(Credit: “Ike for President,” Citizens for Eisenhower, 1952)
The first televised presidential campaign ads appeared in 1952, including a series by Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower. The “I Like Ike” campaign motto was featured heavily (clicking on ad titles in red will open links so you can watch them). Eisenhower’s campaign spent $1.5 million on such ads. Eisenhower won in a landslide, though it’s not clear how much difference his ads made.
Campaign Flyer, Election of 1800
(Credit: savagesandscoundrels.org)
Campaign ads are not new. In the election of 1800, pitting Republican Thomas Jefferson against then-President John Adams, they were mostly flyers and newspaper pieces (and nasty ones at that), but the use of television brought a tremendous growth of election advertising. In the 2020 elections, total spending for ads for federal races (television, radio and digital) totaled $7.3 billion, about half of all campaign expenditures. Television spots accounted for 51 percent of this total, according to the well-researched book Political Advertising in the United States.
Ad Purposes, Types, Benefits and Dangers
We’ll focus on TV and digital ads, but the main points apply as well to other advertising formats (e.g. radio, newspaper, billboards, signs, brochures/flyers, campaign events) and to campaigns for public issues (e.g. ballot initiatives, bond issues). Television includes ads over broadcast, cable and satellite. Digital includes ads on websites, social media and video streaming sites.
Ads can serve several purposes. They may offer information about a candidate and his/her key issues and policies. They may try to persuade people to vote for the candidate or to just get out and vote. They may try gathering information to use to contact voters, raise funds and invite people to help in a campaign (Tip: so don’t give personal information if you don’t want it used).
There are three main types of political ads
“Garage” Ad for Greg Abbott
(Credit: Abbot for Governor)
Positive Ads are used to introduce and extol the candidate and generate enthusiasm. They may highlight the candidate’s character, personal life, community engagement, faith, prior service and achievements. In his bid for Texas governor in 2014, Greg Abbott introduced himself with “Garage.” Since an accident left him paralyzed below the waist, it showed him pushing his wheelchair up ramps in a parking garage to show his determination to heal and, by implication, put maximum effort into serving Texas.
Negative Ads attack another candidate. “The Revolving Door” ad used against Democratic candidate for president Michael Dukakis in 1988 argued that his program as Massachusetts governor which allowed some incarcerated felons weekend furloughs permitted murderers to walk the streets and commit more crimes. It was also known as the “Willie Horton” ad after that convict raped a woman while on furlough. “Going negative” (the “attack ad”) is the most common type of political ad. Research shows as much as 75 percent of all televised Congressional general election and 87 percent of presidential election ads in recent years have been negative.
Contrast Ads portray a stark difference between the candidate and an opponent. During the 2008 Democratic primaries, Hillary Clinton’s campaign ran “Children,” a spot arguing that parents should want someone experienced in foreign affairs dealing with a crisis when the phone rings in the White House at 3 a.m., not a novice (though Barack Obama was not named).
Even though many people tire of seeing political ads, they can have benefits. Of course we must evaluate an ad, not just accept it at face value. Political ads can help us become better informed citizens. Using them carefully you can learn about:
A candidate’s values, character and hopes for citizens
A candidate’s previous work and commitment to public service
A candidate’s positions on core issues and promised actions
Differences with opponent(s) and why the candidate thinks she is a better choice
The content of select public issues
What more you may need to learn about these issues
Who sponsors the ad, why and what they have to gain
Who endorses the candidate, why and what they have to gain
The candidate’s commitment to civility and compromise
How independent the candidate may be if elected
Who the candidate surrounds her/himself with - how welcoming he is of diversity
How truthful the candidate is: are claims about issues/other candidates based on fact?
While much of this can be found in the ad, additional searching for information will yield full benefit.
Political ads can also endanger democracy. If they contain disinformation they mislead the public. Negative ads can sour voters on the political process, especially when negativity moves to incivility. They can depress voter turnout when people get fed up with all the candidates, and they can decrease the sense that engaging in politics matters. Negativity can also increase political polarization if voters start ignoring opposing views, seeking only information supporting what they already think.
Let’s Talk
What should be in a political ad that would tell you if the candidate based a campaign promise on truly understanding an issue (e.g. immigration)?
Ad Sponsors and Why We Get the Ads We Do
The vast majority of funding for political ads comes from large donors - wealthy individuals, corporations, unions, and interest groups. Supreme Court decisions have equated most political speech with free speech and thus have barred most limits on how (and how much) funding can be raised and used. This, many argue, is dangerous to democracy when large donors want something in return.
