Wednesday, January 27, 2010
The changing face of political advertising with a local twist
You’ve no doubt heard that the Supreme Court decided to remove all limits on corporate political spending. We’re already swamped with political action group (PAC) ads and now we’re going to get hours of TV and radio time with the corporate spin. The court decision was followed by lots of speculation on how campaigning might change at the national level. Can’t you just see something like “Nike, Just Do It for Obama” or “Crest keeps McCain smiling” and maybe Budweiser will have a “Don’t Drink and Vote” campaign – it’s going to be 24/7 of this when we get to the midterm elections.
The thing I don’t understand is how a big company with 5,000 employees and 50,000 shareholders decides which candidate to support. Is it the Board of Directors, or the CEO or do the shareholders get to vote? Maybe the employees get to decide – just kidding on that one. I can’t imagine the employees of a major corporation being asked to participate in that decision.
Closer to home, will the Supreme Court decision tickle down to our hotly contested races for Village Council and the School Board - might we be swayed by corporate advertising campaigns?
I wonder if political ads in the Village will follow a candidate because of their past record and views on current issues or, what I’m hoping for, because the headlines and campaign slogans make great reading and even better bumper stickers.
Just think of the possibilities for our local businesses ... “Toxic Beauty likes…” or “No Common Scents backs...” or “2 Clowns laugh at...” or “Jail House Suites hosts...” or “Burly Man linked with….” No matter how you fill in the blanks, it could be an interesting election year.