I chose this ad because of the outrageous amount of mud slinging portrayed.

According to p. 149 in the book, there are few things to keep in mind when evaluating the political ads. I will walk through the steps while applying it to this ad in particular.

Transparency – Does the audience know who is speaking?
In this case, no. Oftentimes, the candidate whom is being represented in the ad will only approve the ad rather than speak in it for legal purposes. Thus, in my mind, discrediting the ad.

Pluralism – Does the media environment provide and opportunity for diverse points of view?
How can it? There is clearly one side to this ad. It represents Bill Nelson = Good, Mack =Bad.

Verisimilitude – Do the sources of the messages take responsibility for the truth claims they make?
There isn’t a single source quoted throughout the entirety of the ad to give credit towards the implications made in the ad.

Practice – Does the message encourage modeling, rehearsing, preparing and learning for civic engagement?
This sentence doesn’t even mean anything. Of course not. It’s just putting down the opposing side.

I have a very shallow view of political ads and I run them through a very critical eye. Most ads are not so focused on the candidate themselves, rather the opposing candidate and what they are doing wrong. This is not good advertising and is not beneficial to society.

Advertisements