The consensus opinion in every corner of mainstream media is “fake news” helped propel Donald Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton.
Do you believe that headline story?
If are a Hillary supporter, most likely you do. Facts, however, suggest otherwise.
Please consider Did fake news help elect Trump? Not likely, according to new research.
“Fake news” stories favoring Donald Trump far exceeded those favoring Hillary Clinton but did not have a significant impact on the presidential election, concludes a new survey of social and other media consumption.
The study, which also downplays the political impact of social media in general, is co-authored by economists Matthew Gentzkow of Stanford University and Hunt Allcott of New York University.
The paper is worth consideration especially given overriding press assumptions about the potency of ideologically driven news coverage.
In part, Gentzkow and Shapiro countered that view by showing that most people do not get their news from ideologically driven sources, with more traditional neutral wire service and local TV fare outweighing the much chronicled cable news channels, notably Fox News, and politically skewed websites.
Much of the paper delves deeply into their mathematical assumptions and modus operandi, citing the work of many others, and may send the heads of laymen spinning. Just a tiny, fleeting example:
[Mish note: The article text I quoted is not printable. The above image is from the original source document: Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election. Hopefully I can get a comment from Salil Mehta at Statistical Ideas.]
“In our model, Trump gets all the voters that Clinton and Neither lost as a result of fake news”
Well, you can also just cut to their chase:
“In summary, our data suggest that social media were not the most important source of election news, and even the most widely circulated fake news stories were seen by only a small fraction of Americans. For fake news to have changed the outcome of the election, a single fake news story would need to have convinced about 0.7 percent of Clinton voters and non-voters who saw it to shift their votes to Trump, a persuasion rate equivalent to seeing 36 television campaign ads.”
Ads More Important Than Fake News
Given the logical conclusion that ads played a more important role than “fake news”, let’s dive into the ad campaigns.
Who Spent More?
Clinton has spent $96.4 million in ads in the general election, compared with $17.3 million for Trump’s campaign, according to a report from NBC News and Advertising Analytics, a firm that tracks ad spending.
Outside groups supporting Clinton, such as the super PAC Priorities USA Action, have spent nearly $60 million. By contrast, groups backing Trump, like the National Rifle Assn., have doled out a total of $16.3 million.
The above from the LA Times on September 21.
On November 2, Bloomberg noted Candidates Make Last Ditch Ad Spending Push Across 14-State Electoral Map.
Money is flowing fast into television markets in battleground states—and then some—across the country. Clinton has increased her ad spending by 86 percent as compared with the week beginning October 18, to $29.6 million, which is double what Donald Trump spent ($14.9 million).
For the week beginning October 25, the Clinton campaign spent $154,696 per electoral vote in the states where she advertised. Her average weekly expenditure per electoral vote over the 19 prior weeks in the general election campaign was $58,492. Donald Trump’s expenditure per electoral vote for the same week was $91,938, largely unchanged from the prior week, but still a considerable increase as compared with his prior weekly average of $22,753.
Over 19 weeks Hillary averaged $58,492 per electoral vote vs. Trump’s average of $22,753.
For the week of October 25, the Clinton campaign spent $154,696 per electoral vote vs. $91,938 for Trump.
Clinton Outspent Trump everywhere buy Virginia and Colorado.
General Ad Spending
Let’s give credit where credit is due. In recognition of Hillary’s significant achievement, she wins three blue ribbons:
- For wasting the most campaign dollars in a losing cause.
- For outspending her opponent by the biggest percentage.
- For outspending her opponent on a per-vote basis and losing.
Lifetime Achievement Award
It’s not easy losing to the most unpopular candidate in history while outspending him nearly 3-1.
I propose Hillary deserves a lifetime achievement award. Her noteworthy performance may never be broken.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock.
Great stats.
Edward Bernays must be turning over in his grave. A monstrous fail for the monstrous PA industry. Maybe people are just getting wise to propaganda or Hilary truly represented a failed elite by any measure.
http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/bernprop.html
LikeLike
Fake news = NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, NYT, LA Times, etc.
In the non disputed emails that were leaked it was shown “independent” and “unbiased” reporters gave Hillary interview questions before hand, gave Hillary veto powers over anything she objected to and gave her approval powers over anything that was published.
The MSM is the fake media.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LikeLike
But I’m thinking the Russians all voted twice, the dead Russians voted, the Russian illegal immigrants all voted, and the Russians drove all the poor people to the polling places and made them vote for Trump.
THAT’s the reason he won. Had nothing to do with Hillary.
LikeLike
I think a significant number of Hillary’s voters were bused to the polls in self driving busses and never got to their destination to vote.
LikeLike
Ad money spent could not overcome the disdain people who knew her, had for her. Most knew her and her history of corruption and disregard for the masses.
She reminded me of a song by Adam Sandler.
“Piece of sheet car” Look it up with correct spelling. Great Reggae tune! 😉
Consider it a tribute to the DC candidate.
Well, here is the search on utube just in case. LOL
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=piece+of+shit+car
Forgive me Mish
LikeLike
Hillary was her own demise. RIP
LikeLike
RIP my ass, rest in hell Hitlary.
LikeLike
Congrats, Chelsea! Yo Mama managed to lose a rigged election!
LikeLike
Those were impressive campaign spending numbers.
LikeLike
Remember how Trump was on the news seemingly every day/nite FOR FREE? And apparently, huge crowds vs. Hillary’s small crowds and very little news coverage.
DJT milked the MSM like a swollen udder……
LikeLike
I’m surprised that it hasn’t been announced that Hillary has come down with some fake illness that would preclude her from attending the inauguration. I hope the TV cameras hone in on her as Trump gets sworn in. I bet venom & fire will shoot out of her mouth.
There’s not a genuine bone in Hillary’s body. 100% fake.
LikeLike
I want to see that close-up also. Her head will be spinning around.
LikeLike
A reenactment of Linda Blair in The Exorcist (complete w/ expletives)
LikeLike
But this does not show the money Trump spent on rallies vs Hillary and the dividends it paid. This is where Hillary blew it. She always had an excuse not to campaign. Direct marketing is where it is at. Screw all the bs advertising it does not emotionally connect the buyer with the product.
LikeLike
“Clinton Outspent Trump everywhere but Virginia and Colorado.” Also Wisconsin. Trump spent more, according to your graph. Oh, yes, the dog that did not bark in the graph: Michigan. It’s not there; Clinton lost it. She also lost PA and Ohio, despite outspending Trump.
LikeLike
MainStreamMedia fake news didn’t help Hillary win, as they hoped it would.
LikeLike
I think it was the constant MSM attacks on Trump for any tiny mistake he made in what he SAID while giving a complete pass for anything the Hildabeast DID that helped him. Some say that the statements he made which they jumped on were part of his plan to get free coverage while showing the MSM’s extreme bias, but I don’t know if I want to credit him or his campaign for that. I think he’s just not a smooth-mouthed politician snake and simply says what he thinks without thinking about how it could be attacked (or, too often IMO, not thinking at all before opening his mouth).
He WAS very smart in suborning a major party and its machine because 3rd party candidates are simply IGNORED by the media while major party candidates cannot be. Even ENTIRELY self-funded 3rd party candidates will probably succeed in being nothing more than major spoilers for one of the major parties, typically the Rep party.
“I propose Hillary deserves a lifetime achievement award.”
She HAS made history as both the first major party female prez candidate and the first major party female prez candidate to LOOSE.
However, since Trump will not be able to sustainably fix the national and world economy and the massive debt levels he inherited, he, Brexit and any other EU-ending exits, and populism/nationalism in general will be blamed for the likely economic crisis or decline during the next four years. Obama has already made the case (a “made case” only to the economically clueless vast majority) what a great economy Trump is inheriting and any downturn will, of course, be Trump’s fault.
LikeLike
Change “to LOOSE” to “to LOSE” although “too LOOSE” would fit her philosophy on proper ethics.
LikeLike
Hillary’s rallies were tepid and poorly attended affairs, requiring pop personalities to elevate the event to vapid stumping for repeated Democrap memes. Trump elevated himself to rock star status and generated excitement, and the ‘deplorables’ comment only helped him. Violent protesters outside of his venues populated by truly cringe worthy persons that most parents would not want their kids associated with also helped to boost Trump.
Oh yeah. Holder should be prosecuted for ‘Gun Walker’, and the French should press for an international arrest warrant for his butt as one of the ‘Walker’ guns was used in the Paris nightclub massacre.
LikeLike