San Francisco Bay Area Television-25 Years of Early Morning News

Today the early morning television airwaves in the San Francisco Bay Area are saturated with local news broadcasts.  Five stations (KTVU, KRON, KPIX, KGO and KNTV) produce a total of 17 hours of local news on weekdays between 4 a.m. and 9 a.m.  Twenty-five years ago, in the summer of 1986, the same stations produced zero hours of local news (excepting the local cut-ins to network programs at 7:25 and 8:25 a.m.).

The world of Bay Area television news broadcasting changed on Monday, September 1 (Labor Day), 1986 when KRON-TV (channel 4, then an NBC affiliate) debuted "Daybreak," a half-hour local newscast from 6:30 a.m. to 7 a.m.  "NewsCenter 4 Daybreak" was then the only local newscast on the Bay Area television dial between 4 a.m. and 9 a.m. (aside from the five-minute cut-ins to the network morning programs at 7:25 and 8:25 a.m.).  Lloyd Patterson and Lila Petersen were the co-anchors.  This half-hour program a quarter century ago spawned the seven hours on KRON (4 a.m. to 11 a.m.), 4 1/2 hours on KTVU (4:30 a.m. to 9 a.m.) and 2 1/2 hours on KPIX, KGO and KNTV (4:30 a.m. to 7 a.m.) that Bay Area viewers see today.

"Daybreak" had a texture that was different from KRON's other newscasts in 1986.  Traffic reporting was heavily emphasized.  Newscasts generally began with live shots of traffic conditions at the toll plazas of the Bay Bridge and Golden Gate Bridge (live traffic cameras were a rarity then).  Much of the content was from KRON's newscasts that aired the previous day.  [For example, the evening anchors' (Jim Paymar and Sylvia Chase) laughter sometimes could be heard during the taped Wayne Shannon commentaries that aired during "Daybreak."]  The New York Stock Exchange began trading at 6:30 a.m. PT, giving 'Daybreak' an opportunity to be among the few broadcast television sources of opening-bell market trends (aside from the Financial News Network on San Jose's channel 48, which had yet to convert to its Spanish language Telemundo format.)  "Bumpers" before commercial breaks included trivia questions and cartoon clips.  A mid-1987 promo summarized what made 'Daybreak' distinctive: "“When the day begins, ‘Daybreak’ is ready.  With local news, stocks, weather and live traffic reports.  Daybreak – the Bay Area’s first newscast.  Weekdays at 6:30.”When the day begins, ‘Daybreak’ is ready.  With local news, stocks, weather and live traffic reports.  'Daybreak' – the Bay Area’s first newscast.  Weekdays at 6:30."

“When the day begins, ‘Daybreak’ is ready.  With local news, stocks, weather and live traffic reports.  Daybreak – the Bay Area’s first newscast.  Weekdays at 6:30.”“When the day begins, ‘Daybreak’ is ready.  With local news, stocks, weather and live traffic reports.  Daybreak – the Bay Area’s first newscast.  Weekdays at 6:30.”

KNTV (channel 11), then the ABC affiliate in the San Jose/Salinas/Monterey television market, in 1987 or early 1988 followed KRON with its 15-minute "Good Morning San Jose" program at 6:45 a.m., displacing the last quarter of the hour-long "ABC World News This Morning."

In January 1988, KGO-TV (channel 7, ABC owned & operated station) announced that it would challenge KRON with its own early morning newscasts, two 15-minute newscasts at 6:00 a.m. and 6:30 a.m., interspersed with 15-minute segments of "ABC World News This Morning" at 6:15 and 6:45 a.m.  It was on the air by mid-1988.  Russ Coughlan, former KGO general manager, was the anchor of a low-budget newscast that featured Coughlan holding up and reading morning newspapers on the air.  KGO touted the fact that its newscast began earlier than KRON's, beginning a "war" for earlier and earlier start times.

The earth literally shook before KPIX-TV (channel 5, then a Westinghouse-owned CBS affiliate) entered the early morning news race.  Its 6:30 a.m. newscast evolved out of special coverage following the October 17, 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake.  By that time KRON had already expanded "Daybreak" to a full hour, beginning at 6 a.m.

KTVU (channel 2, Cox Broadcasting-owned Fox affiliate) began competing in the early morning news market in January 1991 when "Mornings on 2" debuted from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m., featuring host Steve McPartlin, news anchor Terry Lowry and reporter Eric Greene.  Its competitive advantage was that it was the only local newscast against the network programs during its two-hour time slot.  It was then said to be the first local newscast in the western United States to challenge the network programs.  "Mornings on 2" replaced a two-hour children's block, including "G.I. Joe," "Adventures of the Gummi Bears," "Duck Tales" and "Merrie Melodies."

In August 1996, KTVU added a 6 a.m. to 7 a.m. newscast called the "KTVU Morning News," anchored by Dianne Dwyer and Ross McGowan.  That newscast expanded earlier to 5:30 a.m. in August 1998.  Today it begins at 4:30 a.m.

In the early 1990s, local stations increased their local cut-ins to network programs.  In 1992, for example, KRON added 7:55 and 8:55 a.m. five-minute newscasts to join its 7:25 and 8:25 a.m. ones.  "Daybreak" had expanded to two hours (5 a.m. to 7 a.m.) by 1998.  Now KRON begins its local newscasts at 4 a.m., a half-hour earlier than its four rivals.

KPIX ran a local newscast called "Channel 5 This Morning" during the 7 a.m. to 8 a.m. hour in mid-1996.  Anchored by Marcia Brandwynne, it was blended with network content.  KPIX ran a network news program from 8 a.m. to 9 a.m.

Cox Broadcasting, KTVU's owner, bought KICU-TV in San Jose in 1999.  In 2000, KTVU simulcast "Mornings on 2" on KICU. KICU occasionally broke away from KTVU to air Santa Clara County-focused items.

KRON "Daybreak" anchors in the 1990s included Susan Blake (began in 1990) and John Kessler.  [Here are "Daybreak" promos from 1997 and 1999 (featuring John Kessler, Darya Folsom, Christine Nubla, Michelle Franzen and Brian Hackney).]  In January 2002, KRON lost its NBC affiliation and became "independent."  It created its "KRON 4 Morning News" in the 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. timeslot to replace the "Today" program that moved to KNTV.  Eventually the "Daybreak" name was removed from the pre-7 a.m. broadcast.

KCRA-TV, the NBC affiliate in Sacramento, has produced an early morning newscast longer than any Bay Area station.  Well before "Daybreak" premiered on KRON in 1986, KCRA had long broadcast an hour-long "Channel 3 Reports" program from 6 to 7 a.m.

KMST-TV (now KCCN-TV), the CBS affiliate in Monterey (channel 46), also may have beaten KRON to the early morning airwaves.  In September 1986, it aired a 15-minute program called "Morning in Monterey" at 6:15 a.m.

KSBW-TV, the NBC affiliate in Salinas (channel 8), was perhaps one of the last NBC stations that had no local morning newscast whatsoever.  It began producing 7:25 and 8:25 a.m. newscasts in early 1987.  Its first early morning newscast began in August 1987 in the 6:30 to 7 a.m. time slot, featuring Diane Guerrazzi as anchor and Jim Adamson as weatherman.  (KSBW's 11:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. newscasts began the same day, effectively doubling the station's weekday local news productions.)

To make room for "Daybreak," KRON moved the half-hour "NBC News at Sunrise," then anchored by Bob Jamieson, to the 6 to 6:30 a.m. time slot.  "Sunrise" displaced an morning re-broadcast of the previous evening's "Entertainment Tonight."  In August 1986, KRON's five-minute news breaks at 6:45, 7:25 and 8:25 a.m. were called "Daybreak" so that program title antedated the half-hour newscast that began in September 1986.

