The number of Hillary Clinton-sponsored advertisements in this year's general election is half of what President Barack Obama aired four years ago. And it is one third of what it was in 2012 for the Republican candidate. But lower ad volumes are just one of the many things intriguing researchers about this year's campaign.
If you're looking for refuge from the non-stop barrage of presidential politics, tune to a broadcast channel, then wait for the commercials. For presidential ads, according to filings with the Federal Communications Commission, it's a virtual dead zone in Connecticut.
Erika Franklin Fowler, director with the Wesleyan Media Project, said that's not surprising. "Connecticut wouldn't be a smart purchase in the presidential race in particular because the state's so blue," she said.
What is surprising, Franklin Fowler said, is that the advertising dead zone, at least early on, wasn't unique to Connecticut.
"Trump didn't air a single ad on broadcast television or national cable until August 19," Franklin Fowler said. "That is just simply stunning. Once he did, his volumes have been much lower on average than we have seen before."
That's due in large part tofewer group advertisers going for Trump than they did Mitt Romney last cycle.
Carolyn Lin, a professor who teaches communication at UConn, said while TV ads aren't going away anytime soon, they are less important this cycle, thanks to things like social media.
"The more provocative or offensive the language might be -- the more that particular posting is going to go viral," she said.
Lin said that could have an impact on younger voters - and what they accept as truth in the media. Because of social media's growing prominence, Lin hopes more schools will commit to teaching basic media literacy courses, equipping future voters to better suss out the signal from the ever-expanding sea of political noise.
