Social media has transformed electoral politics and allows campaigns to micro-target supporters. However, little is known about the effectiveness of political ads on social media, particularly those that appeal for money. We study the fundraising effects of ad campaigns sponsored by a well-funded Super PAC, The Lincoln Project. Our model includes 100s of millions of ad impressions targeting Facebook users in the 50 states, plus D.C., over 308 days in 2020. We coded ads for tone and fundraising appeals and find that the most effective ads are those that directly appeal for money, while ads that use negativity are associated with a small, positive effect. Ads that include both negativity and fundraising appeals are associated with the most money: each impression yields an additional $0.52 in itemized donations (campaign contributions). The results confirm what previous research on campaign giving has found— people tend to give money to campaigns when they are asked to—and show how digital advertising influences political behavior.
AggarwalMinaliAllenJenniferAlexanderCoppockFrankowskiDanSolomonMessingZhangKellyBarnesJamesBeasleyAndrewHantmanHarryZhengSylvan. 2023. “A 2 Million-Person, Campaign-Wide Field Experiment Shows How Digital Advertising Affects Voter Turnout.” Nature Human Behaviour: 1–10. doi:10.1038/s41562-022-01487-4
2.
AlbertZacharyLa RajaRaymond. 2020. “Small Dollar Donors and the Evolving Democratic Party.” APSA Preprints. This content is a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed. doi:10.33774/apsa-2020-9rnkd
3.
ArceneauxKevinNickersonDavid W.. 2009. “Who is Mobilized to Vote? A Re-analysis of Seven Randomized Field Experiments.” American Journal of Political Science53 (1): 1–16. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00354.x
4.
AuterZachary J.FineJeffrey A.. 2016. “Negative Campaigning in the Social Media Age: Attack Advertising on Facebook.” Political Behavior38 (4): 999–1020. doi:10.1007/s11109-016-9346-8
5.
AuterZachary J.FineJeffrey A.. 2018. “Social Media Campaigning: Mobilization and Fundraising on Facebook.” Social Science Quarterly99 (1): 185–200. doi:10.1111/ssqu.12391
6.
BallardAndrew O.Sunshine HillygusD.TobiasKonitzer. 2016. “Campaigning Online: Web Display Ads in the 2012 Presidential Campaign.” PS: Political Science & Politics49 (3): 414–419. doi:10.1017/S1049096516000780
7.
BartonJaredCastilloMarcoPetrieRagan. 2016. “Negative Campaigning, Fundraising, and Voter Turnout: A Field Experiment.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization121: 99–113. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2015.10.007
8.
BimberBruceDavisRichard. 2003. Campaigning Online: The Internet in U.S. Elections. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9.
BondRobert M.FarissChristopher J.JonesJason J. Adam DI KramerMarlowCameronSettleJaime E.FowlerJames H.. 2012. “A 61-Million-Person Experiment in Social Influence and Political Mobilization.” Nature489 (7415):295–298. doi:10.1038/nature11421
10.
BraderTed. 2020. Campaigning for Hearts and Minds. University of Chicago Press.Campaigning for Hearts and Minds.
11.
BraderTed. 2005. “Striking a Responsive Chord: How Political Ads Motivate and Persuade Voters by Appealing to Emotions.” American Journal of Political Science49 (2): 388–405. doi:10.1111/j.0092-5853.2005.00130.x
12.
BradyHenry E.Lehman SchlozmanKayVerbaSidney. 1999. “Prospecting for Participants: Rational Expectations and the Recruitment of Political Activists.” American Political Science Review93 (1): 153–168. doi:10.2307/2585767
13.
BriansCraig LeonardWattenbergMartin P.. 1996. “Campaign Issue Knowledge and Salience: Comparing Reception from TV Commercials, TV News and Newspapers.” American Journal of Political Science: 172–193. doi:10.2307/2111699
14.
BrightJonathanScottHaleGaneshBharathBulovskyAndrewMargettsHelenHowardPhil. 2020. “Does Campaigning on Social Media Make a Difference? Evidence from Candidate Use of Twitter During the 2015 and 2017 UK Elections.” Communication Research47 (7): 988–1009. doi:10.1177/0093650219872394
CacioppoJohn T.GardnerWendi L.. 1999. “Emotion.” Annual Review of Psychology50: 191–214.
