There is an old line about hockey, that I went to a boxing match (or maybe to modernize it an MMA fight) and a hockey game broke out. To borrow that idea, I was watching some political messaging and a football game broke out. Or a baseball game, hockey contest and so forth.
You get the idea.
It’s not just you if it seems the commercial breaks of sporting events are inundated with political advertising. Listen to a political podcast, and invariably the host or guests will note they were watching say the LSU game one Saturday and the tsunami of political ads was inescapable (that one comes from The Bulwark podcast). I have even noticed them in solid blue New York, dashing my boast that I live in a city that political advertising avoids.
“NFL and NCAA College Football and MLB Playoffs historically represent exceptional reach opportunities for political campaigns as they aid in reaching the somewhat elusive male voter at scale,” said John Link, VP of Sales at AdImpact, an advertising analytics firm. “Conversely, broadcasters, specifically in higher demand markets, rely on stronger rate structures for this premium live inventory during the height of the political season where the demand is the greatest.”
AdImpact crunched a few numbers for us. Unsurprisingly the political ad spend is far up as the election year progresses. There were 198 political spots during MLB games from June 1 to 7 averages , and 193 the following week. The cost per spot ranged from $41,610 to $63,167. By contrast, between September 1 and September 7 there were 580 spots at an average of $380,152. The following week there were 556 ads priced at an average of $334,763.00.
“Typically, from September through the November election we see 60-65% of total political advertising cycle spend,” an AdImpact spokesperson wrote. “October generally sees roughly 35-40% of the total spending. We looked at broadcast TV political advertising running against Major League Baseball (MLB) for 2 weeks in June compared to 2 weeks in September. Political advertising against MLB games is ahead of the industry-wide expected trend with a significant jump in advertisement airings and total spend. The sports advertising acceleration is represented in the number of political ad airings against MLB games, up 3x in September, and even more of a jump for ad spend at roughly 7x in September, which showcases the increased cost per spot.”
AdImpact did not have data to compare to previous election cycles. But anecdotally there is a big uptick. That is likely for several reasons. First, campaigns have more money than ever.
“By some estimates, the figure could climb as high as $12bn before Election Day on November 5, up nearly 30% from the last presidential election in 2020,” reported The Drum.
So there is just more money sloshing around. Second, sports is, aside from political events and major news, the last appointment-time viewing. (We used to call it TIVO proof before everything was available on demand.) Viewers can’t fast forward through the ads and the audiences are huge. And politicians want to share in some of the good vibes of a sporting event. Donald Trump shows up at the Alabama-Georgia game, Tim Walz at the Minnesota-Michigan contest.
And to slightly take issue with AdImpact’s Link’s comment that political campaigns see sports as a way to reach the elusive young male, increasingly women are watching sports in greater numbers too. Nearly half the NFL’s fans are now women, according to the league, and the rise of women’s sports supplements the ways campaigns can use sports to reach voters.
That is the why, but should it be this way? Amazon Prime is alone in having a policy of no political ad spending during its programming. Prime is a subscription service honing the user experience, and has deduced that political ads take away from the overall product.
For so long we heard politics and sports don’t mix. Michael Jordan famously retorted when asked why he doesn’t get involved with causes that Republicans buy sneakers too. That began to change with Colin Kaepernick’s kneeling, and really came to a head with the Black Lives Matters protests. Now, the premise that sports and politics should never meet is a dated philosophy.
But while the premise is no longer failsafe, too much politics in sports can take away from what its role can be as a respite from work and everyday concerns. And it’s not as if leagues don’t regulate the type of ads broadcasters can run, from liquor to gambling spots. The NFL in the early 2000s rejected a proposed Super Bowl ad from Las Vegas.
While political ads are not in the vice category (disagree if you wish), maybe the leagues should ask how much is too much when it comes to how often viewers are bombarded with political pitches.
Broadcasters pay a lot for the right to show sports, so they wouldn’t embrace the notion of artificially reducing their inventory of political ads. And yes Amazon gets by without them, but it can afford to do so while their linear competitors can not. Capping political ads by league fiat is likely a pipe dream.
So enjoy your political ads this week. Hopefully a good game breaks out. And don’t fret, there is only a month left in this election cycle.