Showing posts with label political advertising. Show all posts
Showing posts with label political advertising. Show all posts

Friday, March 06, 2026

17394: TGIFired Day.

MediaPost reported President Donald J. Trump fired Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, declaring she lied to Congress about receiving his approval for a $220 million advertising campaign.

 

In short, the Gaslighter-in-Chief axed a White woman for producing advertisements without permission and replaced her with a White man—plus, he announced the moves on social media.

 

Now Trump can boast, “We ended DEI in America—and Adland too!”

 

Yep, President Donald J. Trump is angling to repeat as White Man Of The Year in 2026.

 

Trump Said Noem Lied About $220M Ad Campaign

 

By Tanya Gazdik

 

President Donald Trump has fired Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem after stating that she lied to Congress about getting his approval for a $220 million ad campaign.

 

“I never knew anything about it,” Trump told Reuters in a phone interview.

 

Two sources close to the White House told the New York Post that Trump is furious that Noem testified that he approved of the ads — and set in motion his later move to fire her, the first cabinet shakeup of his second term. 

 

Trump fired Noem on Truth Social and announced Sen. Markwayne Mullen (R-Okla.) as her replacement.

 

Noem faced bipartisan criticism over the commercials during U.S. congressional hearings this week.

 

“The ad features Noem, donning a cowboy hat on horseback, moving out of a wooded clearing in the Black Hills of South Dakota, the state where she was formerly the governor,” according to The Hill. 

 

“Why do I love these wide open spaces?” Noem asks. “They remind me of why our forefathers came here. Not just for its beauty, but for the freedom only America provides.”

 

Lauren Bis, Department of Homeland Security deputy assistant secretary, said the international ad campaign prompted more than 2.2 million illegal immigrants to self-deport and saved taxpayers more than $39 billion, according to Fox News. 

 

Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin tore into Noem with a blistering series of criticisms to her face on Wednesday.

 

The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee accused Noem of using billions of dollars given to DHS as a “personal slush fund” for her glitzy ad campaign and luxury jet travel, according to The Daily Beast.

 

“You budgeted an astonishing $220 million for media consultant contracts so you can star in self-promoting photo shoots and lavish ad campaigns featuring the Lifestyles of Rich and Famous Cabinet Secretaries, like this one of you on horseback at Mount Rushmore, which was shot during last year’s government shutdown,” Raskin said.

Tuesday, February 10, 2026

17348: On Perceived Brands’ Icy Responses To ICE.

 

Advertising Age published a perspective cautioning brands targeting Latino consumers to not ignore how ICE impacts lives in the segment. In short, the author thinks brands should avoid staying silent and playing it safe when communities face pressures.

 

It’s a debatable proposition, as brands don’t necessarily benefit from taking political stances. Indeed, there are many examples of classic fails when brands publicly advocated for causes.

 

Sure, Archbishop Desmond Tutu declared, “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”

 

But such leaders didn’t have to contend with brand destructors like President Donald J. Trump, the Gaslighter-in-Chief behind ICE.

 

Brand silence is not necessarily siding with oppressors. Rather, it can be a sign of respect, in terms of standing clear of situations where brands have no business, so to speak.

 

Why brand silence isn’t a safe strategy when communities are under pressure

 

By God-is Rivera

 

Every major brand briefing seems to start the same way lately: Hispanic and Latinx consumers are our fastest-growing segment. The data backs it up.

 

Nielsen reports that Hispanic households represent about 14.7% of U.S. households but account for 15% of total consumer spending and 23% of U.S. dollar growth in retail. Their impact is outsized relative to their population size.

 

But there’s a glaring disconnect between how aggressively brands are pursuing Hispanic consumers and how little they’re acknowledging the lived reality of that community.

 

Today, families are navigating fear and instability due to ICE. Cultural identity is being politicized. People are making daily decisions about where to shop, travel, work, or even leave their homes under conditions many marketers have chosen to treat as “off-limits” for brand engagement.

 

You cannot build sustainable growth with a community you refuse to fully see. Here’s how to back your brand with values that resonate:

 

Growth without context is not a strategy

 

When brands say Hispanic consumers are their growth engine while ignoring the pressures shaping their lives, it reveals a dangerous assumption that purchasing power is disconnected from lived experience.

 

Everyone knows the meme-able Jet2holidays audio that became synonymous with travel fails. The brand got in on the joke and leaned in appropriately, engaging with the moment and expanding cultural relevance well beyond its traditional audience.

 

But when the same audio was later used in content depicting immigration enforcement and detainees being transported, Jet2Holidays was abruptly pulled into a far more serious conversation. They were prepared. The company responded quickly, publicly distancing itself from the usage.

 

Brands that pursue growth without understanding how cultural meaning travels, especially in volatile moments, leave themselves vulnerable to being defined by contexts they didn’t plan for. And if they don’t respond to the situation in a timely manner, or ignore it, it can be a recipe for brand-building disaster.

 

Silence is being mistaken for brand safety

 

Many marketers believe the safest move right now is to stand still. Say nothing. Delay campaigns. Shelve anything that might be perceived as risky.

 

But recent examples suggest the opposite.

 

After facing intense backlash over Pride-related merchandise, Target scaled back displays in certain markets, framing the decision as a move to protect employee and customer safety. The reaction among many consumers—particularly younger and multicultural audiences—was swift. For some, the pullback signaled retreat rather than protection. Boycotts and social media protests have cost the retailer.

 

When brands retreat entirely, consumers are far less charitable than brands expect.

 

Hispanic consumers are also more likely to research corporate policies and participate in boycotts based on a brand’s stance, with 51% participating in at least one boycott according to a study by Numerator.

 

Your fastest-growing consumer is also your most attuned

 

Hispanic consumers are deeply attuned to brand values. Further research from Numerator shows 60% of Hispanic shoppers say they would stop buying from brands that don’t reflect their values.

 

Nike has long understood that growth with multicultural audiences requires consistency in beliefs. When the brand has taken public positions aligned with its stated values, it has weathered backlash while maintaining long-term loyalty, particularly among younger, diverse consumers. While not every move has been universally praised, Nike’s audience understands what the brand stands for.

 

That matters deeply to Hispanic consumers. These audiences don’t expect brands to speak on everything. They expect them not to disappear when values are tested.

 

This moment requires cultural readiness, not crisis comms

 

Too many brands are still relying on outdated crisis playbooks. What’s required now is cultural readiness. Your brand needs to understand communities before moments erupt, to know which voices matter, and to make decisions anchored in real values.

 

From its response to global refugee crises to its clear stance against discrimination on the platform, Airbnb has invested in systems, policies, and partnerships that allow it to act quickly when cultural moments arise. These decisions were enabled by groundwork laid well before public pressure mounted.

 

Companies that have invested in this kind of readiness move differently. They respond with clarity because they’ve already done the work of understanding who they are and who they serve. But readiness doesn’t always have to be defensive. It can recognize moments of positive cultural momentum, such as HRC’s #LoveWins, and grow by showing up in ways that feel timely.

 

Growth is a relationship, not an extraction model

 

The Hispanic and Latinx community represents an enormous opportunity, but opportunity is not a one-way transaction. Growth without care is not growth. The brands that will win the future are not the ones that waited for the moment to pass.

 

They recognized a simple truth: When the community is under pressure, business as usual no longer works.

 

God-is Rivera is chief strategy officer at Burrell Communications Group

Saturday, October 24, 2020

15182: President Trump Is Making Internet Advertising Not Great Again.

The campaign ad for President Donald Trump depicted above sure is offering a narrow range of options. Or maybe the selections were incomplete…


Monday, January 23, 2017

13513: Johnnie Walker’s Political March.

