This article was downloaded by: [University of Southern Queensland]On: 10 October 2014, At: 01:15Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Political MarketingPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wplm20

Political Advertising as PoliticalMarketing: A Retro-Forward PerspectiveLynda Lee Kaid aa University of Florida , Gainsville , Florida , USAPublished online: 14 Mar 2012.

To cite this article: Lynda Lee Kaid (2012) Political Advertising as Political Marketing: A Retro-ForwardPerspective, Journal of Political Marketing, 11:1-2, 29-53, DOI: 10.1080/15377857.2012.642731

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15377857.2012.642731

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Political Advertising as Political Marketing:A Retro-Forward Perspective

LYNDA LEE KAIDUniversity of Florida, Gainsville, Florida, USA

Political advertising continues to be a foundation of politicalmarketing, both in the United States and around the world. Theperspective presented here provides a look back at what researchershave accomplished in political advertising research over the pastfive decades, followed by an assessment of the most importantpriorities for future research. We knowmost about televised politicalads, which focus more on issues than personality and usually froma positive perspective, but we know much less about other channels,especially new Web-hosted media. We can expect the legal andregulatory arena to prompt further changes in political advertising.At the same time, differences based on gender and race=ethnicityare likely to become more important, and the political and culturalcontext for international political advertising will demand morecomparative study.

KEYWORDS electronic political advertising, international polit-ical advertising, issue advocacy advertising, political advertising,political advertising methodologies

Political advertising continues to be a foundation of political marketing, bothin the United States and around the world (for summaries of political adver-tising content and effects see Kaid 1999a, 2004b, 2006b; Kaid and Johnston2001; West 2009).

In the United States, political advertising is a term with a clear meaning.In The Sage Handbook of Political Advertising, Dr. Holtz-Bacha and I refer topolitical advertising as ‘‘a means through which parties and candidatespresent themselves to the electorate, mostly through the mass media’’(Holtz-Bacha and Kaid 2006, p. 3). In the United States, political advertising

The author of this article passed away April 13, 2011.Abstract and keywords supplied by special issue editor Christine B. Williams.

Journal of Political Marketing, 11:29–53, 2012Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1537-7857 print=1537-7865 onlineDOI: 10.1080/15377857.2012.642731

29

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

is also generally ‘‘paid media,’’ meaning that time or space is purchased for itspresentation through mass distribution outlets.

The perspective presented here provides a look back at what research-ers have accomplished in political advertising research over the past fivedecades, followed by an assessment of the most important priorities forfuture research.

EARLY PERSPECTIVES: PRINT

Democracy and electoral politics, from their earliest conceptualizations, haveprovided a need for political promotion. In their earliest forms, of course,political promotional activities were limited to interpersonal communicationsand to print and display advertising. In early U.S. elections, such formatswere best represented by political posters and placards and by other printedmaterials (Jamieson 1996). Such materials provided a mechanism for politicalcandidates, parties, and interest groups to develop and describe their posi-tions on issues and topics of current concern and to tout the qualities of theircandidates and opponents.

Academic research addressing the content, viability, usefulness, andsuccess of print political advertising is particularly limited, given the volumeof its use in local election campaigns in the United States. Most of thisresearch has focused on newspaper advertising.

Another visible print advertising format is the political poster, whichtakes various forms as a display advertising approach (traditional posters,yard signs, billboards, flyers, etc.). Political posters provide a way to spreadthe word about and to visualize and dramatize political candidates, parties, orideas. Such advertising was a central part of electoral campaigning in theUnited States in the 18th and 19th centuries and well into the 20th century.Names and slogans were the main fodder for such advertising, and Seidman(2008) has provided an outstanding description of how American politicalcampaigns have used political posters. Nonetheless, little research has testedthe effectiveness of posters in carrying political messages to voters.

Print political advertising via newspapers and posters is much moreimportant in venues outside the United States. In many countries, the regula-tions and restrictions on television advertising are much more severe than inthe United States, positioning print advertising to play a major role in carryingcandidate and party messages to voters (Kaid and Holtz-Bacha 2006a). Suchadvertising is often used for attacks on opponents as well. Although we oftenthink of television advertising when contemplating visual imagery, visualscan be highlighted in a printed medium as well. For instance, Kjeldsen(2007) describes the negative visual images in controversial newspaperadvertisements that aroused strong emotional responses in a recent Danishelection. Research on political posters has facilitated understanding of the role

30 L. L. Kaid

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

of this important advertising form in the public sphere in France (Quere 1991),Germany (Bergmann and Wickert 1999; Holtz-Bacha 2006; Muller 2002),Belgium (Van den Bulck 1993), the United Kingdom (Scammell and Langer2006), Italy (Mazzoleni 2006), and parts of Asia (Willnat and Aw 2006).

Posters also play an important role in political contexts outside politicalcampaigns. Brooks (1996) has analyzed posters used in protest movementson Vietnam, in Cuba, and in the United States. Many World War II posterswere famous during the war and long after (Gregory 1993). Analyses haveprobed the meaning and representations of Soviet posters of Lenin and Stalin(Bonnell 1999). Even in the closed society of China, posters often furnish ameans of protest against unpopular government policies and programs. Such‘‘big character posters,’’ although illegal, offer a forum for complaints andconcerns that have fuelled protests like the Tiananmen Square uprising in1989 (Sheng 1991).

Another print channel for political advertising, bumper stickers on cars,is generally used in the United States simply for candidate=party name identi-fication, but in Israel they carry specific campaign messages (Bloch 2000).Direct mail also supplies an occasion for more personalization than mostpolitical advertising. Direct mail marketers have become very adept attargeting messages to receiver characteristics and specific policy interests.In the United States direct mail has been used successfully to raise fundsfor candidates and causes, as well as to influence votes directly, especiallyin low-involvement electoral situations (Faber, Tims, and Schmitt 1993;Rothschild and Ray 1974). Benoit and Stein (2005) analyzed brochures andconcluded that direct mail political advertising stresses issues more oftenthan candidate character.

ELECTRONIC POLITICAL ADVERTISING

Political Advertising on the Radio

Political advertising is carried to receivers through electronic media includingradio, television, and the Internet. Radio has, of course, been a channel forcommunicating political messages since the first half of the 20th century.Although radio lost its dominance as an electronic format for political adver-tising when television became universally available, several factors have con-tributed to radio’s continued importance for distributing political messages.One important factor in radio’s continued importance was its lower cost, bothin terms of production time and airtime. Many campaigns, particularly localand regional races, cannot afford the high cost of television advertising.Panagopoulos and Green (2008) found that airing even simple radio adscan be beneficial to local candidates, especially to challengers. Radio adver-tising has also demonstrated success in focusing voter attention on substantiveissues, and issues can be used to bolster a candidate’s image (Rudd 1989).

Political Advertising as Political Marketing 31

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Political Advertising on Television

For many years, television ads have dominated the campaigns for presidentand major statewide offices in the United States. In 2008 campaigns aroundthe United States spent more than $2.2 billion on television advertising(Atkinson 2008). Estimates put the advertising spending for the 2010 midtermelections even higher, perhaps exceeding $4 billion (Wheaton 2010).

In the past four decades, we have learned several important thingsabout the conditions under which televised political advertising can beeffective. For instance, research has confirmed that the content of televisedpolitical advertising, unlike televised campaign news, focuses more on issuesand candidate positions on issues than on a candidate’s personal qualities(image) or campaign strategy (Kaid and Johnston 2001; Patterson andMcClure 1976; see also Kaid 2004b).

One of the earliest findings about the effects of television advertising inthe United States was the finding that such ads are successful in overcomingselective exposure, thus insuring that voters are generally exposed to adsfrom all sides of a campaign regardless of the voter’s own partisan or otherpredispositions. Television ads also can be counted on to improve voterknowledge about campaign issues and candidate issue positions. In fact,voters learn more about campaign issues from exposure to televised ads thanfrom television news (Patterson and McClure 1976) or from televised debates(Just, Crigler, and Wallach 1990). In addition to learning about issues, voterevaluations of candidates also can be affected by television ad exposure,sometimes in a positive and sometimes in a negative way (Kaid and Sanders1978; See also Kaid 1999a, 2004b, 2006b for more detailed research findingson political advertising’s effect on voter issue knowledge and candidateevaluations).

