New Campaign Idea

[Brent]

Like many others, I have become sick and tired of most political advertising ("Bob Badguy voted to increase your taxes and pull the bolts out of the wheelchairs of senior citizens. Here is an unflattering photo of Bob kicking a puppy. Bob Badguy is a known homo sapien. Here is another unflattering photo of Bob next to a photo of Osama bin Laden. I'm Gary Goodguy and I approved this message").

My idea is simple: in their advertising, candidates could talk only about themselves. They couldn't mention their opponent, directly or indirectly. They would be allowed to tell us what they would or would not do, but they would not be allowed to tell us what their opponent did/would or did not/would not do. We would need similar rules for special-interest advertisements. Clever pols would still find ways to insinuate things, I'm sure, but I think we would end up with more tolerable advertising and possibly (yes, I can dream) more truthful advertising.

What do you think?

[Brent]

Oh, and I would apply the same rule to debates.

[dhyatt]

You could certainly apply the guidelines to debates as long as all the candidates involved agreed. However, political speech is the most protected form of free speech. A candidate can say things as part of a campaign that don't even have to be true (they often do) and get away with it. Speech that would otherwise be considered slander or libel is routinely protected when used as part of a campaign. That's the primary reason behind election laws requiring disclosure of the entity behind political ads. The reasoning is/was that if a candidate tells an outrageous lie, it will hurt the the one behind the ad more so than the target of th ad. I think this worked reasonably well until 3rd party 'advocacy' (or as I call them 'smear') groups got into the game. Now we are bombarded with often trashy ads and little context as to who is behind them and why.