An election year is upon us, a particularly contentious one, and I’m reminded of how far removed we are from “Morning in America.”
I would be bracing myself for all the negative messaging if I weren’t already so numb to it. Some attack ads come from candidates themselves, but many more seem to emanate from less-than-accountable PACs and special interests. The negativity reaches a whole new level of slime from anonymous social media accounts and influencers who make their bones peddling the sensational without regard for facts or truth.
No one I talk to actually likes attack ads (so they say). Critics—and there are plenty of them—will tell you they’re in poor taste, dishonest, even bad for democracy. Yet the attacks persist. Why?
“The sad truth of American politics is this: negative ads work. They stick. And truth matters, less and less,” says Chip Felkel, Founder of the Felkel Group which focuses on strategic communications and public affairs.
“If it's salacious or accusatory or infers malfeasance, it's remembered. People have short attention spans and attack ads resonate with voters in part, because it has always been easier to get folks to vote, against, rather than for. If you ask, ‘do you like or approve of negative ads?’ you will likely hear, ’No, I wish they would stop that.’ But their actions, and reactions, speak louder than their words.”
I recently spoke with a gentleman who owned an agency specializing in political advertising. I asked how he was able to cope with all the negative messaging.
“Listen,” he said, “Politics is a zero-sum game. There is one winner and everyone else is a loser who goes home. Imagine if every business, every industry operated in that same environment: Imagine Ford wins and all the other car manufacturers go out of business. What tone do you think their advertising would take? Do you think it would be uplifting and light?”
I was at a loss for words at the time. But here’s my answer now that I’ve thought about it: Yes
I’ll always cling to the adage from Howard Luck Gossage that people don’t read advertising, they read what interests them and sometimes it’s an ad. My own, perhaps naive view is that negative advertising isn’t at all more interesting. It’s just easier.
As Felkel says, it’s “easier” to get someone to vote against something than for. Negative advertising doesn’t require a high concept. There is no need to inspire, compel or persuade. Those things take effort, craft and creativity. Who has time for creativity or new ideas in a political campaign that lasts a few months or even a few weeks?
You want a positive reaction from me? Don’t tell me Tesla sucks, tell me love is what makes a Subaru a Subaru.
In 2024, there is more vitriol than ever. Attack and blame are the modus operandi for both the right and the left, so routine that it’s become an expectation—where hardliners tell you that anything less is “weakness.”
But I’m sure I’m not alone when I say I long for more civil discourse. More inspiration. More persuasion. More appeal to our better angels.
It would be so different, it’s bound to work. Right?
