News Feature
Swanni's HDTV 2008 Presidential Forecast!
The candidates are off and running, but how do they look in ultra-real High-Definition TV?
By Phillip Swann

Washington, D.C. (April 10, 2006) -- In 1960, Democratic Sen. John F. Kennedy defeated Vice President Richard Nixon in part because the latter failed to shave in the first presidential debate. Nixon's 5 o'clock shadow made him look unfriendly, if not downright sinister.

In retrospect, the impact of Nixon's faux pas is remarkable when you consider that the debate was broadcast in a grainy black and white.

Can you imagine if it had aired in color? Or, even worse for the non-telegenic Mr. Nixon, in crystal-clear High-Definition TV? In fact, one could argue that the former president would have never even been nominated for high office if the voters had first seen him in high-def.

Seem farfetched? Well, tell that to more recent non-telegenic candidates such as Lamar Alexander, Dick Gephardt (the man with no eyebrows), Bruce Babbitt, Bill Bradley and Joe Lieberman. -- all of whom fared poorly in the presidential primaries because, in part, they didn't look the part on television.

Television's impact on U.S. presidential campaigns is  undeniable. And now, thanks to the emergence of HDTV, it's about to increase -- and dramatically.

Can't Shield the Truth
High-Definition TV's picture is so precise that the facial imperfections and aging signs of TV personalities are now visible to the naked eye. Celebrities can no longer shield their shortcomings with favorable lighting, heavy make-up and the fuzzy picture of analog TV.

HDTV is already causing a mini-revolution in Hollywood where many shows are produced in high-def. Actors are begging for new make-up innovations to hide their flaws.

However, the new picture technology has yet to change the political landscape because the 2004 presidential campaign was largely ignored by the high-def cameras.  The debates -- and almost all campaign appearances --  were broadcast in analog. In addition, the few HDTV productions (the two party conventions aired in high-def) were seen by a small number of voters. Less than 10 million U.S. homes were watching high-def in 2004.

But that should all change by 2008. The high-def audience could be as large as 40 percent by then -- and the networks will likely broadcast most major campaign events in HDTV.

So, of the candidates who are expected to run in 2008, which ones will benefit from the high-def cameras and which ones will suffer?

Swanni's HDTV Ratings
I have assessed each party's top five presidential contenders on how they look in high-def -- and I've given them a 'Swanni HDTV Rating.' Four 'smiley faces' is the best possible rating. (The ratings are based on my observations of the candidates during the high-def broadcast of President Bush's 2006 State of the Union address and various news shows and documentaries broadcast in HD over the last year.)

To read my HDTV 2008 Presidential Forecast, click below!

Swanni's HDTV 2008 Presidential Forecast!

© TVPredictions.com

---

Phillip Swann is president and publisher of TVPredictions.com. He has been quoted in dozens of publications and broadcast outlets, including CNN, Fox News, Inside Edition, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, The Financial Times, The Associated Press and The Hollywood Reporter. He can be reached at swann@tvpredictions.com or at 703-505-3064.

And click TVPredictions.com to read more news and features on TV technology.