​

Where and how Americans get their information continues to change at a velocity that is unprecedented and often hard to fully grasp.  In simple terms, legacy linear corporate media platforms are rapidly giving way to digital ones.  This reality is having profound impacts on the conduct of political campaigns.  In short, getting a message delivered is an entirely new ballgame.  Understanding the new landscape and how to navigate it is not an option for political professionals.  It is step one to be successful.

 

For starters, we can stipulate the role and impact of sources such as daily newspapers and broadcast-cable platforms continue to shrink each and every day.  Even those of us operating in the political realm, with a special interest in current events, seldom watch the Evening News on a traditional broadcast network platform.    In other words, basic arithmetic argues that if you intend to penetrate a given audience, you better be prepared to give priority to the digital universe.

 

When Disney recently decided to prevent the airing of advertisements paid for by the Senate Leadership Fund (SLF—a Republican organization) supporting Republican Senate candidates in Ohio, North Carolina, and Alaska, that was a decision with real impact.  The ads in question highlighted the Democrats’ pro-trans and soft on crime policies.  Disney does not dispute the facts presented.  Instead, they argue these advertisements need to be labeled TV-MA—for mature audiences only.  That results in at least two-thirds of these ads being blocked.

 

Meanwhile, in North Carolina, Hulu has completely blocked another ad narrated by the father of a murdered, college-aged woman from being seen on three-quarters of its programs.

 

These digital platforms are private companies.  Genuine conservatives can decry their decision without demanding the right to tell these progressive platforms what they must and must not allow to be seen.  Frustration over what appears to be the application of inconsistent standards that consistently and constantly favor progressives and Democrats should not translate into abandoning our positions concerning private companies.  We can still get the job done.

 

When legacy linear platforms dominated, there was both a different approach to content itself and to the rules that governed what individual candidates, issues advertisers, and independent expenditure groups could expect. Journalists overwhelmingly prided themselves in being fair to everyone.  Sure, there was bias, but nothing resembling the “protect the narrative-story telling” approach that is in place today.  Candidates were guaranteed equal access to the airwaves.  Content paid for by a candidate could not be blocked on the basis of being untrue or inaccurate.  Issues advertisers and independent expenditure organizations were often required to provide a verification package that substantiated the content was factually accurate.  At the same time, entities regulated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) carefully avoided putting their thumbs on the scale when it came to paid messages being presented to voters by these sources.

 

Now, the lines are more blurred.  To be fair, after the 2020 elections, when digital platforms regularly blocked the ability for conservatives to present their thoughts and ideas, the industry determined that they had to attempt to establish some voluntary standards to avoid government regulation.  As demonstrated in multiple instances, there would appear to be room to dramatically improve those standards and to apply them more consistently and fairly.

 

Additionally, some demand-side platforms (DSPs), made the decision to completely depart the political advertising space, in order to avoid dealing with perceptions of political bias, as well as not desiring to cope with the exposure to congressional oversight.  All of this is to simply say the marketplace for digital political ads, perhaps disproportionately for conservatives, can be tremendously unpredictable.

 

As a conservative, the suggestion is not to put the government (especially the federal government) in charge of some new, massive regulatory regime.  Instead, we believe in allowing private companies to do as they will within existing laws and regulations.  We also believe in being smart and doing what it takes to get our messages delivered to voters.

 

As the founder and managing partner of RYE Digital Strategies, you can understand why we take great pride in getting the job done in this area of placement on behalf of Republican candidates and affiliated organizations.  For the record, while we like to believe we are the best in the business, there are others in this space who feel the same way.  What is important is that placement vendors purposefully deal with different inventory sources for this very reason.  We do just that, so that if one avenue is blocked, we find a new one to put lead on the target.

 

There are only a few options available.  Republicans and conservatives could replace whining with demands for more government regulation.  Yuk! We believe the markets will do a far better job.  We could throw up our hands in surrender, watching ourselves be constantly and consistently blocked by certain platforms, hoping antiquated approaches to message delivery will somehow prevail. Double Yuk!  If we are smart, we will choose a third option—purposefully deal with multiple inventory sources—and keep moving forward.  Count RYE Digital Strategies as a strong voice for this third option.

 

2026-Break Through

10/5/26 2:34 PM   

 

 

 

Joseph Resta is the Founder and Managing Partner of RYE Digital Strategies, a recognized leader in digital placement.  Resta is a seasoned political professional who has served in various roles, including with the RNC, Targeted Victory, and the Presidential Inaugural Committee.