(Middletown, CT) – In the midst of perhaps the most negative presidential primary race in recent history, a new Wesleyan Media Project affiliated study (click here for an older local copy) published by Political Research Quarterly suggests that the tone of ads on the airwaves is not the only thing contributing to citizen perceptions of negativity.

“Despite the fact that citizens are directly exposed to the tone of advertising through their television sets, we find that media play a powerful role in shaping the extent to which the public believes that advertising is negative,” notes Travis N. Ridout, Washington State University associate professor and co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project. “But it is not simply media discussion of negative spots per se that matters but rather the extent to which media discuss advertising in coverage of campaign strategy.”

The study draws on advertising and local media (both television and newspaper) content along with nearly 3,000 survey respondents from the 2006 midterm elections in eight Midwestern media markets from five states.  Respondents were asked to rate the senatorial and gubernatorial candidates’ campaign ads on a scale from “mostly negative” to “mostly positive.”

“Citizens vary in the extent to which they report perceiving the same candidate’s advertising as negative.  Not surprisingly, Democrats and Republicans on average are much more likely to believe that their respective opponent’s ads are more negative than their own candidate’s,” says Erika Franklin Fowler, Wesleyan University assistant professor and co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project.  ”What did surprise us, given the evidence that negativity is more memorable, was that exposure to positive advertising was as much of a predictor of perceived tone as exposure to negative spots.  This may suggest that in a world where negative elections have become the norm, positivity may actually stand out, at least when citizens think about the tone of the race.”

The analysis controls for individual exposure to tone of ads on television and discussion of advertising in local media along with political knowledge and other standard demographics like education, sex, partisanship and competition.

“Though not news to many, we’ve found that Democrats and Republicans don’t watch the same television programs.  This gives campaigns a chance to target their messages to specific types of voters,” said Washington State University professor Travis Ridout, co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project and co-author of the study.  “The good news for Democratic campaigns is that Democrats watch more television than Republicans, which makes it easier for advertisers to reach Democratic voters.  The good news for Republicans is that the more Republican the audience, the more likely it is to turn out to vote.  So in reaching out to Republican voters, one is not ‘wasting’ ads on people who are unlikely to vote.”

“The targeting trends we uncovered from the 2008 campaign were distinct from 2004 and 2000,” notes Michael Franz, co-author, associate professor at Bowdoin College and co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project.  “Whereas Gore, Kerry, and Bush seemed to target shows with audiences made up disproportionately of fellow partisans, both Obama and McCain targeted shows with viewers of the other party (in addition to more traditional mobilization of the base).  Noteworthy in all of this is that the analysis focuses only on shows on the major networks in all three years.  If one had the data on ad buys in local cable, the targeting would be even more prevalent.”

For more information and an abstract of the scholarly article, click here.

(MIDDLETOWN, CT –) The overall number of GOP presidential ads on the airwaves this election year is comparable with 2008, but who is paying for them so far has changed significantly.  The influence of SuperPACs in the race for the 2012 GOP nomination is clear, with a more than 1600 percent increase in interest-group sponsored ads aired as compared to 2008.

In the first presidential election cycle following the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Citizens United v. FEC, interest group involvement in the presidential air war has skyrocketed from 3 percent of all ads aired in the 2008 Republican nomination race to nearly half (44 percent) of all airings. Table 1 shows the total number of GOP presidential ads (through Jan. 25) was just shy of 70,000 airings on broadcast television and national cable in both years. Candidate-sponsored ads, which made up 97 percent of the total in 2008, declined to 56 percent of the total this year.  An estimated $28.9M has been spent to date, a substantial drop from 2008.

Table 1: Advertising in GOP Presidential Primaries*

One reason the number of GOP candidate ads has fallen so much since 2008 is that the Romney campaign is not shelling out the cash it did the first time he ran for president. (He was on the air in Iowa for much of 2007, but he did not start advertising this time around until December 2011).  Table 2 compares the campaigns with the largest number of candidate-sponsored airings across the last two GOP primaries.

Table 2: Front-Runner Candidate-Sponsored Ad Totals in the 2008 and 2012 GOP Presidential Primaries*

Even though Romney has not been on the airwaves as much as he was in 2008, his campaign and its allies have dominated the airwaves in Florida, airing almost 13,000 ads on broadcast television across the state, as of Wednesday, the 25th (Table 3).  Gingrich and his interest-group allies have aired only about 200 spots, with Paul and Santorum out of the broadcast television game.

