Check facts before you vote
By Bruce A. Love
Four years ago, I wrote a column called “Liar Beware!” about the lies, exaggerations, and distortions we hear during every election season. Exposing the shortcomings of political opponents is one thing, but when candidates or their accomplices fabricate stories to smear their opponent’s reputation, they affect the choices of voters who are trying to make informed decisions.
We are preparing to vote for a new president this year. Candidates are likely to implement unsavory advertising tactics. The purpose of most promotional efforts is to sell a product, service, or idea. In the case of political advertising, the goal is to get a candidate elected. The practice of “comparative advertising” is used effectively and tactfully in other industries to demonstrate distinctions between one company’s products and those of the competition. If this approach to advertising were used in politics, political commercials would simply describe the honest differences between those running for office. However, political ads take it a step further and often attack the very character of the opposition.
The purpose of “going negative” is to show that the opposition’s candidate is unworthy to hold any office. History has demonstrated that negative advertising works in politics - that’s why politicians use it! Malicious personal attacks on political opponents are nothing new. In Thomas Jefferson’s campaign against his good friend John Adams, unbelievably nasty personal attacks were launched by both men. Jefferson eventually turned to a surrogate in the media to do his dirty work for him and thus appeared to get above the political fray. His newspaper friend got jail time for libelous statements but Jefferson won the presidency. It’s too bad some journalists and news personalities are not thrown in jail today for their irresponsible and biased reporting.
Interviewing tactics, biases and the timing of stories that news media choose to report can impact public perception about candidates. At times, reliable news sources can be tricked into perpetuating lies that are launched by “sources” that have an agenda. Recently, a CNN reporter referenced a digitally altered (fake) photograph that has been making the rounds on the internet, saying, Sarah Palin “looks good in a bikini clutching an AK-47, but is she equipped to run the country?”
Before making a decision this election season based on internet stories, biased media coverage, and aggressive political advertising, check the facts at Snopes.com, factcheck.org, and politifact.com. When you do, you will discover that:
> John McCain knows how to use a computer (but types slowly because of old war injuries)
> Sarah Palin did not ban any books from the Wasilla Public Library
> Obama and Biden voted against an amendment declaring English the national language of the United States
> Barack Hussein Obama is not a Muslim (despite a recent interview where he referenced “my Muslim faith”)
> Obama was the only one of 6 Democratic presidential candidates not to have his hand over his heart for the playing of the National Anthem during an event in Indianola, IA.
There is a slight possibility I may have introduced a small amount of bias while writing this column. Check the facts at reliable impartial sites and make your own informed decisions!
