Repetition works in political advertising

Its another concept central to advertising success, and that is

to avoid making the consumer work too hard. Thats why
repetition works. Repetition makes things clear.

By ALAN BONNER |
Published: Monday, 06/01/2015 12:00 am EDT

TORONTOLike all angry young men with a couple of credits in political science, I once
denounced government advocacy
advertising and political ads during

coverage, so who needs the parties ads?

Moreover, negative ads debate the

elections. Worse were the Americanstyle attack ads. On the former, I

thought it was pretty obvious that
smoking is bad, exercise is good and we
all should insulate our homes. In
elections, we were saturated with news

coinage of all politicians and depress

voter turnout.
Well, fast forward many years, Im still
angry, but have some political
experience to go with the incorrect
theory.

About 25 per cent of the Canadian

population opts out of the public
discourse on politics and public policy.
They have language barriers, are new
parents raising kids, are on long
commutes to work, or just opt out. They
play candy crush on their mobile
devices; theyre not reading political
blogs. Moreover, the fragmentation of
the market means the other 75 per cent

The Conservatives may have decided

Mulcair is not actually a threat outside
Quebec and they will be in a two-way
contest with Trudeau. Hence, they better
tarnish Trudeau early. This may be in
line with a Quebec tactic by which the
Conservatives just communicate all the
good that has flowed from the
government in Ottawa to Quebecers.
The Conservatives benefit from three

arent getting the same information on

issues.

and four way races in ridings between

Both advocacy and election ads are

needed to tell Canadians what the issues
are, and even that theres an election on.
Negative ads can have a tendency to
increase voter turnout as they increase
our knowledge of the issues.
Canadian political parties have launched
both positive and negative advertising
well in advance of our fall election. Now
is a good time for some product
labelling, even for astute readers of this
newspaper. First, why now, before the
summer, when no one is focusing on
politics? Second, why have the
governing Conservatives attacked
Liberal leader Justin Trudeau when it
appears that Thomas Mulcair and the
NDPare the real threat to remain the
official opposition or even form a
government? Third, how are the Liberal
and NDP ads performing?

Montreal and Quebec and some ridings

in both those cities.
But Ockhams razor (named for the 14th
century Franciscan Friar) dictates that a
more simple explanation is probably
more accurate. These Conservative
attack ads may have been a tactic
devised (not a strategy), and theyre
sticking with it, regardless of whether it
is still relevant. Or, because of the deep
antipathy to the Trudeau name in many
Conservative circles, this may just be
manifestation of that fixation. This
ignores some residual good will that the
Trudeau name evokes in some parts of
the country and in the media.
The Conservative attack ad uses a good
comparisonpolitician leaders are in
job interviews. I used this in a Globe and
Mail piece about 10 years ago. Im sure
its been used many times, including in
Manitoba some years ago. But the attack
ad is gentle on Trudeau, saying he might

be ready to govern some years hence

and that he has nice hair.

what shall we do with Public Safety

Minister Steven Blaney, who has little?

The NDP ad shows average workers with

a voice over by Mulcair stating how the
government is going to help them and
their families. The Liberal ad has
Trudeau in a nice familys modest home
and notes they are not paying down debt
in order to save money for their kids
schooling.

The attack ad works in that it is not

personally offensive and is anchored in
the reality that Trudeau is unproven and
untested in many ways, as are most
challengers. But, it is a Conservative ad
that is actually suggesting voting Liberal
in a future election. If I were working for
the Liberals, Id save that and play it

The first cautionary tale is that negative

ads work better in the U.S. than in
Canada for a variety of reasons (issue
identification, candidate name
recognition, money, etc.). Negative ads
must have a strong grounding in fact
and reality. The Conservative ad, which
showed Justin Trudeau unbuttoning his
shirt at a charity event probably didnt

next time, and rejoice in the

Conservative endorsement.

test well in focus groups. Politicians do

silly things in photo ops and this silly
thing was for a good cause. Canadians
were being asked to make a connection
between an unbuttoned shirt and public
policya bit of a leap.
But this negative ad, is a Canadian
attack ad. So its very polite. The hiring
committee reviewing Justin Trudeaus
resum notes his nice picture and nice
hair, but come to the conclusion that
hes not ready. Maybe next time, but not
now. Moreover, is hair a worthy
debating point during an election? If so,

Theres a concept in advertising and

brand building called the defining
moment. Are you really loving it at
McDonalds? Is fast food fast? If not,
the ads have created a false and high
expectation that cannot be met.
The political version is that a mistake
calls the whole ad or candidate into
question. Thats why I question the
Liberal ad, which says the nice family is
not paying down debt to save for school
in the Liberal ad. If your borrowing costs
are higher than what you are getting for
your savingsyoure nuts. You should
pay down your debt. Or perhaps your
interest payments are a tax deduction.
These thoughts are an unnecessary
diversion from the happy times Justin
Trudeau spent in the familys living
room shooting the ad.
Theres another concept central to
advertising success, and that is to avoid

making the consumer work too hard.

