Over the past decade, U.S. political ad spend has grown at a compound annual rate of 8.55%, despite the average number of toss-up elections declining, per data from Cook Political Report.

Why it matters: Spending is not growing because races are becoming more competitive, but because of policies that allow unlimited spending by outside groups, more issue advocacy moving to the states and the rise of digital advertising channels, like streaming.

The big picture: In other Western democracies, such as Canada, New Zealand, France, the U.K. and Australia, caps have dramatically reduced how much outside groups can spend on elections.

• Less deadlocked legislative branches also means issue advocacy marketing often remains more concentrated at the federal level.
• Stronger transparency measures in other countries make it harder for campaigns and outside groups to funnel ad dollars into more obscure digital channels.

The result: Even in the world's largest ad market, the onslaught of political marketing in the U.S. can feel overwhelming to consumers.

• Without adequate transparency measures, dark money groups can more easily influence elections.

By the numbers: U.S. political advertising, which includes cause and appeal messaging, is expected to reach more than $13 billion this cycle, a new midterm record, according to data from WPP Media.

• That figure is slightly larger than estimates from other third parties, such as those from AdImpact, which do not include certain types of ad spend, such as direct mail or print. (AdImpact projects this year's cycle will reach $11.6 billion in political ad spend.)

Stunning stat: The U.S. political ad market this year is bigger than the entire ad markets in countries like Spain and Italy.

The bottom line: The 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court decision that allowed unlimited spending by outside groups on elections certainly paved the way for unprecedented growth, but other political dynamics have also had an impact.

• With Congress becoming more gridlocked and less productive, more issue advocacy battles are moving to the states, driving a surge in local issue and down-ballot spending.
• AdImpact projects nearly $700 million will be spent this cycle on ads targeting state legislatures, up around 17% from 2024.

Go deeper.

The rise of digital channels, especially streaming, has also given campaigns and outside groups more places to spend.

• Zoom in: The top Senate GOP super PAC has nearly tripled its spending on streaming and social media platforms this election cycle to more than $200 million, Axios has learned.

Why it matters: More campaigns are eyeing streaming because of the ability to target audiences more precisely, negotiate rates and dodge regulatory oversight.

• Unlike with broadcast, dark money groups can essentially pour as much cash as they want into streaming ads without having to detail where they're spending and how much.
• Outside groups often pay multiple times what a campaign pays for ads on broadcast TV and radio because of laws ensuring candidates get the lowest rates. Online, super PACs can negotiate directly.

Of note: Congressional efforts to expand transparency requirements for broadcast ads to digital ads have mostly failed in Congress.

The bottom line: While broadcast still makes up the majority of political ad spend today, more investment has moved to new channels, such as connected TV (streaming) and other digital video platforms, where inventory isn't limited to a 24-hour linear TV schedule.

• By the numbers: Digital and CTV now account for roughly 37% of political ad spend measured by AdImpact.

Share this chart.

Republicans on the ballot this cycle have all but stopped mentioning President Trump in their campaign ads, according to an Axios analysis of broadcast advertising data from AdImpact.

Why it matters: Trump has tried to make the 2026 midterms a referendum on his presidency. His party has run the other way.

The big picture: Ads from both parties in Senate, House and gubernatorial races have shifted from a heavy focus on Trump during the primaries to a much greater emphasis on the economy in the general election.

• Both parties have also leaned much more heavily into health care, with a noticeable increase among House Republicans.

By the numbers: The drop-off is steepest among Republicans, and especially in House races.

• Trump appeared in 66% of House Republicans' primary ads but shows up in just 3% of their general election ads.
• In Senate races, Republican ads mentioning him fell from 77% to 22%.
• Governor's races saw the same shift: Republican ads mentioning Trump fell 34 percentage points.

Democrats have also pulled back from Trump, though less dramatically.

• Trump appeared in 45% of Democratic primary ads, but just 18% of their general election ads.

Zoom in: Republican candidates are mentioning some of Trump's signature issues less than during the primaries.

• The share of Republican ads mentioning immigration has dropped 20 percentage points in Senate races and 14 points in House races.
• Ads referencing law enforcement fell from 11% of Republican Senate primary ads to 6% in the general election, even as their mentions of crime increased.

Between the lines: Candidates often lean on the country's most prominent political figure in primaries, then pivot to policy issues in the general election.

