- Harper Attack Ads - an Insult to the Intelligence and Integrity of all Canadians

Submitted: 9:42 AM on January 27, 2011 The Globe and Mail
Only 15 per cent of Canadians follow politics, but Liberals see hope in the other 85, Jane Taber, The Globe and Mail, 27 Jan.'11
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/only-15-per-cent-of-canadians-follow-federal-politics-but-liberal-pollster-sees-hope-in-the-other-85/article1883878/

[Opps - Jane Taber again - oh well. My last one wasn't pulled so perhaps there's hope, yet]

"only 15 per cent of the Canadian electorate is paying attention to federal politics."

I would be very careful about interpreting that.

For one thing is "paying attention to politics" the same thing as "being influenced by the Harper attack ads".

If one is using the buying a new care comparison, you need only look at the impact the media reports on the Toyota recalls and safety concerns had on the general 'psyche' of the car driving public.

When it comes time to decide what car to buy they have already in their general car related impressions buried in their subconscious this 'feeling' that Toyota is not a good car. One need only look at the car sales since these media reports started coming out.

The buyer may very well not even dredge these negative feelings up from their unconscious to review and analyze their truth and current applicability in the cold hard light of logic and reality. They simply say, "mummm, I don't know about Toyota, I'm not sure they are a good for the job".

That is why Harper and the Con's spend millions well in advance of campaigns. Harper is not stupid, the attack ads are not a waste of money. They are, however, an insult to the intelligence and integrity of all Canadians

That is what the Flanagan Fundamental Principle of Con'ism is all about - “It doesn't have to be true. It just has to be plausible". It need only contain strong emotional and be devoid of rational content

The unconscious negative impact of the Harper attack ads can explains the Dion phenomenon - he was negatively defined before the election was ever called. That can explains why Ignatieff gets such poor support under leadership.

This phenomenon is also at the heart of the viscous person attacks on the integrity of those that dare to say anything Harper and the Con's don't like.

The high emotional content and negativity also play out very well with the right-wing extremist nature of the 33% die-hard Con supporters, epi-centred in Alberta. It acts as a rallying cry encouraging them to respond with contributions and support. The truth or reality of the attacks have nothing to do with it.

When people are inundated with the negativity well in advance of an election they are not focusing on it. That is a bad thing, not good. Since, they may not look at it under the cold hard reality of truth and facts, except only superficially - i.e. is it plausible, but simply and unconsciously 'file it away' in their unconscious to be looked at when it is relevant - i.e during an election. When the time comes what rises up from the unconscious is this the general negativity of the original message and it may very well never by analyzed rationally.

It seems to me studies have shown that attack ads must be countered within 48 hours in order to counteract the psychological impact.

Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html