The next time you hear a political candidate blast his or her opponent in a negative political advertisement, your natural inclination may be to grab the remote and change the channel. However, Vanderbilt University political scientist John Geer believes attacks ads play a crucial role in the democratic political process, so listen to and evaluate that negative message before heading to the polls.
In Geer’s new book, In Defense of Negativity: Attack Ads in Presidential Campaigns (University of Chicago Press), the Vanderbilt professor of political science conducts an in-depth analysis of negative advertising in presidential campaigns from 1960 to 2004.
The Vanderbilt professor of political science defines negativity as any criticism leveled by one candidate against another during a campaign, and acknowledges that the frequency of attack in presidential ads by both Democrats and Republicans has been on the rise the last 40 years. “There are two aspects of negative appeals that enrich the information environment available for voters,” Geer writes. “One, negative information is more issue-oriented than positive appeals. Two, that attacks are more likely to be supported by evidence than self-promotional claims.”
In his book, Geer cites one of the more memorable attack ads from 2004, which showed Senator John Kerry on a windsurfer. The ad was intended to convey the message that Kerry could not be trusted, that he tacked too much. “The opposition has every incentive to raise such doubts, since such information is not only important to voters, it is something that can be documented and thus viewed as credible,” Geer writes.
Geer has found numerous examples throughout American history of negative presidential campaigns. Andrew Jackson was accused of being a murderer and a cannibal and his wife was called a prostitute in the 1828 presidential campaign. “Stupid” and an “ape” were words that critics used to describe Abraham Lincoln in 1860. Geer has noted that even in more recent times, Harry Truman drew an analogy between the Republicans and the Nazis.
“The reality is that attacks stimulate voter interest,” Geer said. “You don’t want politics to be personal, but voters do want a frank exchange of beliefs, especially in a time when the two major parties are so polarized. In the end, democracy is about disagreement.”
In Defense of Negativity: Attacks Ads in Presidential Campaigns has been published by University of Chicago Press. More information is available on its website at: www.press.uchicago.edu.
Media contact: Ann Marie Deer Owens
annmarie.owens@vanderbilt.edu