• But this year's drop-off stands out given how hard Trump has pushed to tie himself to the midterms.
• He has urged voters to pretend he's on the ballot and essentially demanded ads running during the Republican midterm convention in September feature him.

Of note: In this analysis, primary ads are broadcast ads that aired before a race's primary. General election ads aired between the primary and Oct. 26.

• The trends may be even more pronounced in ads running through Election Day.

The bottom line: Most Republicans have been too scared to tell Trump how unpopular he is, Axios reported. But their ad receipts don't lie.

Share this data.

Fox News lost a significant number of viewers last month in the lead-up to tonight's election, a potential signal of Republicans tuning out as Democrats are expected to sweep the House and possibly take back the Senate.

Why it matters: Fox News CEO Lachlan Murdoch attributed the ratings dip to "viewer fatigue," but ratings for CNN and MS NOW were up in October.

• While the comparisons for each network are different, a report last week from Status noted that Fox News was on track to post its lowest-rated month in total-day viewers since December 2023.

Zoom in: In an earnings call yesterday, Murdoch compared the current environment to 2006, with a second-term president heading into the midterms.

• He said last year's news cycle made this year's comparisons difficult and that he doesn't believe viewers are migrating to other networks.

Reality check: Fox News' ratings are still significantly higher than those of its competitors. Last year, its margins over rivals widened to their highest point.

• Its parent Fox Corp. posted huge advertising revenue gains last quarter, largely due to political ads flooding its local broadcast stations, and the World Cup.

The bottom line: The October ratings suggest Republicans may tune out tonight, but Democrats and independents are still expected to engage.

The rapid decline of web traffic has forced internet publishers to invest in ways to gatekeep their content, causing new points of friction for consumers used to the internet as a free and open source of information.

Why it matters: Investors worry most of the publishing industry will not be able to sustain that shift.

Driving the news: Reddit on Thursday said it's moving to a primarily logged-in experience, a huge departure from its 21-year history as a champion of the open web.

• CEO Steve Huffman told Axios Reddit is making the change in part to protect its content from unauthorized scraping.

State of play: Other publishers, rich with original intellectual property and human engagement, are eyeing similar moves.

• Wired, Politico, The Verge, the New York Times and People are leaning into their proprietary apps to protect their IP and drive more value from loyal users.

Between the lines: Reddit's move will have an impact on the company's user growth, but Huffman said the business risk is short-term.

• "The vast majority of engagement and over 80% of our monetization comes from our app and logged-in users," Huffman said.
• "The story for publishers is the same," wrote Michael Silberman, executive vice president for subscription management platform Piano, in response to Reddit's news. "Moderately and highly engaged visitors carried the revenue," he said.

Yes, but: Wall Street, for now, isn't buying it.

• Reddit's stock fell 29.2% last week after it announced the shift.
• Even Google lost a half trillion dollars in market cap last week after admitting its AI summaries on search are eating its ads business.
• People Inc., one of the largest publishers in the U.S., said core web traffic fell 26% last quarter, but digital revenue still grew 2% year over year thanks to a 15% increase in licensing and other revenue streams.

The bottom line: Publishers previously believed Google would hedge against AI disruption of its core profit engine and therefore slow the erosion of the open web. But Reddit's changes combined with Google's results have been a wake-up call.

• "We believe the structural pressures facing open-web publishers such as People Inc. are unlikely to reverse," Madison and Wall analyst Brian Wieser wrote to clients.
• Analysts have now lowered their fourth-quarter revenue expectations for Google.

Go deeper with Media Trends Executive.

A coalition of organizations representing creative talent across music, film, TV, performing arts and creative writing entered the high-stakes legal battle over AI and copyright last week, filing amicus briefs siding with the New York Times in its landmark case against OpenAI and Microsoft.

Why it matters: The case has become a proxy fight for the future of the broader creative economy beyond journalism.

Zoom in: Several briefs filed Friday all support the Times' argument that AI firms should not be allowed to use publishers' material to train their large language models.

• Hollywood stars, including Anne Hathaway, Bette Midler and Madonna, voiced their support for the Times in a brief filed by The Human Consent Foundation, which includes talent giant CAA and several coalitions representing musical artists, voice actors, writers and others.
• Major music groups, including the Recording Industry Association of America, National Music Publishers' Association, ASCAP and BMI, filed their own brief.
• Large labor unions such as SAG-AFTRA, the American Federation of Musicians and the Writers Guild of America East and West filed their own brief to "defend the rights and livelihoods of more than 250,000 entertainment and media workers."
• Talent agencies, such as WME, also weighed in. WME declared an official position on the issue, arguing AI use of creative materials shouldn't be stopped, "but that it should be licensed."

