As the 2024 presidential election enters its final phase, the financial strategies of both campaigns offer a clear view of where the real battleground lies: in media spending. A glance at federal election spending reports reveals the key to each campaign’s strategy. Both Kamala Harris on the Democratic side and Donald Trump on the Republican side are prioritising paid media above all else, turning their campaigns into high-stakes advertising wars.
For Harris’ campaign, media dominance is evident. According to the Federal Election Commission’s reports, 28 of the 30 most significant expenses from her campaign are directly related to media buys and production. Trump’s campaign mirrors this strategy, with 20 of its top 30 expenditures also dedicated to paid media and mailers. Instead of focusing on door-to-door outreach or grassroots organising, both campaigns are opting to connect with voters through the screens that occupy their daily lives.
This trend is about to intensify in key swing states, where nearly half a billion dollars will be poured into advertising in the lead-up to Election Day. Harris and her allies have already committed more than $330 million to television and radio ads over the next seven weeks. Trump’s campaign, while lagging slightly behind in fundraising, has still earmarked just under $200 million for the same purpose. Harris’ advantage isn’t solely due to her fundraising prowess but also thanks to early ad buys by the now-defunct Biden campaign, securing critical airtime well in advance while Trump’s campaign was still dealing with hefty legal expenses.
This focus on media spending is not unique to the presidential race. Across the board, in down-ballot races for the House and Senate, media buys dominate campaign budgets. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, 30% of all campaign spending is funnelled into paid media, with an additional 16% devoted to fundraising efforts. The remainder is split among campaign salaries, logistics, research, and other operational costs, underscoring that political campaigns today are primarily shaped by their media presence.
Despite the traditional emphasis on rallies, field offices, and phone banks, modern campaigns increasingly recognise that elections are won or lost in the media landscape. The belief that door-knocking campaigns are crucial has taken a backseat to securing prime ad slots on popular shows or pre-roll ads on YouTube videos. This media-first approach is considered far more impactful than the field strategies developed in local campaign offices.
With both candidates having their fair share of candid and unpredictable moments in the past, the polished format of a structured and well-thought-out televised ad campaign is understandably very appealing. However, with every aspect of their presentation curated and re-cut, the authenticity of political discourse becomes questionable.
All this being said, advertising is not the sole focus. Vast sums are still being spent on campaign infrastructure, including staff salaries, real estate, and data analytics. Campaigns are now more data-driven than ever, with teams relying heavily on analytics to ensure their messaging is targeted and effective. Without robust data, even the most expensive ads could fall flat, failing to sway the voters they aim to reach.
In the end, though, both the Harris and Trump campaigns are dedicating significant resources to crafting, producing, and airing the ads that will saturate the airwaves in the coming weeks. This media arms race defines the state of democracy in 2024, where the candidates’ success is measured not by grassroots engagement but by the reach and resonance of their carefully scripted media campaigns.
