For a couple of decades now, negative campaigning has been commonplace in the US. Negative campaigning is marked primarily by a candidate saying how they are not like their opponent. Sometimes it goes further by using innuendo, half-truths, out-of-context statements, and even name-calling in an attempt to turn the voters off to the other candidate. The sad truth is that this strategy has been statistically proven to work, despite the un-Christian character of the approach.
Recently, as campaigns began in Australia, the main television network in Australia invited the two candidates for prime minister to be interviewed (separately) for the morning news program. The network did one thing to make the interviews compelling: they insisted that each candidate talk only about themselves and their political views. Furthermore, when either candidate began saying things like, "My opponent says…," the interviewer cut them off and did not permit them to proceed. From the standpoint of these American eyes and ears, it was remarkable.
Perhaps the approach of the Australian television network is a good approach for us: look only at what each candidate says about herself or himself and cut them off (or tune them out) when they start the negative rhetoric. Once we know what a candidate stands for, then we can apply our well-formed consciences to make a good decision.
Copyright © 2010, Deacon Carl D. Smith. All rights reserved. Reprint permission granted to parishes for use in Sunday bulletins. (http://bit.ly/16p8ws)
