Ozean Digital Media Logo
Call 352 376 0505
Book My Meeting
Campaigns, Ads, and Experiments: How Political Science Meets Persuasion

Campaigns, Ads, and Experiments: How Political Science Meets Persuasion

by | Dec 20, 2024 | Political Media

The new edition of the American Political Science Review (Feb 2024) published a study that I was extremely excited to read. It explores political ads and persuasion—those annoying little things on which millions of dollars are spent, and for the most part, are written and produced based on rules of thumb passed down from mentors. But what really works and actually moves voters? In this polarized world, does persuasion even work, or are we just trying to mobilize voters? Well, How Experiments Help Campaigns Persuade Voters: Evidence from a Large Archive of Campaigns’ Own Experiments makes a valiant effort, but falls short in a couple of areas. While this literature does add to our knowledge, it has a significant blind spot. Due to the research design, only ads from Democratic campaigns were studied—but more on that later. Additionally, we must critically evaluate the findings, noting that it appears the ad testing company, Swayable, has researchers listed as authors on the paper, and the findings seem to be extremely favorable to the company’s revenue goals. Noting these two major concerns, let’s explore this study to see how political campaigns (remember—Democratic campaigns only) use experiments to figure out which ads work best. Spoiler alert: It’s more complicated than you think.

Title: How Experiments Help Campaigns Persuade Voters: Evidence from a Large Archive of Campaigns’ Own Experiments

Link: Read the study

Peer Review Status: Peer-reviewed

Citation: Hewitt, L., Broockman, D., Coppock, A., Tappin, B. M., Slezak, J., Coffman, V., Lubin, N., & Hamidian, M. 2024. “How Experiments Help Campaigns Persuade Voters: Evidence from a Large Archive of Campaigns’ Own Experiments.” American Political Science Review, 118(4): 2021-2039. doi:10.1017/S0003055423001387.

Methodology

The study analyzed a treasure trove of data from 146 experiments run by the tech platform Swayable, which worked with Democratic and left-leaning campaigns. These experiments tested 617 ads on over 500,000 respondents. Here’s the gist:

  • Type of Study: Randomized survey experiments
  • Sample Size: Over 500,000 respondents, including diverse demographic and political groups
  • Experimental Design: Ads were tested on treatment groups, while control groups viewed neutral videos (e.g., public service announcements).
  • Measures: Respondents rated their likelihood to vote for a candidate and their favorability toward that candidate on a scale of 0 to 10. Results were adjusted for variables like gender, age, and partisanship to ensure accuracy.

Each experiment aimed to measure the persuasive impact of specific ad features, such as emotional tone, messenger characteristics, and informational content. Data collection spanned two election cycles, offering a comprehensive look at how ad effectiveness varies by context.

Factors Considered in Ad Effectiveness

Figure 3 of the study provides a detailed analysis of the features evaluated for their impact on ad effectiveness. The following factors were explored:

  • Tone of the Ad: Whether the ad was positive, negative, or contrast.
  • Message Content: Inclusion of new facts, emotional appeals (anger, enthusiasm, fear), or policy details.
  • Messenger Characteristics: The demographic attributes, partisanship, or credibility of the spokesperson.
  • Production Quality: The perceived professionalism or “polished” nature of the ad.
  • Pushiness: How assertive the ad was in delivering its message or call to action.

The results revealed a lack of consistency across contexts. For instance, ads emphasizing enthusiasm might perform well in one election but have no discernible effect in another.

Similarly, while emotional appeals were hypothesized to boost effectiveness, the actual impact was context-dependent and often minimal. This inconsistency underscores the challenge of predicting ad success without experimentation.

Results and Findings

  • Overall Effectiveness: Ads had small but significant persuasive effects. On average:
    • Vote choice shifted by 2.3 percentage points in 2018 down-ballot races.
    • Effects dropped to 1.2 points in 2020 down-ballot races and
    • Effects dropped to 0.8 points in the 2020 presidential race.
  • Variation in Effectiveness: Persuasion varied significantly among ads. Some were 50% more effective than the average, while others were 50% less effective.
  • Unpredictable Features: Conventional wisdom about what makes ads effective—like emotional appeals or testimonials—had limited and context-dependent predictive power. What worked in 2018 didn’t necessarily work in 2020.
  • Implications for Campaigns: Experimentation is invaluable. Simulations showed that campaigns investing in testing ads could dramatically improve their impact, especially in close elections.

