What I will remember is how nasty the political scene was in 2010. I can't recall a time when I have heard more lies, more distortion, and more rhetoric from both sides.
I've seen ads on TV where the candidate is not even identified. All they do for 60 seconds is vilify the person they are running against.
I have yet to see one ad, national or local, either here in Little Rock or Cleveland OH where a person came on camera and said,
“My name is Bob White, and I running for the U.S. Senate on the Democratic Ticket. If elected I promise every one of you that I will do the absolute best job I can. I promise I will listen to my constituents and not the lobbyists and PAC. I promise to work for the good of my constituents and my country and if that means crossing the aisle to work with the other party, then so be it. I believe that if all of congress acts together in a universal effort to find the best solutions for our problems that we will prevail.”
In the dark days following December 7, 1941 we proved to the whole world that we could come together as a team and do what had to be done. I for one would like to see a return to that unity and cooperation.
It is my understanding that these ads are not ads from either candidate but rather ads that are paid for my unidentified parties thanks to the recent supreme court ruling allowing unlimited spending on such things. I have not followed all that closely so I could have misunderstood but that is what understand.
Speaking of "I remember", it seems like it was clear that trying to get congress to work together as a team the last couple years has not been in the republican agenda.
That certainly is a major part of it. Either way I'm wondering what has happened to the rules since the days I taught journalism? #1. All political ads must be paid in advance, #2. You must say in the ad who paid for the ad. #3. Equal time must be provided in the same time slot (e.g., between 4PM and 5PM on a Wednesday) if the other party wishes to refute or simply state their own claims. #4. If you defame somebody, you are liable and not the broadcaster. Now it appears that it is no holds barred and the money can come from anywhere, foreign or domestic.
Ironically a poll conducted several years back by a bunch of psychologists in the advertising industry found that fewer than 20% of the voters actually decide who to vote for based upon the ad. All the money, all the talk, all the rhetoric is simply "preaching to the choir" 80% of the time.
The idea doesn't seem so much an effort to recruit new voters but encourage existing voters to getting out and going to the polls. The idea is not so much to vote for my candidate because he is the better of the two, but to portray the other guy as a terrible option. In other words, "I don't much like Candidate A, but I will vote for him anyway because Candidate B. is bad.
Disclosure is one of the things that needs to be insisted upon. People talk about needing a law requiring this. I wonder if networks had any ethics if such a law would be needed. The class you taught was probably based on ethics in journalism not laws.
There were two separate classes required of all journalism students, Ethics and Law of the Mass Media.
In the latter it was clearly defined what could and could not be said "legally" in an advertisement. If you suggest something personal about the other candidate, implying that he has broken the law, e.g., "My opponent has been known to spend time with under aged children in the evenings." You had better follow up with the fact that he is the little league coach or it wouldn't get on the air.
You might even say, "MY opponent spent years in the arms of a woman who was not his wife." You better add, "It was his mother," or we wouldn't allow it to be broadcast.
Back in the days before Cable TV and satellite the Federal Communications Commission was charged with what could and could not be done legally. Most broadcast stations belonged to the NAB (Remember the announcements "This station is a member in good standing of the National Association of Broadcasters") but from what I see on TV today, apparently the FCC no longer has any authority and nobody belongs to the NAB or at least can't be bothered to adhere to what I suppose is seen as an antiquated code of ethics.
Right on! Go unions!
ReplyDeleteI remember too......
ReplyDeleteWhat I will remember is how nasty the political scene was in 2010. I can't recall a time when I have heard more lies, more distortion, and more rhetoric from both sides.
ReplyDeleteI've seen ads on TV where the candidate is not even identified. All they do for 60 seconds is vilify the person they are running against.
I have yet to see one ad, national or local, either here in Little Rock or Cleveland OH where a person came on camera and said,
“My name is Bob White, and I running for the U.S. Senate on the Democratic Ticket.
If elected I promise every one of you that I will do the absolute best job I can. I promise I will listen to my constituents and not the lobbyists and PAC.
I promise to work for the good of my constituents and my country and if that means crossing the aisle to work with the other party, then so be it.
I believe that if all of congress acts together in a universal effort to find the best solutions for our problems that we will prevail.”
In the dark days following December 7, 1941 we proved to the whole world that we could come together as a team and do what had to be done. I for one would like to see a return to that unity and cooperation.
It is my understanding that these ads are not ads from either candidate but rather ads that are paid for my unidentified parties thanks to the recent supreme court ruling allowing unlimited spending on such things. I have not followed all that closely so I could have misunderstood but that is what understand.
ReplyDeleteThe two candidates I have been supporting each have a nice ad.
ReplyDeleteOne:
Two:
Speaking of "I remember", it seems like it was clear that trying to get congress to work together as a team the last couple years has not been in the republican agenda.
ReplyDeleteIt amazes me how many seem to have forgotten Doc.
ReplyDeleteYou betcha Doug!
ReplyDeleteThat certainly is a major part of it. Either way I'm wondering what has happened to the rules since the days I taught journalism? #1. All political ads must be paid in advance, #2. You must say in the ad who paid for the ad. #3. Equal time must be provided in the same time slot (e.g., between 4PM and 5PM on a Wednesday) if the other party wishes to refute or simply state their own claims. #4. If you defame somebody, you are liable and not the broadcaster.
ReplyDeleteNow it appears that it is no holds barred and the money can come from anywhere, foreign or domestic.
Ironically a poll conducted several years back by a bunch of psychologists in the advertising industry found that fewer than 20% of the voters actually decide who to vote for based upon the ad. All the money, all the talk, all the rhetoric is simply "preaching to the choir" 80% of the time.
The idea doesn't seem so much an effort to recruit new voters but encourage existing voters to getting out and going to the polls. The idea is not so much to vote for my candidate because he is the better of the two, but to portray the other guy as a terrible option. In other words, "I don't much like Candidate A, but I will vote for him anyway because Candidate B. is bad.
Disclosure is one of the things that needs to be insisted upon. People talk about needing a law requiring this. I wonder if networks had any ethics if such a law would be needed. The class you taught was probably based on ethics in journalism not laws.
ReplyDeleteThere were two separate classes required of all journalism students, Ethics and Law of the Mass Media.
ReplyDeleteIn the latter it was clearly defined what could and could not be said "legally" in an advertisement. If you suggest something personal about the other candidate, implying that he has broken the law, e.g., "My opponent has been known to spend time with under aged children in the evenings." You had better follow up with the fact that he is the little league coach or it wouldn't get on the air.
You might even say, "MY opponent spent years in the arms of a woman who was not his wife." You better add, "It was his mother," or we wouldn't allow it to be broadcast.
Back in the days before Cable TV and satellite the Federal Communications Commission was charged with what could and could not be done legally. Most broadcast stations belonged to the NAB (Remember the announcements "This station is a member in good standing of the National Association of Broadcasters") but from what I see on TV today, apparently the FCC no longer has any authority and nobody belongs to the NAB or at least can't be bothered to adhere to what I suppose is seen as an antiquated code of ethics.