While studies of the videostyle (Kaid and Johnston 2001) of ads confirmthat most political advertisements concentrate on issues and often use logicalproof or arguments to make their points (Kaid and Johnston 2001), the use ofemotion in political advertising, including fear appeals, has also been cred-ited with powerful outcomes (Brader 2005; Hart 2000; Kaid and Chanslor2004; Kern 1989; Lang 1991).

Confirming the direct effect of political advertising on voter electoralchoices is a more complex undertaking. Often establishing effects on votechoice is dependent on voter self-reports, and voters have learned to be cau-tious about such admissions in the face of media criticism and peer renunci-ation of effects. Consequently, most voters vehemently pronounce theirdisapproval of political advertising, especially negative advertising (Franzet al. 2007; Kaid, McKinney, and Tedesco 2000; Roddy and Garramone1988), often exhibiting an identifiable ‘‘third person effect’’ whereby votersbelieve that others are effected by political advertising while disavowingany effect on themselves (Meirick 2004).

32 L. L. Kaid

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Despite the difficulties inmeasuring direct effects of political advertising onvote choice, several approaches have offered evidence for such effects. Oneapproach has been to tie the amount of money spent for campaign advertisingto vote choice. Because such aggregate-level approaches do not establish directevidence of effects on voting behavior, other researchers have used experi-mental and surveymethods to establish more convincing relationships betweenpolitical advertising and voting behavior outcomes. Still other researchers haveapplied meta-analysis statistical techniques with mixed results, ranging fromassertions of almost no effects from negative advertising (Lau, Sigelman, andRovner 2007) to establishment of several types of identifiable effects includinginfluencing vote choice (Benoit, Leshner, and Chattopadhyay 2007).

Negative Advertising

Negative or attack advertising represents a special place in the practice andstudy of political advertising. Political observers, practitioners, politicians,journalists, scholars, and ordinary voters almost universally deplore the useof negative advertising, and many voters declare that negative ads are ‘‘unethi-cal’’ (Kaid et al. 2000). Nonetheless, negative or attack advertising makes up asubstantial amount of political advertising content in American elections(Benoit 1999; Kaid and Johnston 2001), and a lot of evidence suggests thatnegative advertising is effective, especially when the attack focuses on issues,not personal qualities of the opponent (Geer 2006; Roddy and Garramone1988) and when the ad is sponsored by an independent group (Garramone1984, 1985; Garramone and Smith 1984; Kaid and Boydston 1987; Shen andWu 2002). Negative ads also result in increased voter recall about campaignissues (Bradley, Angelini, and Lee 2007; Geer 2006) and diminish the evalu-ation of the opponent (Brader 2005; Jasperson and Fan 2002; Kaid 1997).The impact of negative ads on the penultimate concern, voter electoral deci-sions, remains a source of conflict, as represented by the dueling claims ofmeta-analysis research (Benoit et al. 2007; Lau et al. 2007). Some studies thatconfront this concern directly have found that negative advertising canproduce positive electoral outcomes for the sponsoring candidate (See Kaid1997, 1999a, 2004b, 2006b for more detailed analyses of these findings).However, these results must be juxtaposed with other research showing novoter outcomes (Brader 2005) and those that document a backlash effect(Garramone 1984; for additional related research see Kaid 1999a, 2004b).

The effects of a negative ad can sometimes be blunted or offset by a well-designed direct rebuttal (Garramone1985; Roddy and Garramone 1988) andby using humor to diffuse the attack (Pfau, Parrott, and Lundquist 1992).Inoculation also can be an effective defense against attacks (Pfau and Kenski1990; Ridout and Holland 2010).

Substantial attention has been given to the concern that political advertis-ing, particularly negative political advertising, has undesirable consequences

Political Advertising as Political Marketing 33

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

for the political system, causing depressed turnout, political alienation,inefficacy, and cynicism toward government and the political process(Ansolabehere and Iyengar 1995; Kaid et al. 2000; Stevens 2009). Manyresearchers dispute these claims, even sometimes finding that high negativitylevels may enhance voter involvement (Franz et al. 2007; see also Kaid 1999a,2004b, 2006b for discussion of additional research findings on this point). Asmentioned earlier, meta-analysis techniques applied to these questions haveyielded inconclusive and contradictory findings (Allen and Burrell 2002;Benoit et al. 2007; Lau et al. 2007).

Political Advertising on the Web

There is little dispute about the growing importance of the Internet as avenue for political advertising. Most online advertising in 2004 was dedicatedto fundraising. The more than $4 million spent on online advertising in the2004 presidential campaign was dwarfed by the spending in 2008 (Atkinson2008; Tracey 2008). Considering just the presidential campaign, Obama spentover $16 million and McCain spent $3.6 million. While most online spendingin 2008 again went for fundraising and grassroots organization, the Obamacampaign purchased advertising on Facebook, BlackPlanet, and MySpaceand on Microsoft game platforms (Jones 2010). Spending for political adver-tising on the Web in the 2010 midterm elections has been estimated at $50million, or about 2% of total advertising expenditures (James 2010). Webadvertising is still overshadowed by its counterpart on television.

These totals, of course, only represent spending for direct Web advertis-ing in traditional advertising formats—videos, display ads, pop-ups, bannerads, and others. However, many Internet venues and formats can be usedas political advertising for very little financial investment, providing candi-dates, parties, interest groups, corporations, and individuals opportunities topromote a point of view. For instance, a candidate’s Web site can be viewedas a form of political advertisement with almost infinite space for touting thecandidate’s issue positions, background, schedule of appearances, newscoverage, and original Internet video ads (Kaid 2006c). TheWeb site can serveas a vehicle for publicizing the endorsements a candidate receives (Williams,Gulati, and Foxman 2009). TheWeb site can also serve as a distribution vehiclefor other advertising, and many candidates post their television, radio, andprint ads on their Web sites (Kaid 2006c). However, researchers have docu-mented that early uses of Web sites did not always provide adequate navi-gation tools or opportunities for citizen interactivity (Williams, Aylesworth,and Chapman 2002).

Researchers agree that candidate Webstyle, like videostyle in televisedpolitical advertising, makes substantial amounts of issue information availableto voters (Bystrom et al. 2004) without the filter of news media or interestgroup interpretation.

34 L. L. Kaid

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Along with the advantages of infinite space, low cost, and absence ofthe news media filter, Internet advertising also offers the advantages of (1)being virtually unregulated, (2) offering direct distribution of promotionalmessages, which is more credible than traditional media (Choi, Watt, andLynch 2006), (3) allowing direct communication with voters, (4) providinga mechanism for targeting messages to specific voter groups, and (5) allow-ing voter responses and interactivity.

Interactivity is a key factor in achieving positive evaluations of the spon-soring candidate (Sundar, Kalyanaraman, and Brown 2003; Trammel et al.2006). Direct comparisons of advertising effectiveness on the Web versus tra-ditional television indicate that those who see ads on theWeb exhibited higherlevels of information seeking (Kaid 2002, 2003). Some presidential candidates(particularly Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004) evoked more positive responsesfrom viewers who saw ads on the Internet compared to those who saw thesame ads on traditional television (Kaid 2002; Kaid and Postelnicu 2005).

Web sites also can be used for attacking and disseminating negativeinformation in a campaign. Wu and Dahmen (2010) found that, similar totelevised political advertising, positive Web messages enhance candidateliking and vote intention and that sponsorship of the Web source influencescredibility of negative information.

POLITICAL ADVERTISING FOR WOMEN AND MINORITIES

The role of political advertising for women and minority candidates hasbecome especially salient in recent elections. Two different perspectives arein play here. First, there is the question of how political candidates of colorand=or women use political advertising and whether the strategies that aresuccessful for these candidates differ from those of white candidates and=ormen (Gordon and Miller 2005). The second perspective relates to how votersof different minorities and genders react to and evaluate political advertising.Kaid and Holtz-Bacha (2000) also have provided multicountry comparisons ofgender differences in response to televised advertising.

