tv Presidential Campaign Ads History CSPAN October 24, 2016 12:00am-1:08am EDT
ofrn about the influence presidential spouses from c-span's first ladies, now available in paperback. it gives readers the look at the personalize and impact of every first lady in american history. companion to c-span's well-regarded biography series and features interviews with first lady's historians. briefhapter offers biographies of 45 presidential spouses and archival photos from their lives. paperback, now available at your favorite bookseller and also as an e-book. neil oxman, next, president of the campaign group incorporated. he talks about the history of campaign ads. he begins with dwight eisenhower and ends with the current 2016 presidential campaign. the free library of philadelphia hosted this hour-long event.
>> i am pleased to introduce tonight's speaker, neil oxman. neil was born and raised in philadelphia. he spent much of his childhood in the stacks of the free branch of the library on 58th and baltimore avenue. skipping ahead a few years, neil founded the campaign group in 1980, and since then, they have worked on more than 750 contested primaries and general elections across the united states. among his clients have been former mayors michael nutter and current mayor jim kenney. he has also served on the free library of philadelphia board of trustees and the free library foundation board of directors. i have known neil for almost 30 years, and he is one of the most fascinating and entertaining people i have ever met. he does not want me to say a lot about him tonight, so let me just say that he is a true renaissance man whose expertise
covers a wide range of topics. he could stand up here tonight and entertain us, speaking about movies or about golf or about the history of philadelphia or about rare books, or even stories about his dog. but tonight, he will focus on political ads. i have heard a version of this talk before, and it is fabulous, and i can't wait to hear it again. we are so pleased to have him here with us this evening. ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming my good friend neil oxman to the free library. [applause] mr. oxman: can everybody hear me?
i'm going to just show tv ads, which makes this thing much more interesting than me gabbing, because this is the most analyzed presidential election in history, the most talked about in modern history because of what is going on. so i think it is much more fun to look at some presidential campaign ads to illustrate what i think people do when they run for office. and i think that it will be much more illuminating than my speaking. i'm going to show you an ad that my company made eight years ago, which everybody thinks was the reason that michael nutter became mayor of philadelphia. >> my name is olivia nutter, and this is my dad. this is the house my dad grew up
in in west philadelphia. this is our dog. this is my favorite food. my dad is pretty cool for an old guy. this is where i go to middle school. my dad is the only democrat for mayor with a child in the public schools. i know he wants to make them better and safer. my dad is pretty busy these days, but he still finds time to take me to school. >> have a good day. be good. [applause] mr. oxman: incredibly, olivia is a senior at columbia now, which really dates us. actually, that is not the real reason that michael got elected, but that he was the best candidate and most qualified. in the summer of 2006, we took a poll.
we asked this question -- "as you may know, the current mayor is term limited and cannot run again. do you think philadelphia's next mayor should continue the policies or move the city in a different direction?" and in the summer of 2006, 66% of the people said move the city in a different direction, and 26% said continue the policies. we asked the same question in january of 2007 at the beginning of the election, and the numbers had grown to 77%-17% -- 77% of the people wanted to change the policies, and only 17% wanted to continue the policies of john street. we were the last person on tv, running against two very well
known people in the city -- congressman brady, who represented half the city, and a millionaire in tom knox, and dwight evans. all of them got on tv with very nice ads and ran ads for months talking about jobs and crime and running the city. but they did not talk about that question. what we try to do in campaigns -- when we have hiring campaigns, we tell people there are three things we try to do. we try to define ourselves, talk about our client before anybody else does. we try to define our opponent, meaning talk about our opponent before anyone else does, and we try to define the stakes of the election. we want to make the election about something that is on our own territory. sometimes you can't do that. if you are democrat running in 1994 and the contract in america
year, if you are a republican running in 1964 or 1974, you are not going to get elected. there are certain years that are really hard, but in 2007, the issue wasn't jobs or crime or schools -- the issue was which person was going to be the least like john street. michael nutter was at 7% of the vote, in last place, and we ran this ad. >> only one candidate for mayor stood up to john street -- michael nutter. john street would not appoint an ethics board to clean up the corruption. nutter stood up to him. john street stonewalled efforts to cut taxes, nutter stood up to him. when he refused to put more money for the police on the budget, nutter got it done. michael nutter will run the city differently. michael nutter for mayor. mr. oxman: then we ran the spot with olivia. running those two ads -- "as you may know, john street cannot run for mayor.
