Top Picks
-
In Defense of Negativity
Fora TV 1y ago
-
Convos With My 2 Year Old - EPISODE 1
Top Picks 1h ago
-
The Graduation Song - Rhett & Link
Top Picks 2h ago
-
A-Bit of Daft Punk
Top Picks 2h ago
-
REAL Lesbians React to Lesbian Porn!
Top Picks 4h ago
-
Google Glass Photographer
Top Picks 5h ago
-
"No Smoking" - Arrested Development Season 4 - Netflix (HD)
Top Picks 5h ago
-
Macklemore & Ryan Lewis: NPR Music Tiny Desk Concert
Top Picks 5h ago
-
The state of education and teaching as told by a veteran teacher
Top Picks 6h ago
-
Van Halen - Eruption Guitar Cover
Top Picks 7h ago
-
Huge earthquake strikes Russia's far east
Top Picks 8h ago
-
The Beauty of Space Photography | Off Book | PBS
Top Picks 8h ago
-
Naked Citizens - World
Top Picks 9h ago
-
Clinically dead mother gives birth
Top Picks 9h ago
-
THE APPLE TIMELINE (English version)
Top Picks 9h ago
-
Oklahomans Remember and rebuild
Top Picks 10h ago
Tags
Description
Attack Ads in Presidential Campaigns featuring the author, John G. Geer, Professor of Political Science and Public Policy, Vanderbilt University; with comments by Jeremy Mayer, George Mason University; and moderated by John Samples, Director, Center for Representative Government, Cato Institute. Americans think negative campaign ads undermine elections and even democratic government itself. But John G. Geer argues that when political candidates attack each other, raising doubts about each other's views and qualifications, voters - and the democratic process - benefit. "In Defense of Negativity," Geer's study of negative advertising in presidential campaigns from 1960 to 2004, asserts that proliferating attack ads are far more likely than positive ads to focus on salient political issues, rather than politicians' personal characteristics. Accordingly, the ads enrich the democratic process, providing voters with relevant and substantial information before they head to the polls. Geer concludes that, if we want campaigns to grapple with relevant issues and address real problems, negative ads just might be the solution - Cato Institute
