gender-politics

Open full view…

Campaign Ads, rhetoric and party lines

indigoh
Fri, 16 Dec 2016 07:55:37 GMT

My research paper was a focus on advertisements made by female candidates running for local and congressional positions. I studied ads from the years 2006-2016 looing for similarities and differences that could be found. I only focused on ads from the bi-partisan system of Republican and Democrat. I went in with the knowledge that women running for office face certain gendered stereotypes, such as they are more compassionate and caring and speak on certain “women’s issues,” than their male counterparts, that political party is usually more important than gender and that Republican women have to navigate through gendered stereotypes while being aligned with their party’s ideals and platform. I wanted to see if these held true in their advertisements as well. I watched the ad videos specifically looking for those characteristics and certain words that would indicate how the candidates presented themselves to audiences and potential voters. I found that there are a few similarities between women’s advertisements despite political differences. The candidates’ ads that I w atched featured the tactic of using the gendered stereotype to their advantage, rather than shying away from it and using a masculine tone. The candidates featured their own families, children and often used children as the sole actors in their commercials, along with pushing messages of being better roles models, education reform and working to ensure safer neighborhoods. The ads featured the candidates as mothers and grandmothers, appealing to the nurturing side of that stereotype, which agreed with the notion of women holding onto this stereotype. While there are other similarities between the videos, this was the most apparent. I found that while there were obvious differences in beliefs and ideals with the two political parties, the biggest difference was the rhetoric used in the ads. Republican/Conservative ads featured the word “Conservative” frequently, which agrees with the idea that Republican women have to find a balance between presenting themselves with the gendered lens and presenting themselves in their party. It was important that in the ads, Conservative moms were labeled as “Conservative moms,” not just moms as was the case in the Democrat ads. What was also important to note was that when children were present in the ads, more often than not, the children were the candidates children rather than child actors. Having a big family is a part of Conservative ideals/traditional values, making the ads party focused and less so specifically candidate focused. Democrat ads didn’t mention the word Democrat nor Progressive in the ads, for Democrat women, they have to navigate their gendered stereotype in a party that works with the stereotype. Republican women have a party that works in some ways against the gendered stereotype. So it is very important that Republican women balance both tactics, but are ultimately seen as upholding their party’s values. Which also agrees with the idea that party is more important than gender. From watching these ads I was able to find a pattern and establish a certain predictability for candidates ads, families, rhetoric, party values, elements that could be useful when candidates are deciding how to present themselves in their ads. My two research questions for political scientists studying in gender and politics are: 1) What are the best ways to study political ads across party lines, especially using rhetoric as a tool? 2) Besides knowing that a combination of masculine and femine technique is more successful in ads, what else can be said about the success of ad tactics from both parties? What specifically makes for a good ad coming from a female candidate?