Exercise Constitutional Right to Filter Bad Direct Mail
Posted by heatherrast on October 24th, 2008I really had no plans to make any mention about the time of year it is. Or more specifically, the crescendoing campaign period. On any level. I figure there’s enough of that going on, enough yelling and posturing, innuendo and poor humor. And that’s just from the supporters of each of the opposing political parties, not to mention the Main Men themselves.
But as much as I’ve grown weary of the magazine covers, telemarketing calls, text ads, Facebook groups, and personal, hand-scrawled letters sent unsolicited by concerned local citizens on behalf of XXX’s campaign (I made my choice quite awhile ago), its all still there, swirling about. A whole bunch of noise and static in the near background. Enough already. I’m a realist and choose to endorse the candidate whose views most closely mirror my own, and whose fleshed-out plans sound as though they’ll carry the most water. However, that doesn’t mean I have a blind eye to my candidate’s weak areas, or poor decisions. I just wish we could stick to the issues.
But really, a couple things bother me about all this. One is the mudslinging. I mean, is there no end to the point/counterpoint? How can anyone make rationale decisions when choosing? Each candidate is so earnest, working to appeal to the common man. If everything is the truth, where are the falsehoods? Or maybe, if everything is a falsehood, where is the truth? Truth is an enigma, wrapped in a riddle…
The other thing that bothers me is the astronomical amounts of money consumed in this self-righteous quest to convert the confused or ambivalent, misdirect the passionate. On a state level, I’ve received four separate pieces of direct mail from a single candidate. The messages on those pieces are very direct, and make sweeping suggestions about the other party’s misappropriation of budget during his/her last term. I’ve also received direct mail from the opponent, and the messages are syrup-sweet “down home, local grown goodness.” When you remove the situational facts (that one winner will need to make critical decisions for Iowans), what remains is little more than fingerpointing. And resources–both financial and natural–that get tossed out with the trash (hint: I don’t read 95% of the direct mail I receive).
As intelligent people in an advanced society, can we not construct a more transparent and civilized platform for debate and deliberation? I hear you rolling your eyes at me. We’re all entitled one pie-in-the-sky dream.
Like many products or services we consumers purchase, there’s a part of me that’s curious if people ever wonder (long after election time is over) if their political brand actually delivers on the promises made during the courting period, during the competitive feature-benefit comparison (or even the price/value mental gymnastics accompanying considered purchase products).
Will your candidate deliver? Or will you be sold a sweet lemon of a new ride?
Tags: direct mail, Messaging, politics
