Newswise — As the November presidential election approaches, political advertisements have increased in the media. While candidates allocate the majority of their campaign funds to advertising, independent interest groups wish to get their message out to voters as well, sometimes without having to follow federal election laws.
These outside groups, known as "527" groups for the IRS code governing their tax-exempt status, have been spending millions of dollars on ads criticizing both President Bush and Democratic rival Sen. John Kerry. Kerry's approval rating dropped after one 527 group, "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" ran a series of advertisements questioning his military record during the Vietnam War.
A Kansas State University professor does not think the change in Kerry's approval rating is mere coincidence.
Soontae An, an assistant professor of journalism and mass communications, has been researching the effect political advertising has on the public and issue-advocacy ads on voter turnout. An said although the Swift Boat ads are bad because they are misleading, issue-advocacy commercials are informative and empower viewers to be more aware of campaign issues.
"Does the public learn from political advertising?" An asked. "To make the society better, we have to make citizens and voters informed so they can make an informed decision on whomever they choose. In 15-30 seconds advertisers can clearly deliver the issue information to the public - what they really need to know."
By analyzing a national sample of issue-advocacy ads, An found the more issue-advocacy ads that appeared in the media, the higher the voter turnout. She also discovered people who live in media markets with heavy issue-advocacy ads gain a better understanding of a candidate's position than those who live in areas that did not run the ads.
An said these issue-advocacy ads are not sponsored by the candidate and are used to promote a specific cause. Issue-advocacy ads are also not controlled by election law because they do not use the words "vote for" or "vote against."
"Strong criticism for the issue advocacy ads has been presented by saying the ads, generally very negative, tend to turn voters away," An said. "But research has shown that although they do not like the negative advertising, people admit they learn because a lot of negative ads focus on issue standings - especially between two candidates."
In the 2000 presidential election, An said the Sierra Club, an environmental interest group, ran an ad campaign in Texas about George W. Bush's environmental record. She said voter turnout increased in the areas where the ads ran. Generally, researchers have only studied the effectiveness of advertising, An said there have been few studies on issue-advocacy ads.
"People think issue-advocacy ads are always deceptive and their nasty voices pollute our American political system," An said. "I want to provide evidence that tells a good aspect of issue-advocacy ads."
Critics of issue-advocacy ads have said interest groups are taking advantage of the election laws by spending large amounts of money on candidates without using the "magic words" supporting a candidate.
"There's no limit because of the first amendment," An said. "Legally, those issue-advocacy ads are to express their political view. There is a big debate among scholars about how much first amendment protection should be given to these interest groups because, oftentimes, they deliver misleading and deceptive messages."
An believes issue-advocacy ads deserve full first amendment protection. The ads help to ensure all voices are heard on important issues.
"Voters are smarter than scholars and policy makers think when it comes to discerning a message," She said. "Research has shown that it has boosted the levels of participation and knowledge."
RSS