Table 3: Spot Count in Florida Primary*

“One reason we’ve seen the Florida polls shift in Romney’s favor over the past few days, when the national polls have not, is that his message has dominated the paid airwaves in the Sunshine State,” noted Travis Ridout, associate professor of political science at Washington State University and director of the Wesleyan Media Project.  “Gingrich—and Paul and Santorum—have had a much more difficult time making themselves heard.”

In South Carolina, however, Romney’s ad advantage was not nearly as great (Table 4).  Romney and interest-group allies aired about 8,000 ads, compared to 5,000 for Santorum, about 4,500 for Gingrich and 3,000 for Paul.  All candidates benefited from sympathetic interest groups airing spots on their behalf; Romney and Gingrich benefited the most while Paul benefited the least.

Table 4: Spot Count in South Carolina Primary*

The outside group most heavily involved in the Republican nomination race has been Restore Our Future, Inc., a pro-Romney group that has spent an estimated $8 million to air over 13,500 spots on his behalf in media markets in Iowa, South Carolina, Florida, Arizona and Michigan (Table 5).  Make Us Great Again, a pro-Perry group, spent an estimated $2.2 million on 4200 spots aired in Iowa and South Carolina, while Winning Our Future, a pro-Gingrich group, has been involved in advertising almost as heavily.  Stephen Colbert’s SuperPAC, Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow has aired 11 spots on broadcast stations and national cable.

Table 5: Top Groups Involved in GOP Nomination Race*

Meanwhile, the Obama campaign has aired over 5,000 ads at an estimated cost of $1.4M, targeting residents of 25 markets in Iowa, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia, and Wisconsin.  Table 6 displays the top ten markets of airings.

“Advertising market placement is like a tell, and it is clear that the Obama campaign views these battleground states as most important at this stage of the game,” said Michael Franz, associate professor of government at Bowdoin College and director of the Wesleyan Media Project.

Table 6: Top Ten Markets Airing Obama Campaign Ads*

However, the Obama campaign is not the only one already advertising for the general election (Table 7).  Americans for Prosperity has aired over 5,000 spots in battleground state markets, while Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies has aired over 4,200 spots in similar markets.  The American Petroleum Institute also aired around 1,500 spots.

“I can’t remember a time when so many groups were so involved in general election advertising so early,” noted Erika Franklin Fowler assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University and director of the Wesleyan Media Project. “An underappreciated fact about this year’s contest is that outside groups are spending more money per ad than candidates, which makes examining the balance of actual ads voters are seeing very crucial when attempting to tease out their influence.”

Table 7: Top Non-Candidate General Election Spenders*

Data reported here do not cover local cable buys, only broadcast television and national cable buys.  All cost estimates are precisely that: estimates.

The Wesleyan Media Project provides real-time tracking and analysis of all political television advertising in real-time. Housed in Wesleyan’s Quantitative Analysis Center –part of the Allbritton Center for the Study of Public Life – the Wesleyan Media Project is the successor to the Wisconsin Advertising Project, which disbanded in 2009.  It is directed by Erika Franklin Fowler, assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University, Michael M. Franz, associate professor of government at Bowdoin College and Travis N. Ridout, associate professor of political science at Washington State University.

The Wesleyan Media Project is supported by grants from The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and Wesleyan University.  Data provided by Kantar Media/CMAG with analysis by the Wesleyan Media Project using Academiclip, a web-based coding tool.  All spending amounts are estimates of broadcast and national cable spots.

Periodic releases of data will be posted on the project’s website and dispersed via Twitter @wesmediaproject. To be added to our email update list, click here.

For more information contact:
David Pesci at 860-685-5612 or dpesci@wesleyan.edu
Erika Franklin Fowler at 860-685-3407 or efowler at wesleyan.edu
Michael M. Franz at 207-798-4318 or mfranz at bowdoin.edu, or
Travis N. Ridout at 509-335-2264 or tnridout at wsu.edu

Wesleyan University, in Middletown, Conn., is known for the excellence of its academic and co-curricular programs. More than 2,700 undergraduates and over 200 graduate students from around the world pursue their classroom studies, research projects, and co-curricular interests in ways that are demanding and intensely rewarding.

