By simply going to a bar in late fall to dodge a shower and catch up on the Bruins game it is obvious how pervasive political advertising is in the United States. Each ad break featured an advertising spot by a party, candidate, or one of the plethora of organizations attempting to influence the outcome of an electoral contest. Placing advertising into context, the authors note that in 2012, more than 4 million spots were broadcast in the name of candidates, parties, 501c organizations, and SuperPACs costing a total of $3.5 billion. Each spot had a specific aim: to build awareness, to garner material or electoral support, or to mobilize or mount a defense. The ubiquity of political advertising means a book that sets out clearly who advertises and why, as well as the strategic considerations and the potential effects, is very welcome. This work of Erika Franklin Fowler, Michael Franz, and Travis Ridout is essentially a textbook; however, the data rest upon the long history of dedication to the study of political advertising for which the Wesleyan Media Project is known. Hence, while offering a grounding in the topic, this work is able to map the development of political advertising over the course of a significant period of history, drawing on the database created at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

The study is framed by four thematic arguments. Firstly, the nature and ubiquity of political advertising is governed by the regulation, or deregulation, of sponsorship. Secondly, big data facilitates targeting. Thirdly, technology is increasingly facilitating more effective distribution. Finally, these developments influence political advertising’s persuasive impact. Basically, more political advertisements are produced, due to deregulation, that are tailored in the most sophisticated means possible so that key voters are most likely to be exposed to them and thus influenced. The chapters then focus on the core areas of regulation, volume and content, creation and testing, buying and targeting via television, online advertising, and the intended and unintended effects prior to offering thoughts for the future. Each chapter introduces the basic definitions and terrain of study, relevant data to support the argument made, and a short summary followed by four or five questions that can be used as a discussion aid with students.

The textbook style does not mean this work offers little that is original and is of little use beyond that of a teaching aid. The discussion of regulations shows that candidates are advantaged due to being offered the “lowest unit rate” when purchasing advertising space; parties, and especially the Republicans, are increasingly reliant on dark money. Dark money is aggregated finance from individual donors funnelled into spending by organizations known as 501c4 groups, which are protected from having to declare the names of donors because political campaigning is not their primary purpose. A significant issue for American democracy is thus highlighted. Without transparency over who pays, neither the veracity of claims nor the extent of corruption in the system can be adequately judged. The fact that across different electoral races between 40% and 70% of Republican ads were funded in ways that required no disclosure highlights how endemic the issue is currently and how, the authors argue, it is likely to worsen.

Despite the negative implications, however, Fowler, Franz, and Ridout return to a core premise that the more advertisements broadcast, the more voters are likely to be somewhat more informed and so able to make better decisions. If that is the case, then citizens are extremely well informed, especially during top-of-the ticket races and if they live in states where there is strong competition. The authors document the creativity of production, evidence of sophisticated targeting and microtargeting, and the increasing use of the online environment, again highlighting multiple opportunities for exposure to political campaign messages wherever citizens consume media. They provide different patterns of usage across online platforms, in terms of platform use and content posted by candidates, though it is disappointing that there is no discussion of the reasons. However, the consistent finding is the level of negativity and its increase, with a rise from 36% to 65% in 2000–14 and the uniformity of content style independent of platform. Critiques of negative advertising abound; hence, this factor might in itself lead us to question whether advertising leads to more informed citizens making better decisions.

The authors defend their claim firstly by arguing that a majority of political advertisements offer substantive policy detail at some level, suggesting this is beneficial for democratic debate. However, when they discuss effects, the data are used to arrive at the somewhat nebulous conclusion that as campaigns are characterized by two-sided flows of information and argumentation, any effect is conditional on the character of the citizens, their context, the levels of exposure enjoyed, and their intellectual sophistication. The positive perspective of advertising therefore rests on accepting that, within the moment of exposure and cumulatively over the course of campaign, a citizen feels informed by a trustworthy source. Yet citizens claim that the most credible advertisements are those from 501c organizations, which can make any claim they wish, generally claim to have strong patriotic ties, and can promote a candidate on any basis desired. The authors recognize this to be problematic but downplay its significance when considering how citizens interact with campaign communication.

It is of course true, as the authors set out in Chapter 7, that advertising is crucial for unknown candidates running in down-ballot races where name recognition needs to be established. But whether it is accurate, as suggested in the subsequent chapter, that exposure to an advertisement can lead to elaboration and independent information seeking is not proven but presented as a likely consequence only. The argument rests on data suggesting that between 66% and 95% of policy advertisements make specific promises and claims to aid voter choices. Questions relating to negativity are somewhat dismissed. Voters accept any attack they deem fair, though this can be influenced by partisan attachment, and any loss of support due to voter distaste for negativity is deemed minimal. In the authors’ conclusion, advertising is deemed positive, remains essential, and so is likely to increase, with greater levels of targeting and 501c-sponsored ads likely.

The positive perception of political advertising may jar with many readers’ sensibilities; the narrative is that advertising is increasingly negative and voters are falling out of love with this style of campaigning. Certainly the media have reinforced this perception, and the Wesleyan team offers counterevidence based on hard data available. The argument is not wholly watertight, however. Some citizens may find negativity offensive and be increasingly prone to avoiding all political messages; others may find negative spots informative. Determining an aggregate effect is complex at best, possibly impossible. The authors build an evidence-based case to give an overview of how political advertising works in America, and in doing so offer a more positive view of its impacts. The work should certainly encourage lively debates in the classroom while providing food for thought for the academic community that wishes to learn more about this complex topic. To those academics and the many students of politics, Political Advertising in the United States will prove an invaluable resource.