TIPA - Truth In Political Advertising

ACCURACY = 5.6 out of 10.0. This advertisement generally was inaccurate and invalid. It misled viewers on the facts of missile defense and therefore, did not meet the TIPA's minimal standards for accuracy.

FAIRNESS = 5.7 out of 10.0. This ad is nominally fair but does not meet up to the standards TIPA upholds because it unfairly portrays the issue.

RELEVANCE = 5.1 out of 10.0. This ad does not address issues that are important to voters, or it does not address them in any kind of meaningful way.

OVERALL = 5.5 out of 10.0. This advertisement fails to meet the standards of practice to which the TIPA would like to see candidates adhere. TIPA believes the advertisement should not have been run and should be pulled immediately, if it still is in rotation anywhere.

Homeland security is arguably the most critical issue of the 2004 Election. As a Republican Advisory Panel member stated, “National defense is a key role of the federal government and voters need to know the truth about where candidates stand.” It is a topic that deserves to be treated accurately and fairly to enable voters to be clear on the candidates’ platforms. The Coors ad titled " Coors Missile Defense " does exactly the opposite. The ad begins with a split screen featuring Democratic candidate Ken Salazar preaching to an audience while pointing his finger, as if he were a dictator. As this image appears, to the left of the screen in bold writing are flashes of frightful phrases to scare voter into believing that Salazar and Kerry will not protect the citizens of the United States the way that Coors and Bush will.

The quotes that are used in this ad are pulled out of context, thus twisting their meaning to paint a weak picture of Salazar. Phrases such as "...advocates deep cuts in the military budget..." and "... Salazar's opposition to missile defense..." characterize this attempt. However, in reality Salazar does not oppose missile defense, he simply wants to do further testing to be able to make a fully informed decision. As one TIPA Advisory Panel Member said, "While this commercial is not completely off the mark, it does stretch the truth."

After bashing Salazar, the screen changes and looks at Coors’ stance on missile defense. The ad depicts him as a loving family man who will protect you and your loved ones by supporting missile defense, thereby implying you can trust him with your vote.

Based on the ratings provided by Advisory Panel members and weighted so Democrats and Republicans were equal in number from a statistical averaging perspective, the TIPA has compiled a set of rating scores for the advertisement “Coors Missile Defense”.

The TIPA uses a "1" to "10" rating scale for Accuracy (with greater accuracy reflected by a higher rating), Fairness (with a higher rating indicating a greater degree of fairness), and Relevancy (with a higher rating meaning the advertisement was most relevant to the U.S. Senate campaign). The Rating System is presented in detail on the TIPA Web site.

ACCURACY RATING. “ Coors Missile Defense ” received an Accuracy score of 5.6 out of 10.0. This ad makes several sweeping statements that are hardly accurate, leading one Democratic Panel member to describe it as, "filled with half-truths." The information that is left out or misconstrued deliberately leads viewers to misinterpret the facts, a point reinforced by another Democratic panelist’s observation, “A classic misdirection. Attributes the position of a group that supports the candidate to the candidate.”

Overall, Republicans rated the Accuracy of the advertisement almost twice as high (7.5) as Democrats (4.0) and Independents (4.0).

FAIRNESS RATING. This ad received a Fairness rating of 5.7 out of 10. It provides an overview of the missile defense issues but also intentionally misleads viewers on the positions of the candidates. As one Advisory Panel Member stated, "If you do visit the clw.org website you have to click on a couple of different links and read a lengthy article about Salazar before you ever get to the part where it says that he endorses further testing." The Coors campaign does not reveal this fact in the ad, leading viewers to believe that Kerry and Salazar will limit "investigative tools used to capture terrorists."

Another Republican panelist commented, “This is guilt by implication. I've not heard Ken's position on missile defense or the military budget--I'm not sure that this ad isn't putting words in his mouth that he has not spoken.”

Republicans rated the fairness of the ad a very high 8.3, more than twice that of Democrats (3.5) and Independents (4.0). This is clearly a topic where party affiliation has a strong influence on how people perceive the ad.

RELEVANCE RATING. This advertisement received a poor Relevance rating of 5.1 out of 10. One of the TIPA’s Republican Advisory Panel members opined, "Why can't the people who created this ad just take the money spent on it (and ALL of the ads like it on both sides of the aisle) and use it to help pay down a little of the national deficit instead? Or help get our kids in Iraq the body armor they need? Or create a few productive jobs for the unemployed? There are so many worthwhile ways to spend time and money. Why waste both on this ad?"

The partisan gap appears once again in the Relevance rating, with Republicans rating the ad a 7.3, noticeably below the rating of Democrats (4.0) and Independents (5.0).

OVERALL RATING. “Coors Missile Defense" fails to meet the bare minimal acceptable standards the TIPA would like to see campaigns adhere to in their advertising. Its overall score of 5.5 is disappointingly an average score for this U.S. Senate race.

(C) Copyright 2004 by the Democracy & Media Education Foundation. All rights reserved. Reproduction, duplication, transmission, or conveyance of this document – in whole or in part – without the express written consent of the DMEF is strictly prohibited. Bona fide print and electronic Press organizations, however, may quote this Report as long as proper attribution is given (i.e., “The Truth In Political Advertising Project”) and the quotation or reference accurately reflects the contents and conclusions of this Report. For questions, please call Zachary Adler at (303) 449-5043 or send an e-mail to Zachary@TIPAP.org. Thank you.