The "Daybreak" logo was a rising sun that was reminiscent of the logo for NBC's "Today" program.  "Today" co-anchors Bryant Gumbel and Jane Pauley cut promos in 1986 for KRON's "Daybreak."  Pauley's five second promo implored viewers to "Give your 'Today' a great start.  Watch NewsCenter 4 'Daybreak.'"

Today five Bay Area stations air local newscasts at 6:30 a.m. weekdays.  When "Daybreak" premiered on KRON in that time slot in 1986, its competition was "Alvin and the Chipmunks" cartoon on KTVU, the "CBS Early Morning News" on KPIX, the last half-hour of "ABC World News This Morning" on KGO.

California State Senate District Numbering: Special Election Law Should Be Amended

The issue of odd/even state senate district numbering has vexed the California political system after every decennial redistricting since the scheme began 132 years ago. Due to shifting district numbers and lines, citizens inevitably are subject to “deferrals” (having no senator until a year ending with “4”) and “accelerations” (having two senators during that period).

If a senate seat that will be elected in November 2014 becomes vacant early, current state law strangely requires use of “old” district borders in special elections held before then, even though “new” districts take effect for other senators in 2012. Absurdly, un-represented residents of the new district are deprived of an opportunity to resolve their “deferral” while residents of the old district may get to elect two senators a few months apart (or even on the same day).  

Courts have upheld this practice, but have not forbidden alternatives.  In Legislature v. Reinecke (1973), the California Supreme Court held there was no violation of the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause in the continuance of staggered terms in state senate elections following redistricting.
The court observed that if the California Constitution's provision concerning staggered terms were given effect, the senators in odd districts elected in 1972 were entitled to serve until 1976, and if vacancies occurred in those districts before 1976, they would be filled using the 1972 districts.  This is a longstanding principle, earlier upheld in People ex rel. Snowball v. Pendegast (1892).  However, no court apparently has required this practice.

California Elections Code sec. 10704 mandates that special elections be held in "the district in which the vacancy occurred." The Legislature ought to revise sec. 10704 to mandate that new senate district boundaries be used in all special elections on and after November Election Day in years ending “2.” Otherwise, Governor Brown should order use of new districts in special election proclamations that he issues pursuant to California Constitution, Article IV, sec. 2 (“When a vacancy occurs in the Legislature the Governor immediately shall call an election to fill the vacancy.”). These remedies would ensure that senators represent as many Californians as possible.

UPDATE (December 8, 2012): State Sen. Doug LaMalfa resigned his senate seat in September 2012 in anticipation of his victory in the vacant 1st Congressional District race in November 2012.  Consequently, a special election to determine his replacement in the "old" 4th Senate District was held on November Election Day.

The "old" 4th Senate District included all of Del Norte, Siskiyou, Shasta, Butte, Tehama, Glenn, Colusa, Sutter and Yuba counties and portions of Nevada and Placer (Rocklin, Lincoln, Loomis) counties.  The "new" 4th Senate District encompasses a much smaller geographic area: all of Tehama, Glenn, Colusa, Sutter, Yuba and Butte counties plus portions of Placer (city of Roseville) and Sacramento counties.

Siskiyou and Shasta counties, western Nevada County (Grass Valley/Nevada City) and the Lincoln/Loomis/Rocklin area of Placer County, have been transferred to the new 1st Senate District.  Consequently, voters in those areas voted for two state senators on the November 2012 ballot (the "old" 4th District and the new 1st District).  Del Norte and Trinity counties were transferred from the old 4th District to the new 2nd Senate District (but they voted in November 2012 for the special senate election in the "old" 4th District).

The city of Roseville in Placer County presently does not have representation in the state senate as it was part of the "old" 1st Senate District (which no longer exists) and is part of the "new" 4th Senate District (next election is in November 2014).  Therefore, Roseville is a "deferral" state senate jurisdiction.

Had Elections Code sec. 10704 been amended or had Governor Brown issued a special election proclamation declaring that the "new" Senate District 4 been "the district in which the vacancy occurred," then the city of Roseville would be represented in the state senate the next two years and Siskiyou and Shasta counties and the Grass Valley/Nevada City area of Nevada County would have been spared the second senate election.

California's 11th Congressional District: U.S. Rep. Jerry McNerney's Remarkable Electoral Success

California’s sprawling 11^th Congressional District (most of San Joaquin County, Brentwood, Pleasanton, Dublin, San Ramon, Danville and Morgan Hill) almost certainly will be changed significantly in the 2011 re-districting. It has proven to be among the state’s most politically volatile constituencies.

U.S. Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Pleasanton) was the only successful general election challenger in all of California’s 173 legislative districts (federal and state) in the past decade, when he defeated seven-term Rep. Richard Pombo (R-Tracy) in 2006. McNerney barely won re-election against San Ramon attorney David Harmer (R) in 2010 (48.0% McNerney vs. 46.9% Harmer, a 2,658 vote plurality). No other incumbent than Pombo was defeated in a general election in a California congressional, state senate, or assembly race in the past decade.

McNerney’s victory in 2006 was improbable, but his win in 2010 was astounding. Last November, McNerney was the only Democrat who won a "Whitman-Fiorina" congressional or state legislative district. Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman defeated Democrat Jerry Brown by two percentage points in the 11^th Congressional district (48.9% Whitman vs. 46.7% Brown). McNerney was the only Democrat who prevailed in the 59 federal and legislative districts that favored Whitman (19 Congress, 13 state senate, 27 assembly). Carly Fiorina, the Republican senatorial nominee, defeated Sen. Barbara Boxer by nearly seven percentage points in CD-11 (50.7% Fiorina vs. 43.8% Boxer).

McNerney's percentage in CD-11 in 2010 (48.0%) was higher than Brown's (46.7%) or Boxer's (43.8%). This was his victory. There were no "top-of-the-ticket coattails" for him to ride on.

Brown and Boxer won in the other 33 congressional districts won by a Democratic congressional candidate. Boxer even won in the two other San Joaquin Valley districts represented by Democrats, despite the Delta water pumping controversy. She defeated Fiorina in the 18^th congressional district, stretching from central Stockton to Merced County (represented by Dennis Cardoza, 47.9% Boxer vs. 44.5% Fiorina) and in the 20^th congressional district, including Kings County and portions of Fresno and Kern counties (represented by Jim Costa, 48.3% Boxer vs. 43.5% Fiorina).

The only Republican congressional candidate who won in a “Democratic” district in 2010 was Dan Lungren in CD-3 (Rio Vista and Sacramento, Amador, Calaveras and Alpine counties). Jerry Brown barely defeated Meg Whitman in CD-3 (47.6% Brown vs. 47.4% Whitman, a 725-vote plurality for Brown), but Carly Fiorina handily defeated Barbara Boxer in CD-3 (Fiorina 52.9% vs. Boxer 40.7%). So, in other words, all congressional districts that elected Republican U.S. Representatives voted for Fiorina, Dan Lungren was the only Republican to win a “Brown for Governor” congressional district and Jerry McNerney was the only Democrat to win a “Whitman for Governor” or “Carly Fiorina for U.S. Senator” congressional district.

In 2008, CD-11 voted Barack Obama 53.8% vs. John McCain 44.5% in the presidential race as McNerney defeated Republican Dean Andal, 55.3% vs. 44.7%. In 2006 in CD-11, Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarznegger trounced Democratic State Treasurer Phil Angelides, 65.3% vs. 31.1%, while Sen. Dianne Feinstein prevailed over Republican Richard "Dick" Mountjoy, 55.4% vs. 40.3%. Riding on a national Democratic trend, McNerney defeated Pombo 53.3% vs. 46.7% in that election. While “top of the ticket” Democrats won CD-11 in 2006 (Feinstein) and 2008 (Obama), McNerney prevailed in 2010 despite losses by Brown and Boxer in his district. McNerney in 2010 won despite an anti-Democratic trend in his district and national antipathy towards his party.

