[EL] Misleading GOP ad (Kyrsten Sinema)

[Jerald Lentini]

If nothing else, the NRCC's disclaimer almost certainly fails to meet the
requirements of being clear and conspicuous. Language identifying the NRCC
is entirely outside the white text box and is overlaid on top of a
photograph. It has the least color contrast of any part of the page, and is
more difficult to read than any other text.


On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 1:08 PM, <info at arizonaspolitics.com> wrote:

>
> (One) irony is that the NRCC trumpeted this back in November, and claimed
> that they were doing it because the "targeted" Democratic Representatives
> were "FRAUDS".
>
> My article: bit.ly/AZp736.
>
> Did further research and found that all 3 Arizona Dems in swing districts
> were targeted with this.  (www.AnnKirkpatrick.com,
> www.SinemaForCongress.com, and www.RonBarber2014.com)  And, in at least
> one of them, the word "Defeat" does NOT show up when the page comes up at
> 100% zoom.
>
> The search engine optimization apparently worked well on Rep. Barber.  The
> NRCC site comes up on page 1 of Google (when you search "Ron Barber 2014"),
> and the official site is on page 5.
>
> My article also lists the 14 Democratic Reps that I was able to find have
> been targeted in this way by the NRCC.
> _____________________
>
> Mitch Martinson
> www.ArizonasPolitics.com
> 602-799-7025
>
>
>  -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [EL] Misleading GOP ad (Kyrsten Sinema)
> From: "Scarberry, Mark" <Mark.Scarberry at pepperdine.edu>
> Date: Tue, February 04, 2014 10:06 am
> To: "law-election at UCI.edu" <law-election at uci.edu>
>
> It absolutely is misleading. If the reader misses one word ("Defeat"), the
> reader would think contributions would be used to support the Democrat. You
> don't have to click through to an obviously anti-Sinema site to contribute,
> nor is there any other indication of the ad's true purpose.
>
> Suppose there had been something conspicuous that would alert the would-be
> contributor, and the ad included a substantive criticism of Sinema. Would
> it be ethical to use the headline to get Sinema supporters to read the rest
> of the ad? My sense is no. It would be different if there were three
> question marks ("???") after the headline.
>
> Mark Scarberry
> Pepperdine
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> > On Feb 4, 2014, at 7:03 AM, "Joseph Birkenstock" <
> jbirkenstock at capdale.com> wrote:
> >
> > Holy charge-backs, Batman... What's the non-"we're trying to trick
> donors" reason for putting "Kyrsten Sinema for Congress" at the top of that
> webpage?
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > Joseph M. Birkenstock, Esq.
> > Caplin & Drysdale, Chtd.
> > One Thomas Circle, NW
> > Washington, DC 20005
> > (202) 862-7836
> > www.capdale.com/jbirkenstock<http://www.capdale.com/jbirkenstock>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>



-- 
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This e-mail message, including any attachments, is
for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
and privileged information or otherwise be protected by law. Any
unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you
are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail
and destroy all copies of the original message.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140204/702cfc29/attachment.html>