I love this assignment! Find an ad that impresses me :)
First, find the best campaign ad for either a governor's race or the 2010 midterm elections
Post the link to the video here
Then, with your link discuss the following items
1. is the ad poitivie or negative in tone
2. Why does the ad "work"? What makes it a good ad?
3. Who paid for or created the ad? (candidate, DNC/RNC, or a PAC/Interest Group)
4. What are they trying to accomplish with this ad- what do they want you, the voter, to know or realize?
Remember, You cannot use the same ad as anyone else in the class
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2012290_2012286_2012228,00.html
ReplyDelete1.This campaign is definitely negative by informing the public that Tom Campbell is only a 'fiscal conservative in name only,' and informing the public of his mistakes.
2.This campaign ad is effective because Carly Fiorina portrays the Tom Campbell's actions while he was the governor's chief budget officer and then asks if those action were “fiscally conservative.” She also begins her campaign ad with characteristics of a fiscally conservative candidate and then compares those characteristics to the character Tom Campbell has shown to the public.
3.According to Carly Fiorina's campaign ad, the advertisement was funded by the candidate herself.
4.Carly Fiorina created the campaign ad to establish that Tom Campbell is not the 'fiscal conservative' he claims to be. She also emphasizes his mistakes and shows viewers that if Campbell is elected, then he will degrade California's budget even more and support the increase of California's gas taxes and other taxes. She also wants the California voter to understand that voting for Tom Campbell would be dangerous, and that she might possess all the qualities and characteristics she mentions in the beginning of the ad.
This was probably one of my favorites that Time magazine wrote about. The campaign ad uses a variety of metaphors and creativity to both entice voters and inform them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRR5OkCdsm0&feature=player_embedded
ReplyDelete1. This ad portrays a negative tone by comparing Meg Whitman to Schwarzenegger. It shows the public that Meg Whitman will make the same mistakes as Governor Schwarzenegger.
2.The ad works because of how it uses parts of what both canidates have said and shows that they have said the exact same things. It portrays to the public that Meg Whitman is no different than governor Schwarzenegger in thier ideologies. The only aspect that could make it a bad ad is the fact that only bits and pieces of speeches are used so it doesn't fully show the true idealogies of Meg Whitman compared to Schwarzenegger.
3. It was paid for and authorized by Jerry Brown.
4. The goal in this ad is that Jerry Brown wants to show the public that Meg Whitman copies Schwarzenegger ideas and that she says the same things that he says. Therefore because of Schwarzenegger's low popularity, the public will want someone different as governor. With this ad, Jerry Brown wants the public to realize that if they vote for Meg Whitman than they are basically voting for another Schwarzenegger.
@Vaibhav: Haha i love the satire used with the sheeps! This is such a negative hard-hitting ad on Tom Campbell. This ad really portrays how nasty and competative an election race can become. I would have liked to know more of what the great accomplishments Carly Fiorina did but other than that I was intrigued the whole time on how negatively portrayed Tom Campbell was and how it informed me of his beliefs and his actions in government.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h3G-lMZxjo
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGGAgljengs
ReplyDeleteChristine O'Donnell “I Am Not A Witch”
1. This ad is positive – Christine is trying to recover her reputation and explain why she should be voted for. She does, however, mention that she won't make any “backroom deals” maybe indicating that other politicians running or who are in office do that.
2. The soft piano music in the background kind of reminds me of those ASPCA videos, which makes viewers feel sympathy for Christine's media blunders. It also has a dark background, just showing her upper torso, so that viewers are only focused on her and what she is saying. It's kind of weird how it looks like she's slowly floating up into the air, maybe I'm totally off, but possibly the message she's trying to send is that she's angelic and will make our nation better? O'Donnell also has a little soundbite: “I'm You.” This goes along with one of the last statements in the video, about how when she goes to the white house, she'll do what 'we would do,' indicating that she will vote how the voters want. O'Donnell's “I'm You” slogan tries to connect viewers with herself so that they feel like they're a close friend of hers which means they can trust her.
