Political Tip #1: Always be the hotter candidate

As anyone who had the distinct honor of taking a theory of communication class in college will tell you (mostly because it’s the sole piece of information they remember), the ‘father of media studies’ Marshall McLuhan famously coined the phrase “The medium is the message.”

It pains me to bring up this quote, given the fact that it’s become a staple in the digital toolbox of self-proclaimed online thought leaders.

The frequency with which they share this wisdom with their audiences, as if they discovered McLuhan’s work in a dusty attic never before seen by prying eyes, gives off similar vibes as the college kid who plays Wonderwall to a crowded dorm room without an ounce of irony.

Yet, there are just some moments in history that can only be described through such cliches.

This is one of them:

There was an inflection point in 1960 where politics and media danced in a way that changed the narrative forever. Two presidential candidates – Kennedy and Nixon – stood under the glaring lights, ready for the first-ever televised debate in U.S. history.

Nixon led in the polls by 6% before the debate. The next day, JFK pulled ahead.

The Linchpin Moment:

Television had only recently woven its way into the living rooms of America, skyrocketing from 9% of U.S. households in 1950 to 90% in 1960. 70M people tuned in to the broadcast, unofficially annointing the event as the genesis of politics-as-spectator-sport.

As Kennedy and Nixon squared off, they weren’t merely debating policies; they were guinea pigs in an experiment to determine how politicians would be perceived in the TV era.

Kennedy, oozing charisma and good looks, was the ideal TV candidate before political strategists even knew what that meant.

He appeared composed, spoke directly to the camera, and projected a magnetism that reached through viewer’s screens, masterfully connecting with the audience.

Nixon, despite his acumen as a debater and politician, could not have been less interested in capitalizing on the new medium’s potential. He didn’t even bother showing up to the pre-production meeting. Rather than focus on his optics or demeanor, he appeared disheveled, unshaven, and dressed in a poorly color-coordinated suit.

Though not all of it was his fault: JFK played a trick on him during debate prep, declining makeup from the studio, leading Nixon to follow suit.

Then, minutes before walking out on stage, JFK’s team applied him with makeup after all. As if Nixon needed any more help appearing pale and tired next to the tanned scion of a political dynasty.

He could have delivered the Gettysburg Address and it wouldn’t have mattered: He failed the eye test.

But Here’s the Twist:

Those who listened to the debate on the radio believed it was either a draw or that Nixon had the edge.

Yet, TV viewers overwhelmingly felt Kennedy had emerged as the victor.

This wasn't just a debate; it was a lesson in the nuanced power of presentation.

It’s possible the actual substance of Nixon’s performance out-classed JFK, but it was delivered in an unsavory package named Richard M. Nixon — an impossible-to-ignore disqualifier when compared to the Sinatra-like JFK.

What This Tells Us About Today:

In many ways, this moment was a harbinger for our current media landscape. Today, with the ubiquity of social media platforms, the 'how' often overshadows the 'what.' Memorable moments, viral tweets, and shareable sound bites carry more weight than comprehensive policy discussions.

Imagine if Kennedy and Nixon had Twitter or Instagram at their disposal. Kennedy would be on IG live with Marilyn Monroe while Nixon would be caught liking p*rn on 9/11, Ted Cruz style…

If this is the first time you’re hearing this reference, I’m sorry. Now you know too.

We've moved from TV screens to mobile screens, but the essence remains: presentation, perception, and the medium's power are paramount.

Remember the "binders full of women" quip or the "Pokemon Go to the polls" line? Moments, when separated from context, can define an entire campaign.

This would have been unimaginable just a few generations ago, when long, densely-packed debates were consumed by voters mostly via transcribed reports or detailed articles after the fact.

Back to our friend Marshall.

This debate is surely enlightening in the sense that it pioneered a new medium that would go on to dominate for decades, but the most salient takeaways can be gleaned from the evolution of media from TV to smartphones and shortform video.

While mediums change, the underlying principles do not.

Authenticity, connection, and understanding the pit-falls and opportunities of a platform are timeless tenets.

I’ll go out on a limb and take Marshall McLuhan’s theory “The medium is the message" one step further. It’s more than a message, it’s the entire story.