From witches to 'Aqua Buddha': why Election 2010 ads are so outrageous
Is Christine O'Donnell a witch? Does Rand Paul worship the 'Aqua Buddha'? These have been the subjects of two legitimate political ads in Election 2010. What's going on?
(Page 2 of 2)
Consultants know they only have a single shot at your attention, he points out. Moreover, the real goal these days is to get picked up by other media – from the evening news to YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter. “The goal is to be so controversial that the 'Today Show’ and ‘Good Morning America’ will replay the clip endlessly and comment on it, keeping the candidate front and center for millions of viewers,” says Mr. Johnson.Skip to next paragraph
Barbara Walters scoop: Herman Cain wants to be SecDef!
Sarah Palin speaks, but are Americans heeding her anymore?
Stephen Colbert almost bought naming rights to South Carolina GOP primary
Digging for political dirt? Twitter could be the source for you.
After his debate gaffe, Rick Perry goes into full spin mode
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
In the case of Ms. O’Donnell, he says, this national coverage provides the additional bonus of delivering her message to fellow tea partyers far beyond her own geographical constituency. “That certainly helps with her fundraising,” he adds.
Increasingly, many ads are not even produced to run as TV spots, but rather are released on DVD or on a website for the sole purpose of being replayed – all at little cost to the campaign. This has allowed campaigns to change the format, as well, says Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism at the Pew Research Center.
“You are no longer just on TV, so you can do ads on YouTube, you can do ads longer than 30 seconds that can go viral,” he says. “You can target specific audiences, and that opens up the kind of storytelling and ads you can do.”
The number of political novices and outsiders in Election 2010 has also spiced the rhetorical stew, says Joe Erwin, former chairman of the South Carolina Democratic Party. ”The field is full of nontraditional candidates this time, and that changes the kinds of ads we are seeing,” he says.
Entertaining, yes. But successful?
But Mr. Erwin points out that media attention doesn’t necessarily translate into votes.
He heartily disagrees with Spitzer’s positive spin on the O’Donnell ad. “If you have to start out by telling people you are not a witch, you are in big trouble, sister,” he says with a laugh, not because it’s true, “but because it means you are playing the game on your opponent’s turf.”
While a rise in negative ads is predictable in the home stretch just before a vote, there really are more this season. According to the Wesleyan Media Project, 20 percent of ads this year attack the personal characteristics of opponents. In 2008, that figure was 14 percent.
Where can it go from here? Mr. Johnson expects the trend only to grow.
In a current Georgia statehouse contest, one of the candidates had been in an altercation with his girlfriend. His opponent got the police record and used the mug shot to put out a direct mail flier that called the candidate an attempted murderer.
“This is the kind of stuff that grabs your attention,” he says. "It’s really bad, but it's what we’re going to see more of.”