Presidential Campaign Ads

In earlier years it seemed that campaign ads took the cuter approach. One technique used was a catchy jingle such as the one that President Eisenhower used in 1952. It takes a positive outlook on Eisenhower and doesn't bash the other candidate. I believe this ad was somewhat effective, the jingle is something that i remember and gets stuck in my head. I believe that with the majority of the people this would be effective.  http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1952

In 1960 Nixon sat down and explained that he has worked with the prior administration and because of this he know from experience what the country needs. I would call this a straight forward approach. He literally sat down on a chair and talked. There was nothing elaborate to it whatsoever and in my opinion I find this to be ineffective. This is the type of ad on TV that I would just tune out. Nothing caught my eye and it was rather boring to watch.http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1960

President Johnson in 1964 took a new and different approach. In an ad that aired only once, Johnson played on fear of the future, that we need a strong President to defend us. We need to keep our children safe from harm and that we need President Johnson to do that. I don't think the ad was that effective, maybe if i was living during that time period I would have found it more effective, but i think that this scared people to much. I don't think it's going to make people vote for him, but will only succeed in scaring US citizens.http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1964

Another tactic used in 1968 by President Nixon was to create an ad titled "youth" to a specific target audience, the youth.  In this ad it showed first a concert, then young intelligent students it makes them feel like they're part of this too. It's not just for the older people, we are all effected by this and he tried to play on this by saying that you are the future, you are part of the government, and get involved so that you can have the future you want. I think it wasn't that effective, even though he tried to relate to young people i feel like that's something people would look right through.http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1968

Then in 1972 McGovern had an ad where it seemed like he was just hanging out with the people and was really listening to what they said. It helped him to seem like he was less disconected to the people while other politicians are. I couldn't really understand what he was saying but i don't think that's really his concern, the big thing is that he is seen with the people. I think this was a good ad because it really made him look like he was a president for the people and that he was including everyone and everything.http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1972

In 1988 there was an ad in favor of the democratic party that used an obnoxious man that sounded uneducated, looked bad, and was an over all mess to represent the republican party. It really bashed the other party going on about how if we keep the republicans in power then the future of our children will be at a great stake because of all of the debt that is being built up. I think this ad worked a little because i was annoyed at it, which is what the democrats want, they want you to be annoyed with the republican party.http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1988

Study Conclusions:

• Campaign ads do work, they are not just a waste of money and can be very beneficial to a campaign.
• Ad's aren't there for the education of the voter, instead they are there to influence the voter and are written that was specifically. 
• Campaign ads have been referred to as legal propaganda due to the fact that they're trying to influence voters with info that isn't always 100% in context.