|
The Dems won pretty handily:
Holperin (D) over Simac (R) 55-45
and
Wirch (D) over Steitz (R) 58-42
On Sunday I was driving from Chicago to Milwaukee, passing through Wirch's district. Listening to the radio, I heard nothing but anti-Wirch ads, and was pretty impressed with the obviously large ad expenditures. Many of these ads were on the presumably expensive Chicago stations that broadcast into that area of Wisconsin. Being down there, exposed to the radio blitz, I was pretty nervous about how this was gonna work out. Can the public withstand such a massive media assault?
Well, they could, and did, as we all found out last night.
That started me thinking. An old but very effective cognitive-behavioral technique involves simply practicing resisting an impulse to do one thing and replacing it with another action. For example, a person with a compulsive behavior might simply work at doing something else when confronted by his compulsion.
Surely all those anti-Wirch ads must have raised some degree of an impulse to vote against him, at least in that portion of the public who were not particularly knowledgeable or committed. But these people resisted the urge, and replaced it with a better and healthier alternative: they overcame whatever level of discomfort the ads may have placed in them and voted for Wirch.
Thus all those who were to some degree susceptible to the negative advertising overcame the implanted negativity and followed their own guidance. In psychological terms, their ability to resist the negative ads was strengthened. Theory would seem to say that their susceptibility to this kind of advertising was weakened, and their "field independence" was strengthened, so they will be more likely to follow their own judgment next time as well. It's kind of like being vaccinated; if the dose of pathogen isn't strong enough to kill you, you will develop resistance to it that will stand you in good stead the next time you are exposed to it.
Could RW propaganda be a self-limiting problem?
|