Ad watch: Pepper's 'Only'

AD: "Only," a 30-second ad for David Pepper for Cincinnati mayor. Started Friday. Produced by the Campaign Group, Philadelphia, Penn.

SCRIPT: "Mark Mallory's ads are misleading. The facts? The police said no to Mallory because he embraced the support of an anti-police hate group. The Post said no to Mallory, and has criticized his proposal to have the mayor take over the schools. The Enquirer said no to Mallory because he opposed key changes at City Hall. We need a mayor ready to change City Hall. That's why only one candidate is endorsed by police, firefighters, the Enquirer and the Post. David Pepper."

VISUALS: The ad uses newspaper clippings, the Fraternal order of Police logo and repeated use of the text "The facts: No to Mallory" as the announcer cites each endorsement.

FACT CHECK: This ad is a direct response to Mallory's one and only television ad of the campaign, in which he touts endorsements from "police, firefighters, labor and business groups." Mallory's ad clearly showed his authority for those statements -- endorsements by the Sentinel Police Association and the African-American Firefighters Association, among others. Mallory also touted an Enquirer endorsement from the primary election complimenting his leadership. But Pepper has the endorsements of the two officially recognized police and fire labor unions, the Fraternal Order of Police Queen City Lodge No. 69 and the Cincinnati Fire Fighters Union Local 48, as well as the city's two daily newspapers.

"Misleading" is one of those words politicians use when they want to question the veracity of their opponent's statements while stopping short calling out a lie. So by calling Mallory's ad misleading, Pepper acknowledges that its statements are technically true.

So where's the line between truthful and misleading? The Ohio Supreme Court has held that a judicial candidate who claimed to have been endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police -- when in fact only one lodge supported her -- "while technically true, was misleading and deceiving." But the Supreme Court ruling made clear that the judicial candidate would have been in the clear if the ad disclosed which police group supported her -- which Mallory's ad did.

STRATEGY: Most modern political campaigns in the television age follow a predictable arc: First, the "warm-and-fuzzy" ads meant to introduce the candidate to voters. Then, beat up on your opponent with negative ads for a few weeks. Finally, return to the warm-and-fuzzies, touting your endorsements. Pepper was well into step three this week when he reversed course and went back to step two. This is one of two "closer" ads by the Pepper campaign that will run up to Election Day; the other touts Pepper's endorsements in a more positive way.

RESPONSE: "This is another divisive tactic by a desperate campaign," said Mallory Communications Director Jason Barron. "David Pepper is losing because he has run nothing but negative ads since the primary. Now he is so desperate that he is attacking our positive commercial. Pepper has taken the chaos from city hall and brought it to the campaign trail."