The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation supports transformational ideas that promote quality journalism, advance media innovation, engage communities and foster the arts. We believe that democracy thrives when people and communities are informed and engaged. For more, visit www.knightfoundation.org.

The Rockefeller Brothers Fund advances social change that contributes to a more just, sustainable, and peaceful world.  The Fund’s grantmaking is organized in three thematic programs that support work in the United States and at the global level: Democratic Practice, Sustainable Development, and Peacebuilding; and in three pivotal place programs that address these themes in specific contexts: New York City, Southern China, and the Western Balkans. For more, visit www.rbf.org.

 ###

(MIDDLETOWN, CT.) Jan. 26, 2012 – Complete with new data on the Florida primary, The Wesleyan Media Project Monday will release its first analysis of campaign ads for 2012.

The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund are supporting the effort, a non-partisan initiative to enhance transparency about those attempting to influence American elections.

A resource for journalists, policymakers, scholars and voters, the project tracks and analyzes all broadcast advertisements aired on behalf of federal and statewide election candidates in all of the country’s media markets. In 2010, more than 100 news organizations cited the project’s data in 400 plus stories in the last five weeks before the mid-term elections.

This year, once the general election campaign begins, the Wesleyan Media Project will expand its analysis to include all YouTube videos mentioning presidential candidates, an increasingly important campaign tool. This is the first presidential election since the landmark, 2010 Supreme Court ruling on the Citizens United case, which opened the door for unlimited corporate and union investment in federal elections

“Television and, increasingly Internet, advertising consume a significant amount of the resources we spend on selecting our leaders,” said John S. Bracken, director of media innovation and journalism for Knight Foundation. ”This project supplies voters, journalists and policymakers with valuable information on how and where those resources are being used by candidates, both on the state and national levels.”

Knight’s funding is the first in a series of grants being announced that support new ways to deepen Americans’ engagement in elections and foster more informed communities.

“As our election campaigns degenerate into a post-Citizens United, no-holds-barred, wild west of political advertising, it is vital to the future of our democracy that the press and the public have as much information as possible about those who are trying to influence our elections,” said Benjamin R. Shute, Jr., program director at the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. “The Rockefeller Brothers Fund is pleased to support the work of the Wesleyan Media Project in bringing greater transparency to the sources of political advertisements.”

In the wake of Citizens United, many politicians, pundits and scholars feared the decision would open the floodgates to millions, if not billions, of dollars from corporate treasuries being spent on 30-second attack ads.  In fact, evidence collected by The Wesleyan Media Project during the 2010 election cycles confirmed that trend, said the project’s Travis Ridout. Ad spending by independent groups increased 350 percent over 2008 levels in U.S. House races, and over 90 percent of the ads sponsored contained an attack on a candidate. There is little doubt that such spending will increase during the 2012 election cycle with the White House at stake and in the absence of legislation that would rein in corporate and union spending, said the project’s Michael Franz.

“The 2010 election was an historic year for political advertising, but with the Oval Office on the line, we expect 2012 to pulverize the 2010 records,” said the project’s Erika Franklin Fowler.  “With generous support from Knight Foundation and Rockefeller Brothers Fund, we are proud to once again provide the only real-time, publicly available information on the content and spending of political advertising in this cycle.”

For the 2012 cycle, the project will analyze raw data for the television spots, which will be obtained from Kantar Media/CMAG. Analysts will also use a specialized web crawler designed to collect information daily from presidential election content uploaded to YouTube. This will include candidate, party and outside organization content, as well as selected content uploaded by individuals mentioning candidates for president. The project will then code each ad (televised and Internet) on several characteristics, including its sponsor (corporate, union, party, candidate, interest group, individual) and tone (negative or positive), allowing a comparison of all of these attributes to determine how ads differ by source.

Periodic releases of data will be posted on the project’s website and dispersed via Twitter @wesmediaproject. To be added to our email update list, click here.

The Wesleyan Media Project is directed by Erika Franklin Fowler, assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University, Michael M. Franz, associate professor of government at Bowdoin College and Travis N. Ridout, associate professor of political science at Washington State University.

