In the “True Conservative” political ad, paid for by the McCain campaign, presidential candidate John McCain assures us that he is just that – “a true conservative, ready to be commander in chief from day one.” With this ad, he addresses potential concerns that his stance may be considered too liberal for the Republican party. In the past, McCain has strayed from his party's stances on immigration, climate change and campaign spending, to name a few issues. But his ad presents us with messages, both visual and aural, assuring us of his dedication to traditional conservatism. The ad opens with interview footage of McCain as a prisoner of war, and goes on to pair him with Ronald Reagan and other nationalistic imagery, such as the American flag.
The 30-second ad, which ran earlier this year until Super Tuesday, presents McCain in a flattering light by appealing to nostalgia. By showing black-and-white footage of a young McCain as a prisoner of war or a slightly older McCain with former president Reagan, the ad attempts to appeal to a generation of voters who lived through the Vietnam War and supported Reagan as he entered the Oval Office. McCain speaks over the images in the ad, talking about “enlisting as a foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution.” But despite this, there are no clear connections between Reagan and McCain, other than their membership in the Republican party.
The ad also makes claims that, if elected, he will cut taxes, but according to an article published by McClatchy Newspapers, McCain's Senate record shows votes against a $1.35 trillion tax cut in 2001 and $350 billion tax cut in 2003. More recently, McCain did vote for a federal minimum wage increase which would also offer tax breaks to businesses in exchange for the increases. In 2006, he voted to extend the Bush tax cuts, and, in 2000, he voted on a bill similar to Ronald Reagan's economic system.
The ad also addresses McCain's Iraq strategy, noting that McCain has “the leadership and experience to call for the surge strategy in Iraq that is working.” At this point in the ad, McCain is paired with a split screen. As he speaks on one side of the screen, men in battle are projected on the other. McCain has greatly supported President Bush in his initiative to raise the number of troops in Iraq. But McCain has also opposed his party on a constitutional ban on gay marriage and stem cell research while the touts him as “a proud social conservative.” In interviews, his office has stated that this is because he wishes to give states the right to decide. The McCain campaign did not respond to several phone calls to its headquarters.
The ad takes great lengths to take away any doubt that staunch Republican voters may have had concerning McCain's platform and voting record. But are his methods ethical? Or are they using strong, evocative imagery and persuasive speech to his advantage?
According to ethicist Sissela Bok, though McCain is not lying outright, he is intending to mislead with his imagery and ignore prior votes with his speech. Bok views politicians' claims in a strict light, suggesting that many make claims with the idea that they will be benefiting the public good (Bok, 173). But their intentions do not make these claims right.
On the other hand, the ad does serve a utilitarian purpose. McCain likely believes his campaign will do the greatest good for the greatest number. As such, the omission of previous votes would be permissible, if it meant that he could better serve his country as a leader. In this case, the omission is small in comparison to the number of people his change could affect. This, under the Kantian view, still does not make the ad ethical. Even if the ad could incite change, it does, to some extent, lead the viewer to believe something that is not entirely true, which is not a situation we would want to be applied universally. Under Kant's categorical imperative, the false implications in the ad would still be universally wrong, regardless of any change they could create.
Looking at this ad through the TARES test, we must first assess the ads truthfulness. The claims in the ad are, for the most part, truthful. Anything that would be construed as a "lie" is an omission of justification for his prior votes. But, according to the test, "an ad would pass the test if it meets a genuine human need to provide truthful information, even if some facts are omitted."
The TARES test moves on to assess the ad's authenticity, or sincerity. McCain's efforts are not exactly sincere. On one hand, he appears to believe that his views are what is best for the nation and to want to best represent all views in his party. Furthermore, if assessing his record, McCain has voted with his party a little more than 88 percent of the time. Though he may disagree on a few issues, he, for the most part, agrees with the Republican Party. But, his messages manipulate. He uses stock footage to his advantage, which lead viewers to believe that he was closely linked to Ronald Reagan and that he has a history of social conservative views. The truth is that his voting records do not match up to these claims.
The ad seems to respect the viewer in taking responsibility for itself. The McCain campaign takes full responsibility for the ad. McCain himself approves the message in the final seconds of the ad. As such, the reader knows who is sponsoring the ad and thus, acknowledges and respects their presence. But despite the respect, the ad lacks a sense of equity. To fully understand the ad and process its ethics, the viewer must have a good grasp on McCain's voting record, involvement with the Republican party and life history.
The ad merely presents glossed-over information without backing. But, lastly, the ad does have a sense of social responsibility. As a presidential candidate, it is clear that John McCain believes he can best lead the country "from day one." As such, he feels society could benefit from his leadership skills. Whether that is true remains to be seen, but its intentions lean toward the socially responsible. Unfortunately, the sense of social responsibility is not enough to save the ad, and it fails the TARES test.
Lastly, running the morally relevant facts through the Potter Box shows its values are mixed. The ad seems to value winning the votes of conservative Republicans and thus glorifies the ideals they hold. But, when the previously addressed principles are applied, it still seems unethical in some ways. Lastly, it appears that the McCain's loyalties are to his country. He wishes to serve as president for the public good, but there is also an element of loyalty to himself and his campaign. The ethics of this ad are cloudy and while it may not be blatantly dishonest, it does intend to mislead, which is the crux of Bok's definition of lying. As such, I found this ad to be unethical. It could have been more clear, addressing the shift in McCain's voting record, and less manipulating of images.
Link to the ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqLWHvbRFO8
__________________________