Research on the first question became particularly salient following the‘‘Year of the Woman’’ in 1992. Initial studies found that, like their male coun-terparts, female candidates focused their advertising on issues, but sometimeswomen emphasized social issues like education and health care (Kahn 1996),settings in which some research has shown female candidates can expectgreater recall from voters (Hitchon and Chang 1995). However, in the 1990sand beyond researchers found the picture more mixed; that is, women candi-dates sometimes stressed the same issues as male candidates and began to usejust as many or more negative ads as male candidates (Kahn 1996; Trent andSabourin 1993). Experimental studies suggest that female candidates canbe effective when using negative ads to criticize their opponents (Fridkin,

Political Advertising as Political Marketing 35

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Kenney, and Woodall 2009) and when they appear in their ads in masculinesettings (Hitchon, Chang, and Harris 1997; Kaid et al. 1984; Wadsworth et al.1987). Issues related to political advertising and minority voters have notreceived a great deal of research attention. Several researchers have arguedthat racial appeals are implicit in many political advertisements in campaignsin which one or more of the candidates is African American (Mendelberg2001). In a sample of ads for African American and white candidates, McIlwainand Caliendo (2009) found that one-third of ads made a racial appeal, usuallyimplicit and referencing character, not issues.

Studies of Latino voters have been more optimistic, describing appeals toLatino voters as centered on core beliefs. Such ads in presidential campaignshave not focused on policy issues, but on family values and social goals(Connaughton and Jarvis 2004).

Researchers have tied political advertising to voter attitudes (Jaspersonand Yun 2007) and to mobilization of Latino voters (Abrajano 2010). Politicalinformation appears to influence minority political attitudes and behaviorsmore directly than white voters (Jasperson and Yun 2007; Shaw, de la Garza,and Lee 2000; Yun, Jasperson, and Chapa 2010).

ISSUE ADVOCACY ADVERTISING

Interest groups, labor unions, or political action committees often sponsoradvertising designed to support or oppose candidates with whom they agreeor disagree on policy issues. Such groups also sometimes sponsor ads to sup-port or oppose policy issues that are on state and local ballots in the form ofreferenda, initiatives, propositions, or ballot issues. Issue advocacy advertisingalso offers corporate interests an opportunity to influence policy issue out-comes. The 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) legislation attemptedto restrict and virtually shut down such expenditures, but in early 2010 theSupreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) deter-mined that corporate and labor union interests could finance (but not in coor-dination with the candidate) advertising that ‘‘expressly advocates’’ the electionor defeat of a candidate, opening the door to more controversy.

Advocacy advertising also plays a role in nonelectoral settings where thegoal of the advertising is to influence public opinion on the issue in questionand to persuade lawmakers to vote in the desired manner. Corporations andother independent groups find issue advertising an effective tool because itprovides a direct approach to citizens, avoiding the news media’s gatekeep-ing functions. Researchers have found such ads to be effective in raising thesalience of the issues involved (Cooper and Nownes 2004). Demonstratingsocial responsibility can also be a goal of such messages. One example, ofcourse, was the modification of routine corporate advertising to includepatriotic and political messages after the 9=11 terrorist tragedy in 2001.

36 L. L. Kaid

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Researchers have also analyzed the strategies used by corporations andinterest groups on both sides of issues to craft political advertisementsdesigned to support or oppose proposed legislation or policies. Good exam-ples are the Clinton health care proposals in 1993 and 1994 and the adoptionof the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in the early 1990s(Kaid, Tedesco, and Spiker 1996; West, Heith, and Goodwin 1996). Similaradvertising strategies have been used to support and oppose the Obamahealth care legislation in 2010 and 2011. Whether the goal of the advocacyadvertising is to affect actual electoral outcomes at the ballot box or to influ-ence the direction and end result of policy debates, studies have shown thatexposure to more issue advocacy ads by independent groups during an elec-tion cycle produces higher levels of issue knowledge and greater likelihoodof turning out to vote on election day (An, Jin, and Pfau 2006).

INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ADVERTISING

Parties and political leaders in democratic governments around the world allface the similar challenge of communicating their policies and messages totheir citizens. Not surprisingly, many governments and leaders have cometo rely on political advertising as a tool for this persuasive communicationtask, taking advantage of the ability to control the message form and contentand the potential for mass distribution (Kaid 2004b). However, the study ofpolitical advertising outside the United States must confront a plethora ofcontextual and cultural concerns. Among the most important concerns aredifferences in governmental structures, political party organizations, mediasystems, regulatory constraints, and, above all, language and culture. Inter-national political advertising research encompasses individual country casestudies dealing with political advertising outside the United States andmore complex and challenging comparative studies between and amongcountries.

Since so much of the political advertising research is based on theAmerican model, it is important to remember that American political tele-vision advertising has two characteristics that distinguish it from almost everyother system in the world. First, all televised political advertising in theUnited States must be purchased by the sponsoring person or group. Thereis no system of free time. Commercial television (and radio) stations, how-ever, must provide all legally qualified federal candidates with the opport-unity to purchase ‘‘equal time’’ for their advertising at the ‘‘lowest unitrate’’ applicable to the time slot being purchased. Second, given the strongadherence to free speech principles set forth in the First Amendment tothe U.S. Constitution, broadcasters may not impose any content restrictionson political ads, as long as the ad contains the required sponsor identificationnotice.

Political Advertising as Political Marketing 37

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Case studies of individual countries or a group of countries first mustconsider the constraints placed on political advertising by varying govern-mental, media, party, and regulatory structures (see Kaid and Holtz-Bacha2006a and Plasser with Plasser 2002 for a more detailed discussion of howthese factors affect political advertising). In parliamentary governments,campaign advertising tends to be focused more on the political party thanon the specific candidate. In addition, governmental structures determinethe ‘‘rules of the game’’ for elections, and in regard to political advertisingthese rules range from a total ban on televised political advertising (forexample, Switzerland) to allowing candidates or parties to purchase unlimitedamounts of time (similar to the United States).

Media system organizational structures also determine how politicaladvertising is allocated and produced. Outside the United States, most coun-tries have some form of public broadcasting and most have a system of directpublic funding for parties, including ‘‘free time’’ given to parties for their elec-tion messages (Jones 2008). In many countries (e.g., Germany, Greece, Italy)a dual system of broadcasting is in operation where both public stations andprivate=commercial stations provide opportunities for political advertising.How much free time is given varies greatly from one country to another,and many systems place other restrictions on this advertising, including (1)limits on the number of free slots granted to each party (sometimes equal,sometimes allocated by party strength), (2) specification of the length ofthe ads, (3) mandates on the time during the election cycle when the adver-tising can air, and (4) restrictions on the actual content of the ads. In manycountries, the legal and political context determines the strategies and stylesused in the political advertising, as Roper, Holtz-Bacha, and Mazzoleni (2004)explain in their analysis of Germany, New Zealand, and Italy.

Another element of the political advertising environment outside theUnited States is the variety of media and formats used—for example, theextensive use outside the United States of display=poster advertisingmentioned earlier. Political advertising on radio is also important in manycountries. In South Africa, for instance, official party election broadcasts areonly carried on the radio (Teer-Tomaselli 2006).

