5.+Effectiveness

=Effectiveness =

The attack ad attempts to not only judge Barack's character, but suggested that his effect on education is inappropriate. Political ads are generally biased in nature, but when they take serious matters out of context they create an initial controversy which may be the intent, but in the long run may become counter productive.. The ad makes an argument but fails to provide evidence. One of the quotes that was used is by Education Week, states that, "(Barack) hasn't made a significant mark on education," but later in that paragraph they expand and state that he "did promote early childhood initiative that advocates considered "innovative and progressive."" Later in that same article Education Week criticized McCain, saying "Education is not his thing." On the contrary, Obama supported "age appropriate" sex education for children in the context of creating awareness and how they should react to improper behavior by adults; the objective being to help them defend themselves against pedophilia.
 * Not Effective **

This 30 second ad insults the intelligence of the average person by throwing out accusations that the McCain administration hopes the general public will take and swallow without questioning the sources. The ad does use a couple strategic techniques such as using shocking allegations in a way that are short and concise which is strength of the ad. The weakness is that there is absolutely no proof. The quotes used are taken out of context and so is the purpose of the bill.
 * **Political ads are biased in nature, but this one takes quotes out of context**
 * **Creates initial controversy**
 * **Argument fails to provide adequate evidence**
 * **Ad insults the intelligence of the average person**
 * **__Strength:__ Attack ad is short and concise with accusations that seem believable at first**
 * **__Weakness:__ No evidence to support claims**