Negative Political Ads: The First Televised Campaign

Political advertising has been a feature of election campaigns since 1952, when the first televised political ads were aired. Since then, negative campaigning has become a staple of the election cycle, with candidates and parties adopting a variety of strategies to discredit their opponents. One of the earliest examples of negative campaigning was in 1952, when the Democrats ran an ad accusing the Republicans of saying one thing and doing another. This set the tone for future elections, with candidates increasingly embracing negative ads to gain an edge over their rivals. One of the most notorious negative ads was the Daisy ad, aired during Lyndon Johnson's 1964 presidential campaign, which implied that his Republican opponent, Barry Goldwater, could not be trusted with nuclear weapons.

Explore related products

Propaganda

$12.05 $14.95

The Campaign Manager

$40.62 $62.99

The Political Campaign Desk Reference: A Guide for Campaign Managers, Professionals and Candidates Running for Office

$16.27 $19.95

The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation

$11.99 $21.99

Winning Local Elections: A Guide To Winning Local, County and Legislative Political Campaigns

$16.95

The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns

$15.06 $19

The first televised attack ad was aired in 1952

In the 1952 ad, Democrats charged that Republicans would say one thing and do another, accusing them of hypocrisy and deceit. This type of attack on an opponent's integrity and trustworthiness has become a common strategy in political advertising. The same year, the GOP started a rumour that Democrat Adlai Stevenson was homosexual, demonstrating how personal attacks and attempts to discredit candidates based on their identity have long been utilised in political campaigns.

The use of television provided a powerful platform to reach a wider audience and influence public opinion. The combination of visual imagery and messaging proved to be an effective tool for political campaigns, with Eisenhower's campaign strategically placing ads between popular shows to capture the attention of viewers. This recognition of the importance of entertainment value in political advertising laid the groundwork for future campaigns to focus on creating captivating content to engage voters.

The first televised attack ad also set a precedent for the increasing role of media and advertising professionals in politics. Kennedy's campaign, for instance, hired Jack Denove Productions to follow him and create exciting spot advertisements, demonstrating how campaigns were beginning to recognise the value of professional production in shaping their candidate's public image.

While the first televised attack ad may have been a turning point, negative campaigning has continued to evolve and adapt to new media landscapes. From radio advertising in the 1930s to the internet and social media, each new technological advancement has provided new avenues for negative messaging. Despite the potential for negative backlash, research suggests that negative campaigning can be effective in influencing voting preferences and shaping public opinion.

The 1964 Daisy commercial suggested GOP candidate Barry Goldwater couldn't be trusted with nuclear weapons

The 1964 Daisy commercial, also known as the "Daisy Girl" or "Peace, Little Girl", was a highly controversial political advertisement that ran as part of Lyndon B. Johnson's presidential campaign. The commercial aired only once but is considered a significant factor in Johnson's landslide victory over the Republican candidate, Barry Goldwater, and a turning point in political advertising.

The ad, created in partnership with the Doyle Dane Bernbach agency and Tony Schwartz, began with a three-year-old girl, Monique Corzilius, standing in a meadow, plucking the petals from a daisy as she counts from one to ten. Her innocent actions and surroundings are suddenly juxtaposed with a mission-control countdown and a massive nuclear blast in the shape of a mushroom cloud. The commercial implied that Goldwater was a warmonger who could not be trusted with nuclear weapons and would lead the world into nuclear destruction. Goldwater had suggested the use of nuclear weapons in the Vietnam War and stated that the US should not fear war with the Soviets. He also wrote that the nuclear bomb was "merely another weapon."

While the ad did not directly mention Goldwater's name, it was designed to highlight Johnson's anti-war and anti-nuclear positions in contrast to Goldwater's more aggressive stance. The commercial was criticised for using the prospect of nuclear war to frighten voters, and Johnson's campaign was accused of implying that Goldwater would start a nuclear conflict. The ad was so powerful that it changed the landscape of political advertising, and even half a century later, it is still remembered as one of the most influential political ads ever created.

The Daisy commercial was not the first negative political ad on television. That distinction goes to an attack ad from the 1952 election, where Democrats charged Republicans with saying one thing and doing another. However, the Daisy ad was considered one of the most savagely negative ads of its time due to its emotional and visceral impact. It provoked immediate controversy and contributed to the "`Nuclear Issue`" being a significant topic of discussion during the 1964 election season.

George H.W. Bush's 1988 campaign ran a racist ad tying a convict to his Democratic opponent

The first negative political ad on television was aired in 1952, when Democrats charged that Republicans would say one thing and do another. The same year, the GOP started a rumour that Democrat Adlai Stevenson was a homosexual.

