Deception in Third Party Advertising in the 2012 Presidential Campaign
In this article, we profile the advertising activities and deception levels of the top 2012 spending independent expenditure groups that focused on the presidential contest. From December 1, 2011, through Election Day, November 6, 2012, independent expenditure groups spent more than $360 million on...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The American behavioral scientist (Beverly Hills) 2014-04, Vol.58 (4), p.524-535 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 535 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 524 |
container_title | The American behavioral scientist (Beverly Hills) |
container_volume | 58 |
creator | Winneg, Kenneth M. Hardy, Bruce W. Gottfried, Jeffrey A. Jamieson, Kathleen Hall |
description | In this article, we profile the advertising activities and deception levels of the top 2012 spending independent expenditure groups that focused on the presidential contest. From December 1, 2011, through Election Day, November 6, 2012, independent expenditure groups spent more than $360 million on presidential television advertising, according to Kantar Media CMAG. More than a fifth of the dollars spent by the top groups purchased ads containing at least one claim judged as misleading by independent fact checkers. The proportion of dollars that these groups spent on ads containing at least one deception was much greater during the primaries than afterward. During the primaries, the pro-Romney super PAC “Restore Our Future” led the pack both in dollars spent on ads containing at least one deception and in the proportion of its ads found deceptive by the fact checkers. During the general election, in the post-primary period, the pro-Obama super PAC “Priorities USA Action” devoted the most dollars and greatest proportion of its total dollars to ads in which fact checkers found at least one deceptive claim. During some but not all of the 2012 election year, the percentage of third party ads containing at least one deceptive claim was higher among those groups not required to disclose their donors than it was among those required to do so. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0002764214524358 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1531931817</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0002764214524358</sage_id><sourcerecordid>3248028511</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-8a82320bc34b903805408dd50b5e12d1983e87334d0cc45eef877af8d8e0251b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkc1Lw0AQxRdRsFbvHgNevERn9sPdHEu1KhTsoZ7DJjtpt6RJ3U2F_vcm1IMIgqfh8X7vwfAYu0a4Q9T6HgC4fpAcpeJSKHPCRqgUT4UweMpGg50O_jm7iHHTS9CKj9jskUradb5tEt8ky7UPLlnY0B2Sifuk0Pnom9VgdWtKOCBPFoGid9R03tbJ1G531q-aS3ZW2TrS1fcds_fZ03L6ks7fnl-nk3laCq261FjDBYeiFLLIQBhQEoxzCgpFyB1mRpDRQkgHZSkVUWW0tpVxhoArLMSY3R57d6H92FPs8q2PJdW1bajdxxyVwEygQf0_lOsMZY_e_EI37T40_SM9BdqA0Wqg4EiVoY0xUJXvgt_acMgR8mGD_PcGfSQ9RqJd0Y_Sv_gvRSOCGA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1507808754</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Deception in Third Party Advertising in the 2012 Presidential Campaign</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Winneg, Kenneth M. ; Hardy, Bruce W. ; Gottfried, Jeffrey A. ; Jamieson, Kathleen Hall</creator><creatorcontrib>Winneg, Kenneth M. ; Hardy, Bruce W. ; Gottfried, Jeffrey A. ; Jamieson, Kathleen Hall</creatorcontrib><description>In this article, we profile the advertising activities and deception levels of the top 2012 spending independent expenditure groups that focused on the presidential contest. From December 1, 2011, through Election Day, November 6, 2012, independent expenditure groups spent more than $360 million on presidential television advertising, according to Kantar Media CMAG. More than a fifth of the dollars spent by the top groups purchased ads containing at least one claim judged as misleading by independent fact checkers. The proportion of dollars that these groups spent on ads containing at least one deception was much greater during the primaries than afterward. During the primaries, the pro-Romney super PAC “Restore Our Future” led the pack both in dollars spent on ads containing at least one deception and in the proportion of its ads found deceptive by the fact checkers. During the general election, in the post-primary period, the pro-Obama super PAC “Priorities USA Action” devoted the most dollars and greatest proportion of its total dollars to ads in which fact checkers found at least one deceptive claim. During some but not all of the 2012 election year, the percentage of third party ads containing at least one deceptive claim was higher among those groups not required to disclose their donors than it was among those required to do so.