Elements of Videostyle in International Contexts

A growing body of research in individual countries or groups of countriesprovides evidence that political advertising outside the United States sharessome verbal content characteristics, the first element of videostyle (Kaidand Johnston 2001). As in the United States, most political advertising doescontain substantial amounts of issue- or policy-oriented information (Holtz-Bacha, Kaid, and Johnston 1994; Kaid 2004b; Kaid and Holtz-Bacha 1995,2006a; Kaid and Johnston 2001). This conclusion regarding issue contentdominance encompasses many democracies around the world, including

38 L. L. Kaid

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

most countries studied in Western Europe, Eastern Europe, and Latin America(Kaid 1999a, 1999b; Kaid and Holtz-Bacha 1995; 2006a; Plasser with Plasser2002). As in the United States, this penchant for issues does not mean thatthe leader’s character, personality, and background are missing from theadvertising. Almost every nation can point to exceptions, to individuals orparty leaders whose personal=image qualities sometimes overshadowedpolicy issues. Italy’s Berlesconi, Germany’s Kohl, Poland’s Lech Walesa, andBritain’s Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair come to mind. Nonetheless, it ispositive and negative aspects of policy issues that make up the greatest por-tion of advertising content in Britain (Scammell and Langer 2006; Scammelland Semetko 1995), Germany (Holtz-Bacha 2000); France (Johnston 1991;Kaid and Gagnere 2006), the Netherlands (Brants 2006), and most other coun-tries where researchers have categorized advertising content (Kaid 1999b;Kaid and Holtz-Bacha 1995, 2006a). Even countries with a substantial focuson party leaders often use personalization in their advertising to establish aconnection with substantive issues, as Moke (2006) has explained aboutadvertising in Chile. An exception can be seen in Greek political spot ads,which often contain more image information than issues (Samaras andPapathanassopoulos 2006).

The content of political advertising also has been important in tracingthe agenda-setting effects identified in Spain between news and advertising(Lopez-Escobar et al. 1998).

Another significant factor in the verbal content of political advertising,tone, is less congruent between the United States and other democraticsystems. As mentioned earlier, the tone of advertising in the United Stateshas grown increasingly negative, but most other democracies continue torepresent the positive in their political advertising (Kaid 1999b; Kaid andHoltz-Bacha 1995, 2006a). Despite the preference for issue content presentedpositively, most candidates and parties also rely on emotional proof to maketheir points in political ads. Researchers have been particularly effective inidentifying the use of emotion in Israeli political ads and illustrating connec-tions between political parties and specific emotional appeals (Marmor-Lavieand Weimann 2006, 2008). Nonetheless, some examples of the dominanceof logical argumentation can be found, notably in France and Britain andreliance on ethos or source credibility in South Korea (Kaid and Holtz-Bacha2006b). In addition, Roka (1999) emphasized the role that advertising hasplayed in communicating candidate and party values to voters in Hungary.

The verbal content of political advertising is an area where culturaldifferences between and among countries have been reflected. Cultural dif-ferences outlined by Hofstede (2001) in terms of individualism=collectivism,uncertainty avoidance, power distance=hierarchy, masculinity, and long=short time orientation and by Hall (1976) as high- and low-context have beenparticularly apparent when comparing advertising in Asian countries withother regions. For example, the preference for emphasis on a leader’s image

Political Advertising as Political Marketing 39

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

or personal qualities over specific issues and reliance on source credibility inSouth Korean advertising signals the Asian culture’s preference for collectivistlow-context (implicit) messages and reverence for wisdom and experienceembodied in the power distance relationship with society elders (Tak, Kaid,and Khang 2007).

Effects of Political Advertising in International Contexts

Research on the effects of political advertising on voters in international set-tings has been more limited than in the United States, although Blumler andMcQuail (1968) pioneered such research with their early studies of uses andgratifications linked to British party election broadcasts. Studies have shownthat, as in the United States, exposure to political advertising does increasevoter knowledge about issues and has measurable effects on candidate eva-luations, sometimes positive and sometimes negative. Such research hasbeen particularly productive in Britain (Blumler and McQuail 1968; Scammelland Langer 2006; Scammell and Semetko 1995), in Germany (Holtz-Bacha2000; Kaid and Holtz-Bacha 1993a), in Australia (Young 2000), and in France(Kaid 1991; Kaid and Gagnere 2006). Falkowski and Cwalina have doneparticularly good work in identifying models and developing theory on can-didate image effects derived from advertising exposure, not only in theirnative Poland but also in comparative contexts (Cwalina, Falkowski, andKaid 2000, 2005; Falkowski and Cwalina 1999). Researchers in Israel havefound that advertisements are particularly effective at influencing the votingdecisions of independent and undecided voters (Cohen and Wolfsfeld 1995),and in South America, Porto (2006) reports that television advertising wascited by voters as one of the most important factors in their voting decisionsin the 2002 presidential election in Brazil. On the other hand, Oates (2006)concludes that voters uniformly take a cynical view of political advertisingin Russia’s new democratic system, attributing few effects to attempts to influ-ence voters with advertising. In Germany, Maier and Maier (2007) deter-mined that the outcome might be even worse for parties using negativeads. In the 2005 German national election, they found that negative adscreated a backlash that harmed the image of the sponsoring party.

International campaigning, like the American system, has been adoptingWeb advertising strategies and formats. Parties and candidates see the advan-tages of controlling their own messages on their Web sites, without the filter-ing and potential distortion of news media. Narrowcasting, targeting messagesto particular voters, is also a potential advantage, and interactive features ofWeb sites invite voter involvement. For instance, parties and candidates inGreece are adopting new technologies for political advertising using shortmessage service (SMS) formats (Mylona 2008), and Carlson and Strandberg(2005) described how candidates for the 2004 European Parliament electionsin Finland used the Web to present themselves to voters.

40 L. L. Kaid

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Americanization of Political Advertising?

As countries throughout the world have adapted their political campaigns tothe availability of modern communication techniques, some scholars havediscussed the possibility that these modernizations represent an ‘‘American-ization’’ trend; that is, countries have been influenced by the American formof political campaigning and advertising and have adapted their own systemsto conform to the American model (Blumler and Gurevitch 2001; Nord 2006).There is general agreement that Americanization includes (1) the adoption ofprofessionalism in campaigns (use of political consultants and moderncampaign techniques), (2) emphasis on mediated, not personal, campaigningand especially the dominance of the television medium, (3) personalization,emphasis on politicians and leaders, rather than the political party, and (4) areliance on opinion polls and surveys to guide campaign strategies anddecisions (Kaid and Holtz-Bacha 1995, 2006a; Plasser with Plasser 2002).

Whether televised political advertising as it is practiced throughout theworld deserves to be characterized as ‘‘Americanized’’ remains an open ques-tion. Much of the debate is centered on the question of personalization. Whileissues still dominate most political advertising, many countries have seen anincreased emphasis on party leaders and a lessening of focus on the politicalparty. For instance, Holtz-Bacha (2000) has traced a trend toward increasedpersonalization in the spots of the larger parties in Germany, but this trendis far from uniform. In any case, as Scammell and Semetko (1995) point outin regard to Britain, the adoption of various marketing techniques does notrepresent full-scale abandonment of the British political culture.

METHODOLOGIES USED TO STUDY POLITICAL ADVERTISING

As with most aspects of the political communication discipline, researchersstudying political advertising use many different methodological approaches(for an overview, see Johnston 2006). One continuing difficulty in makingcomparisons between and among countries is determining the appropriateunit of analysis. Some research (i.e., videostyle) characterizes the dominantimpression created by the entire ad (Kaid and Johnston 2001). When Benoit(1999) classifies spot ads according to their functions (acclaims, attacks,defenses), the functions are applied to themes or parts=statements of eachad’s verbal content, omitting consideration of all audio-video components.This system has not received much use outside the United States. Holtz-Bacha(2000) has developed a better approach, breaking spots into sequences thatprovide more useful units for longer spot formats often produced outsidethe United States.

Research on advertising effects has tended to follow traditional patternsof experimental and survey research. Survey research continues to face inter-nal validity problems as researchers can rarely tie respondent attitudes and

Political Advertising as Political Marketing 41

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

behaviors directly to political ad exposure. Issues of validity remain forexperimental research as researchers debate the importance of real adsand ads created to enhance design elements, real versus contrived candidatesand campaign settings, and adult voter samples versus college studentsubjects (Benoit et al. 2007; Lau et al. 1999).

Measurement of key concepts in political advertising research is alsoimportant. Advances have been made in comparing and testing different mea-sures of advertising exposure and political learning (Ridout et al. 2004). Manyresearchers continue to use the ‘‘feeling thermometer’’ developed by theAmerican National Election Studies. A more complex measure of candidateimage, a 12-item semantic differential scale developed in the late 1960s bySanders and Pace (1977) and refined over the past four decades, has provento have high reliability scores and has been translated and used successfully innumerous countries (Kaid 2004a).

