TV Ads and the selling of the President

[nine30]

Interesting read.

"..................
And because the average 30- to 60-second commercial has little real information, “positive” images are all important. Indeed, Bush’s TV ads “are unique in the history of presidential advertising in that there is no informational content whatsoever,” notes Ryan Lizza (www.NewYorkmetro.com). “They are truly issueless. In that sense, they represent a striking resurgence of Madison Avenue’s influence in presidential politics.”

We see this effectively demonstrated in the political ads run by the Bush campaign and its supporters. Although some of the TV spots seek to destroy Kerry’s credibility, the focus is on selling the presidential product. The “Safer, Stronger” ads aired by the Bush ad people are a good example. No facts or accomplishments are transmitted, just images—a stock ticker and a flag-draped stretcher from ground zero—that recall the challenges of the recession and 9/11. Text across the screen proclaims that TODAY, AMERICA IS TURNING THE CORNER. The tagline simply emphasizes continuity: PRESIDENT BUSH. STEADY LEADERSHIP IN TIMES OF CHANGE. In this, there are no facts showing that the Bush presidency has in any way been an improvement over Clinton.
...........................................

http://www.rutherford.org/articles_db/commentary.asp?record_id=297

[jrthin]

1. Madison Ave

and Bloomberg are pulling this same sh$t in New York.

[napi21]

2. That's absolutely right! I've been saying similar things for a long

time. The presidential campaign is no longer about who has the best ideas, or best or worst past history, but about marketing, advertising and entertainment!

This was confirmed by someone on cspan booknotes withing thee last 2 weeks who wrote a book about why certain candidates get elected and others don't. The bottom line is that the most entertaining candidate wins!

[nine30]

3. Its all product marketing..

You see John Kerry and GW on a shelf in Wal Mart. Which one do you pick ?
Your subconscious does, based on how it responded while watching the 30 sec blitzes.

[napi21]

4. So why don't the Dems spend the $$ on a GOOD marketing co?

Last year, I suggested that they hire one of the ad firms that do the beer ads. I know that sounds silly, but they have done a GREAT job with beer for a lot of years!

I'm sure part of it is the ego of the candidate. They want to believe they can win with their ideas, but the hell with ego. I'm sure Shrub didn't care how he got there, just so he did!

[nine30]

5. substance vs hype

"..They want to believe they can win with their ideas.."

Hehe..since when has substance driven sales over hype? Look no further than Microsoft windows vs Mac or even Linux. Year after year people part with their hard earned cash, only to get a version slower and worse than the one it replaces. People do give into hype and thats the sad reality of today. If advertising weren't effective would entertainers and atheletes be able to make the obscene amounts of money they make ?