Boston Heraldsteria! (Prez Ad Spend Edition)

First in what we expect will be an endless series

The chronically overcaffeinated Boston Herald jumped on the 2016 presidential campaign ad bandwagon yesterday with this Herald Special Report by Erin Smith and Jack Encarnacao.

Campaign ads will have Mass. appeal

$18M in local spots already booked for 2016

Screen Shot 2015-09-01 at 12.53.46 AM

Presidential candidates and super PACs have already booked more than $18 million worth of ad time on local television through next year — just the start of a more than $300 million presidential bonanza for area TV stations.

With ad buys variously targeting women, men and both older and younger demographics, the campaigns and PACs could make 2016 the most moneyed campaign season ever. But it could also be the last big presidential election of the TV age, before the Internet starts cutting deeply into broadcast ad revenues.

 

First of all, 2016 will not be the last big presidential election of the TV age. Internet ads can mobilize, but nothing amplifies the way television spots do.

Second of all, this part of the Herald piece is pure fantasy:

“There’s so much money that’s going to be spent on television advertising that they will run out of spots,” said Kip Cassino of Borrell Associates, a media research company. “There is going to be more political spending — from last Fourth of July until Election Day 2016 — then [sic] has ever been spent in the history of the nation. It’s going to be more than $16 billion.”

 

$16 billion? Seriously?

Let’s consult a more sober-minded source, shall we?

From yesterday’s Wall Street Journal piece by Patrick O’Connor:

Kantar Media, which tracks TV advertising, predicts overall spending for the 2016 elections will be about $4.4 billion, up roughly 16% from the $3.8 billion candidates and outside groups laid out for cable and broadcast ads in 2012. “TV remains the best way to reach passive voters who are not necessarily looking for information,” said Elizabeth Wilner, who oversees Kantar’s Campaign Media Analysis Group.

 

Interestingly, this WSJ graphic directly contradicts the Herald claims by Borrell Associates’ Kip Cassino.

 

WO-AX692A_DATA_16U_20150830140305

 

Notice the source of the graphic?

Borrell Associates!

Go figure.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: