Abolish the Insidious 30 Second Political TV Spot

The FCC should make it illegal for TV stations to run 30 second political ads.

Why do that? Many reasons, not the least of which to stop driving voters nuts in the months and weeks before election days.

Can the FCC do that? Yes it can. The airwaves are publicly owned and licensed to private companies. For elections, the FCC already requires stations to sell equal time to candidates running for the same office, charge candidates less than the regular commercial rates, keep publicly open books in real time so all campaigns can see what others are buying, and the FCC sets other rules to referee candidate media campaigns.

A vote to abolish the 30 second political spot would likely pass with 90% public approval. That sounds like the public interest to me.

In my life as a political media producer I created more than 1,000 political commercials, most of them 30 seconds long. Not because that was my preferred length. Far from it. That’s what TV stations sell. Politics gets wedged into a format designed for commercial advertising. It has no business being in that 30 second window.

This may startle you, but if I were to write a political commercial to fit into 30 seconds, it would only be 7 typewritten lines. But then trim the spot 3 seconds for the required candidate “I approved this message disclaimer, allow some video images and sound effects run without narration, and most commercials provide about 23 seconds or fewer for copy. Three or four typewritten lines are not unusual for 30 second political commercials.

Try describing your program for education, jobs, taxes or other serious topics in 23 seconds. Or fewer.

That explains why so many campaigns do the only thing that really works in 30 seconds—attack their opponents. “My opponent’s a liar and a cheat and here’s the news headline that says so,” works nicely in 30 seconds. Require a minimum of 60 seconds and the campaign is forced to elaborate. The quick hit zinger doesn’t work as well with longer air time.

A few years ago, the British media research firm Think Box confirmed what logic tells you, longer ads drive positive perceptions and are more effective than shorter ads.

If candidates were required to run longer ads, it would likely make a world of difference for the political campaign environment. For one thing, there would be fewer ads, since 60 or 90 or 120 seconds would cost more. More importantly, you would see more ads designed to sell the candidate, not destroy the opponent.

When I began producing campaign media, longer length was my preference. I produced 5, 15, even 30 minute programs. They were really effective at introducing my candidates and establishing their character and political positions. But I generally had to fight with TV stations to clear these times. I mostly was offered 2 a.m. time slots and had to bargain my way back into reasonable access times.

Then, in a Michigan campaign, I ran into a stone wall trying to buy a five-minute program on a Kalamazoo TV station. I took my appeal to the FCC. They heard my case and voted 2-1 that 2 a.m. was reasonable access. After that, when I tried to buy longer length anywhere, stations used my own FCC case against me.

But that was then. Maybe the current FCC might see it differently.

There’s a lot wrong with political campaign communications, the 30 second spot being just one of many changes begging to be addressed. But it’s a big one. And banning it completely would make a huge, positive difference.