The effect of negative political campaign advertising has been questioned for decades. Following is an overview of two studies that seek to identify the role of such advertising and a glimpse at modern-day techniques used for measuring political messaging. Examples of current campaign advertising practices are included as well. The big picture suggests that while there may be some downfalls to negative advertising, campaigns will continue to utilize them.
The book Taking Sides: Clashing Views in Mass Media and Society offers two articles designed to show contrasting viewpoints regarding the role of negative campaign advertising. The article “An Exploration of the Effects of Negative Political Advertising on Political Decision Making” provides evidence that negative campaign advertising can cause certain negative effects. The article “Accentuating the Negative”argues that negative advertising has a secure place in political campaigns despite its effects. The editor’s choice of utilizing these particular articles to show the “yes” and “no” sides of negative campaign advertising is intriguing, as neither article whole-heartedly dismisses the use of negative campaigning. It would be a more compelling contrast if the two articles were absolutely polar in stance.
These two articles relate to Philip N. Howard’s book, New Media Campaigns and the Managed Citizen, which addresses the role of digital technology in political campaigning. Focused primarily on the use of hypermedia and campaign management, Howard also touches on political advertising and tactics used in measuring the effectiveness of negative ads.
In contrast to in-person focus groups that traditionally lead the ad testing world, Howard describes how DataBank.com’s MessageTester software is able to electronically “run the ad to a thousand people and measure their feedback” (p. 81). Within just a couple of days, DataBank.com is able to identify the ad that will best suit a campaign’s target demographic and dismiss ads that may be too negative.
A range of political campaign advertisement styles can be found in use today. To use the labels defined in the article “An Exploration of the Effects of Negative Political Advertising on Political Decision Making,” positive, comparative and negative advertisements exist. Darcy Burner utilizes all three techniques in her Congressional campaign. By viewing ads produced by one candidate, we are able to see how her message is portrayed in each fashion.
An example of a positive ad is the Darcy Burner “Giving Children the best Possible Education” ad which touts the purported benefits that she brings to the table without giving mention to any opposition.
According to the aforementioned article, a comparative ad “communicates negative information about a targeted candidate,” using direct candidate comparisons. An example is the “New Solutions for the Economy” ad comparing Dave Reichert to Darcy Burner in which Reichert is defamed before Burner’s positive ideas for change are introduced.
An example of a negative ad is Darcy Burner’s attack on Dave Reichert: “Is Dave Reichert Independent or Ineffective?” The ad does not compare her views to his and only mentions her name at the end of the ad in order to segue to “I approved this message.”
Despite the warnings of the negative effects of negative campaign advertising, candidates continue to utilize them. Additional information on the findings from each of the works mentioned above can be found on the subsequent tabs on this Web site.
Posted by christyluther 
