A week ago Sunday, September 26, was the 50th anniversary of the first Nixon/Kennedy debate. Many consider this event to be a major turning point in U.S. politics. It was the first time a presidential debate was televised. Many also consider this a turning point in Nixon’s career. The general consensus seemed to be that he had a “face for radio”.


The data on the debate is interesting. Those who watched it on TV believe that Kennedy performed best. Those listening on radio believed that Nixon performed best.


Wally Podrazik, author of “Watching TV: Six Decades of American Television” commented that Nixon was perceived as a man of the 50’s era. Kennedy represented the future and new ways of the 60s. Most people agreed. Nixon seemed uncomfortable and awkward in front of the camera. Many felt that he looked worn out and tired. Kennedy, young and handsome, played to the camera to his advantage.


At first glance, the data seems to support a logical conclusion. Television seemed to be Kennedy’s medium helping him sneak out a victory by a mere 113,000 votes (.1% of the popular vote)


But Bruce Dumont, host of radio’s “Beyond the Beltway”, has a different take. Perhaps television wasn’t the cause of the viewers’ higher marks for Kennedy. Maybe it just happened to be that those people with televisions were predisposed to Kennedy’s message.


Dumont points out that in the 60s television was less widespread than today. It is important to consider WHO was likely to have a television back then.


At the time, televisions were more common in urban areas and cities with large Catholic populations (Kennedy’s religion was a big issue at the time). Those types of people generally aligned more with Kennedy’s Democratic, message. People in the South, West and rural areas had less access to television. They tended to align themselves with a Republican message.


Dumont’s observations provide a striking example of two issues that, on the surface, appear to have a causal relationship. However, digging deeper suggests that perhaps they are two correlated items with a common cause. In this case, the “cause” of both candidate preference and type of media used to access the debate was possibly where a person lived (and the political leanings associated with that).


This also provides a good reminder that looking at data, without considering the broader context in which that data occurred, can lead to erroneous conclusions.


Brad Kolar is the President of Kolar Associates, a leadership consulting and workforce productivity consulting firm. He can be reached at brad.kolar@kolarassociates.com.