3. The “Friends of Christine O'Donnell” paid for this ad, which is a PAC. They receive endorsements from Independence Hall Tea Party PAC, Our Country Deserves Better PAC, Citizens United PAC, One Nation PAC, American Conservative Union PAC, and lots of other SIGs such as NRA, Tea Party Express, etc.
4. This ad is trying to obliterate the negative publicity Christine O'Donnell has gotten due to her talk of witchcraft/pagan and also promote her campaign. She isn't going to make “backroom deals” and is going to vote how the people will.
For Funsies:
http://www.youtube.com/watchv=2mUn2c_PKho&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h3G-lMZxjo
ReplyDeleteI did not understand the ad at first, but after a bit of research, I discovered that it was modeled after a famous Superbowl commercial for Apple. Both commercials allude to George Orwell’s novel “1984”.
The video I chose was negative in tone towards Hilary Clinton, depicting her as a “Big Brother”-type drone that was having a conversation with brainwashed citizens that look like prisoners.
It worked because a lot of people (presumably older than me) have seen or heard of the famous Superbowl Apple commercial, and the video was dramatic and fairly well done (especially considering the fact that an individual, not a campaign person created this). It is a great ad because it is short and dramatic enough to capture people’s attention. This ad was also great because it used emotional appeals…after all, “who would want to end up as a drone! (gasp)” I happened to like the ad because it was interesting and it related to “1984” (an awesome book, in my opinion). This would probably have been a great campaign video had it been paid for by someone who had more money and could run it on TV. The only thing that would have improved this ad would have been if the lady with the hammer had made it a bit clearer that she supported Obama, and the text at the end could have been spruced up and clarified.
A private individual made this ad, because he believed that Obama was “not politics-as-usual” and wanted to persuade other people to view Obama that way as well.
The man wanted people to vote for Obama. I think his target audience was middle-class voters who have an education and might or might not have a political opinion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Byd4fwK1gqY
ReplyDeleteGovernor Flecter's campaign ad for re-election!
1)the tone that this ad had is surely positive to the like of flecter. This ad focuses on the issue of education and how he is doing wonderful things to improve it. its positive with the happy music in the background and the smiling kids grab my eye too. (that wasnt planned out though) haha
2)what makes the ad "work" is the facts it presents throughout the commerical. It also worked by, like i said before, the smiling students and the happy music. Obviously is tries to show that what Flecter is doing for education is loved by the students. It also workds by bringing key facts such as raising education 25% in kentucky, also well as fighting to lower taxes.
3)Well at the end of the ad it says in the tiny letter you can herdly see in the bottom, "paid for by the friends of governor Flecter. this probably means a P.A.C paid for his ad.
4) overall, this ad is here to make you understand the positive things Flecter had done, along with what he is going to do in the future, (or going to fight for).they want you to see the Great things Flecter has done( particually education in this ad) so you will be overwhelm by the great Flecter had done and re-elect him. He is after all the shining light on Kentucky.... well atleast in this ad......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7wjJyMDUH0
ReplyDeleteMichael Steele's ad in 2010 election
1) This ad is displayed is a positive tone because its supporting Michale Steele. It talks about what he plans to do to change D.C.'s policies so that he can fix his home states problems. This ad also plays a jolly tune that makes him seem like a heartwarning guy and that he can relate to the average man... like every other fake politician.
2) He shares what his plans are if elected to Congress and what he will plan to do for his state, Maryland, after he fixes theirs. It displays a heartwarming trustworthy message that he will fix the problems in Congress and do what he can for his hme state. What really makes this ad work is that it appears possible. Steele doesn't throw an impossible tasks with drastic changes in the public. He describes what he would first start with in Congress and keep the ball rolling from there.
3)Paid for by Steele for Senate
4)The change can be real and is easily fixable. A ban on all gifts to lobbyists and no last minute spending ammendments. The voter wants can change policys on government spending and thats what Steele targets in his ad.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8pEaKniq6w
ReplyDeleteJohn McCain's advertisement bash on J.D. Hayworth in midterm elections.
