Will 2008 be a winning campaign year for … newspapers? For the first time since John Kennedy beat Richard Nixon in a presidential race that, by a landslide, anointed television as the medium of choice for political advertising, newspapers are daring to believe they and their Web sites will get more than their usual miniscule share of candidates’ media buys.

“Hope is an interesting word,” says Jeff Webber, senior vice president of advertising at USA Today, when asked about his expectations of The Nation’s Newspaper netting 2008 campaign dollars. “My hope would be the political campaign managers find the Web, but also understand the use of the paper. I would love to see more political advertising in both the pages of USA Today and the Web site. We have a great environment.” It may not be wishful thinking, because the stars appear to be aligning in newspapers’ favor.

For one thing, there’s an almost palpable public weariness with the staple of campaign advertising, the 30-second spot. Those spots are getting lost in a fragmented 500-channel era — and they’re easier to skip with TiVo and cable-box DVRs. So far this year, all the chatter has been about the political tributes or attack videos on YouTube, such as Obama Girl, the Orwell/Apple 1984 parodies, John Edwards brushing his hair 100 times, and Hillary Clinton’s spoof of the final episode of The Sopranos.

And for the first time, newspapers can now compete with the Boob Tube on its own terms. “In the past, political advertising has always been a windfall for television, essentially, and a little bit for newspapers,” says Doug Ray, publisher of the Daily Herald in suburban Chicago. “The Web for the first time gives us, and newspapers generally, the opportunity to sell commercials online. We could never do that in the past.”

When George W. Bush ran for re-election four years ago, few newspaper sites had streaming video. Now, just about every paper of any size offers it. And this time around, newspapers and their industry groups are aggressively going after political ads.

Like dozens of other papers, the Daily Herald has dedicated a sales executive to drumming up campaign business. “When we look at the potential for political advertising, we think it’s greater than it has been in the past,” says Ray. “So we are working to become much more proactive than we have been in the past.”

The Daily Herald’s core circulation area, too, is home to two of what are likely to be among the closest-watched congressional races in the nation, where Republican incumbents narrowly missed being unseated two years ago — and are being targeted by the Democratic Party and anti-war groups again this year. There are also some early indications that presidential hopefuls who have generally regarded newspapers as “free media” unworthy of campaign spending are looking to actually drop some dollars in print or online.

In Iowa — where the party caucuses will be held early next year while college football bowl games are still under way — candidates are doing what they usually do, says Brad Robertson, until last month The Des Moines Register’s vice president of advertising, which is “run a ton of television.” But already, the Register’s Web site has run ads for Democrats Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. Hillary Clinton, as well as Republican Fred D. Thompson.

On Nov. 5, a New York Times story was headlined: “Still No Giuliani TV Ads, But He’s Ready for the Web.” Unfortunately for newspapers, his campaign, for the moment, meant he was ready for free Web — posting videos at friendly sites or YouTube. When will the dollars flow?

Not-So-Humble Pie

If newspapers are dreaming of capturing campaign dollars, one reason is because there’s so much money out there that it could move their 2008 revenue top lines with just a small uptick in share. Depending on who’s counting, total political ad spending — including everything from local and state races to the presidential election — is expected to come in at anywhere from $3 to $5 billion by the time polls close on Nov. 4.

TV will likely capture nearly three-quarters of that spending, with the other 25% divided among other media, estimates Evan Tracey, COO of TNS Media Intelligence/ CMAG. But newspapers shouldn’t get their hopes up too much, Tracey cautions.

“You know the weapon of choice is always broadcast TV, cable after that, and radio after that,” he says. “It’s a gift and curse of geography. Not to throw cold water on print. We have seen success in public affairs and on the issue advocacy-side. The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post are very well-positioned.” As are some state and local papers that have congressional races, he adds.

On the other hand, the Newspaper Association of America (NAA) believes that the industry will carve out a bigger piece of that pie than outsiders think — and do much better than the medium has done in the past four or five decades. “I bet our industry can capture between 12 to 15%” of the total campaign spend, says Jack Brady, the NAA’s director of marketing and advertising. “I think in the last cycle we captured maybe 5%.” In the ‘08 campaign, NAA thinks print alone will capture a 5% share of candidates’ spend.

NAA has been selling newspaper as a campaign medium nearly non-stop the past three election cycles, talking it up at places such as a symposium in New Hampshire sponsored by the trade magazine Campaigns — Elections, and holding workshops on techniques for selling to candidates.

Newspapers will get a bigger share of ad spend, Brady argues, because campaigns are re-evaluating their traditional media buys — and don’t particularly like what they see: “TV and radio are not working out as they used to. I think they are taking a second look at our industry.”

