Negative Social Media as a Platform Free Attack Advertisement.

Surging social media and new government policies have changed the way modern presidential candidates campaign.  Online social forums such as Twitter play a role in the diffusion of information and how the public discusses it. An examination of federal legislature that limits campaign funds will come into play in when discussing media tactics in current elections. Analyses of the recent Big Bird epidemic regarding PBS funding will also show how Twitter is becoming a leading and financially economic means of campaigning and producing negative attack advertisement.

The regulation of hard money entering a campaign is a difficult obstacle for presidential candidates to overcome.  The Federal Election Campaign Act was legislated in 1971 to regulate the amount of hard-money an individual could donate directly to a campaign (Barry et. al 220).  This was an attempt to stop corruption by placing financial caps on the amount an individual citizen is allowed to donate.  While such policy is necessary to keep wealthy citizens and corporations from deciding an election by the means of excessive donations, it does pose the problem of limiting the amount of advertisement a candidate can afford.

The maximum donation limit remained $1,000 until 2002 when John Mcain’s Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act raised it to $2,000.  Though the limit doubled, the costs of airing campaign ads on television remain expensive. The costs of a 30-second advertisement can vary from approximately $50,000 to $350,000 depending on the channel and time (Sarnow).  The high costs of advertising time on television lead campaign managers to search for various other methods of media exposure.  As newspapers are losing revenue and becoming an archaic form of media, the online frontier holds the most promise for political propaganda (Barry et. al 131).

Social media presents a unique opportunity for candidates.  Obama and Romney both have their own Twitter accounts where information about the candidates and campaign are regularly updated.  Yet opening up to outlets such as Twitter poses new threats to candidates, as it validates the realm of social media that then has the ability to put candidates in the public reticule for criticism (Kwak et. al). As Twitter is granted more legitimacy by widespread use, it is becoming more and more characteristic of a news outlet rather than solely a social media network.

Be that as it may, Twitter remains a free medium with which to convey information allowing campaigns to allot funds elsewhere to be more effective with their limited resources.  As FECA restricts candidates, social media may very well set them free.  With boundless opportunity and no time restriction, barring a 140-character limit, Twitter offers the platform from which candidates can express their political views to voters.

While a candidate can use Twitter to promote useful information about his platform, he could also use it to propagate negative comments or attack ads directed at his opposition.  The trend of negative television advertising has been on the rise since 1980, and it continues to be a factor in the current campaigns advertisements (Watternerg, Brians).  Though candidates themselves may refrain from mudslinging online, Twitter gives the public a voice and they can collectively create their own genre of political attacks on candidates.

 When presidential candidate Mitt Romney announced his plans to cut PBS funding and ultimately fire Big Bird, he opened the floodgate to a barrage of cyber mudslinging.   Twitter gives citizens the power to manifest the public opinion into a semi-cohesive attack, not unlink paid advertising (Barry et. al 132).  It may have been the huge popularity of ridiculing Romney’s Big Bird comment that prompted President Obama to allude to it in the second presidential debate. 

Retweeting is an example of how Twitter can propel a single idea forward. The mass repetition of a single idea can be enough to impact candidates.  Twitter users can also amass power for their site by uploading their micro-blogs to a specific trending topic using a hash tag (Kwak et. al).  Pooling ideas around a central topic in this way can generates a clear public opinion that candidates can act on.  As seen with the trending topic #BigBird, many individuals rallied to protest or mock Romney’s attacks on Big Bird.

Big Bird exemplifies how a unified social media network can affect candidates.  This new and easily accessible form of public criticism may lend voters the power to change the ebb and flow of an election. Social media is relied on during campaigns, especially when funds become limited due to donation caps by the FEC.  As long presidential candidates use twitter to give information, it will remain a powerful tool in the hands of the public to scorn them for their comments.  Enough tweets may be what it takes to save a big bird.

"Barack Obama." Twitter. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2012.

<https://twitter.com/BarackObama>.

"#BigBird." Twitter. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2012.

<https://twitter.com/search/%23bigbird>.

Barry, Jeffrey M, Jerry Goldman, Kevin W. Hula, and Kenneth Janda. The Challenge of

Democracy American Government in Global Politics. United States: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, 2012. Print.

Kwak, Harwoon, Changyun Lee Lee, Hosung Park, and Sue Moon. What Is Twitter, a

Social Network or a News Media? ACM New York, NY, USA ©2010, n.d. Web.<http://product.ubion.co.kr/upload20120220142222731/ccres00056/db/_2250_1/embedded/2010-www-twitter.pdf>.

"Mitt Romney." Twitter. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2012.

<https://twitter.com/MittRomney>.

Sarnow, Greg. "Direct Response TV Advertising, DRTV Media Buying, Media Testing,

Increase ROI, Measure Profitability."  Copyright 2011 - Direct Response Academy, n.d. Web. 17 Oct. 2012. <http://www.directresponseacademy.com/artcl.MsrngPrftblty.html>.

Watternerg, Martin P., and Craig L. Brians. "Center for Research in Society and

Politics."Negative Campaign Advertising: Demobilizer or Mobilizer [eScholarship]. N.p., 27 Aug. 1996. Web. 17 Oct. 2012. <http://escholarship.org/uc/item/7gf3q1w1>.