do you want the next mayor to continue the policies of john street or move the city in a different direction?" we made that the stakes of the election. we made the stakes of the election who would be least like john street, much like the stakes of the election in 1979 were who would be least like frank rizzo. because green had run against frank rizzo for mayor in the 1971 primary, he was already seen as a guy standing up to rizzo. we would do that in 2007. and nutter got elected, went from last-place to 37% of the vote in seven weeks, and literally spent the least amount of money.
everybody thinking we were crazy. you can't necessarily always do that in a campaign, but i want to show the history of presidential campaigns. i think you will enjoy the best of the best. i first did this lecture, part of this lecture, when i went to oxford in 1989. the internet did not exist, al gore had not invented the internet yet. [laughter] mr. oxman: we did gore's presidential campaign in 1988. there was an interesting guy named julian cantor, and he loved political ads. knew nothing about them, and he would call on the political consultants when campaigns were over and asked us to send him the tv ads. back then, you sent them to television stations. one of the greatest ad agencies did some of the greatest ads in philadelphia history. you sent to tv stations these gigantic two inch tapes.
nothing was digital. you sent these tapes, and julian cantor literally collected 30,000 television ads before anybody else did, and so because we were nice enough over the years to send him up obscure ads, he was nice enough to send me -- i called him and said, i'm going to go teach, and i want to do a whole year of showing spots. can you hear me now? ok, this is better. i want to do a whole year of showing spots. he sent me 50 pages of his tv ads, and i was able to pull together what i thought was the best of the presidential advertising, before you could go
on the internet and look at it now. so this is how it begins. >> ike for president. >> ♪ you like ike i like ike we'll take ike to washington you like ike i like ike everybody likes ike for president get ike to washington we will travel day and night you like ike i like ike everybody likes ike for president hang up the banners and bang the drums we will take ike to washington we will take ike to washington ♪
>> now is the time for all good americans to come to the aid of their country. vote for eisenhower. mr. oxman: when i hear that, it stays with me for 10 days. i always say, if they want to break the prisoners at guantanamo bay, play that on a 24-hour loop. [laughter] mr. oxman: they can't hear the tv ads? i'm sorry. another person who ran an ad agency in new york where a bunch of people did this, supposedly there was an ad for harry truman in 1948 that no one has ever been able to find. this was in the days where very little of the campaign budget was spent on television advertising. today, the majority is spent on television advertising. what i liked about it was they
actually did negative in the ad. it had a picture of stephenson, a donkey going in the opposite direction. i thought it was quite clever back then. that was the level of sophistication of ads in 1952. they didn't go -- they actually didn't exponentially grow that much. here is what i think is a terrific kennedy ad in 1962. >> ♪ kennedy, kennedy, kennedy kennedy, kennedy, kennedy do you want a man for president who sees it through and through? a man who is old enough to know and young enough to do it's up to you, it's up to you, it's simply up to you do you like a man who answers straight a man who's always fair?
you measure him against the others and when you compare cast your vote for kennedy it is up to you, it is simply up to you kennedy, kennedy, kennedy kennedy ♪ mr. oxman: it's a great ad, really terrific ad. instead of an announcer speaking the copy and saying the message, they put it in a song, and the message was the perfect message. kennedy actually had a pollster, and i don't know whether the pollster actually sat in the
room with the people doing the ad and translated that, but i really thought that was a very clever way, making him upbeat, excited, exciting, making him generational, especially against nixon. i thought it was a really well done ad. the standard unit of television advertising was 30 seconds, these ads were 60 because the tv stations did not figure out they should charge twice as much for 60's as 30's. and so everything in a campaign is about a budget. define yourself, define your opponent, define the stakes of the election. i think the kennedy campaign did that wonderfully, positively, on him, and also did this -- >> every republican politician wants you to believe that richard nixon is "experienced." they even want you to believe that he has been making decisions in the white house. but listen to the man who should know best, the president of the united states. a reporter recently asked president eisenhower this question about mr. nixon's experience. >> i wondered if you could give
us an example of a major idea of his that you adopted in the role of the decider. >> if you give me a week i might think of one, i don't remember. >> at the same press conference, president eisenhower said -- >> no one can make a decision except me. >> as for any major ideas from mr. nixon -- >> if you give me a week i might think of one, i don't remember. >> president eisenhower could not remember, but the voters will remember. for real leadership in the 1960's, help elect senator john f. kennedy. mr. oxman: great ad. you had eisenhower, whose favorable/unfavorable was astronomically high. he was very popular. obviously it wasn't doctored, it was real. it was not some phony baloney produced advertising that you see now, it was a genuine thing. in terms of defining yourself
and defining your opponent, i think the kennedy campaign did that wonderfully and used television, besides the debate -- used television much better than nixon did. in 1960, one of the reasons he lost, famously -- people who heard the first debate on radio thought nixon won, people who watched it on tv thought kennedy won in postdebate surveys. >> 1, 2, 3, 4, five, seven, six, eight, nine. >> 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.
