(UNDATED) Distortions, stretches, half-truths and omissions are familiar features of political campaigns. But independent fact-checkers and analysts say that outright falsehoods in candidates’ ads may be reaching a level not seen since TV commercials entered presidential politics more than a half-century ago.
It is happening, they say, because false advertising has worked; because there are few, if any, penalties for it; and because truth becomes a relative and disputable term in the alternate reality of partisan politics — or as George Costanza once put it on “Seinfeld,”
“It’s not a lie if you believe it.”
“They’re drinking their own Kool-Aid,” said Brooks Jackson, director of the nonpartisan FactCheck.org at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center. “I’ve come to believe that an awful lot of the time they believe the ads. They’ve convinced themselves.
“We saw something that fascinated me,” he said. “Several political reporters noted that Sarah Palin and John McCain continued to repeat the fable that she was a big opponent of the so-called Bridge to Nowhere.
Everybody wrote about it, and they kept saying it anyway,” in speeches and in TV ads.
Political scientist Darrell West examined past patterns in his book “Air Wars: Television Advertising in Election Campaigns.” He said the most dubious and misleading ads generally have come from groups independent of candidates, such as those who made the “Swift Boat” ads against John Kerry in 2004.
“This year, the candidates themselves have really pushed the envelope,” West said. “The 2008 campaign has reached all-time lows in the use of misleading and inaccurate political appeals. Even Karl Rove, the architect of negative ads in previous campaigns, has complained about the tenor of this year’s campaign.”
“When Karl Rove says that,” Jackson added, “you probably ought to pay attention.”
Barack Obama has been cited for ads that quoted McCain out of context to say he would support “100 years” of war in Iraq or that said McCain would slash Social Security benefits.
Obama’s campaign also aired a higher percentage of negative ads than McCain’s — 77 percent to 56 percent — in the first wave of advertising after the conventions, according to a study by the University of Wisconsin Advertising Project.
But negative is not necessarily untruthful.
PolitiFact.com, a project of Congressional Quarterly and the St. Petersburg Times, rated 47 McCain ads and statements from “barely true” to “pants-on-fire” false, compared with 30 for Obama. McCain had six ads in the “pants-on-fire” category. Obama had one.
“McCain is the one who has had the bigger problem in terms of factual accuracy,” West said. The Republican, he added, was the one coming up in the polls until the crisis in financial markets started this month.
Two McCain ads drew particular notice from fact-checkers. One said Obama’s “one accomplishment” was “legislation to teach comprehensive sex education to kindergartners” — misrepresenting his support for teaching them about inappropriate touching by adults, and understating his record.
The other said a “disrespectful” Obama compared Sarah Palin to a pig. Actually, he was talking about McCain’s claim to be a force for change when he said, “You can put lipstick on a pig, it’s a still a pig”– using an expression that McCain once applied to Hillary Clinton’s health-care plan.
McCain ads have said falsely that Obama would raise taxes on the middle class, when in fact he would exempt families earning less than $250,000 from higher taxes, and that Palin did not seek earmarks as governor of Alaska.
The Washington Post said in a front-page story that after becoming fed up about claims that Palin said “thanks but no thanks” to the Bridge to Nowhere, the Obama campaign broke a taboo and used the “L-word of politics to say that the McCain campaign was lying.”
Lying, however, is a word “you don’t hear” from independent analysts, Jackson said. “A lie is an intentional deception. Unless you’re a mind reader, it’s very difficult to prove the intent of anybody.”
Whatever the intent or term, false and negative ads often work very well, said Dr. Carolyn Lin, a communications professor at the University of Connecticut. “When it works, it works like a charm, and historically it has worked. That’s why they do it.
“The unfortunate thing about political advertising,” she added, “is that when you tell lies, these lies often stick, and the liars never receive any penalties.”
Studies have shown that debunking falsehoods can have the backfire effect of reinforcing falsehoods by repeating them.
People screen out facts that run counter to broad narratives they accept, and they perceive reality in a way that conforms to their long-held beliefs, said science writer Farhad Manjoo, who writes about the phenomenon in his book “True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society.”
By rebutting untruths, meanwhile, a candidate departs from his own message and can risk being seen as weak or complaining.
Legally, candidates have a right to lie to voters just about as much as they want, said FactCheck.org’s Jackson.
The Federal Communications Commission requires broadcasters to run ads uncensored, even if the broadcasters believe they are false. And the Federal Election Commission deals with finances, not ads.
