Brad Chambers is proud to be endorsed by Governor Josh Shapiro. Brad is going to work with Governor Shapiro to make life more affordable for Pennsylvanians. Together, they’ll: ✅ Hold data centers accountable ✅ Stand with our public schools ✅ Support job growth and small businesses Join Brad Chambers supporters and vote for him this November!
Pennsylvania Governor 2026: the ads, and who's paying for them
Josh Shapiro (Democrat), Stacy Garrity (Republican) and Ken Krawchuk (Libertarian) are the candidates for governor of Pennsylvania in the November 3, 2026 general election. Josh Shapiro is the incumbent. Semblen has analyzed 75 ads in this race; 11 used at least one manipulation technique, most often glittering generalities and loaded language.
Josh Shapiro (DEM, incumbent), Stacy Garrity (REP), Ken Krawchuk (LIB). On the ballot as listed by Ballotpedia. 75 ads analyzed, 11 with at least one technique in the copy. Newest first. The paid-for-by line is the advertiser's own filing. Updated 2026-10-08.
Findings
As of 2026-10-08. Counts are of distinct ads; the same text run many times is one ad.
- Ads analyzed
- 75 · started running between 2026-01-14 and 2026-10-08
- With at least one technique
- 11 of 75 (15%)
- Most common techniques
- Glittering Generalities · 8 adsLoaded Language · 8 adsAppeal to Fear · 6 ads
- Reported Meta spend
- $621,800–764,029 on all ads, $98,700–126,382 on flagged ads · Meta reports ranges; these are the sums of their ends
- Example
- “make your dreams come true” — Glittering Generalities, paid for by Josh Shapiro · the flagged ad with the highest reported spend that shows the most common technique
Embed this race on your site
A small box with these findings and the newest ads, updated as new ads are analyzed. Free for newsrooms, blogs and campaigns alike; it links back here.
Follow the Pennsylvania Governor race
An email when new ads come in from either side or the outside groups: the techniques, the words doing the work, and who paid. And each debate's analysis the morning after. One-click unsubscribe.
Semblen LLC · 5900 Balcones Drive STE 100, Austin, TX 78731
Who is running these ads
By sponsor (16)
| Paid for by | Ads | With at least one technique | Most common |
|---|---|---|---|
| Josh Shapiro | 46 | 5 of 46 (11%) | Glittering Generalities (4), Appeal to Fear (2), Bandwagon Appeal (2) |
| Josh Shapiro for Vestal Town Justice | 9 | 0 of 9 | |
| PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER PBC | 3 | 0 of 3 | |
| Zachary Petrakovich | 3 | 0 of 3 | |
| Citizens Alliance | 2 | 2 of 2 | Appeal to Fear (2), Appeal to Prejudice (2), Loaded Language (2) |
| Friends of Hadley Haas | 2 | 1 of 2 | Loaded Language (1), Name Calling (1) |
| American Families First | 1 | 1 of 1 | Appeal to Prejudice (1), Bandwagon Appeal (1), Black-and-White Fallacy (1) |
| Brad for PA | 1 | 0 of 1 | |
| Bryan Allen for PA | 1 | 0 of 1 | |
| Chester Water Authority | 1 | 0 of 1 | |
| COMMONWEALTH FOUNDATION | 1 | 1 of 1 | Appeal to Fear (1), Appeal to Prejudice (1), False Urgency (1) |
| Friends of Christina Vogel | 1 | 0 of 1 | |
| Friends of Kristin Egan | 1 | 0 of 1 | |
| Friends of Sara Agerton | 1 | 0 of 1 | |
| Gun Owners of America, Inc. | 1 | 1 of 1 | Appeal to Fear (1), False Urgency (1), Glittering Generalities (1) |
| TIM HAYES FOR PA | 1 | 0 of 1 |
Decide what counts
Not everyone would call every technique manipulation. Untick the ones you'd call ordinary persuasion and the count updates.
15% of the 75 ads here use at least one of the techniques ticked below (11 ads).
- Feel-good words with no concrete meaning. More on glittering generalities, with examples →
- Words picked for the feeling, not the facts. More on loaded language, with examples →
- Making you afraid so you stop weighing the facts. More on appeal to fear, with examples →
- Playing on dislike of a group. More on appeal to prejudice, with examples →
- Pressure to act before you think. More on false urgency, with examples →
- A label in place of an argument. More on name calling, with examples →
- "everyone's doing it" in place of a reason. More on bandwagon appeal, with examples →
- Hinting at a hidden plot without evidence. More on conspiracy appeal, with examples →
- Borrowing a symbol's feeling for an unrelated claim. More on transfer, with examples →
- Only two choices when there are more. More on black-and-white fallacy, with examples →
- Only the facts that help one side. More on card stacking, with examples →
- Blowing something up past what is true. More on exaggeration/hyperbole, with examples →
- Saying it again until it sticks. More on repetition, with examples →
Leaving out the softer ones (loaded language, glittering generalities, slogans, exaggeration, repetition): 15% of ads.
Semblen is free to read and has no ads. If this page was useful, you can support it.
Money in this race
Candidates for governor report their fundraising to Pennsylvania's state campaign-finance office, not the FEC. This page doesn't cover those reports yet, so it shows no money figures.
The ads
75 ads, newest first.
Showing the 1 ad paid for by Brad for PA. Show all 75 ads
Follow the Pennsylvania Governor race
An email when new ads come in from either side or the outside groups: the techniques, the words doing the work, and who paid. And each debate's analysis the morning after. One-click unsubscribe.
Semblen LLC · 5900 Balcones Drive STE 100, Austin, TX 78731
What this page is
- An ad is on this page because its own "Paid for by" line is a campaign in this race; or it ran mostly in PA and names a nominee for governor — unless its sponsor is a campaign for some other office (a U.S. Senate or House campaign included), or it also names PA's Senate nominees, in which case it is on the Senate race's page. Ads from outside groups appear alongside the campaigns' own.
- The candidates are the ones certified for the November ballot, from the source linked at the top. Governors are state offices, so there are no FEC filings behind this page: no money figures, and outside groups are placed on a side only when they are a campaign or a party committee.
- Campaigns run one text as many separate ads. Identical text from the same sponsor is one card here, marked with its number of variants.
- A technique is a specific manipulative move in the wording, found by our model and explained in one line. It is not a claim that the ad is false.
- Claims are checked when a reader asks: press "Check this ad's claims" on a card. The check runs once and its result is shown to everyone afterwards. The ten ads with the most money behind them in each race are checked ahead of time.
- Claim verdicts say what the cited sources say. A verdict that an ad is wrong or misleading is shown only when it cites an established fact-checker or an institutional record — Congress, a federal agency, a court — and its confidence is not low; a weaker one is not shown at all. Each verdict shows what it rests on and how confident it is. If we got one wrong, press Disagree: a verdict that readers dispute and no one defends comes down.
- Video ads come from the campaigns' own YouTube channels; the transcript is analyzed. Meta ads are analyzed on their text; their video and images are not, yet.