Abstract
Negative political ads are increasingly ubiquitous in presidential campaigns but most of the public do not directly observe these ads. Instead they become aware of these negative attacks through the press. Recent scholarship finds that the news media incentivizes presidential campaigns to go negative as it will generate more free coverage compared to positive advertisements. However, scholarship has yet to examine the framing of this free coverage. Through a content analysis of New York Times, Washington Post, and USA Today's coverage of the controversial Swift Boat Veteran's for Truth ads during the 2004 presidential election, this study evaluates whether free media is synonymous with wanted coverage. We find that news coverage provides both benefits and disadvantages for the presidential campaigns associated with the negative ads.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
