Political marketing Essay

The cost of political marketing has been continually on the rise as campaigns grow to be more elaborate and extensive. The cost of advertising alone can cost a national candidate tens of millions of dollars, with local state candidates not lagging behind such figure. This amount is for commercials alone; added expenditures are surveys, exit polls, campaign paraphernalia, and countless other ‘necessary’ expenses. This, I believe, is both good and bad for democracy, but if I were forced to make a choice, I would advocate for election spending regulation, as an unchecked system can threaten our quality of democracy. The advantage of the limitless campaign spending is that it is in line with the democratic principle of unregulated participation. If more people and companies opt to support a candidate, then it is clearly a sign that such candidate is the preferred representative of the populace. In addition, the advantage of the incumbent, which is deemed to be at 15%, can prove to be an obstacle difficult to surpass for challengers who would start in the political field with marginal popularity and limited funds. Also, limiting campaign spending to promote democracy may be in itself paradoxical as the very act or regulation can be argued to violate certain democratic values, like free choice and participation. The clear disadvantage of unchecked campaign and political marketing spending is that it can lead to corruption of candidate and possible electoral victors. Big businesses and corporations would naturally expect payback for their contributions; hence the winning official would be in political debt at the very start of his tenure. Also, it does not promote a level playing field, where the most financially resourceful or those with their own money can have an unfair advantage over new players, who possibly are more qualified. The idea of democracy is equality of opportunities, and regulation does not mean that it is essentially undemocratic; in fact, campaign regulation promotes the values of fair competition and effective representation. Therefore, I support regulation of campaign spending.