Simulations and Their Impact

In what could almost be considered a side note, the researchers conducted simulations to explore the potential value of ad experimentation in campaign strategy. Here’s what they did and what they found:

  • Method: They modeled scenarios in which campaigns invested resources in testing ads to find the most persuasive ones. This allowed them to model/estimate how much more effective overall advertising efforts could become with such targeted approaches.
  • Findings: The simulations showed that even modest investments in experimentation could yield significant returns, particularly in close elections. Choosing a highly persuasive ad over a less effective one could shift the needle in tight races, demonstrating the importance of data-driven decision-making.

Once again, it’s important to note that this research was published in conjunction with an ad testing platform.

Critiques of the Research

  • Generalizability: As discussed, the data came exclusively from Democratic campaigns using the Swayable platform. No conservative ads were included in the analysis. Given the significant personality differences often found between liberals and conservatives, these results may not be generalizable to right-leaning campaigns or voters.
  • Generalizability (con’t):  Additionally, the analysis did not include ballot iniatives or other type of influence campaigns,  which are typically more nonpartisan. 
  • Attrition and Sampling Issues: Some experiments lacked complete data on respondents who dropped out, potentially skewing results.
  • Timing Limitations: Findings are specific to the 2018 and 2020 elections and may not generalize to future elections with different political dynamics, particularly as campaigns continue to learn and improve.
  • Industry Sponsorship/Relationship: The research was conducted only with ads tested by the Swayable platform. Some of the findings support the use of ad testing. While I’m not accusing the researchers of anything, it’s important to note the relationship. It’s crucial to be critical when interpreting the results.

I will note the authors do a good job and are transparent in offering these caveats.

Additional Areas of Potential Study

  • Bipartisan Analysis: Expanding the dataset to include Republican campaigns could reveal whether persuasion techniques differ by political party / ideology.
  • Non-partisan Analysis: Expanding the dataset to include ballot initiatives and issue ads could reveal whether persuasion techniques differ from partisan activities.
  • Primary / General Election Analysis:  Expanding the ads studied to group intra-party (primary) versus inter-party (general) could reveal some significant differences.  This is especially critical given the substantial number of elections decided in the primary, influenced by sorting and gerrymandering.
  • Field Experiments: Testing ads in real-world settings—not just surveys—would enhance ecological validity.  Would the results be ‘replicated’ in focus groups?
  • Ad Context: Future research could explore how competing ads or media coverage influence ad effectiveness.

Conclusion

For me, this is one of those frustrating studies. When you read the title, the title promises answers, but the study raises more questions than it answers.

This research sheds light on how Democratic campaigns use experiments to refine their strategies, emphasizing the need for ad testing in a rapidly changing political environment. However, as Steve Schale, a Democratic operative from Florida, points out, ad-testing can become an obsession that overshadows the larger narrative of the campaign.  He writes, “”We (Democrats) were addicted to ad-testing, to the point that it drove decision-making more this cycle than the desire or need to tell a story.”

The study concludes that ad effectiveness is deeply tied to the specific context of each election, meaning strategies that worked in 2018 might not have the same impact in 2020, let along in 2026 or 2028.  This highlights the challenge for campaigns: predicting what will work is difficult, and there are no guarantees. In fact, attempting to replicate past success is likely to be a futile endeavor.

A cynic would write, the authors conclude that persusion is extremely context driven, and what may work in one election may not work in another….whomp whomp.  Therefore, campaigns should test ads.

Nevertheless, the cumulative impact of even small shifts in ad effectiveness can influence election outcomes, particularly in tight races. The study underscores the growing importance of data-driven decision-making in modern campaigns, but it also leaves many questions unanswered—questions that future research will need to address to refine our understanding of political ad effectiveness.

The Audacious Public Affairs Playbook: What Bold Tactics Are Being Used

The Audacious Public Affairs Playbook: What Bold Tactics Are Being Used

by | Dec 17, 2024 | Political Research

In political theory, two dominant models attempt to explain how power and public policy are shaped within a democracy.

The first is pluralism, the idea that a diverse array of interest groups competes within the political arena, with policies emerging as a compromise reflecting the public’s competing demands.

The second is elitism, which argues that a small, concentrated group of individuals or entities—typically those with significant economic or institutional power—dominates decision-making, often to the exclusion of broader societal interests.

But, as they say, “all models are wrong, but some are useful.”

Reality is rarely so clear-cut. Enter elite pluralism, a hybrid model that offers a more nuanced perspective. This theory acknowledges the competitive nature of pluralism but emphasizes that not all interest groups are created equal. While many groups may vie for influence, certain “elite” groups—those with disproportionate access to resources, networks, and institutional power—inevitably hold a stronger hand.

