Ad #20: TV
Ad: "Polluter Pete"
by The League of Conservation Voters
TRUTH IN POLITICAL ADVERTISING
PROJECT RATING REPORT
SUMMARY
ACCURACY =
5.6 out of 10.0. This
advertisement received a relatively low rating for accuracy. While
it does make some factual claims, the facts are intentionally distorted
and warped to paint Pete Coors as a danger to the environment.
FAIRNESS =
4.2 out of 10.0. This ad makes unfounded and unfair attacks
on Pete Coors, using a combination of production effects and misleading
information to convince voters he is not trustworthy.
RELEVANCE =
6.9 out of 10.0. The
advertisement addresses the environment, a key concern for Colorado
voters, but fails to do so in a real or meaningful way.
OVERALL =
5.4 out of 10.0. This is nothing more than a typical attack
ad, stretching facts and using fear tactics to persuade voters that
Pete Coors is an irresponsible candidate.
DISCUSSION
The advertisement “Polluter Pete” is
a 30-second
litany of environmental offenses allegedly committed by Coors Brewing
Company under the leadership of Pete Coors. In essence,
the message is that Coors doesn't care about the environment and that
he cares more about profit than environmental responsibility.
As one insightful Advisory Panel member
summarized,
“It is correct that Coors
Brewing dumped effluent into Clear Creek. It is also correct that,
in another case, the Colorado law in question would benefit Coors
if the company were to audit its own emissions from fermentation, as
it did in 1992. (I could not determine if Coors really did help write
the law.) In 1992, a self-audit by Coors determined that its volatile
organic compound emissions were far higher than either regulators or
brewers knew. Much smoke and very little comprehensive news reporting
followed the subsequent fight over those emissions and whether Coors
should pay a fine. The law referred to in the ad was enacted after
the Coors disclosure of pollution. The law made such audits privileged
so that they need not be disclosed, and mandated that the polluter
could not be fined or penalized if it came into compliance within two
years. So, it may be true that Coors is one of three worst polluters
in Colorado -- I was not able to confirm or debunk that claim -- but
the underlying issues are complex and worth discussing in an environment
outside of political ads. Coors and its supporters argue that Coors
did the right thing by self-auditing and shouldn't be punished -- and
that the law in question encourages environmental protection. However,
a fairly dispassionate analysis by the National Conference of State
Legislatures (cited by the LCV) raises questions about the Colorado
law and worries that it represents a step backwards in environmental
protection. This last-minute ad seems to be at least in part a payback
for the anti-Salazar Summitville ad that bombarded Colorado airwaves
this summer thanks to an independent trade group. The current ad from
the LCV seems to stick closer to facts than that ad. Too bad the whole
issue of corporate pollution and responsibility isn't given the discussion
it deserves in this campaign. These things certainly won't be thoroughly
discussed in the short time left in the campaign.”
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 ratings for the advertisement “Agree”.
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. “Polluter
Pete” received
an Accuracy rating of 5.6, indicating that while
there is factual information presented in the ad, it is framed in
an intentionally misleading or exaggerated way.
One criticism of the ad’s accuracy
came from a Democratic Advisory Panel member, “The
ad is factually correct but uses more scary production tricks than
a haunted house. Pete appears in black and white in a confusing look.
Meanwhile, the screen is coated in blood red and big looming numbers
count how many fish he (or is it the company) killed. The shot of the
State Capitol looks like something out of 'Mars Attacks'. The final
shot is cast in green toxic slime, trying to make you feel emotionally
'grossed-out' through the colors alone.”
There was a huge partisan gap in the
rating of the accuracy, with Republicans scoring it a meager 3.0 while
Democrats rated the ad a high 8.0 and Independents giving it a 7.0.
FAIRNESS RATING. This
ad received a poor Fairness rating of 4.2 out
of 10. The TIPA Rating System defines this as a "Scurrilous personal
attack intentionally distorting the truth to give a false impression
of an opponent, yet mixed with enough relevant or reasonable claims
to soften what otherwise would be a brutal attack."
One Panel member stated, “This
ad is typical of the League of Conservation Voters, an organization
devoid of any ethics or accountability.
Another panelist observed, "The
materials dumped into Clear Creek were obviously bad, but it was
determined that an employee made a mistake and turned the wrong
valve. Coors responded immediately to mediate the problem. Fact
is, the League of Conservation Voters only supports Democratic
candidates and will create fact from fiction to push their agenda."
Once again, Republicans rated the ad lowest
with a score of 2.0 while Independent panelists gave it a similar
score of 3.0. Democrats rated the ad a 6.5, notably higher than
the other two parties.
RELEVANCE RATING. This
ad received a Relevance score of 6.9 for its focus on the environment,
an area of great importance to many
Colorado voters. However, the malicious nature of the message reduces
its poignancy by quite a bit.
As one Panel member stated, "How
a candidate views the environment is relevant, but Coors has a
good record in this regard."
Independents thought the ad was perfectly
relevant to this race (10.0), while Democrats scored the ad a decent
7.5 and Republicans gave it a relatively low score of 5.6.
OVERALL RATING. “Polluter
Pete” received a poor Overall rating of 5.4. It is typical
of the nasty attack ads released by a third party organizations throughout
this race. The TIPA's has found that the worst ads
on both sides of the aisle are coming from 527's, organizations without
any real accountability or code of ethics to follow.
The ad was summarized by one panelist who
expressed, “The ad suggests Pete
Coors equals pollution. The photos used are surely not related to the
events described in the ad. It's totally misleading.”
(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.