>> these are the stakes. to make a world in which all of god's children can live, or to go into the darkness. we must either love each other or we must die. >> vote for president johnson on november 3. the stakes are too high for you to stay home. mr. oxman: talk about defining your opponent. the most famous political ad in the history of american politics ran once during a monday night football game. it is not like you had to see that ad more than once. it was extraordinarily
controversial at the time, done by tony schwartz and a bunch of new york ad guys. tony schwartz, one of the early political ad man who did other advertising. in the history of the business that i do, advertising people did political ads. it was not a specialization that it is now, where hacks like me who came up through campaigns do political ads. if that ad was define yourself, the opponent, the stakes of the election, without seeing barry goldwater's name or talking about anything else, it clearly did that. let me skip to reagan. >> it is morning again in america. today, more men and women will go to work than ever before in our country's history. with interest rates at about half the record highs of the
1980's, nearly 2000 families today will buy new homes, more than at any time in the past four years. this afternoon, 6500 young men and women will be married. and with the inflation less than half of what it was just four years ago, they can look forward with confidence to the future. it is morning again in america. and under the leadership of president reagan, our country is prouder and stronger and better. why would we ever want to return to where we were, less than four short years ago? mr. oxman: an ad agency in san francisco did the voiceover for the ad. he actually wrote the line morning again in america sitting at a bar downstairs from his office in san francisco. but he was a great voiceover guy. he was the voice of national car rental.
besides running a very large ad agency and being very clever and creative, he also did a lot of voiceover work. that spot for 1984, that was against mondale. after the reagan recession of 1982, that ad had a great deal of feeling -- even though we were still in a recession and things weren't great, the reagan campaign did a terrific job of not just selling but defining the stakes of the election as things are getting better. >> there is a bear in the woods. for some people, the bear is easy to see. others don't see it at all. some say it is tame, others say vicious and dangerous. since no one can be sure, isn't it smart to be as strong as the
bear, if there is a bear? mr. oxman: i wonder if donald trump would understand the metaphor. [laughter] mr. oxman: i just thought about that. terrific ad. none of us are as clever as those guys are, trust me. now i'm going to do a real campaign. it is the summer of 1988. the rule is that the party out of power in the white house has the first convention.
in 1988, that means the democrats held the first convention. dukakis has a very successful convention, he picks lloyd benson as vice president. he has a 17 point lead in the polls with 13 weeks to go. 17 points. a lot of us who have been involved in campaigns have blown 17 point leads, but he had a 17 point lead with 13 weeks to go. in 1988, there was no money disadvantage in either side. you got a check from the united states government for the same amount of money. there were no super pac's, no citizens united, supreme court, it was literally independent committees doing stuff, and the state parties may have done things. each candidate, when they became the nominee, got a check from the federal government, and they could spend that money any way
they wanted to. michael dukakis has his convention and goes home. george bush has his convention two weeks later, and right after his convention, when he is at that point about 13 points down -- he had a little bump at his convention, not the kind that would overcome a 17 point lead -- he picks dan quail to be vice president. he starts running this ad. >> ♪ [inaudible] i loved it when someone said to george, how can you run for president? a great big family, thousands of friends, that's what he has. >> he has met every challenge his country and the world offered.
