Surely there is are many studies! You would know better than I!
But my point in specific was about Dean. This wasn't a generic advertising effect. People saw him up close, he got much higher negatives than other candidates -- he abnnoyed people -- and he lost. I don't think this can be attributed mainly to media brainwashing. I think he lost in IA and NH because he failed impress the voters who saw him close up. In my view. the media effect mainly works by keeping info from people who otherwise lack cheap or free access to ot (not includinf just money costs, but also effort). But with Dean. the caucus voters had the indormation/ They just didn't like what they saw. jks
--- Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
> andie nachgeborenen wrote:
>
> >But I once again note that the assumption that most
> >people are pliable fools
>
> What is it with this binarist maximalism lately?
> People can be
> influenced by advertising and not be pliable fools.
> We're influenced
> by all kinds of things - why not ads, which are
> ubiquitous and often
> very cleverly done?
>
> Doug
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html