Another measure of advertising effects that has proven useful in cross-cultural settings is the AdSam (Self-Assessment Manikin), which uses visualrepresentations to measure emotional reactions to ads of pleasure, domi-nance, and arousal (Morris et al. 2002).

Real-time response measurement also offers an effective way to measuremore precisely what aspects of a political advertisement elicit positive ornegative reactions in voters. Respondents hold dials in their hands and regis-ter their responses as they watch the ads. Sometimes used in conjunction withfocus groups, these response systems also have the advantage of tapping intofeelings without the need for verbal or written expression, making themeffective in cross-cultural situations as well (Maier et al. 2009). Anothermeasurement device that may be helpful in assessing political advertising inmultiple-country contexts is the ‘‘eyeblink startle reflex’’ which has been usedto assess reactions to negative ads (Bradley et al. 2007).

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

Research over the past several decades has helped us to understand more fullythe role that political advertising plays in elections and public policy debatesin both the United States and in our fellow democratic nation-states. Despitemedia and popular censure, research has reassured us that political televisionads focus most closely on issues, not personalities, and they do so most oftenfrom a positive perspective. Even negative ads have their positive side: voterslearn more about issues from negative ads. To be sure, there are some egregi-ous and deplorable examples of negative ads that lie and distort, but as scho-lars we teach our students to beware of stereotyping and painting everythingwith the same brush—we have an obligation to practice what we preach andto avoid jumping on the ‘‘all ads are lies’’ bandwagon. Greater concern mightbe addressed to the fact that ads make greater use of emotional arguments,

42 L. L. Kaid

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

depending less on logic and ethos claims to make their points. There are alsogenuine ethical concerns and abuses in the way new technologies (fromselective editing to special effects and digital alterations) are being used tocreate false and misleading impressions in political ads (Kaid 2001). Even ifethically suspect ads were not normatively objectionable (and they are),participants in the political system should be aware that voters are turnedoff by ads they perceive to be unethical (Tinkham and Weaver-Lariscy 1994).

Political advertising in international contexts remains largely unchartedterritory for researchers. Findings to date suggest that, like U.S. ads, ads inother democratic systems are also issue-oriented and more often positive infocus than in the United States. Of course, there is much more that we don’tknow about political advertising in international settings. If we are to makeadvances, we must stop agonizing over everything that makes us differentand urges us toward imposing American values and democratic governmentand media standards. Some researchers throw up their hands in despair whenconfronted with different media and government systems and often choosenot to try to make comparisons among systems. I urge them, instead, to flingthemselves headlong into these challenging environments and adapt and tryand fail and try again. I don’t say this out of naivete, but from experience (atfailing as well as succeeding).

A few research priorities should take a front seat in our efforts:

1. Channel variables remain one of the greatest challenges for politicaladvertising research, both in the United States and in international andcomparative settings. While television, with its ability to impact throughvisual imagery, remains important, radio and direct mail have advantagesin terms of narrowcasting and targeting. Radio remains an inexpensivemedium with niche audiences that make matchups between audiencecharacteristics and message content possible (Overby and Barth 2006).Print offers an ability to emphasize content and reasoned argument. Inter-nationally, political posters represent very visible messages in the publicsphere. Of course, the Internet deserves increased attention because itmelds the advantages of each prior medium, offering a channel that cansupport the reasoned argumentation of print with the dramatic imageryand emotional impact of video with the targeting and personalizationadvantages of radio and direct mail. We already know that political adshave different effects when transferred from television to radio, from printto television, but now the Web has opened that door even wider. Earlyresearch findings indicate that there are very real differences in politicalads presented on the Web versus television. We know very little aboutwhy this is true, and researchers need to concentrate on determiningwhether interactivity potential should be credited or whether the Internetfacilitates the development of a parasocial relationship with the user. Andnow that citizens can create their own ads and post them on the Web. . .

Political Advertising as Political Marketing 43

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

2. Some of the ‘‘accepted truths’’ about political advertising need to bereexamined. For instance, is advertising’s ability to overcome selectiveexposure still valid in the current environment of remote controls, timerrecordings, replays of television programs on the Web, and the transferof advertising directly to the Web?

3. Political advertising on the Web also opens up questions about the inter-twining of political messages and social networking sites. Social network-ing sites, of course, are all the rage, but the pace of technology is so rapidthat, just as Twitter and text messaging have replaced email for many,something we haven’t even heard of probably will replace Twitter soon.We need to be developing new research designs and measurement toolsto deal with these rapid changes.

4. Other changes in political advertising may emanate from the legal andregulatory arena. We haven’t seen the end of the push to regulate politicalmessages on the Internet. Free speech concerns or not, it’s going tohappen—but how and with what implications for political advertisingresearch?

5. The visual component of political television=Web advertising still begs forour attention. We remain less knowledgeable about this aspect of the adsin every medium.

6. Gender and ethnic=race differences will be more important. BarackObama’s election as president of the United States and the importance offemale political leaders like Angela Merkel in Germany, Segolene Royalin France, and Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin in the United State will forcegender and ethnicity to the forefront.

7. The interaction between news media and political advertising will receiverenewed attention. We know quite a bit now about traditional mediacoverage of ads, or adwatches (Kaid et al. 1993; McKinnon and Kaid1999). However, we don’t yet know very much about how the entry ofthe Web with its potential for citizen interactivity will begin to affect polit-ical advertising. And this interaction between news media and advertisingis almost absent in international analyses.

8. International political advertising should capture more of our attention—particularly with the U.S. government set on a path of ‘‘nation-building’’throughout the world.

REFERENCES

Abrajano, M. (2010). Campaigning to the new American electorate: Advertising toLatino voters. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

Allen, M. and N. Burrell.(2002).The negativity effect in political advertising: Ameta-analysis. In J. P. Dillard and M. Pfau (Eds.), The persuasion handbook:Developments in theory and practice (pp. 83–96). Thousand Oaks, CA: SagePublications.

44 L. L. Kaid

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

An, S., H. S. Jin, and M. Pfau. (2006). The effects of issue advocacy advertisingon voters’ candidate issue knowledge and turnout. Journalism and MassCommunication Quarterly, 83(1), 7–24.

Ansolabehere, S. and S. Iyengar. (1995). Going negative: How political advertise-ments shrink and polarize the electorate. New York: The Free Press.

Atkinson, C. (2008). TNS: 2008 political ads worth $2.5 billion to $2.7 billion.Broadcast-ing and Cable. Retrieved October 1, 2010, from http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/160115-2008_Political_Ads_Worth_2_5_Billion_to_2_7_Billion.php

Benoit, W. L. (1999). Seeing spots: A functional analysis of presidential televisionadvertisements, 1952–1996. New York: Praeger.

Benoit, W. L., G. M. Leshner, and S. Chattopadhyay. (2007). A meta-analysis of politicaladvertising. Human Communication, 10, 507–521.

Benoit, W. L. and K. A. Stein. (2005). A functional analysis of presidential direct mailadvertising. Communication Studies, 56, 203–225.

Bergmann, K. and W. Wickert. (1999). Selected aspects of communication in Germanelection campaigns. In B. Newman (Ed.), The handbook of political marketing(pp. 455–483). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Bloch, L. B. (2000). Mobile discourse: Political bumper stickers as a communicationevent in Israel. Journal of Communication, 50(2), 48–76.

Blumler, J. G. and M. Gurevitch. (2001). ‘‘Americanization’’ reconsidered: U.K.–U.Scampaign communication comparisons across time. In W. L. Bennett and R.M. Entman (Eds.), Mediated politics—Communication in the future of democ-racy (pp. 390–403). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Blumler, J. G. and D. McQuail. (1968). Television in politics. London: Faber andFaber.

Bonnell, V. E. (1999). Iconography of power: Soviet political posters under Lenin andStalin. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Brader, T. (2005). Striking a responsive chord: How political ads motivate and per-suade voters by appealing to emotions. American Journal of Political Science,49, 388–405.

