Jonah Patel
In the high-stakes world of political campaigns, a competitor or adversary is typically referred to as a political rival. The term opposition research or oppo research refers to the strategic practice of collecting information on these political rivals to be used against them. This information can include biographical details, legal and criminal history, and financial activities. The digital age has seen an increase in the use of tracker programs, where videographers follow candidates and record their activities and speeches, with the footage used to discredit them. Social media has also become a powerful tool, with divisive posts about political rivals driving engagement and increasing the odds of a post being shared.
Characteristics of a Political Rival
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Definition | A person, business, or organization that you are competing or fighting against in the same area or for the same thing. |
| Opposition Research | The practice of collecting information on a political opponent or adversary that can be used to discredit or weaken them. |
| Techniques | Counter-rallies, picketing of rival parties' meetings, overwhelming rival candidates' offices with mischievous phone calls, etc. |
| Social Media | Divisive posts dunking on opponents drives engagement on social media. |
| Supporters | Activists, volunteers, and interns who take part in activities such as canvassing door-to-door and making phone calls on behalf of the campaigns. |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Opposition research
In politics, opposition research, also known as "oppo research" or just "oppo", is the practice of collecting information on a political opponent or adversary that can be used to discredit or weaken them. The term "oppo" is commonly used among political campaign staff and opposition researchers. The research is conducted in the period between a candidate's announcement of their intent to run and the election itself, although political parties also maintain long-term databases spanning several decades.
The information collected can include biographical, legal, criminal, medical, educational, or financial history, as well as prior media coverage and voting records. Social media accounts are also commonly scrutinised for past comments and posts. Opposition research can also involve using trackers to follow an individual and record their activities and speeches, which is often done through campaign-funded "tracker programs" where videographers use candidates' itineraries to track and record their remarks. This footage can then be used against them, as in the case of former Senator George Allen, who was unseated after footage of him using an ethnic slur was widely circulated in the media.
Gross Rating Points: Buying Political Campaign Influence
You may want to see also
Whisper campaigns
The use of whisper campaigns is not limited to political candidates but can also be directed at other public figures or individuals who become the target of character assassination. For instance, a whispering campaign was mounted against Jamal Khashoggi when the question of the United States' response to his disappearance was under debate.
While whisper campaigns have been facilitated by modern technologies like the internet, which allow for faster and more anonymous communication, they have also become more susceptible to failure. This is because those seeking to prevent them can quickly publicize their existence and counter their effects.
Who Pays for Political Campaigns? Government Funding Explained
You may want to see also
Negative campaigning
In the cut-throat world of politics, negative campaigning is a well-worn strategy employed by candidates and their teams to gain an edge over their rivals. While it may be unsavory, it is an undeniable feature of modern political campaigns, often proving effective in swaying public opinion and shaping the outcome of elections. At its core, negative campaigning involves a deliberate and strategic effort to discredit, undermine, and tarnish the reputation of an opposing candidate. This can take many forms, from highlighting their opponent's past scandals or policy failures to exploiting personal weaknesses or controversial statements. The aim is simple: to sow seeds of doubt in the minds of voters, framing the rival as unfit, untrustworthy, or a risk not worth taking.
This tactic often arises from a belief that attacking an opponent can be more effective than solely promoting one's own strengths and policies. By shifting the focus onto the rival's shortcomings, a candidate can potentially gain ground, especially if they themselves are relatively unknown or lack a strong political platform. This strategy can be particularly potent when targeted at undecided or swing voters, who may be more susceptible to negative messaging and could ultimately be influenced to vote against a candidate rather than for one.
However, negative campaigning is not without its risks. While it may grab attention and make headlines, it can also backfire spectacularly. Voters may perceive such tactics as desperate or beneath the dignity of the office being sought. It can also invite scrutiny of the attacker's own record, opening them up to counter-attacks and potentially damaging their own reputation. Furthermore, negative campaigns can alienate moderate voters or those seeking a more positive vision for the future. As such, candidates must carefully calculate the potential benefits against the risks of a negative strategy.