Ads may be sponsored by candidates, a political party, a candidate/party collaboration or an interest group – often a Political Action Committee (PAC) that has bundled funds from a variety of donors. Since your evaluation of the ad may depend on who paid for it, you’d want to know that. An “approved by” line telling you the name of the sponsor may be included, but government regulations don’t always require this. To make discovering the sponsor harder, negative ads are not usually sponsored by candidates, protecting them from the anger generated in some voters by such ads. Instead, you’ll often see a neutral or positive name (e.g. “sponsored by Americans for Democracy”) so you have no idea whose money created it.
Focus on Facts
What’s a “Super PAC”?
This opacity might not be so bad if you assess ads from all candidates, but that’s not the case with people who self-censor the ads they’re willing to see/hear or when ad sponsors use targeting. That’s the practice of placing ads on stations known to be largely viewed by voters who prefer one political ideology (e.g. FOX News, MSNBC) or during programs that demographic data suggest attract certain types of voters (e.g. NASCAR races). Micro-targeting goes further and is growing online. It uses data we ourselves supply. For example, if you’re on Facebook you’ve given them certain information just to use the site – and more information by what you view or share. They can provide this information to sponsors who use it to post political ads targeted just at you because of your age, political leanings, issue interests and even your Congressional district and street address.
Anatomy of an Ad: How Ads Try to Manipulate Emotions
(Credit: Reagan for President)
“It’s morning again in America” was the opening line of a 1984 election year ad for President Ronald Reagan, touting the success of his first term. In it, we see a man going to work, a farmer, a couple buying a new home, a wedding, and American flags. The narration is soft, the music gentle and images foster a warm, nostalgic feeling.
Political ads rely on emotional manipulation – the conscious use of our senses to generate specific emotions. Research by University of Michigan political scientist Ted Brader found that ads that spark hope and enthusiasm encourage voters to take an interest and participate in an election and harden commitment to a candidate. Ads that stir fear can scare voters, opening them to new information and changing their minds. Ads that foster anger, however, lead people to dig in and fight for their existing beliefs. Research on the 2020 election by the Wesleyan Media Project found that 22 percent of ads for presidential candidates used a fear approach while 36 percent tried to stoke anger. Positive and negative emotions are not inherently bad. Indeed, as we saw in Question #4, logic and emotion are both needed to make a good decision. The key is being conscious of how an ad is trying to shape your emotions and then applying reason to the ad as well.
“Strong evidence shows that people are more likely to believe what they are told whenever they are in such a [heightened emotional] state.” – Sara and Jack Gorman, Denying to the Grave: Why We Ignore the Facts That Will Save Us
Voices, intonation, music, visual images, lighting, colors and the staging of the candidate on the screen are orchestrated for emotional impact. Ad makers are aware, for example, that:
Uplifting music (as in the Reagan ad) evokes hope while jarring music evokes fear and anxiety
An image looking up at a candidate signals power; an image looking down makes an opponent look weak
Nancy Pelosi
(Credit: americanpatriotdaily.com)
Slow motion makes a candidate appear sinister
American flags and historic backdrops evoke patriotism
Nostalgic images signal hope while frightening scenes evoke fear or anger, such as in the 1964 “Daisy Girl” negative ad against Barry Goldwater where a young girl picking petals off a flower is juxtaposed with a nuclear explosion
“Daisy Girl” Ad of Lyndon Johnson’s Campaign
(Credit: statis.seattletimes.com)
Showing an opponent in black and white, harsh lighting and/or in a very tight facial close-up can foster negativity and accentuate jarring facial features
Joe Biden
(Credit: en-volve.com)
Images, such as a candidate with children or the elderly, signal awareness of issues
Images of local scenes telegraph connection with local sentiments
Bright colors enhance positive feelings; dark colors associated with an opponent evoke negative feelings
Female narration for ads on women’s issues helps women connect with the candidate
"The more neural "tracks" a message activates . . . through words, images, intonation, and music . . . the more evocative and memorable it is likely to be.” – Psychologist Drew Westen
Focus on Facts
Using this website of some of the most famous campaign ads, watch one and name the emotions it’s after and the techniques used.
Anatomy of an Ad: Persuasion Techniques
Of course one way to persuade with political ads is to lie. Under free speech doctrine, broadcast radio and television stations must air candidate ads for all candidates for federal offices without censorship if they run them for any one candidate. As a result, they are not legally liable for ad truthfulness. Cable television stations can chose which ads they run and thus are liable. Under the Communications Decency Act (Section 230), websites are protected against legal action for political ads posted by third parties. Alertness and fact-checking are thus chief protections for thinking citizens.
Lies are often generated by fake online accounts and by bots (software that posts information made to look like it comes from a real person). During political campaigns, a huge amount of political speech is posted this way. One fake Twitter account posing as Russian President Vladimir Putin amassed 18 million followers over six years before Twitter removed it. Twitter and Facebook are constantly removing millions of fake accounts and bots – but only if they discover them.
