Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
msmurphysmith





Joined: 07 Sep 2009
Posts: 2


PostPosted: Mon Sep 07, 2009 11:50 pm    Post subject: Do negative ads really work? Reply with quote

Do negative ads really work? I read that 50% of Canadians didn't like the ads about Iggy? Is that true?
gc





Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 1698
Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4
votes: 16
Location: A Monochromatic World

PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 12:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For me they work...against the party who puts them out, not against the person they are targeting.
crazymamma





Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 1011
Reputation: 71.8
votes: 14
Location: The kitchen

PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 9:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Define negative ad please.

I think there is nothing wrong with pointing out a truth that may be unflattering to your opposition. Isn't that your job, to separate yourself and show the advantage of voting for your party?

But as I stated it must be a truth, not that sickening nonsense like soldiers,..... in the streets,......... in your city..... with guns, we can't make this up garbage.( Which I see didn't seem to have turned off certain who will remain nameless folks from loving the liberals no matter how above it all he/she likes to think they are.)
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 9:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would say that negative ads work with all the people some of the time, and with some of the people all of the time, but never all of the people all of the time.

If they did not work, people would not use them.
Willg





Joined: 19 Oct 2008
Posts: 361
Reputation: 96Reputation: 96
Location: 905

PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think they work, but I also don't believe they can be the sole focus of one's campaign. One of the things that annoyed me in the 2007 Ontario Election, aside from the Faith Based Schools blunder, was the amount of negative ads relative to positive ads that the PC's put out.
msmurphysmith





Joined: 07 Sep 2009
Posts: 2


PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 11:26 am    Post subject: Define negative ads Reply with quote

So is a good old fashioned Canadian parody a negative ad or just fun?
www.mrstiffy.ca
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 11:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree, along with the attack, you must offer a credible alternative. If no one knows who you are or what you stand for, outside of hating the other guy, you stand no chance.
fiscalconservative





Joined: 08 Dec 2008
Posts: 1043
Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9
votes: 6

PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Negative ads work for a bit - as do Nigerian scams, but if they are not really well crafted, the cause long term damage. Bush, Rove and the Republicans had a lot of success with negative attack ads in 2000 and 2004, but come 2008, those same tactics backfired in a huge way. The media turned on the attack ads and made the Republicans look like liars.

Nowdays for a an attack ad to be successful, I think it needs to be true and believeable beyond a reasonable doubt (especially if put out by the right).

Take the Iggy quotes and play them verbatim and in context. Don't pull it out of context because the MSM will beat you with hit. Don't exagerate or infer anything because the MSM will beat you with it.

If you look at the states, CNN began attacking the producers of negative ads. Those attacks were successful, because those ads did not stand up to intense scruitiny. Biased or not, the arguments CNN was making against "godless Americans" and "Call me Henry" were correct.

Of course, "Troops in the streets" has gotta be the all time "how not to launch an attack ad"
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:14 pm    Post subject: Re: Define negative ads Reply with quote

msmurphysmith wrote:
So is a good old fashioned Canadian parody a negative ad or just fun?
www.mrstiffy.ca

So did you join the Blogging Tories simply to add this link or ???

-Mac
CrowChef





Joined: 09 Sep 2009
Posts: 3
Reputation: 2.5Reputation: 2.5
votes: 1
Location: Calgary

PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Negative ads probably wouldn't exist if they didn't work. Sometimes they backfire because the message is tone deaf and/or the candidate goes back on a promise to stay positive. Sometimes they're ineffective because they wait until late in the campaign.

But "running up the negatives" often works (ie, hurts your opponent more than it hurts you), even though people say they hate negative ads or ignore them. They build narratives, especially if they're run early.

I don't mind spending some time on YouTube looking at the messages different parties and interest groups try to send, because it tells me a lot about how they think. Some of the higher quality amateur videos are good too, but they don't tell you as much.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's a decent way of staying informed. Good idea.

