Indiana Law Review Television Ads in Judicial Campaigns Anthony Champagne* Introduction Judicial campaigns have gone through a dramatic transformation in recent years from low-key, low-budget, and often uncontested affairs to hotly contested, expensive races that often cannot be distinguished from contests for offices in the political branches. 1 The traditional judicial campaign was "about as exciting as a game of checkers. Played by mail." 2 The judicial candidate would speak to any group willing to hear a dull speech about improving the judiciary or about judicial qualifications. There were hands to shake, bar and newspaper endorsements to obtain, and little else. While there might be some involvement with interest groups, it usually consisted of speeches before a union local or a medical society and perhaps an effort to obtain their endorsements. Assuming the candidate was an incumbent and had avoided scandal or a highly controversial decision, victory was likely. Indeed, most incumbents would not have an opponent. In a retention election, victory was a virtual certainty. If the race was for an open seat, then an attractive name, a good ballot placement, a popular political party affiliation, or perhaps a newspaper or bar association endorsement, were the avenues to election. 3 To the extent that there was interest group involvement, it was mostly between competing segments of the bar and even that involvement was low- budget and low-key. However, this traditional approach to judicial elections began to change in the late 1970s when deputy district attorneys in Los Angeles began to encourage opposition to judges they believed were soft on crime. Shortly thereafter, trial lawyers in Texas began to pour money into that state's supreme court races. Before long, money was flowing into judicial races from the defense side in tort suits as well. 4 Soon big money was going into judicial * Professor, Government and Politics, School of Social Sciences, University ofTexas at Dallas. B.A., Millsaps College; Ph.D., University ofIllinois. This Paper was prepared specifically for the Symposium on Judicial Campaign Conduct and the First Amendment. The views expressed in this Paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the National Center for State Courts, the Joyce Foundation, or the Open Society Institute. Supported (in part) by a grant from the Program on Law & Society of the Open Society Institute, as well as a grant from the Joyce Foundation. I am grateful to the Brennan Center and especially to Craig Holman for providing me with the Brennan Center compilation of ads. I am also grateful to William Quinlan, Monique Anikwue, and Professor Roy Schotland for ads not found in the Brennan Center materials. Finally, I appreciate ChiefJustice Tom Phillips' willingness to answer questions about television ads in Texas and John Deardourffs willingness to talk about television ads in several other states. 1 . Anthony Champagne, Interest Groups andJudicial Elections, 34 LOY. L.A. L. Rev. 1391, 1393(2001). 2. William C. Bayne, Lynchard 's Candidacy, Ads PuttingSpice into Justice Race, MEMPHIS Commercial Appeal, Oct. 29, 2000, at DS1. 3. Champagne, supra note 1, at 1393. 4. Mark Hansen, A Runfor the Bench, A.B.A. J., Oct. 1998, at 69-70; Alexander Wohl, 670 INDIANA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 35:669 campaigns in states such as Alabama, California, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Illinois. 5 In this new era ofjudicial politics, judicial campaigns have become "nastier, noisier, and costlier." 6 Television has become the major venue for modern day supreme court campaigns. 7 The increased fundraising of candidates has, to a great extent, gone into campaign ads on television. Independent expenditures and issue ads by interest groups have also increased and much ofthat money has also gone into television. 8 With the average American family's television tuned in for eight hours per day, 9 television has become the most effective, albeit expensive, way forjudicial candidates to reach voters. To date there has been no empirical study ofthis use oftelevision injudicial campaigns. This Paper seeks to analyze the television messages of state supreme court candidates in Ohio, Michigan, Alabama, and Mississippi in the 2000 elections. It seeks to determine the themes of judicial campaign ads and the varying messages from candidate—sponsored, party-sponsored, and interest group-sponsored ads. Justicefor Rent, AM. PROSPECT, May 22, 2000, at 34. 5. See Champagne, supra note 1 , at 1 394- 1 404. By the 2000 elections, at least $62 million was spent on judicial races. See Roy A. Schotland, Financing Judicial Elections, 2000: Change and Challenge, 2001 L. Rev. MlCH. ST. U. Det. C.L. 849, 850-51. 6. Roy A. Schotland, Comment, Judicial Independence and Accountability, 61 LAW & CONTEMP. PROBS. 149, 150(1998). 