“Ohio has the toughest truth in political advertising law in the nation, and it doesn’t work,” Jackson said. “There’s no fines, no enforcement mechanism.”
By TOM FERAN
2008 Religion News Service
(Tom Feran writes for The Plain Dealer in Cleveland.)
Copyright 2008 Religion News Service. All rights reserved. No part of this transmission may be distributed or reproduced without written permission.
Beliefnet
Advertisement
posted October 10, 2008 at 6:53 pm
i am not very up on all of the politics like i should be, but for one think when they took prayer out of the school, our country started to go down. I had prayer every day of my 12 years of school, and I think I am a better person for it. personally, i think that there is one leader and his name is GOD. All of the advertising that is done about cigaretts and beer and such, is legal, but praying in school is not for some strange reason. Then there are the presidantal numbskulls who wnat to do who knows what about taxes that are alreas=dy too high anyway.
posted October 10, 2008 at 7:28 pm
If anyone has an ounce of intelligence they know better than to believe ANY political ads. The point is to make the “other guy” look bad, and whatever it takes to do that, is done.
) ). If one wants to pray in school, there are plenty of schools, RCC and others where praying is an everyday activity.
Wanda, what does praying in a public school have to do with politics? If the candidates prayed in school, they wouldn’t lie about their opposition?
And you’re right, praying in public school is not allowed because the United States has a separation of church and state…public school isn’t the place for prayer (except at test time
posted October 11, 2008 at 1:59 am
Actually, Wanda can pray all she wants. After all, after talking about how it wasn’t allowed, she goes on to say she did so every day.
Apparently, she wasn’t arrested.
What was forbidden was only teacher led compulsory prayer. Now, saying that kids won’t pray unless someone in authority forces them? Or that it doesn’t count unless a paid state employee is leading it?
posted October 11, 2008 at 9:50 am
Wanda, John McCain probably prayed in public school about as often as you do, yet “McCain had six ads in the “pants-on-fire” category.” so it didn’t do anything for him.
And as KB points out, kids can still pray; they just can’t be directed by someone how to pray.
posted October 11, 2008 at 11:05 am
Truth is always a problem. Facts, statistics, even dates can be arranged and arrayed to make their interpretation very flexible. Sometimes it is not what is said, but what is left out that helps complete the picture. Sorting truth from convenient fictions is always in the eyes, ears, and mind of the beholder/voter. If we look at the entire election process like parents/teachers listening to adolescents explaining and excusing their behavior, we will be more able to sort and discern what is closer to the truth. Also, be wary of promises that cannot possibly be honored – there has to be a majority of almost 600 other people (all of Congress and the Cabinet, the Joint Chiefs, and a few others) who have to go along with anything a candidate says they will do. Voting is not easy, but it is necessary for anyone who expects to be an actual citizen.
posted October 11, 2008 at 11:36 am
Truth will always matter in this world. Nothing better for anyone’s soul growth than truth. Did you read the article on net yesterday about each sides truths, Obama had one “pants on fire” to his credit and McCain had several. I’m sure you all have seen by now how McCain took the microphone away from a women at one of his rallies, because she said Obama wasn’t to be trusted because he was an Arab!, He said, “no Obama was not and he was a good man, we just believe in different issues”. He said more, look for it on TV, they will play it over and over. I saw it on CNN.
posted October 11, 2008 at 11:55 am
Daniel Patrick Moynahan said that everyone was entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts.
He was obviously wrong.
posted October 11, 2008 at 7:32 pm
pagan the truth is, actually prayer has been a part of school longer than it has not = fact. At the rate this world is going it is a fact that probably always will be, in other words we will probably see the end before that fact changes.
I don’t think the American people will even be privy to the truth again. The spin put on most campaigning has very little to do with the truth and it is acceptable because most Americans not only don’t know the truth but sadly have little concern about the truth, if they did they would find the truth and keep a record of the truth. Americans would put a higher priority on the truth. The sad fact is in this stage of our history more importance is placed on entertainment than the truth. Actors are becoming politicians with much success, not truth but success not for the people but for themselves.
posted October 11, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Truth matters, a lot. But in a campaign we don’t expect a lot of truth. We do expect, post George Wallace and his ilk, that candidates will show enough respect to their opponents to not offer comfort to racists. Palin and other McCain supporters are encouraging racists. Sometimes McCain discourages racist thinking but he has not forbidden those innuendos from his campaign.
