The Persuasive Power Of Campaign Advertising 1st Edition Travis N Ridout Michael M Franz

The Persuasive Power Of Campaign Advertising 1st
Edition Travis N Ridout Michael M Franz download
https://ebookbell.com/product/the-persuasive-power-of-campaign-
advertising-1st-edition-travis-n-ridout-michael-m-franz-51707012
Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.
Embodying The Problem The Persuasive Power Of The Teen Mother Jenna
Vinson
https://ebookbell.com/product/embodying-the-problem-the-persuasive-
power-of-the-teen-mother-jenna-vinson-51901878
Embodying The Problem The Persuasive Power Of The Teen Mother None
Jenna Vinson
https://ebookbell.com/product/embodying-the-problem-the-persuasive-
power-of-the-teen-mother-none-jenna-vinson-25269692
Politicians And Rhetoric The Persuasive Power Of Metaphor Second
Jonathan Charterisblack
https://ebookbell.com/product/politicians-and-rhetoric-the-persuasive-
power-of-metaphor-second-jonathan-charterisblack-2433490
Politicians And Rhetoric The Persuasive Power Of Metaphor 1st Edition
Jonathan Charterisblack Auth
https://ebookbell.com/product/politicians-and-rhetoric-the-persuasive-
power-of-metaphor-1st-edition-jonathan-charterisblack-auth-5333490

Politicians And Rhetoric The Persuasive Power Of Metaphor 2nd Edition
Jonathan Charterisblack Auth
https://ebookbell.com/product/politicians-and-rhetoric-the-persuasive-
power-of-metaphor-2nd-edition-jonathan-charterisblack-auth-5364014
Celebrity Media Effects The Persuasive Power Of The Stars Carol M
Madere
https://ebookbell.com/product/celebrity-media-effects-the-persuasive-
power-of-the-stars-carol-m-madere-7306516
Politicians And Rhetoric The Persuasive Power Of Metaphor Jonathan
Charterisblack
https://ebookbell.com/product/politicians-and-rhetoric-the-persuasive-
power-of-metaphor-jonathan-charterisblack-22268884
Brain2brain Enacting Client Change Through The Persuasive Power Of
Neuroscience 1st Edition John B Arden
https://ebookbell.com/product/brain2brain-enacting-client-change-
through-the-persuasive-power-of-neuroscience-1st-edition-john-b-
arden-4978556
Persuasive Games The Expressive Power Of Videogames Ian Bogost
https://ebookbell.com/product/persuasive-games-the-expressive-power-
of-videogames-ian-bogost-56635344

The Persuasive Power
of Campaign Advertising

The
Persuasive Power
of Campaign
Advertising
Travis N. Ridout
Michael M. Franz
TEMPLE UNIVERSITY PRESS
Philadelphia

TEMPLE UNIVERSITY PRESS
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122
www.temple.edu/tempress
Copyright © 2011 by Temple University
All rights reserved
Published 2011
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Ridout, Travis N., 1974–
Th e persuasive power of campaign advertising / Travis N. Ridout
and Michael M. Franz.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 978-1-4399-0332-2 (hardcover : alk. paper)
ISBN 978-1-4399-0333-9 (pbk. : alk. paper)
ISBN 978-1-4399-0334-6 (e-book)
1. Political campaigns—United States. 2. Advertising, Political—
United States. I. Franz, Michael M., 1976– II. Title.
JK2281.R54 2011
324.7'30973—dc22 2010035516
Th e paper used in this publication meets the requirements of the
American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1992
Printed in the United States of America
2 4 6 8 9 7 5 3 1

Contents
Preface vii
1 Th e Role of Campaign Advertising 1
2 Th e Problem of Persuasion 21
3 A Brief Primer on Data and Research Design 37
4 How Race Context Matters 51
5 How Negativity and Emotional Appeals in Ads Matter 79
6 How Receivers’ Characteristics Matter 103
7 How Ad Coverage in News Matters 123
8 Th e Future Study of Ad Eff ects 145
Appendix A: Variable Coding 153
Appendix B: Full Model Results from Chapter 4 161
Appendix C: Additional Model Results from Chapter 5 169
References 171
Index 181

Preface
T
HIS BOOK BEGAN as an idea in 2004 while working with
Paul Freedman and Ken Goldstein on Campaign Advertising
and American Democracy (Temple, 2007). In the fi rst draft s of
that book, we considered including some discussion of ads’ eff ects on
voters’ candidate preferences. As we fl eshed out the idea and wrote
some prose, however, we knew that the concept deserved its own
lengthy treatment. Th ere were too many interesting questions that
deserved specifi c attention. What kinds of ads are most persuasive?
Who is more strongly aff ected by ad exposure? How does the coverage
of ads in local news aff ect the persuasive properties of the ads? Because
so many interesting questions entered these initial discussions, we sat
down aft er the publication of the earlier book and draft ed an outline.
Th e resulting book does not address or answer all of the potential fac-
tors that condition ad persuasion—that would take a much longer
analysis and probably more than one volume—but it does tackle the
major questions asked by scholars, journalists, and citizens.
In between that initial outline and now, three federal elections have
taken place: the congressional elections of 2006 and 2010 and the pres-
idential election of 2008. Such is the case with scholarship on Ameri-
can campaigns: another election is always around the corner, with
new technologies and tactical innovations changing the landscape.

We have worked to include some discussion of the 2006 and 2008
elections in this book (including modeling ad eff ects in those years)
and the subsequent spread of Internet advertising, but we do not think
the empirical analysis is all that sensitive to the inclusion or exclusion
of election years. Th e research herein shows that ads work, and they
work in a lot of circumstances. We demonstrate this in presidential
and Senate elections across years and surveys. We think the results are
robust and the conclusions, general.
Moreover, it seems unlikely that political advertising is waning as
a method of reaching voters. Some preliminary numbers from 2010
reinforce a point we make strongly in Chapter 1. For example, in Sep-
tember and October of 2008, over 400,000 ads were aired nationally
advocating for U.S. House candidates. In the just-completed 2010
elections, ad volume in House races jumped to over 620,000 ads aired,
an increase of 46 percent. In Senate races, the volume of ads aired in
the fall campaign increased by 12 percent over 2008, from 440,000 ads
to just under 500,000 ads. Th ese increases were not attributable to just
one type of sponsor. Candidates, parties, and independent groups all
bought more ads in 2010 than in 2008. In total there were more ads
aired in the 2010 congressional elections than in any previous set of
congressional elections for which there are data. Ads are as dominant
as ever, and they surely will continue to play a key role in the coming
2012 presidential election.
A lot of people ask us whether ads matter, and, of course, the
answer depends. But, in general, we can say confi dently that ads are
persuasive, especially if you have more ads than your competitor. Th is
does not mean that money to buy ads determines electoral success,
however. Th at is the importance of the empirical work in this book.
Many ads fall fl at, but when they do so depends in part on the context
of the race, the characteristics of the ads, and the profi le of the viewer.
M
ANY PEOPLE deserve special thanks as we complete this work.
Bowdoin College and its junior leave policy helped Michael
Franz devote the 2008–2009 academic year to completing a draft and
working on revisions. A Faculty Research Award also helped fund a
trip to Washington, D.C., in spring 2009 to discuss electoral innova-
viii Î Preface

tions with political consultants. Th anks, in particular, go to Joel Rivlin
and Frank Chi for taking the time to discuss ads, the Internet, and
micro-targeting. Mike’s colleagues in the Government Department
were also very helpful, creating an atmosphere in which an assistant
professor could devote a lot of time to research and writing. Moreover,
his students were more than eager to discuss advertising and its likely
impact on the political process. Steve Smith was an incredible research
assistant in the summer of 2007. He ably coded hundreds of ads on
emotional content and off ered good advice to streamline and improve
the coding. Students in Mike’s Campaigns and Elections class in fall
2007 helped with inter-coder reliability, and more than a few students
wondered how the coding of ads on emotional content could be
enhanced. Mike’s wife, Laura, was a strong advocate of the book, urg-
ing him to consider specifi c changes in the narrative and analysis. She
thoroughly enjoyed the trips to Washington in spring 2009 and hap-
pily wandered the halls of the Smithsonian as Mike learned more
about ad targeting from practitioners. As the book was completed,
Mike welcomed his son Charlie into the world, a true gift .
Travis Ridout thanks Jenny Holland for her work as a coder on this
project and thanks his colleagues at Washington State University for
their support of his research, whether off ering helpful advice or just
leaving him alone in his offi ce to write. He also thanks his wife, Carolyn,
for her unwavering support and for giving him two wonderful daugh-
ters, Lorelei and Julianne, during the course of writing this book.
We also thank Ken Goldstein for granting us access to the advertis-
ing data in 2000, 2004, 2006, and 2008. As we write, both of us have
taken on the advertising project in collaboration with Erika Franklin
Fowler at Wesleyan University. Th e Wisconsin Advertising Project has
now become the Wesleyan Media Project, and we are excited to work
with Erika. Her feedback on some analysis here was incredibly helpful,
especially with the data on local news coverage of ads in Chapter 7.
Th e anonymous reviewers of this draft off ered fi rst-rate feedback,
and there is little doubt that the book is far better because of their
analysis. Alex Holzman was a wonderful guide, and we are very grate-
ful to go through the publication process yet again under his wise
counsel.
Preface D ix

N
OT MANY PEOPLE love political ads, and many people ques-
tion whether they help or harm American democracy. Our hope
is that this book contributes to that important debate and provides
readers with some valuable answers.
x Î Preface

The Persuasive Power
of Campaign Advertising

1 The Role of
Campaign Advertising
D
URING EVERY election campaign, American politicians
invade our television sets. Th ey enter our lives uninvited and
in thirty-second increments. We see them during commercial
breaks while watching our favorite talk or game shows. We see them
between the sports and weather updates during the local news. We
might even see them before a television judge renders a verdict on a
case, or during a rerun of a law or medical drama on cable television.
Th ese political messages come in many shades and tones. Some of
them are positive and uplift ing, where candidates recount the strug-
gles and triumphs of their lives. Many evoke feelings of enthusiasm,
hope, or joy, cued with a crescendo of uplift ing music. Some show the
American fl ag waving. Others depict the candidate eagerly talking
with everyday Americans about economic or moral issues.
Some ads, by contrast, are negative and nasty, attacking an oppo-
nent’s policy ideas or personal character. Many of these messages try
to scare or anger us, using ominous music or unfl attering black-and-
white photos of a political opponent. Th e point of these ads is crystal
clear: your future depends on my election to offi ce.
Not all ads are sponsored by candidates, of course. Th e Democratic
and Republican parties are major players in the advertising game.

2 Î Chapter 1
Some of their ads are coordinated with candidates’ campaigns, and
some are produced and aired independently. Outside interest groups
are also part of the mix. Labor unions are perennially present, for
example, but increasingly so are groups with strange-sounding names:
Americans for Job Security, Freedom’s Watch, Majority Action, Vets
for Freedom, and American Rights at Work.
In short, televised political advertising is everywhere, and its ubiq-
uity raises fundamental questions. Does any of it really matter? Do
political ads break through the clutter and enter the consciousness of
the American voter? In other words, do they infl uence citizens’ views
of the candidates and aff ect how they vote on Election Day? On the
one hand, of course, the answer seems obvious. Th ey must matter.
Why, otherwise, would candidates and their allies spend so much
money on them?
Th is is certainly the impression that one gains from journalistic
coverage of campaigns. For example, Tom Wicker wrote in the New
York Times in 1988 that many blamed the Democratic presidential
candidate Michael Dukakis’s loss on “Willie Horton . . . rather than
[the success of] ideological conservatism” (Wicker 1988). Th e Willie
Horton ads were some of the most famous political ads of the pre-
vious thirty years, and they attempted to depict Dukakis as soft on
crime (Geer 2006, 121–123; Mendelberg 2001).
Many believe it was a few ads by the organization Swift Boat Vet-
erans for Truth, featuring men who had served with John Kerry in
Vietnam, that led to Kerry’s loss in 2004. As the veteran journalist
Robert Novak put it on an appearance on Meet the Press in July 2007,
“For Republicans [in 2004] a swift boat was a very good thing. [It]
kept John Kerry from being president.”
1
And it was Hillary Clinton’s “3 A.M.” ad, asking which Democratic
candidate voters would want answering the phone at the time of a
national crisis, that propelled her to victory in Pennsylvania during
the 2008 nominating contest—at least according to some. Mark Penn,
Clinton’s chief strategist, had this to say about the ad in August 2008:
“Clever negative advertising works. Th at is reality. Th e tactic meets
1
Transcript, MSNBC.com, July 15, 2007, available online at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/
id/19694666/print/1/displaymode/1098 (accessed January 29, 2010).

The Role of Campaign Advertising D 3
with media and pundit disapproval and spawns accusations of nega-
tivity, but the reality is that a clever negative ad can be devastatingly
eff ective.”
2
Although there is some scholarly evidence that political commer-
cials move votes, there is still no consensus about the extent of adver-
tising’s impact—that is, how many votes, if any, are changed. Many
scholars have chosen to investigate important byproduct eff ects of
advertising, such as the relationship between advertising tone and
citizens’ involvement or participation in the political system. But as
Huber and Arceneaux (2007, 957) write, “Few studies that analyze
actual campaigns have been able to demonstrate that advertisements
persuade individuals to change their minds.”
Much political-science research more generally would suggest
that ads should have little impact on changing people’s candidate pref-
erences. Many people enter election campaigns as partisans, for exam-
ple, which makes it diffi cult to sway these voters. Moreover, scholars
have shown that election outcomes can be predicted quite well on the
basis of a few pieces of data known months before an election—indeed,
months before the bulk of advertising has been aired (Holbrook
1996).
3
Other scholars submit that while advertising might have the
potential to sway voters when one side dominates the airwaves, most
presidential campaigns are balanced ones in which competing mes-
sages cancel each other out (Zaller 1996).
And consider this: if you ask typical Americans what they think
of negative campaign ads they see on television, many will tell you
that they detract from American politics—that they weaken demo-
cratic discourse (see Geer 2006, 2). For example, in a 2006 Gallup
poll, 69 percent of Americans reported that they believe little or
nothing of what is said in political advertising. Further, opinion poll
aft er opinion poll fi nds that Americans think politics and campaigns
are too negative. In 2006, for example, 63 percent of respondents in a
diff erent national poll reported that Republican candidates’ ads were
2
Quoted in Politico.com, August 11, 2008, available online at http://www.politico.com/
news/stories/0808/12455.html (accessed January 29, 2010).
3
Indeed, scholars in political science have debated for years the existence and magnitude
of campaign and media eff ects: see Holbrook 1996, chap. 1; Johnston, Hagen, and Jamie-
son 2004.

4 Î Chapter 1
“too negative”; 61 percent reported that ads from Democratic candi-
dates were “too negative.” Nearly 70 percent reported that neither
Democratic nor Republican ads “provided useful information.”
4
If
Americans do not trust political ads, then how can they persuade?
What emerges is a compelling puzzle. Even as campaigns spend
lots of money on television ads, believing that they are crucial for vic-
tory, some scholars believe their eff ects are small, and many citizens
express displeasure at their abundance. Our goal in this book is to
off er the most comprehensive examination to date of the persuasive
power of televised campaign ads. In other words, we hope to off er a
more defi nitive answer to the enduring questions of how, when, and
whether ads matter. We should be clear at the outset. Th e intended
audience for this book is broad—students of American politics, jour-
nalists, political consultants, and interested citizens. As we make clear
later, our primary contribution is not theoretical. In fact, we use the
rich existing scholarship on campaign eff ects to lay out a number of
commonly understood expectations about the eff ectiveness of politi-
cal advertising. To these expectations we bring to bear the best data
available and a sophisticated methodological approach. Th is method-
ological advance is our primary contribution.
More specifi cally, the book examines advertising in American
election campaigns in 2000 and 2004, focusing in both years on the
presidential elections and sixty Senate races. We also add in a later
chapter a discussion of Senate advertising in 2006, and we include a
preliminary analysis of persuasion eff ects at the county level in the
presidential and Senate races of 2008. We do all of this by focusing
on citizens’ exposure to the complete ad environment in a campaign.
Because of that, we say very little about the impact of specifi c ads.
Indeed, as avid consumers of American politics, and as scholars in the
fi eld, we are oft en asked to refl ect on the eff ectiveness of certain ads.
Did Mike Huckabee’s “Chuck Norris” ad help him win the Iowa cau-
cuses in January 2008? Did John McCain’s ad in the summer of 2008,
which featured images of Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, lead citi-
zens to dismiss Barack Obama as little more than a celebrity? We wish,
4
Th e fi rst poll was conducted in October 2006 by USA Today and the Gallup Organization;
the second was sponsored by Newsweek the same month.

