Rudy Giuliani’s political advertisement “Leadership” was released in late April 2007 as a web video but has been available on his website as recently as November 1.(1) In November, Giuliani had not yet aired any television ads, and his primary promotional methods to date have been Internet and radio advertising.(2) The ad “Leadership” is biographical and consists primarily of a montage of video clips of Giuliani speaking to audiences about the kind of leadership he believes the country needs. Throughout the advertisement, uplifting instrumental music plays, as the candidate, always dressed in a suit and tie, makes a series of verbal claims, most of which follow the themes of tested leadership during 9/11, proven results in reducing crime, and fiscal conservatism. When reminding voters of his service during the 9/11 crisis, Giuliani does not mention that his advocacy of fighting terrorism as mayor of New York City was only one small part of his larger battle against crime. The Washington Post reported that in 1999 he cautioned against taking the threat of a New Year’s Eve bombing of Times Square too seriously, saying: “I would urge people not to let the psychology of fear infect the way they act. Otherwise we have let the terrorists win without anybody striking a blow.”(3) In lauding his own leadership, Giuliani also fails to discuss criticism surrounding his performance after the terrorist attack. Some critics have questioned his rush to clean up Ground Zero, risking the health of rescue and recovery crews.(4)
The “Leadership” ad touts Giuliani’s tough stance on crime. In it he says: “We have to bring safety for people, so I made it a very, very large priority to reduce crime.” During Rudy Giuliani’s term as mayor of New York City, crime did decrease. The number of murders dropped from 1,946 in 1993 to 714 in 2001.(5) What the ad doesn’t say is that while crimes did decrease during his watch, they also fell before and after his term in office, and changes in police tactics are believed to be the reason for the significant drop in crime rates.(6) Concerning fiscal responsibility, Giuliani did cut welfare rolls in half, as he advertises.(7) In the ad he also claims: “I reduced taxes dramatically, and in a very short period of time, I was collecting more money from the lower taxes than I was collecting from the higher taxes.” The visual text also says that he “cut taxes 23 times.” According to Factcheck.org, Giuliani only cut taxes 14 times while mayor, not the 23 times he boasts, and he “strongly opposed” one of the largest of those cuts, only giving in after a “five-month standoff with the city council.” The website also questions his ability to advertise fiscal responsibility, as he left a “multibillion-dollar deficit for his successor.”(8)
While Giuliani may be over-simplifying his records on 9/11 and crime, he can legitimately claim some success in these two areas. Fiscal responsibility is much murkier, because of the New York City deficit that existed after his term. Some of the other claims Giuliani makes are even less substantial, such as: “I have a record of producing and getting results.” His performance concerning crime and 9/11 are generally acknowledged, but beyond that, to what record is he referring? He answers few questions for voters by being vague. Other claims are even harder to pin down. Such statements are: “We’ve got to save our schools” and “it is much, much better to give people a hand up rather than a handout.” Generally many voters may agree with these statements, but they offer no solutions or plans of action on which to judge the candidate. They are simply empty sentences aimed to appeal to a wide audience. These statements border on unethical because they offer no clarity for the voter, the supposed purpose of campaign advertising. As Sissela Bok suggests, public trust is a “social good to be protected,” especially in the election of public figures. The health of our election process depends on the ability of citizens to actively vote for the candidate who best represents their values and beliefs. Misleading voters both undermines the election process and reduces citizen confidence in voting. Most ethically problematic, though, are Giuliani’s frequent references to safety and the War on Terror, combined with images of children. Giuliani says: “…I think this country needs a president that can keep us on offense on the War on Terror in order to keep us safe.” This statement bridges a transition between images of the American flag in muted colors and children playing in brightly-colored bathing suits in a sprinkler. Combined with the simultaneous text “keep us safe,” the message is an overpowering one of protecting children, a soft spot in the hearts of most Americans.
In evaluating the ethics of this particular aspect of the “Leadership” ad, the first step, using the Potter Box, is to address the situation. Giuliani uses messages of children and safety to persuade voters to elect him as their leader. The values are protection for all children and America’s future, as well as the prevention of crimes against citizens. Giuliani suggests that being tough on crime and terrorism will better protect Americans. The ethical principle that best applies in this case is the categorical imperative, which applies principle universally. Surely using fear to convince voters to elect a specific candidate should not be a universal tactic, though many candidates use it. Kantian ethics also prescribe that no one person should be used. In this part of the ad, Giuliani specifically targets American fear, reminiscent of the even more ominous “Daisy Girl” ad from 1964. By using imagery of innocent children playing in their front lawn, he unnecessarily targets a sore subject for most Americans, the fear that their own homes or families could be at risk. In this case, Giuliani is most loyal to his own interests, a common theme among political ads, but he is not loyal enough to the American public, who should not vote for a candidate because they fear the consequences of not doing so. While the ad content focusing on Giuliani’s 9/11, crime, and tax records are not wholly truthful, their primary objective is to tell the story from the candidate’s perspective, the purpose of most political ads. The majority of the audience probably expects the candidate’s spin on facts. Giuliani’s ad begins to become unethical with the use of generic phraseology that makes the estimation of his capabilities or beliefs difficult to distinguish, but Giuliani’s use of fear with the children imagery and safety text serve to make the ad unethical. Calls to Giuliani’s campaign for comment were not returned.
5. McIntire, M. (2005, October 5). New York’s falling crime rate is a potent weapon for the mayor.” The New York Times. Retrieved November 7, 2007 from http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/05/nyregion/ metrocampaigns/05crime.html?_r=1&oref=slogin.
6. Langan, P. A. and Dubose, M. R. (2004, October 21). The remarkable drop in crime in New York City. International Conference on Crime, Rome, December 3-5, 2003. Retrieved November 7, 2007, from http://samoa.istat.it/Eventi/sicurezza/relazioni/Langan_rel.pdf.
