Final answer:
A campaign focusing on an opponent's negatives rather than its own positives is engaged in negative campaigning. This tactic has grown with the rise of social media and can sway undecided voters through emotion-based ads, as historically evidenced by several presidential campaigns.
Step-by-step explanation:
A campaign that emphasizes the shortcomings of an opponent instead of promoting the candidate's own positive qualities is engaging in what's known as negative campaigning or “mud-slinging.” This includes attacks on the opposition’s character, past political performance, or personal life. In contrast to positive messages that focus on a candidate’s vision, plans, and accomplishments, negative campaigning aims to paint the opponent in a bad light.
While negative campaigning is not novel, recent advancements in technology have increased its reach and intensity. The vast digital footprints left by individuals on social media platforms provide plentiful ammunition for these campaigns. Critics of the practice worry that it leads to voter cynicism and lower turnout, but proponents argue it can be effective at swaying undecided voters due to the emotional impact of such ads.
Historical examples of negative campaigning include the 'The Daisy Girl' ad from Lyndon Johnson’s campaign and the prevalence of attack ads in presidential races from the 1970s to the 1980s. Despite the potential backlash, political strategists often employ these tactics, believing they can influence the less ideologically driven and more independent voters who tend to show up for general elections.