The Role of Campaign Advertising D 5
of course, that we could provide rock-solid evidence about the eff ec-
tiveness of the latest and most discussed campaign ads—and make
predictions about their eff ectiveness as soon as they appear. We could
make millions as media consultants if such questions could be an-
swered prospectively and defi nitively.
Ultimately, however, an in-depth focus on one or two ads in a
campaign would only begin to answer the question of how the ad
environment in total infl uences citizens’ attitudes and choices. Indeed,
most citizens in actual campaigns view multiple political ads and oft en
in high numbers. Isolating the eff ect of one or a few viewings of one
or a few ads would miss the total impact of advertising in any particu-
lar campaign.
Our contention in this book is relatively simple, actually. We argue
that campaign ads do matter, but their impact is largely contingent.
More specifi cally, we focus on the infl uence of television ads as mod-
erated by three key factors: the characteristics of the ads (promotional
versus attack ads, for example), the campaign context in which they
air (such as open seats and competitive races with an incumbent run-
ning), and the receiver of the ad message (partisan viewers or inde-
pendent viewers, to name two). Th ese are not the only conditions
under which an ad’s eff ectiveness might be moderated, of course; the
issues discussed in the ads may help or hinder a campaign’s persuasive
appeals; the presence or absence of a scandal may also matter, as might
the overall production quality of the ads. Th e three major factors that
we focus on here, however, are the ones scholars have studied the
most and are arguably the most important factors that condition the
infl uence of advertising.
Determining the actual persuasive infl uence of campaign adver-
tising is more than an academic exercise, however. Such an investiga-
tion matters for any evaluation of contemporary American politics.
Indeed, elections are the primary means by which voters and their
elected representatives are connected, and political advertising in par-
ticular accounts for the overwhelming bulk of candidates’ and parties’
electioneering budgets. Voters are oft en bombarded by these short
messages, and in many cases they represent the voter’s only exposure
to the candidate. Th is is particularly true for political novices who
may avoid news media or Internet blog coverage of campaigns.

6 Î Chapter 1
If ads aired during an election campaign do, in fact, alter voters’
candidate preferences, determining the if and when is only part of the
bigger story. We must also ask how ads are persuading. On the one
hand, ads might be “manipulating,” convincing people to vote for a
candidate who might act against their best interests. Th is would be
quite troublesome, as it would suggest that the candidate who has the
most money to buy ads will be the victor, not the candidate who is
more representative of the particular electorate.
On the other hand, ads might be persuading by informing, by
providing people with the information that they need to make enlight-
ened decisions about which candidates best represent their interests.
In this case, ads are not troublesome but represent one more way by
which to bring information to voters, off ering a connection between
elector and elected.
5
The Relevance of Television Advertising
It is likely true that the Internet is the next wave of electioneering inno-
vation, and it may someday supplant television as the primary method
of reaching voters—we can hardly deny these developments. For exam-
ple, in their seminal study of young voters in contemporary American
politics, Winograd and Hais (2008, 154) argue that “[Internet politics]
present the possibility of an end to the ever rising cost of thirty-second
television campaign commercials, and the time-consuming and poten-
tially corrupting need to raise the money to pay for them.” Th e devel-
opment of sophisticated online outreach technology, they add, “will
cause television to lose its role as the primary medium for campaigns
to get their messages out to voters in the near future” (Winograd and
Hais 2008, 163). Given such claims, is it even worth studying the eff ects
of televised advertising? Are we exploring a “dying art”?
5
Indeed, there is a rich scholarship in political science on the ability of voters to make
informed decisions on the basis of minimal information (Downs 1957; Sniderman, Brody, and Tetlock 1991). It seems reasonable to suggest that campaign advertising is one source of information voters can use to make short-term and quick judgments about candidates (Franz, Freedman, Goldstein, and Ridout 2007, 12–18). Th e usefulness of ads, however, is
predicated on the likelihood that they will not draw voters away from candidates they
would normally be predisposed to support.

The Role of Campaign Advertising D 7
Our answer is emphatic. We believe it is important to study politi-
cal advertising on television, largely because the immediate impact of
the Internet (now and in the foreseeable future) is a transformation in
how candidates and their political allies fund advertising, not in how
they attempt to persuade voters. Even the most recent studies of the
eff ects of digital media in elections agree. For example, according to
Kate Kaye (2009, 14, 19), “Many political consultants don’t think
Internet ads can be used to sway voters. . . . Obama grabbed millions
of dollars through online fundraising from countless donors giving
relatively small amounts of cash. But, as in every election in recent
history, the bulk of that money was spent on television ads.” Simply
put, the Internet as superior campaign communicator is not yet here.
Th is leaves television—still—as the primary medium for reaching
potential voters. Th is is true even at a time when campaigns are keenly
aware of the fragmentation of the American media. Th at is, with the
proliferation of cable news choices, Americans have ever more abun-
dant options in news and entertainment. Th is transition from a
“broadcast” media environment, where Americans have only a few
channels and popular programs have huge audiences, to a “narrow-
cast” media, where audience share is split up over hundreds of pro-
grams, leaves television advertisements potentially struggling to break
through to potential voters. As Martin Wattenberg (2010, 57) has
noted, viewership for major presidential speeches and press confer-
ences is down signifi cantly, by as much as 50 percent for the State of
the Union between 1980 and 2005.
A recent U.S. Supreme Court decision may even make televised
political advertising more prominent in the future. Th e court ruled in
early 2010 that corporations and unions were free to spend unlimited
amounts of money on advertising that directly advocated the election
or defeat of a candidate, a practice that was previously illegal at the
federal level and in many states. Some predict this will make political
ads even more prevalent. Th e preliminary evidence from 2010 bears
this out, in fact, as we noted in the Preface.
Moreover, people are not abandoning their television sets, despite
other entertainment options. In November 2009, Nielsen reported
that the average household was watching more television each day
(more than eight hours) than in any previous period, up 11 percent

8 Î Chapter 1
from 1999.
6
Even when Americans watch shows recorded on digital
video recorders (DVRs), a substantial proportion (nearly half, accord-
ing to some estimates) watch the recorded commercials instead of
fast-forwarding through them (Carter 2009). David Carr of the New
York Times had this to say in May 2009:
Why, as network television has been sliced in half in terms of
audience in the last few decades, do marketers still buy in? First
and foremost, because it works. At a time of ever-atomizing
audiences, broadcast television’s slice may be smaller, but it is
still the biggest slice. Th ink network television is washed up,
overwhelmed by targeted and measureable ads on the Web?
How is it that Apple, a tech company, and by the way, probably
the most talented marketing company on the planet, is all over
network television right now? And remember the movie indus-
try is having a big year with big movies, using, yes, network
television to drive people into theaters. Network television
advertising retains traction with both buyers and consumers
because, in spite of the proliferation of screens, people are still
watching more television than ever. (Carr 2009)
Campaigns clearly recognize this, since the volume of paid tele-
vised political advertising has remained relatively stable across recent
election cycles, as data from the Wisconsin Advertising Project reveal.
7

Table 1.1 shows some summary statistics about the number of presi-
dential ads (paid for by either candidates or outside groups) aired in
each media market in each of three presidential nomination seasons:
6
Report posted on Nielsen’s blog, available online at http://blog.nielsen.com (accessed Jan-
uary 13, 2010). Since 2005, Nielsen’s totals for daily household viewing have included shows recorded with a DVR and played back within seven days.
7
Th e Wisconsin Advertising Project is housed at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and
is directed by Kenneth Goldstein. As graduate students, we were involved with the collec- tion and coding of the ad data for the 2000 election. More information about the ad data is provided in Chapter 3. Prior to the project’s establishment in 1998, data on the frequency
of ad airings is only anecdotal, although Shaw (1999) provides some numbers on ad Gross Ratings Points obtained from the presidential campaigns for 1988, 1992 and 1996. Th e
University of Oklahoma maintains an archive of political advertisements back to the 1950s, but the archive has no information on the frequency with which the ads aired.

The Role of Campaign Advertising D 9
1999–2000, 2003–2004, and 2007–2008. A media market is simply a
geographic area in which most people have access to similar tele-
vision and radio broadcasts and newspapers. Th e number of markets
for which we have access to ad-tracking data has increased over time
(from the top 75 media markets in 1998 and 2000 to all 210 markets
for presidential candidates in 2004 and 2008). To make these num-
bers comparable over time, we report summary statistics about the
number of ads aired in each market, not the total number of ads aired
across all markets.
In each successive nomination campaign, the mean and median
number of ads increases. To put these fi gures into perspective, keep in
mind that while both Republicans and Democrats were battling for
their parties’ nominations in 2000, only Democrats had a contested
race in 2004. And in spite of that, there was a substantial increase in
total advertising between those two years. Part of the increase in
2007–2008 could be due to the unusually long race on the Democratic
side, but the market-level summaries that we report should not be
very sensitive to the length of the nominating contest. With the excep-
tion of Iowa and New Hampshire, which saw campaigning and adver-
tising for most of 2007, most markets in the primary phase of the
presidential election received high advertising volumes right before
their primary or caucus date and very little right aft er.
In sum, it seems clear that the volume of advertising has increased
in presidential nomination races in recent years. Why? Th e most likely
explanation for this has to do with changes in campaign-fi nance law
TAB LE 1.1 Number of Ads per Media Market by Year
(Presidential Nomination Races)
Number of ads
per media market 1999–2000 2003–2004 2007–2008
Mean 1,349 1,432 1,860
25th percentile 121 318 214
Median 787 989 997
75th percentile 1,569 1,434 2,348
Source: Wisconsin Advertising Project
Note: Th e period covered is from October 1 of the previous year until the nomination was secured.
Ad totals are for the top seventy-fi ve markets in 2000 and for all 210 markets in 2004 and 2008.

10 Î Chapter 1
and changes in the ways in which candidates have gone about solicit-
ing donations. First, aft er the 2002 elections, the limit on an individual
contribution to a candidate rose from $1,000 to $2,000, making it eas-
ier for candidates to raise funds from relatively wealthy donors.
8
But
at the same time, a ban on large unregulated contributions to political
parties, which began aft er the 2002 elections, compelled the parties
and individual campaigns to reach out to heretofore untapped mil-
lions of small-money donors—done largely on the Internet.
Th is is perhaps best exemplifi ed by Howard Dean’s campaign for
the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004, which was able to
raise $52 million through Internet contributions (Hindman 2005). In
2008, Barack Obama raised, by some estimates, more than $300 mil-
lion for the primary campaign, with up to $200 million coming from
Internet contributions (http://www.cfi nst.org). Th e ability to raise large
sums of cash for the primary campaign has convinced many presiden-
tial primary candidates in recent years to forgo the public funding
option, whereby the government matches private contributions to a
candidate in exchange for the candidate’s promise to limit spending in
primary states. Th is has consequently raised the amounts of money
spent on the nominating contest and resulted in greater use of tele-
vised political advertising.
Does this trend of rising ad airings hold for other races, however?
To examine this, we calculated the number of congressional ads aired
per market in 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2008, including all U.S.
Senate and U.S. House races (Table 1.2). Th e evidence is compelling.
Th ere was a substantial increase in coverage between 1998 and 2000,
and while the amount of advertising in 2002, 2004, and 2008 seemed
to plateau (and even decline in a few categories), all three years saw
substantially higher levels of advertisements over 1998.
Th e initial bump in the volume of advertising between 1998 and
2000 is perhaps best explained by the changing sponsorship of ads.
Around 1998, outside groups and parties began paying for increased
levels of television advertising, a trend that has continued in recent
years. Th e reasoning for this was a much more partisan and polarized
political environment in Washington aft er 1994 (making every com-
8
Th e $2,000 fi gure is also indexed to infl ation. Th us, the individual upper limit was $2,100
in 2006, $2,300 in 2008, and $2,400 in 2010.

The Role of Campaign Advertising D 11
petitive House and Senate election crucial to liberal and conservative
interests), coupled with far looser restrictions on how ads could be
funded (Franz 2008). As a consequence, many more political players
have chosen to air television ads in the past ten years with the inten-
tion of reaching persuadable voters.
For general election presidential advertising between 2000 and
2008, the story is similar (Table 1.3). While the average media market
received 4,075 ads in 2000, the number was about 25 percent higher
(5,069) in 2004. Note, however, the very small number of ads aired (just
three spots) at the 25th percentile. Th is much wider distribution of
ads buys in 2004 is an artifact of the available data. In 2000, we have
only ads aired in the top seventy-fi ve markets, but we have ads aired
in all 210 markets in 2004. With this complete set of market-level
TABLE 1.2 Number of Ads per Media Market by Year (House and Senate)
Number of ads
per media market 1998 2000 2002 2004 2008
Mean 4,096 6,496 5,967 5,568 5,852
25th percentile 1,164 2,374 1,842 1,639 1,135
Median 2,620 5,902 4,821 4,189 4,153
75th percentile 6,592 9,540 9,113 7,946 7,749
Source: Wisconsin Advertising Project
Note: Ad totals are for the top seventy-fi ve markets in 1998 and 2000, the top one hundred markets in
2002 and 2004, and all 210 markets in 2008.
TABLE 1.3 Number of Ads per Media Market by Year
(Presidential General Election)
Number of ads
per media market 2000 2004 2008
Mean 4,075 5,069 4,078
25th percentile 1,222 3 5
Median 3,438 717 1,000
75th percentile 6,783 9,509 7,690
Source: Wisconsin Advertising Project
Note: In 2000, we identify the general election as beginning on June 1. In 2004, because John Kerry
had secured enough delegates aft er Super Tuesday, we count March 3 as the beginning of the general
election. June 15 is the start point for 2008. Ad totals are for the top seventy-fi ve markets in 2000 and
for all 210 markets in 2004 and 2008.

12 Î Chapter 1
data, we can see that presidential candidates oft en put a very small
number of ads in minor markets.
While advertising surged in 2004, it did decline somewhat in
2008. Th e average number of ads aired in the top 210 markets during
the general election presidential campaign was 4,078. Only the median
number of ads was higher that year (1,000 ads in 2008, compared with
717 in 2004). Th is lower total advertising is the consequence of little
interest group advertising in the general election in 2008 (Kimball
2009) and a much lower investment from the Democratic Party, which
aired only 7,800 ads in the entire general election phase across all 210
markets. Th is latter decline was driven by the aggressive fundraising
of Barack Obama, who was the fi rst major party nominee to opt out
of the general election public funding program.
Our core message here is simply put: the best available evidence
suggests that the volume of advertising has increased over recent years
or, at least, remained steady. Consider this bit of historical context.
When McGinnis (1969) was writing about Richard Nixon’s use of tele-
vision in 1968, the medium had not yet been fully embraced by cam-
paign managers. McGinnis specifi cally chronicled the divisions within
the campaign between the “ad people” and the traditional campaign
managers.
9
Forty years later, however, no major campaign consultant
would counsel a presidential or Senate candidate to wage a serious
campaign without a presence on television. In fact, John Kerry’s 2004
bid was essentially run by Bob Shrum, a media and campaign adver-
tising consultant.
Th e dominance of television in political campaigns is still true
even at a time when campaigns are becoming more innovative in the
tactics they use. For example, a new trend in elections involves the
aggressive mining of consumer purchasing data (tracked by credit
card companies) to identify relationships between retail preferences
and political choices (Hillygus and Shields 2009); the information is
subsequently used to instruct get-out-the-vote eff orts and peer-to-
peer contacts. Republicans employed this tactic aggressively begin-
9
Curiously, in her discussion of the emergence of digital media in the presidential election
of 2008, Kaye (2009) chronicles the challenges some online media consultants, especially for the McCain and Clinton campaigns, faced in being taken seriously by more traditional consultants who specialized in offl ine campaigning.

The Role of Campaign Advertising D 13
ning in the 2004 elections (Gertner 2004; Sosnik, Dowd, and Fournier
2006). Put simply, campaign consultants want to know whether con-
servatives disproportionately purchase domestic beer and subscribe
to hunting magazines; whether liberals prefer lattes at Starbucks and
give oft en to charities; and whether moderates prefer American-made
to foreign-made cars. Th ey are able to get answers to these and similar
questions through extensive polling that looks for trends and relation-
ships between consumer habits and political attitudes. Voter fi les are
subsequently linked to data on individuals that is purchased from
credit card companies and, because polling has identifi ed which con-
sumer habits are associated with which political attitudes, these data
can be used by campaigns to develop a highly tailored message and
send it via phone calls or direct mail only to certain types of consumers/
voters. Targeting along these lines can be so precise that a grand-
mother in apartment 4B might receive a health-care mailing that
emphasizes the candidate’s eff orts to secure the long-term viability of
Medicare, while the graduate student in apartment 6C receives the
student-loan mailing that outlines the candidate’s commitment to
aff ordable education.
10
Compare this with the relative ineffi ciency of traditional television
advertising. Most ads are aired on local television news broadcasts or
talk shows and games shows (Goldstein and Freedman 2002). A cer-
tain demographic watches these programs (Rivlin 2008), of course—
usually older voters—but the targeting strategy is broader. Your ad will
be seen by your base voters, undecided voters, voters of the other party,
and lots of non-voters. What you say on television, then, oft en can be
wasted on viewers who will never vote for you, or never vote at all.
In sum, television remains more of a shotgun tactic than a rifl e
shot, as the overwhelming majority of ads (especially, still, for lower
ticket races) are not targeted to specifi c demographic audiences.
10
In truth, this tactic really is not new. Before television—before the modern campaign
more generally—candidates could micro-target diff erent audiences in diff erent states
with diff erent speeches (Hillygus and Shields 2009, 154). Candidates might, for example,
tell one audience something in one town but something completely diff erent in a diff er-
ent town. Th is is the original form of micro-targeting that became impossible in the
world of multimedia, where such inconsistencies in message are easily identifi ed. Th e
micro-targeting trend of today, then, is really a technological trend.

