Can the Press Monitor Campaign Advertising?

Abstract

In the wake of the 1988 election, journalists developed a new format for reporting campaign advertising: the ad watch. Today, stories that critique candidates' televised advertisements are standard fare for newspapers and television news programs. Little is known, however, about the effects of ad-watch reporting on viewers' attitudes about the candidates and about the political process. This article presents the results of three simple experiments involving ad watches aired by CNN in 1992. Surprisingly, participants expressed increased electoral support for the candidate whose ad was scrutinized by the press. We recommend further refinement of the genre, including two-sided ad watches that cover advertisements on a particular issue by competing candidates.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ansolabehere, Stephen , and Shanto Iyengar . 1996. Going Negative: How Attack Advertising Shrinks and Polarizes the American Electorate. New York: Free Press .

Ansolabehere, Stephen , Shanto Iyengar , Adam Simon , and Nicholas Valentino . 1994. “Does Attack Advertising Demobilize the Electorate?” American Political Science Review 88: (4) 829-839 .

Bode, Ken . 1992. “Pull the Plug: Empower the Voters.” The Quill 80(2) 10-14 .

Broder, David . 1990. “Five Ways to Put Some Sanity Back in Elections.” Washington Post, Jan. 14:B1.

Broder, David . 1992. “Hit the Streets...” The Quill 80(2): 8-9 .

Campbell, Donald , and Julian Stanley . 1966. Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research. New York: Rand McNally .

Cappella, Joseph N. , and Kathleen Hall Jamieson . 1994. “Broadcast Adwatch Effects: A Field Experiment.” Communication Research 23(3): 342-365 .

Dennis, Everette E. 1992. The Media and Campaign '92. New York: Simon and Schuster .

Germond, Jack , and Jules Witcover . 1989. Whose Broad Stripes and Bright Stars? New York: Simon and Schuster .

10.

Iyengar, Shanto , and Donald Kinder . 1987. News That Matters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press .

11.

Jamieson, Kathleen Hall . 1992. Dirty Politics: Deception, Distraction, and Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press .

12.

Kaid, Lynda Lee , R.H. Gobetz , J. Garner , and D.K. Scott . 1993. “Television News and Presidential Campaigns: The Legitimization of Televised Political Advertising.” Social Science Quarterly 74(2): 274-285 .

13.

Kern, Montague , Darrell West , and Dean Alger . 1993. “Ad-Watch Journalism.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C.

14.

Kinder, Donald R. , and Thomas R. Palfrey , eds. 1993. Experimental Foundations of Political Science. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press .

15.

Oreskes, Michael . 1989. “What Poison Politics Has Done to America.” New York Times, Oct. 29:E1.

16.

Otten, Alan . 1992. “TV News Drops Kid-Gloved Coverage of Election, Trading Staged Sound-Bites for Hard Analysis.” Wall Street Journal, Oct. 12: A12 .

17.

Patterson, Thomas . 1993. Out of Order. New York: Knopf .

18.

Pfau, Michael , and Allan Louden . 1994. “Effectiveness of Ad-Watch Formats in Deflecting Political Attack Ads.” Communication Research 21(3): 325-341 .

19.

Runkel, David , ed. 1989. Campaign for President: The Managers Look at 1988. Boston: Auburn House .

20.

Taylor, Paul . 1988. “Pigsty Politics: The 1988 Presidential Race Set a New Standard for Negative Advertisements.” Washington Post National Weekly Edition, Nov. 9: A7 .

21.

“Trial Heats Nationally and in the States.”

1992. American Enterprise 3(6): 100-104 .

22.

Vallone, R. , L. Ross , and M. Lepper . 1987. “The Hostile Media Phenomenon: Biased Perception and Perceptions of Media Bias in Coverage of the Beirut Massacre.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 49(3): 577-585 .

23.

Wolinsky, Leo , et al . 1991. “Refereeing the TV Campaign.” Washington Journalism Review 13(1): 22-28 .