7. Television ads did appear in some lower court campaigning as well, but the high expense of these ads made them less frequent in those elections. 8. One of the most significant developments in modern campaigning was the use of independent expenditures. Political action committees and political parties may spend unlimited sums campaigning for or against candidates as long as the committee or party act independently from the candidate's campaign committee. The model for independent political action committees was the National Conservative Political Action Committee (NCPAC), which spent millions of dollars in pursuit of its moral issue agenda See Fed. Election Comm'n v. Nat'l Conservative Political Action Comm., 470 U.S. 480 (1985); W. Lance Bennett, The Governing Crisis: Media, Money, and Marketing in American Elections 53 (2d ed. 1996). Many state laws, like federal law, bar corporations and unions from express political advocacy. However, they can engage in "issue advocacy." That route was of major importance last year, for the first time, in judicial elections. For a discussion of the legal distinction between express advocacy and "issue ads," a distinction that is more legal than real, see Deborah Goldberg & Mark Kozlowski, Constitutional Issues in Disclosure ofInterest Group Activities, 35 IND. L. REV. 755, 759-61 (2002). Bradley Smith believes that both "issue ads" and independent expenditures "are the direct result of efforts by citizens to engage in political participation in the face of contribution and spending limits." See Bradley A. Smith, Unfree Speech: The Folly of Finance Reform 175 (2001). 9. Bennett, supra note 8, at 15. Indeed, since the mid-1960s, most Americans rely on television as the primary news source. See Smith, supra note 8, at 173. 2002] TELEVISION ADS IN JUDICIAL CAMPAIGNS 67 1 I. The Importance of Television One of the best examples of the effectiveness of television in judicial campaigns comes from data gathered regarding the Texas Supreme Court races between 1992 and 2000. 10 On four occasions in the last decade, Republican supreme court candidates were challenged in the primary by candidates with little if any organized support and minimal funding. Yet the insurgent candidates all showed great strength in areas where the established candidate did not run television ads. Of course there may be additional explanations for the strength ofestablished candidates in those geographical areas where ads were shown. For example, perhaps the candidates campaigned harder in those areas or were better organized. Moreover, in some locales candidates may have had stronger name identification than their opponents. 11 However, as Table 1 indicates, the strong correlation between television media markets and voting percentages should not be ignored. One would, of course, expect ads to be purchased in the Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston media markets as these areas represent the state's major urban centers and the source ofmuch Republican voting strength. For example, in the 2000 Republican primary for President, 1,126,757 votes were cast. Thirty percent of those votes came from Dallas, Tarrant, and Harris counties, three of the largest counties (but not the only counties) in the Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston media markets. Likewise, some media markets may be ignored because they contain so few Republican voters. 12 Therefore, major considerations regarding the purchase oftelevision time are clearly cost and the ability to reach potential voters in the Republican primary. 13 The insurgent candidates did not have the resources to run television ads; only the established candidates did and only in some media markets. It was reasonable to conclude that it was the support received by the established candidates in the areas where they ran television ads that led to their victories. It is important to note that since the data all relate to the Republican primary, the effect of the political party label is controlled. If one compares the 10. See tbl.l. The data were compiled by Texas' Chief Justice Thomas R. Phillips and by Karl Rove (who served as a campaign consultant to a number of winning judicial candidates) and were presented at the Summit on Improving Judicial Selection on December 8-9, 2000 [hereinafter Phillips & Rove]. For further detailed data, see Roy A. Schotland, Campaign Finance injudicial Elections, 34 Loy. L.A. L. REV. 1489, 1508-12 (2001). 1 1 . Candidates in Texas Supreme Court races are affected by "friends and neighbors" voting where voters tend to cast ballots for candidates from their home county or from neighboring counties. Gregorys. Thielemann, LocalAdvantage in Campaign Financing: Friends, Neighbors, and Their Money in Texas Supreme Court Elections, 55 J. POL. 472 (1993). 1 2. See Texas Secretary ofState, Historical Data, at www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/historical/ index, shtml. 