14 Î Chapter 1
Ad Persuasion as an Empirical Question
Although campaign advertising on television continues to be relevant
(and will be for some time, we suggest), its actual eff ect on voters is
still a relatively open question. Existing research on the persuasiveness
of political advertising is abundant but has been hampered by several
challenges.
First, experimental lab fi ndings (see, e.g., Ansolabehere and Iyen-
gar 1995; Chang 2001; Kahn and Geer 1994; Meirick 2002; Pinkleton
1997, 1998; Valentino, Hutchings, and Williams 2004) have been
important in helping scholars understand the process by which ads
might work—that is, change minds—but it is very diffi cult to make
the transition from the laboratory to what happens in the real world
of a campaign. Seeing one or two ads in quick succession just is not
the same as seeing a multiplicity of ads from various sources over the
course of a lengthy political campaign. For example, if participants in
an experiment, on average, are 10 percent more likely to vote for a
candidate aft er seeing one of that candidate’s ads in a laboratory set-
ting, what does that mean for the individual at the ballot box on Elec-
tion Day? Does it increase that likelihood by 10 percent, 1 percent,
.01 percent, .000001 percent?
To address this drawback of current scholarship, we focus our
investigation in the real world. Th e ad data we employ come from the
Wisconsin Advertising Project, which coded commercial data about
which ads aired when and where on dozens of diff erent attributes. We
have data on literally hundreds of thousands of political ads aired in
top media markets for each year, allowing us to track presidential and
Senate advertising over the course of the entire campaign season.
For specifi c analyses of both the 2000 and 2004 elections, we make
use of two studies: the two-wave American National Election Study
from 2000 and a three-wave study conducted by the University of
Wisconsin and Brigham Young University from 2004. In particular,
we focus on two outcome variables—people’s reported voting choice
and their evaluations of the Democratic and Republican candidates.
Th e use of these panel studies (which re-interview the same people at
diff erent points in time) not only allows us to speak confi dently about
causation—that exposure to advertising led voters to cast their ballots

The Role of Campaign Advertising D 15
a certain way or feel diff erently about the candidates—but allows us
to examine the eff ectiveness of advertising at diff erent times during a
campaign. Th is represents the most comprehensive examination to
date of the persuasive eff ect of political advertising.
One major advance of our research over previous scholarship on
persuasion, then, is methodological. Our empirical work does not
lack a theoretical focus, however. Indeed, we draw on the rich litera-
ture on campaign eff ects to lay out a number of expectations as to
when and how advertising matters. All ads are not alike. All campaign
environments are not alike. And all message receivers are not alike.
We should not expect the same ad to exert the same degree of infl u-
ence on each person. Th us, we examine how the context of the cam-
paign may infl uence the eff ectiveness of a candidate’s advertising,
focusing in particular on the competitiveness of the race, whether the
messages come from the incumbent or the challenger, and whether
the ads were aired during a presidential or Senate campaign.
We also explore how the characteristics of the person who received
the ad’s message infl uence the ad’s ability to move the person’s candi-
date preference. Our focus is on partisanship and levels of informa-
tion. Th eoretically, strong partisans should be less susceptible to ad
infl uence, as they should be anchored by their partisan attachments;
independents, by contrast, should be far more persuadable. Moreover,
we propose that those who have low levels of political information
should be as open to ad infl uence as those with who have a lot of
political information. Th is expectation runs counter to some models
of persuasion that predict that those with low levels of political infor-
mation are less able to process, understand, and thus accept political
messages. We will argue, though, that because political advertising is
a campaign message designed specifi cally to be easy to understand,
lower levels of political sophistication should not impede message
reception and acceptance.
Research on political advertising has traditionally relied on the
simple categorization of ads as positive (promotional) or negative
(attack). Such a coding scheme does not do justice to the ways in which
ads diff er. In this book, we examine not only whether promotional
and negative ads diff er in their eff ects but whether ads that draw on
diff erent emotions (from anger to fear to enthusiasm) have diff erent

16 Î Chapter 1
eff ects on voters. Th is is important because scholars have only begun
to examine whether advertising’s eff ectiveness depends on the emo-
tions the ads evoke (see, e.g., Brader 2006), yet there is much theory
suggesting that emotions should matter in campaigns (Marcus and
MacKuen 1993).
Finally, research on political advertising outside the laboratory
has focused solely on voters’ exposure to the televised airings of these
messages during commercial breaks. Yet people are also exposed to
political ads through the news media and increasingly on the Internet.
Th ink of the ad nauseam coverage in the news media of specifi c cam-
paign ads in diff erent election cycles—for example, the “Wolves as
Terrorists” ad in 2004, and the “Obama as Celebrity” ad sponsored by
John McCain in 2008. In addition, the news media oft en discuss polit-
ical ads in the context of “ad watches,” where reporters evaluate the
truth of claims made in television ads. Although this is diffi cult to
study empirically, we will make the case that media coverage of adver-
tising may also have the potential to infl uence voters’ choices.
The Role of Campaign Advertising
We should be clear at the outset that our argument in this book is
more empirical than normative. We co-wrote a recent book showing
that exposure to campaign ads can actually be healthy for politics; we
showed, for example, that ads can raise voters’ knowledge about cam-
paigns, spur interest in the election, and even foster voter participa-
tion (Franz, Freedman, Goldstein, and Ridout 2007; see also Patterson
and McClure 1976). But we did not argue that campaign ads should
replace more traditional forms of running for offi ce, such as meeting
with and canvassing voters, holding town hall discussions with citi-
zens, participating in candidate debates, and holding campaign rallies.
We simply believe that ads are less harmful to the electoral process
than the conventional wisdom would suggest. Whatever ails Ameri-
can politics, we are convinced that television ads are not the cause.
However, many people still have misgivings about the role televi-
sion ads play in elections. Many citizens, as we noted above, continue
to express frustration at the abundance of political ads. Th ere is also
always the potential for ads to confuse voters or misrepresent the

The Role of Campaign Advertising D 17
truth. It seems that everyone can off er an example of an ad that seemed
beyond the pale or simply untrue. Th is is particularly relevant in dis-
cerning the persuasive power of campaign ads. Are ads pushing voters
toward or pulling them away from their predispositions? Can ads
trick citizens? Th ese are important questions.
Keep in mind, though, that factual misrepresentations are possible
in all forms of campaign discourse, whether they are online, on televi-
sion, or at a town hall meeting—and this has always been true. Because
television ads are so publicly broadcast, however, the ability to lie out-
right is weakened. And any ad from one candidate or party can always
be countered with an ad from the opposing candidate or party—this
is a particular strength of television compared with other forms of
campaigning. In fact, the counterattack strategy was exercised in the
2008 Democratic nomination battle, when Barack Obama responded
almost instantly to Hillary Clinton’s “3
A.M.” ad. Th e failure to respond,
however, was evident in 2004 when John Kerry chose not to air ads
countering the Swift Boat attacks.
Furthermore, if the news media are watching, unfair television ads
can and should be the focus of their attention. And with every elec-
tion cycle, fact-checking websites spend considerable time investigat-
ing the distortions and misrepresentations in television advertising.
11

All told, the likelihood that complete falsehoods go on the air unvar-
nished and without rebuttal is quite low.
Many recommendations for campaign reform, however, have
focused on the perceived damaging impact of ads. Some have called
for a “positive-only” air war. For example, in 2009, North Carolina’s
Governor Bev Perdue created a task force to explore the viability of
an optional public funding system for state elections that would only
grant money to participants if they pledged to air positive ads. Th e
chair of the task force, in discussing one of the possible policy propos-
als, said, “In order to qualify for endowment money, you [would] have
to pledge not to mention your opponent, and we may say that you
may not engage in advertising that mentions your opponent. Th is will
be a mechanism to discourage negative campaigning and insist on
11
Two in particular are popular at this writing: http://www.factcheck.org and http://www
.politifact.com.

18 Î Chapter 1
issue discussion” (“Reds and Blues” 2009). At the federal level, a key
motivation for forcing candidates to “approve” their message was a
hope that negativity in campaigns would go down (Franz, Rivlin, and
Goldstein 2006, 141–142).
Th ese reform agendas seem motivated by the assumption that ads
are harmful, that thirty-second ads cannot possibly be good for democ-
racy. Th us, the debate over political advertising is an ideal place for
political science to make an important contribution to a real-life pol-
icy debate. In the chapters that follow, we look for evidence about how
oft en and when persuasion happens, as well as whether voters actually
are manipulated in some fashion by their exposure to advertising. We
are hopeful that the analysis in this book will go a long way in helping
citizens, pundits, and political operatives more accurately assess the
role television ads play in contemporary American elections.
Book Preview
We have merely introduced the story in this chapter, of course. Do ads
persuade? If so, when and for which types of voters? Chapter 2 reviews
existing literature on political persuasion. We then lay out expecta-
tions about the conditions under which ads should matter the most
and least. Chapter 3 describes our approach to detecting ad persua-
sion, which involves matching survey respondents with data on the
specifi c ads, and their characteristics, that were aired in their media
markets. Our approach allows us to create a relative, individual-level
measure of ad exposure.
Chapter 4 is the fi rst of our empirical chapters to test the expec-
tations derived from our theoretical framework. We explore how the
campaign context infl uences the eff ectiveness of advertising. Th eoreti-
cally, the impact of advertising should be diff erent for incumbents,
about whom voters know a lot, and their challengers, about whom
voters know very little. It should also diff er depending on the stage of
the campaign (is it early, when people know little about the candidate,
or later on?), and the competitiveness of the race. We explore these
ideas using data from the U.S. Senate campaigns from 2000 and 2004
and the presidential general elections of 2000 and 2004. Certainly, it
would be nice to be able to look at even more races, such as Senate

The Role of Campaign Advertising D 19
primaries, House primaries, and House general elections. We suspect
that ad campaigns in these races infl uence citizens considerably, given
that voters have relatively little information about such candidates,
especially challengers. Th e survey data, however, are too scant—and
levels of advertising are generally too low—to be able to analyze these
races using our approach.
Chapter 5 explores how the characteristics of the advertisements
to which viewers are exposed have an impact on advertising’s eff ec-
tiveness. We develop diff erent accounts of how an ad’s characteristics
should infl uence its eff ectiveness: one that is tone-based (i.e., whether
the ads are negative or positive) and one that is emotion-based, focus-
ing specifi cally on whether the ads make appeals to fear, anger, or
enthusiasm.
Chapter 6 shift s from how the characteristics of the ads matter to
how the characteristics of the viewer might infl uence an ad’s eff ective-
ness. We focus on two specifi c viewer characteristics: partisanship
and political knowledge. Th eory suggests that political independents
should be most infl uenced by advertising, all else being equal, because
they lack a partisan anchor, whereas partisans may be “brought home”
by messages from candidate of their own party, as well. We also sug-
gest that it is those with low political knowledge who should be most
infl uenced by advertising, because those high in knowledge are able to
resist messages contrary to their own political predispositions.
Chapter 7 investigates how televised political advertising can have
an infl uence on viewers who are exposed to such ads in the news
media or on the Internet. We demonstrate that there has been sub-
stantial discussion of political advertising by the news media in recent
elections and that such discussion has increased over the most recent
election cycles. One focus of the chapter is an examination of adver-
tising exposure in 2006, and we split exposure into two types: expo-
sure to thirty-second commercials themselves and exposure to news
coverage of advertising, both in newspapers and on local television
news broadcasts. We look for evidence that exposure to media cover-
age of ads, as opposed to exposure during commercial breaks, has any
infl uence on vote choice. We also spend considerable time discussing
the development of online tools that enhance the possibilities to per-
suade voters.

20 Î Chapter 1
In the fi nal chapter, we off er suggestions for the study of advertis-
ing in the future, and we consider key normative questions related to
the infl uence of political advertising. For example, given the evidence
in the book, are political ads a vital component of American democ-
racy, giving people the information they need to align their voting
choice with their political predispositions? Or are political ads manip-
ulators, leading people to cast ballots in ways they might not nor-
mally? Political advertising has been ubiquitous in all recent election
cycles, and it is likely to remain so for many years. Th is book contrib-
utes an important body of evidence that addresses what ads persuade,
when they persuade, and whom they persuade. In doing so, the book
speaks to claims that advertising has a deleterious eff ect on American
democracy.

2 The Problem of Persuasion
O
UR QUESTION in this book is simply put: Is political adver-
tising little more than background noise, or do ads infl uence
the choices that voters make? Th ere are two ways by which
advertising could infl uence a person’s vote choice—or, at least, who
wins an election. Th e fi rst possibility, and the most direct, is that adver-
tising may infl uence people’s evaluations of political candidates. As
advertising makes one candidate look more or less attractive, the like-
lihood that the viewer will cast a vote for that candidate will rise or
decline. Th e second possibility is a bit more indirect—namely, adver-
tising may encourage or discourage supporters of one candidate from
turning out to vote on Election Day. Th us, a candidate may win an
election not because she has more supporters among the electorate but
because her supporters are more fi red up about going to the polls.
Our focus in this book is on the fi rst way in which advertising
might aff ect outcomes: by directly aff ecting people’s evaluations of
candidates. Why do we focus on this route of infl uence? One reason is
that the impact of advertising, especially negative advertising, on voter
turnout has already been studied extensively. For much of the 1990s,
scholars were motivated to study the relationship between ad tone and
voter turnout because of the controversial claim of Ansolabehere and
Iyengar (1995) that negative ads demobilized citizens and depressed

22 Î Chapter 2
election turnout. Much ink has already been spilled on this question,
and we have waded into the debate ourselves as recently as 2008
(Franz, Freedman, Goldstein, and Ridout 2008). Indeed, we would
suggest that scholars have devoted more time to investigating impor-
tant byproduct eff ects of advertising, such as the relationship between
advertising tone and citizens’ involvement or participation in the
political system (Ansolabehere and Iyengar 1995; Djupe and Peterson
2002; Goldstein and Freedman 1999; Kahn and Kenney 1999; Lau and
Pomper 2004; Martin 2004; Peterson and Djupe 2005) than they have
to studying ad persuasion.
1
Th e other reason we focus on the more direct impacts of adver-
tising on candidate evaluations and voting choice is that most recent
evidence suggests that advertising’s impact on voter turnout is likely
very small, if it exists at all (Jackson, Mondak, and Huckfeldt 2009;
Krasno and Green 2008; Lau, Sigelman, and Rovner 2007). In short,
while the debate over ad tone and turnout seems to have reached
some consensus, there still seems to be much to learn about the extent
of advertising’s direct impact on voting choice.
To be fair, the most recent and most sophisticated experimental
and observational studies in this area do fi nd that advertising is eff ec-
tive in moving votes.
2
For instance, one study found that the diff er-
ence in the volume of state-level presidential advertising between the
two major-party candidates predicted vote choice in both 2000 and
2004 (Shaw 2006); an increase of 1,000 gross ratings points from a
candidate was worth about 0.1 percent of the vote. In addition, studies
based on survey evidence (Goldstein and Freedman 2000; Huber and
Arceneaux 2007) have also concluded that advertising does move vot-
ers. Yet even with a renewed focus on such questions, an important
1
As we have asserted elsewhere (Franz, Freedman, Goldstein, and Ridout 2007), such ques-
tions are vitally important for American democracy, but they are of less interest to candi-
dates and campaign decision makers, who share a single, simple objective: winning elec- tions. As such, we label them byproduct eff ects, but we recognize that they are direct
eff ects and worthy of study in their own right.
2
A number of studies have asked about the relationship between ads and voter persuasion,
but many of these studies are fairly limited in that they focus on one contest or use pre- dominately a handful of undergraduates in experimental settings. We discuss these stud- ies in our literature review in this chapter, but we also devote Chapter 3 to a more specifi c
discussion of research design challenges.

The Problem of Persuasion D 23
question remains: under what conditions is advertising most likely to
matter for voting choice?
We argue that the impact of political advertising in a political
campaign is likely contingent and depends on three factors: the cam-
paign context in which ads are aired; the characteristics of the ads;
and the receiver of the ad messages. In the sections that follow, we
review the existing literature on these claims and offer a series of
testable hypotheses that we explore in Chapters 4–6.
Persuasion and the Campaign Environment
One of the central factors that is likely to infl uence the eff ectiveness of
political advertising is the context of the race or the campaign envi-
ronment. The campaign environment, to us, refers to a variety of
things: the offi ce at stake (president, U.S. senator, or county coroner),
the stage of the campaign (months before the election or the week
before Election Day), the status of the candidate (incumbent, chal-
lenger, or candidate in an open-seat race), and the competitiveness of
the race. Th ere are good reasons to expect that all of these factors
related to the campaign environment will moderate the eff ectiveness
of the ad campaign.
For example, during the presidential general election, the vast
majority of voters are aware of the candidates and already have opin-
ions of them, perhaps making it much more diffi cult for advertising to
have a persuasive impact. As of late July 2008, for instance, only
7 percent of respondents in a CBS News poll said they did not know
enough about John McCain to have an opinion of him; the compara-
ble fi gure for Barack Obama was 5 percent.
3
In contrast, U.S. Senate
candidates vary considerably in how well known they are to the elec-
torate (Jacobson 2008), but they are almost always less well known
than general election presidential candidates. Th is may open the door
for advertising to make an impact. As such, our initial expectation for
the types of races we examine is that ads will have a greater impact in
3
Th e data are from a CBS News poll, fi elded July 31–August 5, 2008. Th e sample was com-
posed of 906 adults nationwide. Th e results are available online at http://www.polling
report.com/people.htm (accessed August 8, 2008).