Despite these potential drawbacks, negative campaigning persists as a feature of political contests. It often reflects a pragmatic approach to politics, where victory is the ultimate goal. For candidates and their strategists, it can be a powerful tool in the right circumstances, especially when employed subtly through carefully crafted messaging and targeted advertising. Ultimately, while it may not be the most honorable tactic, negative campaigning is a reality of modern politics, and one that is likely to continue as long as it proves effective in influencing voter behavior.
Family Political Donations: Legality and Ethical Boundaries
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Social media engagement
Social media has changed the game for political campaigns, allowing both incumbents and newcomers to connect directly with constituents and communicate their views. This has made it easier for newcomers to gain momentum, although it has not replaced the need for funding and support from influential donors.
Political campaigns on social media can take many forms, from simple messaging to live video streaming. Live video, in particular, can encourage meaningful and personable dialogue with voters, as well as addressing local issues that may not be covered by larger outlets. Social media also allows politicians to broadcast their own news and chat with constituents, bypassing traditional media outlets. This can be a powerful tool for political campaigns, as it is a low-cost way to reach a wide audience.
However, social media also presents challenges for political campaigns. For example, political accounts are often seen as annoying by the public, and some people go out of their way to avoid political discussions on these platforms. This can make attracting followers and support more difficult. Additionally, the fast-paced and public nature of social media can lead to gaffes and missteps that can damage a campaign.
To be effective on social media, political campaigns need to focus on their goals and engage with accounts relevant to their cause. Asking questions and posing topical issues are simple ways to encourage engagement and create a sense of community. Bite-sized videos, in particular, have viral potential and can be an effective way to reach a wider audience. Off-the-cuff cell phone footage has become a staple of political social media, offering an authentic and unedited view of candidates.
Kamala's Platform: Her Vision and Plans for America
You may want to see also
Collective party action
Political campaigns are a collective effort, requiring the coordination of various actors, including the candidate, campaign staff, volunteers, and activists. This diverse group of individuals and groups must work together towards the common goal of promoting their candidate and their policies while also finding ways to discredit or weaken their political rivals without incurring backlash or losing popularity with the electorate.
One essential aspect of collective party action is opposition research, which involves gathering information on political opponents that can be used against them. This can include biographical details, legal and criminal records, financial history, and voting records. Often, this information is collected through tracker programs, where videographers follow candidates and record their remarks, capturing any gaffes or controversial statements that can be used to damage their reputation.
Another tactic employed by political parties is to use surrogates or celebrities to campaign on their behalf. This can include influential individuals or activists, known as "foot soldiers," who volunteer their time to promote the campaign through door-to-door canvassing, phone calls, and other grassroots efforts. These volunteers play a crucial role in spreading the campaign message and increasing voter turnout.
In addition to these positive campaigning strategies, parties must also navigate the challenges of negative campaigning. One approach is to distance themselves from disruptive tactics such as counter-rallies or picketing rival parties' meetings, instead focusing on promoting their own candidate's strengths. However, this can be difficult, as parties also seek to actively reduce the attractiveness of their competitors. This dilemma often results in parties farming out attacks to outside groups, such as Super PACs, to avoid direct association with toxic or divisive messages.
The use of social media has also become an integral part of collective party action. Research has shown that divisive posts that reference rival politicians or competing worldviews are more likely to go viral and generate engagement. However, this can lead to increased political hostility and animosity, with social media platforms becoming swamped by negative and polarizing content.
The Political Campaign Trail: America's Strategy and Tactics
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
A rival in a political campaign is often referred to as a "political rival".
Political campaigns may employ various strategies to counter their rivals, such as:
- Hampering the rival's ability to campaign through counter-rallies, picketing their meetings, or flooding their offices with nuisance phone calls.
- Using endorsements from celebrated party members to boost support.
- Employing campaign surrogates, such as celebrities or influential individuals, to campaign on their behalf.
- Conducting opposition research (oppo research) to collect and disseminate information that can discredit or weaken rivals.
- Releasing press statements to capture the dynamics of the campaign and distribute messages to a broader audience.
A study by University of Cambridge psychologists found that divisive social media posts targeting political rivals can drive engagement. Each additional word referencing a rival politician or competing worldview increased the odds of a post being shared by an average of 67% across a dataset of 2.7 million Tweets and Facebook posts. The use of hostile and hyper-partisan language in these posts may ultimately harm politics and society, according to Prof. Jay Van Bavel from New York University.
