Editor,
Joel Hobbs' letter on Friday made an intriguing point about the recent campaigns of Rep. Heather Wilson and Attorney General Patricia Madrid. After viewing many commercials steeped in flashy colors, pictures of contorted faces, out-of-context information, deeply serious narrative voices, poor attempts at subliminal messaging and little to absolutely no factual basis for claims, I also have opinions about the campaign methods in the race for New Mexico's 1st Congressional District.
It is unwise to base voting decisions off of 30 seconds of repeated commercials designed purely for emotional stimulation. Hobbs presents a good point, calling for voters to do their own research and consider facts instead, but he uses the same tactic as campaign ads, stating facts without providing evidence or the proper context.
When making statements for arguments, the presentation of evidence remains critical, even within an opinion letter. Hobbs claimed that Madrid's attack advertisements were more trustworthy than Wilson's stating, "I'm sure Madrid has run ads, but I've rarely seen them, and the ones I've seen are generally less deceptive." Without evidence, there remains no reason to believe that Madrid's commercials are any less deceptive than Wilson's. Evidence that shows not only discrepancy between Wilson's assertions and reality but also proves the truthfulness of Madrid's advertisements would be helpful in this situation.
Hobbs creates a menacing view of Wilson by claiming that most of the negative ads are her doing. People may disagree with that statement and say that the candidates have been meeting each other's ads shot for shot, but Hobbs provides no numbers, nor does he compare the total airtime of Wilson's commercials to dispute this possible disagreement. Hobbs' lack of evidence places a great strain on his argument, and he later pulls information out of context to make a point.
When Hobbs referenced Wilson as receiving $47,000 from companies which profit from the sale of pornography, he failed to mention that the report by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington which he referenced only lists companies such as Holiday Inn, Marriott International and Comcast Corporation, which inevitably provide pornography to their customers, as those customers buy entertainment through their cable and hotel rooms.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
By removing this information from context, Hobbs tries to convince readers that Wilson is hypocritical and corrupt, litigating as her puppeteer lobbyists desire. Without the specifics of content and context, well-known and reputable companies such as Comcast or the Marriott suddenly become pornography dealers.
Hobbs writes a good letter, and he's entitled to his opinions. But providing such bold claims without any evidence is irresponsible. It's good to follow Hobbs' advice and do the research, but it's bad to follow his example - opinions should be founded on well-explored evidence.
David Funnell
UNM student