24 Î Chapter 2
Senate general election races than in the presidential general election.
Moreover, given that the voters exit the presidential nomination sea-
son with more knowledge about the presidential candidates than they
had before entering it, we expect advertising to matter more in the
nomination season than during the general election season.
Incumbency status in the race is another important aspect of the
race environment that should infl uence the eff ectiveness of political
advertising at moving votes. Incumbents generally enter a race well
known by the electorate and are almost always better known than
those candidates who are challenging them (Jacobson 2008). Th us,
voters’ images of incumbents are generally quite solid, based on a lot
of information, making it more diffi cult for incumbents to move vot-
ers through their advertising. By contrast, challengers’ advertising
should have a greater opportunity to shape the image of the sponsor-
ing candidate (all else being equal)—and, in consequence, infl uence
support for the challenger.
One study that examines the diff erential eff ectiveness of incum-
bent and challenger advertising in the context of several U.S. Senate
races from 1996, however, fails to fi nd much diff erence in their eff ec-
tiveness (Goldstein and Freedman 2000). Despite fi nding strong
advertising eff ects in Senate races that year, the estimated eff ects of
incumbent and challenger ad exposure in a model predicting voting
choice were opposite in direction but almost identical in magnitude.
Th is suggests that the size of the impact of incumbents’ and challeng-
ers’ advertising is essentially the same. Of course, this fi nding stands
in contrast to our expectation that advertising will be more eff ective
for challengers.
What about open-seat races? We expect that advertising by candi-
dates in open-seat races, which generally feature two less-well-known
candidates because neither is an incumbent, to have a greater impact
than advertising by incumbents. Th e reasoning for this is straightfor-
ward. Open Senate seats represent the best chance for a party to steal
a seat from the other party; thus, candidates in such races almost
always have access to the substantial monetary resources necessary to
buy ads. Th is also creates a lot of interest among the public. Moreover,
candidates in these races, while perhaps fairly prominent in a state,
are generally not as well known as the incumbents who are stepping

The Problem of Persuasion D 25
down. Th us, advertising is likely to make a diff erence given relatively
unknown candidates, an intense advertising campaign, and a high
degree of public interest.
Th e timing of the advertising also deserves some discussion. Here
we have competing expectations. On the one hand, ads aired early
during a campaign should have more potential to infl uence support
for a candidate, given that less is known about the candidates early on.
In general, this follows from what might be considered a truism: early
information is simply more valuable. On the other hand, early ads are
aired at a time in which many voters oft en are not paying close atten-
tion to the race. If early ads are being ignored, then their potential to
move the vote may be minimal. Ultimately, we fi nd more value in the
former expectation. Because campaigns are so oft en concerned with
setting the agenda and getting out in front of competitors, we believe
that the evidence should reveal eff ects at their strongest when ads are
aired earlier in the campaign.
4
Finally, competitiveness is another aspect of the campaign envi-
ronment that may have an infl uence on the impact of advertising. In
general, we believe that the more competitive the race, the more
impact advertising should have. Why? Voters tend to pay more atten-
tion to the campaign in more competitive races, and there is more
advertising in such campaigns. On the other hand, of course, more
competitive races feature more balanced fl ows of messages from com-
peting candidates. Ads from one candidate generally do not vastly
outnumber those from the other in a competitive race. Th us, it is
unlikely that a voter will receive, say, four times as many messages
from one candidate as from his or her opponent. Furthermore, there
are many other sources of information for the voter in an intense cam-
paign and, thus, other potential persuasive messages out there com-
peting for the voter’s attention.
4
As we will discuss in Chapter 3, we build this expectation directly into our measurement
of advertising exposure. When we estimate the volume of survey respondents’ ad expo- sure, we take the natural log of the estimate. Th is implies an expectation on our part that
the fi rst set of ads viewed by a voter will have more impact than the last set of ads. With
the discussion in this chapter, however, we actually mean something simpler: ads on the air earlier in the campaign (spring or summer of the election year) will have more impact
than ads aired in late September or October.

26 Î Chapter 2
Ultimately, this discussion establishes our fi rst major set of expec-
tations, which we term the context hypothesis. On balance, the con-
text hypothesis expects:
◆ Senate general election ads to have a greater eff ect than presi-
dential general election ads
◆ Presidential nomination-race ads to have a greater eff ect than
presidential general election ads
◆ Challengers’ ads to have a greater eff ect than incumbents’ ads
◆ Open-seat ads to have a greater eff ect than ads in races featur-
ing an incumbent
In our last two expectations, we recognize that the alternative hypoth-
eses are also quite compelling.
◆ We predict that early ads will have a greater infl uence than
later ads, though late ads potentially will have more impact
because the election is drawing close and the stakes are
higher.
◆ Ads in competitive races should have a greater impact than
ads in non-competitive races, though such contexts may also
feature competing information that might attenuate advertis-
ing’s eff ect.
Persuasion and Ad Characteristics
Although the campaign environment surely helps moderate the infl u-
ence of political advertising, the characteristics of the ads themselves
are likely to matter, as well. For example, scholars have identifi ed many
possibilities for how advertising tone—and specifi cally, negativity—
might infl uence voting choice. Two are central to such discussions.
Th e fi rst is what we label an intended eff ects model, in which negative
advertising should lower the evaluations of the attacked candidate,
leading to greater support for the sponsor of the ad.
Political consultants are convinced that negative ads work in this
way. Th e Republican strategist Roger Stone suggests, “People like a
fi ght. Put up an ad about the intricacies of the federal budget, and

The Problem of Persuasion D 27
people will turn the channel. Put up an ad like the Swift boat one, that
creates an indelible image in the voter’s mind” (Rutenberg and Zernike
2004). Steve McMahon, a Democratic political strategist, agrees:
“Focus groups will tell you they hate negative ads and love positive
ads. But call them back four days later and the only thing they can
remember are the negative ones” (Rutenberg and Zernike 2004).
Surprisingly, there is very little evidence to demonstrate that nega-
tive advertising consistently has its intended impact. One study that
speaks to the relationship between tone and voting choice is Lau and
Pomper’s (2004) book-length examination of negative campaigning in
Senate elections. Th ey spend two chapters investigating tone’s impact
on votes received. Instead of looking specifi cally at the tone of adver-
tising, however, they examined the tone of the campaign, as measured
by a content analysis of newspapers. Th eir general conclusion was that
negative campaigning can help reduce votes for the attacked candidate,
but typically only for a challenger who is attacking an incumbent.
Fridkin and Kenney (2004) also found intended eff ects in the
1988–1992 U.S. Senate elections, but only with certain types of nega-
tive messages. Only negative messages deemed to be legitimate—those
discussing issues considered relevant to a campaign discussion—
lowered evaluations of the targeted candidate. “Mudslinging” cam-
paigns did not work as intended. Although insightful, their work
focused on the impact of such messages on candidate evaluations;
they did not examine voting choice, although presumably candidate
evaluations and voting choice are linked. A number of experimental
studies, including Pinkleton (1997) and Kaid (1997), also support the
intended eff ects hypothesis.
A second possible eff ect of negative advertising is backlash (Gar-
ramone 1984; Lemert, Wanta, and Lee 1999). Th at is, viewers of nega-
tive advertising might lower their evaluations of the sponsoring can-
didates if they believe the advertising is untruthful or unfair and thus
would be more likely to vote against that candidate. In a sense, then,
viewers would be punishing candidates for going negative. Th ere is
suggestive evidence in the literature that such a backlash is not infre-
quent. More specifi cally, Lau, Sigelman, and Rovner (2007) performed
a meta-analysis of the large literature on campaign tone and persua-
sion. Th ey note that in all of the studies they examined, there were

28 Î Chapter 2
forty reported eff ects on the impact of negativity; backlash eff ects of
varying sizes were noted in thirty-three of them.
5
On balance, then, the risk of a backlash is real, and political con-
sultants and candidates are very sensitive to the possibility. With any
message that attacks the opposition comes the possibility that viewers
will reject instead the messenger. What remains a mystery in these
models linking ad tone and vote choice, however, is the specifi c mech-
anism that connects the two, which is generally not well specifi ed.
One possible mechanism is provided by a cognitive account. In a cog-
nitive account, people presumably learn positive information about
the ad’s sponsor or negative information about the ad’s target and that
leads them to update their evaluations of the candidates. Another
possibility is provided by an aff ect transfer account. In this account,
a promotional ad presumably generates positive feelings toward the
sponsor, and a negative ad generates negative feelings toward the tar-
get. In truth, though, most research examining the link between tone
and voting choice seems to be agnostic about whether the mechanism
is primarily an informational one or an emotionally based one in
which the aff ect in the ad is transferred to the featured candidate.
Recently, however, scholars have begun to move beyond valence
models that rely on a simple positive–negative conception of tone.
One simple modifi cation is to consider also contrast ads (Jamieson,
Waldman, and Sherr 2000), where ads that compare candidates (their
issue positions or their personal characteristics) are treated diff erently
from ads strictly attacking the opposition—perhaps mitigating the
possibility of a backlash. In our own research, we have oft en collapsed
negative and contrast ads into one category (Franz, Freedman, Gold-
5
A third possible eff ect of negative advertising is that it lowers evaluations of both candi-
dates, which is called the double-impairment eff ect (Basil, Schooler, and Reeves 1991; Merritt 1984; Shapiro and Rieger 1992). Here, the ad has its intended eff ect—it lowers
evaluations of the attacked candidate—and it has a backlash. Fridkin and Kenney (2004)
found this double-impairment eff ect for certain types of negative campaigns—those
described as “mudslinging.” Others have described a victim syndrome eff ect in which
viewers feel sorry for attacked candidates and thus increase their evaluations of them. For instance, viewers of Progressive–Conservative party ads in Canada from 1993 evaluated the Liberal Party leader Jean Chrétien more positively aft er seeing ads that highlighted his
facial paralysis (Haddock and Zanna 1993).

The Problem of Persuasion D 29
stein, and Ridout 2007; Ridout and Franz 2008) because the latter ads
by defi nition contain attacks on the opposing candidate. Such an
approach might conceivably be masking real diff erences in the nature
of these ads, however. Brooks and Geer (2007, 3) note this challenge:
“When studying eff ects of campaign tone, we need to incorporate a
more nuanced view of campaign negativity than is typically assumed
by scholars.” Th ey do this in their study of political engagement by
considering the (in)civility of campaign discourse (see also Fridkin
and Kenney 2008; Sigelman and Park 2007).
Another approach focuses on the specifi c, discrete emotions (e.g.,
anger, compassion, pride) elicited by advertising, which allows for a
more nuanced treatment of diff erent ad types. In one conception, this
account is equivalent to the aff ect transfer model mentioned above in
that ads that elicit anger, fear, or anxiety transfer those negative emo-
tions to the targeted candidate, resulting in lower voter evaluations of
that candidate and a lower likelihood of voting for that candidate.
More simply, advertising might potentially scare or anger viewers
into voting for certain candidates. Likewise, emotions such as pride
and enthusiasm are transferred to the ad’s sponsor, leading to higher
voter evaluations of the candidate and a greater likelihood of voting
for that sponsor.
Th ere have, however, been some challenges to the aff ect transfer
explanation (Brader 2006). Th e fi rst objection is that all emotions—
even if they are of the same valence (i.e., all positive or all negative)—
do not necessarily have the same eff ects on political thinking and
behavior. For instance, some research has posited that while anxiety
elicited by a fear appeal leads to avoidance behavior and heightened
vigilance, this is not the case for anger, which is associated with less
thorough cognitive processing (Huddy, Feldman, and Cassese 2007).
On this last point, it may be the case that an angry message induces an
emotional wall that limits its persuasive impact. A second problem
with the aff ect transfer explanation is that, increasingly, empirical
research has failed to support it. For instance, Brader’s (2006) experi-
mental research found that exposure to enthusiasm cues embedded in
political ads reduced aff ect toward the ad’s sponsor instead of making
receivers feel more warmly toward the candidate.

30 Î Chapter 2
Others have off ered alternatives to the aff ect transfer account,
including the theory of aff ective intelligence (Marcus, Neuman, and
MacKuen 2000). Th is theory posits that humans have two aff ective
subsystems: the disposition system and the surveillance system. Th e
emotions of the disposition system (generally thought of as enthusi-
asm) provide citizens with feedback on the activities they pursue. As
humans learn through the repeated guidance of the disposition sys-
tem, they develop habits: “We sustain those habits about which we feel
enthusiastic and we abandon those that cause us despair” (Marcus,
Neuman, and MacKuen 2000, 10). In the realm of politics, one can
think of many situations in which voters rely on habit and predisposi-
tion, such as in casting ballots.
Brader (2006) has translated the ideas of the aff ective intelligence
into expectations about exposure to various types of emotional
appeals in political advertising. For example, if the aff ective intelli-
gence model is correct, appeals to enthusiasm should strengthen sup-
port for the sponsoring candidate among supporters (who use enthu-
siasm cues to reinforce predispositions) but should have no infl uence
on the support of initial opponents (who have no existing predispo-
sition toward the candidate that enthusiasm appeals can reinforce).
In this sense, enthusiasm cues should increase the role of habit and
prior preferences.
We are unable to assert at this point which of these many models
of how the characteristics of ads infl uence vote choice is “correct”
or which one is better than the others. But we do test these compet-
ing models in Chapter 5, pitting the intended eff ects and backlash
eff ects models against each other in two separate characterizations of
political ads: positive–negative-contrast ads and ads featuring fear,
anger, and enthusiasm. In other words, we ask: are negative ads or
ads that appeal to fear and anger most likely to help or hinder the
sponsor?
We also investigate two other hypotheses implicit in this discus-
sion. First, we test a discrete emotions model that expects fear ad
exposure (which should stimulate political action) and anger ad expo-
sure (which is expected to shut down voter processing) to have diff er-
ent eff ects. We also test for the moderating role of initial support in
the eff ectiveness of enthusiasm appeals.

The Problem of Persuasion D 31
Persuasion and Receiver Characteristics
Although the context of the race and the characteristics of the ads
themselves all should infl uence the eff ectiveness of an ad campaign,
one should not overlook how the characteristics of those who receive
the ads play a role. Th ere are two receiver characteristics that we
believe to be the most important moderators of ad eff ectiveness: the
receiver’s level of political awareness and his or her partisanship.
Th e moderating infl uence of political awareness on persuasion is
expressed most clearly and most succinctly in the existing scholarship
through the dosage-resistance model (Iyengar and Simon 2000; Kros-
nick and Brannon 1993). Th e basics of the model are explained as fol-
lows. Every voter is aligned at some point on the political awareness
scale. Awareness is Zaller’s (1992) preferred term for this concept,
although we will use the terms “political information,” “political sophis-
tication,” and “political knowledge” interchangeably, as well. At the low
end are political novices who know little about politics. When asked, for
example, to identify the majority party in Congress or the job that Nico-
las Sarkozy holds, they cannot. Th ey may very well be interested in poli-
tics or care about the larger issues, but in practical terms they have no
pre-existing store of political information. Th is is in contrast to the
political junkies on the high end of the scale who know everything
there is to know about politics and keep tabs on political events in ways
similar to the millions of Americans who track fantasy baseball scores.
Th ese varying levels of political awareness are expected to moder-
ate to a great degree the impact of political information that fl oods
American voters during an election season. Th e model fi rst predicts
that as political awareness rises, the greater the chance voters will
“receive” the message—in other words, the greater the chance they
will understand and take in political events or news. As an example,
imagine a voter watching television who is exposed to a candidate’s ad
about health care. Th e message is “received” if the voter understands
the point of the ad and is able to discuss the points and arguments
raised in the message. Zaller (1992) calls the assumed relationship
between reception and political awareness his “reception axiom.”
However, with rising political awareness comes a decline in the
“yielding” potential of each voter. Yielding in this sense could be

32 Î Chapter 2
understood as the probability that a voter is persuadable. For voters
with no political knowledge, new information might easily sway any
decision making. But for voters with large stores of political infor-
mation, new messages are harder to break through and more easily
argued against.
When we combine “reception” and “yielding,” we can see that
those on the low end of the awareness scale need the information the
most (high yielding potential) but are less likely to understand it (low
reception potential). Th ose on the high end of the scale are more likely
to understand it (high chance of reception) but are less likely to need
it (low yielding potential). Th e model consequently predicts that, in
many situations, those with moderate levels of political information
are most likely to “accept” a political message.
However, whether the peak of infl uence is near the top or the bot-
tom of the sophistication scale will depend on a couple of key factors.
First, it depends on the intensity of the information environment. Th e
more messages that are being sent, the more likely that people with
lower levels of political awareness will receive those messages. Even
those low in political knowledge can receive political information
when the message environment is particularly intense (Zaller 1992,
267). Indeed, there is some evidence that in presidential elections,
low-information voters are the group that is most responsive to
national conditions when deciding for whom to vote (Zaller 2004).
Th us, the peak of infl uence may be toward the low end of the political
awareness scale when the campaign environment is intense and
toward the high end of the political awareness scale when there are
few messages being sent.
Because presidential campaigns certainly qualify as intense cam-
paign environments, we can reasonably expect that advertising for Al
Gore, George Bush, or John Kerry might prove powerful even among
those who are low in political awareness. But will this be the case, as
well, in U.S. Senate races, which vary considerably in intensity, but—
at least, on average—feature less political advertising? We expect the
answer to be yes, and the reason has to do with the nature of political
advertising.
Th e ease with which a political message can be understood is the
other factor that may determine whether maximum infl uence is found

The Problem of Persuasion D 33
among those with lower or higher levels of political awareness. Th is is
especially important when speaking of political advertising. Because
thirty-second spots typically are expertly designed to convey a sim-
ple message and oft en to appeal to emotions, it is likely that low-
information voters will be able to take in, and be aff ected by, political
ads. Th is stands in contrast to political messages that are more diffi -
cult to understand. For example, hour-long discussions on Sunday
morning talk shows; interviews with candidates or reports on 60 Min-
utes or Nightline; exposés in Vanity Fair or Newsweek ; policy state-
ments on candidates’ websites or blogs—these all require a consider-
able investment by the receiver of the message and can oft en be too
complicated for many citizens to take in.
Television ads, by contrast, are designed to convey a simple, evoc-
ative message in short bursts. Even knowing nothing about the issues
or the candidates does not preclude one from reacting to a compelling
message about family, morals, the economy, or national security. In
fact, a common criticism of television ads is that they dumb down
American politics into something akin to selling toothpaste (Green-
fi eld and Bruno 1972). Th us, we expect political advertising to have its
greatest infl uence on low-information citizens, especially when adver-
tising is intense. Th is is because—with an intense ad environment—
novices have a high chance of reception and a high yielding potential.
We term this our knowledge hypothesis.
A few studies have examined the infl uence of political advertising
on people with varying levels of political knowledge. Valentino, Hutch-
ings, and Williams (2004), for example, use an experimental design
and fi nd persuasion eff ects most commonly among low-information
voters, which is in line with our expectations. Some of our earlier work
(Franz, Freedman, Goldstein, and Ridout 2007) reaches the same con-
clusion. We found that political advertising had as much of an impact
on the knowledge and political interest of low-information citizens as
on the knowledge and interest of high-information citizens, suggesting
that even those without much political awareness are able to receive
the messages of television ads.
6
Huber and Arceneaux (2007), however,
6
Th ere is some evidence in this earlier work of ours that political novices are even more
responsive in terms of knowledge and interest. Th ose on the low end of political aware-
ness have more to gain; therefore, these gains tend to be higher in relative terms.

