PERSPECTIVE: New twist on issue ads

By LIZ SIDOTI
The Associated Press
10/21/02 12:30 AM

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) -- Interest groups once again are running television advertisements in Ohio's two contentious Supreme Court races and one spot appears to have a double message -- dump SBC Ameritech and support the Republican candidates.

Competition Ohio, a local phone competition advocacy group bankrolled by AT&T, says its only motive is to make sure consumers have options for local phone service, and that it's not endorsing Republicans Lt. Gov. Maureen O'Connor and Justice Evelyn Lundberg Stratton.

"They insert a commercial message in what is obviously an endorsement message" and they mix the two messages in one commercial, said Samantha Sanchez, executive director of the National Institute on Money in State Politics. "It's certainly different than what we've seen."

On Nov. 5, O'Connor faces Democrat Hamilton County Municipal Judge Tim Black for an open seat while Stratton tries to defend her seat against Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Janet Burnside.

While O'Connor and Stratton are mentioned briefly in the ad, the focus is on SBC Ameritech, AT&T's main competitor. The ad accuses SBC Ameritech of taking consumer choice away by doubling rates.

Courts have allowed interest groups to run "issue advocacy" ads as long as they don't advocate a vote for or against candidates.

In 2000 and again this year, television commercials and radio advertisements have been run, but they focus on the candidates themselves and their records and imply support or opposition.

Experts say it is unusual for those political ads to also make statements about products or services, which they say is what Competition Ohio's spot does.

"They're using a standard kind of marketing technique that is creating a link between respected individuals and the company's product," said Bruce Newman, professor of marketing at DePaul University and editor of The Journal of Political Marketing. "The candidates are being used by the company to further their own interests."

Sanchez suggested that Competition Ohio could have inserted their commercial self-interest into the ad so they could deny that it was a campaign ad.

Deborah Goldberg, a deputy director at the Brennan Center for Justice, said ads combining commercial and political interests create concerns about a Supreme Court's impartiality to a whole new level.

"The public already is skeptical about the fairness and responsibility of judges," Goldberg said. "But if their names are now going to be exploited for commercial purposes, it's not clear that the public will understand that the candidates have not been involved with that company and won't be skewed if that company comes before them in a case."

O'Connor and Stratton have denounced Competition Ohio's ad, despite its apparent support for them. They say they are against interest groups getting involved in the races because judges must remain independent.

The two said they were surprised by the ad's content and had no idea that their names were going to be included.

"Clearly, this is a piece about one competitive phone company against the other. I can hardly wait to see what Coke and Pepsi do in this race," O'Connor quipped.

"It boggles my mind what they're trying to do," she said.

Stratton said Competition Ohio shouldn't be involved in Supreme Court races or imply which way she and O'Connor would vote in certain cases. She said she has received e-mails from SBC Ameritech employees who are angry that she is being associated with an AT&T front group.

"It's an attack on a competitor that uses our campaign to try to carry the message," Stratton said. "I never expected to become a pawn in a competitive battle between two phone companies."

Gregg Haught, an attorney for Competition Ohio, said the ad had little to do with the two candidates and is not being run to affect the outcome of the election.

"These ads were for the sole purpose of having decision makers and consumers throughout Ohio to focus on the issue of local telephone competition," Haught said.

SBC Ameritech said last week that AT&T was using deceptive tactics to further a corporate agenda.

"This is typical of AT&T's front groups, but this time they have gone too far," said Connie Browning, acting president of SBC Ameritech Ohio. "It's deplorable that AT&T would invoke the names and reputations of respected public officials in an effort to convey misleading information to the voters."

------

On the Net:

http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/

http://www.competitionohio.org