Smear campaign

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is about a political tactic. For the album from Napalm Death, see: Smear Campaign. For the smear test, see Pap Smear.

A smear campaign or smear tactic is a deliberate attempt by an individual or group to harm another individual's or group's reputation. This tactic is also colloquially referred to as mud slinging.

Common targets are public officials, politicians, and political candidates. To a lesser degree, the term can refer to an attempt to damage a private person's reputation; for example, during a trial, the opposing counsel may attempt to cast doubt on the reliability of a witness.

The concept of the smear campaign is related to the concepts of propaganda, media bias, yellow journalism, and other falsehood-related terms such as libel and pejoration. In extreme cases, smear campaigns may lead to widespread persecution, such as in the case of the Dolchstoßlegende before WWII.^{[citation needed]}

Contents 1 Definition 2 Examples 3 Shame campaign 4 Legality 5 In popular culture 6 References 7 See also 8 External links

[edit] Definition

A smear campaign is an intentional, premeditated effort to undermine an individual's or group's reputation, credibility, and character. "Mud slinging", like negative campaigning, most often targets government officials, politicians, political candidates, and other public figures. However, private persons or groups may also become targets of smear campaigns perpetrated in schools, companies, institutions, families, and other social groups.

Smear tactics differ from normal discourse or debate in that they do not bear upon the issues or arguments in question. A smear is a simple attempt to malign a group or an individual and to attempt to undermine their credibility.

Smears often consist of unverifiable rumors and are often distortions, half-truths, or even outright lies; smear campaigns are often propagated by gossip spreading. Even when the facts behind a smear are shown to lack proper foundation, the tactic is often effective because the target's reputation is tarnished before the truth is known.

Smears are also effective in diverting attention away from the matter in question and onto the individual or group. The target of the smear is typically forced to defend his reputation rather than focus on the previous issue.

Smear tactics are considered by many to be a low, disingenuous form of discourse; they are nevertheless very common.

[edit] Examples

Smear tactics are commonly used to undermine effective arguments or critiques. For example, Ralph Nader was the victim of a smear campaign during the 1960s, when he was campaigning for car safety. In order to smear Nader and deflect public attention from his campaign, General Motors engaged private investigators to search for damaging or embarrassing incidents from his past. General Motors eventually was forced to publicly apologize to Nader. Afterwards, Nader’s campaign became successful, and American auto safety legislation was considerably bolstered. Many safety features, including seat-belts, were introduced, and car accident death rates began to fall drastically despite increasing traffic.

[edit] Shame campaign

A shame campaign is a tactic in which particular individuals are singled out because of their behavior or suspected crimes, often by marking them publicly.

In the Philippines, Mayor Alfredo Lim popularized such tactics during his term as mayor of Manila. On July 1, 1997, he began a controversial "spray paint shame campaign” in an effort to stop drug use. He and his team sprayed bright red paint on two hundred squatter houses whose residents had been charged, but not yet convicted, of selling prohibited substances. Officials of other municipalities, emboldened by Lim’s campaign, began conceiving their own anti-crime shame strategies.

Lim’s shame campaign generated much publicity, and many questioned the legality and humaneness of singling out unconvicted suspects. Former Senator Rene A. Saguisag, a member of Movement for Brotherhood, Integrity and Nationalism, Inc. (MABINI), issued a public statement condemning Lim’s policy: "The shame campaign violated presumption of innocence because it transgresses due process…" In January 2000, the 14th Division of the Court of Appeals ruled the policy as "invalid and unconstitutional."^[1]

In January 2005, Metro Manila Development Authority Chair Bayani Fernando announced a "wet rags shame campaign" to target commuters who wait for rides in the middle of the streets. The MMDA traffic enforcers planned to punish jaywalkers by driving by in service vehicles and splashing them with wet rags attached to poles. Sound trucks were to drive ahead and warn pedestrians of their approach; those who refused to comply with traffic regulations were to have wet rags dropped on their heads.

Sen. Richard Gordon disagreed with the shame tactic, saying such a way of disciplining pedestrians is a "return to Grade One." He added that the campaign might work for a time but would end up being futile. Rep. Vincent Crisologo of Ilocos Sur, a known critic of Fernando, said the MMDA chief was resorting to martial law tactics. Rep. Rozzano Rufino Biazon of Muntinlupa City, criticized the plan: "It only shows that the MMDA looks at people as animals who should be herded like cattle instead of using reason to make them follow the law… it is an admission that its personnel assigned to the thoroughfares are not doing their job."

Chairman Fernando, unfazed by criticisms, proceeded with the campaign.^[2]

In 2005, Tony Kwok, Hong Kong’s former corruption chief, suggested that the Philippine government should carry out a shame campaign to eliminate political corruption. A consultant of the Philippines’ Office of the Ombudsman, Kwok said, "This is what you need, a shame campaign. You have to let the politicians know that corruption is a high-risk crime." Kwok cited Hong Kong’s use of TV advertisements to discourage governmental misconduct. He added, "The best way is through enforcement and education."^[3]

[edit] Legality

In many countries, the law recognizes the value of reputation and credibility. Both libel, a false and damaging publication, and slander, a false and damaging oral statement, are often punishable by law and may result in imprisonment or compensation for damages done.

[edit] In popular culture

• In the Family Guy episode "Running Mates," Peter Griffin's last-minute advertisement in which he says, "Lois Griffin is a slut," is an example of mud slinging.

[edit] References

[edit] See also

• Negative campaigning
• Dirty tricks
• Whisper campaign

[edit] External links

• Spinsanity - A U.S. political website that specializes in highlighting smear tactics and other unethical forms of political discourse.