| Description |
Negativity is not a newcomer to American politics. But a perceived increase in the use of negative television advertisements has generated much speculation regarding their effectiveness, as well as calls for reform in our nation's electoral system. Political scientists are divided on the broad question of whether negative advertising is effective in diminishing support for an ad's target. Studies suggest that done correctly, attack advertisements can be very effective; on the other hand, extensive research also suggests that negative commercials can backfire. A key to effective negative political advertising may lie in the content of the commercials. Attacks focusing on substantive issues are often extremely effective; negative advertisements focusing an opponent's personal characteristics, or "image," are more likely to backfire, leaving the sponsor more deeply harmed than the tarqet; These are important considerations for campaigns, because negative information about candidates is remembered longer by voters and given greater weight at the ballot box. The practical implications of these findings, however, may be limited because the lines dividing issue and image attacks are blurry at best. Given the difficulties in assessing the effectiveness of negative advertising, why would candidates choose to pursue a negative strategy? A case study of Utah's 1994 congressional race between Karen Shepherd, Enid Waldholtz, and Merrill Cook sheds some light on the question. In this instance, the decision to attack came only when election dynamics and tactical necessity required the campaign to diminish voter support for its opponents -- because attempts to strengthen its own position were likely to be ineffective. Important American institutions, values, and practical considerations bode poorly for reform initiatives aimed at limiting negative advertising. Current constitutional standards, as well as arguments in favor of a free and robust political discourse and the practical inadequacies of impartial review commissions, make the prospects for limiting negativity in American campaigns slim, and perhaps unwarranted. Drawing concise conclusions about negative political advertising is an extremely difficult, and perhaps impossible, task. This paper does not attempt to do so. Instead, by describing the complex and sometimes contradictory factors that characterize negative political advertising, this thesis attempts to promote a deeper understanding of this important, controversial, and lasting component of our nation's political system. |