Elite pluralism explains why some voices, despite the principles of democratic competition, resonate more loudly in the halls of power.  It’s not just about having a seat at the table; it’s about owning the table—or at least the most valuable seats around it.  While competition exists it is just not a fair fight among equals.

Well-resourced groups have mastered this interplay between pluralism and elitism, creating systems where competition seemingly exists, but the winners are often predetermined. The audacious tactics they use to shape policy and public opinion are worth exploring.

NOTE: In this blog post, I am not making a normative argument. My aim is to acknowledge the tactics I have witnessed—and at times employed—in public affairs. It is up to you, the reader, to draw your own conclusions about the morality of these practices and their intersection with the First Amendment rights to free speech, petitioning the government, and assembly.

“Any man who tries to be good all the time is bound to come to ruin among the great number who are not good. Hence a prince who wants to keep his authority must learn how not to be good, and use that knowledge, or refrain from using it, as necessity requires.”    ― Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince

The Audacious Public Affairs Playbook

A deeper dive into tactics used to shape the political battleground by any means necessary.

Machiavelli is often misquoted or misunderstood as saying, “It is better to be feared than loved.” That’s not exactly what he wrote.

In The Prince, he actually wrote: “Whether it is better to be loved than feared, or the reverse. The answer is, of course, that it would be best to be both loved and feared.”

However, he acknowledged that ideal conditions rarely exist, and when forced to choose, one should resort to being feared. Why? Because people are fickle. Love persists only as long as it aligns with self-interest, but the fear of pain and punishment remains constant.

In the world of public affairs, these principles are alive and well. I’ve generally categorized the tactics in the audacious playbook into two main camps: Buying Your Love or Beating It Out of You.

“Buying Your Love” Public Affairs Tactics

Tactic:  Campaign Contributions & PACs

Financial support for political candidates or causes can buy access, influence, and loyalty. Well-resourced groups often make substantial donations to ensure that their voices are heard in the policy-making process.  This is especially true in the era of super pacs and in the wake of the Citizens United decision.

Example: Elon Musk spends $277 million to back Trump and Republican candidates

Example2: Why some California Democrats take Big Oil money and vote against environmental laws

Tactic: Astroturfing

Creating the illusion of grassroots support to sway public opinion or influence policymakers. By creating a citizens group with little no to citizens “public” support can be seemingly manufactured for a cause, and groups can seem more popular or legitimate than they truly are.

Example:  Microsoft accuses Google of secretly funding regulatory astroturf campaign

Tactic: Lobbying

Direct interaction with lawmakers, regulators, and government officials to push for favorable policies. This often involves offering expertise, research, and sometimes personal incentives to sway decisions.  For example, the pharmaceutical industry spent $293,701,614 in 2024.

Example:  Lobbying Data Summary

Example2:  Lobbying Top Spenders by Sector

Example3:  Lobbying Top Spenders by Industry

Tactic: Think Tanks & Research Funding

Well-resourced groups can fund research from “intellectually” aligned groups or universities, or even establish think tanks to produce research supporting their agenda. These tactics lend credibility and shape public discourse by presenting biased information as fact.

Example:The Secret Donors Behind the Center for American Progress and Other Think Tanks

Example2:  Public Universities Get an Education in Private Industry

Tactic: Partnerships with Charities or Foundations

Donations to charitable organizations or foundations can help create positive public relations, align with a specific cause, and gain goodwill among key stakeholders. This can also be a form of indirect influence and sometimes leads to implicit quid pro quo.

Example:  Strings Attached: How utilities use charitable giving to influence politics and increase investor profits

Tactic: Revolving Door Employment

Hiring former government officials to serve in advisory roles or as lobbyists. This builds connections and ensures that former decision-makers continue to champion the interests of the group they once regulated.

Example: Video: Jack Abramoff: The lobbyist’s playbook on 60min 

Tactic: Cultural Influence

Sponsorships and partnerships with media outlets, celebrities, and influencers can shape public opinion and create a favorable cultural narrative around the group’s goals.

 Example:  Influencers are playing a big role in this year’s election. There’s no way to tell who’s getting paid for their endorsements

Tactic: Political Endorsements and Strategic Alliances

Aligning with influential political figures or organizations can boost credibility and secure powerful allies in decision-making.

Example:  LeBron James Shares Strong Political Message On New Nike Sneakers

Example2:  Harris Grabs Green New Deal Network Endorsement That Eluded Biden  

Example 3: Fossil fuel firms ‘spent £4bn on sportswashing’ says report

Tactic: Event Sponsorships

Hosting or sponsoring high-profile events (e.g., policy conferences, galas) to gain access to influential stakeholders and enhance visibility.

