Public service announcements or propaganda? Experts weigh in on new Trump ads

Weeks before the midterm elections, the Trump administration released a series of taxpayer-funded ads prominently featuring President Donald Trump promoting his agenda, and Democratic lawmakers called them illegal propaganda.

One of the ads plays black-and-white footage of Trump with a voiceover of him saying, “Together we will defeat communism, socialism and Marxism in America.” Photos of him as president and during the 2024 campaign flash onscreen as the song “Love Me,” by JMSN plays in the background. This ad aired Sept. 23 on Fox News and Newsmax, Politico reported.

A group of Democratic lawmakers wrote a Sept. 24 letter to Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff, saying the ad violates federal law and should be taken off the air.

“This is the sort of government propaganda one might expect in North Korea, not the United States of America, and it is an egregious and illegal misuse of Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars,” the letter said.

“This is the final battle,” Trump said in another ad. “With you at my side we will demolish the deep state” and “expel the warmongers from our government.” 

A third ad is a minute-long clip of him speaking at Mount Rushmore in July for the 250th celebration of the country’s independence, praising the U.S. as “the most successful, most accomplished, most exceptional nation ever to exist in human history.” 

“Paid for by the U.S. government,” text on the ads say.

The New York Times reported that more than $1 million likely has been spent on airing the ads, according to an estimate from AdImpact, an ad tracking service. It’s unclear which government agency is paying.

The White House defended the videos, saying they are not campaign ads but public service announcements and past administrations have similarly used PSAs “to explain policy and make the case for the nation’s direction.” It compared Trump’s videos with President George W. Bush’s national television campaign about Medicare; an Obama administration national ad to promote Affordable Care Act subsidies; and a Biden-era ad to encourage COVID-19 vaccination. 

But experts in campaign and government law told PolitiFact they aren’t convinced the Trump ads are public service announcements.

Experts express doubt about the ads

Trump’s ads don’t inform citizens about how to access, benefit from or understand government programs, which is what differentiates public announcements from campaign ads, said Samuel Bagenstos, a University of Michigan law professor. 

“By paying for the ads with government funds, the Trump Administration is violating the statute imposing a government-wide prohibition on using federal funds to pay for ‘publicity or propaganda,’” Bagenstos said. “It’s basically impossible to come up with a respectable argument to the contrary. All these ads do is aggrandize Donald Trump.”

Federal law does not define “publicity or propaganda” but the phrase is included in the omnibus appropriations bills Congress passes every year. Without a definition for the phrase, the Government Accountability Office says it has identified three activities banned by the publicity or propaganda prohibition: self-aggrandizement, covert propaganda and purely partisan materials.

Brett Kappel, an attorney and expert on government ethics law, also doesn’t think the Trump ads qualify as PSAs.

Kappel said whether the ads are illegal depends on which federal agency’s money is being used and whether the appropriations legislation for that agency prohibits using appropriated funds for “publicity or propaganda.”

One ad is repurposed from 2024 campaign

The black and white “Final Battle,” ad, which features Trump walking toward the camera, aired Sept. 26 and 27 during football games and TV programs. It isn’t new. Trump released nearly identical ads in January 2024 and October 2024 during his presidential campaign. The 2024 ads ended with a call to text or vote for Trump. 

The Hatch Act limits certain political activities of federal employees. Whether the ads violate that law is harder to prove since Trump is not a candidate for the midterm elections, even though his party has much at stake, Bagenstos said. 

For the Hatch Act, the key issue is whether these ads constitute “propaganda,” a term that is not defined in the law, said Stanley Brand, a Penn State Dickinson Law distinguished fellow in law and government. 

As a practical matter, with the Trump administration in charge of enforcing the laws, including the Hatch Act, there’s little to no likelihood of enforcement, experts said.

PolitiFact Researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report.