-Mac
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

They work. There's piles of research back it up, and some would be pretty hard pressed to argue that the negative ad campaign against Dion didn't help successfully define him as a gutless wimp in the eyes of most Canadians. Even the people who don't like them will often end accepting the premises of the add, or at least will remember them until the subject of the add does something to reinforce that message.

Like CrowChef said, they can backfire if they're poorly crafted or unfair. But if they're based in truth ...

Heck, look at Ignatieff's little high-school production values ad he just ran. That's probably a few million the Liberals were forced to spend trying to counter the 'Just Visiting' campaign.
hatrock





Joined: 22 Sep 2006
Posts: 489
Reputation: 73

PostPosted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 2:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GOOD negative ads work otherwise parties wouldn't still use them. By "good" I mean one that doesn't get too personal and simply states fact.

The Iggy video of him saying "America ... it's your country just as much as it is mine" is good because you simply can't argue with it.

Iggy is NOT proven in Canada at all and I say keep hammering on his contradictions and what he says in his books, etc.

I hear the next round of ads will be on what Iggy says about Ukrainians.
Roger Langille





Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 148
Reputation: 9.4Reputation: 9.4Reputation: 9.4Reputation: 9.4Reputation: 9.4Reputation: 9.4Reputation: 9.4Reputation: 9.4Reputation: 9.4
votes: 2

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 12:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would like to note then it was not untill after the negative stopped that the Tory Party started to gain in the polls!

No negative adds do not work, they just insult the people !
Habsrwfan





Joined: 04 Oct 2008
Posts: 688
Reputation: 49.8Reputation: 49.8Reputation: 49.8Reputation: 49.8Reputation: 49.8
votes: 5

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Negative ads work as long as they're...

1) Focused on the opposing candidate's political shortcomings or weaknesses, and not on personal characteristics that are irrelevant to the job (such as physical appearance). A relatively unattractive physical appearance may, in fact, hurt a candidate (to be brutally frank, I think that if Hillary Clinton was as physically attractive as Sarah Palin is, that Hillary would be US President right now)... but you can't draw attention to it. It's the sort of thing that can make a difference in a close race, but people don't want to think that it can, so drawing attention to it backfires. It also, of course, simply seems mean-spirited.

2) Have to come across as believable to most people.

3) What I would call 'rubbishing' as opposed to outright 'demonization'.

4) Should focus on one key negative aspect of the opposing candidate. Two at most. Any more than that it may come across as desperate negative campaigning (i.e. "throw everything at the wall and see what it sticks") which will make some voters question the validity of the ad.

5) It helps a great deal if you have video of the opposing candidate's own words, and/or the words of a political ally of his, damning him.


The idea is to make the opponent seem totally unfit for the job... not to make the opponent look like Hitler or the Devil. If an attack ad takes it to the demonization extreme, then it will tend to backfire on the candidate and/or party who uses the ads.


This is why the "Stephane Dion is Not a Leader" ad was extremely successful. It met all five criteria, and in sparkling colors. Just saying that someone lacks leadership abilities and has an unusually hard time setting priorities is rubbishing them as a leader... but it's not demonizing them. It doesn't feel "over the top". And the fact that the words of Dion and Iggy are the ones damning him here is what seals the deal.

Likewise, the 06 Tory ad that attacked the LPC by having Gomery quotes strategically placed next to Martin repeating "The Liberal Party is not corrupt" and then finishing off with the infamous "I'm entitled to my entitlements" quote was thematically brilliant. The message is clear, and presented in a poignantly symbolic way, "The Liberal Party is corrupt, and they even refuse to acknowledge it. ... Do you honestly want to re-elect these scoundrels?"


On the flip side, the "Guns in our City" ad was a complete flop that backfired since it came across as way over the top, it took comments way out of proportion, it tried to demonize rather than simply rubbishing, and frankly... it was even over a pretty irrelevant issue to begin with. Canadians aren't stupid. We realize that our men and women in the armed forces are good people, and even if they do carry on them "guns in our cities" that they're not going to be using them as though they were some sort of Gestapo.


Last edited by Habsrwfan on Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:15 pm; edited 3 times in total
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 3

Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Do negative ads really work?

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB