Can you spot the difference in these two Liberal ads?
If you were watching TV in Ontario about a week ago, you might have noticed this ad (“Build Ontario up”) from Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzI473VJ-QI&list=PLD808265A188F72E5
If you were watching in the past few days, you might have seen this one (“Clear Choices”) instead:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IRe6T5vif0&list=PLD808265A188F72E5&index=4
It’s possible that if you caught both, you thought you saw the same ad twice. But there’s a reason why the second replaced the first – and some new opinion data helps explain what it is.
From May 28 through June 1, as part of its continuing effort to help us see this election campaign through the eyes of the electorate, Innovative Research Group put some of the ads the parties have been running to its online panel. As with the research we highlighted last week, it’s best to see this as a sort of focus group that allows us to see how parties are trying to win over other parties’ supporters or motivate their own.
So, what did the survey find about these two Liberal ads? For starters, while an equal share of respondents indicated each one made a positive impression on them, “Build Ontario Up” generated slightly more of a negative reaction than “Clear Choices” did.
What was your overall impression of the ad?
SOURCE: Innovative Research Group
There was a similarly moderate difference when respondents were asked to judge whether they thought the two ads were “credible”:
SOURCE: Innovative Research Group
Where the differences start to get a little bigger and a little more interesting is “net impact” of the ads on intentions to vote Liberal – which is to say the gap in percentage points between those who said it made them more likely and those who said it made them less likely to do so. Here’s how that shook out for these two ads, broken down into which party respondents self-identified with at the start of the survey:
SOURCE: Innovative Research Group
So based on this research, the second ad is better at motivating Liberals, does less to upset (and thus perhaps motivate) Tories, and gives Kathleen Wynne’s party a somewhat better chance of winning over New Democrats and those who don’t self-identify with any particular party.
Why does “Clear Choices” play so much better than “Build Ontario Up”? Maybe because it’s less strident about pushing Ms. Wynne’s faith in government as it tries, using almost the exact same imagery, to strike a contrast with Tim Hudak. For comparison’s sake, here are the two scripts narrated by the Premier:
Build Ontario up: “I believe government should be a force for good in people’s lives. So my plan is about creating jobs, investing in much-needed roads and transit, and providing fair pensions. Tim Hudak wants to make classrooms more crowded, cut teachers and health care, and somehow make our economy grow by firing a hundred thousand people. Those are the choices in this election. I want to build Ontario up, not tear it down. That’s what leadership is.”
Clear choices: “This election the choices are drawn very clearly. My focus is on creating well-paying jobs, investing in transportation, and providing a better pension so people can retire with dignity and security. Tim Hudak wants to fire a hundred thousand workers and make massive cuts to education, so he can balance the budget one year sooner and slash the taxes big corporations pay. I want to build Ontario up, not cut it down. That’s what leadership is.”
Clearly, the differences are subtle. But parties are known to test just about every word of their messaging, and adapt accordingly. The slight adjustment in those ads speaks to what the Liberals think works for Ms. Wynne, and what goes a little too far.
(Responses to these two ads were drawn from a survey in which 850 eligible Ontario voters participated. Asked which party they usually support, 29 per cent of respondents said Liberal, 22 per cent Progressive Conservative, 17 per cent NDP, 6 per cent Green and 1 per cent other; 14 per cent said they don’t identify with any party and 11 per cent didn’t know.
As parties get more sophisticated in targeting messages to individual voters, we want to get as many people as possible involved in helping us keep track of those messages and how they’re delivering them. If you’d be willing to help us tell the story of this campaign by keeping a campaign diary to let us know who contacted you and uploading campaign material, or maybe giving your reaction to ads, issues and events, you can sign up for the Listening Post Network here.)