Contact info for the Wesleyan Media Project:

David Pesci: 860 685 5612, dpesci at wesleyan.edu
Erika Franklin Fowler: 860 685 3407, efowler at wesleyan.edu
Michael M. Franz: 207 798 4318, mfranz at bowdoin.edu
Travis N. Ridout: 509 335 2264, tnridout at wsu.edu

Contact for Knight Foundation:

Andrew Sherry: 305-908-2677, sherry@knightfoundation.org

Wesleyan University, in Middletown, Conn., is known for the excellence of its academic and co-curricular programs. More than 2,700 undergraduates and over 200 graduate students from around the world pursue their classroom studies, research projects, and co-curricular interests in ways that are demanding and intensely rewarding.

The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation supports transformational ideas that promote quality journalism, advance media innovation, engage communities and foster the arts. We believe that democracy thrives when people and communities are informed and engaged. For more, visit www.knightfoundation.org.

The Rockefeller Brothers Fund advances social change that contributes to a more just, sustainable, and peaceful world.  The Fund’s grantmaking is organized in three thematic programs that support work in the United States and at the global level: Democratic Practice, Sustainable Development, and Peacebuilding; and in three pivotal place programs that address these themes in specific contexts: New York City, Southern China, and the Western Balkans. For more, visit www.rbf.org.

####

“Advertising Trends in 2010” (click here for a local copy), by Erika Franklin Fowler of Wesleyan University and Travis Ridout of Washington State University, and “The Citizens United Election? Or Same as it Ever Was?” (click here for a local copy), by Michael Franz of Bowdoin College, appear in the most recent issue of The Forum, a Journal of Applied Research in Contemporary Politics.

(MIDDLETOWN, CT) – In just the last few weeks a large uptick in negative ads has pushed this year from one that was no more negative than 2008 to the most negative campaign in recent history by both sides. In an analysis of year-to-date (through Oct. 20) and traditional general election advertising (9/1-10/20) of House and Senate races, the Wesleyan Media Project is now finding a marked increase in negativity as the general election season has heated up and drawn close to Election Day.

***To read the entire release as a pdf, click here.
***Table formats: xls

Citizens are seeing many more ads this year, but it is no longer simply the number of ads on the air that are making this campaign feel more negative.  More than half of all ads are pure attack ads, and if we include contrast spots, roughly 2 out of every 3 ads on the air are negative.” said Erika Franklin Fowler, assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University and co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project.

Negative ads mention only the candidate being attacked, while contrast ads mention both a favored candidate and his or her opponent.

Every year there is speculation about unprecedented levels of negativity, but at least in comparison to recent campaigns, we can now confirm the speculation this year is correct,” Fowler continued.

Using Wisconsin Advertising Project analysis of CMAG (Campaign Media Analysis Group) data from 2000-2008 as points of comparison, attack ads have steadily increased since the 2004 election, and the 2010 House and Senate advertising is the most negative in the past decade (Table 1).

Table formats: xls

Looking at just the most recent weeks since September 1, the project finds that Republicans are attacking more than Democrats.  Fifty-six percent of Republican-sponsored ads (including party, candidate and interest group ads) mention an opponent, compared to 49.9 percent of ads sponsored by Democrats and their allies.  Both parties have increased their rate of attacks over 2008 levels.  In the comparable 7-week time period in 2008, 49.3 percent of Republican ads attacked, and 42.5 percent of Democratic ads attacked.

Republicans have been more likely to attack in the waning days of this campaign than Democrats, though Democrats cannot claim the moral high ground, as half of their own ads have contained attacks,” said Travis Ridout, co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project and associate professor of political science at Washington State University.

Moreover, it remains true, in line with our report last week, that Democratic are attacking more personally with 18.4 percent of attack ads containing a personal reference compared to only 5.6 percent for Republicans.

Democratic attacks are disproportionately focused on personal characteristics of their opponents,” said Michael Franz, associate professor of government at Bowdoin College and co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project.  “In fact Democrats are three times as likely to include personal attacks in their negative spots compared to Republicans.”

Taking into consideration the entire year’s worth of political advertising, the project finds that, as a proportion of total ads, Democrats and pro-Democratic sponsors are just as likely to attack as Republican and pro-Republican sponsors in U.S. House and Senate races.  Democratic sponsors attacked in 40.6 percent of their ads; the comparable figure for Republicans was 40.9 percent.  However, while Republican sponsors are attacking at almost the same rate as in 2008 (in which they attacked in 41 percent of all ads), Democratic sponsors have increased their negativity, rising from 36.3 percent in 2008.