Example: The Davos Forum and its role in networking

Tactic: Educational Initiatives or Scholarships

Funding educational programs or scholarships that align with policy goals to build goodwill and influence future thought leaders.

Example: Koch Foundation Criticized Again For Influencing Florida State

“Beating it Out of You” Public Affairs Tactics

A quick note on the use of the “dark arts” in public affairs: Sponsoring groups rarely engage in these tactics directly (especially if they are a public company). Instead, they often employ a layered strategy.

The key is to establish plausible deniability by structuring operations through cutouts often consultants and/or trade associations. By creating multiple layers, those funding the efforts (often to the tune of millions of dollars) can testify under oath that while their money may have been used to advance their interests, they had “no knowledge” of the specific tactics or details. They can then claim with a straight face, “Yes, we spent millions.  We also always follow the law at XYZ group, have a dedicated compliance department, and firmly believe in our right to participate in the political process.  We control no 501c(4) nor do we have a record of ever funding said group.  XYZ has broken no laws.”

“So far as he is able, a prince should stick to the path of good but, if the necessity arises, he should know how to follow evil.”  ― Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince

Tactic: Opposition Research

In-depth digging into the backgrounds, records, and personal lives of political opponents or critics. This can be used to discredit individuals, create scandal, or shift public opinion against adversaries.

Example: Definers tries to reboot after Facebook oppo research controversy

Tactic: Corporate Espionage

In some cases, organizations may resort to stealing trade secrets, confidential information, or engaging in sabotage to gain a competitive or political edge.

Example:  Linwei Ding was a Google software engineer. He was also a prolific thief of trade secrets, say prosecutors.

Tactic: Smear Campaigns

Negative campaigning or information warfare designed to destroy reputations, spread misinformation, or stoke fear. This can be targeted at individuals, organizations, or entire movements that oppose the group’s interests.

Example: Facebook resorts to old smear tactics against TikTok
Example2: Facebook exposed in Google smear campaign

Tactic: Threats of Retaliation

Using threats, whether economic (such as pulling investments) or political (such as targeting re-election campaigns), to punish or coerce opponents into submission.  The old “you’ll never work in this town again” threat.

Example:  Trump has made more than 100 threats to prosecute or punish perceived enemies

Tactic: Legal Pressure and Litigation

Filing lawsuits or using the legal system to intimidate or financially drain opponents. Well-resourced groups may use legal battles as a form of harassment, knowing that smaller groups lack the resources to fight back.

Example: Frivolous suits stalk journalists in states without anti-SLAPP laws

Example2: Appeals court upholds Rick Wilson win over Michael Flynn in defamation case 

Tactic: Astroturfing as a Coercive Tool

While also used to manufacture support, astroturfing can be deployed in a more aggressive form to attack and drown out opposition voices, overwhelming public discourse with misleading or false narratives.

Example: Mad at MADD

Tactic: Media Manipulation

Using media to create fear, confusion, or resentment toward certain groups, issues, or individuals. This can include planting stories, leaking confidential information, or directly influencing journalists to push a particular narrative.

We are now in the phase with media becoming so fractured that certain organizations are attempting to purchase media outlets outright or fund them via advertising / sponsorships as to co-opt any ‘journalistic’ standards.  

Example: Powerbrokers: How FPL secretly took over a Florida news site and used it to bash critics

Example:  In the Southeast, power company money flows to news sites that attack their critics

Tactic: Monetary and Economic Leverage

Threatening to withdraw funding or financial support from entities that don’t align with the group’s interests. This tactic uses economic influence as a means of forcing compliance or silence.

Example:  Harvard and UPenn donor revolt raises concerns about big money on campuses

Tactic: Political Bullying and Intimidation

Using the power of government or other institutional levers to punish or pressure opponents. This can involve public shaming, threats of regulatory crackdowns, or direct threats of political retaliation.

Example:  Twitter accused of bullying anti-hate campaigners

Tactic: Straight Up Bribery

The direct exchange of money, gifts, or favors to secure a specific action or decision from a government official, policymaker, or other influential figure.  R real quid pro quo.  While illegal in most democracies, bribery remains a clandestine tool used to bypass traditional lobbying and advocacy efforts when outcomes are deemed critical or urgent by well-resourced entities. (and now thanks to SCOTUS, it appears you can have a winky winky agreement and then tip after.)

