For more than a decade, the scientific community, scholars, and campaign designers have struggled with the terms campaign effectiveness and campaign effects. At first, the terms were used interchangeably in the literature, thereby obscuring the fact that some campaigns caused unintended consequences. Scholars later increased their scrutiny of the methods used to employ the term campaign effectiveness. This stage of evidence-based data collection bridged economic and epidemiological models, efficacy studies, and quasi-experimental and meta-analyses. The collective goal was focused on methodological rigor, so that across many studies, scholars could identify what constituted campaign effectiveness or success. Yet, measurement should always follow conceptualization of a term, not precede it. Hence, rhetoric is used to legitimize an existing point of view of campaign effectiveness and the challenge ...