Bradley, S. D., J. R. Angelini, and S. Lee. (2007). Psychophysiological and memoryeffects of negative political ads: Aversive, arousing and well remembered.Journal of Advertising, 36, 115–127.

Brants, K. (2006). Sure to come but temporarily delayed. In L. L. Kaid and C.Holtz-Bacha (Eds.), The Sage handbook of political advertising (pp. 227–239).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Brooks, S. (1996). Decade of protest: political posters from the United States, Vietnam,Cuba 1965–1975. Santa Monica, CA: Smart Art Press.

Bystrom, D., M. Banwart, L. L. Kaid, and T. Robertson. (2004). Gender and candidatecommunication: VideoStyle, WebStyle, and NewsStyle. New York: Routledge.

Carlson, T. and K. Strandberg. (2005). The 2004 European parliament election on theWeb: Finnish actor strategies and voter response. Information Polity, 10, 189–204.

Choi, J. H., J. H. Watt, and M. Lynch. (2006). Perceptions of news credibility aboutthe war in Iraq: Why war opponents perceived the Internet as the most crediblemedium. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 209–229.

Cohen, A. and G. Wolfsfeld. (1995). Overcoming adversity and diversity: The utilityof television political advertising in Israel. In L. L. Kaid and C. Holtz-Bacha

Political Advertising as Political Marketing 45

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(Eds.), Political advertising in Western democracies (pp. 109–123). ThousandOaks, CA: Sage.

Connaughton, S. L. and S. E. Jarvis. (2004). Invitation for partisan identification:Attempts to court Latino voters through televised Latino-oriented politicaladvertisements, 1984–2000. Journal of Communication, 54, 38–54.

Cooper, C. A. and A. J. Nownes. (2004). Money well spent? An experimentalinvestigation of the effects of advertorials on citizen opinion. American PoliticsResearch, 32, 546–569.

Cwalina, W., A. Falkowski, and L. L. Kaid. (2000). Role of advertising in forming theimage of politicians: Comparative analysis of Poland, France, and Germany.Media Psychology, 2, 119–146.

Cwalina, W., A. Falkowski, and L. L. Kaid. (2005). Advertising and the image ofpoliticians in evolving and established democracies: Comparative study of thePolish and U. S. presidential elections in 2000. Journal of Political Marketing,4(2=3), 29–54.

Faber, R. J., A. R. Tims, and K. G. Schmitt. (1993). Negative political advertisingand voting intent: The role of involvement and alternative information sources.Journal of Advertising, 22(4), 67–76.

Falkowski, A. and W. Cwalina. (1999). Methodology of constructing effectivepolitical advertising: An empirical study of the Polish presidential election in1995. In B. Newman (Ed.), The handbook of political marketing (pp. 283–304).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Franz, M. M., P. F. Freedman, K. M. Goldstein, and T. M. Ridout. (2007). Campaignadvertising and American democracy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Fridkin, K. L., P. J. Kenney, and G. S. Woodall. (2009). Bad for men, better for women:The impact of stereotypes during negative campaigns. Political Behavior, 31,53–77.

Garramone, G. M. (1984). Voter responses to negative political ads. JournalismQuarterly, 61, 250–259.

Garramone, G. M. (1985). Effects of negative political advertising: The roles ofsponsor and rebuttal. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 29,147–159.

Garramone, G. M. and S. J. Smith. (1984). Reactions to political advertising: Clarifyingsponsor effects. Journalism Quarterly, 61, 771–775.

Geer, J. G. (2006). In defense of negativity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Gordon, A. and J. L. Miller. (2005). When stereotypes collide: Race=ethnicity, gender

and videostyle in congressional campaigns. New York: Peter Lang.Gregory, G. H. (1993). Posters of World War II. New York: Gramercy Books.Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Hart, R. P. (2000). Campaign talk: Why elections are good for us. Princeton, NJ:

Princeton University Press.Hitchon, J. C. and C. Chang. (1995). Effects of gender schematic processing on the

reception of political commercials for men and women candidates. Communi-cation Research, 22, 430–459.

Hitchon, J. C., C. Chang, and R. Harris. (1997). Should women emote? Perceptualbias and opinion change in response to political ads for candidates of differentgenders. Political Communication, 14, 49–69.

46 L. L. Kaid

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors,institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.

Holtz-Bacha, C. (2000). Wahlwerbung als polititsche Kultur. Partienspots im Fernse-hen 1957–1998 (Campaign advertising as political culture: Party TV Spots1957–1998). Wiesbaden, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.

Holtz-Bacha, C. (2006). Political advertising in Germany. In L. L. Kaid and C.Holtz-Bacha (Eds.), The Sage handbook of political advertising (pp. 163–180).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Holtz-Bacha, C. and L. L. Kaid. (2006). Political advertising in international perspec-tive. In L. L. Kaid and C. Holtz-Bacha (Ed.), The Sage handbook of politicaladvertising (pp. 3–34). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Holtz-Bacha, C., L. L. Kaid, and A. Johnston, A. (1994). Political television advertisingin Western democracies: A comparison of campaign broadcasts in the U.S.,Germany, and France. Political Communication, 11, 67–80.

James, M. (2010). TV still the favored medium for ad spending. Los Angeles Times.Retrieved November 27, 2010, from http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-political-ads-20101029,0,6398390.story? track¼rssandutm_source¼feedburnerandutm_medium¼feedandutm_campaign¼Feed%3Aþlatimes%2Fbusinessþ%28L.A.þTimesþ-þBusiness%29.

Jamieson, K. H. (1996). Packaging the presidency: A history and criticism of presi-dential campaign advertising (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Jasperson, A. E. and D. P. Fan. (2002). An aggregate examination of the backlasheffect in political advertising: The case of the 1996 U.S. Senate race in Minne-sota. Journal of Advertising, 31(1), 1–12.

Jasperson, A. and H. J. Yun. (2007). Political advertising effects and America’sracially diverse newest voting generation. American Behavioral Scientist,50(9), 1112–1123.

Johnston, A. (1991). Political broadcasts: An analysis of form, content, and style inpresidential communication. In L. L. Kaid, J. Gerstle, and K. R. Sanders (Eds.),Mediated politics in two cultures: A comparative analysis of presidential cam-paigning in the United States and France (pp. 59–72). New York: Praeger.

Johnston, A. (2006). Methodologies for the study of political advertising. In L. L. Kaidand C. Holtz-Bacha (Eds.), The Sage handbook of political advertising (pp. 15–34).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Jones, C. A. (2008). Campaign finance. In L. L. Kaid and C. Holtz-Bacha (Eds.),Encyclopedia of political communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.

Jones, C. A. (2010). Political advertising, digital fundraising, and campaign finance inthe 2008 election: A First Amendment normative analysis. In M. S. McKinneyand M. C. Banwart (Eds.), Communication in the 2008 U.S. election: Digitalnatives elect a president (pp. 89–104). New York: Peter Lang.

Just, M., A. Crigler, and L. Wallach. (1990). Thirty seconds or thirty minutes: Whatviewers learn from spot advertisements and candidate debates. Journal ofCommunication, 40(3), 120–133.

Kahn, K. F. (1996). The political consequences of being a woman: How stereotypesinfluence the conduct and consequences of political campaigns. New York:Columbia University Press.

Political Advertising as Political Marketing 47

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Kaid, L. L. (1991). The effects of television broadcasts on perceptions of politicalcandidates in the United States and France. In L. L. Kaid, J. Gerstle, and K. R.Sanders (Eds.), Mediated politics in two cultures: Presidential campaigning inthe United States and France (pp. 247–260). New York: Praeger.

Kaid, L. L. (1997). Effects of the television spots on images of Dole and Clinton.American Behavioral Scientist, 40, 1085–1094.

Kaid, L. L. (1999a). Political advertising: A summary of research findings. InB. Newman (Ed.), The handbook of political marketing (pp. 423–438).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Kaid, L. L. (Ed.). (1999b). Television and politics in evolving European democracies.Commack, NJ: NovaScience Publishers.

Kaid, L. L. (2001). TechnoDistoritions and effects of the 2000 political advertising.American Behavioral Scientist, 44, 2370–2378.

