Spending Fast and Furious: Political Advertising in 2020
-
Travis N. Ridout
,
Erika Franklin Fowler
Abstract
This article is a “first look” at political advertising in 2020. Spending on political advertising in the United States in 2020 obliterated records, and Democrats held huge advantages in the presidential race and in most congressional and senatorial races. In addition, all indicators suggest that spending on digital advertising continued to rise. Political advertising was largely similar in tone to past years and, in the presidential race, was substantially more positive than 2016. In addition, interest groups remained heavily involved in federal races in 2020, airing more ads than ever before, though their spending as a percentage of total ad spending was slightly less than in 2016. Political ad spending in 2020 may have been historically high because of the impact of COVID-19 on how campaigns could reach voters, suggesting that paid advertising may decline in 2022 and 2024, at least as a percentage of total election spending.
Acknowledgements
Tracking political advertising in real-time across multiple platforms is an increasingly complicated and time-consuming task. We are indebted to Laura Baum, Pavel Oleinikov, Colleen Bogucki, Markus Neumann, Jielu Yao, and the numerous Wesleyan students who make the work possible. They include Natalie Appel, Liz Atalig, Spencer Dean, Sam Feuer, Angela Loyola, Kevin McMorrow, Brianna Mebane, Conner Sexton, Roshaan Siddiqui, and Natchanok ‘Pim’ Wandee from our Delta Lab computational team, as well as our human coding team, especially our student supervisor Eleanor Raab. The Wesleyan Media Project partners with the Center for Responsive Politics to assess outside group activity and gratefully acknowledges support from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, the Democracy Fund and Wesleyan University. The views presented here are solely those of the authors, as are any errors.
Appendix Graphs and tables
Top groups in 2020.
| Group | First ad | Last Ad | Airings | Cost | Races | Type | Disclose Donors? | Party Lean |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Senate Majority PACa | 2/25/20 | 11/3/20 | 177,923 | $155,814,150 | Sen: AZ, CO, GA, IA, ME, MI, MT, NC, NM, SC, TX | SuperPAC | Partial | D |
| Senate Leadership Fund | 5/29/19 | 11/3/20 | 126,865 | $155,838,300 | Pres; Sen: AK, AZ, CO, GA, IA, KS, ME, MI, MT, NC, SC | SuperPAC | Partial | R |
| FF PAC | 9/29/20 | 11/3/20 | 91,556 | $113,104,170 | Pres; Sen: ME, NC, TX | Carey | Partial | D |
| House Majority PACa | 8/18/20 | 11/3/20 | 86,292 | $98,558,690 | Hou: AK1, AR2, AZ6, CA21, CA25, CA39, CA48, CO3, FL26, GA6, GA7, IA1, IA2, IA3, IL13, IL14, IL17, IN5, KS3, ME2, MI3, MN1, MN2, MN7, MO2, NE2, NJ2, NJ7, NM2, NV3, NV4, NY1, NY2, NY11, NY22, NY24, OH1, OK5, OR4, PA1, PA8, PA10, SC1, TX7, TX21, TX22, TX23, TX24, UT4, VA2, VA5, VA7, WI3 | Carey | Partial | D |
| Congressional Leadership Fund | 8/6/19 | 11/3/20 | 86,280 | $95,517,070 | Hou: AK1, AR2, CA21, CA25, CO3, FL26, GA7, IA1, IA2, IA3, IL13, IL17, IN5, ME2, MI3, MI6, MI11, MN1, MN7, MO2, MT1, NC8, NC9, NC11, NE2, NJ2, NM2, NV3, NY1, NY2, NY11, NY22, NY24, OH1, OK5, OR4, PA1, PA10, SC1, TX7, TX12, TX22, TX24, UT4, VA2, VA5, VA7, WA3, WI3 | SuperPAC | Partial | R |