17.
CarlisleJuliet E.PattonRobert C.. 2013. “Is Social Media Changing How We Understand Political Engagement? An Analysis of Facebook and the 2008 Presidential Election.” Political Research Quarterly66 (4): 883–895. doi:10.1177/1065912913482758
18.
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310. (2010).
19.
CobbMichael D.KuklinskiJames H.. 1997. “Changing Minds: Political Arguments and Political Persuasion.” American Journal of Political Science: 88–121. doi:10.2307/2111710
20.
CummingsNormanCummingsGrace. 2004. Campaigns and elections: American style, 67–82. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Strategy and Tactics for Campaign Fundraising.
21.
ChouLinlyFrankeGeorge R.WilcoxGary B.. 1987. “The Information Content of Comparative Magazine Ads: A Longitudinal Analysis.” Journalism Quarterly64 (1): 119–250.
22.
CoppockAlexanderGreenDonald P.PorterEthan. 2022. “Does Digital Advertising Affect Vote Choice? Evidence from a randomized Field Experiment.” Research & Politics9 (1). doi:10.1177/20531680221076901
23.
CulbersonTylerMcDonaldMichael P.RobbinsSuzanne M.. 2019. “Small Donors in Congressional Elections.” American Politics Research47 (5): 970–999. doi:10.1177/1532673X1876391
24.
DimitrovaDaniela V.MatthesJörg. 2018. “Social Media in Political Campaigning Around the World: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly95 (2): 333–342. doi:10.1177/1077699018770437
25.
DommettKatharinePowerSam. 2019. “The Political Economy of Facebook Advertising: Election Spending, Regulation and Targeting Online.” The Political Quarterly90 (2): 257–265. doi:10.1111/1467-923X.12687
26.
DruckmanJames N.KiferMartin J.ParkinMichael. 2009. “Campaign Communications in US Congressional Elections.” American Political Science Review103 (3): 343–366. doi:10.1017/S0003055409990037
27.
DruckmanJames N.KiferMartin J.ParkinMichael. 2010. “Timeless Strategy Meets New Medium: Going Negative on Congressional Campaign Web Sites, 2002–2006.” Political Communication27 (1): 88–103. doi:10.1080/10584600903502607
28.
EndresKylePanagopoulosCostasDonaldPGreen. 2021. “Elite Messaging and Partisan Consumerism: An Evaluation of President Trump’s Tweets and Polarization of Corporate Brand Images.” Political Research Quarterly74 (4): 834–851. doi:10.1177/1065912920939188
FinkelSteven E.GeerJohn G.. 1998. “A Spot Check: Casting Doubt on the Demobilizing Effect of Attack Advertising.” American Journal of Political Science: 573–595. doi:10.2307/2991771
31.
FiskeSusan T. 1980. “Attention and Weight in Person Perception: The Impact of Negative and Extreme Behavior.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology38 (6): 889. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.38.6.889
32.
FowlerErika FranklinRidoutTravis N.FranzMichael M.. 2016. “Political Advertising in 2016: The Presidential Election as Outlier?” The Forum14 (4): 445–469. doi:10.1515/for-2016-0040
33.
FowlerErika FranklinFranzMartinMichael M. Gregory J.PeskowitzZacharyRidoutTravis N.. 2021. “Political Advertising Online and Offline.” American Political Science Review115 (1): 130–149. doi:10.1017/S0003055420000696
34.
FowlerErika FranklinFranzMichael M.NeumannMarkusRidoutTravis N.YaoJielu.. 2023. “Digital Advertising in the 2022 Midterms.” The Forum. doi:10.1515/for-2023-2006
35.
FranciaPeterGreenJohnPaulHerrnsonPowellLyndaWilcoxClyde. 2003. “The Financiers of Congressional Elections.” In The Financiers of Congressional Elections. Columbia University Press.
36.
GeerJohn G. 2008. In Defense of Negativity: Attack ads in Presidential Campaigns. University of Chicago Press.
37.
GerberAlan S.James GimpelG. Donald P. GreenShawDaron R.. 2011. “How Large and Long-Lasting are the Persuasive Effects of Televised Campaign Ads? Results from a Randomized Field Experiment.” American Political Science Review105 (1): 135–150. doi:10.1017/S000305541000047X
38.
