Ads for Prop. 5 Seen as a Compelling Sell

The television ad campaign for Proposition 5 on Indian gambling has dominated political advertising in California for months. Here, three experts analyze the video pitches:

Don Sipple, GOP media consultant

“The pro-5 ads are straightforward--no cosmetics, no razzmatazz. The main spokesman--that tribal chairman--is eloquent and oozes credibility. He looks you straight in the eye and says, ‘Let us help ourselves.’ Well, that’s a pretty accepted concept in America. And they frame it with a powerful message--that Prop 5 is about Nevada casinos versus California Indians.

The no side is trying to reframe the issue; they’ve got to. Their latest ad reassures voters that Indian gaming will continue no matter what. Very subtle. It says you can be pro-Indian gaming but anti-Prop 5.”

Dee Dee Myers, former press secretary to President Clinton and to Dianne Feinstein in her 1990 gubernatorial race

“The yes-on-5 side does effective testimonial ads, like the woman talking about growing up in a shack with dirt floors, and how gaming brings hope, self-sufficiency. It’s emotional--’We’re poor, help us be less poor.’

The no side has the only ad that connects the issue with average people, the one with casinos sprouting in neighborhoods. It’s silly, but it makes me say, ‘Wait, maybe this has relevance to my life.’ They need to push that argument further.”

Kirk Souder, creative partner at Santa Monica ad firm Ground Zero Branding

“The pro side has done simple, very human spots that tell you this is an issue about people and their welfare. Using Native Americans in the ads is smart, because mainstream America still has a Hollywood image of them, and to see modern Indian people is innately interesting.

The ad with casinos popping up in the neighborhood was a shallow idea. It looks manipulative, insincere. People are too sophisticated to believe that Bally’s would be allowed to build right next door.”