It is interesting when election year comes around, integrity seems to fly out the window. Why is it that political marketers use a different playbook? Falsehoods in political advertising are so prevalent we now have Factcheck.org and Flackcheck.org, both projects of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. And PolitiFact, a Pulitzer Prize-winning operation of the Tampa Bay Times.
Factcheck.org is aimed at reducing the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics – they watch and listen to ads, debates, speeches, interviews and then report of the factual accuracy.
Flackcheck.org debunks false political advertising and reviews how the media reports on political campaigns. They are also reminding broadcasters of their right to reject or require changes in political ads aired by super PACs. (Candidate-produced advertising cannot be refused or censored even if it is inaccurate or defamatory. What? Yes, this is a federal law.)
And then there is the Fact Checker column in the Washington Post. The author Glenn Kessler, has recently issued a challenge to both Former Governor Mitt Romney and President Obama to “give a least one campaign speech, on a substantive policy issue, lasting at least 15 minutes, that does not contain a single factual error or misstatement. That means no sugar-coating of your record, no exaggerated claims about your opponent’s record, and no assertions that are technically true but lack crucial context.”
Fraudulent and deceptive marketing and advertising is not acceptable for any other product or service, just ask Reebok who is to refund $25 million for false advertising of the EasyTone and RunTone shoes.
Hopefully, in our lifetime, political marketers will be held to the same standard. What do you think?
