ABOUT THIS BOOK
Americans tend to see negative campaign ads as just that: negative. Pundits, journalists, voters, and scholars frequently complain that such ads undermine elections and even democratic government itself. But John G. Geer here takes the opposite stance, arguing that when political candidates attack each other, raising doubts about each other’s views and qualifications, voters—and the democratic process—benefit.
In Defense of Negativity, Geer’s study of negative advertising in presidential campaigns from 1960 to 2004, asserts that the proliferating attack ads are far more likely than positive ads to focus on salient political issues, rather than politicians’ personal characteristics. Accordingly, the ads enrich the democratic process, providing voters with relevant and substantial information before they head to the polls.
An important and timely contribution to American political discourse, In Defense of Negativity concludes that if we want campaigns to grapple with relevant issues and address real problems, negative ads just might be the solution.
REVIEWS
"Geer has set out to challenge the widely held belief that attack ads and negative campaigns are destroying democracy. Quite the opposite, he argues in his provocative new book: Negativity is good for you and for the political system. . . . In Defense of Negativity adds a new argument to the debate about America's polarized politics, and in doing so it asserts that voters are less bothered by today's partisan climate than many believe. If there are problems -- and there are -- Geer says it's time to stop blaming it all on 30-second spots."
— Dan Balz, Washington Post
"Geer puckishly argues that negative ads are more nutritious for democracy than sunnier, Morning-in-America-style spots. . . . The point, Geer says, is that campaigns should provide information about the differences between candidates on issues, and attack ads do a good job of this."
— Christopher Shea, Boston Globe
"This book is well written, well argued and logical and steers the reader to the counterintuitive conclusion that political mudslinging can be beneficial. . . . For political advertising scholars in particular, this book provides an alternative, refreshing viewpoint on the subject. Political junkies of all denominations however would also benefit from reading this insightful book."
— Mark Thomas Rice, Political Studies Review
"An important book, containing a large systematic content analysis of presidential advertising over the past 12 elections. The book addresses several basic questions that have been missing in the debate about the impact of negative ads."
— Nicholas A. Valentino, Public Opinion Quarterly
"This book has a great deal to recommend it for undergraduate and graduate students alike. This is what high quality social science is all about. It should become required reading for all journalists and political pundits before the next round of federal elections."
— Richard R. Lau, Perspectives in Politics
"Attack advertising is good for democracy. This is the main argument of John Geer's excellent book on negative ads in U.S. presidential elections. . . . The argument and evidence in this book should prompt critics to rethink the merits of attack ads."
— Bethany L. Albertson, American Review of Politics
"This is a fine piece of scholarly workthat is readable enough for use in the undergraduate classroom and systematic enough to be taken seriously by other investigators. . . . Whatever your particular perspective on the question of negativity, there is no doubt that this book is essential reading. It is thoughtful, interesting, and full of evidence that is badly needed in this literature."