Example: Indian billionaire Gautam Adani’s business empire at risk amid U.S. indictment for fraud, bribery

Example2: Supreme Court sides with mayor accused of accepting a bribe in latest ruling to limit public anti-corruption laws

Conclusion: Understanding the Audacious Public Affairs Playbook


This audacious public affairs playbook is neither exhaustive nor prescriptive. It highlights the lengths to which well-resourced groups can and will go to influence policy, perception, and power. Some tactics operate within the bounds of the law, others test its limits in legal gray areas, and a few are outright illegal. Many fall into ethical gray zones, while others blatantly cross ethical lines.

In an ideal democracy, every voice would be heard equally. Yet, as elite pluralism demonstrates, the reality is far more complex. Influence, access, and resources skew the playing field, often leaving ordinary citizens to compete against entities with disproportionate power.

Whether you admire or detest the tactics in this playbook, they reveal the raw, realpolitik side of public affairs.

However, don’t become too cynical. History is full of examples where less-resourced efforts have defied the odds to harness public opinion and achieve policy or political victories. Often, these successes come in reaction to a well-resourced group overplaying its hand or through decisive legal action.

While power and resources undeniably play significant roles in public affairs, they are not invincible.  Just as the casino doesn’t win every time…..luck and timing can lead to a winning hand.  However, continuing the casino metaphor, over time, the odds remain stacked in favor of the well-resourced. And like in a casino, the house usually wins.

As you reflect on these methods, ask yourself: Where do you draw the line between strategy and manipulation? Between fair competition and coercion? Public affairs, like democracy itself, demands constant vigilance, active participation, and critical scrutiny to ensure it serves the public good.

What’s your take? Are these tactics necessary evils, or do they erode trust in our institutions?  Most importantly, what was left out?

PS.  We must pay homage to two of the biggest contributors to the playbook.

The original OG:  The Tobacco Industry

Then the Energy Industry took tobacco’s playbook and improved upon it.

 

 

Campaigns, Ads, and Experiments: How Political Science Meets Persuasion

Can AI Change Minds in a Polarized Electorate?

by | Dec 13, 2024 | Political Research

Rarely do I read an academic study that terrifies me.  Well…unfortunately my colleague sent me a study that sent chills down my spine.  The future is here, and we aren’t likely to be prepared for it.

As we have written before, persuasion is hard. If you’ve ever tried to convince a friend on any political issue or even to watch your favorite show (and failed), you know how tough it can be. Now imagine a chatbot trying to do it! Crazy, right? Well, not so much.

Recent research shows artificial intelligence (AI) might be better at persuasion than you think. Let’s dive into the science behind this surprising finding.

Title: Artificial Intelligence Can Persuade Humans on Political Issues

Link:  https://osf.io/preprints/osf/stakv

Peer Review Status: Peer-reviewed

Citation:Citation: Bai, Hui, Jan G. Voelkel, Johannes C. Eichstaedt, and Robb Willer. 2023. “Artificial Intelligence Can Persuade Humans on Political Issues.” Stanford University.

PDF download

Article:  AI’s Powers of Political Persuasion 

Introduction

This study explores whether AI, specifically GPT-3, can influence human opinions on political issues. The research tackles a simple yet profound question: Can AI persuade as effectively as humans? Spoiler alert: The answer is yes—and it’s got people talking about the implications for politics and beyond.

Methodology

The researchers conducted three experiments, testing AI-generated messages on over 4,800 Americans. Using GPT-3, they created persuasive messages about policies like public smoking bans, assault weapon restrictions, and carbon taxes. Participants were randomly assigned to read messages from either AI, humans, or AI-curated by humans.

Here’s the breakdown:

  • Sample Size: 4,836 participants across three studies. (n=1,203; n=2,023; n=1610 in respective studies)
  • Design: Randomized survey experiments.
  • Message Content: Varied by policy, with prompts asking authors (both human and AI) to craft persuasive arguments.

Results and Findings

The findings were clear: AI can persuade humans, even on hot-button political issues.

Here are the highlights:

  1. Persuasion Worked Across the Board: AI messages led to small but significant increases in policy support—similar to human-written messages.
    • Example: AI nudged support for an assault weapon ban by about 1.8 points on a 101-point scale.
  2. AI Matched Humans: On average, AI messages were just as effective as those written by people.
  3. Perception Differences: Participants viewed AI-generated content as more logical and factual but less emotional and creative than human-crafted arguments.
  4. The study also revealed that AI’s persuasive power held steady across polarized topics like gun control.

Critiques and Areas for Future Study

While the results are impressive, they come with caveats:

  • Small Effect Sizes: As with most persuasion studies, the observed effects were modest.
  • Generalizability: The sample was diverse but drawn from online platforms, which may limit broader applicability.
  • Context-Specific: Would AI fare as well in face-to-face persuasion or with entirely different audiences?

