I was going to reply to Wade in one of my earlier posts, but I felt this warranted one of it's own. Wade claims that political ads are a waste of money because most people have made up their mind anyway. Here are three ads that were negative and/or played on fear that were quite effective and shifted the moods of the electorate:
1988 - Willy Horton
In this election VP Bush Sr v D-MA Gov. Dukakis, the republicans played this ad in regular rotation and hammered the issue hard at a time when crime rates were high and very much on the minds of the electorate. This effectively painted Dukakis as soft of crime and is considered to a significant factor in his losing the election.
1984 - Bear in the Woods
In this election Pres. Ronald Reagan v fmr VP Walter Mondale, Reagan successfully gave the impression that Mondale had his head in the sand about the USSR nuclear threat. People were made fearful of how Mondale would take on that "bear" and Reagan won handily.
1964 - The Daisy
In the original and arguably the most famous fear mongering ad in the '64 Pres Johnson v. Sen. R-AZ election, a very jarring image is being conjured of an innocent little girl getting obliterated by the atom bomb while picking a daisy in the field. This is post Cuban Missile Crisis a time very much like the mood after 9/11 where peoples fears where at their highest, and one of the few times the democrats successfully branded themselves as the party of international security.
Negative and fear based ads don't always work, (think 2AM Phone Call and Chretien's Speech Impediment) but many more do (Swift Boaters for Truth)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Just to add to that, the CNN Poll of Polls shows nationally Obama with a +7 spread over McCain with %9 percent of those polled un-decided. If those numbers were accurate, it is not beyond possibility that McCain in a hail mary play release an effective negative ad that could shift the momentum in his favour.
Ugh, once again proving my hatred of political attack ads. That one with the girl and the bomb was very creepy...
I just said that "I" think they're useless... Thank you for the excessive and enthusiastic response though, Dave. I agree with you that these ads were effective in those situations and there are probably a number of other successful ones, but overall most attack and fear based ads that air are complete and utter crap with no great effect on the audience.
Having said that, I will now totally contradict myself with proof that I am totally out of touch with the masses. I just saw a story that ran last Saturday in the MSP Star Tribune that says Al Franken's attack ads are working and the latest polling data suggests he is experiencing his first lead over Norm Coleman in their race.
I guess people aren't as bothered by the mud slinging as they say they are in different surveys that come out during every election.
I don't think of these ads as traditional "attack ads" even though they do paint negative pictures of the opponents. What I was trying to show with the Al Franken ad is the way political candidates take specific things that their opponent does and video and audio clips out of context to make them seem evil. Sure, Al Franken has written for Playboy magazine (called porn by Norm Coleman's campaign) but that doesn't mean that he is hellbent on flushing Minnesota down the toilet, which is the impression that you get from the Coleman attack ads that have now been pulled (wonder why?)
But great examples, Dave. I love the Johnson ad, it reminds me of the movie "Fail-safe," one of the best cold war movies of all time.
A non-advertising point but, I think the original Manchurian Candidate is also one of the greatest Cold War movies of all time. The remake was a sham in comparision.
Post a Comment