California gubernatorial candidate Al Checchi (D) visits with a group of fourth graders. (AP)

By William Booth
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 29, 1998; Page A01

LOS ANGELES – In the last days of the California governor's primary race, the airwaves of the state's major media markets are being saturated with an unprecedented barrage of political advertisements – hundreds a day, thousands a week – that is breaking all records for money spent and time bought.

This kind of frenzied ad grab is called, in the lexicon of political consultants and media buyers, "carpet bombing."

From "Good Morning America" to the "Late Late Show" – and every "Judge Judy," "Jenny Jones" and "Jerry Springer" in between – what matters now is less a candidate's talking points, but his or her "gross rating points," the television industry's shorthand accounting of an ad's likely "penetration" in the market.

These days, the savvy insiders at the California campaigns, the media consultants and their ad buyers, are spending their days talking not about position papers, but about the relative merits of "going up" on a "Matlock" rerun vs. another installment of "America's Funniest Home Videos."

The one Republican and three Democratic candidates are buying an astounding 527 spots every day in the state's five major media markets – that's 3,680 ads a week, almost 16,000 a month.

And millionaire businessman Al Checchi, in his first run for a public office, is clearly the king of the airwaves, selling himself on 217 spots a day across the state – including some 60 spots in Los Angeles. Those 60 daily ads in Los Angeles, the second-most expensive and largest media market outside of the New York metropolitan area, could cost Checchi, who is financing his campaign with his own money, an estimated $240,000, based on Checchi's weekly gross rating points and the cost of buying an average point in Los Angeles.

And there is no going back. "It is just going to get worse," said Kam Kuwata, campaign director for Los Angeles-area Rep. Jane Harman (D) who is in the race.

This is big-money politics in the nation's largest, most populous and wealthy state – and there are many who fear this is the dumbed-down future of political discourse in 30-second hits, where statewide candidates need to raise or self-finance $20 million or $30 million just to be competitive in a primary election.

But there might not be any other way to run for governor. There are 33 million residents in California, about half of whom are registered to vote, and only about 5 million are expected to cast ballots in the June 2 primary. If a candidate started with little or no name recognition – as all three Democrats did – the campaigns must buy Big TV, especially in a state where few stations cover politics and the voters in a booming economy, by and large, tell pollsters they are not paying much attention.

"If you're hunting, you go where the ducks are," said Evan Tracey, president of the Campaign Media Analysis Group in Alexandria, which is providing the Checchi campaign with day-by-day tallies of every ad for the governor's race in California. "There's a lot to be said for traditional politicking, kissing babies and shaking hands, but you have to get on TV to reach voters."

Checchi, for example, arranged 500 meetings with voters around the state in the past nine months. Even if 100 people attended each event, Checchi presented himself in person to 50,000 citizens. When he aired a single 30-second spot around the state during the final episode of "Seinfeld," the virtual Checchi reached millions. So did Harman, who also "went up" during "Seinfeld."

The Democratic contenders are all keeping the exact figures of the TV buys close to their chests, fudging the number for reporters by saying they are each spending "in excess of a million dollars a week" on television. But a review of the ad buys reveals that Checchi alone may be spending as much as $2.7 million in a single week. The Washington Post estimate of the cost is based on the published average price of each point in the five California media markets – the campaigns could be getting better deals or worse.

"That's about as a big a buy as you can physically make. That's saturation," said Jon Hutchens, president of Media Strategies and Research, who is not involved in the race. "You want to know where all the money goes in modern campaigns. This is it. It goes on TV."

As the California air wars wage, it is informative to hit the pause button on the remote and see what an average day looks like. It is a Wednesday, less than two weeks from election day, and all three Democrats are on the air, beginning at dawn.

Checchi is urging viewers in San Diego to read his "bold plan" for the future, contained in a new booklet he has published.

California Lt. Gov. Gray Davis (D) talks with a volunteer at a veterans center in Sacramento. (AP)

Lt. Gov. Gray Davis (D), the front-runner in the polls, assures voters getting ready for work in Fresno that he has the experience "money can't buy," a dig at Checchi and a reference to his 23 years of mostly invisible public service.

And Harman promises viewers in Sacramento that she'll be "putting people ahead of insurance company profits" and that every woman has a right to have a gynecologist as her primary physician, an obvious plea toward female voters, who have often tilted elections here.

This one Wednesday (May 20), the last for which complete tallies could be acquired will cost the three major Democratic candidates an estimated $806,000 in television time.