Our country is in terrible trouble already without encouraging racial hatred.
posted October 11, 2008 at 8:19 pm
How about the new look of Beliefnet? I had to look a bit to find this, my favorite place to blog. Anyhow…
cknuck, I’m old enough to remember praying in school,yes, public school, teacher led and also Bible reading! I do remember about when it was outlawed….which, IMO is a good thing. Teacher led prayer is for church run schools, not public.
Henrietta, I too saw on the evening news when McCain stood up for Obama when the woman accused him of being an Arab. Also the fellow who told McCain that he couldn’t trust Obama, and was scared of him! McCain stood up for him then too. I admire him for that. However, McCain’s ads have tended to put those thoughts into people’s minds, and now it is showing up on the campaign trail.
BBC news did an interview with a fellow who said he had always voted Democrate, but this year he wasn’t going to, because he could “never vote for a Negro.” Didn’t catch where the fellow was from, but I think a southern state. That is truly sad. Guess that fellow didn’t realize that this is 2008.
posted October 11, 2008 at 8:41 pm
The man who can’t vote for a negro is being tested as a human being. If he really can’t, he’s flunked earth’s cycle this time. God could not approve of this in 2008, with all the years of education we’ve had about diversity. Was this man from England or America ps?
I believe truth matters to people, and the last eight years was a good eye opener for people, like if you have eyes to see with then see, and if you have ears to hear with then listen. I don’t agree with ck about how awful we all are. We’re not, and we are all being tested every day we live. I find it interesting to read the comments from people after the news clips on CNN, NYTimes, LATimes, and there are very few racists commenting, which to me is great, that we have any is sad, but it’s moving in the right direction. Also, people are very aware of the down side of the political ranting from both sides, but most agree that the Republicans are the worst.
posted October 11, 2008 at 10:12 pm
Henrietta,
The fellow was from the U.S.A. Since he used the word Negro, my thought is that he was from one of the southern states. Unfortunately I didn’t hear what state he was from…as I’m guessing they said at the beginning of the interview. It was an interview done by an English correspondent here in the states. I heard it this afternoon on the 4:00 PM BBC News on WGBH.
posted October 11, 2008 at 11:04 pm
Thanks for the answer ps. I don’t listen to radio much, so didn’t know BBC News was on.
posted October 11, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Here’s a NYT column by Frank Rich, hardly a liberal, saying what others here have said: McCain needs to get the ugly side of his campaign under control. He needs to decide once and for all whether he’s most desperate to be President or to be an American.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/opinion/12rich.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
posted October 12, 2008 at 12:16 am
IMO McCain needs to work on his body language in the next debate he pranced about much like a con artist he seemed full of himself. His shoulders and hand language seemed as if he was selling something to an audience of people who could not possibly understand what he was selling.
posted October 12, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Truth being hard to find, science is our best approximation of it. Truth is usually the first casualty in politics.
posted October 12, 2008 at 7:43 pm
Thanks for the artical to click on nnmns. If Hollywood made a movie of a Presidential election with McCain and Palin running aganist Obama, it would be shocking even in make-believe, but this is really happening, and vigilantism is definitely being aroused by their antics, and the behavior of the Republican crowds cheering them on. Selling ones souls to win an election is sad. The people that are causing it and the players doing it will not be forgotten in the future.
posted October 13, 2008 at 9:13 am
mccain made his first mistake when he replied to the question by a afro-asmerican male re housing : he insulted the man’s intelligence by saying he did not know what fannie mae and freddie mac were.anyone at all interested in housing has heard of these organizations.
posted October 13, 2008 at 6:58 pm
I heard that blooper by McCain too nancy. I remember thinking how condesending it sounded. He is so like Bush, talks before thinking and in goes the foot. I love listening to Obama talk, it’s such a treat. I heard a woman say on camera from I don’t know where, but in a crowd of people, “I never heard of Obama until he was running for President”. That’s amazing where was she four years ago, I guess listening to the Republicans, instead of the Democrats when Obama made his famous speech about America. Well we all heard him and have waited for this moment of time to happen.
posted October 27, 2008 at 4:54 pm
Dear cknuck,
You said, “the truth is, actually prayer has been a part of school longer than it has not = fact.
Perhaps, but segragation was a fact in America for much longer than integration. Doesn’t make THAT right, either.
“I don’t think the American people will even be privy to the truth again.”
You can thank BushCheneyRoveMcPalin for that.
posted November 2, 2008 at 5:11 pm
I cannot from experience imagine prayer causing anywhere near as much damage as segragation, but I do agree with the rest of your post.