The Wesleyan Media Project provides real-time tracking and analysis of all political television advertising in real-time. Housed in Wesleyan’s Quantitative Analysis Center – part of the Allbritton Center for the Study of Public Life – the Wesleyan Media Project is the successor to the Wisconsin Advertising Project, which disbanded in 2009. It is directed by Erika Franklin Fowler, assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University, Michael M. Franz, associate professor of government at Bowdoin College and Travis N. Ridout, associate professor of political science at Washington State University.

The Wesleyan Media Project is supported by grants from John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, The Sunlight Foundation, Wesleyan University, and its partner institutions Bowdoin College and Washington State University. Data provided by Kantar Media/CMAG with analysis by the Wesleyan Media Project using Academiclip, a web-based coding tool. Results are based on a large sample of ads, accounting for over 60 percent of the roughly 705,000 airings between September 1 and October 20.

For more information contact:
David Pesci at 860-685-5612 or dpesci at wesleyan.edu
Erika Franklin Fowler at 860-685-3407 or efowler at wesleyan.edu
Michael M. Franz at 207-798-4318 or mfranz at bowdoin.edu, or
Travis N. Ridout at 509-335-2264 or tnridout at wsu.edu

(MIDDLETOWN, CT –) As of October 20, spending on advertising in U.S. Senate, House and gubernatorial races has eclipsed $1 billion, a historic figure by any measure.  Almost $620 million of that spending has been since September 1, and $250 million was in the past two weeks alone.  As a point of comparison, the Wesleyan Media Project estimated roughly $220M was spent on advertising between January 1 and September 15.  That means in the last two weeks alone, spending overtook the first nine and a half months of the year.  Year-to-date spending is almost 50 percent greater in House races (from almost $142M in 2008 to over $210M today) and has almost doubled in Senate races compared to 2008 (from $157.5M to $314M).

***To view entire release as a pdf, click here.
***For tables, select your format (xls and xml have more information): pdf xls or zipped xml

Almost any way you look at it, the advertising is up—and way up—this year,” said Travis Ridout, co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project and associate professor of political science at Washington State University.  “That’s true for spending and the volume of ads, it is true for House and Senate races, and it is true whether one is looking at candidate or interest group spending,” he explained.

Table 1 shows spending in Senate races for the same September 1 to October 20 time period in both 2008 and 2010.  The only category of ad spending that is down from 2008 is party spending, but if one takes into account coordinated expenditures with the campaigns, party spending is flat.  In the two week period from October 7 to October 20, an estimated $70 million was spent on ads in Senate races.

Table formats: pdf xls or zipped xml

Table formats: pdf xls or zipped xml

Interest group activity has especially increased in House races – by more than 200 percent when measured through airings and more than 250 percent when measured through spending.  As a proportion of all activity, interest group ads account for almost double what they did in 2008,” said Michael Franz, co-director of the Project and associate professor of government at Bowdoin College.  “On the Senate side, we’re seeing a smaller increase in airings (up 30 percent) and a sizeable increase in spending (up almost 150 percent) but as a proportion of all airings, interest groups account for roughly the same amount of the air war as they did last cycle.”

The nation’s most expensive Senate races are found in California, Illinois, Florida and Pennsylvania where more than $15 million has been spent on advertising since September 1 (Table 3).  In terms of the total volume of ads, however, Nevada, Wisconsin and Florida have the nation’s most intense U.S. Senate races.  Democrats and Republicans are fairly well matched in terms of ad volume in many of the states, though the Republican has more than a 2 to 1 advantage in ad volume over the Democrat in both Missouri and Florida’s three-way Senate race. The table also includes the percentage of total airings that were sponsored by interest groups.  In Missouri, Colorado, and Nevada, outside groups have aired about 30 percent of all pro-candidate ads.  In California and Pennsylvania the number is past 20 percent.

Table formats: pdf xls or zipped xml

Table formats: pdf xls or zipped xml

Table formats: pdf xls or zipped xml

Particularly noteworthy is the fact that 6 out of the top 10 interest group spenders are non-profit groups that do not have to disclose their donors, and were we to exclude the Republican Governor’s Association, it would be 7 of the top 10 as number 11 is Americans for Job Security,” said Erika Franklin Fowler, co-director of the Project and assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University.  “That is nearly $40M dollars of advertising activity in top races for which the public will be unable to track the source.”