GerberAlan S.GreenDonald P.. 2003. “The Effects of Canvassing, Telephone Calls, and Direct Mail on Voter Turnout: A Field Experiment.” American political Science Review94 (3): 653–663. doi:10.2307/2585837
39.
GerberAlan S.GreenDonald P.RonShachar.. 2003. “Voting May be Habit‐Forming: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment.” American Journal of Political Science47 (3): 540–550. doi:10.1111/1540-5907.00038
40.
GimpelJames G.LeeFrances E.KaminskiJoshua. 2006. “The Political Geography of Campaign Contributions in American Politics.” The Journal of Politics68 (3): 626–639. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00450.x
41.
GimpelJames G.LeeFrances E.Pearson‐MerkowitzShanna. 2008. “The Check is in the Mail: Interdistrict Funding Flows in Congressional Elections.” American Journal of Political Science52 (2): 373–394. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00318.x
42.
GrantJ. TobinRudolphThomas J.. 2002. “To Give or Not to Give: Modeling Individuals' Contribution Decisions.” Political Behavior24 (1): 31–54. doi:10.1023/A:1020994921777
43.
GreenDonald P.ShacharRon. 2000. “Habit Formation and Political Behaviour: Evidence of Consuetude in Voter Turnout.” British Journal of Political Science30 (4): 561–573. doi:10.1017/S0007123400000247
44.
GolbeckJenniferGrimesJustin M.RogersAnthony. 2010. “Twitter Use by the US Congress.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology61 (8): 1612–1621. doi:10.1002/asi.21344
45.
HamiltonDavid L.ZannaMark P.. 1972. “Differential Weighting of Favorable and Unfavorable Attributes in Impressions of Personality.” Journal of Experimental Research in Personality6 (2–3): 204–212.
46.
HarmonRobert R.RazzoukNabil Y.SternBruce L.. 1983. “The Information Content of Comparative Magazine Advertisements.” Journal of Advertising12 (4): 10–19. doi:10.1080/00913367.1983.10672858
47.
HasenRichard L.2016. Plutocrats United: Campaign Money, The Supreme Court, and the Distortion of American Elections. Yale University Press.
48.
HassellHans J. G.MonsonJ. Quin. 2014. “Campaign Targets and Messages in Direct Mail Fundraising.” Political Behavior36 (2): 359–376. doi:10.1007/s11109-013-9230-8
49.
HibbingJohn R.SmithKevin B.AlfordJohn R.. 2013. Predisposed: Liberals, Conservatives, and the Biology of Political Differences. Routledge.
50.
HillygusD. SunshineShieldsTodd G.. 2009. The Persuadable Voter: Wedge Issues in Presidential Campaigns. Princeton University Press.
51.
JainShailendra PratapLindseyCharlesAgrawalNidhiMaheswaranDurairaj. 2007. “For Better or for Worse? Valenced Comparative Frames and Regulatory Focus.” Journal of Consumer Research34 (1): 57–65. doi:10.1086/513046
52.
JamiesonKathleen H.PaulWaldmanSherrSusan. 2000. “Eliminate the Negative? Categories of Analysis for Political Advertisements.” In Crowded airwaves: Campaign advertising in elections, edited by ThurberJ. A.NelsonC. J.DulioD. A., 44–64. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
53.
JoslynRichard. 1986. “Political Advertising and the Meaning of Elections.” New Perspectives on Political Advertising: 139–183.
54.
KahnemanDanielTverskyAmos. 1979. “Prospect Theory an Analysis of Decision Under Risk.” Econometrica47: 263–291.
55.
KeenaAlexKnight-FinleyMisty. 2019. “Are Small Donors Polarizing? A Longitudinal Study of the Senate.” Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy18 (2): 132–144. doi:10.1089/elj.2018.0498
56.
KeenaAlexWintersieckAmanda. 2022. “The Fundraising Effects of Facebook Marketing During the 2020 Election.” Journal of Marketing Development & Competitiveness16 (4): 1–10.
57.
KusumaraniRiriZoHangjung. 2019. “Why People Participate in Online Political Crowdfunding: A Civic Voluntarism Perspective.” Telematics and Informatics41: 168–181. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2019.04.011
58.
