Analysis of 2012 Presidential Campaign Adverstising - Research Paper Example

? ANALYSIS OF PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN ADVERTISING Advertising is a very effective campaign strategy since, just like in marketing; consumer sensitization has a great impact on the products’ uptake by the market. The consumer in the political arena is the voter and is in need of information to make a choice between the several candidates at their disposal. Another comparison that advertising shares with campaigning is that adverts are not just thrown at the audience to consume but there is great persuasion that accompanies them to make the viewers choose the candidate over their opponents. Campaign adverts the world over are known to use lots of cash to influence the voters’ choice and get the advertisers more and more supporters. The case at hand is in the United States of America where an Analysis of 2012 Presidential Campaign Advertising shall be done to determine the adverts’ effectiveness and failure points in marketing Barrack Obama and Mitt Romney to the American voters1. The 2012 political environment was a tense one with Obama and Romney trying to paint the other as the wrong man for the American presidency. While Obama focused on his track record which was pretty impressive to show the American voter that he was the best candidate for the job, he used Romney’s Wall Street record and role in the 2008 world recession to throw mud unto his opponent2. His position was a delicate one since, though he had managed to see to the elimination of most of America's problems, he had thrown his country into its greatest debt ever. It was a delicate balancing of power that required him to convince the American voter that even with the huge debt he had created for the country; he needed more money to alleviate most of the population from the problems it faced in its daily roles. His campaign adverts therefore focused on his track record and promise for better days ahead. On the other hand, Mitt Romney had a harder task before him in terms of convincing the American voter that he could not only outdo Obama but he could change the leadership of the country and give the average American a chance to make wealth for themselves. His campaign adverts thus focused on the business part of America and Obama's weaknesses. The adverts by Romney's team thus took every word that Obama uttered and used it against the then incumbent president. The two candidates’ campaign adverts thus had different themes but their central message was the bettering of Americans' life3. Obama’s Adverts ‘Always’ The advert by Obama's campaign team dubbed “Always” has the candidate in question clarifying a statement he had said earlier on that if someone had built a business, it wasn’t from their sole efforts but from the support of other Americans who worked hard to see to their dreams. Romney’s team had interpreted that to mean that every American who owned a business had no right to it. The truth was that Obama’s words meant that the American dream can only be realized by the unity and oneness of purpose that the citizens have always shown. It portrayed him as a candidate whose aim for the American multitude was a hardworking and prosperous nation characterized by hard work and looking out for one another4. ‘Firms’ This is an advert aimed at Romney's record on Wall Street as far as his private equity firm and wealth are concerned. Romney had not revealed his wealth and thus the campaign aimed to paint him as an enemy of the people who had personal aims as opposed to Obama's open and candid nature. The advert alleged that Romney had hidden wealth in Bermuda, Switzerland and the Cayman Islands. He was also accused of having sent jobs to India when he was a governor for Massachusetts. These ‘hidden’ properties are allegedly meant to reduce the amount of tax the American government gets from them. The voter therefore has the notion that Romney is the enemy and not the friend since while they pay taxes; he hides his treasure in another country and sends jobs overseas while the citizens he intends to lead have no jobs. The advert managed to reveal Romney’s weaknesses to the voter and must have worked for Obama as he intended. ’47 Percent’ The advert is derived from Romney’s speech that 47 percent of American voters would vote for Obama no matter what and that Mitt Romney did not care about this group of people and that he would focus on the remaining people that made an impact on his plans. He was quoted saying this in a private meeting and it is assumed that he never intended that the general public would have access to this information. Obama's team in this case also intended to portray Romney as a divisive personality unfit for America’s presidency. The message in the advert was that Romney was selective in his leadership and would most probably divide the country into factions each with its privileges. The American voter was therefore cautioned against his candidacy by this advert and given concrete evidence in the form of a video of him speaking the words above5. ‘Big Bird’ Among the most talked about advert of the whole campaign was the one dubbed ‘Big Bird.’ This is an advert for the Obama re-election campaign that pokes fun at Mitt Romney for focusing on Sesame Street instead of Wall Street. The narrator mentions financial crooks like Bernie Madoff and Ken Lay then goes on to say that according to Romney, one need not worry about Wall Street but Sesame Street due to his many mentions of the words ‘Big Bird.’ It funnily ends with the narration "Mitt Romney. Taking on our enemies, no matter where they nest." The aim of this advert is to portray Mitt as a friend of the financial crooks who is likely to focus his resources and time going after the harmless individuals while burying his head in the sand as far as the real enemies of the people are concerned. It also tries to portray him as an escapist who cannot see to people’s real issues and instead jokes about what they face. It was not a very effective advert since the audience got more fun from it than real issues as intended by Obama's campaign team. Romney’s Adverts Mitt Romney's team also made many adverts to entice the voters in America and give reasons as to why he was the best candidate for the presidency. Others focused majorly on his opponent’s weaknesses and why he would do better in this area. As stated above, the adverts were focused majorly on the business incompetence of Obama while promoting his experience at Bain Capital, a private equity firm he had founded. He majorly portrayed Obama as a reckless character who was a spendthrift and would plunge the nation into more and more debt. A few of the adverts are discussed below to bring out their effectiveness and influence on the voting pattern in America in the 2012 presidential elections6. Though Romney eventually lost the election, it was one too close to call and the influence of the adverts cannot be thrown to the wind. ‘Give Me a Break’ The advert is based on Bill Clinton’s 2008 comment that Obama's campaign was ‘biggest fairy tale’ he had ever seen in his campaigning for his wife during the democratic primaries against Obama. The narrator of the advert paints Obama as a character that should not be trusted since even his closest allies have once or twice had doubts about his character. The advert starts off with the narrator saying that Bill Clinton was a good soldier helping his party’s president get re-elected then goes on to question Clinton's statement back in 20087. The advert then shows a video where Clinton says, “Give me a break. This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.” The advert reminded many American voters of Obama's turbulent youth and his way of going around doing things carelessly. The use of Bill Clinton who is a much respected personality and Obama's closest friend against the latter was intended to cast great doubt on the trust the nation should put on the nation’s president. The problem with this advert is that Romney did not give Americans a reason to suddenly distrust Obama since they had already trusted him with their future by voting him into power in the 2008 general elections8. ‘Failing American Workers’ Another advert from Romney’s camp was titled ‘Failing American Workers.’ The advert starts off with an American flag alongside the Chinese flag. The Chinese one then grows bigger as the American one grows little. It is symbolic of the loss of jobs by the American multitude as China gets most of the industrial jobs meant for Americans. The narrator in the advert says that for the first time China is beating the United States; the world’s leading manufacturing country. The aim of the advert is to bring to light the idea that Obama has had a poor record as far as the creation of jobs is concerned. This is depicted in the advert by the claim that America had lost 582,000 jobs since President Obama had taken over. The advert aims to remind the voters that the president had failed to deliver on his promises especially that of creating jobs for the American workers. Romney’s point in this advert is that manufacturing jobs should be brought back from China to America where they would directly benefit the economy and the citizens there. Since unemployment is a major issue in America, the advert sent a strong message to the voters as it directly affected them. Its failure though is that it was not into put into consideration that Americans did not vote into power presidents who want to severe relationships with other countries in this case China but those who create good trade relations with other countries to ensure demand for American products. ‘Failing American Families’ The next advert about Obama's failure is the one dubbed ‘Failing American Families’ which narrates that under Obama's leadership, families had lost over $4,000 per year and that the national debt was then $16 trillion and growing. It was a hit at Obama's spendthrift nature and that he showed no solid plans in place to cut on the country’s debt. The message was that since there was more spending and debt, the American families were slowly failing. With the use of the narration and the figures in the advert, the voter becomes aware of many of the issues that they were unaware of in one way or the other. Since people generally fear debt, the message that their president was plunging them more and more into debt sent the message that he was the wrong candidate for the job. Romney still uses his business acumen as a bargaining point for the presidency since he reminds the voters of the fact that he handled debt all the time in his days as a businessman and that he intends to replicate his record as the American president9. Conclusion In conclusion, the two teams in charge of the campaign advertising for Barrack Obama and Mitt Romney did a great job in presenting their respective candidates to the public. The use of each other’s mistakes for their benefit worked quite well since it is observed that the accused had to come to the limelight to defend their mistakes lest they lost support from their supporters. The advertising in this case was aimed at the general audience since while it was to keep those already sold in place, the undecided and those against a candidate were also influenced and given reasons as to why they should shift camp10. Bibliography Benoit, William. Campaign 2000: a functional analysis of presidential campaign discourse. New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003. English, Anthony. How to Vote with Passion Purpose and Power: A Voter's Primer. Chicago: AuthorHouse, 2008. Geer, John. In Defense of Negativity: Attack Ads in Presidential Campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008. Hacker, Kenneth. Presidential candidate images. New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004. Green, John. The State of the Parties: The Changing Role of Contemporary American Politics. Chicago: Rowman & Littlefield, 2007. Hamm, Theodore. The New Blue Media: How Michael Moore, MoveOn. Org, Jon Stewart and Company Are Transforming Progressive Politics. New York: New Press, 2011. Ridout, Travis. New Directions in Media and Politics. Chicago: Routledge, 2013. Sabato, Larry. Barack Obama and the New America: The 2012 Election and the Changing Face of Politics. Chicago: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2013. Skewes, Elizabeth. Message Control: How News is Made on the Presidential Campaign Trail. New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 2007. Thurber, James and Nelson, Candice. Crowded airwaves: campaign advertising in elections. New York: Brookings Institution Press, 2000. Read More