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0002-7642</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-3381</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0002764214524358</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ABHSAU</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Advertisements ; Advertising ; Deception ; Elections ; Expenditures ; False advertising ; Mass Media ; PAC ; Political action committees ; Political campaigns ; Political finance ; Presidential Campaigns ; Presidential elections ; Presidents ; Primaries & caucuses ; Primary Elections ; Studies ; Television ; Television advertising ; United States of America</subject><ispartof>The American behavioral scientist (Beverly Hills), 2014-04, Vol.58 (4), p.524-535</ispartof><rights>2014 SAGE Publications</rights><rights>Copyright SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. Apr 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-8a82320bc34b903805408dd50b5e12d1983e87334d0cc45eef877af8d8e0251b3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0002764214524358$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002764214524358$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21817,27922,27923,33772,33773,43619,43620</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Winneg, Kenneth M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hardy, Bruce W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gottfried, Jeffrey A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jamieson, Kathleen Hall</creatorcontrib><title>Deception in Third Party Advertising in the 2012 Presidential Campaign</title><title>The American behavioral scientist (Beverly Hills)</title><description>In this article, we profile the advertising activities and deception levels of the top 2012 spending independent expenditure groups that focused on the presidential contest. From December 1, 2011, through Election Day, November 6, 2012, independent expenditure groups spent more than $360 million on presidential television advertising, according to Kantar Media CMAG. More than a fifth of the dollars spent by the top groups purchased ads containing at least one claim judged as misleading by independent fact checkers. The proportion of dollars that these groups spent on ads containing at least one deception was much greater during the primaries than afterward. During the primaries, the pro-Romney super PAC “Restore Our Future” led the pack both in dollars spent on ads containing at least one deception and in the proportion of its ads found deceptive by the fact checkers. During the general election, in the post-primary period, the pro-Obama super PAC “Priorities USA Action” devoted the most dollars and greatest proportion of its total dollars to ads in which fact checkers found at least one deceptive claim. During some but not all of the 2012 election year, the percentage of third party ads containing at least one deceptive claim was higher among those groups not required to disclose their donors than it was among those required to do so.</description><subject>Advertisements</subject><subject>Advertising</subject><subject>Deception</subject><subject>Elections</subject><subject>Expenditures</subject><subject>False advertising</subject><subject>Mass Media</subject><subject>PAC</subject><subject>Political action committees</subject><subject>Political campaigns</subject><subject>Political finance</subject><subject>Presidential Campaigns</subject><subject>Presidential elections</subject><subject>Presidents</subject><subject>Primaries & caucuses</subject><subject>Primary Elections</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Television</subject><subject>Television advertising</subject><subject>United States of America</subject><issn>0002-7642</issn><issn>1552-3381</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkc1Lw0AQxRdRsFbvHgNevERn9sPdHEu1KhTsoZ7DJjtpt6RJ3U2F_vcm1IMIgqfh8X7vwfAYu0a4Q9T6HgC4fpAcpeJSKHPCRqgUT4UweMpGg50O_jm7iHHTS9CKj9jskUradb5tEt8ky7UPLlnY0B2Sifuk0Pnom9VgdWtKOCBPFoGid9R03tbJ1G531q-aS3ZW2TrS1fcds_fZ03L6ks7fnl-nk3laCq261FjDBYeiFLLIQBhQEoxzCgpFyB1mRpDRQkgHZSkVUWW0tpVxhoArLMSY3R57d6H92FPs8q2PJdW1bajdxxyVwEygQf0_lOsMZY_e_EI37T40_SM9BdqA0Wqg4EiVoY0xUJXvgt_acMgR8mGD_PcGfSQ9RqJd0Y_Sv_gvRSOCGA</recordid><startdate>201404</startdate><enddate>201404</enddate><creator>Winneg, Kenneth M.</creator><creator>Hardy, Bruce W.</creator><creator>Gottfried, Jeffrey A.