Home Politics Politics News

Money Down the Tube

Guess who’s profiting most from Super PACs? Hint: It’s not Mitt Romney

Money Down the Tube, campaign ads

A collage of nighttime network television commercials largely dominated by campaign ads the night before election day November 5th, 2012 in Cleveland, Ohio

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty

Candidates may raise the unprece­dented sums of polit­ical cash being funneled through Super PACs this year, and media strategists may decide how to spend them—but the people who actually wind up pocketing much of the money are America’s televi­sion broadcasters. Since the Su­preme Court voided limits on political donations in Citizens United, more money than ever is being devoted to negative TV ads. Industry analysts predict that upwards of $3 billion will be spent on political advertis­ing this year — a surge of more than $500 million over 2008.

“Election season has turned into Black Friday for broadcast­ers,” says Bill Allison of the Sun­light Foundation, which fights for transparency in elections. “It’s just a huge bonanza.”

While TV stations are re­quired by law to offer discount­ed airtime to politicians, Super PACs have to pay market rates. With these outside groups ex- pected to buy more than half the ads benefiting the Romney campaign, the increased com­petition to place ads in bat­tleground states only serves to drive up the price. In a key market like Columbus, Ohio, where campaign spots are al­ready airing at a record pace, the ad buys are expected to ex­ceed the haul from 2008, when political ads made up half of all TV spots purchased during the final week of the election.

In essence, broadcasters are now profiteering from a vicious circle of corruption: Politicians are beholden to big donors be­cause campaigns are so expen­sive, and campaigns are so ex­pensive because they’re fought through television ads. The more cash that chases limit­ed airtime, the more the ads will cost, and the more politi­cians must lean on deep-pock­eted patrons. In short, the dirt­ier the system, the better for the bottom line at TV stations and cable systems. According to an analysis by Moody’s, political ads are expected to account for as much as seven cents of every dollar broadcasters earn over the full two-year election cycle for 2012.

The influx of political cash also means that TV news divi­sions have what Allison calls a “huge conflict of interest” when it comes to reporting on cam­paign finance. The profit mo­tive stifles critical coverage of top donors and meaningful re­forms, such as public financing of elections. “Broadcasters have an incentive not to see the sys­tem changed,” he says.

But while there’s no hope of curbing campaign spending in the near term, a new FCC rule could soon give the public real- time data about who is profiting from the Super PAC marathon. In April, the commission ruled that affiliates of ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox in the nation’s 50 biggest markets must post their revenue from political ads on­line, for all to see. (Such records have long been public -just in­accessible, kept in paper form in files at each station.) The reform would help expose some of the “dark money” spending by me­ga-donors like the Koch broth­ers, but it’s only a modest start: Many communities in battle­ground states — like Fort Myers, Florida, and Reno, Nevada — are located in smaller markets that are not covered by the new rule. A study by the Campaign Media Analysis Group suggests that at least 40 percent of spending on over-the-airwaves presiden­tial ads may remain exempt from disclosure.

But the rule’s shortcomings haven’t kept broadcasters and their GOP allies from going all out to stop it. In June, Repub­licans on the House Financial Services Subcommittee voted to block disclosure and enable do­nors to operate in secrecy. And on July 10th, the National As­sociation of Broadcasters filed an emergency motion to post­pone the rule, arguing that it will allow cable and other com­petitors to undercut their busi­ness. “Shifting even a small per­centage of this advertising away from television,” the NAB con­fessed, would cost TV stations “millions of dollars in revenue.”

The rule is scheduled to go into effect in August — but the NAB move could delay it until well after the election. One bright spot: Time Warner has voluntarily begun posting on­line records of its political ad buys, even though the new FCC rule doesn’t apply to cable companies. Its records are not sortable by dollar amounts — so the public can’t quickly tally how much money the Obama campaign is spending on, say, ESPN2. But voters can now ex­amine individual ad buys. In Columbus, for example, Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS, one of the largest and most notori­ous dark-money groups, has booked three daytime ads to run on Fox News during the last week of October. The spots may be designed to aid Romney and the GOP, but Time Warner will enjoy a tidy bit of political prof­iteering: The cable company is charging $24 per ad—a stag­gering 12 times what the same ads would have cost in May.

In This Article: Coverwall, Election 2012

Show Comments

Newswire

Powered by
Close comments

Add a comment