Kaid, L. L. (2002). Political advertising and information seeking: Comparing theexposure via traditional and internet media channels. Journal of Advertising,31(1), 27–35.

Kaid, L. L. (2003). Effects of political information in the 2000 presidential campaign:Comparing traditional television and internet exposure. American BehavioralScientist, 46, 677–691.

Kaid, L. L. (2004a). Measuring candidate images with semantic differentials. InK. L. Hacker (Ed.), Presidential candidate images (pp. 231–236). Westport,CT: Praeger.

Kaid, L. L. (2004b). Political advertising. In L. L. Kaid (Ed.), Handbook of politicalcommunication research (pp. 155–202). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Kaid, L. L. (2006b). Political advertising in the United States. In L. L. Kaid and C.Holtz-Bacha (Eds.), The Sage handbook of political advertising (pp. 37–61).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kaid, L. L. (2006c). Political Web wars: The use of the Internet for political advertis-ing. In J. C. Tedesco and A. P. Williams (Eds.), The Internet election: Perspectiveson the role of the Web in campaign 2004 (pp. 67–82). Lanham, MD: Rowmanand Littlefield.

Kaid, L. L. and J. Boydston. (1987). An experimental study of the effectiveness ofnegative political advertisements. Communication Quarterly, 35, 193–201.

Kaid, L. L. and M. Chanslor. (2004). The effects of political advertising on candidateimages. In K. L. Hacker (Ed.), Presidential candidate images (pp. 133–150).Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

Kaid, L. L. and N. Gagnere. (2006). Election broadcasts in France. In L. L. Kaid andC. Holtz-Bacha (Eds.), The Sage handbook of political advertising (pp. 83–96).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kaid, L. L., R. H. Gobetz, J. Garner, C. M. Leland, and D. K. Scott. (1993). Televisionnews and presidential campaigns: The legitimization of television politicaladvertising. Social Science Quarterly, 74(2), 274–285.

Kaid, L. L. and Holtz-Bacha, C. (1993a). Audience reactions to televised political pro-grams: An experimental study of the 1990 German national election. EuropeanJournal of Communication, 8, 77–99.

Kaid, L. L. and C. Holtz-Bacha. (Eds.). (1995). Political advertising in Western democra-cies: Parties and candidates on television. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

48 L. L. Kaid

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Kaid, L. L. and C. Holtz-Bacha. (2000). Gender differences in response to televisedpolitical broadcasts: A multicountry comparison. Harvard Journal of Inter-national Press=Politics, 5(2), 17–29.

Kaid, L. L., and C. Holtz-Bacha. (Eds.). (2006a). The Sage handbook of politicaladvertising. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kaid, L. L. and C. Holtz-Bacha. (2006b). Television advertising and democraticsystems around the world: A comparison of videostyle content and effects. InL. L. Kaid and C. Holtz-Bacha (Eds.), The Sage handbook of political advertising(pp. 445–457). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kaid, L. L. and A. Johnston. (2001). Videostyle in presidential campaigns: Style andcontent of televised political advertising. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Kaid, L. L., M. S. McKinney, and J. C. Tedesco. (2000). Civic dialogue in the 1996presidential campaign: Candidate, media, and public voices. Cresskill, NJ:Hampton Press.

Kaid, L. L., S. L. Myers, V. Pipps, and J. Hunter. (1984). Sex role perceptions andtelevised political advertising. Women in Politics, 4(Winter), 41–53.

Kaid, L. L. and M. Postelnicu. (2005). Political advertising in the 2004 election:Comparison of traditional television and internet messages. American Beha-vioral Scientist, 49, 265–278.

Kaid, L. L. and K. R. Sanders. (1978). Political television commercials: An experi-mental study of the type and length. Communication Research, 5, 57–70.

Kaid, L. L., J. Tedesco, and J. Spiker. (1996). Media conflicts over Clinton policies:Political advertising and the battle for public opinion. In R. Denton and R.Holloway (Eds.), The Emerging Clinton presidency (pp. 102–121). Westport,CT: Greenwood Publishing Co.

Kern, M. (1989). 30-second politics: Political advertising in the eighties. New York:Praeger.

Kjeldsen, J. E. (2007). Visual argumentation in Scandinavian political advertising: Acognitive approach. Argumentation and Advocacy 43, 124–132.

Lang, A. (1991). Emotion, formal features, and memory for televised politicaladvertisements. In F. Biocca (Ed.), Television and political advertising: Vol. 1.Political processes (pp. 221–243). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Lau, R. R., L. Sigelman, C. Heldman, and P. Babbitt. (1999). The effects of negativepolitical advertisements: A meta-analytic assessment. American Political ScienceReview, 93, 851–875.

Lau, R. R., L. Sigelman, and I. B. Rovner. (2007). The effects of negative political cam-paigns: A meta-analytic reassessment. The Journal of Politics, 69, 1176–1209.

Lopez-Escobar, E., J. P. Llamas, M. McCombs, and F. R. Lennon. (1998). Two levelsof agenda setting among advertising and news in the 1995 Spanish elections.Political Communication, 15, 225–238.

McIlwain, C. D. and S. M. Caliendo. (2009). Black messages, white messages: Thedifferential use of racial appeals by black and white candidates. Journal of BlackStudies, 39, 732–743.

McKinnon, L. M. and L. L. Kaid. (1999). Exposing negative campaigning or enhanc-ing advertising effects: An experimental study of adwatch effects on voters’evaluations of candidates and their ads. Journal of Applied CommunicationResearch, 27, 217–236.

Political Advertising as Political Marketing 49

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Maier, J. and M. Maier. (2007). Audience reactions to negative campaigns spots in the2005 German national elections: The case of two ads called ‘‘The Ball.’’ HumanCommunication 10(3), 329–344.

Maier, J., M. Maier, M. Maurer, C. Reinemann, and V. Meyer. (Eds.). (2009). Real-timeresponse measurement in the social sciences: Methodological perspectives andapplications. Frankfurt-am-Main, Germany: Peter Lang.

Marmor-Lavie, G. andG.Weimann. (2006). Measuring emotional appeals in Israeli elec-tion campaigns. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18, 318–339.

Marmor-Lavie, G. and G. Weimann. (2008). Intimacy appeals in Israeli televisedpolitical advertising. Political Communication, 25(3), 249–268.

Mazzoleni, G. (2006). TV political advertising in Italy: When politicians are afraid. InL. L. Kaid and C. Holtz-Bacha (Eds.), The Sage handbook of political advertising(pp. 241–257). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Meirick, P. C. (2004). Topic relevance reference groups and dimensions of distance:Political advertising and first- and third-person effects. CommunicationResearch, 31, 234–255.

Mendelberg, T. (2001). The race card: Campaign strategy, implicit messages, and thenorm of equality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Moke, M. (2006). Political advertising in Chile. In L. L. Kaid and C. Holtz-Bacha(Eds.), The Sage handbook of political advertising (pp. 145–159). ThousandOaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Morris, J. D., C. Woo, J. A. Geason, and J. Kim. (2002). The power of affect: Predict-ing intention. Journal of Advertising Research, 26(4), 7–17.

Muller, M. G. (2002). Parteienwerbung im Bundestagswahlkampf 2002. Eine qualitat-ive Analysepolitischer Werbung und PR [Party advertising in the 2002 Germannational campaign]. Media Perspektiven, 12, 629–638.

Mylona, I. (2008). SMS in everyday political marketing in Greece. Journal of PoliticalMarketing, 7, 278–294.

Nord, L. W. (2006). Still the middle way: A study of political communication practicesin Swedish election campaigns. Harvard International Journal of Press=Politics,11(1), 64–76.

Oates, S. (2006). A spiral of post-Soviet cynicism: The first decade of political adver-tising in Russia. In L. L. Kaid and C. Holtz-Bacha (Eds.) The Sage handbook ofpolitical advertising (pp. 309–323). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Overby, L. M. and J. Barth. (2006). Radio advertising in American political campaigns:The persistence, importance, and effects of narrowcasting. American PoliticsResearch, 34, 451–478.