13. Telephone Interview with Thomas R. Phillips, Texas Supreme Court ChiefJustice (Aug. 15, 2001) (transcript on file with author); Telephone Interview with John Deardourff, media director (Aug. 20, 2001) (transcript on file with author) [hereinafter Deardourff Interview]. 672 INDIANA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 35:669 percentage difference in votes for the established candidate in those areas where television buys were made versus those media markets where no buys were made, the difference is remarkable. 14 In media markets where the established candidates ran television ads, in terms ofvote percentages, they received between twelve percent and 1 8.5% more votes than in media markets where they did not buy television time. 15 The media markets where these differences were found vary considerably in size, representing huge markets such as Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth to much smaller markets such as Abilene-Sweetwater, Corpus Christi, and Lubbock. Thus, the differences in victory margins between the areas where media buys were made and where they are not was not fully explained by the urbanism ofthe media markets (though the largest markets, Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston have the most Republican voters and so media buys there were essential). Examination of individual media markets showed a pattern of success for established candidates in areas where ads were purchased. 16 In the four primaries examined in Table 1 , there were thirty-eight media markets where the candidate purchased television advertising. The established candidate won at least a majority in thirty-five of those thirty-eight media markets. 17 In thirty-seven media markets, a candidate did not purchase television time and the established candidate won at least a majority in only eleven of those markets. 18 Given the myriad offactors that can explain electoral success, one should be careful to impute victory in these judicial races solely to television ads. On the other hand, the general pattern of high margins of victory in areas where television was used is so powerful that it cannot be ignored. II. The Nature of the Medium Television encourages the use of dramatic and eye-catching political advertisements. In the context of judicial races, such ads include the use of talking trees, 19 exploded tires and overturned vehicles, 20 accusations that a candidate is pro-crime (one ofthe more eye-catching is that the candidate is soft on pedophiles) 21 and accusations thatjudges are corrupted by campaign money. 22 14. Seetbl.l. 15. Id. 1 6. See Phillips & Rove, supra note 1 0. 17. Id. 18. Id. 19. Ads used in Michigan included talking trees, one of which was named "Don Oak." 20. The problems with Firestone tires were noted in judicial campaign ads in Michigan and in Alabama. 21. Being "tough on crime" was a campaign theme found in all four states (Alabama, Michigan, Mississippi, and Ohio), Michigan had an ad that stressed a challenger's decision as an intermediate appellate judge that was favorable to a child molester. A similar charge was made against a Wisconsin justice. The grandmother of a murdered child appeared in that ad. See Judith L. Maute, Selecting Justice in State Courts: The Ballot Box or the Backroom?, 41 S. TEX. L. REV. 2002] TELEVISION ADS IN JUDICIAL CAMPAIGNS 673 As Ansolabehere, Behr, and Iyengar point out: More often than not, the victor is the candidate who is best able to condense his or her message into something that the average voter—who is far removed from politics, and usually hates commercials—will remember and care about. Out of necessity, such circumstances force candidates to highlight easily absorbed negative messages about the opponent. 23 The judicial elections of 2000 in the four states studied in this Paper confirmed this theory. Candidates used themes such as crime control, civil justice, and family values to offer voters an appealing message that would attract votes. They also used aspects of their ads as signals oftheir underlying attitudes and values. Further, they attacked their opponents by portraying them as corrupted by campaign contributions, the tools of special interests, and soft on crime. Additionally, the 2000 judicial elections saw strong use of television ads by political parties and interest groups. Those ads proved especially hard-hitting and negative. Party and interest group advertisements have a particular advantage injudicial races in taking a negative approach since third party ads are not subject to the restrictions of the Canons of Judicial Ethics. While some candidates for judicial office have publicly requested interest groups to stop campaign efforts on their behalf, 24 there is little political incentive to do so. As Ansolabehere and Iyengar point out: "Organized interests seem to have a unique edge in going negative. Attack advertisements from interest groups convey all ofthe negatives about the candidate who is attacked without the risk ofa political backlash against the candidate the group supports." 