Future research could explore how AI performs in dynamic debates or if adding emotional elements or visuals could make AI messages more compelling.

Another promising direction would be to study the cumulative effect of message bombardment. Preliminary findings suggest that it’s not always the quality of a single messenger that sways opinions but the volume and variety of different voices delivering the message.

An important takeaway from this paper is that the research utilized GPT-3, and since the introduction of GPT-3, the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) have advanced significantly, showing no signs of slowing down. This rapid evolution underscores the need for continuous examination as the technology becomes even more sophisticated.

Conclusion

This study marks a step in understanding AI’s role in persuasion. As AI tools continue to advance, their capacity to shape opinions could significantly influence politics, advertising, and even our interpersonal communication.

While the observed effects may seem modest, the effects are small with humans.  The real power of AI lies in its scalability. When combined with automation, this technology poses a potential threat, particularly in the hands of malicious actors. The ability to produce persuasive messages at scale could amplify foreign interference in elections or facilitate widespread misinformation campaigns.

Although I hesitate to advocate for additional regulations, the immense power of these tools demands responsibility.  It is why the authors write, “Our findings call for immediate consideration of regulations of the use of AI in political activities.” 

Moreover, we cannot overlook the role of platforms like TikTok.  Our youth are unknowingly contributing to the development of AI technologies that could potentially be leveraged against us.

I agree, policymakers must remain vigilant, as the risks of unregulated use could undermine public trust.  

Reflecting on these implications, I suddenly feel a bit like a Luddite.   UGH!

The Hero’s Journey in Politics: Lightsabers, Wands, and Brooms

The Hero’s Journey in Politics: Lightsabers, Wands, and Brooms

by | Dec 10, 2024 | Political Media

“Ok, enough about polarization. Got anything else?”

Leave it to a friend to let you know when you’ve beaten a dead horse.

Fine, I went to see Wicked last weekend with my daughter, wife, and another 50 or so theater kids.

As is tradition, I leaned over during the show to share my profound wisdom  whispering, “You know this is basically Star Wars, but with brooms. Harry Potter, but with brooms.” My daughter, naturally, rolled her eyes. (To be fair, she rolls her eyes at me constantly, but I could actually hear it this time—even in the dark.)

Let me explain.

The Hero’s Journey

When I teach Advanced Campaign Strategies and Paid Media at the University of Florida, I include a module on the Hero’s Journey. My students, having not signed up for a literature class, often tilt their heads at me like confused puppies. But once they see how it applies, they understand its relevance to politics and public affairs.

The Hero’s Journey is one of the most enduring and versatile narrative structures in storytelling. It serves as a blueprint for understanding stories that transcend culture, geography, and time.

And because of that, in my opinion, it’s essential for any public affairs, government relations, or political operative to understand its power.

Why Study the Hero’s Journey?

      • Cultural Universality: From The Odyssey to Wicked, this framework reveals the shared storytelling traditions of humanity. It underscores the innate human need to explore transformation and meaning through narrative.
      • Psychological Depth: Rooted in Jungian archetypes, the Hero’s Journey resonates with individual psychological growth, presenting challenges as metaphors for personal struggles.
      • Adaptability: It applies to virtually any story—literature, film, or personal narratives—making it an invaluable tool for creators and analysts alike.

The Basic Structure of the Hero’s Journey

The Hero’s Journey unfolds in three acts, each encompassing key stages:

ACT 1:  Departure: The hero leaves the ordinary world, guided by a mentor, and steps into the unknown.

ACT 2:  Initiation: They face tests, allies, and enemies, culminating in a transformative ordeal.

ACT 3:  Return: The hero comes back, bringing newfound wisdom or an “elixir” to benefit their community.

The Hero’s Journey: A Refined Structure

The three main acts can be broken down further using Joseph Campbell’s monomyth outline,  a universal framework for storytelling, structured around the hero’s transformation. Below is an expanded explanation of its 12 stages:

ACT 1:  Departure

      • Ordinary World: The mundane life the hero begins in.
      • Call to Adventure: A challenge disrupts their ordinary life.
      • Refusal of the Call: The hero resists due to fear or doubt.
      • Meeting the Mentor: Guidance from a mentor prepares them for the journey.
      • Crossing the Threshold: The hero steps into the unknown.

ACT 2: Initiation

      • Tests, Allies, and Enemies: The hero faces challenges and builds alliances.
      • Approach to the Inmost Cave: They confront deep fears or conflicts.
      • Ordeal: A life-or-death trial leads to transformation.
      • Reward (Seizing the Sword): The hero gains knowledge, power, or treasure.