Table formats: pdf xls or zipped xml

By all accounts advertising in 2010 is one for the history books,” concluded Fowler.

The Wesleyan Media Project provides real-time tracking and analysis of all political television advertising in real-time. Housed in Wesleyan’s Quantitative Analysis Center – part of the Allbritton Center for the Study of Public Life – the Wesleyan Media Project is the successor to the Wisconsin Advertising Project, which disbanded in 2009.  It is directed by Erika Franklin Fowler, assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University, Michael M. Franz, associate professor of government at Bowdoin College and Travis N. Ridout, associate professor of political science at Washington State University.

The Wesleyan Media Project is supported by grants from John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, The Sunlight Foundation, Wesleyan University, and its partner institutions Bowdoin College and Washington State University.  Data provided by Kantar Media/CMAG with analysis by the Wesleyan Media Project using Academiclip, a web-based coding tool.

For more information contact:

David Pesci at 860-685-5612 or dpesci at wesleyan.edu
Erika Franklin Fowler at 860-685-3407 or efowler at wesleyan.edu
Michael M. Franz at 207-798-4318 or mfranz at bowdoin.edu, or
Travis N. Ridout at 509-335-2264 or tnridout at wsu.edu

###

(MIDDLETOWN, CT –) As we reported last week, “claims that 2010 is the most negative election to date may be premature.  In an analysis of close to 900,000 airings from January 1 to October 5, 2010, the Wesleyan Media Project finds that the distribution of positive, negative and contrast ads is comparable to 2008 in proportion, if not in volume.”  In an update to that release, and with a focus on House and Senate races, we continue to find similar rates of negativity.  Furthermore, we find that Democrats and Republicans are airing similar proportions of negative (and positive) spots in federal races.  However, there is one crucial difference: Democrats are using personal attacks at much higher rates than Republicans and a much higher rate than Democrats in 2008.

***To view entire release as a pdf, click here.
***To view tables only, select a format: pdf xls or zipped xml

Table 1 shows the percentage of attack ads (ads focusing only on the opposing candidate) that are focused on candidate characteristics, issues of public policy, or a mixture of both.  (Breakdowns in this way for contrast and promotional spots are available in the downloadable excel file.)  In 2010, pro-Democratic ad sponsors focused on the personal characteristics of Republican candidates in 21% of their attack ads.  This is up from the 12% of Democratic attack ads in 2008 that were focused on personal characteristics.  Republicans have mentioned candidate characteristics in 11 percent of their attack ads this year.

The use of personal attacks actually makes sense for the Democrats this year,” said Michael Franz, co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project and associate professor of government at Bowdoin College.  “The issue environment does not really favor them, in that many Obama policies are unpopular, so many Democrats are choosing to point out the personal foibles of their opponents.”

Table formats: pdf xls or zipped xml

As a consequence, issues are taking a backseat in Democratic ads.  In fact, they are the primary focus in only 35 percent of their attacks,” said Erika Franklin Fowler, co-director of the Project and assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University. “In contrast, the data suggest that Republicans are taking advantage of citizen unhappiness with the current state of affairs by attacking Democratic candidates primarily on substantive policy issues—that’s the focus of 56 percent of their attacks,” she added.

Table formats: pdf xls or zipped xml

Travis Ridout, co-director of the Project and associate professor of political science at Washington State University, offered some perspective:  “In spite of the dozens of attack ads this year that focus solely on the personal characteristics of candidates, there are many more that focus on policy issues.  So while there may be plenty of mud-slinging on our television screens, much of the discussion of political opponents still centers on issues of public policy.”

The Wesleyan Media Project provides real-time tracking and analysis of all political television advertising in real-time. Housed in Wesleyan’s Quantitative Analysis Center –part of the Allbritton Center for the Study of Public Life – the Wesleyan Media Project is the successor to the Wisconsin Advertising Project, which disbanded in 2009.  It is directed by Erika Franklin Fowler, assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University; Michael M. Franz, associate professor of government at Bowdoin College and Travis N. Ridout, associate professor of political science at Washington State University.

