Digital platforms are eager to offer guidance. Platform reps regularly share best practices, creative recommendations, and optimization frameworks designed to improve performance. For many political agencies, these suggestions become default strategy.
The problem is that most platform best practices are not built for political campaigns. They are built for commercial advertisers with long timelines, stable messaging, and transactional goals. When agencies apply them uncritically to politics, performance may improve in the short term—but strategic effectiveness often suffers.
Platform recommendations are designed to maximize on-platform behavior. Likes, clicks, shares, and watch time are valuable signals for algorithms, but they are not reliable indicators of persuasion or turnout.
Political campaigns care about outcomes that platforms cannot fully measure:
Vote choice
Voter confidence
Turnout behavior
Agencies that optimize exclusively around platform metrics risk mistaking activity for impact. High engagement does not necessarily translate into votes.
Commercial best practices assume time for learning. Political campaigns rarely have that luxury. Testing frameworks that require weeks of optimization may be irrelevant when messaging windows last days.
Agencies following platform playbooks too closely often over-test and under-commit. By the time “winning” creative is identified, the moment has passed. In politics, timing frequently matters more than statistical confidence.
Decisiveness is often a better strategy than perpetual experimentation.
Platform best practices tend to push creative toward uniformity. Shorter videos, similar hooks, familiar formats. While this may improve delivery efficiency, it also creates a sea of sameness.
Political campaigns pay a price for blending in. Voters exposed to dozens of nearly identical ads struggle to remember who said what. Distinctiveness—tone, framing, and voice—matters more in politics than in most commercial categories.
Agencies that blindly follow creative guidelines risk eroding brand identity in exchange for marginal performance gains.
Platforms often encourage higher frequency as a path to efficiency. In political advertising, excessive repetition can quickly become counterproductive. Voters are more sensitive to message fatigue and more likely to react negatively when ads feel overwhelming or repetitive.
Agencies must actively manage frequency with voter psychology in mind, not just cost-per-result targets. Sometimes spending less preserves more goodwill.
The most effective agencies treat platform guidance as information, not direction. Best practices can inform tactical decisions, but they should never override campaign strategy.
Agencies that perform best typically:
Use platform recommendations selectively
Adapt them to campaign timelines and goals
Override them when they conflict with message discipline
Strategic judgment remains more important than algorithmic preference.
The biggest mistake agencies make is forgetting that political campaigns are not selling products. They are asking for trust, belief, and participation. The emotional and psychological dynamics are different.
What works for e-commerce does not always work for civic decision-making. Agencies that understand this distinction are better positioned to advise clients and protect campaign integrity.
As political advertising continues to evolve, agencies must redefine their relationship with platforms. Collaboration is useful, but deference is dangerous.
The most successful agencies understand how platforms work without surrendering strategic control to them. They balance performance with purpose, efficiency with identity, and optimization with restraint.
In politics, best practices are not rules. They are starting points. Agencies that remember that will continue to deliver results—without losing sight of what campaigns actually need to win.