Neg­a­tive ads

The Washington Times Weekly - - National -

“Glad it’s over? You’re not the only one. Vot­ers in six states with closely con­tested U.S. Se­nate races were re­cently asked by the Gallup Or­ga­ni­za­tion their opin­ion of the po­lit­i­cal ad­ver­tis­ing they’d seen this year. The vast ma­jor­ity, in ev­ery state sur­veyed, de­scribed it as ei­ther ‘some­what neg­a­tive,’ ‘very neg­a­tive’ or ‘ex­tremely neg­a­tive.’ Roughly a third of those sur­veyed in each state said ‘ex­tremely neg­a­tive,’ ” John El­lis writes at www.Opin­ionJour­nal.com

“Ac­cord­ing to Ad­ver­tis­ing Age mag­a­zine, the to­tal amount spent this year on po­lit­i­cal ad­ver­tis­ing will reach $2 bil­lion, a hefty in­crease over 2004. If one con­ser­va­tively es­ti­mates that at least half of all po­lit­i­cal ad­ver­tis­ing can be fairly de­scribed as ‘neg­a­tive,’ then 2006 will be the first year that neg­a­tive po­lit­i­cal ad­ver­tis­ing ex­pen­di­tures reached the $1 bil­lion mark. That’s a dol­lar amount greater than all of the television, ra­dio and print ad­ver­tis­ing buys done by An­heuser-Busch (es­ti­mated by Ad Age to be $919 mil­lion) in 2005,” Mr. El­lis said.

“Imag­ine, if you will, what your taste for Miller beer would be if An­heuser-Busch spent half of its an­nual ad­ver­tis­ing bud­get de­scrib­ing all of the var­i­ous Miller brands in the most un­sa­vory terms. Or, what your taste for a Bud­weiser would be if the lads at Miller un­leashed a $500 mil­lion neg­a­tive ad cam­paign against ‘the King of Beers.’ Imag­ine both at the same time and you get some idea of what do­mes­tic pol­i­tics is like for most Amer­i­cans.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.