However, one of the most notable negative political ads in US history was run by George H.W. Bush's 1988 campaign. The ad tied a convict to his Democratic opponent, Michael Dukakis, and was considered racist.

The ad, known as the "Willie Horton ad", attacked Dukakis over Massachusetts' furlough program, which allowed prisoners to have weekend passes. It featured a mugshot of William Horton, an escaped convict from Massachusetts who had committed robbery, rape, and assault. The ad juxtaposed photos of Horton with photos of Dukakis and touted Bush's support of the death penalty. It was designed to expose Dukakis' policies on crime as weak and stoke fears about black men and crime.

The ad was produced by Bush's media advisor, Roger Ailes, and his campaign manager, Lee Atwater. Atwater, a Southerner, was aware of the impact of masked appeals to race in elections. He renamed William as "Willie", playing on racial stereotypes. The ad was financed by the National Security PAC and was not officially affiliated with Bush's campaign.

The use of Horton as a political weapon was effective in reducing support for Dukakis. Bush easily defeated Dukakis in the election, becoming the 43rd president of the United States.

Explore related products

The Political Campaign Desk Reference: A Guide for Campaign Managers, Operatives, and Candidates Running for Political Office

$18.95

Campaign Craft: The Strategies, Tactics, and Art of Political Campaign Management (Praeger Series in Political Communication)

$32 $43.15

The Art of the Political Campaign: How to run for elected office with no money, name recognition or political connections

$9.99

Effective Tactics for Local Political Campaigns: Winning Strategies for Successful Local Political Campaigns: Unleash the Power of Effective Tactics to Secure Your Victory

$12.95

Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices (Communication, Media, and Politics)

$36.41 $60

Campaign of Chaos: Trump, Biden, Harris, and the 2024 American Election

$30 $27

The 2012 presidential campaign was particularly negative, with 3/4 of ads appealing to anger

The 2012 presidential campaign was marked by an abundance of negative advertising, with three-quarters of the ads appealing to anger. This shift in tone may be attributed to the increasing influence of media in elections, with candidates recognising the power of television as a platform to influence voter preferences.

Negative campaigning has a long history in American politics, dating back to the 1800 election between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. However, the introduction of television as a medium for political advertising added a new dimension to these tactics. The very first attack ad on television was aired in 1952, when Democrats charged Republicans with saying one thing and doing another. This set a precedent for negative campaigning in subsequent elections.

The 2012 campaign stood out for the high proportion of negative ads, with only 14.3% of ads considered positive. This was a notable increase from previous years, and it caught the attention of academics and researchers. One study by Erika Franklin Fowler, an assistant professor of government, found that 75% of ads aired during the 2012 presidential race appealed to anger. This focus on negative messaging may have been a deliberate strategy to influence voter turnout, as research suggests that negative advertising can suppress voter participation, particularly among Independent voters.

The effectiveness of negative campaigning is a subject of debate. While some studies suggest that negative ads can demobilize voters, others find that they can be influential in shaping voting preferences. The success of these ads also depends on who is producing them and the political affiliation they represent. Personal contact from political campaigns can have a mobilizing effect on voters, but the role of message tone in grassroots campaigns has been relatively understudied.

The 2012 campaign provided a notable example of the impact of negative advertising. The race between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney featured hard-hitting attack ads from both sides. Romney's ad criticised Obama for using negative campaigning, while Obama's campaign targeted Romney's business practices and outsourcing of jobs. These ads contributed to a perception of the 2012 election as particularly negative and divisive.

Negative campaigning is not limited to the US, with examples from New Zealand, Canada, and the UK

Negative campaigning is a common tactic used by politicians to discredit their opponents. While it is a risky and controversial strategy, many politicians are willing to use it to gain an edge over their opponents. Negative campaigning is not limited to the US; it is prevalent in many other countries, including New Zealand, Canada, and the UK.

In the 1975 New Zealand general election, the opposing National Party launched the infamous "Dancing Cossacks" television attack advertisement. This ad, animated by Hanna-Barbera, claimed that the incumbent Labour Party's recently introduced compulsory superannuation scheme could lead to Soviet-style communism.

In Canada, during the 1993 federal election, the Progressive Conservative Party launched attack ads that were widely seen as mocking opposing candidate Jean Chrétien's facial deformity.

In the UK, the Conservative Party ran a campaign during the run-up to the 1997 general election, stating that the Labour Party was dangerous.

These examples demonstrate that negative campaigning is a global phenomenon, with politicians in various countries employing similar strategies to discredit their opponents and influence voters' perceptions.

Frequently asked questions