Most ads by candidates, at least, don’t contain outright lies because seasoned fact-checkers spot them and the fallout for the candidate can be damaging. But candidate ads can certainly play loose with the truth. Ads sponsored by others lack this constraint. See the “So What?” section below for tips on dealing with the dangers of fake accounts, fake news and bots.
There are many other persuasion techniques, and being alert to them enables you to critically evaluate political ads. Some of the more common techniques follow. Some ads use more than one.
Endorsement by an “Authority”
An Endorsment Ad for Joe Biden
(Credit: Biden for President)
During the 2020 presidential race, the Biden campaign aired “Endorsed,” in which Capt. Sully Sullenberger, hero of the “Miracle on the Hudson” praised Biden. He cited Biden’s experience and character which so many attributed as well to “Sully,” who landed his damaged aircraft on the Hudson River, saving everyone on board. Using people widely recognized as authorities in their fields to pitch a candidate encourages voters to take note.
The Bandwagon Effect
In his book, Influence, psychologist Robert Cialdini identifies social proof as a key method of persuasion. We tend to follow people who we see as peers. If they are on board, we are more likely to join them. Political ads use this principle to try to foster a bandwagon effect – people adopt behaviors and beliefs when they feel many others are doing so. Candidates have rallies – and show them in their ads - to foster this feeling. Their ads often show “average” citizens extolling their virtues. They may also cite polling results showing they are in the lead or that “public opinion” supports their stance on an issue.
Subconscious Priming
Psychologist Drew Westen ran an experiment in which the word “RATS” was flashed in front of participants - so quickly as not to be noticeable - before showing them a photo of an anonymous candidate. Participants were then asked to rate several aspects of the candidate. Other participants were flashed the word “STAR” subliminally before seeing the photo. Those subjected to “RATS” were more negative about the candidate. In psychological terms, they were primed. Priming occurs when exposure to one stimulus influences reaction to another without our being aware of this effect.
For example, research shows that voters are more likely to support school bond issues when their polling place is in a school. In his book, The Political Brain, Westen noted that over 250 experiments in recent decades demonstrate that people primed with thoughts about their own mortality tend to favor conservative candidates. Such priming is often done by asking people to answer survey questions about death, burial and related subjects. Numerous experiments have shown that priming people to think about racial minorities can also affect their political attitudes and voting preferences. Research also shows that when priming induces anxiety, such as about immigration it can lead people to search for more information to confirm their concern rather than information that would challenge it.
Stoking the Fear of Loss
The “Hands” Ad
(Credit” YouTube.com)
In the 1990 North Carolina Senate race Jesse Helms’s campaign ran the “Hands” ad. It showed a white person’s hands crumpling a job rejection letter while the narrator said: “You needed that job. And you were the best qualified. But they had to give it to a minority because of a racial quota. Is that really fair? Harvey Gantt [his opponent] says it is.” In addition to racial priming, the ad used loss aversion – we avoid something framed as a loss [in this ad, affirmative action and voting for Gantt] over an equivalent gain.
For example, people often sell stocks if they fear an impending financial loss even if holding them for the long term would produce a gain. To use another example, some people pay for the loss damage waiver when renting a car for fear of having an accident. Loss aversion is used in political ads warning about losses due to specific policies (e.g. tax hikes, deficit spending, defunding police) and of common American values (e.g. freedom, equal treatment, privacy). Loss aversion is explained in part by the endowment effect (see Question #9), in which we place a higher value on what we already have (in Helms’s ad an equal chance at a job).
Association Bias
About half the members of Congress are millionaires. Many live lives far removed from typical Americans. Yet campaign ads show them with “regular people” – in restaurants, homes, businesses, on the farm - to show they are “just plain folks.” Such ads use association bias – we are prone to accept irrational connections between people, objects or events.
Association bias was used in an attack ad against Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential campaign. Immersed in a controversy about what happened to her emails, the ad preyed on the fact that some of them showed up on the computer of Anthony Weiner, the husband of a top Clinton aide who had sent them to her spouse’s computer so they could be printed when she got home. Wiener, a former Congressman, had been disgraced by a sexting scandal, so the ad encouraged voters to associate Clinton with Weiner and his transgressions. (Note also in this screenshot the darkened images and juxtaposition of the two scowling faces.)
2016 Campaign Ad Against Hillary Clinton
(Credit: dailymail.co.uk)
Sometimes the association bias can be used without words, such as juxtaposing a picture of a smiling opponent next to a picture of people in a food bank line.
· The Contrast Effect
Suggesting a sharp contrast between the candidate and the opponent is one of the core techniques in political ads. In the “Daisy Girl” ad, Lyndon Johnson cast himself as the peace candidate and Barry Goldwater as the war candidate. Name-calling is a frequent contrast technique. In the 2004 presidential election, ads against John Kerry called him a “flip-flopper,” suggesting he always changed his issue stances. In the 2016 campaign, Donald Trump called his opponent “Crooked Hillary.”