1. This ad negatively represents J.D. Hayworth as everything America doesn't want, as ignorant and stupid and obnoxious. It sheds a disdainful eye on Ombama as well (no doubtedly on purpose by McCain) to question his citizenships.
2. This ad works in that it does bring about its objection, to show J.D. Hayworht in a bad light and bring doubt into the minds of voters to double think on a vote for Hayworth. However, this ad similarly makes one look down upon McCain for such obvious slander, mudslinging, and painfully blunt immaturity.
3. This ad is subscripted at the end as "paid by Friends of McCain." One cannot help but view these friends as biased in their support and most likely personally given permission by McCain to publish and expose this ad.
4. The goal of this ad is to slander the name of J.D. Hayworth, which is is effective in. Theose who created the ad, the friends of McCain, wanted to bury Hayworth's intent and character is speculaction to detract votes.
P.S. I found this interesting/humorous: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACfVGmF5eTU.
Tampax is equivalent/related to violent deaths? Ok....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lS9UhEtbvs
ReplyDelete1. This ad is positive in tone and images yet negative because he talks about the negative effects of democrats in office. Overall Greg Reed created a positive tone.
2. This ad works because it appeals to all the republicans, all the conservatives, and anyone who is unhappy with the democrats in office. Considering this is alabama, that most likely includes most of the population. Therefore, he has appealed to everyone in his audience, making this an effective ad. Also he was talking to a variety of people displaying that he supposedly is friendly and caring.
3. The candidate Greg Reed paid for the ad.
4. What Greg Reed is trying to get accross is his belief that many of the liberals and democrats created "big government" which caused the unemployment crisis. He is a conservative republican which would make it obvious that he would blame the democrats and liberals for everything. His main objective is to get the viewers to believe that the democrats in office are not doing things right and that if he is elected, he will do things right as a republican.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK_qW5e1-0Y
ReplyDelete1) This ad is positive in tone. Bradbury is discussing how though Oregon is going through a rough time, due to the state of the economy, he is more than prepared to get them out.
2)This ad "works" for a few reasons. He starts off by saying, "I've found in life, that when faced with challenges, you just need to find a solution." He then follows by saying when he had trouble walking due to MS, he got a segway to help him. He then says, with the economy of Oregon own, he is well-equipped to find a solution. Also he relates to the seqway by saying he intends to propose solutions to get their economy rolling. This ad makes us feel bad for his disability, and tries to make the viewer feel sympathetic,and also make us believe he is the best man for the job.
3)At the end of the ad it is written, "Paid for by the Friends of Bill Bradbury."
4)The ad is trying to convince the viewer that Bradbury is the best man for the job and that they should vote for him because he is the best equipped to handle adversity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9hZO-dQYww
ReplyDeleteThis is on of Tim Jame's ads in his campaign when he ran to be Governor of Alabama.
1. The ad is Definitely has a negative tone. Instead of using uplifting and enthusiastic diction, he speaks looking straightforward into the camera (from different angles infront of the same wooden backdrop)and uses a strict, almost harsh, tone of voice and phrases his words in a way which sound mean. He also uses rhetorical questions to try and hook the reader onto his train of thought (which is a bad train).
2. I suppose it would work because of how direct James is. He speaks directly into the camera the entire time (and with the help of sappy music in the background) creates the effect of actually talking one on one with the people at home. The ad is FILLED with pathos, appealing to people's emotions and personal convictions about immigrants who speak different languages. James assumes that there are many out there who would support his action on this so he speaks firmly about it to grab those people's attention. It would work on me if that was what I believed.
3. At the end of the ad it said "Paid for by Tim James 2010, INC." so I'm assuming it mean that he paid for it on his own.. ?