34 Î Chapter 2
use the 2000 Annenberg panel survey to fi nd evidence that the mod-
erately informed are most infl uenced by political advertising.
Some research even concludes that political messages have the
most impact on the most highly aware citizens. Most of these fi ndings,
however, deal not with political advertising but with news messages
more generally. Moreover, most of these studies are concerned with
priming (i.e., the activation of issues that voters use to evaluate candi-
dates), not persuasion (Druckman 2004; Krosnick and Brannon 1993;
Miller and Krosnick 2000). On that score, Krosnick and Brannon
(1993, 972) argue that those high in knowledge “have a greater ability
to interpret, encode, store, and retrieve new information.” We fi nd this
argument, as we have mentioned, most compelling for situations in
which the information environment is low intensity and for news
reports that are more diffi cult to understand, not for political ads.
Th e second characteristic of the receiver that should moderate the
eff ectiveness of political advertising is the individual’s partisanship.
Our partisan hypothesis is rooted less in revising existing theory than
it is testing some basic predictions. Indeed, of the scholarship on the
moderating eff ects of political ads, partisanship is the dominant focus.
We expect that political independents, because they are unlikely to
resist the messages of any candidate as being inconsistent with their
existing beliefs, will be infl uenced by exposure to advertising from
both candidates. In contrast, Democratic advertising will have little
impact on Republicans, but it will increase support for the sponsor
among Democrats. Th e same story applies to Republicans’ adver-
tising, which is likely to have its greatest impact on political indepen-
dents and Republicans. Th us, one overall eff ect of the campaign—
in addition to infl uencing independents—is to bring partisans home,
just as Lazarsfeld, Berelson, and Gaudet (1944) noted more than a
half-century ago.
Th e literature that speaks to this hypothesis has off ered a mixed
assessment of its validity. Chang (2003) reported that it was partisans
who were infl uenced most by ad exposure, not political independents.
Moreover, the series of experiments by Ansolabehere and Iyengar
(1995, 77) supported the claim that nonpartisan voters are “the least
receptive to political advertising.” Instead, they reported that the eff ect
of advertising is mainly reinforcement, moving voters to cast ballots

The Problem of Persuasion D 35
in line with their partisan inclinations. But a diff erent experimental
study (Kaid 1997) found some evidence for the opposite conclusion:
that political independents were more infl uenced by watching a polit-
ical spot than were partisans. Pfau, Holbert, Szabo, and Kaminski
(2002) went further, fi nding diff erences between partisans and unaf-
fi liated subjects depending on ad sponsor and type; candidate contrast
ads appeared to have the strongest eff ect on Republicans, while candi-
dates’ positive ads and interest group ads had the strongest eff ect on
independents.
7
Conclusion
Th is chapter has outlined our expectations for how the impact of
political advertising varies depending on the campaign environment,
the characteristics of the ads themselves, and the characteristics of the
ad receiver. We should be clear here, however, about the nature of our
contribution to the existing research. In off ering predictions about the
moderating infl uence of the campaign environment, for example, we
borrow heavily from others’ research. While there is little scholarship
specifi cally comparing ad eff ects across race contexts, our expecta-
tions come directly from what years of scholarship has taught us about
when campaigns more generally matter. In off ering predictions about
the eff ects of ad characteristics, we have learned a great deal from the
very rich and still growing work on ad tone and the rapidly expanding
work on emotions in campaigns. To that end, it is time to consider the
characteristics of ads in new and unique ways. As to the moderating
eff ect of receiver characteristics, especially as they relate to the dosage-
resistance model, we believe it is important to consider not only the
intensity of the message but also the nature of the message. Some mes-
sages are received by those low in political sophistication because
those messages are repeated time and time again (as in presidential
campaigns), but other messages are received by those low in political
sophistication because the message itself is easy to understand (as
with thirty-second ads in all types of campaigns).
7
Other research examining the impact of campaign events—not political advertising
specifi cally—also concluded that political independents were the most infl uenced (Hilly-
gus and Jackman 2003).

36 Î Chapter 2
One limitation of our study is that it is primarily a study of tele-
vised political ads, not a study of campaign communications more
generally. We will say very little, for example, about the persuasive
appeal of radio ads (of which there is very little scholarly work; see
Geer and Geer 2003), billboard advertisements and lawn signs (of
which we can locate no major studies; however, see Addonizio, Green,
and Glaser 2007), or direct mail and peer-to-peer contacts (see Hilly-
gus and Shields 2009). Th e conclusions that we draw about the per-
suasiveness of political ads, then, do not necessarily generalize to
other forms of campaign communications. In fact, some suggest that
micro-targeted messages conveyed via direct mail might be even more
persuasive than political ads (Hillygus and Shields 2009). Such tar-
geted appeals can be tailored to fi t the issue needs or interests of spe-
cifi c voters and are subject to less scrutiny by the news media. Th e
idea is that the more personal the message, the more potential it has
to persuade. Examining this claim by comparing the relative persua-
siveness of campaign ads with other political messages is certainly a
worthwhile pursuit but is beyond what we can accomplish here.
In short, when we considered writing this book, we sat down and
listed all of the things we knew about when campaign ads should mat-
ter most. We hoped to bring the best available data to bear on these
questions. So while our primary contribution is not theoretical, and
while our focus is limited to television advertisements, the reach of
our data and the reach of our empirical investigations are the particu-
lar strengths of this book. In short, our analysis extends far beyond
the political contexts of the many studies on political ads that precede
ours, and we rely on the very best survey and advertising data. We
digress briefl y in the next chapter to review those data and methods.

3 A Brief Primer on Data
and Research Design
I
N THIS SHORT CHAPTER , we describe the data used in the
analysis for Chapters 4–6. (In Chapter 7, we switch the focus some-
what and leave the discussion of the methodology employed there
to that chapter.) One of the key advantages of our approach in this
book is methodological. Most existing research in the study of ad
eff ects relies on laboratory experiments, which have been critically
important in helping scholars understand the process by which ads
might work (see, e.g., Ansolabehere and Iyengar 1995; Chang 2001;
Kahn and Geer 1994; Meirick 2002; Pinkleton 1997, 1998; Valentino,
Hutchings, and Williams 2004). It is very diffi cult, however, to make
the transition from the laboratory to what happens in the real world
of a campaign. Seeing one or two ads in quick succession just is not
the same as seeing a multiplicity of ads from various sources over the
course of a lengthy political campaign.
To overcome this challenge, we rely on a combination of survey
data and real-world ad-tracking data. We can, therefore, test the eff ects
of exposure to multiple ads in multiple contexts (Senate and presiden-
tial races; competitive and non-competitive elections; open seats and
races with incumbents). We can also look for these relationships at the
individual level, which allows voters in the same media market, state,
or county to have very diff erent levels of advertising exposure.

Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:

Seguidla pues aquí abajo; seguidla en medio de
vuestras tribulaciones y de vuestras incertidumbres;
seguidla, apesar de vuestra incredulidad. Uníos á la
verdad, ella os salvará. Sí, cuando hayais franqueado
la vida, esa figura arrojará su velo, y Cristo, visible en
fin, en todo el esplendor de su divina sonrisa, Cristo os
dirá: “Hijo mio, reconóceme, soy la verdad.”
Salí de la asamblea, á las últimas palabras de este discurso y corrí
á una sala vecina. Recibí en mis brazos á Truth, jadeante, casi
desmayado. Le tomé la mano, estaba abrazadora.
—Desgraciado le dije, os matais!
—Amigo mio, murmuró reposando su cabeza sobre mi hombro,
hagamos nuestro deber; lo demas es vanidad.

CAPITULO XX.
Un luncheon
[38]
de ministros.
El nuevo apóstol fué conducido á su casa por mí, en medio de la
multitud que le felicitaba. Truth, tenia gran necesidad de reposo. Le
incité á echarse un rato en su cama. Pero desgraciadamente tuvo
que pagar su tributo personal permaneciendo de pié. La señora
Truth habia preparado un formidable luncheon para los amigos de su
marido, dignándose darme un puesto entre los invitados.
Jenny y Susana estaban allí, encantadas del sermon que acababan
de oir, sin comprenderlo quizá. Es increible el imperio que la palabra
ejerce en las mujeres. Mas de una vez estando solo en mi cuarto,
me he preguntado á mí mismo, cerrando las puertas con dobles
cerrojos, si la mujer no era naturalmente superior al hombre. Ella
tiene pasiones menos violentas y mayor facilidad de educacion.
Cuando Adan se adormecía en su inocencia, Eva tenia ya curiosidad
de saber. Paréceme que si de entonces acá, nosotros hemos
heredado la bonhomia de nuestro primer padre, las hijas de Eva no
han dejenerado de su abuelo. Yo creo, con Moliére, que es prudente
no instruir á este sexo malicioso é inquieto. Manteniendo á las
mujeres en una honesta ignorancia dámosles todos los vicios; pero á
la vez todas las debilidades de la esclava; nuestro reinado está
asegurado. Pero si educamos esas almas ardientes é injénuas, si las
inflamamos con el amor de la verdad, quien sabe si no se
avergonzarian muy pronto de la necedad y brutalidad de sus amos?
Guardemos el saber para nosotros solos; él es quien nos divinisa:
“Notre empire est détruit si l’homme est reconnu.”
Sentáronse á la mesa, y lo confieso, parecióme una feliz
determinacion. En mi ardor relijioso habia olvidado de almorzar, de

suerte que mi bestia comenzaba á sufrir. La dueña de casa hízome el
honor de sentarme á su izquierda y junto con el té sirvióme dos ó
tres tajadas de jamon de Cincinnati, que me costó gran trabajo
devorar decentemente. Susana hacíame señas con sus grandes ojos,
como reprochándome mi voracidad. En esto reconocí á mi hija; por
que en los Estados-Unidos, lo mismo que en Francia, son los niños
los que en toda casa decente le dan la leccion á su padre.
Asi que mi terrible hambre se hubo aplacado un poco, entablé
conversacion con mi vecina; era esta una excelente y amable
persona que adoraba á su marido, lo cual es costumbre en América.
La salud de Truth me inquietaba; yo tenia para mí que el púlpito le
agotaria mas pronto que el diario, y hé ahí lo que traté de insinuarle
diestramente á su mujer. Por no alarmarla, la dije en términos
jenerales que la palabra era un oficio duro, y que ciertos
temperamentos nerviosos y delicados tenian á veces necesidad de
un reposo absoluto. Tarea inútil! La señora Truth no habló sino de la
grandeza de su nuevo estado. El orgullo la embriagaba.
—Ser esposa de un pastor, hé ahí el sueño de todas las jóvenes,
me decia. Si supiérais que pena tuve cuando mi querido Joel
renunció á su primer vocacion para hacerse diarista! Solo el
ministerio puede colmar todos los votos de una mujer; solo así es
que ella puede ser la compañera de su marido, su verdadera mitad,
en toda la estension de la palabra. Tener las mismas penas, los
mismos placeres, los mismos deberes.
—Predicais acaso vos tambien, la dije.
—En la Iglesia no, repuso; el apóstol Pablo, nos lo prohibe. Pero
qué! es por ventura solo en el templo donde se ejerce el ministerio y
se anuncia la palabra de Dios? Instruir á las niñas, aconsejar á las
jóvenes, visitar las recien paridas, llorar con las viudas, velar los
enfermos, leerles el Evanjelio, y ayudarles á bien morir, si necesario
fuese; hé ahí diversas obras en que puedo ayudar, y algunas veces,
hasta suplir á mi marido. Joel, añadió, alzando la voz, ¿no es verdad
que yo soy vuestro vicario, y que vos teneis confianza en mi?

A este singular discurso, que, cosa estraña, no sorprendió á nadie
sino á mí, Truth contestó haciendo una seña con la mano y
sonriéndose dulcemente. La mujer de un pastor, convertida en
pastor á su vez y en sub-ministro! Semejante absurdidad no habia
nunca crusado mi mente. Verdad es que siempre he vivido en un
pais razonable. El baile y la olla, hé ahí para una francesa los dos
polos de la existencia. Salir de ellos es un desórden, y lo que es
peor, ridículo.
—Sin embargo, continuó la señora Truth, hay todavia algo mas
bello que el ministerio, es la mision.
—Teneis mujeres misioneras? esclamé espantado.
—No, contestó ella; solo los católicos tienen ese privilejio que yo
les envidio. Nosotros no tenemos hermanas de caridad; tenemos
simplemente mujeres de misioneros. Es un papel que siento no
poder desempeñar. Compartir uno las tareas de su marido; participar
de sus peligros, eso es grande á los ojos de Dios. No os asombreis
de mi ambicion; soy hija de ministro; mis dos hermanas se han
casado con misioneros. El uno está en el Cabo, el otro en la China, y
las dos bendicen al Señor que les ha dado una suerte gloriosa.
—Vuestros misioneros casados, contesté yo, no tienen una vida
muy ruda, que digamos. Llevar consigo su mujer, sus hijos, su hogar,
es cambiar apenas de patria. Unid á esto una instalacion cómoda y
fija, acompañada de un buen sueldo, y convenid conmigo en que
bajo tales condiciones, no se necesita una gran virtud para predicar
el Evanjelio.
—Deveras? repuso mi vecina, asombrada de mi ironia, añadiendo
en seguida: Ignoro si vale mas atravesar el mundo, sembrar de paso
la palabra de Cristo, y confiar su jérmen á la gracia de Dios, que
encerrarse en un campo limitado para plantar en él, regar y cultivar
hasta la mies de ese precioso grano; pero lo que yo sé es, que la
felicidad de tener uno á su lado lo que se ama, lejos de quitarle
nada á la caridad del misionero, le añade quizá un mérito mas á su
abnegacion. Pedro era casado; dejó por esto de ser escojido para

servir de príncipe á los apóstoles? En el cabo, mi hermana ha
establecido una escuela y un obraje para las negras jóvenes, y
sirviéndose así de la civilizacion, prepara los corazones á recibir el
Evanjelio; los Boers han quemado tres veces la mision, y mi cuñado
que es médico, como la mayor parte de los misioneros, ha perdido la
mano sacándole á un pobre cafre una flecha envenenada. En China
los Taí Pings han espulsado á mi hermana de provincia en provincia.
Encuéntrase ahora cerca de Shang-Hai, arruinada, enferma; pero
siempre llena de fé. Su casa es el hospicio de los heridos, el asilo de
las viudas y de los huérfanos; ella es la que en medio de la fiebre y
de una inquietud perpétua, ayuda á su marido á predicar el
Evanjelio. Mas probada que Abraham, Dios le ha exijido ya dos veces
la vida de sus hijos. Feliz de ella, no obstante, que ha sido elejida
para tal sacrificio y que ha podido servir al Señor, aun á costa de lo
mas puro de su sangre!
Yo no contesté nada. En la historia de Abraham hay cosas que me
conmueven mas que el episodio de Isaac. Sea virtud ó fanatismo,
esa obediencia es superior á mis fuerzas; no la comprendo.
Para alejar reflexiones que me perturbaban, díme vuelta del lado
de mi vecino de la izquierda; era el verdadero tipo del Sajon; anchos
hombros, pecho saltado, cuello adornado de una cabeza cuadrada,
rasgos abruptos, frente calva y enormes cejas bajo las cuales
brillaban unos ojos flamantes, la fuerza y la voluntad á la vez. Noé
Brown, así se llamaba mi nuevo amigo, era el pastor á quien Truth
sucedia. Aproveché esta ocasion de instruirme, y le pregunté que
era esa iglesia Congregacionalista, cuyo nombre me intrigaba.
—Cómo! dijo Brown; sorprendido de mi ignorancia, no sabeis que
es nuestra vieja iglesia puritana, la que nuestros padres los
peregrinos, espulsados por la intolerancia, trajeran consigo en su
primer buque, la Flor de Mayo? Quebrando con las abominaciones é
idolatrias de la Babilonia anglicana, nuestros abuelos quisieron cortar
de raiz la herejia de la jerarquia. A ejemplo de los primeros
cristianos, de cada reunion de fieles hicieron una Iglesia, ó
congregacion independiente, república perfecta, gobernada por los

