Negative Campaigning

History

The politics of smear campaigns have a long and dishonorable tradition, all the way back to the first contested American presidential election in 1800. While frank criticism of one's opponents is anticipated, and attacks play well with partisan crowds, speeches and debates that become personally vindictive and deliberately distort the message of an opponent cross the line into negative campaigning.

A smear campaign entails the deliberate attempt to undermine the reputation of an opponent in the eyes of the public. Obscure information on a party or a candidate can be removed from its appropriate context, and twisted to promote a misleading line. Such attacks can be very personal and hard-hitting, and candidates who are thinking of running for office often have to reflect upon what events or circumstances in their past life might come back to haunt them.

Prior to the age of radio and television, it was possible for candidates to make unsubstantiated accusations and unfounded attacks to a particular audience and by the time opponents had discovered what had been said or published, the election was over and it was too late to respond. In an age of rapid communication, political actors have to exercise greater caution. Thus, contemporary negative campaigns are more likely to distort through the presentation of decontextualized information and invitation to false inferences, rather than through simple falsification. Moreover, contemporary campaigns, notably those backed by substantial financial contributions, are able to employ a dual-track process. The most direct attacks are disassociated from the name or reputation of the candidate or party who stand to benefit from the attack, leaving them to deliver the more positive message, while others engage in mudslinging.

...