negative campaigning

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "negative campaigning" is correct and usable in written English.
It is typically used in the context of political campaigns to describe tactics that focus on criticizing an opponent rather than promoting one's own policies or qualifications. Example: "The election was marred by negative campaigning, with both candidates resorting to personal attacks instead of discussing their platforms."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNING Yeltsin, having decided to run, had to pull off the trick of winning.

The New Yorker

So is negative campaigning.

The New Yorker

Negative campaigning is not informative.

The New York Times

Leaders don't like negative campaigning.

The Guardian

The negative campaigning will continue".

The New York Times

"Negative campaigning never, ever works.

The Guardian

A.V discourages scorched-earth negative campaigning.

The New Yorker

The aim was to discourage negative campaigning.

University of California, Berkeley

The barbs over negative campaigning receded.

The New York Times

"Apparently, negative campaigning works," he said angrily.

The New York Times

Davis is known for his negative campaigning.

The Guardian

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Consider the ethical implications of using or discussing "negative campaigning". Acknowledge the potential for such tactics to mislead or discourage voters.

Common error

Avoid using "negative campaigning" as a catch-all term for any criticism in politics. Focus on instances where the primary goal is to damage an opponent's reputation rather than to debate policy.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "negative campaigning" functions primarily as a noun phrase. It names a specific type of political activity focused on criticizing opponents. As Ludwig AI pointed out, it's a usable phrase in written English.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

98%

Formal & Business

1%

Academia

1%

Less common in

Science

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "negative campaigning" is a common and grammatically correct term used to describe political tactics that focus on criticizing opponents rather than promoting one's own policies. As Ludwig AI confirms, this phrase is widely used, particularly in news and media contexts. While its effectiveness is debated, it's crucial to use the term accurately, specifying the tactics involved and considering the ethical implications. Alternatives like "attack ads" or "smear campaign" can provide more specific nuances. Avoiding overgeneralization and focusing on the intent to damage an opponent's reputation are key to using the phrase appropriately.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

attack ads

Focuses on the specific form of negative campaigning through advertisements.

negative advertising

Similar to attack ads, but emphasizes the advertising aspect.

smear campaign

Emphasizes the intention to damage the reputation of an opponent.

mudslinging

Highlights the use of scandalous or abusive allegations.

critical campaigning

Focuses on criticizing opponents rather than promoting one's own policies.

political attacks

A broader term encompassing various forms of negative strategies.

aggressive campaigning

Describes the intensity of the campaign, which may include negative tactics.

opposition research

Refers to the investigation into an opponent's background and vulnerabilities.

dirty tricks

Implies the use of underhanded or unethical tactics.

character assassination

Specifically targets the reputation and integrity of an individual.

FAQs

What are some alternatives to "negative campaigning"?

You can use alternatives like "attack ads", "smear campaign", or "mudslinging" depending on the specific context.

Is "negative campaigning" effective?

The effectiveness of "negative campaigning" is debated. Some studies suggest it can depress voter turnout or backfire, while others indicate it can be a successful strategy for swaying public opinion.

What ethical considerations are involved in "negative campaigning"?

"Negative campaigning" raises ethical concerns about honesty, fairness, and the potential to distort an opponent's record or views. It can also contribute to political polarization and cynicism.

How does "negative campaigning" differ from legitimate criticism?

"Negative campaigning" often involves personal attacks, distortions, or exaggerations, while legitimate criticism focuses on policy differences, qualifications, or track records.