Thats why repetition works. Repetition
makes things clear.
Repetition is vital because people are
living their lives, wrestling with kids,
reading the newspaper, doing the dishes
and not paying close attention to the
campaign or ads. Thats why I question
the NDPs need to connect the dots and
explain what on earth the government
had to do with a man making bagels or
taking in dry cleaning in their ads. After
35 years of the Reagan revolution and
attacks on government spending, about
40 per cent of OECD economies are still
public sector and will stay that way. The
NDP ad should have started with the
fact that government spending is here to
stay and no amount of right-wing
rhetoric will change that. Its whether a
party will be good stewards of that
spending that is the issue.
Stored information in voters minds,
much of it very deep, is more powerful
than the ad. This is a great old theory by
which the consumer doesnt reach out in
the grocery store for the can of soup, but
rather the can of soup reaches out for
the consumer by triggering those stored
images. The NDP had to circumvent that
35 years of anti-government discourse. I
dont say overcome or disprove.
Circumventing could be simply stating
that the publics money has to be spent
wisely and for the benefit of average

people, not paving a road and then

digging it up again. By the way, this
clich about digging up perfectly good
roads is actually true. A Transport
Canada study says we waste 30 per cent
of public works spending this way by not
coordinating the repairs of pipes,
services, and pavement above.
The other principle in both advertising
and politics is to go with your strength,
not your weaknesses. McDonalds
doesnt sell high-class atmosphere and
shouldnt try tp. It would be ridiculous.
And thus, to the Conservative ad
featuring the Prime Minister. It features
the PM working alone, in shirtsleeves,
with his voice-over saying how tough the
job is. But unlike Jimmy Carter, hes not
making an excuse; hes just stating the
reality. Out he walks and flicks off the
light. We believe this ad, because we
believe that the PM does work pretty
much alone, at night and wrestles with
the best course of action. A sticking
point though is that he says one
shouldnt be ideological. Perhaps the
next ad will advocate keeping politics
out of the election.
The PM is not a jokester and putting
him in a nutty photo-op would have
been a disaster. Harper was once asked
if he had ever smoked marijuana. He
responded, Do I look like I smoked

marijuana? One joke every 10 years is

plenty for Harper.
We have a lot more ads to come, so a
little more product labeling might be in
order.
Conventional wisdom has it that the
governing party can be more positive,
with the opposition having to be
negative to get voter attention. But the
opposition has to follow up quickly with
their positive method of approaching the
problems they say exist. The test case
recently was the Ontario election which
should have featured very strong attack
ads by the PCs and NDP, but didnt and
Premier Kathleen Wynne is grateful.
A good strategy thesedays is to get a free
media bounce from your ads. A good ad,
played on YouTube for free, can
generate hundreds of thousands of
dollars in discussion on political talk
shows.

life and real time, long before voters

start paying attention to the election
which raises the last piece of product
labelling.
The way to test ads is with what
the Harvard Business Review calls
empathic testing or what my colleague,
the late Ken Kansas, helped invent
animatics. This involves testing a
visual or script in the context in which it
will be experienced. Ken would set up a
screening room in a shopping centre to
show a mock-up of an ad stripped into
the actual TV show in which it would
play. I say mock-up because viewers are
sophisticated enough to critique
production values (edits, voice-over etc.)
and may miss the content. Animatics use
amateurish drawings of eventual shots
and a voice-over to elicit viewer
response to the content.
Ken, being based in New York, had tens
of millions of dollars to spend on
research and

Finally, William of Ockham might just

say that all these ads are a test, in real
advertisingenough to break the spending limits in 60 Canadian ridings. So, in Canada,
it may be cheaper to run these ads up the flagpole and see what happens.
Allan Bonner (allanbonner.com) has worked with two dozen Canadian premiers and
party leaders, shot political ads and coached leaders for televised debates. He is the
author of several books on communication and politics.
news@hilltimes.com
The Hill Times