The ties between advertising and politics have been strong over the years—some would say too strong, given that television time has become dangerously important in helping to determine the outcome of national, state and even local elections. One school of thought is that TV stations should be obliged to provide free time to viable candidates for public office, which in turn would make the process less reliant on special interest money needed to fund media buys. While such a measure would represent progressive reform, it’s clear that more must be done when you look at the history of political advertising; a genre that’s traditionally been marked by mudslinging, scare tactics, misstating the issues and often misrepresenting the views and voting records of one’s opponents.
Yes, mudslinging can backfire, and many voters don’t get the credit they deserve for being able to see through misleading, heavy-handed messages. But the other effect of negative ad bombardments is the alienation of potential voters. Research has uncovered a 15 percent decline in national voter turnout since the early ’60s, arguably a time that saw the industry’s most compelling, manipulative, creative political advertising, perhaps embodied best in Lyndon Johnson’s presidential campaign against Sen. Barry Goldwater. The well-known "Daisy" spot showed a little girl plucking petals off a daisy, counting each petal. The countdown then segues to a mushroom cloud from an atomic explosion. Without even mentioning Goldwater, the ad cast doubt on the senator’s ability to lead the country based on his hawkish reputation.
According to some scholars, that ad unleashed a nuclear reaction of its own, by demonstrating the impact a spot could have on the political landscape. Others jumped aboard the manipulative bandwagon, and political advertising on TV grew uglier and less creative—and also led to people, particularly young voters, deciding to tune out of the political process altogether.
Now, as races get tighter, campaigns seemingly get nastier—the latest example being the contest between Gov. George W. Bush and Sen. John McCain in the Republican presidential primaries. After McCain’s New Hampshire win, the sniping began with a volley of negative spots as each candidate tried to discredit the other. Rather than bring about an even more vigorous discussion of the issues, a close race often begets more distorted attacks that further remove us from what’s important.
Many political scientists contend that the danger of dwindling voter turnout is that it often leaves decision-making to extremist factions who have axes to grind, and thus will surely exercise their voting muscle. Factions become more powerful when a significant cross-section of potential voters elect not to participate in the democratic process.
Underscoring that point is The Advertising Council’s "Y2Vote" campaign, which thankfully exercises the power of advertising to positively impact society. Designed to get out the vote, the campaign targets 18-to-24-year-olds who haven’t registered to vote, as well as those who have registered but aren’t showing up at voting booths.
The two spots—"Fritz & John" and "Clarence," out of Bates USA, New York—were directed, respectively, by Brian Aldrich and Martin Canellakis of bicoastal Coppos Films.
In "Fritz & John," for example, two whacked-out guys—grunge musicians with a possible hint of skinhead mentality—pontificate about their music being "the most powerful form of political influence." On one level, the guys are unintentionally funny because they’re so out-there. On another level, they’re scary when a voiceover points out: "These guys vote. Shouldn’t you?"
