On September 10, the progressive state blog MN Publius broke a story about Republican Senator Norm Coleman failing to comply fully with the Stand By Your Ad provision of the McCain-Feingold Act. In an attack ad against challenger Al Franken, Coleman’s media team had failed to include his image for the requisite four seconds to denote that Coleman was responsible for the ad. By September 14, the Washington Post reported that three more Republican Senate candidates were being challenged for similar infractions.

Now, in a Leftmost Bit exclusive, it appears that the McCain campaign has also failed to comply:

U.S. Code Title 47,315, which describes how a federal campaign qualifies for lower TV advertising rates, states the following:

(C) Television broadcasts

A candidate meets the requirements of this subparagraph if, in the case of a television broadcast, at the end of such broadcast there appears simultaneously, for a period no less than 4 seconds –

(i) a clearly identifiable photographic or similar image of the candidate; and

(ii) a clearly readable printed statement, identifying the candidate and stating that the candidate has approved the broadcast and that the candidate’s authorized committee paid for the broadcast.

While the “Paid for by… Approved by…” language is on screen for four seconds, McCain’s image is only on screen for about 2 and a half. It’s the same mistake the Coleman campaign made. Interestingly, the Obama campaign complies with the four second requirement by putting a thumbnail image of Obama next to the “Approved by” disclaimer as it runs at the end of a spot:

Now here’s where it gets murky: The original text of McCain-Feingold only required the printed disclaimer to appear for four seconds, but not the candidate’s image:

a statement that identifies the candidate and states that the candidate has approved the communication. Such statement—

(i) shall be conveyed by—

(I) an unobscured, full-screen view of the candidate making the statement, or
(II) the candidate in voice-over, accompanied by a clearly identifiable photographic or similar image of the candidate; and

(ii) shall also appear in writing at the end of the communication in a clearly readable manner with a reasonable degree of color contrast between the background and the printed statement, for a period of at least 4 seconds.

I’m no lawyer, but I believe that in cases where one wording is more precise than the other, the more precise wording is what counts. So while the McCain campaign may not have directly violated the original wording, they did violate the requirements necessary to the receive the discounted TV ad rate (four seconds of both the text and the candidate’s picture).

Is any of this a big deal? No, not really. The spirit of the law was followed, even if the execution was careless. But this incident does reinforce the notion that in today’s YouTube era of politics, every word a candidate speaks and every second of video a campaign puts out can be scrutinized endlessly by the masses. Everyone’s watching all the time. Let’s just hope we don’t come across any wardrobe malfunctions.

Sen. John McCain’s Friday announcement of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate has made waves throughout the country, and particularly on the left and right blogospheres. Because Sarah Palin is such an unknown, and because the Republican Party will attempt to use this week to introduce Sarah Palin to the country, I think right now is the perfect opportunity to define her in the minds of Democrats and independents, those who may be swayed by the presence of a woman and a second so-called “maverick” on the Republican ticket.

And so, I’m announcing the launch of the tiniest of nanosites in Defining Sarah Palin.

I quickly threw the site together in about three hours over Labor Day weekend, using it as an excuse to learn jQuery, a Javascript framework. Granted, on a technical level, the use of jQuery isn’t all that impressive. The name and design of the site were inspired by the recent movie Forgetting Sarah Marshall.

If you’re on my side ideologically, I encourage you to spread the word, and maybe even contribute some of your own definitions in the comments or on Twitter.