CNN has a nice piece on the evolution of political advertising on tv since 1952 (the date of the first ad). It is really interesting to watch. (see link here)
Political ads sure have changed since the 1960's. The ads that we see today definitely have a more viscous angle and generally seem to be attacking one candidate or another. I liked the Regan ads from the video that showed the sun rising in American and the poor economy fading away in the background while Americans went off to work. I think that type of ad would work better today as people are getting tired of the attack ads.
Though interesting to watch, the content of this was not particularly enlightening for me. However, this kind of meta-analysis of campaigns seems like a healthy direction for American politics and media. I'm sure that for many individuals, this video will give them a lot of context for the current political climate, but I worry that this kind of faux history cheapens actual historical knowledge.
I agree with Beth. The half ads that we see today of a political party is attacking the opposing party and it doesn't only happen in the United States. During my time abroad, I was able to see some of the campaigning ads which were very similar to ours and would consume the commercial time. From the video I was able to see how much the ads have changed. Before they used to be more serious and held a message about the candidate who was being represented in the video, but now they are mostly about the what they opposing party is doing wrong. It also seems like nowadays, we remember the ads more because they were funny rather than for what was actually said.
This video is very interesting! I actually heard a talk on NPR the other day that reiterated this same message. The talk mentioned that because of media, presidential candidates must do a better job than ever of being interpersonal and relating to the American public. The talk also mentioned that our great founding fathers would most likely not of been elected today because most of them were very introverted. A historian commented that though George Washington was brilliant, he struggled to articulate his thoughts. Candidates today need to be able to present their plans and sway voters. In regards to the video, I though the Nixon advertisement at the beginning of the video was very powerful! The add said “vote like your whole world depends on it.” This message emphasizes the importance of foreign policy and the United States’ stance with the rest of the world.
This was a very cool video to watch. Something that stood out to me was the mention of the lack of factual based ads these days. As a voter, it has gotten to the point where I pretty much disregard any advertisement I see on TV, because every single one just condratics their opponents. I've also given a lot of thought about the fact that we (in this class) are fortunate enough to become educated about the political race at a great school, and yet it's still hard to understand all the issues and stances that the candidates take. It makes you wonder how difficult it is for some Americans to vote, because perhaps they haven't been very well informed about the race. If that is the case, and they have to rely on the television advertisements, there are sure to be people manipulated by the ads produced by super PACS.
This is a nice short overview of how our political ads have changed overtime. The biggest change that will certainly go down in history for this period--Is how ads have changed with the introduction of superpacs. These bodies are arguably totally unethical because of the lack-of-regulation regarding their agendas. There is no need for a "I approve this message", so companies can be as slanderous, mud-slinging, and wildly accusational as they want. While intellegent people can certainly spot out some of the facts from fiction--their vote counts JUST as much as the ignoramus who is directly affected by the ludacrisness of a particular ad.
The guy raises a very good point about inaccuracies of the political communication with the public. Except for the people who can really understand what the message, the ads can be quite misleading for many people. Furthermore, rather than conveying the message the ads are being used a tool by big companies to associate themselves with influential personalities and creating a faulty image.
Political ads sure have changed since the 1960's. The ads that we see today definitely have a more viscous angle and generally seem to be attacking one candidate or another. I liked the Regan ads from the video that showed the sun rising in American and the poor economy fading away in the background while Americans went off to work. I think that type of ad would work better today as people are getting tired of the attack ads.
ReplyDeleteThough interesting to watch, the content of this was not particularly enlightening for me. However, this kind of meta-analysis of campaigns seems like a healthy direction for American politics and media. I'm sure that for many individuals, this video will give them a lot of context for the current political climate, but I worry that this kind of faux history cheapens actual historical knowledge.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Beth. The half ads that we see today of a political party is attacking the opposing party and it doesn't only happen in the United States. During my time abroad, I was able to see some of the campaigning ads which were very similar to ours and would consume the commercial time. From the video I was able to see how much the ads have changed. Before they used to be more serious and held a message about the candidate who was being represented in the video, but now they are mostly about the what they opposing party is doing wrong. It also seems like nowadays, we remember the ads more because they were funny rather than for what was actually said.
ReplyDeleteThis video is very interesting! I actually heard a talk on NPR the other day that reiterated this same message. The talk mentioned that because of media, presidential candidates must do a better job than ever of being interpersonal and relating to the American public. The talk also mentioned that our great founding fathers would most likely not of been elected today because most of them were very introverted. A historian commented that though George Washington was brilliant, he struggled to articulate his thoughts. Candidates today need to be able to present their plans and sway voters.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the video, I though the Nixon advertisement at the beginning of the video was very powerful! The add said “vote like your whole world depends on it.” This message emphasizes the importance of foreign policy and the United States’ stance with the rest of the world.
This was a very cool video to watch. Something that stood out to me was the mention of the lack of factual based ads these days. As a voter, it has gotten to the point where I pretty much disregard any advertisement I see on TV, because every single one just condratics their opponents. I've also given a lot of thought about the fact that we (in this class) are fortunate enough to become educated about the political race at a great school, and yet it's still hard to understand all the issues and stances that the candidates take. It makes you wonder how difficult it is for some Americans to vote, because perhaps they haven't been very well informed about the race. If that is the case, and they have to rely on the television advertisements, there are sure to be people manipulated by the ads produced by super PACS.
ReplyDeleteThis is a nice short overview of how our political ads have changed overtime. The biggest change that will certainly go down in history for this period--Is how ads have changed with the introduction of superpacs. These bodies are arguably totally unethical because of the lack-of-regulation regarding their agendas. There is no need for a "I approve this message", so companies can be as slanderous, mud-slinging, and wildly accusational as they want. While intellegent people can certainly spot out some of the facts from fiction--their vote counts JUST as much as the ignoramus who is directly affected by the ludacrisness of a particular ad.
ReplyDeleteThe guy raises a very good point about inaccuracies of the political communication with the public. Except for the people who can really understand what the message, the ads can be quite misleading for many people. Furthermore, rather than conveying the message the ads are being used a tool by big companies to associate themselves with influential personalities and creating a faulty image.
ReplyDelete