WHEW! WE MADE IT
The Primaries are over. After the fact, it seemed to be a big to-do over not much. Of course, that's not the way the politicians and their closest followers see it. To them it's life or death, and they are getting warmed up for the real battles -- which consist mostly of seeing who can sling the most
mud. But enough said about our political system.
We have many happy months to go before all the campaign hoopla will be over. I was just wondering how many of you out there are already as tired of political ads as I am. After all, I am almost 84 years old.
One of the things I dread the most when important elections come around is the constant pummeling of the ads and the ubiquitous refrain accompanying them. "I'm So-and-So, and I approve this message!"
STAND BY YOUR AD
Believe it or not, this isn't just a catchy phrase...is a legal mandate!
Of course it is!
You knew that. I mean, after all, we’re talking about government, aren't we?
Image Source: https://imgflip.com/meme/12244012/Godzilla-approved
The Primaries are over. After the fact, it seemed to be a big to-do over not much. Of course, that's not the way the politicians and their closest followers see it. To them it's life or death, and they are getting warmed up for the real battles -- which consist mostly of seeing who can sling the most
mud. But enough said about our political system.
We have many happy months to go before all the campaign hoopla will be over. I was just wondering how many of you out there are already as tired of political ads as I am. After all, I am almost 84 years old.
One of the things I dread the most when important elections come around is the constant pummeling of the ads and the ubiquitous refrain accompanying them. "I'm So-and-So, and I approve this message!"
STAND BY YOUR AD
Believe it or not, this isn't just a catchy phrase...is a legal mandate!
Of course it is!
You knew that. I mean, after all, we’re talking about government, aren't we?
Image Source: https://imgflip.com/meme/12244012/Godzilla-approved
The SBYA (Stand By Your Ad) Provision is part of the “Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act” adopted in 2002 ("written by Democrat Russ Feingold and the late John McCain, both of whom were serving in the U.S. Senate. McCain, a Republican, and Feingold wrote the bill in an effort to legitimize campaign contributions by banning large corporate donations.")
https://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/.
The Act 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. The goal, according to The New York Times, was to limit insults and accusations at one another.
How's that working for you? Image Source: cagle.com/jason-stanford/
https://www.nj.com/hudson/dupuy
https://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/.
The Act 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. The goal, according to The New York Times, was to limit insults and accusations at one another.
How's that working for you? Image Source: cagle.com/jason-stanford/
https://www.nj.com/hudson/dupuy
The SBYA provision was intended to minimize the “Attack Ads” which began to proliferate in the 1960s, criticizing an opponent's political platform, and turning the whole thing into a slandering contest.
I suppose it is a miracle it ever got passed. The provision was an attempt to force candidates to associate them-selves with the attacks in such ads (rather than do it anonymously) and to discourage defa-mation of character as a campaign strategy.
Representative David Price of North Carolina, proposer but not author of the amendment, stated: "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, which no one asked for, 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 subsequent 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 ---, and I approve this message.”
I suppose it is a miracle it ever got passed. The provision was an attempt to force candidates to associate them-selves with the attacks in such ads (rather than do it anonymously) and to discourage defa-mation of character as a campaign strategy.
Representative David Price of North Carolina, proposer but not author of the amendment, stated: "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, which no one asked for, 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 subsequent 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 ---, and I approve this message.”
MUDSLINGING: A GOOD OLD AMERICAN POLITICAL TRADITION
lMAGE SOURCE: https://www.slideserve.com/vlad/mudslinging
lMAGE SOURCE: https://www.slideserve.com/vlad/mudslinging
I also predict that in 2024, and many year after, the American Political System will continue to honor the long tradition of negative campaign rhetoric. It shall carry on as before.
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 first, last, and only non-partisan president.
By the election of 1800, between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, influential outsiders and journalists took up the banner. There is a history to the election, which I won’t bother you with other than to give some of the quotes. Thomas Jefferson John Adams
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 first, last, and only non-partisan president.
By the election of 1800, between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, influential outsiders and journalists took up the banner. There is a history to the election, which I won’t bother you with other than to give some of the quotes. Thomas Jefferson John Adams
The President of Yale publicaly suggested that if Jefferson were elected “we would see our wives and daughters the victims of legal prostitution.”
An article in a Connecticut newspaper 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 journalist and 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 unflattering articles charging the new president with having fathered children with a slave named Sally Hemings.
In presidential elections, 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?”
And not one of them had to tag his ads with "I approve this message."
ALL’S WELL THAT ENDS WELL
Jefferson was elected, and later he and Adams mended fences and became close friends again, but the tradition of badmouthing their competition to the point of slander and lies has lived on into the 20st century when things seemed to reach the anonymous-ad-boiling-point in 1988 with the Willie Horton ad on television.
Who, you ask, is Willie Horton?
