Over the past few days I have seen campaign ads for both Kerry and Bush. Up to this point I have been underwhelmed. All of the ads for both parties rate pretty high on an imagery scale, but really low on substance. Maybe this phase of the campaign is more about -alleged- principles than about solutions to issues.
I suppose that the buzz-words in the image-laden campaign ads play well with focus groups. Advertising professionals are probably more savvy about that kind of stuff than I am. It is hard to believe that people can be swayed by the content of those ads. Especially the ones out now that don't really "say" anything.
Even though this may tip my hand and show some bias, the recent Bush ad about empowering the middle class against big business is exceptionably laughable. As a principle it is good, but is that really the way Republicans operate? I suppose that in this case, perception is vastly more important than reality.
That said: Kerry's ads aren't really "saying anything" either.
Worse yet, it seems like both major candidates' ad campaigns are being handled by the same company. Lighting, effect, and mood are awfully similar in each of the candidates' ads. -I wonder if they'll fix that for the next round.
The funny thing about the content of the ads is that it seems like a bunch of lies if it comes from a candidate one doesn't support; yet -at least- plausible from a candidate one supports. I suppose all of the perceptions rely on which version of the truth that a person subscribes to.