Yesterday, the Americans had a by-election and the Democrats (currently not in power) are now in contention to win the 2008 presidential election. Do you think that campaign voice overs had anything to do with it?
Of late whenever the TV is turned on to an American station up here, there are a series of ads that start by bashing candidates running for senate posts, many of which don't even promote the candidate who sponsored the ad until the tail end of the commercial.
The tone goes from fear to an alarmingly positive tone in the dying seconds of the advertisement.
It can be a bit confusing if you don't know the players involved or that it's election time south of the border.
Both the incumbent Republicans and opposing Democrats use these tactics to secure votes for or against.
Yesterday, I found a post at the blog Pipeline written by someone sharing their experience of listening to an NPR broadcast featuring two talent who record attack voice overs.
The blogger described how they could go from one extreme to another.
Here's a quote:
"Their normal voices were similar to their TV voices, but they both used subtle changes in pacing and breathing that transformed them from normal deep-voiced guys into all-knowing voices of serious condemnation"
That's quite the extreme of use of a voice over, however, that sort of delivery is characteristic of political attack ads.
The question is: How greatly do voice overs used in political ads persuade voters one way or the other?
Did they influence your vote?
Looking forward to hearing from you.
Best,
Stephanie
