The Jambar
Recent scandals involving political smear ads reveal a growing change in the social landscape — the power of advertising.
Billions of dollars are spent on advertising every year in the U.S. Between digital channels and traditional broadcast ads, there’s seldom a medium that consumers can turn to without something vying for their attention.
Social media sites collect and sell user data for targeted advertising. Broadcast television runs on ad revenue. Even journalism relies on advertising to pay the bills. Anything that seems free to the user exists through the buying and selling of their attention.
Advertisers treasure attention for a reason. It isn’t just about selling a product. The control of public perception plays an important role in marketing. Ads have the power to impact culture on a wide scale.
Public relations often intertwines itself with advertising to create cultural campaigns. The American Psychological Association describes one such campaign in public relations where a campaign shifted what the public believed to be a healthy breakfast — all through the power of advertising and psychology.
It’s no surprise that political advertising continues to grow, given the influence campaigns have on cultural beliefs. NBC4 reported that the Ohio Senate race alone spent over $500 million in advertising and reservation spending.
Open Secrets shows fundraising for both candidates in the Ohio gubernatorial race totaled millions — $81.9 million for Republican candidate Vivek Ramaswamy and $37.6 million for Democratic candidate Dr. Amy Acton.
Numbers continue to boom each election cycle, especially in swing states such as Ohio where politicians fight to influence opinion. Advertising plays an important role in modern politics where money pushes agendas.
Political power no longer relies on qualifications. It relies on how much money can be thrown at advertising. This favors those who have the excess millions to spend on ads. Even if a candidate themselves isn’t rich, their donors are.
A system like this doesn’t offer political representation for and by the people. It offers representation to those who can buy somebody a campaign.
Government regulations could curb this excessive spending. A cap on campaign budgets could even the playing field between candidates. This limitation would prevent the pervasiveness of political ads and allow the public to engage with each agenda without being overwhelmed.
Until then, the onus is on the public. Individuals choose how they let ads impact their opinions. The people need to engage with political ads knowing that the intent involves a deeper change to public thought.
Advertising is a tool. It’s not just about selling a product. It’s about changing ideas — and those changes should be made for the good of all people.