This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Do not allow paid political advertising on radio, tv, and internet.
Mass media is arguably the primary influence on the average person's decision-making. It was for this reason that tobacco product advertising was stopped. Political ads have become not much more than attempts to persuade voters to vote NO for something or someone. Most of the content is negative and derogatory, if not outright false. Useful, truthful information is getting more scarce with each election. More muck gets raked every time the campaign season rolls around. Better we should exercise personal initiative to inform ourselves about candidates and issues. Billions of advertising dollars are at stake so the mass media will probably flaunt their powers of influence to stop any such effort, I know the tobacco lobby sure did.
Closing Statement from edward long
123 comments by 23 participants covered the spectrum from status quo to take the vote away from women!
8 people agree with the idea of stopping paid political ads on electronic mass media. 15 people have other ideas. Most believe there is a problem with campaign ethics. Some of the suggestions are: free air time for candidates with fact checking; third party ads ok but not endorsed by candidates; do what other countries do; repeal sufferage; people need information made available to them because they will not get it themselves; a 9-step program was itemized in detail; purge voter ignorance by force-feeding education; all advertising is propaganda; people have already made up their minds so ads don't have much influence; 2 people like the idea but feel it is too difficult to execute (the tobacco ad prohibition carried little weight); one person prefers the status quo; one thinks negative ads are helpful. Thanks to all who shared their wisdom and energy. I will see if TED will allow a debate on this.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.














pat gilbert 50+
You may scoff at this but it was done in Canada in the early 80's that is paying dividends today.
edward long 100+
pat gilbert 50+
edward long 100+
pat gilbert 50+
My intention is to bring people up not patronize or nanny them but bring them up. They have to make their own decisions. A basic education is NOT force feeding a political ideology.
The reality is that a culture teaches more than any other vehicle. What I'm talking about is to introduce critical thinking into the culture.
Your idea will not work it will just be more government meddling to no effect at the cost of yet more bureaucracy. I have thought about this a lot I did a Venn diagram of this once with the 3 dynamics were government, people, and business the overlapping part in the middle was EDUCATION, that is what it is.
edward long 100+
pat gilbert 50+
However Paul Martin is easily searched.
The Venn diagram is self evident.
What you are talking about is a symptom and fixing it will result in changing the way the marketing companies do their work but it does not address the core problem. You are making a correlation between cigarettes and advertising but it does not demonstrate causality. Education in anything is self evident to say otherwise is to say that if someone doesn't know how to do something it is irrelevant to his lack of production.
edward long 100+
pat gilbert 50+
Your answer is illogical and akin to saying I will fix the porch by oiling the back door.
Well Eddy this is one of those things we ain't gonna agree on.
edward long 100+
pat gilbert 50+
How come?
"false advertising contributes greatly to the real problem . . . voter ignorance!"
How come?
"As a result they vote based on misinformation and lies."
How come?
[Because they are not acting on their own volition]
How come?
[Because they are not trained in critical thinking]
How come?
[Because they are trained to think superficially]
How come?
[Because things are caused they do not just happen]
So what can we do about this?
[Education, which almost occurs willy nilly, if it is allowed to]
edward long 100+
pat gilbert 50+
No I will not accept an infringement on the 1st amendment especially for something that would not create much effect.
John Smith 30+
pat gilbert 50+