| America First Action | 4/17/20 | 11/3/20 | 86,206 | $75,660,450 | Pres | SuperPAC | Partial | R |
| One Nation | 7/26/19 | 9/4/20 | 65,263 | $36,839,650 | Sen: AL, AZ, CO, GA, IA, KS, KY, ME, MI, MT, NC | 501c4 | No | R |
| Priorities USA Actiona | 2/25/20 | 11/3/20 | 54,990 | $43,236,540 | Pres | Carey | Partial | D |
| Club for Growthb | 3/13/19 | 11/3/20 | 44,357 | $27,119,350 | Pres; Sen: AL, KS, GA; Hou: AL1, AL2, AZ6, CO3, FL19, GA7, GA9, IN5, KY4, ME2, MI10, MT1, NC3, NC9, OH1, OK5, PA10, SC1, TN1, TX12, TX21, VA7, WI7 | SuperPAC | Yes | R |
| Majority Forward | 1/18/19 | 8/18/20 | 41,357 | $21,908,730 | Sen: AZ, CO, GA, IA, ME, MI, MT, NC | 501c4 | No | D |
| Independence USA PAC | 9/29/20 | 11/3/20 | 38,441 | $45,057,040 | Pres; Hou: MI11 | SuperPAC | Yes | D |
| Preserve America PAC | 9/1/20 | 11/3/20 | 33,774 | $71,431,980 | Pres | SuperPAC | Yes | R |
| AB PACb | 11/13/19 | 11/3/20 | 34,523 | $28,981,870 | Pres | SuperPAC | Partial | D |
| Duty and Honor | 8/5/20 | 9/2/20 | 30,618 | $19,671,470 | Sen: AL, AZ, CO, GA, ME, MI, MT, NC | 501c4 | No | R |
| Doctor Patient Unity | 8/1/19 | 4/10/20 | 24,711 | $21,524,640 | Hou: CA23; Sen: AL, AZ, CO, GA, IA, KY, LA, ME, MI, MN, NC, NH, TX, VA | 501c4 | No | D |
| VoteVetsb | 8/7/19 | 11/3/20 | 24,386 | $18,720,620 | Pres; Sen: AZ, AK, ME, MI, NC, TX; Hou: KY6, NM3, PA17, TX23, VA2, VA7, NC9, NY24, VA5 | Carey | Partial | D |
| Women Vote | 2/25/20 | 11/3/20 | 21,023 | $13,483,240 | Sen: IA, KS, ME, TX; Hou: AR2, CO3, IA2, IL3, IL13, IN5, MI3, MO2, NM2, NY24, OH1, OK5, TX21, TX23, VA5 | SuperPAC | Yes | D |
| Unite the Country | 12/9/19 | 11/3/20 | 15,974 | $15,329,890 | Pres | SuperPAC | Partial | D |
| 314 Action Fund | 9/24/19 | 11/3/20 | 15,475 | $5,221,020 | Sen: AK; Hou: CA21, NY1, SC1, VA5 | Carey | Yes | D |
| House Majority Forwarda | 8/20/19 | 10/28/20 | 14,569 | $8,650,050 | Hou: CA21, CA49, IA1, IA3, ME2, MI3, MI8, MI11, MN2, NC9, NH1, NM2, NV3, NY19, NY22, NY24, OK5, PA8, PA10, SC1, TX16, UT4, VA2, VA7 | 501c4 | No | D |
| American Action Network | 10/19/19 | 8/25/20 | 14,500 | $7,699,440 | Hou: IA1, IA3, IL13, ME2, MI8, MN1, MN7, NC8, NE2, NJ3, NM2, NV3, NY19, NY21, NY22, NY24, OK5, PA8, PA10, PA17, SC1, UT4, VA2, VA7 | 501c4 | No | R |
| American Crossroads | 9/12/20 | 11/3/20 | 12,167 | $26,034,660 | Sen: IA, KS, ME, NC | SuperPAC | Yes | R |
| Persist PAC | 2/19/20 | 3/4/20 | 12,044 | $9,622,250 | Pres | SuperPAC | Yes | D |
| Plains PAC | 7/7/20 | 11/3/20 | 11,900 | $12,431,150 | Sen: IA, KS | SuperPAC | Partial | R |
| America First Policies, Inc. | 3/20/19 | 10/27/20 | 11,849 | $3,149,940 | Pres; Sen: AL, MI; Hou: IA1, ME2, NC11, NM2, NY19, NY22, OH4, OK5, PA8, SC1, UT4, VA7, WI3 | 501c4 | No | R |
| total | 985,309 | $964,819,560 | ||||||
| % of all group spending | 64.6% | 68.9% |
Source: Kantar/CMAG with analysis from Wesleyan Media Project. Group classifications from Center for Responsive Politics.aExcludes some ads co-sponsored with another group. bAired ads using some different names and disclosure classifications. Primary sponsor type is included here; ad totals sum across the group types.
