Politics, Money, and the Gullibility of Information Age Voters

With the 2016 presidential race approaching, the news is filled with stories about the amount of money the candidates have raised.  These articles focus on everything from legal structures, such as Super PACs, that allow unlimited fundraising to be solicited, to candidates’ varying successes at events packed with deep pocketed donors.  Donald Trump, the much maligned Republican frontrunner, has emphasized his wealth as a central plank of his campaign.  Why is money so important to presidential races?  The millions of dollars raised by candidates is far more than the costs of employing staff and renting real estate; the majority of a candidate’s cash now goes to advertising costs.

Massive ad campaigns, coordinated across television, internet, mobile, and even radio broadcast have been run by every serious candidate in recent elections, and this upcoming election season promises to be no exception; a recent Politico article cites projections that television advertising alone will cost the candidates 4.4 billion dollars this cycle, over five hundred million more than the 2012 cycle.   This emphasis on advertising spending reveals the reality that advertising dollars buy votes.

The Citizens United case heard by the Supreme Court established the ability of corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money on political contributions.  This opened the floodgates for campaign spending and enraged many activists who claimed that this would allow corporations to dictate the course of American politics.  Instead of whether or not this money should be allowed to be spent, however, people should have been asking a different question: why do people rely on paid, often stilted and stylized ads, to make their electoral decisions?  Why do these often old fashioned, heavy handed ads have such an effect on voters that campaigns feel obligated to spend billions of dollars on them?  In other words, how and why do ad dollars buy peoples’ votes as effectively as a bribe?

In an age where people have unprecedented access to information, it would seem logical that their votes would be more informed than past generations, and thus less susceptible to propaganda published by special interests seeking to influence them.  Yet instead of utilizing their access to stay informed and make a decision that is in their best interest, voters simply absorb the political theatrics packaged into the entertainment content they consume.  Ask anyone about their primary usage of the ever increasing bandwidth available from nationwide internet service providers, and they would likely cite high definition content streaming among the most important.  People overwhelmingly use the amazing technologies at their disposal to consume entertainment, not real information.  Political operatives harness this obsession with being entertained to force voters to consume their own political messages on every platform, placing ads in mobile apps and commercials on popular television programs.

The amazing reality is that these ham-fisted tactics bear fruit; if people hear a message enough times, they start to believe it.  Just by increasing exposure via short ads, campaigns can bump their poll numbers enough to make a substantial difference; this is emphasized by the monetary priority campaigns place on advertising across all platforms, and on television especially.  The prospect of an information age promises increased knowledge in the general populace, but has led to increased susceptibility to propaganda and monetary manipulation.  It is disappointing that votes in this country are not won by ideals and vision, but by strategically employed advertising dollars.