So this week we’re taking a look at Carol and Frank’s respective attack ads. When I told my roommate about the subject of my new blog entry, she then launched into a five-minute speech about how I could talk about the people who strap cameras to them and videotape what they do at night to observe their territoriality and mating habits. Apparently she thought I had said “attack cats.”
Pictured: Attack cat
But as usual, I digress. We’re here to talk about attack ads: from daisies to bears to hope, attack ads have been a powerful tool for candidates to use and abuse since the advent of television. Love ‘em or hate ‘em, millions of dollars are pumped into them each election cycle, and they barrage our televisions mercilessly. So, let’s see how they’re being used in the New Hampshire District 1 race.
Take a moment to watch the ad I chose from Congresswoman Shea-Porter’s campaign. As the incumbent, Shea-Porter can play much more defense than offense, which is reflected in this ad. She’s keeping it issue-based here, discussing veterans' care and bringing in her mom for a domestic touch. Heck, she doesn’t even mention “her opponent,” which is probably part of her larger strategy. Carol’s trying to show she’s focused and confident, and brought in the old lady to soften the edge.
Now, here’s Frank Guinta’s ad. The obvious contrast here is that Frank is on the offensive, having to work doubly hard to take the reigning incumbent down. The slightly demented Pelosi/Shea-Porter animation is an interesting visual, trying to show how Shea-Porter is toeing the party line like a Democratic drone. He criticizes Shea-Porter, then presents his campaign message and policy initiative as the better choice for voters. Obviously, it’s more effective to take your opponent down before building yourself up, and Guinta is definitely following that tried-and-true blueprint.
And those are thoughts for the week, attack cats and all. Before I go, though, Frank Guinta and Congressman Shea-Porter have made slight changes to their campaign websites, so the new link for Guinta’s website is here and Shea-Porter’s is here. Next week we’re going to discuss the thing that makes the world – and political campaigns – go ‘round: money, money, money. So come back same time next week for a discussion of how the big green stuff is affecting New Hampshire’s District 1 race.

I love the picture of the attack cat, that's hilarious! I really like this entry, though I'm not sure that I would characterize Shea-Porter's ad as an "attack ad." She seems to be keeping it mostly positive and focusing on her own story and policies, though there is some veiled criticism of the Republican Party.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Amanda that Shea-Porter's ad doesn't seem as negative but it still does subtly criticize the Republican Party. Both candidates used attack ads in their campaign because it seems by bringing out the other candidates faults the less likely people will vote for them. In elections it is hard to have positive television ads and therefore many candidates use attack ads in order to sway voters. I wonder how much attack ads in this district impacted the election.
ReplyDelete