AOW 28

More Attack Ads, Please

Paul Begala

Newsweek Magazine

Author:  Paul Begala is a Newsweek/Daily Beast columnist, a CNN contributor, an affiliated professor of public policy at Georgetown, and a senior adviser to Priorities USA Action, a progressive PAC.

Summary: In the age of mass advertisements, this article is a semi satirical recommendation to the campaign candidates: use more negative ads. He claims researchers believe that negative messaging is more effective due to our natural instincts, because throughout evolution picking up on bad cues had been the key to survival. Feeling like anger, distrust, contempt etc. are simply more common and familiar than positive ones like friendship and loyalty. He jokes that Americans are especially negative, starting with our founding father’s great negative rants, exemplified by the Declaration of Independence, and continuing with our obsessions with scandals. He explains some 2012 campaign examples of slandering, and gives advice to other “fans” of the genre. Greatly simplified, they are the following: be factual, avoid race, be cinematic, avoid emotion, use damning quotes.

Analysis: This article is interesting to analyze it is a long piece about a rhetorical device. Playing devil’s advocate to many people’s claims that negative ads are unfair and untrue, Begala argues the truth we would not like to believe. In a very satirical tone, he congratulates the lowest yet most effective ads not only in the context of this upcoming election but also those of previous elections. His purpose is most likely to prove that negative advertisement is merely a device that is proven to be very effective and therefore completely justified to use. Reaching an educated audience, those that read Newsweek, he assumes that his readers either follow the elections or watch TV in general. His advice is backed up by solid evidence, the previously successful negative campaign ads. At least for me, his purpose was achieved.

Devices: There are not many devices he uses in this piece. Again, the emphasis goes to his satirical tone, which points fun at himself, the ads, and the audience. This prevents the reader from disagreeing with him before getting pulled into his argument. He points out our weak spot by using common knowledge in the form previous ads that most of his audience has seen. His use of logo gives his somewhat unusual argument strength and is possibly his greatest strength. The formatting of his article is also very effective; he breaks his argument into sub points and explains them one by one.