D
Dr. Jai Maharaj
Guest
Obama Still Has Big Advertising Edge
By Matthew Mosk
Washington Post Staff Writer
THE WASHINGTON POST
Saturday, February 16, 2008; A11
Since emerging from a coast-to-coast slate of presidential
contests on Feb. 5, Democrat Barack Obama has significantly
outspent rival Hillary Rodham Clinton on television
commercials, providing a crucial edge that helped push him
to a rapid succession of primary and caucus victories.
Obama's ability to blanket the airwaves -- and repeatedly
start statewide television ad campaigns a week ahead of
Clinton -- has been the defining advantage to emerge from
the commanding fundraising lead he staked out in January.
In the nine days following Super Tuesday, the senator from
Illinois spent about $13.5 million on television ads,
compared with Clinton's $8.3 million, according to a media
consultant not connected with any campaign who collected
the figures and shared them on the condition of anonymity.
In Wisconsin, which will vote on Tuesday, Obama ads
monopolized the airwaves for six days before Clinton
responded with her own spot.
"Since the beginning of this race, he's always relied on
getting that big head start, and he continues to do that,"
said Evan Tracey, the chief operating officer of Campaign
Media Analysis Group, which analyzes political advertising.
"It's hard to make up for that."
Signs are emerging, though, that the Clinton team
recognizes the strategic disadvantage the advertising
imbalance has created. In Ohio and Texas, two crucial
contests set for March 4, both campaigns began advertising
at the same time and have been spending about $50,000 a
day.
Clinton has invested in several new ads -- including one
that directly attacks Obama -- that will air in small and
large markets in Wisconsin. And while Obama has purchased
television time in Austin, Dallas, Houston and San Antonio,
Clinton has made large advertising buys in virtually every
Texas market, from Amarillo to McAllen.
That advertising onslaught is now possible, key Clinton
supporters said, because the campaign's fundraising has
rebounded since January, a month in which Obama raised $32
million to Clinton's $13.5 million.
"At this stage of the campaign, they're back on equal
footing," said Mike Stratton, a Denver political strategist
and Clinton fundraiser.
In recent days, the Clinton team has described an online
fundraising resurgence that is putting $1 million a day
into the coffers of the senator from New York. The campaign
has also pressed into service former president Bill
Clinton, holding a rapid succession of fundraisers in
Washington, Milwaukee, Los Angeles, New York and Florida
over nine days this month.
"We're in the unique situation of having a spouse who is
capable of bringing in dollars on a very aggressive basis,"
said Hassan Nemazee, a New York financier who is one of the
Clinton campaign's finance chairmen.
Several media analysts and campaign advisers said yesterday
that Obama's substantial advertising edge played a critical
role in his ability to rack up wins in the contests that
followed Super Tuesday voting on Feb. 5.
Kenneth Goldstein, a professor at the University of
Wisconsin at Madison who monitors political advertising,
said television ad campaigns are the most effective when
one candidate is on the air and the other is not. Obama has
regularly had the chance to define himself to the
electorate without competition.
That was critical for Obama, Goldstein said, because he is
not nearly as well known as Clinton. Alan Solomont, a top
fundraiser for Obama, said the campaign has always
recognized that Clinton's near-universal name recognition
is a daunting challenge.
"We're running against a quasi-incumbent who's known
everywhere," he said. "In virtually every state, we start
from a standing position. We essentially start behind.
That's why being able to advertise is so important."
Robert Zimmerman, a New York public relations executive and
key Clinton supporter, said that any assumption that
Obama's advertising advantage will prove decisive moving
forward represents "an inside-the-Beltway mind-set."
"There are so many ways the messages are getting through,"
Zimmerman said. "With free media, news coverage, Internet
ads, rallies, direct mail -- I think this whole notion that
the number of ads you have up determines one's viability,
it's obsolete thinking."
Clinton's latest advertising push has for the first time
included negative spots. Two ads have knocked Obama for
declining to debate her in Wisconsin. Obama responded to
the first negative ad with a spot that said, "After 18
debates, with two more coming, Hillary says Barack Obama is
ducking debates? It's the same old politics of phony
charges and false attacks."
The Clinton team fired back yesterday with a commercial
that says, "Barack Obama still won't agree to debate in
Wisconsin. And now he's hiding behind false attack ads.
Maybe he doesn't want to explain why his health-care plan
leaves out 15 million people and Hillary's covers
everyone."
Goldstein said he was surprised that Clinton has only now
started to aggressively attack her opponent. He compared
the circumstances to the 2004 contest between President
Bush and John F. Kerry. Bush was far better known and used
his ads to attack the senator from Massachusetts. Kerry ran
mostly positive spots, Goldstein said.
"At this point, this campaign is really about Barack Obama
now. He's still not as well known. Her job really is to
define him," he said. Until now, Obama's financial edge has
not allowed her to do that.