Campaign reported on patronizing political pap for Johnnie Walker—created by White advertising agency Anomaly—that celebrates U.S. diversity with a contemporary spin on the classic tune “This Land is Your Land.” Based on the predominately White people section at Anomaly’s website, minorities should realize this adland is not your adland.

Friday, November 20, 2015

12943: Multicultural Campaigning.

From NBC News…

Clinton Campaign Hires Black Owned Advertising Firm

By Lauren Victoria Burke

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has hired Burrell Communications, an African American advertising and media firm.

Based in Chicago and Los Angeles, the firm is owned by two African American women, McGhee Williams Osse and Faye Ferguson, both seasoned marketing and advertising professionals.

Burrell Communications, founded in 1971, will assist the campaign in focusing on African American voters, targeting their concerns and issues as Clinton moves forward towards the first primary and caucus tests.

In 2012, African American women showed up big at the polls and delivered the highest voter turnout of any voters, between the ages of ages 18 to 29, in the U.S. electorate.

Though many political observers wonder if that level of voter participation was only possible because President Obama’s name was on the ballot, Clinton is expected to fight hard to assemble Obama’s coalition of voters as the cornerstone of a winning strategy.

It’s likely Burrell Communications’ influence will be seen in South Carolina, where Black voters are a big key in a race primarily between Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders. (Ms. Williams Osse even completed her completed post-graduate advertising studies at the University of South Carolina.) The South Carolina primary is on February 27th and currently Clinton is polling ahead.

“We choose to be an agency that specializes in the African-American market. This is our DNA — our passion... and we believe that we are responsible to the community to whom we speak — the African-American community; our community,” the Burrell website reads regarding the company’s overall mission. The firm has designed campaigns for major corporations ranging from McDonald’s to Toyota to General Mills to American Airlines.

These new hires add to other African American hires who are currently working for Clinton.

The most prominent of those hires includes LaDavia Drane, who is Hillary Clinton’s Director of African American Outreach, Marlon Marshall, who is Clinton’s Director of Political Engagement, and Karen Finney, Clinton’s strategic communications adviser and spokesperson. Finney also worked for Clinton during her run for Senate in 2000.

The campaign also hired well known political veteran Ron Lester to focus on the campaign’s African American polling.

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

12422: Hillary Clinton’s Mad Politics.

Advertising Age reported that Hillary Clinton is likely tapping advertising executives—specifically, GSD&M Chairman Emeritus Roy Spence and Coca-Cola Marketing Executive and former GSD&M Director of Client Services Wendy Clark—to help craft messages for her potential presidential campaign.

Now, it’s not uncommon for politicians to employ adpeople to help persuade and woo voters. For example, Hal Riney hatched the iconic “Morning in America” commercial for Ronald Reagan in 1984. Ad Age opined the following:

Should Ms. Clinton run, her purpose would be to leverage her strengths as an experienced political pro with a large base of female support, while crafting a message that appeals to a wide swath of Americans tired of politics-as-usual. Ms. Clark, a political outsider who has worked on mass-marketed brands, might bring valuable experience to the table in that endeavor.

If Ad Age’s supposition is accurate, one has to wonder about Clinton’s initial choices from adland, especially in regards to the goal of concocting “a message that appeals to a wide swath of Americans…” Sorry, but the overwhelming majority of White advertising executives are culturally clueless, rendering them incapable of effectively and honestly addressing the true, diverse American public.

Consider the fact that Spence masterminded the inane “3 a.m.” commercial during Clinton’s 2008 bid for the Democratic nomination. The spot received lots of criticism and ridicule—and most importantly, it failed to move Clinton ahead of Barack Obama. Additionally, Spence is among those wonderful folks who gave you Annie the Chicken Queen for Popeyes. In short, GSD&M is hardly the home of inclusive, enlightened thinkers, which makes enlisting Spence and Clark a pretty risky and probably reckless decision.