ACT 3: Return

      • The Road Back: The hero returns, facing residual dangers.
      • Resurrection: A final test solidifies their transformation.
      • Return with the Elixir: The hero brings back something to benefit their world.

That’s it.  That is most of Hollywood explained.  The challenge is once you learn the structure of the Hero’s Journey, you start understanding how ubiquitous it is.   It is everywhere.

For example, here’s a breakdown with Star Wars, Harry Potter, and Wicked:

A Hero’s Journey: light sabers, magic wands, and flying brooms.

Hero’s Journey Stage
Ordinary World
Call to Adventure
Refusal of the Call
Meeting the Mentor
Crossing the Threshold
Tests, Allies, and Enemies
Approach to the Inmost Cave
Ordeal
Reward (Seizing the Sword)
The Road Back
Resurrection
Return with the Elixir
Star Wars (Luke Skywalker)
Tatooine, working on a moisture farm.
Message from Princess Leia via R2-D2.
Hesitates due to family obligations.
Obi-Wan Kenobi.
Leaves Tatooine after family is killed.
Joins forces with Han Solo, Leia, and others; faces Darth Vader.
Sneaks into the Death Star to rescue Leia.
Confronts Vader and the Empire.
Destroys the Death Star.
Returns to the Rebel base as a hero.
Emerges as a leader of the Rebellion.
Joins the fight to restore balance to the galaxy.  (setting up the sequal to come)
Harry Potter (Harry Potter)
Living in the cupboard under the stairs.
Receiving his Hogwarts letter.
Initially unsure how to navigate his new world.
Hagrid and later Dumbledore.
Boards the train to Hogwarts.
Befriends Ron and Hermione; faces Malfoy and Snape.
Faces challenges in the Forbidden Forest.
Battles Quirrell/Voldemort for the Philosopher’s Stone.
Saves the Stone and secures peace at Hogwarts.
Faces the prospect of another year at Hogwarts with new challenges.
Learns to overcome self-doubt.
Brings hope and inspiration to his friends and peers. (setting up the sequal to come)
Wicked (Elphaba)
Growing up as an outcast in Munchkinland.
Invited to attend Shiz University.
Doubts her ability to fit in at Shiz.
Madame Morrible and Glinda.
Arrives at Shiz and begins magical studies.
Befriends Glinda and Fiyero; faces prejudice and the Wizard.
Discovers the Wizard’s corruption.
Stands against the Wizard’s oppressive rule.
Gains self-acceptance and her powers.
Flees to avoid persecution.
Fakes her death to achieve freedom.
Leaves Oz but transforms Glinda into a leader. (setting up the sequel to come)

Conclusion


Said, another way, my little trip to see the movie wasn’t an ordinary trip, it was an epic Hero’s Journey.

      • Ordinary World: A typical Saturday, before watching UF rout FSU.
      • Call to Adventure: “Dad, you’re coming, right?”
      • Refusal of the Call: “Couldn’t I just stay home and smoke some ribs?”
      • Meeting the Mentor: My wife, reminding me I’d enjoy it and spending time with my daughter.
      • Crossing the Threshold: Boarding the car with excited daugher and said wife.
      • Tests, Allies, and Enemies: My daughter’s withering eye-rolls at my whispered commentary.
      • Approach to the Inmost Cave: Waiting for Defying Gravity.
      • Ordeal: Sitting still for nearly three hours, buttery fingers, singing theatre kids, and hearing the eye rolls.
      • Reward: Sharing the joy of a movie/musical with my daughter and wife.
      • The Road Back: Riding home, processing the message and trying to sing Popular not knowing any words.
      • Resurrection: My daughter admitting (begrudgingly) that my “Star Wars with brooms, Harry Potter with brooms” comment wasn’t entirely wrong.
      • Return with the Elixir: A newfound appreciation for musicals and a silver dad medal.

See? The Hero’s Journey really is everywhere—even when you’re just a dad at a musical before a football game. (in which UF crushed FSU by a score of 31–11!)

All kidding aside, understanding the Hero’s Journey is critical for political professionals. Whether crafting campaign narratives, shaping public perceptions, or building coalitions, the ability to harness this timeless storytelling structure can be the difference between shaping influnce or falling on deaf ears.

PS.  Reminder, most of the time, it’s not about the policy, it’s the Vibes.

The Slow and Consequential Death of Local Newspapers

The Slow and Consequential Death of Local Newspapers

by | Dec 6, 2024 | Political Research

News Deserts and Civic Erosion: The Consequences of Losing Local Journalism

 

Local newspapers are closing at an alarming rate. Not only are they disappearing, but many are also merging or consolidating operations (looking at you Gannett).

