Political Ads Cause Candidates to Carefully Craft Messages

By CAITLIN HAEDRICH

To many students’ surprise, as they walked into schoolhouse last Tuesday morning, there was a large billboard on display in the lobby. Featured on the board was a picture of Carolyn Keyes, a candidate in the upcoming Advanced Studies Program (ASP) presidential election. Behind her was a Photoshopped image of a landscape, sky, and stars complete with the following caption: “She won’t reach for the stars. NASA will crumble under Keyes.” The quote is in reference to Keyes statement during the debate the other evening that, in order to reduce federal deficit, she would cut the NASA program.

The billboard was the first installment in series of advertisements by the Mass Media class for and against the candidates in the ASP presidential election. Throughout the past week, numerous other advertisements have popped up across campus. On the same day that the billboard appeared, the ice cream machines featured the flavors “Kreme de la Keyes” and “Molly K Cream” instead of the usual vanilla and chocolate. In addition, each side dispensed the same flavor (vanilla) making the statement that the candidates were both the same and bland.

Last Wednesday, students woke to find the sidewalks of St. Paul’s chalked with anti-Kepner slogans, while after lunch they had the opportunity to attend a “Block Party,” to support the Block Party, which is also the name of Kepner’s political organization.

The messages have sparked the interest and the ire of students across campus. Anna Spencer, a World Religions student, said that she “didn’t know that she (Keyes) wanted to cut NASA” and that she “(didn’t) think cutting NASA altogether is good.” Some students felt that the negative ads were a little too strong, as Amber Brooks, a Forbidden Fictions student said that she “hate(s) political bashing.” Carrie Brewster, an Ecology student, said that she “thought that if (someone) were going to spread negatives ads around campus, each side should get equal publicity. There are two sides to the story. The anti-Keyes ad was not as flamboyant as the anti-Kepner ads.”

For the most part, neither party did much in response to the ads. They appreciated the positive campaigning and, as Macy Howarth, crisis manager for Molly Kepner says, “It got her [Kepner’s] name out either way.” Carolyn Keyes even said that the negative ads “keeps it interesting” and that she “has no problem with negative campaigning as long as it is accurate.” The biggest setback they had with the ads was one they hadn’t anticipated. Carolyn said “The only issue we’ve had is with the negative campaigning against the other team. We’ve had people thinking that it was us. We don’t want people to think we are being unfair.” Kepner’s crisis manager maintains that this weeks debate will help set things straight. Hopefully, students with concerns or question about the statements made in the ads will be able to voice them during the open debate. In the mean time, Howarth says, “we chose not to respond.”

Interestingly, after both negative ads featured the candidates plan to cut NASA, both candidates retracted or restated what they had said at the first debate during the second debate held Monday. Responding to a question regarding her earlier statements and the ensuing controversy, Keyes said that she “never planned to cut NASA entirely.” Kepner defended her own comments by saying that she “(thought that) people misread what we said about NASA.” Their changes in stance reflect the impact the advertising campaigns have had on their respective campaigns.

Monday’s presidential debate all but concluded the formal campaign process as the election date continues to draw closer. Voting will take place this Friday during dinner where there will be booths for students to cast their ballots. Regardless of who wins, each candidate will certainly look to the effect that the various advertising campaigns had on their road to victory.