no one in this century is better prepared to be president of the united states. mr. oxman: the bush campaign -- that ad was done by roger ailes. the bush campaign had a group of ad people. the campaign found out that barbara bush was more popular than george bush, so it was her voiceover the first half of the ad. define yourself, your opponent, the stakes. a week after the republican convention, the bush people started running an ad where the first half is voiceover by this extraordinarily wonderful, popular woman, barbara bush, talking about how lovely and great a family guy george bush is. and then you have moses --
charlton heston, when he was still an icon, before he did the nra stuff, when he made fun of himself on "saturday night live" and was nominated for academy awards and won them -- you have charlton heston saying my favorite line in the history of television advertising for politics, talking about george bush. "perhaps no one in this century is better prepared to be president of the united states than george bush." i wish i could write that line for one of my clients. when you think about who ran for president in the last century -- teddy roosevelt, franklin roosevelt, dwight eisenhower -- he did have a little bit to do with winning the second world war and beating fascism. but you write perhaps no one in this century is better prepared than george bush, and so george bush is defining himself. he is talking about himself before michael dukakis talked
about him. he is defining himself as a great family guy and a guy who stands with world leaders and making himself bigger than life, because moses is telling you that george bush is bigger than life. michael dukakis does nothing. so the bush people run this. >> as a candidate, michael dukakis called boston harbor an open sewer. as governor, he had the opportunity to do something about it but chose not to. the environmental protection agency calls his lack of action the most expensive public policy mistake in the history of new england. now the dirtiest harbor in america will cost residents $6 billion to clean. michael dukakis promises to do for america what he has done for massachusetts. mr. oxman: there used to be something in this country called the liberal republican. some of you might remember. there were people like john heinz -- sorry to bring up his name -- and hugh scott and jacob javits and about 40 people who are actually liberal republicans.
and they used to be proenvironment. when they asked this question in a poll before the ad ran -- the two main candidates for president were mike dukakis and george bush -- who would be best to protect the environment? dukakis was winning, because people believed the democrats were better for the environment. they ran is ad, and bush started winning that question. so you have bush staying with a positive ad, talking about how wonderful he is, and defining his opponent. define yourself, the opponent, the stakes. in 1988, there was not anything great nationally going on. it was not 2006 about change, it was not 2008, it was not the contract with america, it was not watergate. it was not a seminal year. it was just a normal election where people could hit each other with two by fours. and the dukakis people, who had the same amount of money as the bush people -- by the way, the
way you bought television until 1988 -- clinton changed it, i will talk about that -- the way you bought television in 1988 was write three checks. you took three tapes to abc, nbc, and cbs, and you wrote three checks. 99% of the advertising that was seen was national ads. clinton himself in 1992, with some smart people, carvell, said this is insane. why do i care if anybody sees my advertising in wyoming? i'm not going to win the electoral votes of wyoming. why do i care who sees me in boston? i'm not going to lose massachusetts. so he started spot buying in the
media markets, the way in pennsylvania we are now in the middle of this maelstrom of tv ads in the presidential campaign, but if you go to -- i just spent a week in california, where i saw both san francisco tv and central california tv for monterey. the only ads on tv were for the referendums that are going on, the ballot questions. not a single presidential campaign. because donald trump is not winning california's electoral votes. but in 1988, it was simple. you made an ad, you walked it to the tv stations in new york city, and -- the bush people are defining themselves, and now defining mike dukakis as bad on the environment. dukakis does nothing. revolving door. >> he vetoed the death penalty. his revolving door prison policy gave weekend -- and on while
outcome of many committed other crimes like kidnapping and rape and many are still at large and now michael dukakis says he wants to do for america when he is done for massachusetts. america cannot afford that risk. mr. oxman: mike dukakis in george bush, who was the best at protecting us against crime? followed up by this. >> bush in dukakis on crime. bush supports the death penalty for first-degree murder's. dukakis not only opposes the death penalty, he allowed murderers begin passes for prison. despite a license, received 10 weekend passes for present. he kidnapped a young couple, stabbing a man and repeatedly . -- mr. oxman: that is arguably the second-most famous ad in the history of american politics.
cost nothing to produce. a voiceover, a couple of pictures, and an independent committee did that and ran that and all the sudden, mike dukakis is opening up jail cells. the bush people did not stop it. >> michael dukakis as opposed virtually every defense system we developed. he opposed new aircraft carriers. he opposed anti-satellite weapons. he opposed systems including -- he opposes stealth bombers, and emergency warning system. even criticize our rescue mission to grenada and our strike on libya. now he wants to be our commander-in-chief.