viejos y administrada por el pastor. De ese centro de independencia
y de igualdad nació nuestra comunidad. Allí es donde está el secreto
de nuestra vida y de nuestra grandeza política. La América no es
sino una Confederacion de Iglesias y de comunes soberanos; es
decir, la florescencia del puritanismo. Aquí, lo mismo que en todas
partes, la relijion ha hecho al hombre y al ciudadano á su imájen;
una Iglesia libre, ha enjendrado un pueblo libre.
Esta paradoja, proferida con toda la gravedad puritana me chocó.
Si se creyese en estos fanáticos, su catecismo gobernaria el mundo.
Que echen su vista á la Francia, esa patria de las luces y de la
filosofia, y no tardarán mucho en saber á lo que se reduce la
influencia de la relijion sobre el estado y la sociedad. Uno es allí muy
católico en la iglesia, y, todavia mas, fuera de ella. Tal era lo que yo
procuraba demostrarle á mi predicante; pero el hombre era porfiado
como un Sajon forrado en un Yankee, y cuantas mas eran las
pruebas que yo amontonaba para confundirlo, tanto mayor era su
obstinacion.
—Ved sino á los Ingleses, esclamó él. Quien conoce su Iglesia,
conoce su historia. Lores espirituales, asambleas, señoras de la fé,
una carta inmutable en treinta y nueve artículos, un libro de
oraciones establecido por la autoridad de los obispos y del soberano,
universidades y escuelas privilegiadas, enormes propiedades y un
patronato considerable; qué otra cosa han podido producir sino una
sociedad aristocrática? Sin los disidentes, que son la sal de la tierra,
mucho tiempo ha que la Inglaterra estaria momificada lo mismo que
el viejo Ejipto.
—Y los franceses? le pregunté yo, con el intento de confundirlo.
—Los franceses, me respondió él, son católicos, monárquicos y
soldados, al paso que los Americanos son protestantes, republicanos
y ciudadanos; cosas que están en su lugar como los dedos de la
mano, de suerte que tan dificil seria hacer de la Francia una
República, como de los Estados Unidos una monarquia. La diferencia
entre las Iglesias hace la diferencia entre las sociedades.

—Podria saber á cuál de las susodichas sociedades le concedeis la
superioridad?
—Juzgad vos mismo, me contestó él; la una es una sociedad de
niños, la otra una sociedad de hombres.
—Veo con gusto que somos del mismo parecer.
—Estoy encantado de ello, repuso él; bebiendo tranquilamente su
tasa de té.
—Es cierto, añadí yo, inclinándome hácia él: mas bien que un
pueblo los americanos son un enjambre de inmigrantes diseminados
en el desierto, y por esto, la libertad tiene quizá pocos
inconvenientes. Pero la América sentirá á medida que envejezca la
necesidad de formar una verdadera sociedad y se plegará á la
bandera de la autoridad.
—Caballero, dijo él, poniendo bruscamente su taza sobre la mesa,
vos no me entendeis; yo pienso justamente lo contrario de lo que
me decis.
—Cómo así, esclamé yo, tomais por ventura á los franceses por un
pueblo de niños.
—En política, contestóme, no hay que dudarlo. De qué época
datan su libertad, y qué libertad! de 1789; la nuestra data de 1620;
nosotros somos ciento setenta años mayores que ellos; tenemos tres
veces mas esperiencia que ellos, y por consiguiente veinte veces
mas sabiduria.
—Luego, es á la América, repuse yo con voz conmovida, á quien
discernis la palma de la civilizacion?
—Evitemos las confusiones de palabras, contestóme con piedad.
Civilizacion, es una palabra complexa, ¿comprende tantos elementos
diversos, que cada pueblo á su turno podria reclamar la prioridad.
Qué es lo que constituye la civilizacion? La relijion, la política, las
costumbres, la industria, la ciencia, la literatura, el arte? Es alguna
de estas cosas? O son todas ellas juntas?

Ved que complicado es el problema. El arte, por ejemplo, que los
Jentiles llamaban la flor de la civilizacion, no brota muchas veces
sino un bástago podrido, asi, entre nosotros los modernos, que
vivimos de la imitacion de los antiguos, yo creo que el pueblo mas
viejo es el mas artista. En Francia se tiene un gusto mas refinado
que en Inglaterra; pero un Italiano tiene naturalmente mas habilidad
que un Francés. En industria, todas las naciones libres valen lo
mismo. La ciencia no tiene patria. En cuanto á la literatura, cada
pueblo halla en la suya la espresion de su pensamiento; dejo á los
críticos el placer pueril de asignarles sus respectivos puestos á Dant,
Moliére ó Shakspeare; pero la relijion, la política y las costumbres
forman un pabellon inseparable. Ahí está la sávia de un pais, su
porvenir. En este punto yo le doy sin vacilar el primer lugar á mi
Iglesia y á mi pueblo; yo creo en la libertad, soy Americano,
puritano.
—Mohicano, dije yo para mi coleto, te veo venir: tu no sabes ni
siquiera mentir para pasar por político.
Iba á confundir á tan insoportable predicante, cuando por fortuna
suya, nos levantamos de la mesa. Y dejando ahí á ese espíritu
estrecho y adusto, acerquéme á un jóven pastor, cuyo aire agradable
disponía en su favor. Antes de almorzar, Truth habíame presentado al
Sr. Naaman Walford, como una de las columnas de la nueva Sion.
Deseoso de ver ese fénix que se llama un teólogo razonable; y
queriendo ser acojido benévolamente por el Sr. Naaman,—comencé
felicitándole por la exelente adquisicion que su Iglesia hacia con la
persona de mi amigo Truth.
—Perdon, me dijo,—yo soy presbiteriano.
—Presbiteriano, esclamé á mi turno, y venis á complimentar á un
rival? Deveras que vuestra accion revela una bella alma; porque,
entre, nosotros ese ministro á quien le tomais la mano, es un hereje
á quien vos mismo condenais.
—Yo, repuso él muy sorprendido; yo no condeno á nadie,—eso no
es cristiano.

—Me esplico mal, querido Sr. Naaman; queria simplemente decir,
que á ejemplo del divino pastor, que buscaba las ovejas descarriadas
de Israel, vos no temeis el vivir familiarmente con jentes cuyo error
detestais.
—El Sr. Truth, me ha edificado esta mañana, contestóme, y no le
creo en error.
Asombrado á mi vez, y creyendo haber oido mal le dije:
—Decidme, señor, ¿creeis que vuestra Iglesia enseña la verdad?
—Sin duda,—de otra manera no permaneceria en ella.
—Entonces, repuse yo, quiere decir que asi como hay dos
verdades hay tambien dos Iglesias; una verdad presbiteriana y una
verdad congregacionalista. Probablemente hay tambien una verdad
baptista, metodista, luterana y hasta una verdad católica. Yo
suponia, perdonad mi ignorancia, que la verdad era una, y que la
señal del error consistia en dividirse al infinito.
—Doctor, dijo Naaman un poco conmovido de mi vivacidad
francesa, cuando estais en el mar, qué es lo que haceis si quereis
saber la hora que es?
—Le pregunto la hora al sol, y el sol me la dá. Qué! pretendeis
contestarme con un apólogo? A mi edad, querido señor, se tiene
poco gusto por los ejemplos, y, no se aceptan sino razones.
—Que quereis, doctor, soy jóven y me permito contar con vuestra
induljencia, contestó Naaman, sonriendo amablemente. El sol os dá
la hora. Cuando es medio dia en Paris, podriais decirme que hora es
en Berlín?
—No; todo lo que yo sé,—es que un telégrama espedido de Berlín
á las once se recibe en Paris hácia las diez y media; es decir que
aparentemente llega treinta minutos antes de haber partido. Por lo
demas, importa poco, os lo concedo,—que cuando es medio dia en
Paris, sean la una en Berlin, las dos en San Petersburgo, y, si
quereis, las nueve de la mañana en las Azores y las siete en Quebec.
Todo depende del meridiano.

—Asi, dijo Naaman, el sol es el mismo en todas partes y en
ninguna marca la misma hora: qué significa esto?
—Decididamente, repuse yo, vos sois astrólogo, y quereis hacer
de mi un adepto. Os contesto, pues, señor profesor, que es el mismo
sol visto de diferentes puntos.
—Una interpelacion mas, doctor, y os pediré despues gracia por mi
indiscrecion. Entre todas esas horas, cual es la cierta?
—Singular pregunta! la hora es cierta para cada cual, desde que el
sol sale ó parece salir de un punto distinto. Está satisfecho el señor
profesor de su discípulo de barba gris?
—Sí, doctor, veo que estamos conformes asi en teolojia como en
astronomia.
—Señor Naaman, le dije yo,—comienzo á comprenderos. Para vos,
la verdad es el sol, que cada uno de nosotros vé segun el horizonte
que nos rodea. Por consecuencia, cuando para la Iglesia
presbiteriana es medio dia, la hora se ha pasado para los baptistas y
no ha llegado aun para los metodistas. Quién sabe si á los católicos
se les coloca en las antípodas? Y, hé ahí un medio injenioso de
armonizar su orgullo con su caridad.
—Señor, dijo Naaman ruborizándose,—vos me ofendeis. Habeis
comprendido mi pensamiento, y sin embargo desconfiais de mis
sentimientos. Sí, yo creo que hay un horizonte distinto para cada
iglesia, y, me atreveré á decirlo, para cada cristiano. El nacimiento y
la educacion nos dan el punto de partida; ahora, toca á nosotros
mismos caminar hácia esa verdad que nos llama,—acercándonos á
ella sin cesar á fuerza de estudio y de virtud. No digo que no haya
iglesias mas iluminadas las unas que las otras por la luz divina; pero
al mismo tiempo creo que el mejor cristiano puede muy bien
encontrarse en el seno de la iglesia mas oscura. No hay la menor
duda que es una gran ventaja estar colocado cerca del sol, sin
embargo, esto no es siempre una razon para verlo mejor. Hé ahi,
señor, porque amo á mi Iglesia presbiteriana, y por qué, no obstante
amarla tanto,—no condeno á nadie.

Todo esto era dicho con una ingenuidad encantadora. ¡Qué bella
cosa es la virtud en un alma jóven; es como la sonrisa de la aurora
en los primeros dias de Mayo!
—Mi jóven amigo, le dije yo, vuestras ilusiones tienen algo de
seductor; el sentimiento que las hace nacer es respetable, pero el
primer soplo de la razon las disipará. Si cada cristiano vé la verdad á
su modo,—no hay verdad. Y, hénos aquí de nuevo en el escepticismo
de Montaigne. En vano buscareis un dogma que sea atacado,—una
creencia que no se conmueva. Vuestra teoria tan cristiana en
apariencia, nos condena á una duda invencible, y conduce á la
incredulidad universal.
—Doctor, contestóme el jóven con un tono de modestia que me
chocó,—me parece que estais haciendo el proceso al espíritu
humano, es decir, á la obra de Dios. De la diversidad y debilidad de
nuestros ojos, podria tambien concluirse que no vemos nada. Sería
la misma lógica y el mismo sofisma. En los estudios naturales, cada
uno de nosotros no toma sino la parte que puede apropiarse; se ha
observado que esta diversidad de opiniones arruine la ciencia? En la
física, por ejemplo, hay una sola teoria siquiera que escape á la
discusion? Negarias por esto que existe una verdad física?
—La comparacion es mala, mi querido Naaman. Qué queda de la
física de ha treinta años? La verdad de ayer,—es el error de hoy dia.
—No, doctor, el error de ayer ha caido como caen las hojas secas;
la verdad no ha cambiado, por que dándole otro nombre, ella no es
otra cosa sino el conocimiento de la naturaleza, y la naturaleza no
cambia.
—Os concedo eso, jóven; pero la verdad relijiosa es de otro órden
que la verdad natural.
—Doctor, repuso Naaman, aunque os concediese esa hipótesis
discutible, no por eso nos entenderiamos. Cualquiera que sea el
número y la variedad de los cuerpos que poblan el mundo, nosotros
no tenemos para verlos sino nuestros ojos; lo que no vemos no
existe para nosotros. Cualquiera que sea el carácter de una verdad,

nosotros no tenemos sino nuestro espíritu para comprenderla.
Nuestra alma, es por ventura doble? Para descubrir las verdades
naturales, Dios le ha dado á cada uno de nosotros una facultad
investigadora, inquieta, laboriosa que se llama, la razon. Habrá
acaso en nosotros otra potencia, destinada á recibir sin esfuerzo
individual la verdad relijiosa, á la manera del espejo que refleja el
objeto que se le presenta? Si esa facultad no existe, la diversidad de
opiniones relijiosas es forzosa; depende de la edad, de la educacion,
del pais, de la enerjia natural de nuestro espíritu ó de su actividad.
Si, al contrario, esa facultad existe, todos debemos pensar de la
misma manera, así como todos respiramos del mismo modo, por una
ley de la naturaleza. Pero tal no es el caso, y por ello bendigo á Dios.
El le ha dejado á cada uno de nosotros la libertad de desconocerlo,
para darnos el derecho de amarlo. Esa libertad que os espanta es
nuestra mas hermosa herencia; ella es la que hace de la relijion, un
amor, y de la fé una virtud.
—Naaman, esclamé yo, vos sois el profeta de la anarquia. Vos
disipais el mas bello sueño de la humanidad. Una fé, una ley, un rey,
tal era la divisa de la Edad Media, divisa que cada hombre lleva en el
fondo de su corazon. Qué es lo que vos nos ofrecéis en cambio? La
confusion. Qué significa una Iglesia, en la que cada cual habla una
lengua distinta, sin comprender la de su vecino?
—Señor, repuso el jóven ministro, yo amo tanto como vos la
unidad. Cristo nos lo ha dicho: llegará un dia en que no habrá sino
un solo rebaño y un solo pastor; yo creo en la palabra de Cristo.
Pero la unidad no es la uniformidad. Contemplad la naturaleza; qué
conjunto admirable! Y, sin embargo, no hay un árbol, una planta,
una flor, qué digo! una hoja, siquiera que se parezca á otra. Dios
saca de la variedad infinita, la unidad viviente y perfecta. Por qué, la
ley de la naturaleza no ha de ser la de la humanidad? Por qué, no ha
de tener su puesto, la voz de cada criatura, en ese concierto de
alabanzas que la tierra canta al Señor? Qué es la esteril monotonia
de una nota única, al lado de esa armonia fecunda? La unidad mia,
es la Iglesia universal, esa Iglesia que abraza todas las almas fieles.

