James Urbaniak ([info]urbaniak) wrote,
@ 2008-02-29 22:51:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
This Week in Advertising: The Telephone Game
The tone of the ad -- which echoes the infamous Daisy Ad from the 1964 Johnson-Goldwater presidential race and the red phone ad former Vice President Walter Mondale ran against Gary Hart in their '84 race for the Democratic nomination -- indicates that the Clinton campaign is pulling out the all the stops leading into the Ohio and Texas primaries.

. . .

It seems Roy Spence, the creator of Mondale's red phone ad, borrowed from his own portfolio in creating Clinton's latest ad. Spence joined the New York senator's presidential campaign after New Hampshire.
ABC News Political Radar
A lot of people are writing that it evokes the Daisy ad. Actually, it really evokes this Johnson ad. Which inspired Roy Spence to "create" this. And so on. Will somebody please send this guy some new ideas?

Update 3/5: Contrary to popular belief, it appears the ad was not Mr. Spence's handiwork. More of an homage to his homage.

(Mondale commercial link via Ezra Klein)

web stats script

(Post a new comment)


[info]skidmarksteve
2008-03-01 08:48 am UTC (link)
Nothing related to your post but I saw your episode of Numbers on tonight, as always brilliant work!

(Reply to this)


[info]abbster88
2008-03-01 03:14 pm UTC (link)
I didn't even find that ad particularly effective...I know my president needs to be able to make smart decisions in a crisis. I would think most people would be aware of that fact.

(Reply to this)


[info]sally_shears
2008-03-01 04:10 pm UTC (link)
New idea? Why go with a new idea when the old ones are so good at ramping up the fear-meter of the largely ignorant and easily-led masses? I supported Hillary right up until she unleashed her attack-dog husband; such tactics do not appeal to me, and the idea that you have to do whatever dirty, back-handed, morally reprehensible, soul-killing things you have to do to get elected is something that I see changing (there's that word again) with Obama's candidacy.

(Reply to this)


(Anonymous)
2008-03-01 05:19 pm UTC (link)
Tangentially related: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qe0BPwWAxnk

(Reply to this)


[info]rjwhite
2008-03-01 07:39 pm UTC (link)
In the '84 Mondale ad, the message that I take away from it is that Commissioner Gordon should remain as the head of Gotham City's police force.

(Reply to this)


[info]photocindy23
2008-03-01 07:47 pm UTC (link)
In filmmaking, isn't that called an homage? I guess homages are just plagiarism with a conscience.

(Reply to this)


[info]noskilz
2008-03-02 03:29 am UTC (link)
Maybe I'm just too jaded to appreciate it, but I just don't get the whole exploiting terror angle with these phone ads. Interestingly, and to your credit, this is the first place I've seen the Hillary ad tracked back through it's various antecedents rather than "OMG it's daisy part 2: electric boogaloo." The FUD angle is clear, it just seems the response is out of proportion to the offense.

I'm not sure it's a very effective ad, and the Obama remix amuses to no end, but I just can't get a handle on the freak-out I was seeing on various political blogs Friday.

(Reply to this)


[info]jaynagy
2008-03-02 04:14 am UTC (link)
Have they not mentioned Horton-in-the-tank yet? Good ol' standby story.

(Reply to this)


[info]urbeatle
2008-03-02 07:52 pm UTC (link)
Although the ad's innocuous (and ineffective,) it reminds me of one of the reasons I told people why I'm opposed to Hillary. Some years ago, she was promoting some internet censorship plan (basically, she wanted to ban materials from the internet that you could get in any library.) Her primary argument was "think of the children". Anytime I hear someone essentially threatening children to get you to agree with them, I'm immediately turned off.

I mean, "think of the children" is not as morally wrong as "it's all because of Those People" or "we need to defend our lifestyle", but it's about as equally bankrupt as a rational argument.

(Reply to this)


(Anonymous)
2008-03-03 06:40 pm UTC (link)
This whole campaign is blowing my mind. The Dems are promoting the one candidate (Clinton part 2) most likely to polarize people and get another Rep elected. I don't know what Obama stands for, but I know he's not a Bush or a Clinton and that's good enough for me. Bush part 2 has done a good enough job to make Satan look like Padre Pio, but it's hard to forget the eight years of failure and scandal that was Clinton part 1.

(Reply to this)

well done
(Anonymous)
2008-03-24 01:55 pm UTC (link)
thanks much, dude

(Reply to this)

well done
(Anonymous)
2008-04-05 09:23 pm UTC (link)
thank you, brother

(Reply to this)

Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…