McNerney’s political success also is remarkable because most CD-11 communities are “bellwether cities” in statewide elections, full of independent-minded voters (considered “fickle” by partisans). As “bellwether city” voters decide, so goes California. Tracy, for example, voted closer to the statewide result in the 2010 gubernatorial election than any other California city. Dublin was no. 27.

Senator Boxer’s loss of CD-11 in 2010 was in contrast to her victory there six years earlier. In 2004, Boxer defeated former Secretary of State Bill Jones (R), 50.2% vs. 46.6%. She lost 6.4 percentage points in 2010 compared with 2004. Her narrow victory in 2004 demonstrated that it was possible for a Democrat to win in CD-11, even as Republican President George W. Bush defeated Democratic Sen. John Kerry in the presidential race there, 53.9% vs. 45.3%. [In 2004, Boxer won in all congressional districts that elected Democrats to the House and in three congressional districts that elected Republicans: CD-11 (Pombo), CD-26 (Dreier) and CD-45 (Bono).] Boxer’s success in 2004 in CD-11 helped to persuade McNerney to re-challenge Pombo in 2006. Although Pombo strongly defeated McNerney in 2004, 61.3% vs. 38.7%, McNerney rose 14.6 percentage points to oust Pombo in 2006.

Republicans have won all four gubernatorial elections in CD-11 in the past decade. In addition to Whitman's defeat of Brown there in 2010, Schwarzenegger won CD-11 in 2003 and 2006 and Bill Simon (R) defeated Gov. Gray Davis (D) in 2002 (Simon 50.5% vs. Davis 40.9%).

McNerney's Wins More Impressive Than Tauscher's In 1990s

McNerney's victories in 2006 and 2010 were more impressive than Ellen Tauscher's wins in the 10th Congressional District in the 1990s because she was aided by "coattails" from Democratic presidential and gubernatorial candidates at the top of the ticket who won in her district. In the 1996 presidential race, CD-10 voted 48.2% Bill Clinton (D) - 42.6% Bob Dole (R) - 6.2% Ross Perot (Reform). Tauscher (D) narrowly unseated two-term Rep. Bill Baker (R) that election, no doubt aided by Clinton's 5.6 percentage point advantage. CD-10 voted 56.0% Gray Davis (D) - 41.3% Dan Lungren (R) in the 1998 gubernatorial election. In the 2000 presidential contest, CD-10 favored Al Gore (D) over George W. Bush (R) [Gore 52.1%, Bush 44.8%, Nader 3.1%]. With Gray Davis and Al Gore decisively winning CD-10 in 1998 and 2000, Tauscher won both of those elections comfortably. With Democratic gubernatorial nominees losing CD-11, McNerney had no such help in 2006 and 2010.

State Senate Districts - 2010 Election - Two Republican Districts "Crossed Over"

In 2010, 38 of the 40 state senate districts voted for the gubernatorial and U.S. Senate nominees of the parties that won the state senate seat in the most recent election. In other words, these districts elected Democratic state senators and voted "Brown-Boxer" or elected Republican senators and voted "Whitman-Fiorina." None of the districts that elected Democratic state senators voted for Whitman or Fiorina. However, among the 15 districts that elected Republican state senators, SD-12 (Cannella) and SD-15 (Blakeslee) crossed party lines and favored both Brown for Governor and Boxer for U.S. Senate.

State Assembly Districts - 2010 Election - One Republican District for Brown; Two Democratic Districts for Fiorina

Three Assembly districts were "crossovers" in the 2010 elections for governor and U.S. Senate. All three were "Brown-Fiorina" districts: AD-5, AD-10 and AD-30.

In November 2010, 52 Assembly districts elected Democratic assembly members; 28 districts elected Republican assembly members. A total of 53 Assembly districts supported Brown for Governor (all of the districts that elected Democratic assembly members plus AD-30, which elected Republican David Valadao). Twenty-seven Assembly districts favored Whitman. The only "crossover" Assembly district in the gubernatorial election was AD-30.

In the U.S. Senate election, 50 Assembly districts supported Boxer and 30 Assembly districts favored Fiorina. Two districts that elected Democrats to the Assembly supported Fiorina for U.S. Senate: AD-5 (Pan) and AD-10 (Huber). All districts that elected Republican assembly members voted for Fiorina.

Final Analysis: McNerney Is Only Democratic Federal or State Legislator Who Represents "Whitman-Fiorina" District

Congressman Jerry McNerney is the only Democrat who represents a "Whitman-Fiorina" district. Of the 111 federal and state legislative districts now represented by Democrats, only McNerney's district favored Whitman for governor. McNerney is one of the three Democratic federal and state legislators whose districts supported Fiorina for U.S. senator [along with AD-5
(Pan) and AD-10 (Huber)].

Of the 62 federal and state legislative districts currently represented by Republicans, four crossed over and voted for Brown for governor [CD-3 (Rep. Lungren), SD-12 (Sen. Cannella), SD-15 (Sen. Blakeslee), AD-30 (Assemb. Valadao]. Sixty of the 62 legislative districts represented by Republicans voted for Fiorina for U.S. Senate; the two "crossover" districts that voted for Boxer for U.S. Senate were SD-12 and SD-15.

"Air War": Political Advertising on San Francisco Bay Area Broadcast Television: November 2010 Election: Part Two: Ballot Measures

This is Part II of CalPolitical’s analysis of political advertising on San Francisco Bay Area broadcast television in the days leading up to the November 2010 election (a.k.a. "The Air War"). This article focuses on advertising for and against the various statewide ballot measures. Part I discussed candidate advertising.

CalPolitiCal compiled all political ads that appeared during the 11 p.m. newscasts on four television stations in the San Francisco Bay Area on the six nights leading up to the November 2010 election.

The 11 p.m. “late news” generally is the most-watched local newscast produced by a particular television station, according to the November 2010 Nielsen ratings. CalPolitiCal’s analysis included the following four newscasts:

(1) KRON’s “KRON 4 News at 11 p.m.” (16,000 viewers, Independent/My Network station)

(2) KPIX’s “CBS 5 Eyewitness News at 11 p.m.” (49,000 viewers, CBS owned-and-operated)

(3) KGO’s “ABC 7 News at 11 p.m.” (48,000 viewers, ABC owned-and-operated)

(4) KNTV’s “NBC Bay Area News at 11 p.m.” (28,000 viewers, NBC owned-and-operated)

Omitted were KTVU’s “Ten o’clock News” (88,000 viewers), which airs an hour earlier, the Spanish language 11 p.m. newscasts on KDTV (29,000 viewers) and KSTS (3,000 viewers) and the hour-long Mandarin News at 10 p.m. on KTSF (channel 26). The 11 p.m. newscasts on KPIX, KGO and KNTV are 35 minutes long; KRON’s 11 p.m. newscast generally ends by 11:30. Perhaps to take advantage of the abundant political advertising, KRON temporarily expanded its 11 p.m. newscast to 35 minutes during the weeks leading up to the November 2010 election.

The “Study Period” included six nights: Wednesday, October 27^th through Monday, November 1^st (Election Eve). Television commercials that ran immediately before, during and immediately after the 11 p.m. newscasts were included.

Ballot measure and issue ad spots tend to be much more expensive than candidate advertising on broadcast television. In the 60 days preceding a general election, television advertising for candidates generally may be purchased at "lowest unit rates."

"Jobs" was the keyword of the November 2010 election. "Jobs" was worked into many ads for propositions. It was the major theme of the successful "No on 24" television campaign and a major point in many of the "No on 23" TV ads, for example.

