“In another sign of the unusual nature of this election year, slightly more has been spent thus far on general-election broadcast television ads targeting U.S. Senate contests than on those for the White House race,” Bloomberg reports.

“Kantar Media/CMAG shows $129.3 million has been spent through Aug. 29 on the general-election phase of 18 Senate races, compared to $128.4 million that’s been plowed into TV ads for the presidential campaign… Through the first eight months of 2012, for example, $350 million had been spent on general-election ads for the presidential race, while just $70 million had been spent on 22 Senate races.”

“Hillary Clinton has reserved nearly $80 million in additional television advertising across eight key states in coming months… offering both a window into how the Democrat sees the presidential contest shaping up and a reminder of her dominance on the airwaves in the the race against Republican Donald Trump,” the Washington Post reports.

“The campaign is targeting Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio and Pennsylvania. In addition, Clinton is continuing to advertise in the Omaha market in Nebraska, one of only two states that awards its electoral votes based on performance in congressional districts.”

“The Trump campaign, by contrast, launched its first general-election TV ad last week, saying it planned to spend $4.8 million on a 10-day buy in four states: Florida, North Carolina, Ohio and Pennsylvania.”

CNN: “Two states that the Clinton campaign will not air local ads in through September and October: Virginia and Colorado.”

Bloomberg: “The presidential primary season has been a ratings bonanza for cable-news outlets, and it can only get better when the major parties hold their nominating conventions next month. So why not seize the moment?”

“CNN is charging advertisers $40,000 to $100,000 for a 30-second spot during the Republican and Democratic conventions, compared with about $5,000 for a normal prime-time commercial… Fox News plans to charge similar rates.”

Bloomberg: “According to Kantar Media, Clinton and Sanders aired 206,528 spots between them this year—and not one was deemed “negative” by the analysts in Kantar’s Campaign Media Analysis Group.”

Said Kantar exec Elizabeth Wilner: “In an open presidential primary, this is probably unprecedented.”

Bloomberg: “Trump has benefited from free coverage from news media in a way that no modern candidate has (estimated value: $3 billion). His campaign spent only about $19 million on TV ads in the primaries… That was far less than Jeb Bush, whose super-PAC blew through $70 million. Trump has also been a shrewd user of social media, where he maintains a dialogue with his supporters.”

“But his approach, based largely on his celebrity, is one that can work only for him. For everyone else, TV ads are still the preferred means of reaching the most potential voters. Presidential candidates and super-PACs spent more than $400 million this primary season. Total TV ad spending by all campaigns, including state and local races, is expected to reach $4.4 billion… eclipsing the record $3.8 billion spent in 2012.”