Looking for Meaning in All the Wrong Places: Why Negative Advertising Is a Suspect Category

Abstract

A critical review of academic work on negativity in political advertising shows that the concept has been defined in ways that are too broad, insufficiently holistic, and too pejorative. Data from the American National Election Study demonstrate the disproportionate use of "negative" to describe campaign ads by voters. Exploratory data suggest the component parts of negativity: misleading claims, emotional appeals, one-sided attacks, and a generally loathsome view of politicians. To better understand academic interest in the subject, it is necessary to explore the shared assumptions of the political reform movement of the past century and of reformminded researchers-specifically their disdain for the emotional underpinnings of political behavior, even as emotion is linked with higher citizen engagement with politics. It is possible to pursue a better informed and less benighted discourse on campaign advertising by eschewing the global conception of negativity by more seriously engaging the theoretical bases of representative government.

The Implicit and Explicit Effects of Negative Political Campaigns: Is the Source Really Blamed?

“…The definition of negative message. One potential explanation for the inconsistency of previous findings may be partially due to an inaccurate and fuzzy definition of negative messages (Richardson, 2001). Lau and his colleagues (1999) clearly acknowledged this problem: “ negative advertising is a contested concept, we based (.…”

Patterns of Negative Campaigning during the 2019 European Election: Political Parties’ Facebook Posts and Users’ Sharing Behaviour across Twelve Countries

“…In balanced messages, negative as well as positive statements are used in about equal shares. That is, the sender both criticizes or attacks but also supports and applauds in the same message (Richardson, 2001). Last, neutral messages include neither positive nor negative statements and have a rather informative character without intentionally eliciting any emotional response.…”

¿Por qué los candidatos atacan en campaña? Factores explicativos en la publicidad política televisiva

“…La proliferación de ataques entre adversarios políticos no es una práctica novedosa. En democracias antiguas como la ateniense y modernas como la norteamericana, se ha documentado la presencia de señalamientos negativos, agresiones e incivilidad en los discursos de campaña, con momentos históricos álgidos, tenidos como decadentes, y otros más neutrales, en donde se concibe como un componente natural de la disputa por el poder (Richardson, 2001). La innovación de la segunda mitad del siglo xx, a partir de la cual cobra fuerza la preocupación por la negatividad en el discurso político, es la publicidad política televisiva que, en virtud de su amplia difusión y apelación emocional, tendría un impacto insospechado hasta ese momento.…”