25 One should not overlook that such advertising campaigns provide a mechanism to attack the opponent while the supportedjudicial candidate remains above the fray and well within the requirements of the Canons of Judicial Ethics. 26 If nothing else, however, television vastly increases the audience to 1197, 1224 n. 167 (2000). 22. Commonly, a candidate will allege that the other side is corrupted by campaign money and is the captive of special interests. Such a theme was found in all four states. Some Ohio commercials pushed this theme so hard that the Ohio State Bar Association President spoke out against the commercials. See videotaped comments of Reginald Jackson, President of the Ohio State Bar Association (on file with Indiana Law Review). 23. Stephen Ansolabehere et al., The Media Game: American Politics in the Television Age 100(1993). 24. Schotland, supra note 5. 25. Stephen Ansolabehere & Shanto Iyengar, Going Negative: How Attack Ads Shrink and Polarize the Electorate 128(1 996). 26. "In an era ofthirty-second television advertisements, interest group advertising can hold considerable sway over the electorate, and the independent expenditures of interest groups can be especially hard-hitting since they are free of ethical constraints." Anthony Champagne, Interest Groups and Judicial Elections, 34 LOY. L.A. L. REV. 1391, 1408-09 (2001). 674 INDIANA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 35:669 which misleading, questionable, or improper statements may be directed. Because there has been so little research on the use of television in judicial campaigns, as opposed to research on campaigns for other offices, it is important to obtain a more general idea of the nature ofjudicial television ads.27 Are the types of ads mentioned above characteristic of judicial campaigns? Or, are judicial television ads generally informative to voters? With a better understanding ofthe nature ofjudicial television ads, we could better understand this new era injudicial politics. iii. television and judicial campaigns in 2000 in alabama, Mississippi, Michigan, and Ohio: Signaling and the Themes of Crime Control, Civil Justice and Family Values With the generosity of the Brennan Center, I was able to obtain transcripts of forty-four judicial campaign ads that were run in Alabama, Michigan, Mississippi, and Ohio in the 2000 elections. These represent the bulk ofjudicial campaign ads broadcast in seventy-five major media markets in those states during the 2000 campaigns. 28 From a variety of other sources, I was able to identify eleven additional ad transcripts. 29 Some ofthe more notable characteristics ofthe ads are summarized in Table 2. The extent of third party involvement in the airing of ads is especially impressive. Of the fifty-five ads, only twenty-eight were paid for by the 27. The lack of research on judicial television ads is due to the newness of television as a judicial campaign medium. Until recently, limited funds made the use of television for judicial campaigns prohibitive. See Schotland, supra note 6, at 1 50. Paul Carrington writes that "the media blitz exponentially increases the cost ofcampaigns [H]igh-priced judicial elections are a public disaster. The cost of such campaigns has been doubling almost every biennium so that judicial campaigns are regularly spending millions, much ofit on spot advertising on commercial campaigns are regularly spending millions, much of it on spot advertising on commercial television " Paul D. Carrington, Judicial Independence and Democratic Accountability in Highest State Courts, 61 Law & Contemp. Probs. 79, 1 12 (1998). 28. Due to statistical coding errors, seven judicial ads that were identified by the ad monitoring system were not provided to the Brennan Center. 29. Three ads not in the Brennan Center compilation were candidate ads from Alabama that can be viewed at http://www.yourvotealabama.org/adwatch/adsolution. Two ads, one produced by the Michigan Democratic Party and the other by the Michigan Chamber ofCommerce, were noted in Laura Potts, High Court Race Begins Early with Dueling Ads, FREE PRESS (Detroit), Aug. 1 7, 2000, at 1 , available at http://www.freep.com/news/mich/courtl 7_200008 1 7.htm. Three ads were provided by Professor Roy Schotland of the Georgetown Law Center. They were all Chamber of Commerce ads from Mississippi. One Michigan Republican Party ad was located at http://www.migop.org. Mr. William Quinlan also provided a Michigan Democratic Party ad. A final Michigan Democratic Party ad was mentioned on Associated Press wires on November 1, 2000 at 6:29 p.m. It is unknown how many times these eleven ads were broadcast. 