See YouTube video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd2btvyThuc
Contrary to what people say, negative advertising is a useful and effective tool in election campaigns. The term negative is used to indicate that your opponent(s) are the focus of your advertising, while positive advertising has a focus on you. Positive advertising shows why you are the best option and negative advertising shows why your opponent is not the best option.
Maybe a better term to use is COMPARATIVE advertising, with objective to compare and contrast options, which gives voters more information so that they can see the big picture rather than just the limited and exaggerated hype of a positive campaign.
There is a lot of psychological strategy involved in a negative ad - maybe more than in a positive ad. The use of the primary emotions of fear and anger are used to either suppress or mobilize voters.
Francesco d’Angela, Service Designer di @HintoGroup- “Oltre la Frontiera Crea...
Negative Advertising in Election Campaingns
1. Winning
the
Campaign
Nega%ve
Campaigning
Željko
Zidarić
Civic
Innova1on
Incubator
July
7,
2014
I
inkubator
2. Anyone can become angry
- that is easy, but to be angry
with the right person at the
right time, and for the right
purpose and in the right way
- that is not within everyone's
power and that is not easy.
Aristotle - Nicomachean Ethics
Book II, 1109.a27
Activists
35. Opinion
I do not agree with
voter suppression
because I see it as a manipulative
strategy to prevent people from
exercising their democratic
rights and obligations.
39. LossAversion
The pain of loss
is almost twice as
strong as the reward
felt from a gain
Pleasure
Pain
Loss
Gain
Small
Pleasure
Big
Pain
Counter-balanced by
Optimism bias
45. Fear
Flight
Fear is a response to a
stimulus perceived as a threat
– either now or in future.
• Rapid decisions
• Black or white thinking
• Herd mentality
46. Anger
Fight
Anger is a response related to
psychological interpretation
of having been threatened.
• Powerful tool
• Catalyst for action
• Optimism + control
• Respected response
47. Disgust
Avoid
Disgust is a feeling of
revulsion to the unhealthy.
• Risk minimization
• Preventative response
• Withdraw + avoid
• Long tem imprint
Contempt = Anger + Disgust
50. Disgust
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
Disgust
Sensi1vity
Conserva1ves
are
more
easily
disgusted
than
Liberals
Inbar, Pizarro, Iyer Haidt (2012) “Disgust sensitivity, political conservatism and voting”
N
=
29,623
in
USA
51. Neuroscientist
Paul D. MacLean, 1960s
TheBrain
3
1.
Rep%lian
FEAR
Fight
or
Flight
2.
Limbic
Emo1ons
+
Values
amygdala
hijacking
3.
Neocortex
Ra1onal
Thought
2
1
53. DualProcess
1890
William James
Associative
True Reason
1986
Petty Cacioppo
Peripheral
Central
1996
Steven Sloman
Associative
Rule Based
2000
Stanovich West
System 1
System 2
2003
Daniel Kahneman
Intuitive
Reasoning
2004
Strack Deutch
Impulsive
Reflective
2011
Daniel Kahneman
Fast
Slow
58. Goals
Negative ads that
work aren’t ‘negative.’
They are ‘hard-hitting
issue ads about our
opponent’s record of
shame!’
Alex Castellanos
Republican strategist
65. AdBudget
The Wesleyan Media Project
Daily
Number
of
Ads
Republican
Democrat
5,000
5,000
-‐140
-‐120
-‐100
-‐80
-‐60
-‐40
-‐20
0
Days
to
Elec1on
2008
Daily
Democra1c
and
Republican
Ads
Elec1on
Day
67. Targets
Media
Voters
Opponent
Put opponent on defensive
Influence them to investigate
- get earned media
Influence
• suppress the undecided
• force voters to reassess
• mobilize your support base.
75. 2016: Obama's America
2012 documentary by
conservative author |
and commentator
Dinesh D'Souza.
July 13, 2012 (limited)
August 24, 2012 (wide
Run Time
89 minutes
Budget
$2.5 million
Negativev2.0
77. KnowOpponent
If you know your enemies and know yourself,
you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles.
Sun Tzu, The Art of War
78. HonestyinAds
People
want
ads
that
are:
• More
about
issues
than
traits
• Issues
that
relate
to
governing
• Be
more
specific
than
vague
• Prove
it
through
documenta1on
Nega)ve
ads
are
more
about
real
issues
than
are
posi)ve
ads
John
C.
Greer,
In
Defense
of
Nega1vity
79. Topics
Attack your opponent where you are strongest
- make opponent part of your story
1. About the public record and issues
2. What the costs of their policies will be
1. Past policies
2. Future Policies
3. Qualifications of your opponent
1. Experience: Have they been in office before?
2. Traits: Do they flip-flop?
3. Out of touch?
80. Topics
1. Be Fair: Make sure you throw clean mud!
• Factual and documented
2. Us substantive arguments
3. Say something positive about your opponent
then disagree
4. Use negative ads judiciously
• Strategically timed
• Use in moderation at proper intervals
5. Graphic and audio design = emotion
82. Right-KarlRove
Rovian Counter-thrust
Take away your opponents
competitive advantage
The
Rovian
Playbook:
Campaign
Tac1cs
Tac1c
1:
Take
the
offensive
Tac1c
2:
Aaack
your
opponent’s
strengths
Tac1c
3:
Accuse
your
opponent
of
what
they
will
accuse
you
of
Tac1c
4:
Go
Nega1ve,
then
cry
foul
Tac1c
5:
The
“Big
Lie”
Tac1c
6:
Appeal
to
moral
values
Tac1c
7
Sell
the
Bush
persona
Tac1c
8:
Sell
an
adolescent
worldview
Tac1c
9:
Exploit
the
media
Tac1c
10:
Create
straw
issues
Tac1c
11:
Employ
surrogates
Tac1c
12:
Use
emo1onal
appeals
Tac1c
13:
Rely
on
expert
tes1monials
Tac1c
14:
Rhetorical
devices
Tac1c
15:
Use
of
language
83. Saul Alinsky – Rules for Radicals
1. Power is not only what you have
but what the enemy thinks you have.
2. Never go outside the experience of your people.
3. Go outside the experience of the enemy.
4. Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.
5. Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.
6. A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.
7. A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.
8. Keep the pressure on.
9. The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.
10. If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through.
11. The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.
12. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.
Left-SaulAlinsky
90. Formal
fallacies
Proposi1onal
fallacies
Quan1fica1on
fallacies
Formal
syllogis1c
fallacies
Red
herring
fallacies
• associa1on
fallacy
• appeal
to
emo1on
• argumentum
ad
hominum
• argumentum
ad
populum
• argumentum
ad
baculum
• argumentum
ad
consequen1am
Informal
fallacies
• false
aaribu1on
• if-‐by-‐whiskey
• moral
high
ground
• moralis1c
fallacy
• moving
the
goalposts
• onus
probandi
• pe11o
principii
• argumentum
ad
nauseam
• argumentum
ad
temperan1am
• argumentum
e
silen1o
• cum
hoc
ergo
propter
hoc
• circulus
in
demonstrando
LogicFallacies