I. Proposition 19 (Marijuana Legalization)

No ads supporting or opposing Proposition 19 aired during the Study Period. "No on 19" won with 53.5% of the statewide vote.

II. Proposition 20 (Citizens Redistricting Commission-Congressional Districts)

“Yes on 20” ran a total of ten spots during the study period, all of them the “children playing marbles” ad. Four of the ten spots ran on KRON; two spots apiece ran on KPIX, KGO and KNTV. “Yes on 20” ran ads on all four stations on Election Eve. "Yes on 20" won the election with 61.3% of the statewide vote.

III. Proposition 21 (Vehicle License Fee for Parks)

“Yes on 21” ran at least 15 spots during the six-day Study Period. “Yes on 21” ads ran seven times on KPIX, five on KGO and three on KNTV. None ran on KRON’s 11 p.m. newscast. Many of the “Yes on 21” spots were “bookends;” in many airings, the same 15-second ad ran at the beginning and end of each commercial break. The favored “Yes on 21” ad changed during the Study Period. Whereas on October 27^th the ad ending with the girl at the drinking fountain was mostly commonly aired, by October 29^th the ad with the fox at the end was most commonly used.

No “No on 21” ads were aired during the Study Period. "No on 21" won the election with 57.3% of the statewide vote.

IV. Proposition 22 (Ban on State Borrowing from Local Governments)

No ads supporting or opposing Proposition 22 aired during the Study Period. "Yes on 22" won with 60.7% of the statewide vote.

V. Proposition 23 (Suspension of AB 32, Global Warming Act of 2006)

During the weeks leading up to the November 2010 election, the main 30-second ad against Proposition 23 was "Forward Backward." The YouTube posting characterized this ad, "Our first TV spot against Prop 23, the deceptive ballot measure bankrolled by two Texas oil companies, that would give them the license to pollute our air." Windmills and solar panels were shown. It emphasized onscreen "California 500,000 clean energy jobs and growing". Onscreen text said that Proposition 23 was "Dirty Energy" that "Would keep California addicted to oil" and "Threatens 500,000 California jobs."

On or about October 29th, a new 30-second ad began appearing on Bay Area television, "Enough." The image at the beginning was of an oil refinery with the phase "Haven't we had enough of dependence on oil?" on the screen and spoken by a male narrator. This ad repeatedly referred to "two Texas oil companies." "Two Texas Oil Companies Prop 23 would kill clean energy jobs," "Two Texas Oil Companies' Prop 23 hurts California's economy," "Two Texas Oil Companies' Prop 23 increases pollution" and "Two Texas Oil Companies' Prop 23 increases health risks" were other onscreen messages. (The anti-Texas theme had particular resonance in the San Francisco Bay Area at the time because the San Francisco Giants were in contention with the Texas Rangers for baseball's "World Series.") The ad indirectly alluded to the Louisiana "Deep Horizon" oil spill by showing video of a burning offshore oil rig. The final onscreen message in the ad was "STOP the Dirty Energy Proposition NO on 23."

The disclaimer for the "Enough" ad said that it was "Paid for by No on 23 - Californians to Stop the Dirty Energy Proposition. Sponsored by Business and Environmental Organizations for Clean Energy and Jobs. Major funding by Thomas Steyer and the National Wildlife Federation." Thomas Steyer is founder and co-senior managing partner of Farallon Capital Management, LLC.

During the Study Period, "No on 23" ran two ads focusing on public health problems associated with "dirty energy." The 30-second American Lung Association ad featured Jane Warner, president of the American Lung Association in California. The 15-second ad featured Dr. Arti Desai. The YouTube posting for Dr. Desai's ad stated, "Pediatrician Dr. Arti Desai, M.D. talks about why the American Academy of Pediatrics, CA urges a NO vote on Prop 23. Prop 23 would weaken air pollution standards, threatening the health of children and all Californians."

On or about October 29th, "No on 23" also introduced the 15-second "Scales" ad. The YouTube posting described this ad, "This spot weighs who supports and opposes Prop 23, the Dirty Energy Proposition."

Twenty-four (24) “No on 23” spots aired during the Study Period: eleven spots on KGO, eight on KPIX and five on KNTV. No "No on 23" spots aired on "KRON 4 News at 11 p.m." during the Study Period. Some these spots were 15-second ones. On Election Eve, one "No on 23" spot aired apiece on KPIX (Enough), KGO (Scales) and KNTV (Scales).

In addition, KTVU aired half-hour "No on 23" paid programs at 11 p.m. on Sunday, October 31st (displacing "A Second Look," a KTVU production) and Monday, November 1st (displacing a "Seinfeld" re-run).

No “Yes on 23” ads aired during the Study Period.

"No on 23" won with 61.6% of the statewide vote and 72.7% of the Bay Area vote. "No on 23" won all nine Bay Area counties: Alameda (76.2%), Contra Costa (67.4%), Marin (78.2%), Napa (65.0%), San Francisco (82.3%), San Mateo (73.3%), Santa Clara (70.2%), Solano (60.8%) and Sonoma (73.1%).

VI. Proposition 24 (Repeal of Corporate Tax Breaks)

Both sides of Proposition 24 were evenly matched during the Study Period. Eight spots aired favoring Proposition 24 and eight spots ran opposing it. Proposition 24 lost statewide (58.1% no) and in the Bay Area, but the Bay Area outcome was close (49.5% yes, 50.5% no).

A. Yes on 24 - LOST (41.9% of statewide vote, 49.5% of Bay Area vote)

The main “Yes on 24” ad was called “Handout.” The YouTube posting says, “Vote Yes on Prop 24 -- because it's time to give our SCHOOLS a break, not the big corporations.”

“Handout” featured Martha Millan-Schimon, a fourth grade teacher in Bakersfield. She began the ad by stating to the viewer, “State budget cuts are crippling my classroom.” The closing onscreen message was “VOTE YES ON PROP 24 GIVE OUR SCHOOLS A BREAK, NOT THE BIG CORPORATIONS.” The disclaimer stated, “Paid for by Yes on 24, the Tax Fairness Act. Sponsored by taxpayers and public employee groups, California Teachers Association Issues PAC and America’s Families First, Inc.”

A second “Yes on 24” ad began running on October 28^th, which included teacher Tamara Carr, an elementary school teacher in Pittsburg (Contra Costa County).

"Yes on 24" aired eight spots total on 11 p.m. newscasts during the Study Period, two apiece on KRON, KPIX, KGO and KNTV. "Yes on 24" aired no ads on the weekend 11 p.m. newscasts (Oct. 30th and Oct. 31th). On Election Eve, "Yes on 24" aired ads just on KPIX and KGO, the two highest-rated 11 p.m. newscasts.

"Yes on 24" won in three Bay Area counties: Alameda (55.7%), Marin (50.2%) and San Francisco (59.5%).

B. No on 24 - WON (58.1% of statewide vote, 50.5% of Bay Area vote)

“No on 24” ran two ads during the Study Period. The first “No on 24” ad (dubbed “More Layoffs”) consisted of a series of people completing each others’ sentences as they criticized Proposition 24. The transcript of the last 40 percent of the ad underscores its simple (and simplistic) message, “Prop 24 would force more layoffs. More layoffs. More layoffs. And that’s something that hurts everyone. Everyone. Everyone. Stop the Jobs Tax. Vote No on 24.” The ad left viewers with the words, "more layoffs" and "everyone" echoing through their minds.

The YouTube posting stated, “A Giant Step Backward on California's Road to Recovery. Prop. 24 throws roadblock after roadblock in front of the state's economic recovery and threatens decades of vital service cuts. The slower our recovery, the fewer tax revenues we'll have to fund our schools and hospitals and roads. With 2 million Californians out of work and an unemployment rate higher than almost every other state, we need to encourage job growth, not penalize it.”