2002] TELEVISION ADS IN JUDICIAL CAMPAIGNS 675 candidates. 30 Ten of the ads were aired by the political parties, fourteen were aired by defense interests such as the Chamber ofCommerce and other business groups, and three were aired by plaintiffs' lawyers and unions. 31 The considerable number ofads paid for by third parties is a strong indication of the increased involvement of interest groups in judicial elections. From the perspective ofthe interest groups, an effort to persuade voters independent ofany official statements by the candidate may be desirable since it removes the ad from the ethical restrictions and political accountability that may be placed on a candidate. 32 In discussing political ads, Ansolabehere, Behr, and Iyengar note that "[T]he battle over paid media is fought in 30-second increments." 33 This is certainly the case with televised judicial ads. All but five of the fifty-five commercials surveyed for the article were thirty seconds long and those five were each fifteen seconds in length. With few exceptions, these ads were repeated time and again. That is because for an ad to have impact on an election, it must be shown numerous times, often in prime time. 34 Judicial ads are no exception to this standard. The forty-four ads obtained from the Brennan Center were broadcast at least 13,203 times. 35 Those that were candidate ads were broadcast 7151 times and the third party ads were broadcast 6052 times. Thus, of the judicial ads for which data are available, forty-six percent ofthe judicial ads broadcast were not under the control of the candidate or the Canons of Judicial Ethics. Not all ads received the same degree of repetition. One Mississippi candidate ad was broadcast only three times, while one Ohio Democratic Party ad was broadcast 1695 times and an Ohio Chamber of Commerce ad was broadcast 1 1 59 times. Overall, only six ads were broadcast fewer than fifty times each. Thirteen ads were broadcast between fifty-one and 150 times each; nineteen ads were broadcast between 201 and 450 times each; two between 45 1 and 600 times each; and only four were broadcast over 900 times. 36 One should, however, be cautious in interpreting the importance ofmere repetition ofads. In addition to the frequency ofads, other data regarding the ads must be considered to fully understand their value. In particular, data on the media market in which the ad was broadcast, the time period over which the ad was broadcast, and the time slots in which the ad was shown are important. Ads shown in urban areas such as Houston, for example, would have greater impact on potential votes than the same ad shown in the much smaller Abilene-Sweetwater market. Ads shown over a brieftime period probably would not be absorbed by the voters as well as an ad broadcast over many days. Similarly, ads shown in some time slots or 30. Seetbl.2. 31. Id. 32. Champagne, supra note 1, at 1408-09. 33. Ansolabehere et al., supra note 23, at 1 00. 34. A/ at 89. 35. The seven ads not included in the Brennan Center compilation due to coding errors were broadcast a total of 2514 times. See Appendix, infra. 36. See id. 676 INDIANA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 35:669 during certain programs would be far more likely to reach potential voters than at some other slots or programs.37 There were still television ads that followed the traditional model ofjudicial campaigning—talking about the qualifications and experience ofthe candidate, not signalingjudicial attitudes and values, avoiding discussion of legal issues or cases, and refusing to attack one's opponent. However, those ads were rare. Only eight of the fifty-five ads reflected such a traditional approach to judicial JO campaigning. One thing that is particularly clear about the messages in many ofthese ads is that the commercials provide signals to voters about the candidates' judicial philosophies. 39 Those signals may sometimes be ambiguous. An example is an Alabama commercial in which the candidate and citizens comment on the supreme court candidate's fairness and impartiality. The candidate claims he has "the experience, the reputation, the judicial temperament and also the judicial 3 7. Deardourff Interview, supra note 1 3 . 38. All of these ads were paid for by the candidates as opposed to interest groups. Two of the ads stressed newspaper endorsements. A speaker in one of the ads was a former U.S. senator (and former state supreme court justice). Another ad emphasized that the candidate had been praised by the governor. Still another ad stressed the candidate's father, a recently deceased former supreme court justice. An example of such a traditional ad was a fifteen-second ad aired in Ohio: "His integrity and philosophy have made him one of the most respected judges in Cuyahoga County. Judge**** has real world experience. ****. Honest, fair Ohio values." O'DonnellReal World Experience, Ohio, 2000 Election, Candidate Ad. The aforementioned ad was run by the challenger against Justice Alice Resnick. Resnick was attacked with far more aggressive ads sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce and its affiliates. The Chamber's efforts in the Ohio Supreme Court race cost millions of dollars. Schotland, supra note 5. An example of the aggressive nature of the Chamber's ad campaign against Resnick is Resnick Tookfrom Injury Lawyers, Ohio, 2000 Election, U.S. Chamber of Commerce. 