Zoom out: The broad support across groups with different commercial imperatives also shows the creative community recognizes what's at stake, even if it does not have the incentive or need to wage its own lawsuits.

• News outlets, authors and music publishers have led the charge in filing lawsuits to protect their IP, but the briefs filed last week show the court how broad the implications of this fight could be.

Several journalism organizations, including the News/Media Alliance and a coalition of local journalism groups, also filed briefs supporting the Times, emphasizing the financial sustainability of the journalism industry.

The big picture: A recurring theme in the amicus briefs filed last week focuses on how AI companies shouldn't be broadly exempted from licensing copyrighted content.

• This is a notable position, given how much U.S. creative industries have historically relied on licensing agreements for music, TV and film distribution.
• OpenAI and other firms have argued that creating a licensing system for digital content would be too cumbersome. The Justice Department has supported that argument for training AI models, but not necessarily for outputs of AI queries.

What to watch: Hollywood's support comes as the Times has expanded its legal battle against the AI industry.

• The company, alongside other publishers, on Monday sued web browser Brave, alleging it scraped its copyrighted works and distributed it to AI firms.

Share this story.

Hollywood is bracing for a cold winter as layoffs and buyouts balloon from consolidation and growth pressure.

Why it matters: Unfocused spending on content, talent and tech during the first wave of the streaming era is being met with discipline meant to position entertainment giants to better compete in a world where streaming is saturated and AI reshapes how content is consumed, created and distributed.

The latest: Disney is planning to lay off thousands of employees in the third round of cuts this year under new CEO Josh D'Amaro, per Bloomberg.

• The company, which had cut staff as recently as September before this round, has told investors that it's looking to reduce costs to invest in new growth areas.

Between the lines: Netflix last month said it plans to lay off 1,000 employees, or up to 6% of its workforce, as engagement rates fail to meet growth expectations.

• Hello Sunshine, the production company founded by Reese Witherspoon, will reportedly cut half of its staff after Witherspoon, alongside French content studio Mediawan, bought back the company from Candle Media at a fraction of its original sale price.
• Skydance is offering employee buyouts ahead of what are expected to be significant cuts to its workforce following the merger between Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery.
• Comcast said it anticipates significant job cuts in its cable and telecom units, as it prepares to spin off NBCUniversal in 2027.

The big picture: Job losses in the media sector are still down significantly year-to-date compared with 2025, but the makeup of those cuts will likely be similar.

• Roughly 30% of the more than 17,000 media job cuts last year were attributed to acquisitions and mergers, according to data from Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

This year's election is chock full of new shows, special features and livestreams designed to give political junkies an inside look at how races are being called and playing out in real time.

Why it matters: Most of those experiences aren't designed to supplant traditional television coverage, but they offer viewers a chance to engage with new voices with different perspectives on a second screen, or on the go.

The big picture: News and prediction market companies are expanding election offerings to hyper-serve political fanatics seeking detailed data and analysis.

• CNN will debut a new election data and analysis tool called Sightline that gives political junkies access to the expertise behind its Decision Desk.
• CBS News is launching a new election night streaming show called "The Nerd Show" that gives political junkies the opportunity to watch its decision desk analyze races and make calls in real time.
• NBC News is launching a cross-platform franchise centered on Steve Kornacki's signature data-driven analysis. Tonight, Kornacki is expected to be live for 13 hours straight walking viewers through precinct-by-precinct midterm drama at his famous Big Board.

Between the lines: Media companies from Mediaite to Semafor are launching their own YouTube livestreams, CNN's Brian Stelter notes. C-SPAN is simulcasting livestreams from The Young Turks and Patrick Bet-David on C-SPAN2 and C-SPAN3 linear channels.

• Creators like Mosheh Oinounou of Mo News and Jessica Yellin of News Not Noise will be going live from their social channels.
• Political news veterans Chuck Todd and Chris Cillizza are teaming up with Decision Desk HQ to host "The Projection," a live election night broadcast on Substack, YouTube and X.

Follow Axios.com tonight for election results and analysis.