Advocating Advocacy Ads

Political campaigns are notorious for making media buys on the fly, and at the last minute. So even with the accelerated presidential primary schedule, it was hard in mid-November to gauge how candidates would be spreading their dollars around in the days before the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary, let alone what the victors might have in mind for the general election.

But some papers did have success in the 2006 congressional races.

The Hartford (Conn.) Courant, for instance, saw a payoff from the aggressive courtship of campaign managers it started several years ago. With former Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman running for re-election as an independent against the party primary’s victor — and with several tight congressional races — the Courant pulled in about $250,000 in political advertising, says Don Munson, the paper’s senior account executive/national advertising.

But the campaigns also fired up the Courant’s advocacy advertising. Munson says special interest and advocacy groups spent $650,000 during the ‘06 election cycle, and the paper figures that this time around the advocacy spend will also be about three times the amount it gets from candidates.

The newspaper’s sales staff is alert to opportunities to drum up advocacy ads. For instance, when Sen. Barack Obama visits Connecticut, advocacy groups like to reach out with ads on subjects ranging from energy costs to saving the whales. “It goes beyond the immediate elections,” Munson says. “Advocacy is an ongoing float, if you are sensitive to it. It’s all there right on the surface just waiting to be scratched.”

The lion’s share of campaign media buys may go to television, he concedes, but the advocacy ads will go into print right up to Nov. 4: “The issues will keep coming, whether it’s save energy or save Darfur.”

Indeed, the Washington Post, the paper of record for political wonks, isn’t counting on candidates dropping much on campaign advertising. “Certainly, it’s not for lack of trying,” sighs Senior Advertising Manager Marc Rosenberg.

Instead, the Post expects to see an uptick in advocacy advertising, which represents about 5% of the paper’s total ad revenue. Traditionally, the paper sees advocacy ad spend go down in election years, as groups try to affect races by buying local media. The difference this time, Rosenberg says, is the reach of washingtonpost.com.

The site attracts many politically astute users from outside the Beltway — exactly the folks advocacy groups want to reach in election years. It’s too soon to tell how much the paper could gain, Rosenberg says, but clearly he has high hopes. Four “public policy” salespeople are dedicated to print advocacy ads, with another two specifically selling the Web.

According to the NAA’s Brady, other papers should prepare themselves for advocacy ad opportunities. “The 527 groups are the big thing this year,” he says, referring to the tax-exempt interest groups formed to back candidates with so-called soft money. They’ve been quiet right now, Brady adds, “but I think once the general [election] hits, that’s where it’s going to be an all-out battle with a lot more 527s.”

Best of all, Brady says, these groups “seem to be most newspaper-friendly.” Certainly they’ve got money to spend: In 2004, for instance, the pro- Democrat “America Coming Together” 527 spent more than $72 million, and the “Swift Boat Veterans For Truth” dropped more than $22 million opposing Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.

USA Today is also expecting an increase in advocacy ads this election cycle, says senior VP/advertising Webber, who also serves as publisher of the Web site. The paper has assigned two sales executives exclusively to drum up advocacy and political advertising. It traditionally hasn’t received much campaign advertising, but Webber thinks that, too, might change. In addition to its robust Web site, USA Today has the advantage of never endorsing candidates.

“Our audience is very much the undecided voters,” Webber says. “We tend to reflect middle America much more as compared to other newspapers or news organizations that might swing right or left.” Even so, it’s been a tough sell, he acknowledges: “We always wondered, ‘How can these guys not see this?’”

Smart readersWebber brings up a factor that’s a double-edged sword for newspapers looking for campaign ads: their tuned-in readers.

On the one hand, newspapers have the voters campaigns want. A study for NAA by the Democratic polling firm The Cromer Group found that 74% of voters who cast ballots in the 2000 presidential election and the 2002 congressional election said they read a paper either every day (55%) or several times a week (19%). In 2005, a survey found that 56% of all voters in the 2004 election cycle had seen newspaper ads for local candidates, and that 82% found the ads helpful in picking a candidate.

Unfortunately, that’s not the kind of voter most campaigns are looking for in the crunch time before Election Day when they really ramp up spending.

“They are trying to find those 5% of the voters who have been living in a cave and have not yet formed an opinion,” the Washington Post’s Rosenberg says. “Readers of newspapers and their Web sites are at the other end of the scale — these are people who are informed. They are not the target of political advertisers. It’s the one time we regret we don’t have a bunch of ignorant readers.”