america cannot afford that risk. mr. oxman: this is before cable tv. when you do big campaigns today, you have that you send kids who are trackers to follow your opponent and they record everything, if they can. you have kids monitor everything where your opponent is on television, and they recorded. here, the only time you could be on tv is your on the nightly news at 6:30. dukakis goes to mississippi or alabama or someplace in the south to prove he is tough on national defense, and he gets in a tank. a national guard unit is there. of course, he looks like one of those heads in the back of a car, bobbing around. the bush people are laughing hysterically. they take the tape off tv, they
go to one of the studios in new york where they are making their ad spirit that night they record the ad, they take it to the tv station and run it the next day. now, moses is tell you how wonderful george bush is, and their defining mike dukakis in an era where the holding of a case is not who is going to least like frank rizzo, or the one republican we have done in -- there's no overriding issue. so they are making dukakis weak on crime, on defense, and the environment. and the 17 point lead is now, he is behind by a couple points. this was finally the dukakis repsonse.
him him him him him >> it is a picture of bush with noriega. we need better ads. something better than i don't remember. >> i am working on it. >> you better be. >> they would like to sell you a package. wouldn't you like to rather choose a president? mr. oxman: does anyone understand what that ad is about? [laughter] that's my big sin, i mosey have then i am always a day behind in what is going on in the world. i sat in front of the television and i read the paper. i look up, i had no idea who that ad was for, who it was made for. dukakis -- >> dukakis came up with that health insurance plan for
working people. we have enough problems with the working class. >> what does bush do? u.s. himself up in the american flag. >> they would like to save a package. mr. oxman: and one more! [laughter] >> i think we need another tv commercial. nobody reads anymore. >> let's hope not. dukakis change that program. four cops on the street, crime down 13%. >> how long do you expect to get away with this? >> they would like to sell you a package. when you rather choose a
president? mr. oxman: obviously, bush beat dukakis. susan estrich, who managed the to talk this -- the dukakis campaign is one of the yell lawyers in the fox campaign. mike dukakis could have one that campaign had he responded the way you're supposed to respond in those campaign. there's a theory among the chattering classes where it says underneath them they are strategists. that means a have no clients. south shore here in philadelphia , who have known since he was a , you don't see him
chattering because he has clients. there is a theory among the people who talk to each other, which i happen to agree with, that political ads and presidential campaigns are mattering less and less. in a mayoral campaign, in a senate race, and a gubernatorial campaign, when you do not have everybody in the world talking about the campaign 24 hours a day, ads matter. let me show you an ad that mattered. >> i was born and raised in central pennsylvania. >> dad joined the peace corps in served for two years in india. >> then he went to m.i.t. and got a phd. >> i started out driving a forklift. >> i have always thought that when our company does well, so should our workers. that is why we share between 20% and 30% of our profits with our
employees. >> but as experience is not just in business. he served as pennsylvania secretary of revenue. >> he turned down government perks. >> donating his salary to charity. >> what can we say, he is a little different. >> a lot different. >> i am tom wolfe and i will be a different kind of governor. >> tom wall, a fresh start for pennsylvania. mr. oxman: two years ago in february 2014, no one had heard of tom wolfe. he was at 5 in the polls. the only two people less likable are a-rod and joe banner. sam hinkey and joe banner.
they were both around 30. they had millions of bucks. and wolfe was at 5, and he said he was going to spend $10 million of his own money. they get scared, they said they wanted to wait until the end of the campaign. the winner of the campaign, for a period of four or five weeks, he only spent $2 million statewide, tom wolfe goes on tv in goes from five to 40 in the polls. him that ad mattered because the campaign became a referendum on likability. it became a referendum on likability. it was not about who's going to create the most jobs, with save
the taxpayers most money, was best at solving crime, it was a referendum on likability. that ad mattered. this is what i think is the last ad that really mattered in a presidential campaign. >> they had personally raped, c ut off ears, cut off heads. >> the accusations that john kerry made against the veterans of vietnam was devastating. and it hurt me more than any physical wounds i had. >> cut off limbs. >> that was part of the torture, to sign a statement that you had committed war crimes. >> john kerry do the enemy for free what i and many of my confidants and the prison camps to torture. it demoralizes. >> he betrayed us in the past. how can we be loyal to him now? >> he dishonored his country and more importantly, the people he served with.
he sold them out. >> veterans for truth is responsible for the content of this advertising. mr. oxman: that has become a term of art, swift voting someone. bush, he knows what he did come his records in the national guard is still unknown. versus kerry, who was a decorated war veteran who goes over there and has the guts that she probably could've gotten any difference he wanted -- he went over there and fought. and was real. an independent committee spent just a couple hundred thousand dollars, and rove goes right after kerry's strength. where he should have won veterans of 90 to 10, in goes after his strength and i think that is the last ad that really
matter. obviously there were great ads for obama and really good ads for clinton where she did the 3:00 a.m. in the morning phone. there were ads in 2012 taht were really good. but that was the last ad that had a gigantic effect in the presidential campaign. think about the 17 people running in the republican primary for president, where they spent hundreds of millions on tv. forgetting the fact that trump won, i don't know if any ads moved any points anywhere. it did nothing. i think bernie's ads maybe, but it was more that bernie was not hillary. this is where we are in 2016. >> i'm hillary and i approve this message. >> where were these made? >> i don't know, they were made someplace.
ties shirts, cufflinks. >> where are the shirts made? bangladesh. the ties are made where? china? in china. [laughter] >> i'm hillary clinton and i approve this message. >> in times of crisis, america depends
on steady leadership. >> knock the crap out of them. >> and calm judgment. because all it takes is one wrong move. >> i would bomb the -- out of them. >> just one. >> i'm hillary clinton and i approve this message. >> i know more about isis than any of the generals do.
he is a war hero because he was captured. i like people who are not captured. >> what sacrifices have you made? mr. oxman: the spot for this. you're on tv and you say whatever you're going to say. i do
not know when the letterman appearance was, but it was not any last year. letterman has been off for a year, it is certainly more than a year. you're on tv, and your opponent, like they did with dukakis and the tank, your opponent taser tv
appearances and creates an ad around
that. or they do this, do 26. >> i'm hillary clinton and i approve this message. >> use a race-baiting, xena phobic religious bigot. >> he is a phony, a fraud. >> he is not a serious adult. >> i cannot vote for donald trump. >> trump should not be supported. >> i think he has this qualified himself to be president. >> i just cannot support donald trump. mr. oxman: to do that ad some number of years ago you have to get all those folks in a room and you have to get them to agree to say something, and you have to edit it down. here, i guarantee you, anyone on that ad did not necessarily think when they were appearing on msnbc or cnn or whatever program that that would end up necessarily in a clinton ad. by the way, you do understand why you see hillary's voice at
the beginning. to get the political rate, which is less than a commercial rate, you have to hear the voice of your clients and show a picture of the person. besides written on it, where it says before by whatever entity pays for. if it is a candidate committee. for the truck people, they have now done the same thing.
>> hillary clinton call tens of millions of americans deplorable. >> you can put half of trump supporters into what i call the basket of deplorables. racists, xena phobic, homophobic, you name it. >> people like you, you, and you. you know what is deplorable. hillary clinton demonizing people like you.
mr. oxman: you define yourself,
you do the space of your election. this election is an anomaly. george mcgovern, who won one state, and walter mondale who won one state, both at favorable, unfavorable's that were unbelievably popular when they lost in landslides compared to hillary clinton's. she is 35, and unfavorablity is 52. she's minus 117, he's minus 20. no one has been as unpopular as she has on the democratic side. the ads -- i don't know -- i do think the ads mean something in the 11 or 12 states where hillary is advertising to a much larger degree than trump is. both through her own super pac and her own candidate committee.
i know it must be driving the clinton people crazy in brooklyn because they are doing -- the clinton people are running an unbelievably wonderful campaign. the best of the obama world, the best of the clinton world from 2008, the best of the old man's campaign from 1992 and 1996. whether it is fundraising, television advertising -- although she made that unforced error in calling people deplorables. it is sort of like mitt romney's 47%. i do not think it is as bad. but we will see. it did make the polls close for
a short time because on top of that, she fainted, or allstate did. she got sick. it is not good to get sick. we were doing a campaign against bill ross in delaware. for tom carper. there are going been 112 people in the history of the united states were a senator, governor and congressman. the last two were from delaware. both happened in the 19th century because as i'm sure all of you know, popular elections in the senate did not happen until the early part of the 20 century. the legislature chose the senator.
it was easier for them to pick a governor or a congressman. you do not have to run for the senate. that is why so many of the people who had been governor served in 19th century, far fewer than the 20th century. the current governor in 2000 is running against ross to become the center. you do not be income insiders that often. it just does not happen. he started out behind in the polls. we were doing his campaign. we pulled fairly close even. with three weeks ago, roth, who was 71 or 73 at that point, was standing in front of the hotel dupont going ready to make a speech. he was being interviewed on channel 12, and he fainted on camera.
went down, boom. he was ok. he was dehydrated, just like hillary. our numbers went up. it seems in the last -- questions? >> [inaudible] mr. oxman: we did not queue that purposefully. >> the one you chose was very dark. in contrast that showed nutter, very light-skinned and amiable. [inaudible] mr. oxman: no, no.
the pictures you are seeing our 25th generation, the color is horrible, we did not doctor any photos. we didn't, ok? you understand, this is not what you saw on television. this is generations down because it has unmixed and copied and copied and copy. this is not what you saw. we did not use a smiling picture, that is for sure. >> we have about 10 minutes. that is about three or four questions.
>> i have a question. do you think political ads ever change anyone's vote from republican to democrat? mr. oxman: sure, absolutely. yes. yes they do. period. >> do you have any evidence for that? mr. oxman: thousands of campaigns. there were lots of republicans who voted for tom wolfe instead of corbett. there are lots of democrats, four years in the state who voted for arlen specter instead of his opponent. the answer is yes, ads that made a difference. in the state of pennsylvania -- the answer is yes. in some offices -- yes, it does matter. otherwise somebody of another party would never win. if you look at the polls going on in lots of states are now, there are campaigns happening where a person in a minority party might upset that person. part of it is because of television advertising. >> nice presentation, really interesting.
the first couple ads, the kennedy ad and the ike ad, they were just about bare of all content. particularly the eisenhower ad, there was no issue. kennedy, it was kind of like, he is younger. but in the later ones, real stuff. i'm wondering, was it just the immaturity of the form or to the people change you made the ads? mr. oxman: this business, television advertising, it really began in the late 1940's, early 1950's, because that is when television began. you know the story of william paley. his dad was in the cigar business in philadelphia. one day they advertise on the
radio for their business and sales went up. and he said we are in the wrong business, we should be in the radio business. the first cbs tv affiliate was what is now channel 10. this business of advertising on television, which of course is a step up from advertising on radio, is a business that just started in the early 1950's, by and large. there has been an evolution to it. what an advertising person did in 1952 seems primitive to what the sophistication about what the clinton people are doing in 2016. >> those jingle ads sound like soap ads. >> i too am enjoy the
presentation. i was surprised when he said the tv ads are not strong or do not matter as much now as they did before. mr. oxman: that is what some commentators are saying. >> that surprised me. but i do have a question. mr. oxman: i mean, the theory is this, that in a campaign like this, where -- how many of you in this room -- i guarantee most of you in this room have talked about this presidential campaign more than you have talked about almost any presidential campaign in years. maybe not you, most of you in this room. it is on 24 hours a day on cnn. when that is, the effectiveness of those things is less credible than tom wolfe coming out of the blue and talking about himself in a way where you do not know anything about him. >> i do have a question with
computers being everything today , all of the newspapers to survive are all on computers. mr. oxman: there's an editor of one of the newspapers behind you. [laughter] >> do you think that the columns, the editorials on newspapers are still very important? do you think that they sway people? mr. oxman: in some races, sure. i do not know whether the monterey herald editorial, which i assume will be for hillary clinton, will make people in monterey, california -- in that election. but it might in a county commissioner race.
i truly do believe editorials do matter in some races. the thing that affected me the most in the presidential campaign was the saturday a week ago in the wall street journal, the 2000 word piece written by former secretary of state -- a defense bob gates. he just eviscerated trump. but in a thoughtful way. yes, they do matter. >> thank you. >> i'm wondering about how effective the advertising is for independents and whether there is any data to actually indicate whether advertising, such as we have been seeing, can affect a choice at the independent level. mr. oxman: they do not run that often. >> independence or undecided, i mean. mr. oxman: what effect it has an independent voters? >> yes. mr. oxman: in lots of states the majority of voters are independent. what we do in polls -- we would say to people, is there a