Money Matters

I was reading the further coverage of the Newtown anniversary, amazed at how the media likes to glorify psycho killers and spur copycats, when I read:

 

"New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's organization, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, has spent roughly $15 million this year on advertising to influence the debate."

 

I recalled the stats from yesterday's Washington Post article:

 

"In the first half of 2013, the NRA and other gun rights groups outspent gun-control organizations on federal lobbying, $12.2 million to $1.6 million, according to the nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation."

 

So, Bloomberg spent $15 million last year, but only $1.6 million (from all anti-gun sources) was spent on lobbying in the first half? Makes sense when you consider Bloomberg spent a lot of advertising money trying to sway State-level elections in November, but that certainly doesn't support the WaPo's narrative that "the NRA" massively outspent the anti's.

 

The distinction between lobbying money and advertising money becomes more clear in light of an article in Advertising Age that notes the anti's outspent pro-gun groups seven to one on TV:

 

"In the year after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., gun-control groups spent $14.1 million on TV advertising. According to Kantar Media's CMAG, that gave such groups a seven to one advantage over gun-rights organizations, which only spent $1.9 million.

 

"At the same time, gun-rights groups, led by the National Rifle Association, spent about $6.2 million on lobbying instead of advertising, according to a study by the Sunlight Foundation.

 

"The gun-rights groups may have had the better tactic -- especially in a quiet election year. [...]

 

"'The return on the investment has been very weak,' said Elizabeth Wilner of Kantar Media. 'When you are doing advocacy advertising you are looking for Congress to pass something.'"

 

If you add all these numbers up, the pro-gun folks spent about $8M on lobbying, while the anti's spent about $2M. When it comes to advertising, though, the pro-gun folks spent only $2M and the anti's spent over $14M. Add the both figures up, and the pro-gun folks spent about $10M while the anti's spent around $16M. Once again, we've been significantly outspent.

 

Don't be disappointed by this, though! Look at our successes, especially at the Federal level, and you can see that we focused our money where it would have the most influence and we were able to avoid any major legislation in the aftermath of Newtown. What this means is that our opponents spent more money, on less-effective channels, and still wound up with nothing to show for it.

 

That, my friends, is smart fighting.