39. Signaling is not limited to television ads. Some commenters have expressed the concern that signaling of attitudes and values actually represents a candidate's prejudging a case. See, e.g., David Barnhizer, "On The Make": Campaign Funding and the Corrupting of the American Judiciary, 50 CATH. U .L. Rev. 361, 388 (2001). Barnhizer mentions reports that "in one of the Illinois primaries this spring, a Republican Supreme Court justice, S. Louis Rathje, was unseated by a challenger who paid for campaign fliers that were distributed by anti-abortion groups. They described the challenger, Robert R. Thomas, as 'the only endorsed pro-life candidate.'" Judge Rathje warned that the tactic used by Thomas showed that politics were now a full part ofjudicial elections. Rathje claimed the problem is that: People who have cases in court . . . will have to get used to appearing in front ofjudges who have already stated their views. "Would you feel more or less comfortable . . . with ajudge who has already told you how he is going to rule?" Id. (quoting William Glaberson, State Judges Are Acting More Like Politicians as Challenges Grow, J. REC. (Oklahoma City), June 23, 2000, available at 2000 WL 14296340) (footnote omitted). Judge Thomas said that the pro-life declaration was simply a statement of his personal views. "It has nothing to do with my even-handed participation in cases." Id. 2002] TELEVISION ADS IN JUDICIAL CAMPAIGNS 677 philosophy that suits me well for that job." 40 Except for one sentence, the ad is innocuous and does not offer any elaboration of the candidate's experience, reputation, temperament or philosophy. However, in one sentence the candidate says, "I respect the right to a trial byjury." 41 On the one hand, the statement may be seen as mere campaign rhetoric. On the other, the candidate is arguably presenting a cue to voters about one of the more important legal issues in Alabama today—the extent to which juries function as decisionmakers. Other ads are subtle and their meaning less ambiguous, even though they still rely on rather vacuous terms and phrases. For example, one candidate's ad says, "He does not make policy from the bench .... [He is] honest, [has] common- sense, conservative." 42 The language is general, but it does project the image of a non-activist, conservative judicial philosophy. While the above-mentioned ad signals certain attitudes and values to voters, many of the ads are much more glaring in discussing judicial values. One candidate ad stressed the candidate's views on crime control in which the candidate stated, "I think for too long our courts have really emphasized the rights of criminals at the expense of victims." 43 This was followed by an announcer saying, "Supreme Court Justice **** believes in protecting the rights ofpolice officers, victims, and law-abiding citizens. Technicalities or loopholes shouldn't keep criminals on the street. That is why Justice **** is supported by more than 22,000 Michigan police officers." 44 The candidate then commented, "I think police officers are really champions of our society." 45 Such a crime control appeal is, to say the least, not unusual. An Alabama Supreme Court candidate ran an ad saying, Why did the Alabama Fraternal Order ofPolice endorse Judge **** over **** for Alabama Supreme Court? Because she respects law enforcement. Judge ****. A twenty-year record fighting crime as a prosecutor andjudge. A ninety-one percent conviction rate in DUI cases as a district judge. And last year in two tragic cases, Judge **** sentenced two convicted murderers to the death penalty . . . . 46 40. Woodall Nothing but Fair, Alabama, 2000 Election, Candidate Ad. 41. Id. 42. O 'Donnell Without Fear or Favor, Ohio, 2000 Election, Candidate Ad. 43. Taylor Victims ' Rights, Michigan, 2000 Election, Candidate Ad. 44. Id. Endorsements by police, state trooper or sheriffs' organizations are frequently mentioned in ads. In five ads, endorsements by various police organizations were mentioned and in two ads endorsements by both police organizations and prosecutors were mentioned. Finally, in one ad, endorsements by police and teacher organizations were mentioned. No other organizational endorsements were mentioned in any ads except for endorsements by various newspapers. Newspaper endorsements were mentioned in four ads. Newspaper endorsements in ads are considered especially useful since they provide a third party validation of the merits of the candidate. Deardourff Interview, supra note 13. 