Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Attack ads: kaboom or bust

JENNIFER WELLS

jwells@globeandmail.com

Latest comment posted at 11:28 AM EST 06/09/08

The groundbreaking 'Daisy' was one of the first and most memorable negative campaign ads. But do they work? ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. bob gervitz from United States writes: They sure don't work for me, but they do leave me with three thoughts:
    a) that the sponsor of the ad is a slimy, mean-spirited son of a bee to make such an attack, and b) that the person or party being attacked must be good enough to worry the sponsor enough to need to stoop so low as to make the attack, and c) that the sponsor themselves must not have anything worthwhile to say about themselves, because they're focusing on the other guy.

    I certainly don't believe the content of the attack ad itself since it is, after all, an advert and nobody should believe those, on any topic.
  2. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: They most certainly DO work. They kept Harper out of majority territory in the last election. They kept him out of government in the election before that. Take the "You won't recognize this country when I'm through with it" quote. Harper NEVER said that. That was a Mulroney quote from just prior to the 1984 campaign. The Liberals dusted it off and attributed it to Harper. People say they don't work because no one wants to admit they can be so easily manipulated. But they DO work, and the proof is in the results. Think of it. A 2% swing in votes from one party to the other can make all the difference. Even a 1% swing can put dozens of seats in play. So even if attack ads are 99% ineffective, they're still very effective. The important thing is not to overdo it. (The Tories 1993 "Does this look like a Prime Minister??" spot and the Liberals 2006 "Soldiers in our streets" ad are two examples of overdoing it.) Crossing the line can backfire in a hurry.
  3. Surley Burley from Tecumseh, On., Canada writes: The attack ads do not work for me. They are sheer desperation. It is sad that candidates cannot stand for a position on their past record, beliefs, and future commitments rather than by tearing down their opponent. It seems like juvenile grade school fighting. My mother taught me that a person only tears down another because they feel inadequate themselves. It's very possible she was right.
  4. Jordan Dunelle from Victoria, Canada writes: I think that politics in general involves too much mud-slinging. 'Authentic' leaders and visionaries should be investing their energy in creating a positive future, for us all, their opponents included. Attacks, in any manner simply say more about the attackers and their fears, than they say about those recipients of the negativity. It is possible to create political advertising that does not even mention pure 'politics' let alone the slandering of ones opponents. For a great example from the UK, here is a link:
    http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=bgpqaHLsX6A
  5. B.C. Expat from Ottawa-Hull, NCR, Canada writes: They seem to work largely on people who don't think very much. Though not an attack ad, I still remember in the 1991 BC provincial election debate how Gordon Wilson's meaningless quip, "See, this is why nothing ever gets done in the BC legislature!" (when Harcourt and Johnston were arguing a point, as they were supposed to be doing at a debate) single-handedly vaulted the BC Liberals from an also-ran to the official opposition.

    A clever quip should not be able to do that.
  6. Don Quixote from the warming Mosquito Belt, Ont., Canada writes: Attack Ads are for immature grown people, too busy to realize one election gone wrong can damage their wellbeing for another 4 to 5 years...
  7. Jonny Quest from Canada writes: "...she says, sweetly muddling ..."

    what the heck is sweetly muddling?
  8. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Sure they work! I turn on the video machine or change channels regardless of Party. I swore after the last campaign that I wouldn't vote until they all stopped insulting my intelligence. The Election is not Question Period. I want substance to base a vote on, not distractions. We have serious issues Nationally, more issues in the global market, and even more with respect to our roles in global pollution, global water supply, and wars and peacekeeping roles, as well as negotiating peace. When the CEO of RBC says that the global financial system is at its worst dysfunctional state since the Great Depression, and we're a major G8 nation, well Deficits of $6 billion just don't make sense. Our real leaders, who avoid politics apparently to get their vision in place, never seem to be conflicted or heard by grandstanding politicians. Truth and History always seem to be casualties of our Elections, sadly. Just nobody in site. Not one Party in these last few Parliaments has really been consistently focussed on Canada or Canadians. In other countries, people risk life and limb to secure a viable nation (Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Argentina, Honduras, Burma, Thailand, Taiwan, South Korea). Here, we act like it's a given. It's just slip slidin' away. No vision, no leadership, no passion, no astuteness for our country. Just the system. Sustain the system, the party (ies), and keep making our nation into the world's mine-tailing chaotic brew. BS!

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top