KrasnoJonathan S.Philip GreenDonaldCowdenJonathan A.. 1994. “The Dynamics of Campaign Fundraising in House Elections.” The Journal of Politics56 (2): 459–474. doi:10.2307/2132148
59.
LauRichard R.1985. “Two Explanations for Negativity Effects in Political Behavior.” American Journal of Political Science: 119–138. doi:10.2307/2111215
60.
MarcusGeorge. E.Russell NeumannW.MacKuenMichael. 2000. Affective intelligence and political judgment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
61.
MattesKyleRedlawskDavid P.. 2015. “The Positive Case for Negative Campaigning.” In The Positive Case for Negative Campaigning. University of Chicago Press.
62.
MillerJoanne M.KrosnickJon A.. 2004. “Threat as a Motivator of Political Activism: A Field Experiment.” Political Psychology25 (4): 507–523. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00384.x
63.
MillerPatrick R.BobkowskiPiotr S.MaliniakDanielRapoportRonald B.. 2015. “Talking Politics on Facebook: Network Centrality and Political Discussion Practices in Social Media.” Political Research Quarterly68 (2): 377–391. doi:10.1177/1065912915580135
64.
McGregorShannon C.2020. “Taking the Temperature of the Room” How Political Campaigns Use Social Media to Understand and Represent Public Opinion.” Public Opinion Quarterly84 (S1): 236–256. doi:10.1093/poq/nfaa012
65.
NeuendorfKimberly A.2017. The content Analysis Guidebook. Sage.
66.
PanagopoulosCostasBerganDaniel. 2006. “Contributions and Contributors in the 2004 Presidential Election Cycle.” Presidential Studies Quarterly36 (2): 155–171. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5705.2006.00296.x
67.
PetrovaMariaSenAnanyaYildirimPinar. 2021. “Social Media and Political Contributions: The Impact of New Technology on Political Competition.” Management Science67 (5): 2997–3021. doi:10.1287/mnsc.2020.3740
68.
PrattoFeliciaJohnOliver P.. 1991. “Automatic Vigilance: The Attention-Grabbing Power of Negative Social Information.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology61 (3): 380. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.3.380
69.
RhodesJesse H.SchaffnerBrian F.La RajaRaymond J.. 2018. “Detecting and Understanding Donor Strategies in Midterm Elections.” Political Research Quarterly71 (3): 503–516. doi:10.1177/1065912917749323
70.
RidoutTravis N.Franklin FowlerErikaBranstetterJohn. 2010. “Political Advertising in the 21st Century: The Rise of the YouTube Ad.” In APSA 2010 Annual Meeting Paper.
71.
RidoutTravisN.FowlerErika FranklinFranzMichael M.. 2021. “Spending Fast and Furious: Political Advertising in 2020.” The Forum18 (4): 465–492. doi:10.1515/for-2020-2109
72.
RosenstoneSteven J.HansenJohn M.. 1993. Mobilization, Participation and Democracy in America. New York: MacMillan.
ShawDaron R.DunLindsayHeiseSarah. 2022. “Mobilizing Peripheral Partisan Voters: A Field Experimental Analysis From Three California Congressional Election Campaigns.” American Politics Research50 (5): 587–602. doi:10.1177/1532673X22109429
76.
SheaDaniel M.BurtonMichael J.. 2006. Campaign Craft: The Strategies, Tactics, and Art of Political Campaign Management. 3rd ed.Westport, CT: Praeger.
77.
ShoganColleen J.2010. “Blackberries, Tweets, and YouTube: Technology and the Future of Communicating With Congress.” PS: Political Science & Politics43 (2): 231–233. doi:10.1017/S1049096510000041
VerbaSidneyLehman SchlozmanKayBradyHenry E.. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Harvard University Press.
80.
WeberChristopher. 2013. “Emotions, campaigns, and political participation.” Political Research Quarterly66 (2): 414–428. doi:10.1177/1065912912449697
81.
WinterseickAmandaAlexKeena. 2023. “Ask and You Shall Receive: The Effects of Negativity and Fundraising Appeals on Facebook Data Replication Files.” doi:10.21974/krcf-q931.Available at:https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/poli_data/1/
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