4.James is trying to send a message out to his voters or potential voters that he does not accept the population of non-English speaking immigrants in this country and is determined to do something about it. He is making it clear for those who feel the same way, that something Will be done about this issue if he is elected.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_pKFlGFJYg
ReplyDeleteThis is that ad that proclaims, "Barack Obama is the worst president in history"
First of all, let me just say that I'm not someone who agrees with this statement, or this candidate, for that matter.
1.) Obviously, the ad is very negative in tone, completing bashing Obama and his administration, saying that our country is going to be weakened becuase of him .
2.) To the people that this ad "works" for, this is very effective. It perfectly articulates the feelings of a large group of people in this nation right now. The broad and insinuating statements can properly adress the anger of the people who do feel this way. A lot of people feel like Washington needs the "hell" kicked out of it.
3.)Tha ad was paid for by Quayle's campaign.
4.)This ad is meant to create angry and hateful feelings in the people who feel cheated by this administration. These feelings are present in the country, and Quayle was trying to manipulate these feelings into a vote for him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNV8-mh5gnc&feature=related
ReplyDelete1.) This cheesy happy-go-lucky ad is in a positive tone and makes Pat Quinn seem like a freakin' saint.
2.) This ad is good because it is very clear and direct. It uses images of Pat Quinn being friendly with the public and lending a hand in activities. The ad even signifies key points in his goal as governor including:
investing in early childhood education, boosting communit colleges, creating more clean-energy jobs, and leverging loans for small businesses.
3.) This ad was paid for by "Taxpayers for Pat Quinn" (whatever that means..)
4.) This ad is trying to make the public see that Pat Quinn is a good guy that loves the state of Illinois and has worked hard for many years to help it prosper.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XG6uz4M8xQI
ReplyDelete1. is the ad poitivie or negative in tone
Negative when blaming the Republicans but positive when saying how there is hope and what will be done.
2. Why does the ad "work"? What makes it a good ad?
The add grabs your attention at first and it is clear and to the point. It is easy for people to understand and it is not too long and drawn out.
3. Who paid for or created the ad? (candidate, DNC/RNC, or a PAC/Interest Group)
Scott Heidepriem for Governor of South Dakota.
4. What are they trying to accomplish with this ad- what do they want you, the voter, to know or realize?
They want the voter to of course elect Heidepriem, but also why they should. He states that there is too much state spending and that it is the Republican's fault, so clearly he must be Democrat. There has been 500 million dollars spent since 2003, and it is mentioned how this is not good. To cut government spending he wishes to end no bid contracts and to stop "fooling the public with accounting tricks". He believes these are the only things that can stop the spending without raising taxes.
Wow, Alsion, I am surprised no one picked that video before you. Personally, I feel that video was produced by some ignorant politician, because clearly the worst president in the United States was definitely William Henry Harrison, who only served for 2 months.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulW9UU01RRw&list=PL73C48B1FE43CF02B&index=77&playnext=1
ReplyDelete1.This campaign video is negative as it involves Alexi Giannoulias harping on Mike Kirk saying that he is a liar and that if voted into office, he will only continue to
lie.
2. This add is very effective as it lists all of the things that Kirk has messed up on in the past while he was in office. In the video Kirk himself is listing the mistakes he made or the things that are considered to not be very effective. In the beginning of the video, newspaper headlines are shown with words such as “false” and “lied” are repeatedly shown until the video starts to list some of the “bad” things that he has done.
3.The campaign was paid for by Alexi Giannoulias himself for Illinois.
4.This campaign add is trying to persuade viewers to vote for Alexi Giannoulias as it shows readers a few reasons as to why they should not vote for him. They repeatedly list some of the “bad” things he has done and that by voting him back into office, we would be voting in another liar.
This is Jessica Schildt.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdIlzAyueow
I apologize for the video quality…it’s not as good as it could be, to say the least.
1)The ad definitely has a negative tone. It aims to paint John McCain as an inept, archaic candidate. The ad also tries to form a connection between George W. Bush and John McCain, which is also a negative agent in the
2)It is an attack ad that resonates especially with younger viewers, as digital media is a huge aspect of our lives. Using dramatization, the ad adopts an end-of-the-world stance on John McCain’s lack of technological expertise. Regardless of the validity of the argument or the viewer’s ideas of the candidate, this ad is a “good” ad in that it effectively alienates younger voters from choosing John McCain.