The lone Republican, Attorney General Dan Lungren, will also spend about $91,000 on this day, in fact, he does not need to spend a dime. In California's new "blanket" primary, voters can cross party lines to vote for any candidate, with the top Republican and top Democrat facing each other in the general election this November. Lungren is the de facto GOP nominee. So why is he advertising? Because the Democrats are. "If you're not up on TV," explained Harman's campaign manager, "you don't really exist."

Running an effective air war is both art and science. Television is divided into "day parts," known in the business as early morning, daytime, early fringe, early news, prime access, prime time, late news and late fringe.

Each day part has its demographic, and much is known, in tremendous detail – show by show – to researchers at A.C. Nielsen Co. and other marketing companies about the average viewer at any time, for any program. Not only is gender, income and race of likely viewers contained within the marketing books, it is possible to know, for any given minute of television in any major market, how many viewers are likely to snowboard, drink fine wines, gamble or go to church on Sunday. While any demographic can be good, the campaigns focus a lot of attention around news programs, for the simple reason that viewers who watch them are the most likely to vote.

From this wealth of information, the "buyers" at the campaigns make their picks. Want stay-at-home moms anxious about health care? Or seniors? Blacks? The rich, the poor? Spanish speakers? The buyers know it is a matter of placing the candidate's advertisements on "Hard Copy" or "Jeopardy," "Fresh Prince of Bel-Air" or "Sonny & Me: Cher Remembers."

The buyers are given three basic parameters by the campaigns: how much money the candidate has in a given week, what their "traffic" or rotation of ads should be, and who they want to reach – the "targets." The data goes into some marketing software and out comes a proposed buy. Then it's to the telephones to place the buys and negotiate the "most-favored" rates, which the stations do not have to provide to candidates until 45 days before a primary.

The campaign's media consultants provide the poll-tested 30-second spots – about gun control or HMOs or endorsements. Among the three Democrats, there is not much that separates their positions. It is all a difference in style. In a nutshell, Harman is a woman who cares about health care and gun control; Checchi is a businessman with a bold plan who cares about education; and Davis is the experienced leader who's "been there fighting on the right side – and always on our side."

Lungren, as befits a Republican attorney general, tells viewers that "character is defined as doing what's right when no one's looking." He also reminds the audience, in another spot, that he executed a child murderer, but "it's not something I enjoy."

With recent Field Polls reporting that many viewers say they are turned off by negative advertisements, the campaigns have mostly pulled their attack spots. It may not be, however, that they curtailed them to be nice. The attacks may have already done as much good as they could, and it was time to go positive.

The coins of the realm here are "gross rating points," established by the station's Nielsen ratings. The evening news may have 15 gross rating points, meaning that 15 percent of the TV audience with their sets on will see that advertisement. The final episode of "Seinfeld" or the Super Bowl would have four times that much. Huge numbers.

It was traditionally believed that 100 gross rating points guarantees that any one viewer will see an advertisement one time. But the remote – and its insidious "mute" button – changed all that. For Coke, Nike, the Miracle Mop and candidates.

And political ads are the most likely to incite the finger poised over the remote to start punching the buttons.

Michael Powell, Checchi's campaign director, said, "now you generally go up six, seven, 10 times." Or more. Checchi appears to be buying 2,000 gross rating points a week. That is presenting any one ad to any one viewer 20 times. That is why there are so many ads. Because if a candidate has the money, TV can deliver the market.

The problem is not just the candidates' mostly bland advertisements. It is that now there is so much "clutter," so many political spots jamming the dial, not just for the governor's race, but for every other race, local and statewide, in California, as well as the barrage of spots over hard-fought propositions dealing with bilingual education and the use of union dues in political campaigns.

"It is getting harder and harder to be heard," said Gary South, political director for the Davis campaign.

There are five major markets in California: Los Angeles, San Francisco, Sacramento, San Diego and Fresno, plus the Spanish-language stations, upon which all the campaigns are running ads targeted at Latinos. Some of the campaigns, too, are also investing heavily in the "down-markets" based around Chico, Palm Springs, Santa Barbara, El Centro, Monterey and Eureka. Checchi's campaign manager said, "It's a whole new era. We're in markets nobody's ever been in [for a statewide race]."

Sometimes, when a candidate is especially strong in a given market, is possible to "cheat" as media consultants put it, by buying less there. But nobody is cheating in this governor's race. They are buying almost every spot that is available.