45. See supra note 44. 46. Stuart F.O.P. Endorse, Alabama, 2000 Election, Candidate Ad. 678 INDIANA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 35:669 The ad touched all the buttons. Police liked this candidate. She was a prosecutor and a crime fighter. She was tough on drunk drivers. She was tough enough on crime that she would sentence murderers to death. After seeing the ad, few voters would doubt her views on law and order. Of the fifty-five television ads surveyed for this Article, twenty-three presented some sort of a crime control message. 47 However, fifty-two percent (twelve ofthe twenty-three) ofads with a crime control message were candidate- sponsored ads. One is reminded ofOregon Justice Hans Linde's comment about judicial campaign slogans: "Every judge's campaign slogan, in advertisements and on billboards, is some variation of 'tough on crime.' The liberal candidate is the one who advertises: 'Tough but fair.' Television campaigns have featured judges in their robes slamming shut a prison cell door." 48 While a crime control message was extremely important in the campaign ads, another major theme of advertising dealt with civil justice issues. Of the fifty- five television ads, twenty-one ofthe ads offered some sort of treatment of civil justice issues, ranging from a criticism ofajustice's dependence on funding from trial lawyers to a discussion of judicial candidates' views on product liability issues. However, while fifty-two percent of the crime control ads were candidate-sponsored, only twenty-four percent (five of twenty-one) of the civil justice ads were. The most frequent and clear-cut treatment ofciviljustice issues were run in ads by third parties. For example, one ad asked: Is justice for sale in Ohio? You decide. Since 1994, Justice **** has taken over $750,000 from personal injury lawyers. Justice **** ruled in favor of trial lawyers who had contributed to her campaign seventy percent of the time. After a union leader and a big contributor complained about a ruling **** made, **** became the only Justice to reverse herself in the case. ****. Is justice for sale? 49 A Michigan ad dealing with civil justice mentioned that the opposing candidate had "represented the radical Welfare Rights Organization and she's a personal injury lawyer," 50 One of the most blatant discussions of product liability issues was a Michigan ad: Should corporations that know they're selling dangerous defective products be held accountable? Michigan Supreme Court Justices **** **** and **** don't think so. They support a law that makes it harder 47. This includes mention of endorsements by law enforcement and an ad denying that a judge had departed from sentencing guidelines. Mention ofbeing a "toughjudge" without a crime- related context or mention of background as a military policeman was not considered by me as being a crime control message. 48. Hans A. Linde, Elective Judges: Some Comparative Comments, 6 1 S. Cal. L. Rev. 1 995, 2000(1995). 49. Resnick Is Justicefor Sale, Ohio, 2000 Election, Citizens for a Strong Ohio. 50. Robinson and Fitzgerald Reverse, Michigan, 2000 Election, Chamber ofCommerce Ad. 2002] TELEVISION ADS IN JUDICIAL CAMPAIGNS 679 to hold corporations accountable for dangerous products. ******** and ****. A law that could hurt families whose loved ones were killed or injured in accidents with Firestone tires. **** **** and ****. Oh no. Republicans who put big corporations and insurance companies ahead of people. 51 Candidate ads also sometimes provided a strong message on civil justice issues. For example, one candidate ad in Michigan stated: For over twenty years, I have been fighting for Michigan families in our legal system. I've learned that all people ask for is fairness. But today our supreme court is packed with politicians who side time and again with big insurance companies. My opponent has even been willing to ignore the law just to be sure that special interests win. That's wrong. I am ****. I want to change the Supreme Court and give our families a fair shake, because where does it say that only the rich and powerful deserve justice? 52 Notable within the category ofads with a civil justice theme was a recurring charge that the opposing candidate was "for sale" or "sold to business and insurance interests" or to trial lawyers. For example, a third party-funded ad in Alabama that attacked funding by trial lawyers stated: [Announcer]: If you thought we finally got greedy trial lawyers out of Alabama politics, try again. Alabama trial lawyers are funneling millions of dollars to ****, ****, **** and ****'s campaigns for Supreme Court. And trial lawyers are spending even more to fund new attack ads. We know why trial lawyers are spending that kind ofmoney but why are ****, **** ? **** ? an