Panagopoulos, C. and D. P. Green. (2008). Field experiments testing the impact ofradioadvertisements on electoral competition. American Journal of PoliticalScience, 52, 156–168.

Patterson, T. E. and R. D. McClure. (1976). The unseeing eye: The myth of televisionpower inpolitics. New York: Putnam.

Pfau, M. and H. C. Kenski. (1990). Attack politics: Strategy and defense. New York:Praeger.

Pfau, M., R. Parrott, and B. Lindquist. (1992). An expectancy theory explanation ofthe effectiveness of political attack television spots: A case study. Journal ofApplied Communication Research, 20, 235–253.

50 L. L. Kaid

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Plasser, F. and G. Plasser. (2002). Global political campaigning: A worldwideanalysis of campaign professionals and their practices. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Porto, M. P. (2006). Political advertising and democracy in Brazil. In L. L. Kaid andC. Holtz-Bacha (Eds.) The Sage handbook of political advertising (pp. 129–143). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Quere, H. (1991). French political advertising: A semiological analysis of campaignposters. In L. L. Kaid, J. Gerstle, and K. R. Sanders (Eds.), Mediated politics intwo cultures: Presidential campaigning in the United States and France (pp.85–98). Westport, CT: Praeger.

Ridout, T. N. and J. L. Holland. (2010). Candidate strategies in the presidentialnomination campaign. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 40(4), 611–631.

Ridout, T. N., D. V. Shah, K. M. Goldstein, and M. M. Franz. (2004). Evaluating mea-sures of campaign advertising exposure on political learning. Political Behavior,26, 201–225.

Roddy, B. L. and G. M. Garramone. (1988). Appeals and strategies of negative polit-ical advertising. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 32, 415–427.

Roka, J. (1999). Do the media reflect or shape public opinion? In B. Newman (Ed.),The handbook of political marketing (pp. 505–518). Thousand Oaks, CA: SagePublications.

Roper, J., C. Holtz-Bacha, and G. Mazzoleni. (2004). The politics of representation:Election campaigning and proportional representation. New York: Peter Lang.

Rothschild, M. L. and M. L. Ray. (1974). Involvement and political advertising effect:An exploratory experiment. Communication Research, 1, 264–285.

Rudd, R. (1989). Effects of issue specificity, ambiguity on evaluations of candidateimage. Journalism Quarterly 66, 675–682, 691.

Samaras, A. N. and S. Papathanassopoulos. (2006). Polispots in Greece. In L. L. Kaidand C. Holtz-Bacha (Eds.), The Sage handbook of political advertising (pp. 211–225). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Sanders, K. R. and T. J. Pace. (1977). The influence of speech communication on theimage of a political candidate: ‘‘Limited effects’’ revisited. In B. Ruben (Ed.),Communication yearbook I (pp. 465–472). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

Scammell, M. (1995). Designer politics: How elections are won. Houndmills=Basingstoke, England: St. Martin’s Press.

Scammell, M. and A. I. Langer. (2006). Political advertising in the United Kingdom. InL. L. Kaid and C. Holtz-Bacha (Eds.), The Sage handbook of political advertising(pp. 65–82). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Scammell, M. and H. A. Semetko. (1995). Political advertising on television: TheBritish experience. In L. L. Kaid and C. Holtz-Bacha (Eds.), Political advertisingin Western democracies (pp. 19–43). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Seidman, S. A. (2008). Posters, propaganda, and persuasion in election campaigns inthe United States and around theworld and through history. NewYork: Peter Lang.

Shaw, D. R., R. de la Garza, and J. Lee. (2000). Examining Latino turnout in 1996: Athree-state validated survey approach. American Journal of Political Science44(2), 332–340.

Shen, F. and H. D. Wu. (2002). Effects of soft-money issue advertisements on candi-date evaluations and voting preference: An exploration. Mass Communicationand Society, 5, 395–410.

Political Advertising as Political Marketing 51

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Sheng, H. (1991). Big character posters in China: A historical survey. Journal of AsianLaw, 4, 234–256.

Stevens, D. (2009). Elements of negativity: Volume and proportion in exposure tonegative advertising. Political Behavior, 31, 429–454.

Sundar, S., S. Kalyanaraman, and J. Brown. (2003). Explicating Web site interactivity:Impression formation effects in political campaign sites. CommunicationResearch 30(1), 30–59.

Tak, J., L. L. Kaid, and H. Khang. (2007). The reflection of cultural parameters onvideostyles of televised political spots in the U.S. and Korea. Asian Journal ofCommunication, 17(1), 58–77.

Teer-Tomaselli, R. (2006). Political advertising in South Africa. In L. L. Kaid andC. Holtz-Bacha (Eds.), The Sage handbook of political advertising (pp. 429–442). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Tinkham, S. F. and R. A. Weaver-Lariscy. (1994). Ethical judgments of politicaltelevision commercials as predictors of attitude toward the ad. Journal ofAdvertising, 23, 43–58.

Tracey, E. (2008). Role of advertising in the 2008 U.S. presidential campaigns. Arling-ton, VA: TNS Media. Retrieved January 16, 2009, from http://s3.amazonaws.com/thearf-org-aux-assets/downloads/cnc/ad-effectiveness/2008-11-06_ARF_AE_TNS.pdf.

Trammell, K. D., A. P. Williams, M. Postelnicu, and K. D. Landreville. (2006). Evol-ution of online campaigning: Increasing interactivity in candidate Web siteand blogs through text and technical features. Mass Communication andSociety, 9, 21–44.

Trent, J. S. and T. Sabourin. (1993). Sex still counts: Women’s use of televised adver-tising during the decade of the 80s. Journal of Applied CommunicationResearch, 21(1), 21–40.

Van den Bulck, J. (1993). Estimating the success of political communication strate-gies: The case of political poster impact in a Belgian election. European Journalof Communication, 8(4), 471–489.

Wadsworth, A. J., P. Patterson, L. L. Kaid, G. Cullers, D. Malcomb, and L.Lamirand. (1987). ‘‘Masculine’’ vs. ‘‘feminine’’ strategies in political ads:Implications for female candidates. Journal of Applied CommunicationResearch, 15, 77–94.

West, D. M. (2009). Air wars: Television advertising in election campaigns, 1952–2008 (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.

West, D. M., D. Heith, and C. Goodwin. (1996). Harry and Louis go to Washington:Political advertising and health care reform. Journal of Health Politics, Policyand Law, 21, 35–68.

Wheaton, K. (2010). Political spending for midterm elections could top $4 billion.Advertising Age. Retrieved January 18, 2012, from http://adage.com/article/news/midterm-elections-2010-political-spending-top-4b/146818/.

Williams, C. B., A. Aylesworth, and K. J. Chapman. (2002). The 2000 E-campaign forU.S. Senate. Journal of Political Marketing, 1(4), 39–63.

Williams, C. B., G. J. Gulati, and E. R. Foxman. (2009). What’s in an endorsement? Ananalysis of Web-based marketing in the 2004 presidential campaign. Journal ofPolitical Marketing, 8(3), 173–189.

52 L. L. Kaid

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Willnat, L. and A. Aw. (2006). Political advertising in emerging democracies: ThePhilippines, Hong Kong, Singapore, Indonesia, and Malaysia. In L. L. Kaidand C. Holtz-Bacha (Eds.), The Sage handbook of political advertising(pp. 399–416). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wu, H. D. and N. S. Dahmen. (2010). Web sponsorship and campaign effects:Assessing the difference between positive and negative Web sites. Journal ofPolitical Marketing, 9(4), 315–329.

Young, S. (2000). Spot on: The role of political advertising in Australia. AustralianJournal of Political Science, 37(1), 81–97.

Yun, H. J., A. Jasperson, and S. Chapa. (2010). New voices and new voters: Ethno-technology in reactions to candidate messages in the 2008 campaign. InJ. Hendricks and L. L. Kaid (Ed.), Techno-Politics and presidential campaigning:New technologies, new voices, new voters. New York: Routledge.

Political Advertising as Political Marketing 53

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f So

uthe

rn Q

ueen

slan

d] a

t 01:

15 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014