Strategic Communications and Marketing News Bureau

Do voters ever learn anything from campaign commercials, or are the ads all just so much mudslinging?

Why so negative? That might be what many viewers of campaign ads wonder with each new presidential campaign season. And why does so much of the record sums raised by candidates go for advertising, both positive and negative? Scott Althaus is a professor of political science and of communication who studies campaign media and advertising strategies, and their effects on voting behavior. Althaus was interviewed by News Bureau social sciences editor Craig Chamberlain.

Many voters say they hate negative campaigns, so why do candidates run them?

Campaigns go negative, in part, to get important information out that the news media may not be inclined to get out. Typically the strategy is to try to reduce the opponent’s positive ratings among voters and hope that doing so doesn’t produce a rebound effect that draws down the favorability ratings of the candidate who sponsored the ad. We see negative campaigning throughout American history. We can go back to the election of 1804, in which Thomas Jefferson was re-elected, and in that campaign they didn’t have 30-second spots in the way that we do right now, but they had campaign songs that were printed in newspapers. One of the songs used against Jefferson, sung to the tune of “Yankee Doodle Dandy,” made reference to his alleged illicit relationship with one of his female slaves, Sally Hemings: “When pressed by load of state affairs, I seek to sport and dally; the sweetest solace of my cares is in the lap of Sally.” That’s negative, that’s hard hitting, and that was 200 years ago. There’s nothing new about negative campaigning. What’s new is a better understanding of when, strategically, it’s going to advantage one side or the other.

You believed early on that this campaign was destined to be especially negative. Why?

Typically when we’re going into a presidential election cycle, one of the two candidates will be either the incumbent or his vice president. This election in 2008 is the first time in 56 years we’ve had two non-incumbent politicians running for president. Because of that, neither side can claim a clear hold on, or take the blame for, the record of the incumbent. That means that the information that’s exchanged within the campaign is going to be potentially more important for shaping perceptions about which of these two politicians is more likely to do a good job in office. And because neither one is terribly well known, there’s an opportunity for each side to try to discredit the other, and to try to paint the other side in the most negative light.

Why are ads so important in a campaign?

We have seen a tendency over time for more and more Americans to tune out from news of politics and government. Given this tendency, it becomes more and more challenging for campaigns to try to reach citizens with information they believe is important for citizens to consider on election day. If the campaigns can’t do it through the mainstream news media, or if the mainstream news media put up a filter that focuses on certain events or certain issues rather than the ones the campaigns would like to talk about, then paid advertising becomes the vehicle through which the campaigns try to directly engage with the voters. A fair amount of campaign advertising aired during the general election season is placed in entertainment programming, where citizens are not necessarily looking for information about the campaign.

Can we learn anything from campaign ads?

Many people like to complain about ads being vacuous and trying to distract people from the real issues. But stepping back from that, it’s also the case that the ads contain a lot of important information about the candidates’ issue priorities and the kinds of policy promises that they intend to keep down the road if they are elected. There’s a fair amount of research suggesting that the ordinary citizen can pull a great deal of policy-relevant information out of a 30-second ad, and in some ways more information than you might get from the typical minute-and-a-half news story.

Do ads actually change many voters’ minds?

Traditionally, in the last several decades, it was thought that the main purpose of advertising was to persuade people who were undecided or independent, who weren’t committed to one side or the other. Over time, however, it’s become clearer that there are fewer people in the electorate whose minds aren’t made up come election day. For that reason, while campaigns have not given up on trying to persuade independent voters, another purpose of ads is to motivate people already likely to support a candidate, but who may not be likely to get up and go to the polls and cast a ballot. You don’t need to convince those likely supporters that you’re the better candidate; you need to convince them to do something about it. And that’s why we’re seeing a lot of the negative advertising today, from both sides, that to some observers seems absurd and full of distortions and untruths. These ads aren’t intended to win over the undecided voter so much as to draw media attention toward the candidate’s preferred issues and to motivate the candidate’s own base of likely supporters.

Read Next

Announcements Marcelo Garcia, professor of civil and environmental engineering at The Grainger College of Engineering.

Illinois faculty member elected to National Academy of Engineering

Champaign, Ill. — Marcelo Garcia, a professor of civil and environmental engineering in The Grainger College of Engineering, has been elected to the National Academy of Engineering.

Social sciences Male and female student embracing on the quad with flowering redbud tree and the ACES library in the background. Photo by Michelle Hassel

Dating is not broken, but the trajectories of relationships have changed

CHAMPAIGN, Ill. — According to some popular culture writers and online posts by discouraged singles lamenting their inability to find romantic partners, dating is “broken,” fractured by the social isolation created by technology, pandemic lockdowns and potential partners’ unrealistic expectations. Yet two studies of college students conducted a decade apart found that their ideas about […]

Engineering Civil and Environmental Engineering Professor Nishant Garg, center, is joined by fellow researchers, from left: Yujia Min, Hossein Kabir, Nishant Garg, center, Chirayu Kothari and M. Farjad Iqbal, front right. In front are examples of clay samples dissolved at different concentrations in a NaOH solution. The team invented a new test that can predict the performance of cementitious materials in mere 5 minutes. This is in contrast to the standard ASTM tests, which take up to 28 days. This new advance enables real-time quality control at production plants of emerging, sustainable materials. Photo taken at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign on Monday, Feb. 3, 2025. (Photo by Fred Zwicky / University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign)

Researchers develop a five-minute quality test for sustainable cement industry materials

A new test developed at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign can predict the performance of a new type of cementitious construction material in five minutes — a significant improvement over the current industry standard method, which takes seven or more days to complete. This development is poised to advance the use of next-generation resources called supplementary cementitious materials — or SCMs — by speeding up the quality-check process before leaving the production floor.

Strategic Communications and Marketing News Bureau

507 E. Green St
MC-426
Champaign, IL 61820

Email: stratcom@illinois.edu

Phone (217) 333-5010