A History of Political Ads with Mr. Lewis and Mrs. O’Boyle
By Max Yurko
On a rainy fall day in early October, St. Paul’s School for Boys hosted the first of many “Lunch and Learn” sessions educating the group on relevant election issues. The discussion on October 2 featured SP faculty leaders, Mrs. O’Boyle and Mr. Lewis, lecturing on the history of political ads and campaign tactics.
Mrs. O’Boyle began by describing the impact of an effective logo to attract voters. A well-designed logo typically presents a visual representation of the candidate along with their core message. Logos serve as easily recognizable symbols for a campaign and are easy to mass produce, creating consistent advertising. Name recognition factors prominently in the use of signs throughout communities, while bumper stickers allow campaigns to promote their candidate on roads and highways and market them across the country. On the production level, campaigns use graphics, images, colors, and scenes that appeal to audiences and instill a favorable impression.
Propaganda often forms a powerful and dangerous arm of a campaign, particularly insidious in its tendency to manipulate and mislead the public with lies and half-truths. Mrs. O’Boyle emphasized that visual representations and video messaging attempt to boost the reputation of their favored candidate and tarnish the opponent by appealing to emotion and patriotism, and sometimes include misleading statements. She capped off this message with an entertaining parody of exaggerated claims and attacks that highlighted the extreme levels to which campaigning might go.
The use of microtargeting has expanded exponentially because of technology. Campaigns collect personal data, including addresses, profession, workplace, and religion, and use computer algorithms to target voters with advertisements unique to their circumstances. These ads then appear on online platforms frequented by that individual. Through this invasive technique, political organizers can tailor their communication to reach voters with messages that align with the biases of the targeted individual.
As Mrs. O’Boyle concluded her introduction to political campaign techniques, Mr. Lewis launched into his segment examining the fallacies within political ads. He noted that campaigns utilize advertisements for two purposes: to lure voters into choosing their candidate or to discourage voters from voting altogether. There are two main strategies to entice voters: “ad hominem” and “ad populum” arguments. Ad hominem or “against the person” consists of attacking the rival’s personal traits rather than discussing substantive issues. The ad hominem attack uses various tactics to scorn the opponent. The other strategy to attract votes is ad populum or “appeal to the masses”. Campaigners utilize the “bandwagon appeal”, claiming something that is popular is good precisely because of its popularity. Utilizing a form of peer pressure, the ad populum argument gains power by corralling massive groups of voters who yield to the opinions of others in deciding their vote.
Mr. Lewis reviewed several types of fallacies that build on faulty logic. The slippery slope fallacy is an argument that if a specific action is taken, then another will follow. These ads create a public fear that if a certain candidate is elected, they will make an executive move which will lead to even more disastrous consequences. The deceptive strawman argument exaggerates or presents a candidate’s positions bizarrely or inaccurately in order to discredit it. The campaign may claim their opponent holds a position that he has not endorsed, and then argue against that false position. The strawman argument essentially tricks voters into incorrectly associating an undesirable policy with a candidate who has not actually argued for that policy. Finally, campaigns may create a false dilemma, presenting two options with one drastically worse than the other. The public then must select the “lesser evil” and vote for the campaign’s candidate.
The discussion culminated with reviews of polling practices and media bias. Mr. Lewis pointed out that polls are tools easily manipulated and skewed toward desired outcomes. Additionally, media bias affects the version of the “facts” and the tone in which candidates receive coverage. By realizing the specific bias of the new outlet, voters can interpret the validity of a message and know when to seek more information or a different point of view on the same subject.
Mrs. O’Boyle capped off the session with a reminder to “question everything.” Voters must investigate sources and trace claims back to their origin. She advised students that images can be easily manipulated, and words drastically altered. So, when it comes time to vote, be someone who self-advocates, recognizes deception, and examines political messaging with a critical eye.
Leave a Reply