To underscore the “jobs” message, the only onscreen text during the first 25 seconds is “Up to 322,000 Jobs Lost.” The disclaimer at the end of the ad stated, “Paid for by No on 24-Stop the Jobs Tax, a coalitions of taxpayers, employers, small businesses, educators and hi tech and bio technology organizations, with major funding from Genetech and General Electric Company including aggregated contributions.”

The second “No on 24” ad, “Job Killer,” featured a man in a white apron who presumably was a small hardware store owner on the typical "Main Street." This man spoke to the viewer throughout the ad as he walked about the hardware store. His opening lines: “Small businesses are struggling. Over two million Californians have lost their jobs. And now Sacramento politicians are promoting Proposition 24, a jobs tax and a job killer.” In a YouTube posting dated October 21, 2010, “NoProp24” stated, “Watch our new ad! Prop 24 is a job killer that is opposed by EVERY major newspaper in California!”

The disclaimer on “Job Killer” said, “Paid for by No on 24-Stop the Jobs Tax, a coalition of taxpayers, employers, small businesses, educators & high tech and biotechnology organizations, with major funding from Cisco Systems and Viacom.” (Apparently a hardware store owner made for a better “small business” than Cisco and Viacom.) (See Part I of the "Air War" post for discussion about Meg Whitman's "Job Killer" TV ads.)

“More Layoffs” ran five times during the Study Period, four times on KRON and once on KGO. It did not run on the KPIX and KNTV 11 p.m. newscasts during the Study Period. “Job Killer” ran three times during the Study Period, once apiece on KRON, KPIX and KGO’s 11 p.m. newscasts.

"No on 24" won in six Bay Area counties: Contra Costa (53.8%), Napa (57.7%), San Mateo (51.3%), Santa Clara (56.1%), Solano (55.9%) and Sonoma (53.0%).

VII. Proposition 25 (Majority Vote for the Legislature to Pass the Budget)

A. Yes on 25 - WON (55.1% of statewide vote, 66.6% of Bay Area vote)

The only “Yes on 25” ad that ran during the Study Period was “Big Check.” The tagline that was stated four times in the ad (twice verbally and twice in on-screen writing) was “No budget, no pay.” The main feature of the ad was a fictitious $4.9 million check representing pay to state legislators during the 100 days that the state budget was not passed on time. As a hand tore up the check, the narrator stated, “This ends with Prop. 25.” Later a yellow highlighter pen is seen coloring the phrase “permanently forfeit” as the narrator stated, “With Prop. 25, legislators permanently forfeit their pay and benefits for every day the budget is late.”

The phrase “majority vote” did not appear until the 22^nd second (spoken by the male narrator) and never appeared once on the screen. There was no mention of the existing two-thirds vote requirement to pass state budgets through each house of the Legislature.

“Big Check” ran 14 times during the Study Period: four times on KRON, three times on KPIX, four times on KGO and three times on KNTV. It ran on no 11 p.m. newscasts on October 27^th. It ran on all 11 p.m. newscasts except KPIX on Election Eve.

"Yes on 25" won all nine Bay Area counties: Alameda (70.7%), Contra Costa (62.8%), Marin (68.4%), Napa (60.0%), San Francisco (75.8%), San Mateo (65.6%), Santa Clara (62.7%), Solano (59.3%) and Sonoma (67.2%).

B. No on 25 - LOST (44.9% of statewide vote, 33.4% of Bay Area vote)

“I’ll Drink to That – No on 25” was only “No on 25” ad that ran during the Study Period. The YouTube description of the ad stated, “Our ad, titled "I'll Drink to That -- No on 25″ highlights the loophole in Prop 25 that would allow the State Legislature to raise its tax-free expense accounts, known as per diems, with a simple majority vote, but would do nothing to ensure an on-time, balanced budget. The ad also draws attention to language hidden in Prop 25 that would make it easier for majority-vote tax increases.”

This ad featured five well-dressed people who are presumably state legislators seated at a table in what was presumably a fancy restaurant. They are served fine wine and fancy desserts. The ad subtly conveys that the legislators have spent long hours there celebrating as all of the other tables are empty at the end of the ad and the tuxedoed waiter glances at his watch. The opening narration states, “While many Californians are struggling, many politicians are living it up at taxpayer expense.” The closing narration said, “Put a stop to politicians’ higher taxes and spending. Vote No on 25.”

The onscreen message at the end of the ad stated that it was “Paid for by Stop Hidden Taxes – No on 25/Yes on 26, a coalition of taxpayers and employers, with major funding from CA Business PAC, sponsored by CA Chamber of Commerce and Small Business Action Committee PAC.”

“No on 25” ran spots on 11 p.m. newscasts just during the first two days of the Study Period (Oct. 27^th and Oct. 28^th). It ran a total of five spots during those days. Two spots ran on “CBS 5 Eyewitness News at 11 p.m.” on Oct. 27^th and one spot apiece on KPIX, KGO and KNTV on Oct. 28^th. “No on 25” did not advertise on KRON’s 11 p.m. newscast during the Study Period.

"No on 25" won no Bay Area county.

VIII. Proposition 26 (Supermajority to Pass New Taxes & Fees)

Proposition 26 is regarded is one of the most consequential ballot measures passed in the November 2010 election. It has major effects on fiscal policy at the state and local levels.

A. Yes on 26 - WON (52.5% of statewide vote); LOST in Bay Area (41.8%)

No overt “Yes on 26” ads ran during the Study Period (the “No on 25” ad nominally also was a “Yes on 26” ad, but only in the disclaimer at its end). "Yes on 26" ran ads on Bay Area broadcast television before the Study Period. "Yes on 26" apparently suspended its television advertising on Bay Area broadcast TV before the Study Period.

"I just love fees!" was a 30-second "Yes on 26" television ad. It was uploaded to YouTube by "StopHiddenTaxes" on October 12th. The YouTube posting stated, "Vote YES on Prop 26 to protect our right to vote on local taxes." The ad depicted a group of well-dressed men and women sitting around a conference table, presumably a gathering of lobbyists and/or public officials. The highlight was when the man at the head of the table (who looked like a distant relative of corrupt former U.S. House Republican Majority Leader Tom DeLay) gleefully announced to the gathering, "I just love fees!", curling his fingers as if to form quotation marks. The men and women at the table then smiled and laughed.

The ad began with with a darkened screen with the words, "Behind Closed Doors". The other onscreen messages were "Yes on 26: Closes Tax Loophole," "YES on 26: Voter Approval for Higher Taxes" and "YES on 26." The onscreen disclaimer read, "Paid for by Stop Hidden Taxes - No on 25/Yes on 26, a coalition of taxpayers and employers, with major funding from CA Business PAC, sponsored by CA Chamber of Commerce and Small Business Action Committee PAC."

Versions of this ad ran on KICU's "Bay Area News at 7 p.m." on October 21st (7:21 p.m.), KGO's "ABC News Nightline" on October 22nd (11:56 p.m.) and KNTV's "Tonight Show with Jay Leno" on October 23rd (12:09 a.m.). By the beginning of the Study Period on October 27th, "Yes on 26" ads apparently had vanished from Bay Area TV airwaves.

Although "Yes on 26" won statewide, it lost in the Bay Area. "Yes on 26" won in two Bay Area counties: Napa (51.1% yes) and Solano (53.5% yes).

B. No on 26 - LOST (47.5% of statewide vote); WON in Bay Area (58.2%)

“No on 26” ran a series of 15-second ads. The YouTube posting with the ads stated,

“SCN produced "Gulf Horizon," "Cigarette Man," and "Oil Derrick," as a set of 15 second spots designed to educate voters on the environmental consequences of California Proposition 26. Often, the spots were aired back-to-back or as book ends to commercial breaks.

