Adweek talks about the impact the political ads of both Sen. McCain and Sen. Obama had during the Olympics. According to research done by Nielsen IAG, it appears that McCain had ads that topped the goal of a breakthrough ad or one that shows “effectiveness in communicating the basic message and intent-to-vote increase.” Of course there was much talk about the “Celebrity” ad aimed at discrediting Obama’s popularity which had a communication effectiveness of 90%. Obama did however beat out McCain in the area of likability. Isn’t that always the way with celebrities?
Adweek also gets into a bunch of calculations about what areas were polled and how the number breakdown to determine a winner and still managed to confuse me about how McCain won this one. This give McCain an edge because it proves that people are willing to listen to what he saying about Obama and take that to heart. But it’s fortunate for Obama that the ads aired during the Olympics are such a small part of what voters will remember and weigh when choosing their candidate.
Besides those two weeks had enough shining advertising moments to override election coverage. So I’m doubtful that anyone is really putting much stock into those ads anyway. Which causes me to wonder how effective political ads will be for this campaign. This is a clearly a very different type of campaign. One where voters are more engaged and informed than ever before. Gone are the days of sitting by idly while one candidate bashed another. Voters are making more of an effort to know the candidates that they are getting behind and are recognizing these ads for what they really are- one party’s opinion of another. So it may be harder to produce a spot that paints a negative picture without having a voter run out and see for themselves if it’s true. It’s reported that both candidates spent $5-6 mil in advertising dollars to have these ads run during the Olympics. Was it money wasted?