Campaigns as Tamasha

A sizeable portion of election campaigns across the globe consist of personal attacks by one candidate against the other. This is true not just for India, but for almost every country which has a democratic system of electing governments, including the United States of America. Research conducted by the most renowned Harvard University has highlighted that personal attacks and misinformation are prominent features of US election campaigns, particularly within the digital landscape and often targeting the integrity of the electoral process itself. Personal attacks, often referred to as character attacks or ad hominem fallacies, are generally considered detrimental to election campaigns, distinguishing them from substantive, policy-based criticism. Negative campaigning can inform voters about a candidate’s flaws. In contrast, personal attacks often cross the line into uncivil behaviour that harms the very democratic process itself. At least one Harvard study suggests that personal attacks in election campaigns are generally detrimental to the attacker and ineffective at persuading voters. Personal attacks are often viewed as “dirty campaigning” and can have the potential to trigger backlashes, with voters reacting more positively to policy-focused discussions. It has also said that personal attacks are frequently perceived as more negative than policy-based arguments and can lead to a “boomerang effect”, lowering the favourability of the candidate who makes them. Research findings published by Cambridge University and related academic studies also indicate that in UK election campaigns, personal attacks are perceived as more negative by voters than policy critiques, yet they often fail to harm the target and may boost support for them. It is interesting to note there are studies which also argue that disrespect in political communication may not always engender negative evaluations. Two prominent Western political science scholars – Christina Mölders of the University of Hamburg and Niels Van Quaquebeke of the Kühne Logistics University – claim that their research shows people find disrespect to be entertaining. The two have said that beyond all norms and credibility, their findings could be a very simple reason behind voters’ approval of disrespect in the political context. And the tamasha goes on.