General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMore than half of broadcast advertising in the midterms has been paid for by outside groups
Beyond its durable imprint on American civic life, the Watergate scandal of four decades ago left its mark on political language. For one thing, that suffix will not go away. Commit a major folly, and you can count on some headline writer describing it as Whatever-gate. Forty years later, investigations into wrongdoing by public officials still routinely yield the Watergate-era chestnut: What did so-and-so know, and when did he know it? Americans are well aware, too, that they would be wise to follow the money, abiding words bequeathed by the shadowy figure Deep Throat in All the Presidents Men, the 1976 Watergate-themed film.
Follow the money was sound advice in the 1970s. It is even more sensible these days, when cash courses through American politics like a flash flood.
Watergate was a catchword for a multitude of government and political sins. At its core were secret, and illicit, contributions to the 1972 re-election campaign of President Richard M. Nixon. Some Nixon retainers went to prison. Also, more than a dozen American corporations were found guilty of criminal behavior, typically for having showered barrels of dollars on the campaign in the hope no, expectation that their largess would translate into favors from the administration. As can be seen in the latest video documentary from Retro Report, tracing the money side of life from Watergate to today, much has changed. Oh, the cash still flows, and a fair amount of it continues to be secret. But what was deemed ill-gotten loot 40 years ago is now legally accessible, countenanced by no less than the United States Supreme Court. And the money no longer rains down on presidential and congressional campaigns by the barrelful. By the truckload is more like it.
Big political scandals have often inspired laws to address whatever went wrong. Watergate was no exception. The same went for lesser situations that were eyebrow-raising all the same; the trading of campaign contributions for sleepovers in the Clinton White House was one example. With almost every cycle of wrongdoing and attempted reform, Americans have had to absorb a sometimes-bewildering array of political terms, like soft money versus hard money, or PAC it stands for political action committee, in case you forgot versus super PAC. They have also had to come to grips with Supreme Court rulings that do not always seem consistent, one with another, on what sort of behavior is kosher.
more
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/20/us/the-cost-of-campaigns.html?_r=0
If you want to know why people increasingly are voting in Repubs in spite of the failure of Republican ideology, start here.
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)Even elections. Yay capitalism!
Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)last week, and wondered if this money was going to individual TV entities or to a few major owners? Is there anywhere that lists how much FOX, CNN and others get for the ads?
How does this all work?
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)Nobody is buying advertising from CNN. the only time that happens is during a presidential election.
The TV and radio stations have to sell commercial time to federal candidates (U.S. House and U.S. Senate) at their lowest unit rate, meaning the lowest rate they sell advertising to their highest billiing customers.
If you really are intersted in how much revenue a TV or radio station is recieving in political advertising, you can go to the TV or radio station and ask to see their public file. They will be shocked because while the public file is available to the public (duh), it is quite rare that anyone ever actually goes to a broadcast facility and makes such a request. You have to do this during regular business hours.
Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)I figured it went out of one pocket and back in the other. Glad to see it stays in the community of people who are inundated with the ads.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)radio stations are no longer owned by people or corporations located in the same city as the TV or radio station, sadly your last sentence is not always true.
Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)We had 3 radio stations that were home-owned, but I'm not sure if they still are. I'll have to check that out.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)a corporation was limited to owning a maximum of 12 AM, 12 FM, and 12 TV licenses and only one TV ststion per market and only one AM and one FM per market. I wish that was still the case now.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)is why they love the GOP, profit.
forthemiddle
(1,375 posts)Walker is actually being outspent by groups supporting Mary Burke.
That is the reason most people believe the polls are dead even.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)it appears the Democratic National Committee is outspending Republicans on television advertising by a wide margin.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Jenoch
(7,720 posts)Until just a few years ago, only advertising by the candidate's committee was allowed on radio and television.
JEB
(4,748 posts)under educate 'em, flood 'em with slick ads the compliant media plays uncritically. Works like a charm.
Ykcutnek
(1,305 posts)The effect of President Obama's approval rating is being overstated by the media.