A Functional Analysis of Presidential Direct Mail Advertising

Abstract

This study investigated the nature of direct mail advertising, a commonly used but little studied form of political campaign communication. 715 brochures were content analyzed employing the Functional Theory of Political Campaign Discourse and Issue Ownership Theory. Acclaims were more common than attacks, which in turn were more frequent than defenses. Primary campaign pamphlets used more acclaims and fewer attacks than general campaign brochures. Democrats used more attacks and fewer acclaims than Republicans. In the general campaign, incumbent party candidates acclaimed more and attacked less than challengers. Incumbents were also prone to use past deeds to acclaim more, and attack less, than challengers. Incumbents tended to use future plans to acclaim more, and attack less, than challengers. Winners used more acclaims and fewer attacks than losers. Overall, direct mail brochures discussed policy more than character. Democrats discussed policy more and character less than Republicans. Democrats discussed Democratic issues more, and Republican issues less, than Republicans. Incumbent party candidates discussed policy more, and character less, than challengers. Winners discussed policy more, and character less, than losers. Winners attacked more on policy, and less on character, than losers. Similarities and differences between direct mail advertising and other message forms were discussed.