I AM A WOMAN
 | If someone tells you that you have enough shoes, Stop talking to them. You don’t need that kind of negativity in your life. |
AND I APPROVE THIS MESSAGE
I was just wondering how many of you out there are getting as tired of political ads as I am, and we still have months to go. Most of all, “I Approve This Message” is getting really irritating. When did this statement become such a thing? Why do all the candidates say this?
STAND BY YOUR AD
Believe it or not, this is a legal mandate! Of course it is! You knew that. I mean … after all … we’re talking about government here!
STAND BY YOUR AD
Believe it or not, this is a legal mandate! Of course it is! You knew that. I mean … after all … we’re talking about government here!
The SBYA (Stand By Your Ad) Provision is part of the “Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act” adopted in 2002 which amended the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require candidates for federal political office, as well as interest groups and political parties supporting or opposing a candidate, to include in radio and television advertising the statement that the candidate has approved the
statement. Photo source: cagle.com/jason-stanford/
statement. Photo source: cagle.com/jason-stanford/
The provision was intended to minimize the “Attack Ads” which began to proliferate in the 1960s, criticizing an opponent's political platform. and has since become a slandering contest. It is an attempt to force candidates to associate themselves with the attacks in such ads (rather than do it anonymously) and to discourage defamation of character as a campaign strategy.
Representative David Price of North Carolina, proposer of the amendment, state:
"The American people are sick of the relentlessly negative tone of campaigns, particularly in presidential races. ‘Stand By Your Ad’ isn't just about restoring civility to campaigns. It's also about restoring people's faith in our political process." wikipedia.org/Stand_by_Your_Ad_provision
In my opinion, that would be a good thing. Unfortunately, it hasn’t seemed to achieve its purpose, but at least the public knows who is saying what.
THE “BAD TIMING AWARD” GOES TO….
As Jon Levine says in mic.com/articles/, “Despite noble intentions, the major flaw of the Stand By Your Ad provision wasn't in the text but its timing.” Adoption preceded actions which rendered it somewhat ineffective.
The Legislation addresses only radio and television ads without anticipating the popularity of the internet and social media. Also, the Supreme Court allowed unlimited donations to super PACs, not named in the SBYA statute. “Now, rather than any single person, massive political ad campaigns are often bankrolled by groups with names like ‘Security is Strength’” not subject to the disclosure.
Violation of the “Stand By Your Ad” provision can result in penalties levied by the Federal Election Commission and the loss of lowest rates for campaign ads. Attempts have been made to broaden the text to include internet ads, but the original bipartisan support has fallen victim to the ever-expanding schism between political parties and platforms.
I predict a long and full life for the words “I’m X, and I approve this message.”
MUDSLINGING: AN AMERICAN POLITICAL TRADITION
I also predict the American Political System will not betray the long tradition of negative campaign rhetoric.
Most likely, the first presidential election in the United States of America (1788–89) is the only one not plagued by badmouthing the other candidates. That’s because no one else ran against George Washington. Washington had no political party and did no campaigning. He was our last and only non-partisan president.
Representative David Price of North Carolina, proposer of the amendment, state:
"The American people are sick of the relentlessly negative tone of campaigns, particularly in presidential races. ‘Stand By Your Ad’ isn't just about restoring civility to campaigns. It's also about restoring people's faith in our political process." wikipedia.org/Stand_by_Your_Ad_provision
In my opinion, that would be a good thing. Unfortunately, it hasn’t seemed to achieve its purpose, but at least the public knows who is saying what.
THE “BAD TIMING AWARD” GOES TO….
As Jon Levine says in mic.com/articles/, “Despite noble intentions, the major flaw of the Stand By Your Ad provision wasn't in the text but its timing.” Adoption preceded actions which rendered it somewhat ineffective.
The Legislation addresses only radio and television ads without anticipating the popularity of the internet and social media. Also, the Supreme Court allowed unlimited donations to super PACs, not named in the SBYA statute. “Now, rather than any single person, massive political ad campaigns are often bankrolled by groups with names like ‘Security is Strength’” not subject to the disclosure.
Violation of the “Stand By Your Ad” provision can result in penalties levied by the Federal Election Commission and the loss of lowest rates for campaign ads. Attempts have been made to broaden the text to include internet ads, but the original bipartisan support has fallen victim to the ever-expanding schism between political parties and platforms.