In 1974, William Horton was a convicted criminal serving time for first degree murder, who became eligible for the weekend furlough program. He was allowed to take furloughs and spent them shopping, attending church, and being with his daughter. At that time the furlough program was highly praised as a success.
However, in 1987, one particular furlough weekend, Horton escaped and committed more crimes. Personally, he had nothing to do with the presidential election in 1988, but his recently high profile on the news stoked a debate on whether the furlough program should be deep-sixed because it was "soft on crime."
During the 1988 presidential election, Horton became a central figure in Bush’s campaign as a way for the candidate to imply that his opponent, Massachusetts governor Michael Dukakis, was "soft on crime."
An article in a Connecticut newspaper 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 journalist and 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 unflattering articles charging the new president with having fathered children with a slave named Sally Hemings.
In presidential elections, 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?”
And not one of them had to tag his ads with "I approve this message."
ALL’S WELL THAT ENDS WELL
Jefferson was elected, and later he and Adams mended fences and became close friends again, but the tradition of badmouthing their competition to the point of slander and lies has lived on into the 20st century when things seemed to reach the anonymous-ad-boiling-point in 1988 with the Willie Horton ad on television.
Who, you ask, is Willie Horton?
In 1974, William Horton was a convicted criminal serving time for first degree murder, who became eligible for the weekend furlough program. He was allowed to take furloughs and spent them shopping, attending church, and being with his daughter. At that time the furlough program was highly praised as a success.
However, in 1987, one particular furlough weekend, Horton escaped and committed more crimes. Personally, he had nothing to do with the presidential election in 1988, but his recently high profile on the news stoked a debate on whether the furlough program should be deep-sixed because it was "soft on crime."
During the 1988 presidential election, Horton became a central figure in Bush’s campaign as a way for the candidate to imply that his opponent, Massachusetts governor Michael Dukakis, was "soft on crime."
When a political action committee used Horton’s mug shot in an attack ad, he became part of an infamous election-season strategy to stoke fear and racial anxiety among white voters. The ad was produced by supporters of a candidate without that candidate's authorization, and devastated the other candidate.
Image Source: https://www.history.com/news/
"The 30-second ad was financed by the National Security PAC, not Bush’s campaign. It was designed to expose Dukakis’ policies on crime as weak, taking advantage of an issue that historically drove Republican votes. But it also used photos of Horton, including his mug shot, to panic prospective voters about black men and crime." https://www.history.com/news/
All this set the later stage for the bipartisan adoption of the advertisement portions of the SBYD in 2002, which was intended to curtail such advertising in the future by being sure the candidate was clearly tagged as supporting the ad's claims.
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
Image Source: https://www.history.com/news/
"The 30-second ad was financed by the National Security PAC, not Bush’s campaign. It was designed to expose Dukakis’ policies on crime as weak, taking advantage of an issue that historically drove Republican votes. But it also used photos of Horton, including his mug shot, to panic prospective voters about black men and crime." https://www.history.com/news/
All this set the later stage for the bipartisan adoption of the advertisement portions of the SBYD in 2002, which was intended to curtail such advertising in the future by being sure the candidate was clearly tagged as supporting the ad's claims.
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
Image Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/conservativecartoons/
JUST SAYIN'
□
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
2024
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/bipartisan-campaign-reform-act-success-or-failure/
https://www.mic.com/articles/126897/when-the-hell-did-i-approve-this-message-become-a-thing
https://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/candidates-say-i-approve-this-message-but-why/KT5OG7W2BZFDBHYX3VFXGAB4HI/
https://www.thenewsherald.com/2022/09/28/candidates-dont-want-you-to-know-their-party-affiliation/
https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/630073/why-politicians-say-i-approve-this-message-in-ads
https://theweek.com/articles/470977/craziest-most-nailbiting-elections-history
https://www.history.com/news/george-bush-willie-horton-racist-ad
https://www.reddit.com/r/conservativecartoons/comments/jxpigi/if_the_2024_election_were_held_today/?rdt=57873&onetap_auto=true&one_tap=true
□
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
2024
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/bipartisan-campaign-reform-act-success-or-failure/
https://www.mic.com/articles/126897/when-the-hell-did-i-approve-this-message-become-a-thing
https://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/candidates-say-i-approve-this-message-but-why/KT5OG7W2BZFDBHYX3VFXGAB4HI/
https://www.thenewsherald.com/2022/09/28/candidates-dont-want-you-to-know-their-party-affiliation/
https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/630073/why-politicians-say-i-approve-this-message-in-ads
https://theweek.com/articles/470977/craziest-most-nailbiting-elections-history
https://www.history.com/news/george-bush-willie-horton-racist-ad
https://www.reddit.com/r/conservativecartoons/comments/jxpigi/if_the_2024_election_were_held_today/?rdt=57873&onetap_auto=true&one_tap=true
RSS Feed