COMM 386: READING ASSIGNMENT ALERT! This story on media, government and campaign ads has (almost) got our name on it.

Howard Kurtz, media writer for The Washington Post, has this analysis of campaign ads in tomorrow's paper. It goes back through the year, examines the two presidential campaigns' spending and the ads' effectiveness. It covers a lot of ground in relatively little space, and I think we ought to be familiar with it as we look at the last weeks of the campaign.

One unanticipated conclusion, toward the end of the story, is that positive ads work. Obama is running a lot of them in battleground states, and Kurtz suggests they're having an effect:

Strategists could think of only two commercials this year that had a significant impact on the campaign dialogue. One was Hillary Rodham Clinton's "3 a.m." ad, which questioned Obama's readiness to handle an emergency phone call, and the other was McCain's spot likening Obama to Paris Hilton, which triggered a debate over the celebrity aspects of his candidacy.

But while positive spots are often deemed less newsworthy, a sustained campaign can yield results over time. Devine said Obama's lead in battleground states where he has advertised heavily is greater than in states where he has been on the air less often. In one recent ad, Obama talks about the values instilled by his mother and grandparents.

It's worth thinking about. And talking about. And blogging about, if you get my drift.