Political advertising has come a long way since the beginning of politics. For one, our media and technology has changed so much. I wanted to explore all the effects of negative political advertising on not only the candidates and issues but also on the voters. We all know that advertising can be a very negative thing and sometimes makes you wonder what is true and what is not.
To begin, advertising comes from many different sources. Newspaper, radio, magazines, television, signs, buttons and bumper stickers, just to name a few. Not only do political candidates make use of these sources but so do organizations that stand behind certain issues. Around election times, it is almost impossible to step out of your house and not be surrounded by advertising everywhere you go.
I personally think that policital advertising has helped create the huge divide between our country. It is no secret that out country is more divided now than it ever has been before. With all the negative ads and the horrible lies how could we not be? For those of us who are not involved in politics other than just to vote, these ads can be extremely confusing and even cause people not to vote at all.
MSNBC published an article in 2006 after some research had been done during the 2004 election. Dr. Marco Iacoboni, a professor at UCLA concluded that viewers seemed to lose empathy for their own candidate once he was attacked. What is even more shocking is that in the last eight years, political parties are spending much more money on negative ads than positive ads. Maybe this is because politics has become about attacking one another and not focusing on the issues. “Negative ads make supporters of the attacker more likely to vote and followers of the victimized candidate depressed and less likely to vote”, said Stanford University communications professor Shanto Iyengar. “These ads do not get people to switch sides”, Iyengar said. "You can't get them to vote for you, but maybe you can get them to stay home."
With this research, it is shocking to me that the negative political ads keep growing. As a voter, I don’t really care to hear what one candidate can say badly about another. I want to hear honest views on the issues and more about the candidates themselves, not the bad things about the other. In the last election, I felt that even in the debates there was more negative words than I ever remember hearing in past elections. Its not wonder people stay home on Election Day. Why would you want to vote for someone who spends millions of dollars bashing someone else?
While the negative ads may leave an imprint in my brain, I personally would rather not watch them. Since I think it is of utmost importance to vote, I try to take every political ad that I see or hear with a grain of salt. I try to go online and read policy issues instead of watch TV to see peoples dignity shattered. With all these negative ads and very few ads about the candidates themselves, it is no wonder people feel like they cannot make an educated decision on who to vote for.
Works Cited Borenstein, Seth. "This is your brain on negative ads." 3 Nov. 2006. Web. 9 Oct. 2009. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15549677//.
To begin, advertising comes from many different sources. Newspaper, radio, magazines, television, signs, buttons and bumper stickers, just to name a few. Not only do political candidates make use of these sources but so do organizations that stand behind certain issues. Around election times, it is almost impossible to step out of your house and not be surrounded by advertising everywhere you go.
I personally think that policital advertising has helped create the huge divide between our country. It is no secret that out country is more divided now than it ever has been before. With all the negative ads and the horrible lies how could we not be? For those of us who are not involved in politics other than just to vote, these ads can be extremely confusing and even cause people not to vote at all.
MSNBC published an article in 2006 after some research had been done during the 2004 election. Dr. Marco Iacoboni, a professor at UCLA concluded that viewers seemed to lose empathy for their own candidate once he was attacked. What is even more shocking is that in the last eight years, political parties are spending much more money on negative ads than positive ads. Maybe this is because politics has become about attacking one another and not focusing on the issues. “Negative ads make supporters of the attacker more likely to vote and followers of the victimized candidate depressed and less likely to vote”, said Stanford University communications professor Shanto Iyengar. “These ads do not get people to switch sides”, Iyengar said. "You can't get them to vote for you, but maybe you can get them to stay home."
With this research, it is shocking to me that the negative political ads keep growing. As a voter, I don’t really care to hear what one candidate can say badly about another. I want to hear honest views on the issues and more about the candidates themselves, not the bad things about the other. In the last election, I felt that even in the debates there was more negative words than I ever remember hearing in past elections. Its not wonder people stay home on Election Day. Why would you want to vote for someone who spends millions of dollars bashing someone else?
While the negative ads may leave an imprint in my brain, I personally would rather not watch them. Since I think it is of utmost importance to vote, I try to take every political ad that I see or hear with a grain of salt. I try to go online and read policy issues instead of watch TV to see peoples dignity shattered. With all these negative ads and very few ads about the candidates themselves, it is no wonder people feel like they cannot make an educated decision on who to vote for.
Works Cited Borenstein, Seth. "This is your brain on negative ads." 3 Nov. 2006. Web. 9 Oct. 2009. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15549677//.
Hollihan, Thomas A. "Political Advertising." Uncivil Wars Political Campaigns in a Media Age. Boston: Bedford/ St. Martin's, 2009. 136-60. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment