BU Today: Why do you favor keeping conventions?

Vigil: Critics who claim conventions have outlived their original purpose are correct, but they fail to see the evolution of the conventions and the purposes they serve now. 

Originally, conventions were deliberative events designed to give handpicked party members the ability to choose a nominee, but that was when the selection process for nominees was not very democratic, and only the privileged few had any say in who could run for president. Modern conventions, sometimes referred to as “coronation conventions,” are about building unity among party members after a potentially divisive primary season and rehearsing the shared values of party, as well as showing the party’s vision of the nation and its future and making a concentrated argument in favor of a party and its nominee, in hopes of attracting voters. 

It is an opportunity to highlight the character of the nominees, offer insights into how the party would lead, and give citizens a sense of how their would-be leaders view them. Conventions cover key issues in a more nuanced way than ads do and provide the parties an opportunity to demonstrate the breadth—or lack thereof—of their support among would-be constituents based on the participants in the several nights–long event.

BU Today: What do conventions tell us that we wouldn’t learn from the media, campaign ads and info, and televised debates?

Vigil: The conventions are the parties’ opportunity to weave a narrative that they control, particularly when they stream their full convention on their own YouTube channels as they did in 2020. Although the press used the live feeds and injected their own information, analysis, and commentary, viewers and scholars had—and still have, since they remain available online—the opportunity to watch the conventions as the planners intended them. While the basic information about key issues and stances are, or should be, consistent with those reported out and appearing in ads, etc., there are attitudes and perspectives that a convention underscores that ads, debates, and other messaging do not. 

For example, in 2020, the Democratic National Convention [DNC] made a big effort at being inclusive. The number and variety of participants was higher than any other convention in US history, underscoring an effort at enhancing the party’s diversity and creating a perception of Democrats as a welcoming party for (almost) anyone, excluding those who do not value diversity.

In addition, the DNC depicted women in a fashion that was historically significant. Rather than foregrounding them as mothers and wives, as has long been the commonplace portrayal by both parties—including in 2016 and how the Republicans presented women in 2020—the DNC showed women as experts with a range of interests and credentials. Relational connections were not a default starting point. They treated women as full citizens, the way men are usually depicted. It was a remarkable shift toward political parity that was subtle and normalized the idea of women as independent, autonomous political actors. 

Conversely, the 2020 RNC offered a view of its constituents as largely heterogeneous and limited in scope, especially women and persons of color. Participants were cast in very traditional roles that underscored the conservative nature of the party. What’s more, the lack of participation by any past leaders of the GOP signaled a disconnect from historic Republican legacies. No former presidents, no past nominees, no members of classically Republican families as speakers indicated just how much Donald Trump worked to make the party his own. While these ideas are present in other messaging, having the RNC be so clear about it in an unadulterated and open manner is very telling.

BU Today: Given that the GOP didn’t even bother to write a platform in 2020, might it be argued that their convention at least wasn’t particularly informative?

Vigil: This is only true in the narrowest sense of political messaging being informative. The GOP has not constructed a clear platform for two election cycles now. However, that doesn’t mean the RNC hasn’t been informative. 

During 2016 and 2020, we saw the Republicans distinctly break with several traditions—they have not had a former president or nominee participate, they have not offered a platform, they have included the nominee in more aspects of the convention than historically has been the case (the DNC did this in 2020 as well), and they used the White House as a location for overt campaign activities: the 2020 spouse’s address by Melania Trump, the acceptance address by Donald Trump, and several prerecorded sessions with visitors of different sorts that might have violated the Hatch Act [banning most executive branch employees from politicking]. Contravening norms is antithetical to the GOP’s long-standing claim to be the party of “law and order” and to the basic tenets of conservatism, indicating a divergence from historically Republican ideology and the party’s continued embrace of politics of personality rather than principle. Perhaps not technically new information, but it is important and consequential.

BU Today: Your book also will argue that conventions are an important custom, yet TV viewership for both conventions in 2020​ fell dramatically. Does that suggest that they are of diminishing importance to Americans?

Vigil: Keep in mind that television is no longer the only medium for viewing the conventions. Tracking only TV viewership provides a limited perspective on interest levels, because it only captures the immediate live audience and fails to account for online viewers who watch live or in a delayed fashion. Some estimates indicate that approximately 18 percent of total 2020 convention viewership occurred online. The significant changes to the media ecosystem, including increasing audience segmentation, multiple mediated access points, and failure to appropriately compare similar programming types, as well as outdated reporting standards about viewership, help perpetuate the idea that no one cares about the conventions, when there are a lot of people watching. Some data show that the DNC was watched on television by 84.4 million people, with another 15.3 million viewing through the top 10 online outlets. The RNC drew 77.6 million television viewers and at least 20 million more online—again on just the top 10 online sources. 

For comparison, the 2024 Super Bowl only attracted about 42 million television viewers, the 2021 version, only 38.2 million.