3)President Obama endorsed the advertisement.
4)The Obama campaign team wants this ad to alienate younger voters from voting for John McCain, as well as end the “Bush era” which allegedly suffered from the same problems. This is a pro-Obama advertisement.
Vaibhav I am genuinely freaked out right now lol, that "wolf in sheep's clothing" is going to make me have nightmares ;( thanks a lot.
ReplyDeleteYeah it was very entertaining if nothing else, I like their theme, very majestic, dramatic, and intense. I guess that's what's necessary in order to get people's attention and for them to walk away with something, definitely influenced me a bit that Campbell is not a good choice.
I do however think that candidates should at least show their face or give some input in their commercials. I know they do not personally make the videos, but they are still in charge since it is their race. The public needs to know who they ARE voting for and why, not who they ARE NOT voting for.
Max I found that one and loved it and then saw that you had it and then I cried, thanks a lot for making me cry ;p
ReplyDeleteYeah that one is hilarious. It's almost like it was planned but I have a feeling the developers simply found coincidences for the most part. I like the magazine cover of "Twins", good movie. Again, the only flaw I would see, like I saw with Vaibhav's, is that I believe campaigners should show their face in their ads.
@ Jared
ReplyDeletehaha dude i dig the beginning of your ad i mean that is prime advertising from politicians.. that baby is deathly scared and wants to fight for THE INDEPENDENT DEMOCRAT!!!! it astonishes me to think that people when they see this on their t.v's they actually believe that he is the person to solve all of South Dakota's problems. Ads like these are in every state election AND THEY WORK!
@ Jessica Schildt
ReplyDeletedaaaaaaaaaaannnng talk about a slap in the face to McCain. this just shows what length politicians go to to tell the people that they are better than any other politician running against them. Huh, if McCain cant use a computer, i wonder who does his tweets and Facebook? the world may never know...
First off and in general, I just want to point out those bashing ads' "who sponsored this message" blurbs at the end. It's honestly humorous how fast they go. I love catching it. And the same goes for those side effects messages which say a thousand fatal outcomes from using the product in two seconds in a low, soft voice, or when the information flashes for a milisecond at the bottom of the screen in pt. six font. That's how I feel about all these: "this message was sponsored by so and so." Length of time needed to say that: eight second. Length of time they say it: three seconds. Nice...
ReplyDeleteNow:
@Carissa: That "I'm not a witch" thing couldn't have gone well. I don't know what made her think that that would go over well. Every politician recieves scrutiny and name calling. It's this thing called mudslinging, but why point it out further by denying it like that? If it was a reasonable accusation, denying it would make sense, but this? No.
P.S. I thought the music was creepy. That was my first reaction. Witch like?? maybe ;) lol. Creepy, witchy music.
@Ryan Mahoney: This ad is feel good, warmn hearted, and positive. Who wouldn't want to live in a cozy, tight-knit community like portrayed here? everyone shaking hands and smiling, walking along the plains. It's all so proactive, and very unlike Washington D.C. so it helps make the viewers think that this ideal will be brought over and represented in Washington. However the bashing at liberals is obviously negative and in the end he makes it economic related, which is something that the hardworking people this is intended for can't stand. They work hard for their money and deserve it. He points this out, but then remarks that he would never take a pay raise while others have less. Sorry if I've never heard a bigger lie [more B.S.] in my life. Hopefully people looked past all this happiness and instead to the issues he represented, because this ad was clearly "buttered up" after hearing that remark.
@Vhaibav
ReplyDeleteI couldn't believe that I was the first to that one either! And I can't believe he was saying that either. Maybe if he went through APUSH and/or had a time machine he could say something like that. :)
@ Allison
ReplyDeleteWow, that was intense. I can't believe I hadn't seen that before. It was so negative but definitely effective for those who have the same feelings. He definitely gained support with that one.