</creator><creator>Jamieson, Kathleen Hall</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201404</creationdate><title>Deception in Third Party Advertising in the 2012 Presidential Campaign</title><author>Winneg, Kenneth M. ; Hardy, Bruce W. ; Gottfried, Jeffrey A. ; Jamieson, Kathleen Hall</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-8a82320bc34b903805408dd50b5e12d1983e87334d0cc45eef877af8d8e0251b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Advertisements</topic><topic>Advertising</topic><topic>Deception</topic><topic>Elections</topic><topic>Expenditures</topic><topic>False advertising</topic><topic>Mass Media</topic><topic>PAC</topic><topic>Political action committees</topic><topic>Political campaigns</topic><topic>Political finance</topic><topic>Presidential Campaigns</topic><topic>Presidential elections</topic><topic>Presidents</topic><topic>Primaries & caucuses</topic><topic>Primary Elections</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Television</topic><topic>Television advertising</topic><topic>United States of America</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Winneg, Kenneth M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hardy, Bruce W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gottfried, Jeffrey A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jamieson, Kathleen Hall</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>The American behavioral scientist (Beverly Hills)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Winneg, Kenneth M.</au><au>Hardy, Bruce W.</au><au>Gottfried, Jeffrey A.</au><au>Jamieson, Kathleen Hall</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Deception in Third Party Advertising in the 2012 Presidential Campaign</atitle><jtitle>The American behavioral scientist (Beverly Hills)</jtitle><date>2014-04</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>58</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>524</spage><epage>535</epage><pages>524-535</pages><issn>0002-7642</issn><eissn>1552-3381</eissn><coden>ABHSAU</coden><abstract>In this article, we profile the advertising activities and deception levels of the top 2012 spending independent expenditure groups that focused on the presidential contest. From December 1, 2011, through Election Day, November 6, 2012, independent expenditure groups spent more than $360 million on presidential television advertising, according to Kantar Media CMAG. More than a fifth of the dollars spent by the top groups purchased ads containing at least one claim judged as misleading by independent fact checkers. The proportion of dollars that these groups spent on ads containing at least one deception was much greater during the primaries than afterward. During the primaries, the pro-Romney super PAC “Restore Our Future” led the pack both in dollars spent on ads containing at least one deception and in the proportion of its ads found deceptive by the fact checkers. During the general election, in the post-primary period, the pro-Obama super PAC “Priorities USA Action” devoted the most dollars and greatest proportion of its total dollars to ads in which fact checkers found at least one deceptive claim. During some but not all of the 2012 election year, the percentage of third party ads containing at least one deceptive claim was higher among those groups not required to disclose their donors than it was among those required to do so.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/0002764214524358</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0002-7642 |
ispartof | The American behavioral scientist (Beverly Hills), 2014-04, Vol.58 (4), p.524-535 |
issn | 0002-7642 1552-3381 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1531931817 |
source | Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Sociological Abstracts; SAGE Complete A-Z List; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Advertisements Advertising Deception Elections Expenditures False advertising Mass Media PAC Political action committees Political campaigns Political finance Presidential Campaigns Presidential elections Presidents Primaries & caucuses Primary Elections Studies Television Television advertising United States of America |
title | Deception in Third Party Advertising in the 2012 Presidential Campaign |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-10T05%3A38%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Deception%20in%20Third%20Party%20Advertising%20in%20the%202012%20Presidential%20Campaign&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20behavioral%20scientist%20(Beverly%20Hills)&rft.au=Winneg,%20Kenneth%20M.&rft.date=2014-04&rft.volume=58&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=524&rft.epage=535&rft.pages=524-535&rft.issn=0002-7642&rft.eissn=1552-3381&rft.coden=ABHSAU&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0002764214524358&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3248028511%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1507808754&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0002764214524358&rfr_iscdi=true |