Spiking political attack ads as news generators
What has happened to the media coverage of so-called “attack ads” or political advertising? Have they been “spiked” as not news worthy?
Two weeks ago when the Liberals launched their campaign accusing the Harper government of closing down Parliament to avoid tough questions about Afghan detainees, unemployment and the environment, they must have noticed something had changed. The media’s treatment and resulting news coverage of their radio, newspaper and web advertising campaign was likely far less than they had hoped for.
I’m certain they were counting on more coverage than I observed.
Several years ago when the Harper Conservatives attacked Liberal leader Stephane Dion, the television news coverage was huge, but so too was the television media purchase made by the party. As the Conservatives rolled out that series of attack ads aimed at Dion the news coverage very significant. This no-cost news exposure of the ads must have sent waves of glee throughout the PMO. The opposite must have been true at Liberal party headquarters and their leader’s office. I recall that both my colleague Bernie Gauthier and I were doing double duty in commenting on these ads, every newscast carried the story for days and then refreshed their coverage with the release of each new ad in the series.
A year or so later when the Conservatives turned their attack-ad dog on Dion’s replacement Michael Ignatieff, the news coverage was similar. The Conservatives once again extended their television advertising budget through the news coverage the ads generated. Good strategy.
But that was then. Has something has changed? The lack of news attention given to the Liberal’s recent campaign, begs the question: Is there a relationship between ad budgets and news coverage?
One might speculate that the TV networks have concluded that they were not going to give valuable TV time to a campaign that didn’t have a TV budget. The issue of proroguing Parliament was one that dominated news and political reporting for a week or so, but coverage of the Liberal ads was essentially a one-day wonder. Maybe that one-day coverage was all it deserved?
The Liberal ads were a step up from the earlier iteration with Ignatieff sitting in a forest talking about trade with China and India. Who cares? These latest ads have better impact. But still I wouldn’t call the ads depicting a chain-link fence around Parliament Hill “attack ads.” They could have at least used barbed-wire along the top of the chain-link.
In the end, I wonder if the Liberals did get it right? Their poll numbers suggest that they are currently in a virtual tie with the Conservatives for voter support. Although, I believe that it isn’t the Liberal advertising campaign that is working, but rather the risk the government took when thinking that Canadians don’t care about the work of their Parliament.
It would seem the BCRA, or bipartisan legislation co-authored by Senator Feingold meant to curb the behavior we are seeing today, has failed.
Russ Feingold is my senator, a decent guy. Once his claim to fame was that he was supposedly a maverick. But even after calling his offices and asking him not to vote for the stimulus package, where most of the money went to the New York financial district and six months later was used to pay million dollar bonuses, Russ voted for it anyway. It would have been a stimulus check to each and every taxpayer of at the very least $7,000 had the government sent the money to the people who pay the taxes in the first place. Some would have received checks of more than $11,000 based on their income. Now that would have stimulated the economy like you wouldn’t believe. Schools could use that money. The roads need serious repair. Instead, the money mostly went to banks and other financial institutions in one or two states, money from the entire country! , and was concentrated to the very people Russ often says he does not support. It makes you wonder.
But even more concerning is the BCRA, the bipartisan legislation he basically wrote in 2002 to control campaigns. It was supposed to stop what we are enduring now. I like Russ. But if there is anyone who says one thing and something else entirely happens, it would appear it is Russ Feingold. It would appear he is one of the best at doing just that in fact.
http://williamthien.wordpress.com/2010/10/27/campaign-finance-reform-a-plague-of-democracy/