Perhaps campaign advertising should contain a simple warning: The following may contain falsehoods or misleading assertions amid kernels of truth.
As the end of this year's election season nears, the proliferation of advertising for and against proposed issues and candidates inevitably delivers a reminder that voters really need to examine those ads carefully.
The same goes for candidates who approve the messages they put out there. Candidates best understand the full impact of the messages they're delivering.
The latter is particularly true when the best-financed candidate in the state's highest profile race has opted to do most of her communicating with voters through paid messaging.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the daughter of a former governor and protégé of Donald Trump, put up an ad early in her campaign that galled a lot of people, especially the teachers -- past and present -- of Arkansas.
Here's how the ad begins:
"When I'm governor, we will educate kids, not indoctrinate them. And we will prepare students for the workforce, not government dependency."
Understand that absolutely all candidates for governor include a pro-education plank in their respective platforms.
They don't usually do what Sanders did, using a broad brush to malign Arkansas educators as indoctrinating, rather than teaching, their students. Or of having low expectations and goals for the children in their care.
Teachers or parents -- really anyone who appreciates what Arkansas teachers do for the children of this state -- had to hear the rankling insult Sanders delivered.
Someone must have let Sanders know how that ad hit the state's underpaid, overloaded teaching corps. She offended a lot of people, people who vote.
Nevertheless, she has continued with the insulting message, repeating it in her campaign literature and in advertising right up to the end of the campaign.
Sanders, the Republican nominee, faces Democratic nominee Chris Jones and Libertarian Ricky Dale Harrington in next week's general election for governor.
A recent poll showed her with a 10-point lead over Jones, who is an impressive challenger but less well known and with far less funding for his campaign. Harrington came in a distant third in the polling.
Sanders consequently remains the leading candidate and will likely be the next governor.
Among her first challenges will be repairing relations with the state's teachers, but it's a bed of her own making.
•••
Equally galling is the simplistic advertising touting certain ballot issues.
This year's heavily financed campaign for Issue 4, which will legalize recreational marijuana in Arkansas, is the worst offender when it comes to misleading information.
The ever-present ads for Issue 4 are a mix of truth and less-than-full disclosure.
This is an extraordinarily long amendment, one that really requires reading more than just the name and title that will be on the ballot.
The proposed amendment itself is more than 2,800 words long, not one word of which can be altered except by another constitutional amendment approved by the people. The Legislature is specifically prohibited from changing anything in Issue 4.
It is impossible to explain fully any complex issue in a brief ad, as a review of any election's issue campaigns will confirm. But the promoters pick and choose what to emphasize and ought to get that part right.
Consider the advertising emphasis on how law enforcement will benefit from the legalization of recreational, or adult-use, marijuana.
The Issue 4 ads talk about "millions" more in revenue for law enforcement, "safer streets" and such. The impression they leave is that the money will be going to police agencies.
It won't. It would instead go directly to qualifying police officers, if this amendment is approved.
What it actually promises is that certified police officers in Arkansas will split 15 percent of the proceeds from a required 10 percent supplemental sales tax levy on retail cannabis sales for adult use.
The amendment directs that portion of the tax proceeds be used "to fund an annual stipend to all full-time law enforcement officers certified by the Commission on Law Enforcement Standards and Training and in good standing."
What we're talking about here is a direct bonus for every full-time law enforcement officer in good standing.
What's more, the amount of the stipend will increase through the years as the market for recreational marijuana grows.
Obviously, it is also a way for promoters of Issue 4 to discourage law enforcement officers from objecting to legalization of adult-use marijuana.
As a former law enforcement officer says in one ad, "The best part is (Issue 4) will bring millions in new police funding from here on out."
He doesn't explain where the promised money will go. The amendment does.
The state Department of Finance and Administration will establish eligibility and distribute available funds in equal shares to all eligible officers.
No one should begrudge raises for deserving law enforcement officers, but is this micromanagement from within the state constitution the way to get them or to give them?
The problem here is with the way the new funding for police is presented in the ads for Issue 4. They don't really tell voters what is being proposed, only that money -- and a lot of it -- will flow to law enforcement. Voters are led to imagine how it will be used. If the amendment is passed, law enforcement agencies will still have a lot of needs, maybe even more pressing, that none of this money will fund.
There could be budget chaos in city halls, county courthouses and the statehouse, too, if Issue 4 passes, which seems likely.
For the record, this law enforcement funding issue is hardly the most concerning of provisions in Issue 4. Arkansas voters really need to wait for a better proposal to legalize recreational marijuana.
And, while they're at it, they should reject the other three amendments proposed this year. None need to be added to the state constitution.