Since 2005, approximately 3,200 local newspapers in the United States have either shut down or merged with other publications. Even more troubling, the rate of closures has accelerated in recent years:

  • In 2022, about two newspapers closed per week.
  • By 2023, the rate increased to 2.5 closures per week.

If this trend continues, by the end of 2024, one-third of the newspapers that existed in 2005 will be gone.

Some view this decline of traditional media as a necessary step forward—a form of “creative destruction” that clears the path for innovation and more engaging alternatives. Others, however, see it as a sad but inevitable transition, where nostalgia is being replaced by newer, seemingly “better” options that align with individual preferences.

But in the world of politics, this isn’t just a shift in how we get our news—it’s a seismic change with far-reaching consequences.

Research shows that when local newspapers fade away:

  • Local Political Awareness Erodes: Citizens know less about local issues and are less likely to participate in state and local politics.
  • Nationalization of Politics Intensifies: All politics becomes national politics.
  • Democratic Accountability Weakens: Local corruption thrives when no one is watching.
  • Civic Engagement Declines: Voter turnout decreases, especially in smaller communities.

Now, new findings tie the death of local newspapers to something even more worrisome: increased polarization and an increase in straight-ticket voting.

Let’s dive into the academic research that unpacks these intriguing connections.

Study at a Glance

  • Title: Newspaper Closures Polarize Voting Behavior
  • Link: Journal of Communication
  • Peer Review Status: Yes
  • Citation: Darr, Joshua P., Hitt, Matthew P., and Dunaway, Johanna L. 2018. “Newspaper Closures Polarize Voting Behavior.” Journal of Communication 68: 1007–1028.

Paper Introduction

The researchers sought to answer a pressing question: what happens to voting behavior when local newspapers shut down?

Specifically, they examined the effect of these closures on split-ticket voting—where voters pick candidates from different parties for different offices.

The hypothesis? Fewer newspapers might mean less local political news, leading voters to rely on national, partisan sources instead. Spoiler alert: the hypothesis holds water.

Methodology

This study employed a quasi-experimental design using genetic matching.

It compared counties with and without newspaper closures between 2009 and 2012 while controlling for demographic and economic factors.

The researchers analyzed 110 closures and measured changes in split-ticket voting by looking at differences in votes for presidential and senatorial candidates in 2012. Their main dataset came from the National Digital Newspaper Program and other demographic sources.

Results and Findings

Here’s where things get spicy:
      • A 1.9% Drop in Split-Ticket Voting Counties that lost a local newspaper saw a decline in split-ticket voting, meaning voters were more likely to align their choices strictly with party lines. While the percentage may seem small, this represents a meaningful uptick in polarization.
      • The Role of National News Voters in affected counties appeared to turn to national media, which is brimming with partisan rhetoric. Without local reporting to highlight nuanced, community-specific political issues, voters defaulted to “us versus them” party cues.
      • It’s Not About Information Loss The researchers ruled out the idea that voters simply lacked enough political information. Instead, they suggested that nationalized media drowned out diverse perspectives, emphasizing polarized party identities.

Critiques and Areas for Future Research

  1. Is 1.9% really that large? This study look at changes for national offices.  At the local level (congressional & state legislatures), it is likely that a voter lives in a safe district, and 1.9% isn’t likely to make a huge difference.
  2. Generality of Results:
    The study used counties as its unit of analysis, which may mask individual-level differences in behavior. Future research could incorporate voter surveys for a more granular view.
  3. Limited Time Frame:
    The analysis stops at 2012 (darn peer review….), and it’s unclear whether the trends persisted or grew stronger in subsequent years as media consolidation continued.  The
  4. Geographic:
    Regions with robust alternative media sources might experience less polarization than those with few news outlets.  Exploring the rural/urban divide specifically and expanding the dataset to include these factors could yield deeper insights.

Conclusion

Local newspapers are more than just sources for restaurant health reports, high school football scores, and lottery numbers.

They serve as a vital check against potential corruption and the increasing influence of nationalized, hyper-partisan news outlets.

This study presents a clear message:  local journalism is about more than mere nostalgia – it’s about mitigating the growing political divide in America.

Sadly, I believe the decline of local newspapers is now irreversible.

Despite recognizing the effects, I confess I cancelled my own subscription to the local newspaper.  The “local” newspaper had lost its local focus, and honestly, the overall product is terrible. (To add insult to injury, the cancellation process was appalling. After paying online, I was forced to speak with a persistent salesperson who tried to pressure me with “special deals” “just for me.”)

Nevertheless, it’s essential that we grasp the significant consequences of this trend.