Ads by group type in presidential and house races.
References
Broockman, D., and J. Kalla. 2020. “When and Why are Campaigns’ Persuasive Effects Small? Evidence from the 2020 US Presidential Election.” OSF Preprints, https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/m7326.Search in Google Scholar
Fowler, E. F., M. M. Franz, and T. N. Ridout. 2019. “The Blue Wave: Assessing Political Advertising Trends and Democratic Advantages in 2018.” PS: Political Science and Politics 43 (1): 57–63, https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049096519001240.Search in Google Scholar
Fowler, E. F., T. Ridout, and M. Franz. 2017. “Political Advertising in 2016: The Presidential Election as Outlier?” The Forum: A Journal of Applied Research in Contemporary Politics 14 (4): 445–70.10.1515/for-2016-0040Search in Google Scholar
Franz, M. 2007. Choices and Changes: Interest Groups in the Electoral Process. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Franz, M., and T. Ridout. 2010. “Political Advertising and Persuasion in the 2004 and 2008 Presidential Elections.” American Politics Research 38 (2): 303–29, https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x09353507.Search in Google Scholar
Passwaiter, S. 2020. “Political Ad Spending this Year Reached a Whopping $8.5 Billion.” AdAge, https://adage.com/article/campaign-trail/political-ad-spending-year-reached-whopping-85-billion/2295646.Search in Google Scholar
Sides, J., L. Vavreck, and C. Warshaw. 2020. “The Effect of Television Advertising in United States Elections.” Working paper, http://chriswarshaw.com/papers/advertising.pdf.10.1017/S000305542100112XSearch in Google Scholar
Williams, C. B., and G. J. J. Gulati. 2018. “Digital Advertising Expenditures in the 2016 Presidential Election.” Social Science Computer Review 36 (4): 406–21.10.1177/0894439317726751Search in Google Scholar
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Articles
- The 2020 Election
- Misreporting: Social Scientists, Political Commentators, and the Politics of Presidential Selection
- Spending Fast and Furious: Political Advertising in 2020
- Why Trump Became a ‘Confederate’ President
- Háblame de tí: Latino mobilization, group dynamics and issue prioritization in the 2020 Election
- Marching to the Ballot Box: Sex and Voting in the 2020 Election Cycle
- Religion and the 2020 Presidential Election: The Enduring Divide
- The Rural-Urban Continuum of Polarization: Understanding the Geography of the 2018 Midterms
- You’re Fired! Donald Trump and the 2020 Congressional Elections
- Book Review
- Boris Heersink and Jeffrey A. Jenkins: Republican Party Politics and The American South 1865–1968
- Review
- Learning From Loss: The Democrats 2016–2020
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Articles
- The 2020 Election
- Misreporting: Social Scientists, Political Commentators, and the Politics of Presidential Selection
- Spending Fast and Furious: Political Advertising in 2020
- Why Trump Became a ‘Confederate’ President
- Háblame de tí: Latino mobilization, group dynamics and issue prioritization in the 2020 Election
- Marching to the Ballot Box: Sex and Voting in the 2020 Election Cycle
- Religion and the 2020 Presidential Election: The Enduring Divide
- The Rural-Urban Continuum of Polarization: Understanding the Geography of the 2018 Midterms
- You’re Fired! Donald Trump and the 2020 Congressional Elections
- Book Review
- Boris Heersink and Jeffrey A. Jenkins: Republican Party Politics and The American South 1865–1968
- Review
- Learning From Loss: The Democrats 2016–2020
