Replies

Would have to disagree with you. The voters, ages 18-40, spend most of their time on the internet. Very seldom do they read papers or other print media. Mostly watch YouTube instead of cable TV.

And I would disagree with you.

I'm quite aware of the amount of advertising on websites such ad YouTube and Facebook and Google.

FACT and reality are different. People don't click on advertising, and most advertising is now "in-your-face" or intrusive. Meaning that, they are posted on top of the pages that people really click to see and read and hear. And most people don't tolerate and just wait for the ad to complete, and most just click it off and continue to their content. When I've gone to Youtube, the first thing that appears is advertising, which I don't pay attention to or I click it off after about 4 seconds. Compare that to TV and radio advertising, which can't be clicked away from, other than going for snacks.

The hundred million or more that would go to Facebook and/or Twitter and/or Google, could be better spent on radio and TV and perhaps in the print media.

“Compare that to TV and radio advertising, which can’t be clicked away from...”

But again, the problem is the 18-40 year old voters are not particularly watching TV or listening to the radio. They prefer listening to their MP3 playlists thru headphones and watching YouTube videos. And the Dem ads on YouTube try very hard to grab them in that first 4 seconds, and always throw in their favorite actor/celebrity along with it to keep them listening.

I don’t think it’s a waste of advertising dollars to spend on YouTube. Facebook ads can be ignored more easily by the public. But the GOP sure better have a solid place on the internet for the 2020 election, no doubt. Many folks have cut the cord and cancelled their print media subscriptions. Just the way it is now. The GOP needs to reach independent voters with online methods along with using TV ads and print.