It’s campaign season and you know what that means; constant bombardment by presidential candidates each pleading their case and vying for the American public’s support through relentless advertising. Though it may seem pointless and overbearing, there is in fact a catalogue of reason and science that is behind each of these messages. This particular advertisement on Barack Obama’s behalf contains a wide array of tactics to appeal to the electorate. These tactics include perspective taking/trust building, personal appeal, social suggestion, negativity and a formula called AIDCA (attention , interest, desire, convocation and action). Each of these techniques is incorporated into the below featured advertisement in order to portray Mitt Romney as self-righteous and uncaring and Obama as the clear choice to lead this country.
The first and possibly most evident technique being utilized is perspective taking as a form of gaining trust. By exposing Romney’s private conversation where he is speaking poorly of 47% of Americans, saying they are “dependent upon government,” “believe that they are victims,” and “believe the government has a responsibility to take care of them,” Obama is able to authenticate this message because Romney was unaware of the fact that he was being taped. As detailed by Aronson, when an audience is convinced that someone is not intentionally convincing them of anything they will be more inclined to believe it (Aronson 82). Because this was unintended to be heard by the entire country, what Romney says becomes more credible, which makes it an even bigger slap to the face.
After Romney’s dismal of nearly half the American population, the commercial transitions to personal statements by an array of individuals simply stating that they are a part of the 47 percent. By incorporating these personal appeals as opposed to countering with a plethora of facts and information, this commercial was able to invoke an emotional response. We have become so immune to the relentless political advertisements that we now view them as exaggerated and unreliable. By featuring these everyday people, the message they carry with them is more trustworthy and believable than if it was said by a politician (Roarty). What these personal messages also accomplish is social suggestion; the concept that “someone else is everyone else,” that this handful of people being featured represents the 47% being attacked, including the viewer (Makosky). Converse to Romney’s assertion that Obama voters do not take personal responsibility and are reliant on government, these people are expressing that they handle their responsibilities and are just like you and I.
After Romney’s dismal of nearly half the American population, the commercial transitions to personal statements by an array of individuals simply stating that they are a part of the 47 percent. By incorporating these personal appeals as opposed to countering with a plethora of facts and information, this commercial was able to invoke an emotional response. We have become so immune to the relentless political advertisements that we now view them as exaggerated and unreliable. By featuring these everyday people, the message they carry with them is more trustworthy and believable than if it was said by a politician (Roarty). What these personal messages also accomplish is social suggestion; the concept that “someone else is everyone else,” that this handful of people being featured represents the 47% being attacked, including the viewer (Makosky). Converse to Romney’s assertion that Obama voters do not take personal responsibility and are reliant on government, these people are expressing that they handle their responsibilities and are just like you and I.
In addition to these tactics, the negativity and attack on Romney’s ideals were a crucial aspect of this advertisement. In the evolution process, if humans were unable to pick up on negative cues they would fail to ward off danger and predators. Such as, we are already more inclined to be sensitive to these hints (Begala). In this case, Romney is the predator and it is the viewer’s job to identify that and prevent him from causing harm. Though the public consensus seems to be that these negative ads are ineffective and a nuisance, evidence proves quite the contrary (Martin). Survey research has proven that negative campaigning, in fact, increases voter turnout and political participation, though people believe the opposite (Martin).
Each of these tactics was extremely useful in portraying Romney as a villain and Obama as a unifying leader, though ultimately they can be related back to the AIDCA formula (Vize). The commercial opens with Romney’s private conversation, a change of pace from what one typically sees on TV, which can be interpreted as the attention getter that draws the viewer in. Something to make note of is the quick changes in scenes that are sped up in this introduction because it creates the idea that it is bad or wrong, that what Romney is saying is just not right (Vize). They then invoke interest in the advertisement with the content of the conversation and how damning it is. Next,the desire factor is engaged with its portrayal of everyday people claiming to be part of the “47 percent” because it creates a link between them and the viewer. Convocation is made by linking those speaking on the commercial and Obama’s voice/emblem which pairs the positively portrayed 47 percent with President Obama. Finally, the commercial closes with an implied call to action, to vote for the candidate who hears our voices and will be everyone’s president, not just for those who support him, conversely to Romney’s claim.
This cocktail of perspective taking, personal appeals alongside social suggestion, negativity and the AIDCA formula were successful in gaining the trust of the viewer and portraying Obama as the right choice to make in this year’s presidential election. Though, like most, I am generally opposed to advertiser’s trickery and manipulation of the mind, I found this one to be fair and refreshing as opposed to the more hateful ads. In this case, the candidate is simply divulging information regarding his opponent in a non-blasphemous manner. Romney used politically incorrect rhetoric which Obama used to build his rapport with a large portion of the electorate.
Sade Akindele
oakindele@regis.edu
Aronson, Elliot. "Mass, Communication, Propaganda, and Persuasion." The Social Animal. 11th ed. Publishers: Worth, n.d. 59-111. Print.
Begala, Paul. "More Attack Ads, Please." Newsweek 159.13/14 (2012): 15-16. Print.
Makosky, Vivian Parker. "Identifying Major Techniques of Persuasion." Teaching of Psychology 12.1 (1985): 42-43. Print.
Martin, Paul S. "Inside the Black Box of Negative Campaign Effects: Three Reasons Why Negative Campaigns Mobilize." Political Psychology 25.4 (2004): 545-62. Print.
Roarty, Alex. "Voters Trust Real People, Not Pols." National Journal (2012): 29. Print.
Vize, Anne. "The Art of Persuasion." Screen Education 63 (Spring2011): 66-70. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment