The midterm elections are in need of a rebrand
To say Americans will be flocking to the polls today would be an insult to flocks. The Pew Research Center has documented that voter turnout in midterm elections has been lower than in presidential election years as far back as the 1840s. Only 15 percent of Americans have been following the midterms “very closely” this year, according to Pew, down from 2010, when that number was 25 percent.
One of the people following the elections is political pundit David Brooks, who has declared flatly that “the 2014 campaign has been “the most boring and uncreative campaign I can remember.” Recent surveys show that almost 50 percent of Americans were completely unaware as of last week that midterm elections were slated for today, according to Ron Seyb, an associate professor of government at Skidmore.
In short: The midterm election is a bad brand.
“It’s hard to get people to pay attention, much less get them to turn out,” said Seyb. “Presidential elections are about the direction of the country for the next four years. By voting in the election, it’s a mandate to the government. There’s nothing like that in the midterm elections, and things are so fragmented.”
Seyb, who teaches government, doesn’t blame people for their apathy. “People are absolutely rational not to listen to that moral suasion to go out and vote just because it’s their civic duty,” he said. “People are feeling disaffected with and disengaged from the political system. Whatever is pushing them to the polls is not that strong. Even if they do vote, you’re going to get the same outcome because Democrats and Republicans can’t work together.”
Still, it’s not as if these local and state contests are meaningless either. A shift of six seats from Democrats to Republicans would make Mitch McConnell, the senior senator from Kentucky, the Senate majority leader. (A recent report said the Senator is “oozing with confidence,” conjuring an unfortunate image to readers everywhere.) There are no fewer than 65 competitive House races.
There have been more than a billion dollars spent on advertising in these elections, according to the Wesleyan Media project. Voters in six states have seen more than 10,000 ads in the past two weeks. “Ads have an effect, but they’re short term,” said Seyb. “People forget very quickly. Where they can have an effect is on the margins — 2 to 3 percent. In a close race, that can be important.”
One problem is that there isn’t a single issue driving this election. And without an overarching narrative, one is left with few clues as to what is on voters minds. If Gallup is to be believed, Republican and Democratic voters both viewed the economy, jobs and fixing the federal government as important to their congressional vote this year, according to a September poll.
But social media paints a different picture altogether. By looking strictly at social engagement, ShareThis, a company that gathers large-scale social data, found that climate change, healthcare and immigration are the most talked-about issues for this election. The breakdown of those shares is also revealing. People are 30 percent more likely than the general population to share about Republican candidates on Facebook, whereas users of Twitter and reddit were 30 to 40 percent more likely to talk about Democrats.
Millennials are twice as likely to share about the midterms as other generations. And they are nearly two times as likely to “influence” others with those shares.
Of course, interest online does not necessarily translate to intent in the voting booth. “We’re just looking at broader sharing activity,” said Vivien Pillet, manager of research at ShareThis. “Sharing indicates a likelihood to be engaged in that content, but it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re going to vote — or tell us how they’re going to vote.”
The challenge for politicians, then, becomes how to capitalize on social chatter to turn that user activity into votes. The challenge is how to rebrand the midterms.
“At a presidential election, people have more of a civic patriotic belief that they really should vote,” said Rob Shepardson, co-founder and partner of SS+K, a creative agency that did work on behalf of President Obama’s re-election bid. “But some of these local elections or state elections don’t really affect them, when in fact sometimes they affect them more than a national election.”
How the push for anti-‘woke’ advertising could create controversy for brand startups
As some push back on inclusive marketing, startups with more to lose sound off.
U by Kotex believes normalizing periods will help it reach millennials, Gen Z
U by Kotex is looking to continue with recent streaming ads, digital spots, banner ads, shopper marketing and influencer partnerships focused on “Normalizing Periods.”
With TikTok star Keith Lee, Pepsi hopes to draw Gen Z to Black-owned restaurants
Pepsi is teaming up with TikTok food reviewer Keith Lee to promote the best Black-owned restaurants with a focus on Gen Z.
SponsoredWhat the measurement and currency discussion really means to TV advertisers
Ali Mack, head of TV and agency, Experian Major streaming video providers have recently made headlines by adopting new currencies for ad measurement, threatening Nielsen’s long-standing TV ratings monopoly. NBCUniversal, for example, has certified iSpot and VideoAmp as currencies for advanced audiences and formed the Joint Industry Committee with Paramount, TelevisaUnivision and Warner Bros. Discovery. […]
Can Meta remain the ‘holy grail of paid advertising’ with challenges, challengers and Advantage+?
With more competitors and less solutions, advertisers sound off on Meta's social ad dominance.
Digiday+ Research Briefing: CMO Strategies — How marketers’ social platform budgets stack up
In this week's Digiday+ Research Briefing, we share focal points from Digiday's recently released reports on how marketers’ social platform budgets stack up, and how agencies are feeling less pessimistic about the death of the third-party cookie.