The Wesleyan Media Project is supported by grants from John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, The Sunlight Foundation, Wesleyan University, and its partner institutions Bowdoin College and Washington State University.  Data provided by Kantar Media/CMAG with analysis by the Wesleyan Media Project using Academiclip, a web-based coding tool.  Results are based on a large sample of ads, accounting for nearly 700,000 airings between January 1 and October 13.

For more information contact:

David Pesci at 860-685-5612 or dpesci at wesleyan.edu
Erika Franklin Fowler at 860-685-3407 or efowler at wesleyan.edu
Michael M. Franz at 207-798-4318 or mfranz at bowdoin.edu, or
Travis N. Ridout at 509-335-2264 or tnridout at wsu.edu

###

(MIDDLETOWN, CT –) In the battle for control of Congress, economic references are far and away the most prominent theme mentioned in both Democratic and Republican advertising.   In particular, jobs are receiving the lion’s share of attention with nearly half of all Republican ads (46 percent) mentioning employment and well over a third of all Democratic ads doing the same (38 percent), followed closely by mentions of taxes (44 percent of GOP, 36 percent of Dem ads).  Beyond that, however, ads by or on behalf of major party candidates diverge in their attention to specific references.

***To view entire release as pdf, click here.
***To view tables, select a format: pdf xls or zipped xml

Democratic ads are attacking Wall Street and candidates with Wall Street experience, viewing those ties as a key liability this year,” said Erika Franklin Fowler, assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University and co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project.  “In addition, Democratic ads tend to mention trade and globalization and frequently feature accusations that Republican candidates are sending American jobs to China.  In short, the Democratic strategy involves an attempt to paint Republicans as out of touch with the average American’s economic reality.”

*Based on Wesleyan Media Project on-going analysis of airings in senatorial and congressional ads from Kantar Media/CMAG.
**Some ads mention more than one issue or theme.

Republicans are focusing heavily on government spending and the budget deficit more generally along with the spending of stimulus dollars in particular,” said Travis Ridout, associate professor of political science at Washington State University and co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project.  “Republicans are primarily going after the liberal, tax-and-spend image of Democrats.  But they aren’t ignoring Wall Street altogether either as almost 9 percent of their airings target the financial district too.”

Other domestic issues have taken a backseat to the economy, but not surprisingly health care is among the top mentions for both parties.

Almost a third of advertising by or on behalf of Republican candidates are attacking health care reform while a much smaller percentage of Democratic ones – primarily candidate-sponsored ones – are discussing reform” said Michael Franz, associate professor of government at Bowdoin College and co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project.  “In the aggregate, Democrats are actually talking more about social security than health care while getting hammered by Republican spots seeking to capitalize on mixed opinion surrounding the landmark legislation.”

Table 2 displays the proportion of Democrat and Republican airings mentioning Obama, Congress, and either party in a disapproving way.

In an anti-incumbent year, Congress is a frequent target of both Democratic and Republican attacks,” added Fowler, “but gone are the Democratic references to hope and change. Rather it’s Republicans who own change this year, a common theme in almost 8 percent of GOP airings.”

* Based on Wesleyan Media Project on-going analysis of airings in senatorial and congressional ads from Kantar Media/CMAG.

Republicans are going out aggressively against Obama with more than a quarter of all spots mentioning the president in a disapproving fashion,” said Ridout.

The Wesleyan Media Project also tracks mentions of other key phrases such as Main Street, Tea Party, and experience.

Given the political mood, this is not a year to trumpet experience, and this is reflected in our analysis.  ‘Experience’ is featured in less than 0.5 percent of airings.  It might surprise some, however, that despite all of the media focus on the Tea Party and Tea Party candidates, references to the movement are even less common than references to experience,” noted Franz.

The Wesleyan Media Project provides real-time tracking and analysis of all political television advertising in real-time. Housed in Wesleyan’s Quantitative Analysis Center –part of the Allbritton Center for the Study of Public Life – the Wesleyan Media Project is the successor to the Wisconsin Advertising Project, which disbanded in 2009.  It is directed by Erika Franklin Fowler, assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University, Michael M. Franz, associate professor of government at Bowdoin College, and Travis N. Ridout, associate professor of political science at Washington State University.