"Gulf Horizon" served as a stark reminder of the recent consequences of allowing corporations to evade paying for the environmental damage they cause. Visually, the ad eliminated jarring cuts by simulating the motion of a camera panning across boxes of images and footage. This technique gave the spot the illusion of being longer than just 15 seconds.

On "Cigarette Man," SCN partnered with digital animators to design and create a walking talking cigarette pack to deliver the Big Tobacco's message that, "You pay so we don't have to!"

In creating "Oil Derrick," SCN again partnered with digital animators to design a giant robot built entirely out of rigs, derricks and fuel pumps. "Oil Derrick" was like no other political ad, and the robot was like no other political spokesman.”

Common to all three ads were onscreen quotations from the San Jose Mercury News that Proposition 26 was “Sponsored largely by oil, tobacco and alcohol companies” and from the Los Angeles Times that Proposition 26 “Makes it extremely difficult to charge businesses for the damage they cause.”

The disclaimer at the end of the ads stated that they were “Paid for by No on 26, teachers, police and other public and private employee groups protecting taxpayers, Democratic State Central Committee of California and Thomas Steyer.”

These ads were difficult to monitor because they were so brief. At least 20 of these 15-second ads ran on 11 p.m. newscasts during the six-day Study Period. “Cigarette Man” ran on at least one 11 p.m. newscast every night; it ran at least once on each station, a total of at least nine spots. At least six spots of “Oil Derrick” ran on 11 p.m newscasts during the Study Period. At least five spots of “Gulf Horizon” ran during the Study Period.

"No on 26" lost statewide, but won in seven Bay Area counties: Alameda (62.5% no), Contra Costa (53.5% no), Marin (66.1% no), San Francisco (69.9% no), San Mateo (58.9% no), Santa Clara (52.9% no) and Sonoma (58.5% no).

IX. Proposition 27 (Repeal Citizens Redistricting Commission)

No television ads aired supporting or opposing Proposition 27. Perhaps to avoid confusion, the "Yes on 20/No on 27" campaign made no overt mention of its opposition to Proposition 27 in its "Yes on 2o" ad. "No on 27" won with 59.5% of the statewide vote.

"Air War": Political Advertising on San Francisco Bay Area Broadcast Television: November 2010 Election: Part One: Candidates

Television advertising is a major factor, if not the deciding factor, in many political contests. Whereas the "ground war" is waged with competing "get-out-the-vote/get-in-the-vote" campaigns with literal "boots on the ground," voter-by-voter at the precinct/retail/micro level, the "air war" is waged on broadcast television, cable TV and radio on the regional/wholesale/macro level. CalPolitiCal compiled all political ads that appeared during the 11 p.m. newscasts on four television stations in the San Francisco Bay Area on the six nights leading up to the November 2010 election.

The 11 p.m. “late news” generally is the most-watched local newscast produced by a particular television station, according to the November 2010 Nielsen ratings. CalPolitiCal’s analysis included the following four newscasts:

(1) KRON’s “KRON 4 News at 11 p.m.” (16,000 viewers, Independent/My Network station)

(2) KPIX’s “CBS 5 Eyewitness News at 11 p.m.” (49,000 viewers, CBS owned-and-operated)

(3) KGO’s “ABC 7 News at 11 p.m.” (48,000 viewers, ABC owned-and-operated)

(4) KNTV’s “NBC Bay Area News at 11 p.m.” (28,000 viewers, NBC owned-and-operated)

Omitted were KTVU’s “Ten o’clock News” (88,000 viewers), which airs an hour earlier, the Spanish language 11 p.m. local newscasts on KDTV (29,000 viewers, Univision) and KSTS (3,000 viewers, Telemundo) and the hour-long Mandarin News at 10 p.m. on KTSF (channel 26). The 11 p.m. newscasts on KPIX, KGO and KNTV are 35 minutes long; KRON’s 11 p.m. newscast generally ends by 11:30. Perhaps to take advantage of the abundant political advertising, KRON temporarily expanded its 11 p.m. newscast to 35 minutes during the weeks leading up to the November 2010 election.

The “Study Period” included six nights: Wednesday, October 27^th through Monday, November 1^st (Election Eve). Television commercials that ran immediately before, during and immediately after the 11 p.m. newscasts were included.

According to the California Secretary of State, 2.33 million votes were cast in the nine-county Bay Area in the November 2010 election. Nearly 995,000 ballots were precinct votes, cast on election day at polling places (43 percent of total). The majority of Bay Area votes, 1.33 million (57 percent), were cast by mail or dropped off at polling places on election day. (The rest of California collectively had a much higher percentage of precinct voters – 54 percent precinct voters vs. 46 percent vote-by mail.) Although a mere 43 percent of Bay Area voters cast votes in precincts, many of the vote-by-mail voters did not mark and return their ballots until the days leading up to the election, including election day. In November 2010, a higher-than-usual number of vote-by-mail voters are said to have held onto their ballots until election day. Therefore, many vote-by-mail voters likely were influenced by political advertising during the Study Period.

This article focuses on advertising for candidates for the various offices on the November 2010 ballot in the San Francisco Bay Area, especially governor and U.S. senator. A future article will discuss advertising for state and local ballot propositions.

A total of seven candidates ran a total of 125 television spots on Bay Area 11 p.m. newscasts during the Study Period. Most were 30-second spots; some 60-second spots were run by gubernatorial candidates. Fifty-nine spots were placed by gubernatorial candidates, 29 spots were placed by U.S. Senate candidates, nine spots were placed by a State Treasurer candidate (State Treasurer Bill Lockyer), 27 spots were placed by a congressional candidate (Rep. Jerry McNerney) and one Assembly candidate (Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan) placed an ad. No independent groups placed ads concerning candidate elections on 11 p.m. newscasts during the Study Period.

Jobs and the economy were major themes of political ads in the closing days of the 2010 general election campaign. In the gubernatorial race, Meg Whitman dubbed her opponent "Job Killer Jerry Brown." Brown stated in one of his television ads that Whitman had laid off 10 percent of eBay workers in her last year as C.E.O. In the U.S. Senate race, Carly Fiorina blamed incumbent Sen. Barbara Boxer for California job losses; Boxer responded with an ad featuring some of the 30,000 Hewlett Packard employees laid off during Fiorina's tenure as HP C.E.O.

I. Gubernatorial Election: Jerry Brown (27) vs. Meg Whitman (32)

A. Meg Whitman Campaign for Governor – Republican – 32 spots

Meg Whitman spent $179 million (including $144 million of her own money) on her unsuccessful run for governor; much of her expenditures were for television advertising. Whitman ran three ads during the study period: “Orbit” (30 sec.), “Again” (30 sec.) and “I’m ready” (60 sec.). She ran a total of 32 spots on Bay Area 11 p.m. television newscasts during the study period.

(1) “Orbit” Ad (a.k.a. "Job Killer Jerry Brown") – anti-Brown

“Orbit” began appearing on Bay Area broadcast television on Monday, October 25^th. In this anti-Brown ad by Whitman, a narrator with a muffled male voice stated that the “real Brown plan” was “always more taxes, more spending, more lost jobs.” The tag line was "Job Killer Jerry Brown." The Whitman campaign characterized this ad as "highlighting Jerry Brown's real plan for more spending, more taxes and more lost jobs. More of the same old failure from Sacramento."

“Orbit” ran 11 times during the study period, on Wednesday, October 27^th and Thursday, October 28^th. It ran five times on KGO, three times on KPIX, two times on KRON and once on KNTV. By Friday, October 29^th, it had been replaced on the 11 p.m. newscasts with “Again.” However, the Whitman campaign did continue to run “Job Killer” at other times of the day through Election Eve.

