For a politician, the thought of targeting voters through cellphones, which are constantly on their person, is a seductive one—so seductive that campaigns will have shelled out an estimated $4 billion on digital advertising by the close of the midterm elections, according to MarketWatch.
Nevertheless, out of those expensive digital ads, many will be skipped by eye-rolling people who cannot get past the cheesiness and frustrating nature of them. Political advertisements are counterproductive since they are constructed to attract supporters but end up deferring them from caring.
In an election, there are three types of voters: those with minimal interest or awareness in the election—the group least likely to vote at all; those with a moderate interest and awareness; and those with a high interest and awareness.
Political advertisers try to waste few resources on the former and lattermost groups—low-interest voters may not even go to the polls, and high-interest voters likely have their minds already made up. The moderate-interest voters are the golden honeypot.
To the annoyance of politicians, a 2013 study by the University of California Los Angeles and Stanford University found that these moderately-interested, sought-after voters tune out roughly half of the political ads they encounter. The same study also suggests that the floods of political advertisement may drive these voters to tune out of politics altogether.
Additionally, a 2017 study in American Political Science Review found that ads in the later stage of a general election have effectively zero persuasive impact. The most these ads do is rally a politician’s base supporters. Ads that run in primary elections or very early on, however, are far more persuasive.
At best, political ads have a net-zero or barely positive effect; at worst, political ads discourage voters from engaging in politics generally. Not only will more moderate-interest voters tune out of ads, but more will tune out of politics entirely. So much for $4 billion.
Perhaps what bothers us most about political ads is how formulaic and predictable they are. For instance, look at the typical attack ad.
Every side has some uniform model for attack ads. The format usually proceeds as follows: “Candidate A has fought long and hard for Policy X. Everybody knows Policy X is terrific. Candidate B opposes Policy X. If Candidate B wins in November, Armageddon. Vote for Candidate A.” This blueprint is bland, unpersuasive and even annoying.
Hopefully the influx of digital advertisements in politics will force campaigns to reevaluate their persuasive tactics and shift the debate from deceitful tactics to centering on core ideology and intellectually honest language.