The Wesleyan Media Project is supported by grants from John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, The Sunlight Foundation, Wesleyan University, and its partner institutions Bowdoin College and Washington State University.  Data provided by Kantar Media/CMAG with analysis by the Wesleyan Media Project using Academiclip, a web-based coding tool.  Results are based on a large sample of almost 700 unique ads, accounting for nearly 300,000 of the more than 500,000 airings between September 1 and October 13.

For more information contact:
David Pesci at 860-685-5612 or dpesci at wesleyan.edu
Erika Franklin Fowler at 860-685-3407 or efowler at wesleyan.edu
Michael M. Franz at 207-798-4318 or mfranz at bowdoin.edu, or
Travis N. Ridout at 509-335-2264 or tnridout at wsu.edu

###

(MIDDLETOWN, CT –) The volume of advertising in the 37 states holding gubernatorial races this November is up dramatically over the volume of advertising aired up to this point in 2006.   A Wesleyan Media Project analysis of gubernatorial race airings between September 1 and October 7, 2010, finds that almost 300,000 ads have been aired across the country in gubernatorial races, double the volume aired in 2006.  Candidates accounted for 72 percent of those ads, while parties accounted for another 16.2 percent.  Independent groups financed almost 12 percent of the ads, an increase from the 7.4 percent that they financed in 2006.

***For a pdf of the full release, click here.
***Table formats: pdf, xls, or zipped xml (note: xls and xml have more information).
***For a NEW TABLE of Top IG spenders in GOV races, select your format: pdf, xls, zipped xml

Table formats: pdf, xls, or zipped xml

One big story this year is the role that outside groups are playing in gubernatorial races.  These groups have more than tripled their involvement in terms of the number of ads they have aired on behalf of candidates running for governor,” said Travis Ridout, associate professor of political science at Washington State University and co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project.

What explains the more than doubling of advertising this election season from 2006?

In part, this is a reflection of the extremely competitive environment this year,” said Michael Franz, associate professor of government at Bowdoin College and co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project.  “A third of the races for governor are legitimate tossups,” he added.

Table 2 shows that the state that has seen the most gubernatorial ads is California, where an estimated $35 million was spent on 51,519 ad spots in the September 1 to October 7 time period.  (Figures in this table include all candidate-, party- and independent group-sponsored ads).  Most of the California ads were paid for by the candidates themselves, though the Republican ad advantage is not as large as one might expect given Republican candidate Meg Whitman’s proven ability to self-finance her campaign.   During all of 2010, Whitman’s campaign aired just under 175,000 spots in California.  Floridians have also been hit hard by television advertising, with over 44,000 spots being aired in the state during the post-September 1 period.  Two Midwestern states with close gubernatorial races, Wisconsin and Ohio, races each saw over 19,000 ad airings worth an estimated $8 million in each state.

Table formats: pdf, xls, or zipped xml

Sometimes lost amidst the focus on Citizens United and control of Congress this year is the fact that key battlegrounds in gubernatorial races may fundamentally shape the political landscape on important policy issues, not to mention redistricting,” said Erika Franklin Fowler, assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University and co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project. “The sheer volume of advertising is one prime indication that both sides understand how high the stakes are.”

The Wesleyan Media Project provides real-time tracking and analysis of all political television advertising in real-time. Housed in Wesleyan’s Quantitative Analysis Center –part of the Allbritton Center for the Study of Public Life – the Wesleyan Media Project is the successor to the Wisconsin Advertising Project, which disbanded in 2009.  It is directed by Erika Franklin Fowler, assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University and her collaborators Michael M. Franz, associate professor of government at Bowdoin College and Travis N. Ridout, associate professor of political science at Washington State University.

The Wesleyan Media Project is supported by grants from John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, The Sunlight Foundation, Wesleyan University, and its partner institutions Bowdoin College and Washington State University.  Data are provided by Kantar Media/CMAG with analysis by the Wesleyan Media Project using Academiclip, a web-based coding tool.  All spending numbers are estimates.

For more information contact:

David Pesci at 860-685-5612 or dpesci at wesleyan.edu
Erika Franklin Fowler at 860-685-3407 or efowler at wesleyan.edu
Michael M. Franz at 207-798-4318 or mfranz at bowdoin.edu, or
Travis N. Ridout at 509-335-2264 or tnridout at wsu.edu

###