More at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/15/AR2008021503321_pf.html
Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/24fq83
http://www.mantra.com/jai
http://www.mantra.com/jyotish
Om Shanti
Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org
The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
DISCLAIMER AND CONDITIONS
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
By Matthew Mosk
Washington Post Staff Writer
THE WASHINGTON POST
Saturday, February 16, 2008; A11
Since emerging from a coast-to-coast slate of presidential
contests on Feb. 5, Democrat Barack Obama has significantly
outspent rival Hillary Rodham Clinton on television
commercials, providing a crucial edge that helped push him
to a rapid succession of primary and caucus victories.
Obama's ability to blanket the airwaves -- and repeatedly
start statewide television ad campaigns a week ahead of
Clinton -- has been the defining advantage to emerge from
the commanding fundraising lead he staked out in January.
In the nine days following Super Tuesday, the senator from
Illinois spent about $13.5 million on television ads,
compared with Clinton's $8.3 million, according to a media
consultant not connected with any campaign who collected
the figures and shared them on the condition of anonymity.
In Wisconsin, which will vote on Tuesday, Obama ads
monopolized the airwaves for six days before Clinton
responded with her own spot.
"Since the beginning of this race, he's always relied on
getting that big head start, and he continues to do that,"
said Evan Tracey, the chief operating officer of Campaign
Media Analysis Group, which analyzes political advertising.
"It's hard to make up for that."
Signs are emerging, though, that the Clinton team
recognizes the strategic disadvantage the advertising
imbalance has created. In Ohio and Texas, two crucial
contests set for March 4, both campaigns began advertising
at the same time and have been spending about $50,000 a
day.
Clinton has invested in several new ads -- including one
that directly attacks Obama -- that will air in small and
large markets in Wisconsin. And while Obama has purchased
television time in Austin, Dallas, Houston and San Antonio,
Clinton has made large advertising buys in virtually every
Texas market, from Amarillo to McAllen.
That advertising onslaught is now possible, key Clinton
supporters said, because the campaign's fundraising has
rebounded since January, a month in which Obama raised $32
million to Clinton's $13.5 million.
"At this stage of the campaign, they're back on equal
footing," said Mike Stratton, a Denver political strategist
and Clinton fundraiser.
In recent days, the Clinton team has described an online
fundraising resurgence that is putting $1 million a day
into the coffers of the senator from New York. The campaign
has also pressed into service former president Bill
Clinton, holding a rapid succession of fundraisers in
Washington, Milwaukee, Los Angeles, New York and Florida
over nine days this month.
"We're in the unique situation of having a spouse who is
capable of bringing in dollars on a very aggressive basis,"
said Hassan Nemazee, a New York financier who is one of the
Clinton campaign's finance chairmen.
Several media analysts and campaign advisers said yesterday
that Obama's substantial advertising edge played a critical
role in his ability to rack up wins in the contests that
followed Super Tuesday voting on Feb. 5.
Kenneth Goldstein, a professor at the University of
Wisconsin at Madison who monitors political advertising,
said television ad campaigns are the most effective when
one candidate is on the air and the other is not. Obama has
regularly had the chance to define himself to the
electorate without competition.
That was critical for Obama, Goldstein said, because he is
not nearly as well known as Clinton. Alan Solomont, a top
fundraiser for Obama, said the campaign has always
recognized that Clinton's near-universal name recognition
is a daunting challenge.
"We're running against a quasi-incumbent who's known
everywhere," he said. "In virtually every state, we start
from a standing position. We essentially start behind.
That's why being able to advertise is so important."
Robert Zimmerman, a New York public relations executive and
key Clinton supporter, said that any assumption that
Obama's advertising advantage will prove decisive moving
forward represents "an inside-the-Beltway mind-set."
"There are so many ways the messages are getting through,"
Zimmerman said. "With free media, news coverage, Internet
ads, rallies, direct mail -- I think this whole notion that
the number of ads you have up determines one's viability,
it's obsolete thinking."
Clinton's latest advertising push has for the first time
included negative spots. Two ads have knocked Obama for
declining to debate her in Wisconsin. Obama responded to
the first negative ad with a spot that said, "After 18
debates, with two more coming, Hillary says Barack Obama is
ducking debates? It's the same old politics of phony
charges and false attacks."
The Clinton team fired back yesterday with a commercial
that says, "Barack Obama still won't agree to debate in
Wisconsin. And now he's hiding behind false attack ads.
Maybe he doesn't want to explain why his health-care plan
leaves out 15 million people and Hillary's covers
everyone."
Goldstein said he was surprised that Clinton has only now
started to aggressively attack her opponent. He compared
the circumstances to the 2004 contest between President
Bush and John F. Kerry. Bush was far better known and used
his ads to attack the senator from Massachusetts. Kerry ran
mostly positive spots, Goldstein said.
"At this point, this campaign is really about Barack Obama
now. He's still not as well known. Her job really is to
define him," he said. Until now, Obama's financial edge has
not allowed her to do that.
More at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/15/AR2008021503321_pf.html
Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/24fq83
http://www.mantra.com/jai
http://www.mantra.com/jyotish
Om Shanti
Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org
The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
DISCLAIMER AND CONDITIONS
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.