 
(2) “Again” Ad – anti-Brown

The Whitman campaign characterized “Again” as an ad “focusing on Jerry Brown's CNN interview where he admitted he didn't have a plan when he ran for Governor of California and it was all a lie.” Most of the video came from Frank Sesno’s interview with Brown on the April 16, 1995 “CNN Late Edition” program. The ad ended with “NO PLAN THEN. NO PLAN NOW. IT’S ALL A LIE” on the screen. It first appeared on Friday night, replacing “Orbit,” and ran a total of 15 times on various 11 p.m. newscasts through Election Eve. It aired once apiece on KRON and KNTV, seven times on KPIX and six times on KGO.

(3) “I’m Ready” Ad – pro-Whitman

Whitman ran a one-minute positive ad called “I’m ready” six times during the six nights leading up to the election. According to the Whitman campaign, “In the 60-second spot, Whitman explains that she's running for Governor to "restore the California dream for everyone" and that she's prepared to take on California's tough problems.” For reasons unknown, it ran heavily on KNTV’s 11 p.m. newscast. It ran once per night on “NBC Bay Area News at 11 p.m.” from Wednesday to Sunday, but not on Election Eve. It ran once on “ABC 7 News at 11 p.m.,” on Sunday.

B. Jerry Brown for Governor – Democrat – 27 spots

 
The Jerry Brown campaign ran six different ads during the study period, a total of 27 spots:

(1) Pro-Brown - "Serious" consisted of Brown speaking directly to camera for most of its 30 seconds, describing his chief policy goals. This ad began running in early September, but disappeared for a few weeks. It did not run at the beginning of the study period on Wednesday, Oct. 27^th, but ran frequently thereafter. The Brown campaign apparently viewed this ad as important to undecided voters in the final days before the election. This ad ran 13 times from Oct. 28^th through Nov. 1^st (Election Eve), especially on KPIX and KGO. It ran six times on KPIX, five times on KGO and once each on KRON and KNTV. It was a nightly staple on KGO.

(2) Anti-Whitman/pro-Brown – “Why I Came to California 30 Years Ago” used Whitman's praise about how California functioned thirty years earlier to highlight the fact that Brown was then governor. This ad ran once during the Study Period, on Wednesday, October 27^th on KPIX,

(3) Anti-Whitman – “Capital Gains” was critical of Whitman's tax plan. It ran twice, once each on KGO and KNTV on Wednesday, October 27^th,

(4) Anti-Whitman – "Real Meg" focused on allegations of ethical lapses during Meg Whitman's service as C.E.O. of eBay and as board member of Goldman Sachs. It used U.S. Rep. Michael Oxley (R-Ohio)'s description of a business deal connected to Whitman as "corrupt." The ad stressed that Whitman "paid herself $120 million right before the company (eBay) laid off 10 percent of its workers." The narrator's final words were, "We're choosing a governor. Shouldn’t character matter?” This ad ran three times during the Study Period, only on Friday, October 29^th. It ran once each on KRON, KPIX and KGO.

(5) Anti-Whitman – “Echo” consisted of side-by-side video of Schwarzenegger and Whitman stating very similar or identical political slogans and platitudes. It was regarded as one of Brown’s most effective television commercials. It ran four times during the study period from Oct. 28^th to Nov. 1^st on KRON, KPIX (two times) and KNTV (but not on KGO). It ran on KNTV on Election Eve.

(6) Anti-Whitman – “Polygraph” – ran four times during the study period. “Polygraph” became Brown’s anti-Whitman television ad of choice in the final days of the campaign. It ran once on KNTV on Oct. 31^st and once each on KRON, KPIX and KGO on Nov. 1^st (Election Eve).

II. United States Senate Race: Carly Fiorina (11) vs. Barbara Boxer (18)

A. Carly Fiorina for U.S. Senate – Republican – 11 spots

Carly Fiorina ran two ads on Bay Area 11 p.m. newscasts during the Study Period: "Label" and "Crushed."

(1) "Label" began with a narrator intoning, "Everyone is hurting," and featured various Californians speaking about party labels. The Fiorina campaign characterized the ad as, "Republican. Democrat. Independent. Party doesn't matter anymore--when bickering ends, solutions begin."

(2) "Crushed" was Fiorina's "closing argument" television ad in the Bay Area, running during the crucial "get-out-the-vote" days before election day. It stated that Senator Barbara Boxer failed to protect California jobs, that Boxer praised "the stimulus plan" (presumably referring to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009) and criticized her for "trillions in deficits, billions in taxes." It implied that she was a "failed senator." The ad was laced with economic apocalypse imagery, complete with a sign that stated "STOP THE CONGRESS CREATED DUST BOWL." The anti-Boxer portion was in black-and-white; the end portion of the ad promoting Fiorina was in color. The narrator's final line: "We can change Washington, but not unless we change the people we send there."

Fiorina ran eleven spots during the Study Period, all on the two top-rated 11 p.m. newscasts: KPIX (5 ads) and KGO (6 ads). Fiorina ran no ads on KRON or KNTV.

The “Label” ad ran on Wednesday night on KGO's 11 p.m. newscast. From Thursday night through Sunday, Fiorina ran the “Crushed” ad every night on both the KPIX and KGO 11 p.m. newscasts. "Label" ran twice on KPIX "CBS 5 Eyewitness News at 11" on Saturday and twice on KGO "ABC 7 News at 11" on Sunday. Fiorina ran no ads on Election Eve (Monday); presumably her campaign either ran out of money or chose to focus its resources on other California television markets.

Before the Study Period, Fiorina ran the anti-Boxer ad called "Bickering." It appeared on KICU "Bay Area News at 7 p.m." on October 21st and on KGO "ABC 7 News at 11 p.m." on October 24th, for example. The campaign's statement on YouTube.com said that the ad was "highlighting Boxer's 28-year record of bitter partisanship and ineffective leadership in Washington. This is the fourth ad in Fiorina's statewide television advertising campaign." It began with a male narrator declaring, "California jobs gone and Barbara Boxer plays politics." It noted that "her hometown paper refused to endorse her" and quoted from the San Francisco Chronicle's non-endorsement editorial of Sen. Boxer on Sept. 26. "When bickering ends, solutions begin. No partisan games. I'll reach across the aisle, work with others, oppose my party if needed. Your agenda, not mine," Fiorina spoke directly to the viewer.

B. Barbara Boxer for U.S. Senate – Democrat – 18 spots

Senator Barbara Boxer ran a total of 18 spots during the six nights leading up to the election. She ran two ads, both anti-Fiorina:

(1) "Workers: Carly Fiorina Laid Off 30,000 at Hewlett Packard" featured former Hewlett Packard employees critical of Fiorina’s service as HP CEO and

(2) "Carly Fiorina: Out of Touch" criticized Fiorina's positions on assault weapons, offshore oil drilling, Social Security reform and abortion. It stressed that Fiorina "was endorsed by Sarah Palin." The closing tag line was “Carly Fiorina: Just Too Extreme for California.”

Each of these ad types ran interchangeably nine times during the study period.

The HP ad ran twice on KPIX, four times on KGO and three times on KNTV. The “Too Extreme” ad ran three times each on KPIX, KGO and KNTV. Boxer did not advertise at all on KRON’s 11 p.m. newscast during the study period. On Thursday, October 28^th, the HP ad ran on all three stations. On Sunday, October 31^st, the “Too Extreme” ad ran on all three stations. Only on KGO were both Boxer ads run on the same newscast, on Friday, October 29^th and on Saturday, October 30^th.

Boxer did not advertise on the 11 p.m. newscasts on Election Eve on KRON and KPIX. On Election Eve, she ran the HP employees ad once on KGO and the “Too Extreme” ad once on KNTV.

Boxer started advertising on Bay Area broadcast television on or about September 13th, beginning with her "Made in America" ad. That ad focused on veterans health care ("a combat care center" authorized through 2006 legislation), after-school programs (a 2001 law) and job creation ("I'm working to make California the leader in clean energy," she announced). It ended with her stating, "I want to see the words 'Made in America' again." The "Made in America" ad was Boxer's main "positive" ad in 2010.