Quien ama á Cristo es mi hermano: lo que yo miro es su amor, no su
símbolo. Agustin Crisóstomo, Gerson, Melachthon, Jeremias, Taylor,
Bunyan, Fenelon, Law, Channing, hé ahí los soldados de ese ejército
divino. Qué me importa su rejimiento? Su bandera es la mia, la
bandera de la verdad.
—Bravo! Naaman, dijo Truth, apoyando su mano en el hombro del
jóven ministro; convertidme á ese pagano.
—Vos, sereis el pagano, esclamé yo. Pienso que aqui no hay mas
cristiano que yo, ó si os parece mejor, mas católico, en la verdadera
acepcion de la palabra. Al paso que vosotros destrozais la relijion,
abandonándola á todos los caprichos, solo yo, fiel á los viejos y
sólidos principios, quiero un símbolo único que sea la ley de los
espíritus; y para mantener esa ley de verdad llamo en mi socorro el
brazo secular.
—No os lo decia, carísimo Naaman, repuso Truth riéndose. Es un
pagano de la decadencia, uno de esos adoradores de la fuerza que
se imajinan que la verdad se decreta, ni mas ni menos que como se
borronean leyes.
—No soy tan ridículo, contesté yo á mi vez, un poco alterado. Yo
tambien amo la verdad, pero no soy ciego como los utopistas. Para
ellos la libertad es una panacea universal que en todas partes cura el
mal y el error; la esperiencia me ha hecho menos confiado. El
mundo no es una academia de filósofos, discutiendo tranquilamente
las mas temerarias tésis; el pueblo, esa hidra de infinitas cabezas, es
un conjunto de criaturas débiles, ignorantes, locas, perversas,
criminales; para contenerlo y dirijirlo se necesita un freno. Ese freno
es la relijion, sostenida, impuesta por una autoridad exterior. Si el
poder no se encarga de la causa de la Iglesia, se acabó el
cristianismo; la sociedad queda entregada al ateismo, á la anarquia,
á la revolucion. Hé ahí señores, por qué razon creo en la necesidad,
qué digo! en la santidad de la fuerza, puesta al servicio de la verdad.
Soy pues un pagano, á la manera de San Agustin, de Bossuet, y de
tantos otros cristianos exelentes, sin hablar de vuestro Calvino; pido

que la sociedad le empreste su espada á la Iglesia; ó en otros
términos,que el Estado tenga una relijion.
—Una relijion de Estado, dijo de repente Brown, estirando su
cabeza de perro dogo; quién es ese mónstruo? Y qué! por ventura
tiene alma el Estado para tener una relijion?
—Señor, le contesté secamente, vos teneis sin duda necesidad de
un Estado impío, y de leyes ateas.
—Señor, repuso mi áspero interlocutor, yo no me pago de
palabras. Qué es el Estado? En una monarquía, el príncipe. Así,
pues, treinta millones de cristianos tendrán la relijion de Achab,
cuando por casualidad Achab llegue á tener relijion. Entre nosotros,
donde el poder alterna, se cambiará de fé cada cuatro años. Hé ahí
lo que yo llamo, ateismo puro; creer por órden, es no creer en nada.
—Cuando yo hablo de Estado, le interrumpí, entiendo la sociedad
política.
—Bien, repuso él: será la mayoria la que decida del símbolo y de
la fé, despues de discutir y enmendar. Tendremos una relijion
parlamentaria. Se pondrá en discusion la Encarnacion ó la Trinidad y
se votará. Qué comedia! Cosa estraña! desde que el mundo existe,
no hay una sola verdad natural que haya sido descubierta por un
solo hombre; son necesarias muchas pruebas, á veces, hasta el
martirio del inventor para que esa verdad reuna algunos fieles; un
siglo no es mucho para conquistarle la mayoria. Pero en relijion es
otra cosa, la mayoria no se equivoca nunca. Vaya una infalibilidad!
Que nos devuelvan el papa, acepto el milagro, y rechazo el absurdo.
—Señor Brown, le dije, alzando la voz, vos no respondeis á mi
objecion. Si el Estado no tiene relijion,—la ley será atea.
—Siempre palabras, señor, repuso el intratable predicante. El
Estado es una abstraccion; un modo de designar el conjunto de los
poderes públicos. Pero la sociedad es una cosa viva,—es la reunion
de todos los ciudadanos que habitan una misma patria. Y, si esos
hombres son cristianos,—si su moral es cristiana,—como ha de ser
atea la sancion que esos hombres le den á la moral pública,—ó en

otros términos, la ley dictada por ellos? El buen árbol no puede
producir malos frutos
[39]
.
—Imprudente! esclamé,—cómo podeis imajinaros que si el Estado
permite toda especie de creencias, no ha de sufrir el Evanjelio?
—Vos teneis poca fé, señor, dijo Brown dirijiéndome una mirada
terrible, y olvidais que Pablo ha dicho: las armas de nuestra milicia
no son carnales. El cristianismo,—nunca ha sido mas bello, ni mas
fuerte que cuando ha tenido en contra suya al mundo entero. Mirad
á vuestra alrededor, señor, y vereis que en ninguna parte como los
Estados Unidos se mezcla la relijion con la vida; y sin embargo el
Estado no la conoce. No aprisioneis las almas, no las tengais en la
noche que las corrompe; dejadlas en libertad, é iran á Dios.
—Pero, señor Brown, es imposible que el Estado pague todas las
comuniones, y que se haga el tesorero del primer fanático á quien
se le antoje abrir una iglesia.
—Concedo que no pague á nadie, esclamó el adusto puritano. Y,
con qué derecho intervendria? Tiene acaso otro dinero que el
nuestro. Cómo! el judio ha de pagarles á los cristianos para que
estos le llamen deicida? Y yo he de pagarles á los unitarios que me
disputan la divinidad de Cristo? Qué injusticia! qué ultraje á mi fé!
Ved ademas qué papel le dais al Estado. Cuando el lejislador declara
que la relijion no es de su competencia,—proclama el respeto de la
conciencia, y, es cristiano por su misma abstencion. Suponed ahora
que proteja diez comuniones distintas, diez creencias enemigas, qué
significará esa tutela insolente sino que el Estado vé en la relijion un
instrumento político, y que no tiene por todas ellas sino la misma
indiferencia y el mismo desprecio? Ese hermoso sistema, señor, que
vos no habeis inventado,—es la política del paganismo.
—Muy bien, repuse yo, dejad á cada fiel el entretenimiento de su
culto, veremos cuantas iglesias tendreis. Todo el mundo se hará ateo
por economia.
—Os equivocais, mi querido doctor, dijo Truth con amistoso tono.
La prueba está hecha y arguye en contra vuestra. Tenemos cuarenta

y ocho mil iglesias, edificadas todas por los particulares, y cuyo valor
se estima en cien millones de pesos
[40]
. Cada año erijimos mil
doscientos templos nuevos y el término medio del salario de
nuestros pastores es próximamente de quinientos pesos,
[41]
—lo que
equivale á un presupuesto de veinte y ocho millones de pesos
[42]
.
Buscad un pais donde el Estado pague los cultos, estoy seguro que
no hallareis uno solo que gaste la mitad de lo que nosotros
gastamos
[43]
. La razon es sencilla: el Estado debe ser avaro del
dinero que le toma á la comunidad, al paso que el individuo se
complace en enriquecer su iglesia, y no retrocede ante ningun
sacrificio. Nada hay tan pródigo como la fé y la libertad.
—Muy bien, dije yo; pero la cuestion de dinero no es todo: falta la
cuestion política. Darle al primero que se presente el derecho de
establecer una iglesia,—es reconocer todas las asociaciones, es
abrirle ancha arena á la ambicion relijiosa y al fanatismo,—es decir, á
lo mas ardiente y pérfido que hay en el mundo. Suponed que una de
esas iglesias aventaja á las demas,—que se apodera de las almas, y
hé aquí un Estado en el Estado. Entonces sentireis, aun que
demasiado tarde,—la falta en que habeis incurrido al abdicar una
proteccion mas necesaria al gobierno que á la iglesia, una proteccion
que no es en el fondo sino la defensa de la soberania.
—Ahí es donde os esperaba! gritó el puritano entrando en el
entrevero á la manera de un jabalí. Os conozco, señores políticos; ha
tiempo que Spinosa, el príncipe de los ateos y Hobbes el
materialista, y Hume el escéptico me descubrieron vuestro secreto.
Necesitais una iglesia oficial para deshaceros de la relijion. No es la
influencia política lo que os incomoda; ella es nula en un pais de
libertad; lo que temeis es la influencia moral. El cristianismo es por
naturaleza,—inquieto, agresivo, conquistador. Quiere poseer al
hombre por entero; sociedad y gobierno,—todo quiere invadirlo y
penetrarlo con su espíritu. Hé ahí lo que á nosotros nos anima y á
vosotros os espanta. Obispos que se duermen en su púrpura
señorial,—pobres vicarios, cuyo celo se modera y se dirije; una
relijion, especie de moral frívola y estéril, que predica la obediencia

al pueblo, hablándole siempre de sus deberes y nunca de sus
derechos,—tal es el ideal que á vosotros os encanta y á nosotros nos
horroriza. Vosotros rechazais la libertad por la misma razon que á
nosotros nos hace detestarla. Nosotros creemos en el Evangelio, y
vosotros le temeis.
—Yo tengo miedo de las asociaciones, le dije,—no del Evanjelio.
—Sí, por que la asociacion es la única forma posible de la libertad.
Necesitais un Estado, cuya omnipotencia nada inquiete,—que no
tenga frente de sí sino individuos aislados y conciencias mudas. El
despotismo romano en toda su fealdad. Nosotros los cristianos—
entre el Estado y el individuo, entre la fuerza y el egoismo,—
echamos la asociacion, es decir, el amor, la caridad, verdadero
vínculo de los corazones, verdadero cimiento de las sociedades. Para
difundir la Biblia, para propagar la palabra divina, para iluminar las
almas, para socorrer á los miserables, para consolar á los que
sufren, para levantar á los caidos,—necesitamos centenares de
asociaciones, millares de reuniones. Nosotros queremos que un
pueblo cristiano haga el bien por el concurso libre de todos sus
miembros,—que no encargue á nadie de un deber que solo él puede
desempeñar. Pero todas esas compañias no pueden existir sino bajo
una condicion,—que la iglesia, que es la primera y la mas
considerable de todas, sea señora absoluta en su esfera. La iglesia
es, la que con su libertad cubre y garantiza todas las asociaciones; y,
hé ahí como es que la relijion, lejos de ser un peligro para el Estado,
—es la vida misma de la sociedad. Ved, pues, señor, por qué razon
es que nosotros tenemos necesidad de la libertad relijiosa; la
necesitamos por que Cristo nos la ha dado: y porque ella es la
madre de todas las libertades. El que esto no sabe no es cristiano,—
ni ciudadano.
Iba á estrangular á aquel fanático por toda contestacion, cuando
sentí que una manecita tomó la mia. Reconocí á Susana y me sonreí.
—Mi buen padre, dijo despacito; van á ser las dos, es necesario
partir.

—Sí,—la hora de ir al bosque. ¿Está el carruaje ahí?
—Papá, es dia del Señor y no se anda en carruaje. Voy á llevaros
á la escuela del Domingo.
—Tienes razon, pensé para mi. Un Parisiense estraviado en este
hermoso pais de libertad, siente gran necesidad de ir á la escuela.
Siempre tiene algo que aprender y mucho que olvidar.
Cuando me ví en la calle, lejos de aquella atmósfera teolójica,
recien respiré.
Uf! dije, bostesando, y que pesados son! Parecen bueyes atados al
arado, trillando siempre el mismo surco. Una hora de relijion y de
política, es demasiado para un francés; hay con que disgustarlo del
Evanjelio y de la libertad. Quién me hablará de algo razonable y
divertido,—de pintura, de ópera, de música ó de guerra? Paris, Paris,
—yo tengo necesidad de lavarme la cara con tu ambrosía.
No sé que locura iba á decirle á Susana, cuando apercibí al
hermoso Naaman, caminando junto á nosotros lo mismo que el
pastor que sigue su oveja. Habia olvidado que estaba en América, y
que la señorita mi hija era por el momento presbiteriana.

CAPITULO XXI.
La escuela del Domingo.
Quién me dirá de donde proviene la debilidad de un padre por su
hija? Consiste en la ilusion de verse reproducido en ella,—lo mismo
que la madre de verse reproducida en el hijo? Para nosotros los de
las barbas grises, los de las caras arrugadas por la vida, será el
placer de vernos renacer bajo una forma graciosa y riente? Será el
encanto de un amor puro, que no desea sino sacrificarse? Lo ignoro,
pero lo cierto es que el inevitable Alfredo no estaba ahí y que yo
saboreaba á la manera de un celoso la dicha de hablar y de reir con
Susana. Mirábame en sus límpidos ojos, cuando una mano colorada
engastada en un largo brazo me cojió de improviso en mi tránsito, y
una voz sepulcral me gritó: Esta noche te volverán á pedir tu alma.
Al mismo tiempo metiéronme un papel en el bolsillo de mi frac. Dí
vuelta, y al hacerlo, otra voz me gritó: Piensa en tu salud,
metiéndome otro papel, en el otro bolsillo de mi frac. A este ruido
acudieron tres hombres negros, levantando los brazos como en el
juramento de los Horacios, y aullando á cual mas, metióme cada uno
de ellos en el seno no una espada, sino un librito. La vision
desapareció en seguida.
—Qué es esto le pregunté á Susana, que reia de mi espanto.
—Padre mio, me dijo,—es la sociedad de los tratados relijiosos que
trabaja por vuestra conversion.
—Muchas gracias! esclamé metiendo en mi bolsillo,—los Signos de
la bestia, las Rosas de Saron, y la Trompeta de Jericó; aquí lo
enriquecen á uno, lo mismo que en otra parte lo roban. Qué quieren
que haga con estos tesoros de edificacion?
—Tened paciencia, padre mio, dijo Susana,—dentro de un instante
ellos han de servirnos para hacer felices á algunos.

—Confesad, le dije á Naaman, que abusais de la letra de molde.
Comprendo que distribuyais la Biblia,—desde que ella es vuestra
enseña, pero lo que no entiendo es,—para qué puede servir esa
teolojía pueril que sembrais por las calles.
—Sois demasiado severo, contestó el jóven ministro, pensad en
que toda nuestra relijion está en la Biblia. De la escritura es, de
donde cada uno de nosotros debe sacar la regla de su fé, mediante
el libre esfuerzo de la razon. Un protestante que no lee es un
cristiano que no llena sus prácticas. Qué cosa mas simple que un
proselitismo que nos agrupa sin cesar al rededor de la Biblia?
Despertar la conciencia, obligar al último de los hombres á
refleccionar y á leer,—repetirle que solo él está encargado de su
salud, hé ahí el objeto de todas esas publicaciones. “Piensa en tu
alma, solo tú eres responsable de ella,”—tal es la conclusion
uniforme de estos libritos. Si á eso llamais teolojía,—toda nuestra
literatura es teolójica; la menor novela está impregnada del mismo
espíritu. La Biblia es citada en ella á cada pájina, lo mismo que el té.
Lo que nos encanta, no es la pintura de esas borrascas que devastan
el corazon y arruinan la voluntad: es el cuadro de una alma jóven
que, colocada entre la tentacion y el deber, rechaza á Satanás y
llama á Dios. Hasta nuestras ficciones son tratados de educacion.
—Sí, dije yo sonriendo,—es la moral en accion.
—Es algo mejor que eso,—repuso él,—es la relijion en práctica, la
fé que habiendo entrado en el alma inspira toda la vida. Nosotros no
entendemos jota de esa falsa distincion entre la moral y la relijion;
no hay dos conciencias. El hombre natural murió con el último
pagano; nosotros no conocemos sino al cristiano. El que es cristiano
lo es en todas partes: en la iglesia, en la familia, en el comun, en el
Estado.
Me parece que el piadoso Naaman aprovechaba con placer esta
ocasion de repetir como nuevo algun viejo sermon, cuando por
fortuna, llegamos al templo presbiteriano. Era la sesta iglesia que
visitaba en el dia,—justísima espiacion de mi pasada tibieza!

Entramos en la sala de lectura,—vasta pieza contigua al templo.
Un millar de niños y de jóvenes, devididos en grupos estaba
sentado, en bancos circulares. De distancia en distancia veíase de
pié á los pastores y pastoras de aquel gracioso rebaño; ó como se
les llama,—á los monitores. Al presentarse Naaman toda la asamblea
se levantó; el órgano tocó una marcha guerrera, y en seguida, todas
aquellas jóvenes voces cantaron en coro, con acompañamiento de
timbales:
“O Christ! nous sommes ta milice;
Contre l’ignorance et le vice.
Nous marchons sans honte et sans peur.
L’amour, l’aumône et la prière,
Ce sont là nos armes de guerre:
Notre drapeau, c’est le Seigneur!
O Christ! notre chef! notre père!
Nous voulons vaincre la misère,
Et chasser l’infidélité;
Ne regarde point à notre âge,
Donne-nous sagesse et courage:
Nous défendrons ta vérité”
[44]
.
Qué será? será que hay un encanto secreto en la voz de la
infancia? O será que desprendiéndonos de nosotros mismos, por
decirlo así, los años nos hacen mas tiernos para esas almas, que
entran en la vida sin conocer los peligros. No lo sé. Pero yo me sentí
conmovido por el canto de esos pequeños soldados tan
valerosamente enrolados bajo el lábaro del Evanjelio.
—De aquí veinte años, pensé, cuantos quedarán en sus filas? No
importa; el espectáculo de una juventud que tiene valor y fé es
siempre hermoso. Guárdenos Dios de esos viejos de diez y ocho
años que solo creen en su egoismo,—almas gangrenadas que todo
cuanto tocan infestan, y que solo dejan en pos de ellos corrupcion y
muerte.

