Is placing the same USA Today Ad in our local newspaper cost effective?

[MedicSean37]

I just did a price check for placing the same ad (full page) in my local paper. It goes out to approx 40,000 people. The cost was 778.74 for one day. This is in TN. Is this cost effective?

[skiingff]

Yes, that's a pretty good rate.

USA Today is a horrible newspaper, they grossly inflate their circulation numbers by including free copies given out to hotels, even if no one's staying in the room; restaurants, and where ever else they can contract with to boost their circulation #s.

[Menthol Patch]

If anyone uses this ad in their newspaper I would urge them to use the first version. The second version is gutted and watered down.

[aroberso]

I'd consider doing this in my local paper as well.

[LibertyEagle]

If anyone uses this ad in their newspaper I would urge them to use the first version. The second version is gutted and watered down.

Maybe a split between the two, would be the best. Some of the changes were good ones, IMO. But, I do agree that it has been watered down a bit too much.

[skiingff]

Would any of you consider doing this in Iowa, or New Hampshire?

That would be better than Dickson, TN or Oklahoma.

[Cindy]

Would any of you consider doing this in Iowa, or New Hampshire?

That would be better than Dickson, TN or Oklahoma.

Iowa between the two as he is lower in the polls there.

I still highly encourage this sort of activity elsewhere as Paul needs to be doing better in national polls as well, to be getting more credibility with the media and voting population, that he is a viable candidate with a chance of winning.

Go for it in TN, and Iowa , start a chip in for it!!!!! Meetups should start chip-ins to run this Ad in all of their local newspapers.

I'm making copies of it to pass out at the Freedom Rally in Clearwater Florida this weekend.

[Menthol Patch]

Maybe a split between the two, would be the best. Some of the changes were good ones, IMO. But, I do agree that it has been watered down a bit too much.

It has been watered down a LOT!

If we are willing to water down our message and speaking anything less than the absolute truth then we are no different than the Republicans and Democrats. They change their words, platforms, and message all the time depending upon which way the political wind is shifting.

We need to speak boldly, truthfully, and always spread the same UNFILTERED message!

[Energy]

Let's chip in for Iowa and New Hampshire newspapers for maximum effective and return on investment. They can slingshot Paul into prominence.

[Furis]

Would any of you consider doing this in Iowa, or New Hampshire?

That would be better than Dickson, TN or Oklahoma.

I'm having someone contact the news papers in my home county about cost.

My home county only has 7,400 people in it though (that includes children).

[frasu]

This is more of a question for people around NY... There are 2 free newspapers that are getting distributed every day in busy points of Manhattan: AM New York, and Metro... Is it worth trying to advertise in those newspapers? A lot of people pick it up, mainly because is free, and they might have decent pricing...

[Energy]

This is more of a question for people around NY... There are 2 free newspapers that are getting distributed every day in busy points of Manhattan: AM New York, and Metro... Is it worth trying to advertise in those newspapers? A lot of people pick it up, mainly because is free, and they might have decent pricing...

I think any exposure is a good thing. If it informs even just a handful, they tell their friends/family, and so on. Try anything as we're in the fight of our lives.

[krott5333]

sounds like a great rate to me.

the Erie paper probably sees 100k a day, and they charge about $7000!

[manny]

So long as llepard is cool with people using his ad, I think it's an excellent idea for it to be used elsewhere. Especially in smaller/local newspapers which are easier to fund, perhaps through chip-in or meetup groups.

Btw, I prefer the second, updated and - to many people here - tamer version. Remember, the hope is that it will be read by people who aren't massively into libertarianism, have never heard of Hayek or Rothbard and have been conditioned to disbelieve anything politicans say that sounds too good. Come on too strong and they might get scared away. Using more moderate language is not the same as watering down the message, just trying to keep the readers who have a half-way open mind and get them to follow the links/'phone numbers and then end up feeling the way we all do. Either version is still far more radical than any other candidate would dare think/say/endorse or even have their supporters thinking. Just my 2 cents!

[MedicSean37]

If I start a chipin, I'm I allowed to post it here?

[aknappjr]

No. Its not a persuasive ad. You might get the "constitution-buff" vote, but that's less than 1%. The ad does a very poor job of appealing to voters. We don't have the money nor time to "teach" everyone in America (or at least the 50 million voters necessary) the Constitution and how important it is. We do have time to tell them that Dr. Paul
1. Is consistent and experienced
2. Is a traditional Republican (fiscal conservative, traditional Republican foreign policy of no nation building)
3. Is popular - wins money and straw polls

[krott5333]

No. Its not a persuasive ad. You might get the "constitution-buff" vote, but that's less than 1%. The ad does a very poor job of appealing to voters. We don't have the money nor time to "teach" everyone in America (or at least the 50 million voters necessary) the Constitution and how important it is. We do have time to tell them that Dr. Paul
1. Is consistent and experienced
2. Is a traditional Republican (fiscal conservative, traditional Republican foreign policy of no nation building)
3. Is popular - wins money and straw polls

I think you're wrong. People have a feeling that something is wrong with our country today, but its a subconscious feeling. Such an ad brings it out, and realizes the corruption of our current federal government.

[aknappjr]

The ad is targeting the 1% of the country who, like us, care and believe strongly that the constitution should be followed.

The ad is quite ineffective at targeting the 25% or so that vote in Republican primaries.

Just think: would the $100K or whatever the ad costs be better spent targeting voters in New Hampshire and Iowa and buying local media there (targeting Dr. Paul's immigration policy in Iowa and his traditional Republican values in New Hampshire), or more effective in USA Today targeting the 1% or 5% of the country who feel strongly that the founding fathers were right.

I'm all for spending big money supporting Paul (for those who have it), but its a question of efficacy. The ad is simply ineffective at the next goal in our campaign - to increase polling numbers (to be considered viable in the MSM).