Demobilized and Demoralized: Negative Ads and Loosening Bonds

Michael C. Munger

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511510519.002

2 - Demobilized and Demoralized: Negative Ads and Loosening Bonds

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009

Edited by

Pierre Salmon and

Michael C. Munger: Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Duke University
Albert Breton: Affiliation:
University of Toronto
Gianluigi Galeotti: Affiliation:
Università degli Studi di Roma 'La Sapienza', Italy
Pierre Salmon: Affiliation:
Université de Bourgogne, France
Ronald Wintrobe: Affiliation:
University of Western Ontario

Book contents

Get access

Summary

I don't like this backbiting – this putting someone down to build yourself up.

Betty Norden, administrative assistant, Washington, North Carolina, quoted in Raleigh News and Observer, April 30, 1996.

NEGATIVE ADVERTISING AND THE QUALITY OF ELECTIONS

Ms. Norden raises two important theoretical questions. I have fleshed out the questions, and given what I believe to be the answers:

Q: Is it possible for political candidates to use negative advertising to “put someone down to build yourself up”? This is clearly the popular perception, but is it consistent with an equilibrium model that allows the best response to advertising messages?
A: As is often the case, the answer is, “It depends.” If you mean, “Are candidates usually able to win more votes if they ‘go negative,” the answer isYES. If you mean “Are all candidates able to increase their net vote percentages by negative ads, in equilibrium,” the answer is clearlyNO.
Q: Is Ms. Norden's “dislike” of mudslinging simply a matter of taste, or is there something deeper at work?
A: There is something much deeper at work. Negative ads are individually rational, in the sense that they “work” for the candidates. But the utility citizens derive from living in such a political system is sharply reduced.

In this chapter, I review briefly some of the results on negative campaigning, and then consider the effects of attack tactics on the citizens and the electoral system.

Type: Chapter
Information: Rational Foundations of Democratic Politics , pp. 15 - 29

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511510519.002 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alesina, , Alberto, , and Alex, Cukierman. “The Politics of Ambiguity.”Quarterly Journal of Economics, 105 (1990): 829–848CrossRef Google Scholar

Ansolobehere, , Stephen, , Shanto, Iyengar, Adam, Simon, and Nicholas, Valentino. “Does Attack Advertising Demobilize the Electorate?”American Political Science Review, 88(1994): 829–838CrossRef Google Scholar

Chappell, , Henry W. “Campaign Advertising and Political Ambiguity.”Public Choice. 79(1994): 281–303CrossRef Google Scholar

Converse, Phillip. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics.” In Ideology and Discontent, ed. David Apter, New York: Free Press, 1964

Enelow, James, and Melvin Hinich. The Spatial Theory of Voting: An Introduction. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984

Garramone, , Gina, M. “Voter Response to Negative Political Ads.”Journalism Quarterly, 61(1984): 250–259CrossRef Google Scholar

Harrington, , Joseph, . “The Revelation of Information through the Political Process.”Economics and Politics, 4(1992): 255–276CrossRef Google Scholar

Harrington, , Joseph, , and Gregory, Hess. “A Spatial Theory of Positive and Negative Campaigning.”Games and Economic Behavior, 17(1996): 209–229CrossRef Google Scholar

Hinich, Melvin, and Michael Munger. Ideology and the Theory of Political Choice, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1994

Hinich, Melvin, and Michael Munger. Analytical Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997

Laver, Michael, and Norman Schofield. Multiparty Government: The Politics of Coalition in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990

Ordeshook, Peter. “The Spatial Theory of Elections: A Review and Critique.” In Party Identification and Beyond, eds. Ian Budge, Ivor Crewe, and Dennis Farlie, New York: Wiley, 1976, pp. 271–296

Page, Benjamin. Choices and Echoes in Presidential Elections. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976

Poole, , Keith, , and Howard, Rosenthal. “The Polarization of American Politics.”Journal of Politics, 46 (1984): 1061–1079CrossRef Google Scholar

Popkin, Samuel. The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994

Schofield, , Norman. “Anarchy, Altruism, and Cooperation: A Review.”Social Choice and Welfare, 2 (1985): 207–219CrossRef Google Scholar

Shepsle, , Kenneth. “The Strategy of Ambiguity, Uncertainty, and Competition.”American Political Science Review, 66 (1972): 551–568CrossRef Google Scholar

Skaperdas, , Stergios, , and Bernard, Grofman. “Modeling Negative Compaigning.”American Political Science Review, 89 (1995): 49–61CrossRef Google Scholar

Wattenberg, , Martin, P., and Craig, Brians. “Negative Campaign Advertising: Demobilizer or Mobilizer?”American Political Sceince Review, 93(1999): 891–899CrossRef Google Scholar

Wheatley, , John, , and Sadaomi, Oshikawa. “The Relationship Between Anxiety and Positive and Negative Advertising Appeals.”Journal of Marketing Research, 7(1970): 85–89CrossRef Google Scholar

Book contents

2 - Demobilized and Demoralized: Negative Ads and Loosening Bonds

Summary

Access options

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive