OK. I get that. But let me ask you something.
Do the people in Florida never leave the state? Do they not travel for business, or to visit relatives or go on vacation? When they do travel, do they scrupulously avoid any exposure to mass media?
Do they have relatives, friends or business aquaintances who may have some infuence upon them who live in other states?
I wonder if this targeting business may not be too clever by half. I am in Texas and I’ve seen a zillion Obama ads. Now Filth ain’t winning Texas, I have no doubt about that. And it’s possible that they’re just THAT stupid and spending money here for no good reason. Maybe. But I wonder.
Hank
Hi, all - I’m a long time lurker here at FR... perhaps I can help clear this up. I sell TV advertising for a living and have worked in both local cable and local broadcast TV.
TV advertising can be purchased at the local, regional or national level (or some combination of all three). For example, in the auto industry local clients are the area dealerships (”Orlando Ford”), regional clients are the regional dealer associations (”Southeastern Ford Dealers”) and the national clients are the manufacturers (”Ford”).
Presidential elections, as others have mentioned, boil down to the states (and specific areas within those states) where the candidates are competitive with each other... so, it is generally considered a waste of money for them to buy TV ads at the national level. In states like Texas and California where there is no contest, it is also a waste of money for either Romney or Obama buy local or regional TV ad slots.
Since you have DirecTV, the only local ads you can see would be from your local broadcast TV stations. Otherwise, you are only seeing national (or perhaps regional) ads on the “cable networks” you receive via satellite. Unlike local hardwired cable systems (like Time Warner, Comcast, etc.), the satellite dish companies do not have a way to “insert” ads at the local level.
Why Obama would be running national TV advertising I don’t know - maybe his media buyers feel it is still cost effective on the national “cable networks” despite him having no chance in some parts of the country (like Texas).
I’d say that Floridians watch TV at home a great, great deal more than while traveling. During the election cycle they might see 100 ads at home but probably more like 2 or 3 while out-of-state. What’s more relevant in that scenario, the local or the national?
Besides this, I know many Floridians who actually do not leave the state very often. My brother, for example, most often vacations within the state (it is a tourist haven after all).
As far as out-of-state relatives and friends calling them up and trying to influence people in swing states based on ads they saw in their own states—well, I just think targeting the ads to the people in the swing states themselves would be a lot more direct and practical, not to mention I would imagine a lot more likely to work than some sort of second-hand pitch.
Why Obama is advertising in TX, I don’t know. It seems pretty foolish and wasteful to me. I hope he keeps it up. I’m sure he wants to win the popular vote too, but it really isn’t the most important thing. I just hope Romney keeps his eye on the electoral college instead. (I do feel sorry for your inundation with Obama ads though—I’m sure it is annoying.)
The percentage of visitors in most states at any given time is very small, especially in the fall when families aren’t vacationing since kids are in school.
To advertise trying to catch this tiny amount of visitors is not effective use of funds.