Does Obama have a risk at being "overexposed"?

was GWB underexposed? lets put him to the same grill we are putting Obama to

I think most of the American public likes to think that the President is just a normal dude. More exposure will probably reveal that about Obama.

Anything that shows him acting like a regular, nice guy will not hurt him.

I think the white house having a twitter is a bit odd, infact I think this new way of promoting using social networking sites is a bit odd. I mean I see the benefit and value but I think at some point there will be so much of it that no one will pay attention. Like internet banners….who really clicks them?

The President always risk overexposure, it comes with the office.

For people who turn to alternative forms of media, like the internet, it’s not over-exposure at all: it’s first exposure. Some people just don’t watch the news or read newspapers, but they text and tweet and use Facebook, so this could be the first time they are actually feeling connected to the current president.

If his utilization of many forms of media gets his message to the widest audience, it can only be a good thing.

Yeah, I don’t watch the news. And I don’t seek out information on Obama, the man, or whatever. What I do look for is what’s happening in Congress and so on, thus I’m not overexposed to him. Anyway, as far as I’m concerned, one person’s opinion, even if it’s in a well-regarded magazine, is exactly that. People will have their own opinions on the man.

He’s the President! How can you get underexposure as the leader of the free world?

Unfortunately we have become a celebrity obsessed country. I can only hope the magazine was People or OK but I fear it was a national news magazine.

Overexposed means that an entertainment figure has his/her picture (film is exposed, get it?) in the media so much that the public gets bored and moves on to the next person-of-the-moment.

The news media is supposed to keep us informed not entertained, which they did at one time, What we should be getting is what our leaders are doing as they represent us. The president’s dog is not as important as his political programs. It is easier for reporters and cameramen to think up questions about the dog and take pictures of the dog romping around the White House than themselves learn about legislation and ask relevent questions.

Americans have themselves to blame for all the ‘human interest’ fluff that some are now becoming bored with when they won’t sit still long enough to learn about the President’s actions that will affect the next 3 generations.

No.

The word risks suggests a downside. One might become a bit bored, but if his message is on target, there would be no damage. just a familiarity, which in my view should help him. Remember that the fight for achieving visibility today is so much more competitive than in the past, that it is a case of more than less being the best formula to success.

He was overexposed during the primaries. You might as well have called MSNBC “OBAMANBC”.

@galileogirl right there with you.

I dont think it’s so much “overexposure” that’s the problem; maybe overexposure on stupid details. It’s only fair for a populace to know all about the top dog in charge. What I dont like/understand is how much of a celebrity the news is identifying him as and how far the coverage is going on petty details about him – such as him swatting flies, eating hotdogs with dijon mustard and buying dogs. Luckily, I have friends interested enough to go fishing through political facts to keep me informed on the Obama administration agenda, otherwise I’d be confined only to what I could scrape up on the internet. I’m complete and totally lost as far as what’s going on in Afghanistan – all I know is more and more soldiers are dying.

Political figures are becoming the next Paris Hilton’s. As Bill Maher eloquently pointed out, everyone laughed when the McCain campaign put out ads portraying Obama as a celebrity.

@Disc2021 You make a very good point! It’s overexposure on stupid details. MSNBC is a great example of this. It was a month ago or so that Obama visited London. MSNBC’s top story of the day was what Michelle and the girls were wearing. Fox news actually gave us news of the world that day. Can you believe it?

It’s interesting how others view the media when the media supports your flavor.

Luckily, he isn’t the leader of the free world (whatever that means) but only the pres of the US. His exposure is meaningless in terms of Image. His Image is meaningless as well. What he does and how he does it is what is important.

I don’t know. Sitting out back have a few beers with an army of reporters watching.

It is like he is still on the campaign trail.
Every time I see him it is like watching a used car commercial.

I don’t think he is overexposed, I am interested in what he has to say. But, the more he is out there talking, the more opportunity for him to put his foot in his mouth, so there is a risk that comes with allowing access and commenting on issues. “Jounalism” today grabs onto badly stated comments and plays the same quote 100 times adding their spin, without putting things into context, without hearing full thoughts.

I like that he is using many mediums to stay in contact with citizens. I am a “fan” of President Clinton on Facebook and I love seeing his updates and video comments to questions submitted by other fans.