III. California State Treasurer – Bill Lockyer – 9 spots

Bill Lockyer, the incumbent state treasurer who previously was the two-term state attorney general, was the only other statewide office seeker who advertised on 11 p.m. television newscasts in the San Francisco Bay Area on the six nights leading up to the general election. Lockyer spent $7.77 million in the 2009-10 election cycle. Lockyer ran nine spots during the six days, all on the top two-rated newscasts: “CBS 5 Eyewitness News” and “ABC 7 News.” He ran no ads on KRON or KNTV. All were the same ad: “How About the Truth for a Change?”

Lockyer’s motivation was mysterious. Just about every political observer assumed that he would easily defeat his Republican challenger (Mimi Walters) and that a television advertising campaign was unnecessary, especially in the Bay Area, which is his political base (he represented portions of the East Bay in the Assembly and Senate from 1972 to 1998). His wife Nadia Lockyer was locked in a close race for Alameda County supervisor, so it is possible that his advertisements served indirectly to boost the “Lockyer” name and his wife’s campaign.

Perhaps his ads did help him to achieve what may have been his goal: bragging rights as the top vote-getter in the country (of all candidates in all states) in the November 2010 election. Lockyer received 5,433,222 votes, around 5,000 more votes than Jerry Brown did. (The top statewide vote-getter in Texas, incumbent Comptroller of Public Accounts Susan Combs, received 3,307,935 votes.)

Gavin Newsom for Lieutenant Governor ran ads earlier in October on San Francisco Bay Area broadcast television, but he apparently stopped his television advertising in the area before the study period. "Abel Maldonado's Record On The Environment" was Newsom's main television ad in the Bay Area when he stopped advertising. It criticized Lt. Gov. Maldonado's environmental record in the Legislature. "Maldonado sided with the Texas oil companies," a male narrator declared, with an oil refinery and the Texas state flag behind a picture of Maldonado. Newsom addressed the camera with waves crashing behind him on a beach, "I've got a message for Texas oil companies: 'Don't mess with California.' As Lieutenant Governor, I'm going to fight hard to protect our air, our water and our coastline." The final tag line was "Don't mess with California." This ad appeared on KICU's "Bay Area News at 7 p.m." on Oct. 21st and on KTVU's "Ten o'clock News" on Oct. 22nd, one week before the Study Period.

The California Attorney General race ended up as the tightest statewide contest in California in 2010, yet neither Democrat Kamala Harris nor Republican Steve Cooley advertised on Bay Area 11 p.m. television newscasts during the Study Period. Harris ran ads during the primary election campaign in May and June.

IV. U.S. House of Representatives: 11^th Congressional District: Jerry McNerney (Democrat) – 27 spots vs. David Harmer (Republican) – zero spots

The closest congressional race in California in 2010 was in the 11^th Congressional District, which includes the southern and eastern suburban and rural fringes of the San Francisco Bay Area (Morgan Hill, Tri-Valley, Brentwood, Discovery Bay) and most of San Joaquin County (in the Sacramento-Stockton-Modesto television market). The voting population is split roughly 50-50 between the two media markets. The population of the 11^th Congressional District accounts for just 3.9 percent of the nine-county Bay Area population (based on 2000 census data), so McNerney’s message was irrelevant (or “wasted”) for all but a few Bay Area television viewers.

Incumbent Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Pleasanton) was the only person to defeat an incumbent legislator in California state or federal office in the past decade when he prevailed over Rep. Richard Pombo (D-Tracy) in 2006. In 2010, Republican David Harmer (R-San Ramon) sought to ride the national Republican wave and oust McNerney. Harmer had run for Congress unsuccessfully twice before, first in Utah in 1996 and second in California’s 10^th Congressional District in the 2009 special election.

McNerney ran 27 spots on Bay Area 11 p.m. television newscasts over the six-day study period; he tied Jerry Brown as the No. 2 political candidate advertiser (the two Jerrys accounted for roughly two out of every five political candidate ads on Bay Area 11 p.m. newscasts during the Study Period). All were the same ad – an anti-Harmer commercial called “Abolish the Public Schools.” It relied heavily on a San Francisco Chronicle op-ed by Harmer that was published on August 27, 2000. The ad emphasized that Harmer was a “Corporate Lawyer” and bluntly stated, “David Harmer is just too radical.” The latter half of the ad stated that McNerney was “Protecting Local Schools from Devastating Cuts” and that he was “Endorsed by California Teachers” and many local newspapers.

Just before the study period, McNerney ran a slightly different version of the ad that said that he was “a moderate.” That ad began running on or about October 22nd. By the beginning of the Study Period, McNerney had modified the ad to stress the word “Independence,” drawn from a Contra Costa Times endorsement editorial. Fifteen of McNerney’s 27 ads (more than half) ran on “ABC 7 News at 11 p.m.” McNerney saturated KGO-TV’s broadcast on Election Eve (Monday night), with four spots, running at just about every commercial break (including the pre-newscast and post-newscast/ “Nightline” lead-in breaks). McNerney ran six spots apiece on “CBS 5 Eyewitness News at 11 p.m.” and “NBC Bay Area News at 11” during the study period. McNerney ran no ads on KRON 4 News at 11 during the six-day period.

McNerney ran other television ads earlier in the fall, but relied exclusively on “Abolish the Public Schools” in the final days of the campaign. The earlier ads were “Patriot,” “File” and “Earned It.” “Patriot” was the only ad that was completely pro-McNerney, completely without an anti-Harmer message. Stressing McNerney’s advocacy for veterans’ issues, it began McNerney’s fall advertising campaign.

"Earned It" used a local World War II veteran to criticize Harmer's plan to privatize the Social Security program. This ad appeared on KICU's "Bay Area News at 7 p.m." on Oct. 21st and on KTVU's "Ten o'clock News" on Oct. 22nd, one week before the Study Period. By Oct. 23rd, and for the remaining two weeks of the campaign, "Abolish the Public Schools" had become McNerney's chief television ad.

Harmer did not run a single television commercial on a Bay Area 11 p.m. newscast in the six nights leading up to the election. Harmer instead focused his resources on the Sacramento-Stockton television market. There were no television commercials placed by independent groups concerning the CD-11 election during the study period on Bay Area 11 p.m. newscasts.

Harmer won in the San Joaquin County portion of the district, but McNerney prevailed narrowly overall by under 2,700 votes on the strength of his Bay Area returns. McNerney’s superiority in the Bay Area “air war” no doubt contributed substantially to his victory, but it was a costly campaign tactic.

V. State Legislative District Races – Joan Buchanan for Assembly – 1 spot

The sole competitive state legislative race in the November 2010 election in the San Francisco Bay Area was in the 15^th Assembly District, which includes Walnut Creek, the San Ramon Valley, Livermore, Oakley and Brentwood, along with the Mountain House, Galt and Elk Grove areas in the Central Valley. It had been a Republican district until Democrat Joan Buchanan defeated San Ramon Mayor Abram Wilson when the seat was open in 2008. Assemblywoman Buchanan again defeated Wilson in their re-match in 2010.

Buchanan advertised on Bay Area broadcast television in the final weeks of the campaign, a rarity for a state legislative race in the region. A mere five percent of the Bay Area’s population resides in the 15^th Assembly District (according to 2000 census data), so Buchanan was casting a very wide net to catch the relatively small number of viewers eligible to vote in her district.

Buchanan ran just one spot on Bay Area 11 p.m. television newscasts during the Study Period, on Saturday, October 30^th on KPIX. She also ran ads on other channels at other parts of the day, including during the San Francisco Giants World Series games on KTVU.