Thursday, October 30, 2008

Why No on 6 campaign is deceptive.... and smart

No Proposition 6 has invested in a lot (of the little) money it has on radio ads attacking proposition 6 as a last push before the election.
To hear the ad, please visit this site: http://www.votenoprop6.com/video/No69_1_BudgetCrisis.mp3

Basically the thirty second ad, which is being played across California, plays on the very brittle economic sentiment widespread in California right now. The economic failures in the U.S. have been no more evident than in California, who has, and is, experiencing a very unstable moment.

Both campaigns are very aware of the fact that the proposition would target people of color in specific areas of the country. It would seem as though the No on 6 campaign could easily negatively frame this proposition as an unjust measure that would target some over others, thus, unfairly creating a law that contradicted a democratic principle of being equal under the law. However, instead of making this an issue about race and poverty, instead the ad and the campaign are banking on the economy. Genius!

Instead of making this a campaign of social inequality, which does not ring well with everyone, the No on 6 campaign can safely tap into the issue of the economy. The ad states that the proposition would “Spend billions on tax payers dollars more a year,” which is not true. The proposition would definitely increase funding for prevention, intervention and police staffing, in addition to funding unforeseeable costs (such as a larger number of incarceration rates), but not by the many billions stated here.

The world “billion” was used three times, that is, once every ten seconds. Indeed, they distort the truth a couple times, however, the pitch is marvelous and the twisted truth becomes secondary to an oblivious audience. Though they should quickly dispel the myth that California is on the brink of chaos, by utilizing the economic crisis (due to the fact that it is the number one issue this presidential election), the ads should do quite well.

No comments: