I find myself in the awkward position–particularly during tough economic times–of criticizing a policy that is significantly increasing the number of commercials being made. It’s counter to numerous stands we have taken over the years to stimulate spotmaking and branded content opportunities as well as to ensure the health of the production community at large.
But in this case, more is less when it comes to the Supreme Court decision back in January to overturn campaign finance laws, thus allowing corporations, unions and other groups to spend on political campaign ads without having to disclose who and where the funding comes from. This decision has opened the commercial and media expenditure floodgates.
Elected officials from five states find the major ramping up of campaign spending to be disconcerting and have formed the Coalition for Accountability in Political Spending to combat it.
The coalition is facing an uphill battle and its credibility isn’t helped by the fact that four of its organizers are Democrats–Illinois Governor Pat Quinn, Pennsylvania Treasurer Rob McCord, North Carolina Treasurer Janet Cowell, and New York Comptroller Tom DiNapoli. The fifth founding member is L.A. Controller Wendy Gruehl, whose office is nonpartisan.
The Democratic bent to the coalition stirs skepticism in that Democrats are currently being targeted by the lion’s share of this new breed of political ad spending. However, in a different election cycle–given the spending power of unions which are traditionally supporters of the Democratic Party–the Republicans could find themselves more on the receiving end at some point down the road.
Indeed there’s a price to pay for the increased revenue being funneled into media and advertising industry coffers. For one, this influx of business comes largely from mudslinging messages with special interests gaining additional influence peddling power. This often negative advertising marked by character assassination and distortion of the truth isn’t good for the country or, in our corner of the world, the reputation of the ad business which comes off as generating expedient, manipulative communication.
Yet while I don’t like this brand of advertising, I can live with it. After all, that’s freedom of speech.
What pushes me against it, though, is that we aren’t told who’s speaking. If the special interests were clearly identified with full public disclosure, I’d defend the right of those speaking even though they are often contributing to what I personally regard as a continued unhealthy, disingenuous polarization of our society.
In mainstream advertising, the public knows who’s behind an ad and can judge those brands and their messages accordingly, with people making their buying decisions as they see fit. All I ask is the same for political advertising.
In one of the initial installments of our “Then, Now and Looking Ahead” series, Rich Silverstein, co-chairman/creative director of Goodby, Silverstein & Partners, San Francisco, said on the “now” and “looking ahead” fronts vis a vis the Supreme Court verdict, “I know it means more money for the advertising industry but that’s not the way we should elect people or deal with issues.”
Utah Leaders and Locals Rally To Keep Sundance Film Festival In The State
With the 2025 Sundance Film Festival underway, Utah leaders, locals and longtime attendees are making a final push — one that could include paying millions of dollars — to keep the world-renowned film festival as its directors consider uprooting.
Thousands of festivalgoers affixed bright yellow stickers to their winter coats that read "Keep Sundance in Utah" in a last-ditch effort to convince festival leadership and state officials to keep it in Park City, its home of 41 years.
Gov. Spencer Cox said previously that Utah would not throw as much money at the festival as other states hoping to lure it away. Now his office is urging the Legislature to carve out $3 million for Sundance in the state budget, weeks before the independent film festival is expected to pick a home for the next decade.
It could retain a small presence in picturesque Park City and center itself in nearby Salt Lake City, or move to another finalist — Cincinnati, Ohio, or Boulder, Colorado — beginning in 2027.
"Sundance is Utah, and Utah is Sundance. You can't really separate those two," Cox said. "This is your home, and we desperately hope it will be your home forever."
Last year's festival generated about $132 million for the state of Utah, according to Sundance's 2024 economic impact report.
Festival Director Eugene Hernandez told reporters last week that they had not made a final decision. An announcement is expected this year by early spring.
Colorado is trying to further sweeten its offer. The state is considering legislation giving up to $34 million in tax incentives to film festivals like Sundance through 2036 — on top of the $1.5 million in funds already approved to lure the Utah festival to its neighboring... Read More