Political scientists usually conclude that voters dislike negative campaign ads,
ID: 1114078 • Letter: P
Question
Political scientists usually conclude that voters dislike negative campaign ads, but we can use game theory to offer an explanation for why they continue to be used. While negative ads are (nauseatingly) commonplace in electoral competition, they are far less frequent in business competition; i.e., it is rare to see company A directly attacking the quality or character of competing company B to the extent that political candidate X attacks political candidate Y. (We might see a company talk about the insufficiencies of “the leading brand,” but the negativity is very tame compared to what happens during campaign season.) How might game theory also offer an explanation for this behavior?
Explanation / Answer
Ans.
Negative campaign ads are more effective than positive campaign ads although voters dislike negative campaign.candidate runs negative campaign to put there opponent down and themselves be up.Here candidate X attacks political candidate Y by negative campaign. There can be two condition for X and Y one of them will win and other loose or vice versa.Candidate X behaviour indicates that it beleives if candidates Y is down it can go up and win. So game theory can explain about winning or losing by negative campaign ads .
However, when one candidate attacks other through negative ads it's rare to see company making ads rarely attacking each other . So voters may punish negative companies in such repeated games of publishing negative ads.