I predict a long and full life for the words “I’m X, and I approve this message.”
MUDSLINGING: AN AMERICAN POLITICAL TRADITION
I also predict the American Political System will not betray the long tradition of negative campaign rhetoric.
Most likely, the first presidential election in the United States of America (1788–89) is the only one not plagued by badmouthing the other candidates. That’s because no one else ran against George Washington. Washington had no political party and did no campaigning. He was our last and only non-partisan president.
By the election of 1800, between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, influential outsiders and journalists had taken up the torch. There is a long backstory to the election, which I won’t bother you with other than to give some of the quotes.
Thomas Jefferson and John Adams
Photo source: https://www.bing.com/images/
The President of Yale publically suggested that if Jefferson were elected “we would see our wives and daughters the victims of legal prostitution.” A newspaper in Connecticut stated that “Jefferson would create a nation where ‘murder, robbery, rape, adultery and incest will openly be taught and practiced.”
Others in the Adams camp called Jefferson "a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mulatto father.”
Not to be left out, an influential supporter of Jefferson, named Callender, wrote that Adams was “a rageful, lying, warmongering fellow; a ‘repulsive pedant’ and ‘gross hypocrite’ who ‘behaved neither like a man nor like a woman but instead possessed a hideous hermaphroditical character.”
An interesting side note to the above story: Callender expected to be named postmaster as a reward for his support. When Jefferson appointed someone else, Callender wrote a series of articles charging the new president with having fathered children with a slave named Sally Hemings.
In this election, no one was exempt and the candidates’ wives were also subjected to public name-calling. In the words of one historian, the election of 1828 boiled down to: “Do you want to vote for someone whose wife is a whore or do you want to vote for someone who pimped for the czar of Russia?”
ALL’S WELL THAT ENDS WELL
Jefferson was elected, and later he and Adams mended fences and became close friends, but the tradition lived on.
Things seemed to reach the anonymous-ad-boiling-point in 1988 with the Willie Horton TV ad consisting of a mug shot of convicted murderer William Horton. This criminal was released as part of the weekend furlough program, escaped, and committed more crimes.
The ad was produced by supporters of a candidate without his authorization, and devastated the other candidate, setting the later stage for the bipartisan adoption of the as part of the SBYD in 2002.
But the relentless, undying ingenuity of the American Political System has found ways to continue the example set by our forefathers who, after all, were just human beings like everyone else.
That’s my message and I’m sticking with it.
I AM AUTHOR R. ANN SIRACUSA
AND I APPROVE THIS MESSAGE
□
sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_by_Your_Ad_provision
https://www.mic.com/articles/126897/when-the-hell-did-i-approve-this-message-become-a-thing
https://www.marketplace.org/2016/10/17/where-did-i-approve-message-come/
https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-campaign-mud-slinging-history-flashback-perspec-1002-md-20160930-story.html
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/04/facebook-and-google-asked-to-suspend-political-ads-before-general-election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_advertising
https://www.heraldcourier.com/news/the-presidential-election-had-plenty-of-mudslinging/article_309eebb2-efc5-5e70-a9e7-5225158b8101.html
https://westfieldfinancialplanning.com/mudslinging-political-tradition/
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2008/10/ten-most-awesome-presidential-mudslinging-moves-ever/
https://www.cagle.com/jason-stanford/2012/10/confessions-of-a-political-junkie
sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_by_Your_Ad_provision
https://www.mic.com/articles/126897/when-the-hell-did-i-approve-this-message-become-a-thing
https://www.marketplace.org/2016/10/17/where-did-i-approve-message-come/
https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-campaign-mud-slinging-history-flashback-perspec-1002-md-20160930-story.html
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/04/facebook-and-google-asked-to-suspend-political-ads-before-general-election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_advertising
https://www.heraldcourier.com/news/the-presidential-election-had-plenty-of-mudslinging/article_309eebb2-efc5-5e70-a9e7-5225158b8101.html
https://westfieldfinancialplanning.com/mudslinging-political-tradition/
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2008/10/ten-most-awesome-presidential-mudslinging-moves-ever/
https://www.cagle.com/jason-stanford/2012/10/confessions-of-a-political-junkie
RSS Feed
