Election season brings political campaign ads. Endless campaign ads. Relentless, non-stop, repeated, incessant metal spikes driven directly into our skulls.
Honest, sincere campaign ads that present a candidate’s views and intentions serve a public good. They build name recognition and help voters make informed choices.
But why must candidates subject us to their badmouthing each other ad nauseam? Where’s the public value in calling an opponent “radical” or “liberal?” Who are these messages intended for? How does putting another person down make a candidate more electable? Is there evidence that these ads persuade voters to support a candidate? Or do they serve only to reinforce biases? Do they inform voters? Or just make candidates feel better about themselves?
I don’t like seeing attack ads from any candidate, whether I’ll vote for them or not. Attack ads have become so tedious that I stopped listening altogether. For any candidate. With any message. Positive or negative. I mute the volume, look away, or leave the room until they’re over.
Is this the best use of campaign funds? How does throwing money away on ads voters ignore or that turn voters off to a candidate’s message benefit anyone?
Candidates who can’t win without jabbing at opponents are probably not strong candidates to start with.
Do better, candidates. Voters deserve civility, honesty, and respect.
Gordie Felger
Hiawatha
Thanks for signing up. Keep an eye on your inbox for the next edition.
ℹ️ You may want to whitelist emails from
thegazette@adamspg-email.com
to make sure it doesn’t go to your spam folder!
Get the latest news and more delivered right to your inbox every day at 7:00 am.
Share Your Voice Your trust matters to us. Share your thoughts or suggest a story here.
To view our latest eEdition, click the image on the left.
Your browser is out of date and potentially vulnerable to security risks.
We recommend switching to one of the following browsers:
Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device.
