I am getting tired of people claiming that the media manipulates them into voting for who "they" want them to vote for. "They" being Special Interest Groups, Corporations, the Zionists...or whatever. This has come up on this forum (almost always from new users) every few months for years. I want to know the truth of it.

So I am flat out asking all of you...do YOU think you were manipulated into voting for someone last election by a candidate's advertising? That is, did the advertising supercede your own ideology and make you vote for who "they" wanted you to?

Time to put up or shut up.

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

My answer no and a big hell no. Although every now and then their intersting to watch they have absolutly no influence on my decision. Then again though I actually think about and debate politics almost daily but yet I don't beleive the American people are that stupid and can be so easily brainwashed.

__________________
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams

Where have all the Conservatives Gone?

Well, typically, the people with actual knowledge and expertice are the least affected by advertisement.. This is the reason, why the products, that are sold to other (engineering/expert) companies are rarely adverticed.. Or if advertisement is done, the advertisement is informative instead of the normal brainwashing style.. Always, the ignorant customer is the primary victim..

The same phenomenon raises to importance with this poll.. People in the political forum are typically well informed and they have also quite strong opinions of their own.. So they are not only well informed, but they are also already politically aligned.. They have chosen their sides, and if they will change their side, the change will be caused by some real event or information.. It will not happen because some vague advertising...

This is the fundamental problem with this poll.. It is also an issue, which makes this poll very meaningless.. The people, who are targeted by the political advertising don't hang here in the PoliticalForum..

Another issues is, that people themselves might not recognize that they have been manipulated by the political advertising/propaganda.. They might also be ashamed to admit it for other or for themselves..

- BtD

__________________
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
[George Orwell, 1984]

Then on the other hand.. Are the politicians and the spin-doctors so stupid that they spend millions of dollars on adversiting, when it is unable to change the general opinion? These people are political animals and they should hold very firm expertice in the art of making presidents and forcing their own candidate throught the election.. For some reason I believe, that of the general population and the political experts, the latter are smarter.. Otherwise, certain things would just not make sense..

- BtD

__________________
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
[George Orwell, 1984]

Because they are not really changing opinions...they are presenting information the viewer may not have been aware of before. There is a difference.

Realizing that the person you were going to vote for is not really parallel to your ideology, and thus changing your vote, is not the same as someone manipulating you into voting a way you dont really want to. And THAT ia the accusation...that money is all that matters. That money is some magic mind control.

Money helps you get your message out. Thats it. It cant make people embrace your message. No amount of advertising would have made me vote for Al Gore or David Duke.

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

Like with swiftboat veterans?

Still advertising is greatly TV-ads and such very visible advertising - very visual, but with very limited capacity to transfer information.. With TV, there is rarely time for explaining and telling reasonings and details.. Instead, it is very powerfull tool in stimulation emotions and transferring mental pictures..

Especially with TV ads, the nature of the advertising is very uinformative.. Stories cannot be told in the few 10 seconds available.. Instead, punchlines, strong words and powerfull mental associations can be utilized very effectively.. Also the repetitive nature of the media comes handy.. You see the same images and punchlines again and again.. They come and go.. With no backing, with no reasoning.. There is no intelligence, only emotion.. Repeated empty associations for the subconscious mind..

- BtD

__________________
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
[George Orwell, 1984]

I pay zero attention to that which I like to call political litter. Most of it is utterly underly-informative.

I was 19 in 2004, and I could have registered to vote, but I didn't like Bush or Kerry, and I feel the same way now. In retrospect, I am glad that Bush won- but not very glad. Both of them are, in my opinion, way off on the issues. The only thing that gives Bush an edge in my mind is the fact that Kerry was obviously following every poll that he could find, while Bush is an ideologue, which means that at least he stands up for what he believes in, even if what he believes in is often wrong.

I think they blew his brains out.

Repetative advertising, and public opinion gather the sheep, yes it works. They wouldn't pump so much money into it if it didn't bear any fruit. As for who we have to vote for, it doesn't matter. All that matters is market share, and which way the mind market share is going. That's why we all go through this same two party bait and switch while we lose our property rights, and things like the "Real ID" get passed b y congress. Also the PA 2 is coming. There is a two party duoploy in the land of the free to do what you're told. Establish an IRV or some derivative, and the two party first at the gate system will be destroyed.

Congress will never do that, and you don't see this info on MSM. If it was, the masses would gravitate to it in a heartbeat. Imagine massive repetative commercials on IRV voting or some derivative. Even on the news instead of the crap they have on there now. Imagine it, because you won't see it.

The question you need to ask, is in this poll, sadistic grandstander.....

http://www.politicalforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=13224

__________________
God forgive America

Morality has (no) bearing on real life

Of course everyone here has opinions based on some actual thought, background, and/or knowledge. This is typical of the politically involved. Generally in presidential elections and possibly gubernatorial, the general population will also make choices with some substance to them. But when people vote, they tend not to leave the parts of the ballot they don't get blank. They make some kind of assumption. One common criterion which is losing favor with younger generations is blind party allegience. But this does not work in nonpartisan politics or in the case of independants (or people who would like to think of themselves as independents).
When all else fails, people fall back on name recognition. That is why politicians spend so much to get their names out there. It works. People, drawn in by a couple races or ballot issues that they care about, usually wind up voting for the candidate with his or her name being the most recognizable- unless they are strong partisans, in which case they vote straight ticket or close to it.
And as much as Americans hate negative ads, note that they still make them. That is because they have effect.
If people paid more attention to politics and got more involved, advertising would have little or no effect.
This said, it is simplistic to claim that people are "enslaved" by the media. The problem is that on issues they don't bother thinking about they make a decision based on what they heard or saw last rather than on what they learned (because they didn't bother learning). But since most voters do not pay attention to most races, it's pretty easy to see why there are so many safe seats for incumbents or for a particular party. Also, the most useless voters are not necessarily the dumbest ones, but the ones who vote as a "civic duty", but who do not feel such a civic duty to think or learn about issues or candidates.
But while the media do not have some godly brainwashing power over people, their influence is clear. Would parties waste so much money on ads if they didn't get effects? Doubtful. Unfortunately a sizable part of the population lets the media do the thinking for them on issues and races they can't be bothered with. And it's perfectly rational from the micro point of view. They tend to have little to gain from learning about issues.
There are certain psychological effects that humans are susceptible to and if you think parties don't know about them, you're crazy. One is that if you are the first to frame a subject, the people will see it in your frame. The next is that if you are the last to make a point, the point will resonate stronger with the people. Repetition has amazing ability to get things stuck in peoples' heads. Think about crappy pop music and advertising jingles. And when all that fails, remember that most partisans vote for emotional connection to a group more than for particular issues. This only changes when an issue or group of issues is of extreme importance to the individual.
So it's like Abe said. You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time... I'd add that it depends on how much they really care. And fooling this much is usually enough to secure a race, especially one that is local or "of little importance."