Susana estaba cerca de mi y de pié. La señorita era monitora.
Tenia mucho que hacer, porque habia doble auditorio y la escuela
estaba en revolucion.
—Donde está Dinah? esclamó una voz revoltosa. Dinah es mi
querida preceptora; yo no te conozco á tí.
Susana cojió en sus brazos á la rebelde, que se resistia á ello
llorando, y la dijo dos palabras al oido. La sonrisa volvió en el acto,
como el sol despues de la lluvia.
—Me lo prometes? murmuró la chiquilla.
—Mañana, repuso Susana. La niña echó los brazos al cuello de su
nueva maestra, y la besó en ambas mejillas. La paz estaba hecha, la
leccion comenzó.
Rolaba sobre la historia de Israel en tiempo de los reyes. Por
primera vez, lo confieso con verguenza, hice conocimiento íntimo
con el profeta Eliseo. Era este un excelente hombre cuando no se
encolerizaba. Pero apesar de lo bello de la moral, no le perdono
mucho que digamos el haber hecho que unos osos se comieran á
cuarenta niños que se burlaban de su calva. A este precio yo no
querria ser profeta, ni en mi pais.
Dos episodios surtieron el éxito mas completo cerca de los niños;
tal es de vivo en estas almas jóvenes el sentimiento del bien y el
mal! Primero fué la historia de Naaman, jeneral del rey de Siria,
implorando gracia de Eliseo para ser librado de la lepra. Naaman se
retiró curado y convertido; pero convertido con sus reservas
políticas, que prueban una vez mas que no hay nada nuevo bajo el
sol.
Al fin, dijo Naaman: Sea como tú quieres: Pero te suplico que me
permitas á mí, siervo tuyo, el llevarme la porcion de tierra que
cargan dos mulos; porque ya no sacrificará tu siervo de aqui
adelante holocaustos ni víctimas á dioses ajenos, sino solo al señor.
Mas una cosa hay solamente por la que has de rogar al Señor á
favor de tu siervo, y es que cuando entrare mi amo en el templo de

Remmon para adorarle, apoyándose sobre mi mano, si yo me inclino
en el templo de Remmon, para sostenerle al tiempo de hacer él su
adoracion en el mismo lugar, el Señor me perdone á mi, siervo tuyo,
este ademan.
Respondióle Eliseo: Véte en paz!....
[45]
.
La tolerancia del profeta, escandalizó á los niños, no puedo
ocultarlo. Naaman fué silbado unanimemente, lo mismo que un
cobarde que transije entre su conciencia y su interés. Dia vendrá en
que Remmon, Mamon ó Baal os presentarán una mano llena de
dinero ú honores, á condicion de que le adoreis; feliz aquel que no
se incline ante el ídolo, guardando solo para Dios el sacrificio de su
corazon.
En seguida, vino la historia de Giezi, el servidor de Eliseo, hábil
hombre, que se hacia pagar los milagros de su amo, traficando así
con la virtud ajena. Qué furor en el jóven auditorio! y qué gozo
cuando Susana, engrosando la voz para parecerse al profeta,
pronunciaba el terrible anatema:
“Habeis recibido oro y vestidos, para comprar plantas de olivo,
viñas, bueyes, ovejas, criados y criadas.
“Pero tambien la lepra de Naaman se adherirá á vosotros, y á toda
vuestra raza por siempre jamás.
“Y Giezi se retiró, todo cubierto de una lepra blanca como la
nieve:”
[46]
.
Todavia existe, esa honrada posteridad de Giezi, aunque un poco
cambiada por el tiempo. Por fuera háse conservado blanca como la
nieve; pero la lepra ha entrado en su alma; no es ya el cuerpo lo
que roe.
Esta educacion dada á la infancia por la juventud me encantó, y
cumplimentando por ello al ministro, añadí:
—Pero, pienso que vosotros os reservais el catecismo. La doctrina
corria riesgo de alterarse al pasar por aquellos lábios novicios.

—No, me dijo; tanto para la doctrina como para lo demas,
nosotros nos remitimos al monitor, bajo nuestra vijilancia, bien
entendido. Nadie es hereje á los diez y ocho años, y si algo hay que
temer; es mas bien demasiado apego á la letra.
—Si, pero si esas jóvenes cabezas trabajan?
—Eh bien! dijo el pastor,—ahí estamos nosotros para abrirles el
camino. Nuestra divisa es la de Pablo: Allí donde está el espíritu del
Señor, allí tambien está la libertad.
No nos place á nosotros la fé del carbonero,—esa ignorancia
crédula que lo mismo santificaria á un cristiano, que á un
mahometano ó á un budhista. La juventud tiene una crísis del
espíritu, lo mismo que una crísis del cuerpo. Llega para ella una hora
en que es necesario luchar con la verdad, como Jacob con el ángel,
y aquel solo se convence que ha sido convencido por el Evanjelio.
Nosotros queremos una fé razonada.
—Y razonadora, añadí yo, porque cada uno de estos monitores
debe salir de aquí con el gusto y la manía de predicar.
—Tanto mejor, dijo Naaman,—para nosotros, todo hombre es
sacerdote, y toda mujer sacerdotiza. Por qué ha de haber menos
ardor en la sociedad relijiosa, que en la sociedad política? El título de
Cristiano es acaso menos bello que el de ciudadano é impone menos
deberes que éste?
Yo no contesté nada: eso de considerar á la relijion, lo mismo que
un patrimonio comun de los fieles contrariaba todas mis ideas. Me
habian enseñado que la Iglesia era una monarquia,—no una
república. A fuer de hombre prudente, yo he dejado siempre el
cuidado de mi conciencia á la Iglesia que me ha educado. No es á
mí,—sino á mi director á quien compete el cuidado de mi salud. Por
qué, pues, me he de tomar una fatiga inútil,—encargándome de una
peligrosa responsabilidad?
La leccion iba á concluir; Susana me desembarazó de todos mis
libritos con gran alegria de los niños; cantóse un hermoso cántico de
despedida; y la fiesta terminó con una distribucion universal de

regalos y apretones de mano. Rango, fortuna, edad, traje,—todo
estaba confundido hacía dos horas; sentíase uno vuelto á los
primeros tiempos del cristianismo, en que la multitud de los
creyentes no tenia sino un corazon y una alma. Y decir que cada
siete dias en el dia del Señor, toda la juventud americana viene á
estas reuniones fraternales á dar y recibir una leccion de amor y de
igualdad! Oh! como efecto moral ninguna enseñanza,—la del mismo
Bossuet,—valdria esta educacion mútua!
Salimos; Alfredo estaba ahí para arrebatarme el brazo de Susana,
cuya felicidad yo no envidiaba; mis ideas comenzaban á tomar otro
jiro: mi corazon sentia, mas que nunca, toda su paternal debilidad.
Tiempo es ya, decia para mis adentros, de que Susana comience á
ejercer; como ama de casa, sus grandes cualidades de monitora.
Figurábaseme ya ver en el porvenir un ejército de nietos mas
relijiosos, mas enérjicos y felices que su abuelo. Y, embebido en
estas ideas y mirando á mis enamorados que caminaban delante de
mí, llegué á mi casa.
El resto del dia, lo pasamos hablando de todo lo que habiamos
visto ú oído en la mañana, y Dios sabe cuantas cosas se ven y se
oyen el Domingo en América! Qué son nuestros espectáculos al lado
de estas fiestas del corazon y del espíritu? En mi vida habia pasado
dias mas sérios,—nunca, jamás el tiempo habíame parecido tan
corto, ni mejor empleado.
Como de costumbre, la noche terminó con la lectura de la Biblia.
Marta trajo el librote negro, que ya era para mí un amigo. No habia
dia que yo no hallára en él una respuesta á alguna pregunta secreta
de mi alma,—estraña casualidad que confundia mi filosofía.
Habiamos quedado en el séptimo capítulo de Daniel. La vision de
las cuatro bestias apocalípticas que representan las cuatro grandes
monarquias de la antiguedad no me hizo el menor efecto; tengo
muy poca imajinacion para gozar con semejantes sueños
gigantescos. No le sucedia á Marta lo mismo, que á cada paso
suspiraba. El Cuerno, que tenia ojos como ojos de hombre y una
boca que proferia palabras insolentes, arrancó un grito de

admiracion; estaba toda conmovida cuando el profeta pintó al
Anciano de los dias, con su ropaje mas blanco que la nieve y sus
cabellos mas blancos que la lana, sentado en un trono de llamas y
servido por un millon de ánjeles, al paso que mil millones
permanecen en silencio ante él. Lo que para mí no era sino una
alegoria, para ella era la verdad,—es la única manera quizá, que la
idea divina tiene de entrar en un espíritu injénuo,—que para sentir el
infinito tiene necesidad de imájenes.
Despues de estas grandes pinturas vinieron los versículos en que
el profeta anunció el Mesias.
13 “Yo estaba pues observando durante la vision nocturna, y hé
aquí que venia entre las nubes del cielo un personaje que parecía el
Hijo del hombre; quien se adelantó hácia el anciano de muchos dias,
y le presentaron ante él.”
14 “Y dióle este la potestad, el honor y el reino; y todos los
pueblos, tribus y lenguas le sirvieron á él: la potestad suya es
potestad eterna que no le será quitada y su reino es indestructible.”
Escuchando este pasaje, me sentí como Daniel: “Quedé muy
conturbado con estos mis pensamientos, y mudóse el color de mi
rostro: conservé empero en mi corazon esta vision admirable.”
[47]
Y como nó, acababa de asistir esa mañana misma al espectáculo
de ese trono cuyo reinado dura hace diez y nueve siglos! El
cristianismo, cuyos funerales se anuncian en la vieja Europa,
presentábaseme en América,—mas jóven, mas fuerte, mas
triunfante que nunca. Treinta millones de hombres que viven del
Evanjelio, qué enigma para un Parisiense que ha leido á Diderot, y
que, en una noche de invierno, se ha imajinado que comprendia á
Hégel!
Así que entré en mi cuarto comencé á pasearme, ajitado durante
largo rato por una multitud de pensamientos que se rechazaban
unos á otros. Recuerdos de infancia, estudios de la juventud,
reflexiones de la edad madura, ideas nuevas, todo esto, daba vuelta

en mi cabeza y hacia en ella el caos. Parecíame que una voz
misteriosa fisgaba á mi alrededor.
Bravo, Daniel, murmuraba aquella irónica voz, conque te haces
capuchino. Héte místico, fanático y ademas de esto ridículo. Antes
de poco tambien vas á ganguear lo mismo que maese Brown, y á
hablar mejor que él el dialecto de Canaan. O Franceses, eternos
camaleones! Chinos en Canton, Beduinos en Arjel, puritanos en
Massachusetts, cómicos en todas partes ¿cuándo sereis hombres?
Cuando vuelvas á Paris, Daniel, dejarás en la barrera ese cant
insípido, y ese librote negro que las jentes de buen gusto respetan,
sin tocarlo jamás. Un filósofo le saca políticamente el sombrero al
cristianismo,—es menester no ponerse mal con nadie; ir mas allá es
la debilidad de los espíritus estrechos. El dios del siglo diez y nueve,
es el viejo Pan, eclipsado demasiado tiempo por la dolorosa figura
de Cristo. Sumérjete en el infinito, Daniel; adora á tu padre el
abismo; es el culto á la moda,—el único que puede confesar la
infalible razon de nuestros dias.
—No, esclamé, mis ojos se han abierto; he sacudido el penoso
sueño en que nuestra alma se enerva. Esos niños me han enseñado
esta mañana el vínculo sagrado que une estrechamente á la libertad
con el Evanjelio. Si para nosotros todo acaba con el cuerpo,—no
tenemos ni derechos ni deberes; somos un rebaño malhechor, que
es necesario apacentar y castigar hasta que la muerte lo mande á
podrirse en la fosa eterna. Solo es persona aquel á quien la
inmortalidad pone en comunion con Dios. Solo es hombre y
ciudadano aquel que puede adherirse á una justicia viviente,—á una
verdad que no muere. El pobre, el enfermo, el esclavo, el
desgraciado, el criminal, no se hicieron sagrados sino el dia en que
Cristo los rescató con su sangre y los cubrió con su divinidad. Adios
Hégel, Spinosa! Adios las palabras puestas en lugar de las cosas!
Adios la materia divinizada! Yo he visto á donde conducen á los
pueblos y á los hombres tales doctrinas, y no quiero, ni los bajos
goces de la multitud, ni la estóica resignacion de los espíritus
magníficos. Yo necesito otra cosa que embriaguez ó desesperacion:
necesito vivir! Vivir es creer y obrar. Perdidas las ilusiones de la

juventud y las ambiciones de la edad madura,—mi razon es quien te
llama ¡Oh Cristo! y la esperiencia la que me arroja de nuevo á tus
piés. Devuélveme la esperanza despues de tantas decepciones;
devuélveme el amor despues de tantas traiciones, y que luzca
cuanto antes el dia felíz en que la vieja Europa imitando á la jóven
América, pronuncie un grito que se eleve de la tierra al cielo, un
grito salvador: Dáçs ó la lábÉêíad!

CAPITULO XXII.
Disgustos de un funcionario Americano.
Levantarse con el alba, teniendo el cuerpo y el espíritu bien
dispuesto, envolverse en una gran bata, amacarse en un rocking
chair
[48]
, y mientras se fuma una pipa de marilandia, darse, como
dicen los Alemanes una fiesta de pensamientos, hé ahí un verdadera
placer....cuando no se tienen treinta años, despues de un dia bien
empleado y de una noche tranquila.
Sentado en la ventana, entreteníame en ver á la ciudad salir de su
sueño. Lecheros, carboneros, carniceros, y especieros corrian por las
calles, y bajando al piso subterráneo por la escalera exterior hacian
el servicio de cada casa sin incomodar á sus habitantes. Habríase
dicho que todo estaba calculado para que nada turbára el santuario
en que reposaba el dueño de casa. La morada de un francés es un
cuarto de posada: en él entra quien quiere; el home de un sajon es
una fortaleza, defendida con cuidadoso celo contra los importunos y
los curiosos. Es un hogar, en el sentido sagrado y misterioso de esta
vieja palabra, importada de Oriente.
Mientras admiraba la calzada, barrida y regada ya por mis
cantoneros, un cabriolé tirado por un lijero caballo, llegó cerca de mí
metiendo gran ruido. Me han gustado siempre los caballos, y asi
seguia con los ojos, el aire altivo del troton americano, cuando
derrepente el animal se aplastó. Del fondo del cabriolé, y como
lanzado á todo vapor, salió un enorme sombrero, pasando como una
flecha por sobre las orejas del corcel y en pos de él un hombrecito,
envuelto en una larga levita. Era el amigo Seth, perseguido sin duda
por los manes del perro que habia hecho asesinar.
—Marta, esclamé, sacando la cabeza por la ventana. Marta, agua,
vinagre; corred, yo bajo.

Cuando llegué á la calle, el hombre ya se habia levantado y
sacudido; pasóse las manos á lo largo del cuerpo, para asegurarse
que no tenia nada roto, echóse al estomago un vaso de agua, y
púsose á descinchar y acomodar el caballo, sin decir palabra. Marta
estaba cerca de él, temblando como una azogada.
—Entrad, en mi casa, le dije yo á Seth; un poco de descanso os
hará bien; si necesitais algo aquí estoy yo.
—Doctor Daniel, contestó secamente; yo no tengo ninguna
necesidad de tus servicios. Hasta la vista.
Y tomando el caballo de la brida, lo tiró cojiando hácia la casa de
Fox, el attorney; Seth venia sin duda á la ciudad por un proceso, y
habria dejado de ser cuácaro si una pierna estropiada ó una cabeza
lastimada le hubiera desviado de su interés.
Vuelto que hube á mi observatorio, cargué una segunda pipa. Sin
pasiones, sin cuidados, gozaba de mi tranquilidad; me daba un
placer de niño siguiendo con los ojos el sol, que de la cima de las
casas descendia lentamente á la calle. Tres golpes aplicados á la
puerta me sacaron de mi fantaseo. Era el vecino Fox, adornado de
una cartera bajo el brazo. Su visita me sorprendió. Sabíale muy
contrariado de su derrota electoral, y no era hombre de olvidar en
dos dias ni sus odios, ni su envidia.
—Buen dia, señor inspector de caminos y calles, me dijo entrando
en mi cuarto.
El modo como acentuó estas palabras, me desagradó. Soy la
paciencia en persona; pero no me gusta que se burlen de mí.
—Salud al señor attorney, le contesté con balbuciente voz. Podré
saber lo que me proporciona el honor de veros.
—Pues no hay mas, querido doctor, repuso él con una voz
burlona, sino que sois un personaje! Vedos en el camino de la
grandeza! Vuestros mismos adversarios se inclinan ante vuestro
talento y fortuna. Qué pueden decir ahora vuestros envidiosos?

Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.
More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge
connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.
Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and
personal growth every day!
ebookbell.com

The Persuasive Power Of Campaign Advertising 1st Edition Travis N Ridout Michael M Franz

About This Presentation

Slide Content

Tags

Categories

Download

Quick Actions

Statistics

Related Slideshows

The Persuasive Power Of Campaign Advertising 1st Edition Travis N Ridout Michael M Franz

About This Presentation

Slide Content

Slide 1

Slide 2

Slide 3

Slide 6

Slide 8

Slide 9

Slide 10

Slide 12

Slide 13

Slide 14

Slide 15

Slide 16

Slide 18

Slide 19

Slide 20

Slide 21

Slide 22

Slide 23

Slide 24

Slide 25

Slide 26

Slide 27

Slide 28

Slide 29

Slide 30

Slide 31

Slide 32

Slide 33

Slide 34

Slide 35

Slide 36

Slide 37

Slide 38

Slide 39

Slide 40

Slide 41

Slide 42

Slide 43

Slide 44

Slide 45

Slide 46

Slide 47

Slide 48

Slide 49

Slide 50

Slide 51

Slide 52

Slide 53

Slide 54

Slide 55

Slide 56

Slide 57

Slide 58

Slide 59

Slide 60

Slide 61

Slide 62

Slide 63

Slide 64

Slide 65

Slide 66

Slide 67

Slide 68

Slide 69

Slide 70

Slide 71

Slide 72

Slide 73

Slide 74

Slide 75

Slide 76

Slide 77

Slide 78

Slide 79

Slide 80

Slide 81

Slide 82