Political Advertising in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election: Ad Hominem Ad Nauseam

Abstract

Political advertisements ( N = 136) from the 2016 U.S. presidential election are content analyzed in this study that investigates message strategy used by Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in their televised ads. The negative nature of the campaign, and the high negative views voters held for Trump and Clinton, seems to have influenced the tone and focus of the ads. Despite Trump’s reputation for ad hominem attacks throughout the primary and general election phases of the presidential campaign, it was Clinton who waged more ad hominem attacks in her advertisements, mostly focused on labeling Trump as unfit for office. Trump and his supportive political action committee groups were more likely to run contrast ads to compare differences between his policies and Clinton’s policies, but Clinton’s campaign failed to use a full range of message strategies to contrast her policies with Trump’s and to bolster her own image through her campaign ads.

Political Messaging Over Time: A Comparison of US Presidential Candidate Facebook Posts and Tweets in 2016 and 2020

“…Fowler et al (2016) find that Hillary Clinton, in particular, was overwhelmingly negative in her television spots in the 2016 election. Tedesco and Dunn (2018) suggest that her ads had more ad hominem attacks, while Trump's were more likely to contrast his character and policies with Clinton's. Although there is limited analysis of social media on this dimension, Gelman et al (2020) analyze the 2018 Tweets by candidates running for US Congress and for Governor and find that tweets were more likely to be positive than negative in the general election.…”