— Scott D. McClurg, Journal of Politics
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Illustrations
Acknowledgments
The Need for Negativity: An Introduction - Senator Tom Daschle
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226285009.003.0001
[negativity, propaganda, political debate, campaign]
This chapter provides reasons why people need to rethink the opposition to negativity in campaigns. It includes some historical context that underscores the underappreciated role of attacks in American politics. Additionally, the chapter develops an argument about the importance of negativity in democratic politics. Worries about negativity lie at the very center of concerns about the health of the electoral system and whether that system promotes a process which can be thought of as democratic; serious concerns that warrant serious attention. The problem is that people are all too quick to criticize the system and wring hands over the ill-effects of negativity. (pages 1 - 19)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
Assessing Negativity - John G. Geer
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226285009.003.0002
[campaigns, negativity, information environment, presidential election]
This chapter illustrates that negativity is on the rise in presidential elections campaigns. Campaigns are important democratic institutions, because they link politicians and voters. In the weeks and months prior to an election, candidates send messages to the public about why they deserve their support. The public, in turn, considers these messages when voting. The ability of campaigns to be democratic, therefore, depends heavily on the quality of information available to voters as they cast their ballots. This “information environment” is more, of course, than just the messages politicians send to voters. Candidates engage in many forms of persuasion as they seek the support of the mass public, giving speeches, conducting meetings, holding interviews with journalists, taking questions from the press, and participating in debates—to name a just few. Most of these efforts contribute to the information environment available to voters, usually indirectly through the filter of the news media. (pages 20 - 41)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
The Information Environment and Negativity - John G. Geer
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226285009.003.0003
[negativity, information environment, debate, advertising]
This chapter serves two critical goals. First, it establishes a set of normative standards for assessing the quality of information in campaign appeals, standards that allow people to judge the relative informative potential of negative and positive appeals. Second, the chapter contends that there is an asymmetry between negative and positive appeals—that negative appeals are more likely to have documentation supporting them than positive appeals—and it provides considerable evidence to support this claim. This asymmetry, in turn, affects how candidates frame their attacks and self-promotional arguments, which produces a series of important and testable hypotheses about the differences between negative and positive campaign rhetoric. (pages 42 - 63)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
Evaluating Character Attacks - John G. Geer
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226285009.003.0004
[negative advertising, paid commercial, presidential campaigns, personal attacks]
This chapter assesses the merits of personal attacks, arguing that personal attacks are not excessive in presidential campaigns and showing that they are not on the rise. So, despite all the common assumptions that modern campaigns are increasingly fueled by harsh personal criticism, the evidence simply does not support such a view. Even so, about a quarter of all attacks involve some reference to the traits of presidential candidates. The question becomes, then: Are these attacks inflammatory or do they deal with reasonable concerns that any informed voter should think about? It appears that these attacks are defensible and are usually not a subject of concern. (pages 64 - 84)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
Evaluating the Content of Negative and Positive Issue Appeals - John G. Geer
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226285009.003.0005
[positive appeals, negative appeals, self-promotional appeals, presidential campaigns]
This chapter evaluates the merits of issue-based attacks, raising the question of whether these attacks are about legitimate issues. Are they about important and real problems? The core argument hypothesizes that the answer should be yes; yet conventional wisdom suggests that policy attacks tend to focus on frivolous issues. The chapter develops a set of standards to answer these questions. The findings again suggest that negativity better deals with issues of importance to the public than positive appeals. The chapter shows theoretically why issue attacks will be more likely to spell out the policy differences between candidates, presenting evidence consistent with this insight. (pages 85 - 110)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
Dragging the Truth into the Gutter? The News Media, Negativity, and the 1988 Campaign - John G. Geer
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226285009.003.0006
[negativity, presidential campaign, information environment, 1988 presidential election]
This chapter evaluates one of the most controversial presidential campaigns in modern times: the much-discussed Bush–Dukakis battle in 1988. It is clear that something happened in 1988 which warrants close inspection. In recent years, the news media have devoted much attention to attack advertising, an interest that began quite suddenly in 1988. Is there something different about 1988 that justifies this attention? To answer this kind of question, the chapter makes use of content analysis of ads, but also includes other sorts of evidence to make more nuanced judgments about the negative and positive appeals in that campaign. Most of the conventional explanations of what happened in 1988 do not hold up under scrutiny. It appears that much of the explanation lies with the behavior of the news media, not the candidates. (pages 111 - 135)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
Negativity, Democracy, and the Political System - John G. Geer
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226285009.003.0007
[democratic, presidential advertising, accountability, civility, negativity]
This chapter, which considers the rise of negativity in light of important trends in American politics such as declining voter turnout, lower faith in elections, and shrinking trust in government, also offers an explanation for the rise of negativity and discusses negativity's relationship to democracy and accountability. It furthermore focuses on three of the most visible trends involving the public's attitude toward the electoral process that might plausibly be tied to increasing negativity, the first of which is the public's “faith in elections.” This attitude seems especially appropriate because it captures whether the public views elections as promoting democratic ends. The second trend involves the public's “trust in government.” A key ingredient to a successful democracy involves the electorate's confidence in government. Third, the chapter examines turnout in presidential elections. It concludes with a discussion about civility and negativity. (pages 136 - 162)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
Appendix
Notes
References
Index
