of the potential impact of radio on the election process came quickly. Whether through radio coverage of candidate addresses, the development of political advertising, or the coverage of major campaign events such as conventions and debates, strategists and ultimately candidates recognized that radio could reach millions of voters. That accessibility thus influenced the need to effectively present the candidate and the candidate's message in this medium.

     Undoubtedly, radio's election coverage brought the political process much closer to the American people. Not only could those with a radio in their living room suddenly sit in on their party's national convention, but they could also hear campaign addresses delivered by presidential candidates in distant states. Even more important, the American people could listen to a candidate deliver an address on specific issues in real time, and they could judge for themselves the information as well as the candidate's delivery style and personality. In essence, radio, through its election coverage, handed the American people the opportunity to participate in and make decisions about candidates firsthand without relying solely on press interpretations.