Ĉu ĉi tio estas la Fino de Hillary Clinton?

Kvankam mi ŝatas pensi pri mi kiel liberecano, eble estas iom da anarkiisto en mi. Mi ĝuas la demokratiigon de la interreto same kiel la malaltan koston de teknologio. La du pruntedonas sin por provizi potencon al tiuj, kiuj ne aĉetis ĝin.

Kazo estas ĉi tiu freŝa parodio de Hillary Clinton en reklamo de Apple en 1984. La filmeto estis alŝutita al Youtube kaj estis spektata pli ol 300,000 fojojn. Persone mi ekridis. Mi ne estas fervorulo al senatano Clinton, kvankam mi absolute komprenis kaj respektis la talenton de ŝia edzo kiel bonega oratoro kaj politikisto.

La ironio de ĉi tiu memfarita filmeto estas, ke ĝi vide reproduktas la malvarmon, kiun mi sentas ĉiufoje, kiam mi vidas senatanon Clinton paroli. Mi scivolas kiom multe da influo tia video povus havi en kampanjo. Estas nenio en la video, kiu montras al Hillary Clinton kiel malbonan elekton por prezidanto ... nur sentas tiel.

Ne nur iu ajn prenis la tempon por fari ĉi tion, ĝi estis iu subtenanta senatanon Obama. La filmeto estas bone produktita kaj, mi supozas, kostis nur tempon por disvolvi. Ĉu ĉi tio estas la fino de la kandidateco de Hillary Clinton por prezidanto?

Jen la originala reklamo de Apple (montrita dum la Superbowl en la tago):

Ĉu ĉi tio estas malbona politiko? Ĉu malbona civitaneco? Ĉu ĝi estas nerespondeca? En mondo, kie publika bildo estas ĉio kaj politikistoj elspezas milionojn (baldaŭ miliardojn) por puŝi tiun bildon, ĉu ne estas ironie, ke teknologio metita en la manojn de unu homo povas ŝanceli tutan elekton?

Jen kiam ĝi amuziĝas!

12 Komentoj

  1. 1

    I am deeply suspicious of this ad.

    The soundbites seem to be completely wrong for the ad. I realize there is a certain irony in the original, which juxtaposes “we shall prevail” with the throwing of the hammer. But in the original, the voice has an obviously evil quality to it. These soundbites are Hillary’s explicit attempt to come across as a regular person, having a “conversation” with each of us individually, whereas the original ad speaks of “one people, one will, one resolve, one cause,” and “a garden of pure ideology where each worker may bloom, secure from the pests of any contradictory thoughts.” Meanwhile, the Hillary soundbite says “I don’t want people who agree with me.” Also, the image of big brother is dark, and blends in with the dark wall in the original commercial, while the imagine of Clinton is bright white, an aberration in the monolithic room

    If I had to guess at the source of this video, I would bet it came from the Clinton campaign. Imagine seeing it without any knowledge of the original. Most people probably don’t remember the original all that well. Here is an alternative interpretation of the Clinton video: Clinton is trying to awaken people who have become used to politics as a competitive sport, or partisan war, rather than a discussion, an exchange of ideas, about how to make everyone better off. Hillary says that it’s “really good” that “so far, we haven’t stopped talking.” However, some evil forces don’t want you to keep talking. Right before the hammer is thrown, the text on the screen over Hillary reads, “this is our conversation.” The next time we see the screen, a smiling Hillary again says she “hopes to keep this conversation going,” just before the sledge hammer smashes into the screen. In the original ad, following the initial explosion as the sledgehammer crashes into the screen, we hear a light, cool breeze, suggesting freedom. This sound appears to have been slowed down in the Clinton video, lowering the pitch and suggesting the cold wind of emptiness and despair. By this point we are really wondering who would be so evil as to want to end “our conversation.” We then see a bright white screen which says, “On January 14th, the Democratic primary will begin. And you’ll see why 2008 won’t be like ‘1984.’” Note that 1984 has a significance in presidential politics quite apart from Orwell’s book. 1984 was the year Walter Mondale, running as an unabashed liberal, lost every state in the nation except Minnesota. The white screen, associated with Clinton, promises a different outcome in 2008, until it is covered over by a pitch black screen bearing Barack Obama’s web address. It must be he who wishes to end the conversation.

    • 2

      Ben,

      Thanks for the lengthy comment! Journalists are trying to track down the actual person who uploaded this to YouTube – I’m curious to see as well. I doubt it was the Clinton campaign, though. And I’m also doubtful it was the Obama campaign, he’s been fairly critical of attack ads and has avoided it thus far. My guess is that it was an Obama fan with plenty of time on their hands and some good software.

      Rather than concentrate on the politics, what is of interest to me as a marketer is what this does to the hundreds of millions of dollars that these folks will spend on their campaigns. Will it thwart the attacks? Strengthen them?

      One thing I instantly noticed was that John McCain ads come up on Google with the mention of Hillary Clinton. It appears the McCain camp already sees value in behavioral advertising!

      salutoj,
      Doug

  2. 3
  3. 4
  4. 7

    This Hillary 1984 video is getting way overhyped. There are important issues out there more important than
    clever little internet ad campaigns with no real message, especially one that isn?t even original.

    • 8

      Amy,

      Your point is absolutely valid. Unfortunately, many voters don’t vote on the actual issues, though. I think it’s one of the fallacies of a modern visual age and politics. Wrong or right, many voters are easily swayed.

      That’s why I think this is a fascinating event. It’s simply the beginning of much more to come. I have know idea of its impact on voters yet – but no doubt that there will be one.

      salutoj,
      Doug

  5. 9

    I absolutely understood and respected her husband?s talent as a great orator

    Sometimes things are funny, even when not intended. I hope you are aware of the double meaning that any sentence gets that includes the words “Clinton” and “oral” 🙂

  6. 10

    Its a power advertisement, especially if you are familiar with the original (by Ridley Scott, I think). It won’t be the end of Hilary as there are a lot of other important issues at stake, but it is a good shot at here. The business about the guy who made it seems to detracts from it though.

    • 11

      I did hear that he was a subcontractor with a company that was doing some work for Obama but he’s since been fired. That’s unfortunate – I really don’t think there was anything negative about the ad at all, though there was definitely an overlying theme! I wish the guy well, it was indeed a good shot.

  7. 12

Kion vi pensas?

Ĉi tiu retejo uzas Akismeton por redukti spamon. Lernu, kiel via komento datiĝas.