Interesting expose. I think he is right.
Tomfoolery of the Highest Order
Discussing tomfoolery from Liberals, Democrats, the New York Times, the ACLU, the United Nations, France, the anti-war Trotskyites, the "religion of peace," Multiculturalists, and countless others. And, unabashed support for President Bush and mocking the tomfoolery of those running against him.
MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" contest was a sham
A few things about this: CBS has decided against airing the winner during the Super Bowl, citing their long-term policy against airing issue ads. Oliver Willis thinks CBS and Viacom are appeasing the powers that be. (Yeah, sure. They are so right-wing) While I, at the same time, think CBS should have accepted the ad, I am also glad they decided not to air it because I just do not want to watch political ads during the Super Bowl (God willing, the Eagles will be in it). Regardless, what started a train of thought that I must convey was this simple sentence in the article:
MoveOn is airing a 60-second version [of] the commercial, which was selected through a contest calling for anti-Bush ads, in advance of President Bush's State of the Union address Jan. 20. The group has purchased $300,000 worth of air time on Time Warner's CNN that starts Jan. 17 and runs through Jan. 21.
Why did the mention of a 60 second version get my brain flowing with thought? Let me explain. (You cannot discount this like you can a typical MoveOn pronouncement, which is full of canards and easily-discredited lies.)
I worked in radio for a long time. When I either produced or dubbed spots, they had to be 30 or 60 seconds. Often, there would be a 60 second spot, and an edited version of the same one, cut down to 30 seconds. If MoveOn has a 60 second spot ready to go already, then I am convinced they had the winner planned out well in advance. Am I a tinfoil hat-wearing conspiracy monger? I don't think so, so hear me out.
I sat and watched every spot that was a finalist. Most of them were simply outrageous and inflammatory. Run of the mill far-left nonsense, "Bush lied about WMD," "Bush killed Iraqi civilians," "Bush is a schoolyard bully," etc. The finalists were full of red meat for the typical MoveOn.org member. Why then, with judges who have made some of the most outrageous anti-Bush pronouncements, did they end up picking the most sensible, airable ad as the winner? Stroke of luck? Coincidence? I think not.
Watch the winner. bushin30seconds.org I think even if you reject the message, you'll agree that, unlike most of MoveOn.org's tomfoolery, this is a perfectly reasonable and debate worthy ad, not easily dismissed like just about all of the other finalists.
The contest was billed by MoveOn.org like this:
Year after year, a few dozen Washington consultants make the great majority of political ads. They look the same, they sound the same – even the actors seem familiar. Perhaps as a result, voters tune out, even when there are critically important messages to convey. Sounds like they are looking for a regular person to make the ad. Something cool, slick, and outside the Beltway. A good idea actually, in theory. They continue:
That’s why we decided to launch Bush in 30 Seconds, an ad contest that’s intended to bring new talent and new messages into the world of mainstream political advertising. We're looking for the ad that best explains what this President and his policies are really about -- in only 30 seconds.
Now, no amateur or regular Joe would make two versions of the ad, one 60 seconds, then edit it to 30 seconds. The contest says in only 30 seconds, and I am sure every entrant took that limitation to heart. Now, let's look at the winner. He is Charlie Fisher, 38, of Denver, an ad executive at the Leo Burnett firm, who allegedly did the ad on his own time. (Who happened to fly all the way in from Denmark for the awards ceremony. Wonder how much that cost.)
Granted, MoveOn.org never said it was an amateur contest, but sure made it seem like it was for regular people:
The contest was created by MoveOn.org Voter Fund to try to make the political process more accessible to ordinary Americans unlikely to be hired to create advertising in traditional political campaigns.
Nice wording by MoveOn. I never took it to mean that someone from a major ad firm from Chicago would be the winner. (I guess since Leo Burnett lost the Delta Airlines account, this guy has had some time on his hands.) For further proof, look at what "contest" judge Margaret Cho said:
Bush in 30 Seconds was a brilliant concept and the night was devoted to all the people who made ads on their computers, using their own money, their own hearts and minds, and most importantly, their right to free speech. It was the first time in a long while where I felt proud to be an American. Yeah, sure.
Think about what I have said. A group that has made its name by promulgating the most egregious slander against President Bush (they did not have this visibility when they were dedicated to protecting Clinton) runs an ad contest. The contest gets the most attention by "accidentally letting slip through" a few Bush=Hitler ads. Their finalists are chock full of anti-Bush screed which have been discredited time and time again. The judges of the contest, some of the most shameless Bush haters around, "allegedly" pick the most sensible anti-Bush ad, which conveniently has a 60 second version ready to go within a week after the winner is announced. The winner was produced by a professional at a world-class agency, who has been in Denmark, so I'm sure that he isn't all of a sudden finishing the extended version. Those 30 seconds take days, even weeks, to do. In closing, ask yourself this:
What one issue has given MoveOn.org the level of visibility they currently enjoy? Without a doubt, it is the Iraq War, and their hardcore stance against it. Why, then, when trying to get an ad on the Super Bowl, the most watched TV program of the year, where the commercials are discussed as much as the game, does MoveOn.org want to run an anti-Bush economic message? The answer: Because even they know their crap will only play to the far left, and just about every one of their finalists would end up soiling MoveOn.org's name (yes, even more than it is now) with the average American who does not know or care about them. The majority of the American people would be appalled if they were to see just about every one of those ads on the Super Bowl. The people behind MoveOn.org are not dumb. They didn't turn a small website run out of their house into a political player by being idiots.
MoveOn.org played everyone on this. The contest was a sham.
djslybri.blogspot.com |