That’s one reason Leo Kivijarv, vice president of the Stamford, Conn.-based media research firm PQ Media, is skeptical that newspapers will see much revenue from this election cycle, despite the increased campaign spending and what he says is a much better job newspapers are doing to try to win campaign dollars.

“The key demographics presidential candidates are trying to reach, especially in the benchmark states, are the swing voters — and swing voters are not heavy newspaper readers,” he says.

On the front lines

One exception to that rule is Florida, Kivijarv adds. But for now, Florida papers are not reaping any advantage because the national Democratic Party is banning candidates from campaigning there. The party is angry that the state party ignored its warnings and moved its primary earlier in the calendar, disrupting the grand plan.

Still, Florida’s papers are ready. The Orlando Sentinel has a sales manager dedicated to political advertising, and in the days before the primary and general elections the paper again plans to run voter guides — which have been successful in pulling campaign ads.

Across the state at the Tribune sibling South Florida Sun-Sentinel in Fort Lauderdale, campaigns have been contacting the paper inquiring about Web and print rates for advertising later in the cycle, says spokesman Kevin Courtney. “There’s been very little action so far,” he adds, “but the feedback we’re getting is that the newspaper and Web sites are being looked at more closely than ever.”

Spanish-language newspaper publisher ImpreMedia expects Florida to deliver for its La Prensa weekly, which is distributed in Orlando and Tampa, says the chain’s senior vice president of sales, Erich Linker. With the Hispanic vote in play between the Republicans and the Democrats, he adds, ImpreMedia intends to be “very aggressive” in going after campaign advertising.

ImpreMedia’s Los Angeles daily, La Opinion, is developing a voter registration program that expects to draw campaign advertising. And the chain is partnering with MTV and MySpace in providing the Spanish-language translations for the “Presidential Dialogue” online Q&As with candidates. “We’ve had preliminary discussions from some of the national folks,” Linker says. “Obviously, they’re waiting for their candidates to be nominated, but I think that’s encouraging.”

Similarly, Tribune Co.’s Spanish-language daily Hoy in Los Angeles is “certainly hopeful” that it is going to gain more political advertising this year, says General Manager/Editor Javier Aldape. With California’s primary now moved up to Feb. 5, “candidates will be looking to make a decisive statement,” he says, and the paper expects they will use Hoy. Already, Aldape adds, the paper is getting more advertising for statewide referenda.

The Los Angeles Times is also making “a very engaged effort to capture” campaign ad dollars, spokeswoman Nancy Sullivan says, though for competitive reasons it doesn’t want to talk about its specific initiatives.

For the most part, the presidential candidates aren’t talking about where newspapers fit in their media buy mix. Calls to the campaigns of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, and John Edwards were met with no responses.

Some candidates may speak only to their “bases.” In late October and early November, for example, the Obama campaign bought a lot of banners on liberal blog site The Huffington Post.

However, Mitt Romney’s campaign has bought some newspaper, says campaign spokesperson Alex Bourgos. The candidate early on bought full-page ads in the New Hampshire Union Leader and the Washington, D.C., paper Roll Call. “Most of our advertising at this point is focused on TV, radio, and direct mail,” adds Bourgos.

Romney was also, as of mid-November, among the most active buyer of Web advertising, according to an analysis by Ad Relevance, a business of Nielsen Online that is owned (as is E&P) by The Nielsen Co. Bourgos says the campaign paid to get its banner ads in a wide variety of sites. But as a New York Times article in early November pointed out, that resulted in banner ads for Romney, who is running as a social conservative, in such unlikely spots as Gay.com’s dating site and FanFiction.net, which includes user-written pornography.

Other campaigns have been embarrassed by having their ads placed in sites they do not consider appropriate for their message. So newspapers’ advantage on the Web may be that campaigns can be ensured a “safe” environment.

But whether or not presidential candidates turn to newspapers, the primary schedule will have an effect on local and state candidates that most have not yet noticed. “There are a lot of elections next year,” says TNS Media Intelligence/ CMAG’s Tracey. “The underreported notions of these Feb. 5 primaries [are] forcing a number of states to have three statewide elections. They’ll have a February presidential primary, and they’ll still have state and local primaries in late spring and summer, and then the general election.” As a result, he adds, campaigns will need to do much more advertising.

“I don’t think it’s going to be a year that the balance is upset and print beats broadcast — that won’t happen,” Tracey says. But it will be an up year for political advertising in newspapers, because, he believes, “Print’s sweet spot is issue advocacy and public affairs advertising.”

By Mark Fitzgerald and Jen Saba

Popularity: 10% [?]