The Accuracy Rating is
on a one-ten scale per the following legend:
01 = Grossly inaccurate with total disregard for the truth; an advertisement
which intentionally misstates facts to definitively create an impression
which is the opposite of the truth and which omits key facts which
otherwise would lead the observer to the opposite conclusion; viewed
as truly despicable by anyone with a conscience or a modicum of decency.
02 = Extremely inaccurate with “facts” fabricated
and/or distorted so as to give a false impression of the truth; a damning
indictment of misleading advertising.
03 = Generally inaccurate with a plurality of key
facts misstated and/or intentionally omitted, giving the observer the
impression something false is true or vice versa.
04 = A mix of accurate and inaccurate statements
(e.g., 50- 50) with more than one significant fact misstated and/or
with key, known or well-established facts omitted; a factually misleading
advertisement.
05 = Superficially accurate (approximately 70% of
the time) with one or more significant facts intentionally misstated
or erroneous; clearly not meeting any kind of minimal standards for
overall accuracy but appearing to do so as part of an effort to mislead
the observer.
06 = Nominally accurate (approximately
80%) but with one to three key facts subject to misinterpretation
or misunderstanding and such misinterpretation or misunderstandings
likely to have been intentional as part of a “smokescreen of truth” used
to pursue a falsified argument.
07 = Generally accurate (approximately
+90%) with one or two key facts subject to misinterpretation or misunderstanding – and
they clearly should have been corrected before the advertisement
was used.
08 = Very accurate (approximately +95%) with one
or two facts unintentionally unclear or subject to misinterpretation
or misunderstanding.
09 = Almost 100% accurate, with some minor unintentional
misinterpretation or misunderstanding of one or two facts possible
but unlikely; an advertisement obviously created with the pursuit of
truth in mind.
10 = Absolutely and totally accurate from a factual
perspective.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The Fairness Rating is
on a one-ten scale per the following legend:
01 = So terribly mean-spirited, evil, despicable, and/or unfair that
the candidate should be ashamed of him- or herself and resign from
the election; this rating is so low that voters supporting the candidate
sponsoring the advertisement or intended to benefit from the advertisement
should cast their vote for his or her opponent; contains multiple,
horribly vicious personal attacks, clearly intended to ruin the personal
life of an opponent or opposed candidate; the ultimate in scummy.
02 = Extremely unfair and/or
inaccurate with “facts” fabricated
and/or so extraordinarily distorted to vilify or otherwise severely
harm the opposing candidate; containing false or highly personal yet
irrelevant material which could unfairly damage the targeted candidate
for life; contains one or more vicious personal attacks; truly reprehensible.
03 = Grossly misleading and unfair effort to stain the reputation
of an opponent, meant to severely harm him or her.
04 = 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.
05 = Contains an unfounded or
unjustified personal attack on a candidate which is patently unfair
and which is not fair game.
06 = Hard-hitting but fair and
reasonable; hard-edged and perhaps a bit too tough yet just within
the bounds of what should be considered acceptable.
07 = Very fair; portrayal of
the opponent might be negative but is not exploitative or unreasonable
in any way; shows a contrast which is accurately and fairly represented.
08 = Extremely well-balanced
and reasonable; does nothing to unfairly portray the opponent in
a negative light but still may use one very relevant negative to
contrast the candidates or ballot issues yet does so in an acceptable
manner.
09 = Bends over backwards to
be fair and kind to an opponent; intentionally portrays the opponent
in a good light; makes no statements which could be unfairly construed.
10 = Extraordinarily fair to
the point of being magnanimous to the other side; if every candidate
were this generous, negative advertising would not exist; one might
think the opposition developed and sponsored this advertisement.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The Relevance Rating is
on a one-ten scale per the following legend:
01 = So totally irrelevant that the sponsoring candidate or the person
or group for whom the ad is intended to benefit should be tarred and
feathered (figuratively speaking) for his, her or their attempts to
use these issues in the campaign; the transgression is so egregious
that voting for the opponent of the sponsoring or candidate or organization
or other beneficiary is a must so the target of the irrelevant ads
ultimately benefits.
02 = Extremely irrelevant with
issues or “facts” selected,
fabricated, deployed and/or otherwise used in an intentional manner
to redirect voters away from the real issues of the day but done so
in a manner which serves to attack the opposition via distortions,
vilification, et cetera, often with the simultaneous intent to severely
harm the opposing candidate; containing misleading or false material
or one or more vicious personal attacks which are designed to suppress
discussion of what truly are the relevant issues of the day.
03 = Grossly misleading effort to redirect voters, possibly including
an attempt to stain the reputation of an opponent, meant to severely
harm him or her; scurrilous personal attack intentionally distorting
the truth to give a false impression of an opponent and avoid addressing
the issues voters see as key in a race.
04 = Contains subject matter which has little to do with the campaign
or contest at hand; obviously created to focus on a subject which casts
the sponsoring or benefiting candidate in a positive light although
the subject matter has little or no relationship to the political race.
05 = A slight majority of the
material is not relevant (e.g., +50%) and, instead, unintentionally
obscures those issues which are on the minds of most voters; this
advertisement may be sloppier in its construction than intentionally
devious (although the ultimate ramification may involve voter confusion).
06 = More relevant than not (i.e.,
+65%) but containing a confusing mix of topics, subjects, and themes
(in terms of their relevance) -- some of which apply to the contest
at hand and others which simply do not apply at all (hence the confusion).
07 = Almost all (80%) understandably
applicable and relevant subject matter and material which is related
to one or more key issues of the day for a plurality of voters and
which is articulated clearly.
08 = Quite relevant and appropriate
(+90%); the subject matter of the advertisement involves one or more
topics which are critically important at this time and are on the
minds of most voters but something minor and irrelevant may still
have been included in the advertisement.
09 = Very relevant material (i.e.,
approaching 100% relevance); the subject matter of the advertisement
is right on target and highlights the issues which clearly are important
to most people today; this advertisement “hits the
nail on the head” when it comes to topic selection.
10 = Extremely relevant
(definitely 100%); could not have selected more appropriate and fitting
topics, information, and claims; this is what this campaign should
be all about; a model for this and other political campaigns; this
candidate or campaign should be lauded and supported for the willingness
to address what truly are the key issues of the day.
