I got this idea after McCain got just that type of treatment last week. The ad, which compared Barack Obama to Brittany Spears and Paris Hilton, was shown every day during the week, almost on an hourly basis, by all three networks. There's no way the McCain campaign could have afforded such coverage. Thanks to those networks, they didn't have to.
I also began to think that the bar for what is an over the top ad has gotten lower and lower. I didn't think the McCain ad was a cheap shot. In fact, I thought it was quite clever. It didn't say anything negative about Obama, it just pointed out that he is famous for just being famous and not much else. People who think otherwise should remember the Harry Truman quote, "I don't give 'em Hell, I just tell the truth and they think it's Hell."
If you want ot see a cheap shot ad, go back and look at what the Swift Boaters die to John Kerry. You can also go look up ads used against Harold Ford and Max Cleveland. Now those were cheap shots. By the way, those ads also got saturation coverage when they came out.
By Monday morning I found that the McCain campaign was thinking the same thing I was. They put out a new ad that once again kidded Obama about being famous for just being famous. This time they put the ad out in limited markets and took a chance that the networks would five it the same treatment that the other one got. They were right. McCain's people even told the networks what they were doing, and they still got away with it.
One reason this happens is because when you get right down to it, it is hard to find enough news to fill 24 hours. I mean, if there isn't a missing white woman to look for or a car chase, you just have to take what you can get. That's how come I also learned Monday morning the People Magazine paid $15 million dollars to get the first pictures of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie's twins.
Boy, times sure have changed. I've heard that when I was born people paid my parents not to show them pictures.


