The New Style of Election Attack Ads

I'm John McCain, and I endorsed this message.


Whether from John McCain, or one of hundreds of other politicians, this discarded phrase is certainly not the political food-for-thought most people seek to devour. However, the disclaimer appears before numerous radio and television political ads, and may be gaining in importance. A relatively underdeveloped style of campaign ad is emerging- one where the ad's supporter might be difficult to deduce. As campaign attack ads shift towards identity masking, and away from finger pointing and just plain making stuff up, the public's ability to make an informed decision weakens. Using the theories of Gramsci, Adorno, and Marx, a critical eye can be applied towards the latest style of political treachery.

The facilitation of a hegemonic culture caused by presenting the ideals of the bourgeoisie as "common sense" was identified by Gramsci decades ago. Yet, this still endures in terms of political campaign ads, perhaps stronger than ever. Identification with religious beliefs is a time-tested way of normalizing the public through a combination of fear and common sense. This controversial Elizabeth Dole 2008 North Carolina senate campaign commercial implies that voting for Dole's opponent means condemning oneself to a world of heathenism. Note the end of the commercial, where a photo of Dole's opponent is shown while a women's voice says, "there is no God." That's not the candidate's real voice- this commercial crosses way into the land of fraudulent representation. Using a website called Viddler.com, I further extrapolate on the fraudulent implications here. Please note, though, that the commercial is obviously against Dole's opponent, so the "I'm Elizabeth Dole, and I approved this message,” is not necessary to identify the true backer to the audience.

This wasn’t the case in several areas during the 2006 regional elections. Democrats claimed that Republicans were calling people in the middle of the night, with automated messages featuring the Democratic candidate’s name prominently. It is alleged that the goal was to trick people into believing Democrats were calling before angrily hanging up. By using this suspect tactic, campaign managers were banking on a notion popularized by Adorno. As Adorno put it in "How to Watch Television," "The message is invariably that of identification with the status quo." Specifically, by making their opponents appear outside the realms of normalization, they were hoping to appeal to the public’s sense of what is appropriate.

Implying one’s identity is that of one’s rival candidate is only one of the more ethically questionable ways to use an opponent’s persona against him or her. Another popular style is to use favorable endorsements as ammunition against a rival candidate. In a strong sense, this plays into Adorno’s notion of a “culture industry.” A notable quote from Adorno's "Culture Industry Reconsidered," reads, "the culture industry misuses its concern for the masses in order to duplicate, reinforce and strengthen their mentality, which it presumes is given and unchangeable." Rather than popularize sound bytes which express each candidate’s unique approach to the issues, news outlets frequently air clips of the candidates attacking each other on nothing more than party line differences, which adds nothing new to elections. I side with Adorno in believing that the media outlets must truly hoist the largest share of blame for this, as they choose which sound bytes to air.

As campaign ads continue to become more misleading and fraudulent, an overhaul of the campaign process might even by seen. As such, current election media campaigns face many of the same problems Marx saw with capitalism. Namely, the top-down information system purported by the media and the bourgeoisie could cause irreparable tensions in the entire system, eventually leading to collapse. Certainly, the beginning stages are evident, including voter disillusionment and general distrust of politicians. Also note the "related videos" for this clip. Right now, the system in place to oppose these ads is woefully inadequate. Campaign ads are often banned from the airwaves, but they can find resurrection in youtube.com, as is the case with Elizabeth Dole’s attack ad. In addition, the punishment of fines only serve to increase the distance between the opportunities of the wealthy and those of the common worker.

Taking this to a speculative level, one can humorously speculate on the future of campaign ads. For instance, in this self-made creation, an innocent campaign by a fun-loving children’s entertainer could easily be run into the ground by misrepresentation.