With Election Day still more than six weeks away, the amount spent on political advertising on Boston television stations is already significantly higher than it was for the entire 2008 campaign, driven by a tight Senate race in Massachusetts and the presidential candidates’ feverish bid for electoral votes in New Hampshire.
Candidates, the groups that support them, and other special interest organizations have shelled out about $46 million on TV ads in Massachusetts this year — compared with $27.5 million in all of 2008 — in a spending spree that is expected to accelerate. Much of the money is coming from political advocacy groups taking advantage of a 2010 US Supreme Court ruling that eased restrictions on campaign financing.
Comments
if Obama is advertising a lot on Boston TV stations, then he must be worrying about losing electoral votes in MA, as well as in NH.
Faulty logic or you're letting your anti-Obama feelings take the place of the facts. The main reason for advertising so much on Boston stations is that a lot of people here in New Hampshire, particularly the southern areas, watch Boston-based stations. The only major-network-affiliated station based in NH is WMUR in Manchester. So, we watch Boston stations. (She does say that in the article.)
No surprise that Bill Fine refers to healthy spending. That's not the term I would use. I see it as an unhealthy signal of a very broken process. A few seconds of time filled with symbolic hooks that range from being incomplete distortions to intentional lies. Repeated ad nauseum. Television could be a great way to reach voters. But the potential and the reality are two entirely different things.