It’s easy to tell it’s University Students’ Council election time even if you have no interest in student politics — the signs crop up on University College Hill, you are likely bombarded with Facebook group invites and it suddenly seems everyone has a colourful tag attached to their knapsack.

Third-year kinesiology student Omid Azami calls himself a casual observer when it comes to student elections. “I basically vote for the person’s campaign that annoys me the least,” he says.

But sometimes it’s easy to get caught up in all the media campaign hype — it’s fun to watch the presidential candidate’s YouTube videos, if for no other reason than to see if someone can top current USC president Emily Rowe’s “Boom De Ya Da” video from last year. But what effects do these media strategies have, other than providing a distraction for a couple of weeks?

Patty Pakvis, a sociology professor at King’s and Brescia university colleges, thinks candidates should focus more on being professional instead of relying on gimmicks to grab students’ attention.

Candidates need to work extra hard to get noticed among a demographic that is notoriously targeted by consumer advertisements.

“We are exposed to anywhere between 1,500 and 3,000 advertising messages a day,” Pakvis says. “Any advertising campaign will need something very special or particularly attention-grabbing to break through the clutter.”

It seems campaign videos have become the latest attention-grabbing medium — but how effective are they, really?

According to political science professor Cameron Anderson, videos are probably less valuable in attracting voters this year.

“Given the fact that all the candidates have a video, the effects of that video are minimized because all of them have something,” he says. “Now, if one of them has a video that’s remarkable and worthy of talking about — the must-see video — then perhaps that might generate interest around that particular candidate.”

For many, no candidate has achieved the same effect Rowe did with her video last year.

“I’m not sure any one candidate this year would have that cache around a video because all of them are doing it, so the uniqueness of it is sort of lost,” Anderson adds.

The videos, no matter how entertaining they are, really only serve one purpose — to grab attention. Students who care about the election will probably research candidates regardless of the videos.

“I think the student would have to be motivated in the first instance to pursue [a candidate’s platform],” Anderson says. “I’m not sure how many students would be in that position.”

Despite being catchy, this year’s videos say little about candidate’s ideas or platform promises. However, candidate’s personal websites provide an opportunity to learn more — if students take the time to research their vote.

It’s hard to imagine student campaigns without the websites, videos and colourful paraphernalia. While media might get more students interested in elections, there is a point where too much emphasis on aesthetics can detract from the real purpose of the hype — to find a leader for our student body.