@ Erin
ReplyDeleteBefore reading your post, I had no idea what the point of that video was about even though I have seen it several times. Now that I understand it I can see where you are coming from. I would never have guessed that the lady with the hammer was for Obama let alone that the entire video was trying to get people to vote for Obama. I agree with you that the maker of the video should have made that more obvious and that the letters needed to be clarified and made more noticeable at the end. For being made by just one man, I think the video makes a big impact overall.
@ Jessica
ReplyDeleteI think that the video you chose will have an impact on the younger voters as they rely on technology for a lot of things in their everyday lives. It definitely is an ad that is aimed at John McCain, but what I think is that even if McCain doesn’t know how to work technology, that does not mean he wouldn’t be a good president. President Obama knows that a lot of the younger voters rely on technology for everything and even if the ad does not do a whole lot for the older voters, it would definitely turn the younger ones away and to think like that sickens me as our lives should revolve solely around technology, if that makes sense. It was definitely an effective video though. Good job!
@ Jared "The Hammer" Johnson
ReplyDeleteIt's obvious that he attacks the Republicans but he attempts to make theem look like fools. By saying we've created a "monster", he's impling that the Republicans have no idea what they are doing and they know what to do is spend more money. That makes sense especially because the Obama administation alone spent billions on the healthcare plan and this Heidepriem Democrat is bagging on Republicans for 500 million. It still is not good but it's not as bad as billions.
@ Ryan Mahoney
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting to hear the first thing he says is he will strive to create a better economy. That hits home for nearly all republicans. And throughout the video you see Reed talking to a black woman, construction workers, and a heartwarming clip of him with his wife a walk together. But he only speaks out of the main focus of the entire Republican party so it's hard to tell if he has his own political views or if he is on the bandwagon. Ex: He also claims he would never take a pay raise like the democrats did. But under all the pressure, he may not be able to stand up for his own political views beacuse he could be on the bandwagon.
Sorry these are so late….
ReplyDelete@Max- That video was actually a little creepy. How did they find that many examples of similar speeches? I think this ad was very odd… It bothered me that this video focused so much on bashing not one but two politicians that the person they are pushing you toward is condensed into 1.5 seconds; I barely heard the candidate that the ad campaign was made for.
@Carissa- Hmmm…. The “I’m You” was a little disconcerting. I think she should have explained that a bit more. The piano music was fine, but the moving background was distracting and made her seem like she was floating, which was probably not what she was aiming for. I think this was an attempt to manage the damage done by some other things she had said, and it was not very convincing.
I couldn’t find the page for your other video…. :)
@Alana- That was a very energetic video. Where on earth did they find those actors? Anyway… I agree with you about how this video makes the viewer question John McCain’s character as well as JD Hayworth’s. This ad seems very unlike McCain, and I’m surprised he didn’t have it removed from the internet.
@Ryan Mahoney- That ad did seem positive! I noticed there were very few black people though, which surprised me; usually, politicians try harder to get more racial diversity in their ads. The guy’s tone was even and sounded very reasonable, which is comforting to the viewer.
@Sam- I agree with you, that ad was dreary. I didn’t like how the camera was always zoomed in on his face- it made me want to step back and watch the ad from across the room. It was also distracting that he kept entering the room…. He should have entered once and then stopped moving. I also didn’t like how he looked down for a few seconds at the end- it made me feel like he was either lying or reading a script (in that case, get a sign behind the cameraperson).
@Jessica- Wow, this was really negative. I can’t believe that Obama actually brought this up; I watched a few of the videos after that one and they said that McCain can’t type due to a war injury. If I was Obama, that would be the last thing I would bring up, because Obama just opened the door to point out how Obama had not served in the military (as far as I know, but I could be wrong) and could be young and inexperienced.
Fir those of you who participated- Awesome Ads. Well done. Erin- way to Rock this week
ReplyDelete