ads – Mason Votes

By Rashad Mulla

Negative presidential campaign advertisements are effective in forming and changing public opinion, according to Thom Mozloom, founder and owner of The M Network, a professional media planning and branding agency.

Broadcast live via video conference from Washington, D.C., Mozloom spoke to college students from the University of Denver, Pace University in Manhattan and George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. on Sept. 11. Mozloom said negative campaign advertisements, no matter their factual merits, are effective in shaping this election.

“The reason why you keep seeing negative ads or fear tactic ads come out is, quite simply, because they work,” said Mozloom,

George Mason guest instructor Steve Taylor pounced on to the question of truth 20 minutes into the broadcast.

“It’s depressing to learn I was right,” said Taylor, a former White House correspondent for ABC Radio. “It’s a lowest common denominator system. It basically proved lies work.”

Feedback from the George Mason students reflected Taylor’s perception of truth being looked over in campaign advertisements.

“I think truth should be important,” George Mason student Monica Block said during the live taping. “But I think when it comes to a 30-second ad, people aren’t really going to do their research.”

In response to Block’s comment, Mozloom said truth should be in the discussion, but politicians don’t deem it important.

“The politicians who use these spots (aren’t) fact-checking them,” Mozloom said. “There’s no repercussion to it.”

In an example of his assertion, Mozloom said Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain’s famed celebrity advertisement, in which McCain compared Sen. Barack Obama to Paris Hilton, was meant to counter the Democratic presidential nominee’s trip to Europe.

“That issue was exasperated by the Obama camp’s response,” Mozloom said. “They gave a response to this ad, which, for the life of me, I couldn’t fathom. You want that news cycle to change again as fast as possible.”

Instead, Paris Hilton came out with her own celebrity advertisement, Obama made one of his own, and the media covered the advertisement for three weeks. McCain’s strategy worked, and no semblance of fact was needed, Mozloom said.

“The time that was spent talking about (the advertisement) was far greater than the ad run itself and the money they paid for that ad,” Mozloom said.

C-SPAN political director and University of Denver professor Steve Scully asked Mozloom to analyze historical presidential advertisements, including “The Daisy Girl,” a 1964 spot by former president Lyndon B. Johnson’s campaign when he was running for election against Republican opponent Barry Goldwater. This ad is one of the “hallmarks of negative advertising,” Scully said.

“It caused such a reaction, that they pulled it,” Mozloom said. “The fact that you and I are talking about this 40 years later has to qualify it as one of the greatest political ads of all time.”

After the presentation, Taylor reiterated the importance of advertising in presidential campaigns.

“There is a close connection between political advertising and political journalism,” Taylor said. “You can judge whether the campaigns are playing it safe or going on the attack. It shows the direction they think they are headed in.”

From: UPI

By Katherine Libby

In the weeks leading up to the election, the number of presidential television ad campaigns has soared to an unprecedented level, irritating many young voters.

The Associated Press, surveying approximately 1,000 undecided voters, reported that 60 percent said television advertisements did not sway them one way or another. A third of those voters said they were less likely to vote for either candidate after watching the ads.

Diana Friedman, a student at George Mason University, was first introduced to politics by her father when she was 10. Although she is a self-described liberal, her belief in voting for a candidate rather than a party makes her a voter that such campaign ads target.

Unfortunately for presidential hopefuls, however, the media has never affected her beliefs; instead they have just annoyed her.

“I don’t like listening to or watching the overplayed ads that try to influence the public,” said Friedman. “It’s like they are trying to tell me what to do. I know I am capable of making my own informed decisions… so I always just tune it out.”

Friedman’s feeling towards such ads seems to be a common trend among a number of young voters. For recent George Mason graduate Darya Seraj, it’s not just about the frequency of the campaign advertisements, it’s about the content too.

Seraj believes that the ad campaigns can confuse a viewer. “It bothers me that facts are often taken out of context and can seriously mislead viewers,” said Seraj. “The first time I voted was when I was 20 and that’s mainly because I didn’t know who to believe.”

Although Seraj did her research on candidates and their policies, the constant presentation of new facts about one side or the other made her question her beliefs. “I would hear something about a candidate in an ad, I would check to see if it was true. Sometimes it was and sometimes it wasn’t. Ultimately I was left confused and frustrated,” said Seraj.

While it is clear that these television ad campaigns are an important tool for presidential candidates, both Friedman and Seraj said that the more the ads are aired, the more irritated they become and the less likely they are to listen.

From: UPI