Campaigns & Elections - August 2007 - (Page 60)

feature Underdogs like Paul Wellstone use Madison Avenue creativity to grab headlines—and votes. ad that breaks out of the few standard formulae is still a rare thing. Why is political advertising so much less adventurous than business advertising? Does it have to be, or are politicians missing the boat? Politicians are Like Banks? Paul Flowers has run an advertising firm in the Dallas area for more than 20 years, and in 2006 he published “Underdog Advertising: Proven Principles to Compete and Win Against the Giants in Any Industry.” Having targeted his business at such underdogs in the world of commerce, Flowers has implemented many bold, risky ad campaigns—underdogs, after all, have to go out on a limb. In some industries, however, an advertiser can only get so creative. “Every business has a certain amount of ‘risk capital’ they can use,” Flowers said. “If I am advertising a bank or a hospital, I can’t take nearly the kinds of risks in my advertising than I could if I am selling a beer or a video game.” Flowers thinks most politicians see themselves in the bank-and-hospital category. “You don’t want to be so off the wall that people are going to say, ‘I don’t want a clown as my governor.’ ” Indeed, most politicians and political media professionals seem to see it this way. But even banks are breaking out of this narrower view of limited “risk capital” for serious businesses. One ING Direct television spot hinges on a grown man in a squirrel suit falling out of a tree. Why can they get away with this? While ING does big-time asset management and owns insurance companies, its television ads are mostly aimed at potential customers for its savings, lending and CD business—which are primarily Internet-based. “An Internet bank typically relates better to a younger audience,” Flowers said. “The younger audience is going to be more open to that than an older audience is.” In each election cycle, a few politicians take an edgier tack, especially if they’re trying to get young people excited. In 1998, Jesse “The Body” Ventura, a former professional wrestler, ran television ads starring action figures. His campaign also placed eye-catching and original (read: goofy) print ads comparing his sneakers (“If he has to wear shoes”) and his heft (250 pounds) to that of his opponent (“tassled loafers” and 155 pounds). A Minneapolis StarTribune exit poll found a near unprecedented 61 percent turnout among voters ages 18 to 29, with 46 percent of them voting for Ventura. The youth vote gave him the critical boost to win in a three-way election. Similarly, in 2006, on the strength of the youth vote, liberal anti-war Democrat Ned Lamont defeated incumbent pro-war Sen. Joe Lieberman in the Democratic Senate primary. Lamont, who pulled in 52 percent of the primary vote, won the 18-to-29 year-old voter 63 percent to 36 percent. Lamont’s television ads ventured to the silly side—including hit pieces on himself for making bad coffee and being a poor karaoke singer. The Hill newspaper conducted a survey comparing Lamont’s first TV ad with the spot Lieberman was running at the time, and Lamont’s ad trounced the longtime senator. Better to Lose Safely… For advertisers who like to take risks, one of the toughest jobs is to convince the client to go along. “When I present an advertising campaign to a client, if their palms aren’t a little bit sweaty when they buy off on it, we probably haven’t pushed them far enough,” said Flowers, who champions underdog clients trying to get noticed. Client reluctance is multiplied in the political world, which probably leads to political advertising’s creative lag. For one thing, politicians feel the stakes are too high. If a car dealer runs a risky ad that misses the mark, their sales might suffer for a month but the business will have time to right itself. In politics, your second chance might not come for four or six years, if at all. It’s a problem William Berry, president of William Berry Campaigns, encounters frequently. “Sometimes for candidates,” Berry said, “it’s easier for them to lose safely than to actually put themselves in position to win by taking measured, well-thought-out and hopefully based-uponresearch chances.” Also, as Berry pointed out, “It’s a personal thing.” A congressional candidate running a daring ad is risking much 60 CAMPAIGNS & ELECTIONS 08.07

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Campaigns & Elections - August 2007

Cover Contents Editor’s Note Ames Straw Poll Cavalcade; Last Candidate Standing; The New Dollar-A-Year Guy; Web Videos That Can Change the Election Across State Lines: Campaign News from Around the Country People and Organizations Movers and Shakers: Ten Questions for Matthew Taylor and Philip de Vellis Campaign Consultant Sign-Ups Reel Time Cover Story: Building Blocks From Madison Avenue to K Street Money Can’t Buy Votes Dick Cheney: Roll Model for Millions Ames: Still Weird, Still Important How to Do Tougher, Quicker Crisis Management Online Cause-Based SocNets Lure Issue Voters The Great Exaggeration Why Primetime TV is Alive and Well, Politically Speaking Buyer’s Guide Tips for Toeing the Fine Line Between Employment, Friendship Managing Your Friend’s Campaign? Think ‘Consigliore’ Off The Record

Campaigns & Elections - August 2007

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.