Contrast ads sometimes show a candidate’s position opposite quotes suggesting the opponent stands for just the opposite. In 2020, the Biden campaign ran an ad with the tagline: “If you don’t respect them, you can’t lead them.” The ad showed quotes by President Trump suggesting he disparaged soldiers, as in the screenshot below in which Trump called the recently deceased Senator John McCain (a Vietnam vet and prisoner of war) a “loser”.
So What? Now What?
Thinking citizens use political ads to inform themselves on public issues and candidates while staying alert to at least these five thinking traps that ads may use to shape how they vote:
Emotional manipulation – conscious use of our senses to generate specific emotions
Priming: exposure to one stimulus influencing our unconscious reaction to another
Loss aversion: avoiding doing something framed as a loss
Association bias: accepting irrational connections between people, objects or events
Contrast effect: distorting our perception by exaggerating the differences between things
On October 3, 2020, viewers of the five broadcast TV stations in the Grand Rapids media market were subjected to 1,463 political ads. Anyone watching TV that day must have felt overwhelmed, making it hard to use them to make a good decision. Yet here are tips to avoid being flooded with political ads and to use them well.
Control Your Exposure to Ads: If you want to limit the ads you see or hear, you can always turn off the source (TV/radio/website), skip over or mute it. Online, there are additional steps you can take:
o Be Careful About Search Terms: For example, if you search on a politician’s name, the site’s algorithm may link that search to political advertisers who’ve paid for this information – and ads for that candidate will follow.
o Alter Your Online Ad Preferences: For example, if you go to the Ad Settings and Ad Preferences portions of a Facebook account, you can see all the advertisers Facebook has linked you to based on your site activity. You can tell Facebook to “hide” or “show less” from these sources. You can also “unfollow” pages and people.
o Ignore Last-Minute Ads. Ads launched in the last few days before an election leave little time to verify or contest their accuracy. Some sponsors take advantage of this by making outlandish statements. Best advice: ignore/delete them.
Avoid Fake Accounts and Disinformation in Ads and Bots: While major online sites try to find and remove fake accounts, fake news and bots, there are steps you can take:
Find Out If and How Your Site Verifies Posts as Legitimate: On Facebook, for example, look for blue check mark the telling you the page/profile of a public figure is authentic.
Look for Qualifiers: Some sites will flag posts as containing false or partially false information. If it does not and the claims in the ad seem excessive, fact check them using fact check sites and/or search other reputable sites to see if they sustain the claims.
Check Out Political Ads to Verify Their Contents.: Politifact.com rates political stories/ads using a “Truth-O-Meter” ranging from “true” to “false” and even “Pants-on-Fire” for the most outrageous ones.
(Credit: politifact.com)
Use the Tips in Question #12 for Dealing With Fake News.
Read Journalist Tetyana Klug’s Helpful Tips on Spotting Fake Accounts and Bots.
“Unless it's from an authoritative source, it's just a thing on the internet." - Laura Edelson, NYU researcher
Be Conscious of Ad Sponsorship: Knowing who sponsored an ad is necessary in evaluating its claims. The “sponsored by” line at the end of an ad tells you who paid for it (though this is not required for online ads posted to a website other than the sponsor’s). If you don’t recognize the name, put it in an Internet search engine to help you judge how much to trust the ad’s claims. Be wary if you can’t find out who sponsored an ad since you then can’t judge its truthfulness or the sponsor’s agenda.
Learn from the Political Ad: You can learn useful information by focusing on just one ad for each candidate in a race. Using our earlier discussion, fill in the cells in the worksheet below to record what you learn, supplemented (if you wish) with other information you gather.
Block Emotional Manipulation: Since political ads may aim for positive emotions or negative emotions, using ads wisely requires knowing what emotions they seek to provoke and putting rational thought between the appeal to emotion and what you think about the candidate, the issues and the arguments made. This is especially important with negative ads because research shows they (a) provoke a strong emotional reaction, (b) are recalled better and (c) tend to be more believable (even if they should not be).
You can use the worksheet below, based on our earlier discussion of the techniques ads use to foster emotions, to (a) spot how images, words and sounds are being used, (b) what emotions they aim to create and (c) how you choose to respond.
Some are easy to spot (e.g. the endorsement). Some impact us subconsciously, but with effort we can make the subconscious conscious by stepping back to analyze what the ad is attempting to do. The worksheet below can help. Keep in mind: a single ad may use more than one technique.
After being flooded with political ads, many citizens have become cynical about government. Political ads can help us make good decisions, however, if we approach them as thinking citizens. The same is true of the statements and actions of all public figures, whether they are elected or appointed, on the campaign trail or in a government office. Question #15 focuses on how to decide if a public figure is telling the truth – and even if it’s OK that sometimes they do not.