As the presidential race heats up, so too do the tactics chosen by each party to entice voters to vote for them. An advertisement released by the Obama campaign today, labelling McCain’s campaign strategies as dishonorable, is just the latest instalment of the fierce advertising battle between the candidates this election.

Posted by Newsmax, the ad begins with John McCain’s vow to never “never take the low road to the highest office in this land.” Quoting news sources such as The New York Times and TIME, the ad claims McCain continues to make “dishonest smears that he repeats even after it’s been exposed as a lie.” The ad finishes by saying “It seems deception is all he has left.” This latest ad has prompted me to look at the previous political ads for this election and frankly, they are pretty childish. The McCain campaign released an ad earlier this year which compared Obama’s media attention to that of Paris Hilton or Britney Spears, an obviously insulting suggestion to a man that is running at president of the United States. “The focus on events and activities is much more something you would expect from someone releasing a new movie than running for president,” the ad says. McCain called Obama disrespectful in a later ad to elevate Palin’s standing. The catfight continued when the Obama released an ad that suggested McCain is out of touch, saying he still can't use a computer. I think Obama has stepped up his campaign, approaching it with a sharper tone, in a “two can play that game” way with this response to McCain’s dig at him. So are these negative ads helping or hindering McCain and Obama’s case? Is the mudslinging and criticism justified? I don’t think so. I am concerned with what each candidate can bring to the table, not what the other one can’t. I like to think I am well informed in political matters, however, not everyone is as wrapped up with the election as much as the city of Oxford.

Newsweek has published an article today, discussing the candidates' appeal to the “low-info” voters by appearing on day time talk shows. By “low info” the article was referring to white, working class, blue collar voters. Although the campaign for presidency is a priveledge and very important position to take on, I think that it is a great idea for candidates to appear on entertainment talk shows. Obama and McCain have said they both want to help the “ordinary” people, but “ordinary” people don’t check poll results everyday. “Ordinary” people don’t religiously read TIME, Newsmax, or The Economist. Basically “ordinary” people don’t have time, aren’t interested or find all the political information and policies too overwhelming to take onboard.

Barrack Obama has appeared on The Ellen DeGeneres Show, Good Morning America and has chatted with The View. Although not as prominent as Obama on the talk show scene, McCain has chatted with Regis and Kelly and endorsed the work of Heidi Montag from MTV reality show The Hills. This all may seem degrading, being referred to as “low-info” and you may be thinking, “low-info? How can anyone be a low-info voter, there is information everywhere!” But the truth is that not EVERYONE is as debate crazed as Oxford. Both candidates are using their resources to address potential voters who would otherwise be left in the dark, by speaking to them in ways they can relate. If potential swing voters are turning on their televisions everyday to watch Good Morning America, then that’s where the candidates need to be in order to be seen and heard. It may not get the specifics of their policies across, but it will let America know who they are as a candidate, afterall some information is better than no information at all.

In case you haven't seen the ad, here it is.