This isn’t the first time MultiCultClassics has wondered about the use of advertising executives as political strategists and executioners. Indeed, do representatives of an industry that continues to make diversity a dream deferred and denied deserve to service a presidential candidate? If Clinton really wants to speak to “Americans tired of politics-as-usual,” she ought to reconsider business as usual with modern Mad Men and Mad Women.

Sunday, December 02, 2012

10808: More Political Conservatives In Adland.

Advertising Age published a perspective from Strategic Media Consultant and Glass House Strategy Principal Vinny Minchillo, who helped create advertising for the Mitt Romney-Paul Ryan presidential campaign. Add the recent Adweek interview with Jim Ferguson and it looks as if Carl Warner is dead wrong to believe there’s a dearth of political conservatives in the advertising industry. Minchillo boasted that he reinvented political advertising for the Romney-Ryan run. Funny, it came off like typical Republican bullshit. Regardless, as even Minchillo acknowledged, his candidate’s loss makes it all sorta moot. Although perhaps he proved that strong advertising will only make a lousy product fail faster.

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

10726: Don’t Vote For Rick Boyko.

Advertising Age published a brainless perspective from Rick Boyko, who called on the advertising industry to regulate political advertising. Boyko whined:

Whatever the answer, our industry should be outraged and should act. Not just because of the volume of terrible communications being generated. Not because of the billions of ad dollars being wasted. Not even because everyone hates all the negative advertising. No, the reason we should act is because the public—the very people we’ve spent our careers trying to reach with truthful and meaningful communications to earn their trust and loyalty—believe the crap that has saturated the airwaves these past six months comes from us.

Um, was Boyko working on the pot legalization initiatives in Colorado and Washington?

For starters, the stuff Boyko called crap is coming from us. It has always come from us. Yes, some of it is more heinous than the rest; unfortunately, Boyko can’t expect the industry to set standards for political advertising any more than he can hope the communications quality of local car dealership commercials will match global campaigns for top automakers. The ad game continues to feature its fair share of hacks, hucksters and charlatans.

Secondly, it’s extraordinarily obscene for Boyko to take such a revolutionary stand. After all, our industry has historically defended the rights of Big Tobacco, Booze Manufacturers, Pharmaceutical Makers, Oil Companies, Fast Food Producers and other questionable advertisers to peddle their goods and services with fuzzy facts and misinformation. Boyko has likely conspired with the full range of shady characters in his time. The man is a master at twisting the truth.

Thirdly, Boyko is a motherfucking asshole. For a hopeless and hypocritical cause such as regulating political advertising, he is quick to mount his soapbox and rally the troops. Yet for the dearth of diversity—a dilemma that he is directly responsible for having perpetuated—the man takes the quiet road. He refuses to see his crimes and admit to his wrongdoings in this area too. Why, it’s the fault of minorities for failing to realize the opportunities and pursue the possibilities.

In this regard, Boyko comes off like, well, a stereotypical politician.

For Its Own Sake, Adland Should Reconsider Political Advertising

‘Why Wouldn’t We Expect to Have the Same Level of Scrutiny Brought to Bear on Political Ads as There Are on Ads for Toothpaste or Frozen Peas?’

By Rick Boyko

My name is Rick Boyko, and I approved this message.

Last week I posted this note on Facebook: “After billions of dollars were wasted on terrible, misleading, ineffectual and not-factual advertising, I’ve voted. Beginning tomorrow, let’s hope we can all begin to forge a new civil discourse that can move the country forward positively. We also have to demand that the rules for political advertising must be changed. I mean, why wouldn’t we expect to have the same level of scrutiny brought to bear on political ads as there are on, say, an ad for toothpaste or frozen peas?”

The note instantly sparked a debate. This is a discussion that we need to start now, before another election cycle. What can we do to stop all of the negative and misleading advertising?

It amazes me that to make any superlative claim for any product that airs on network TV, you have to provide substantiation from 85% of the market. So if it takes that much legwork, background checking and documentation to prove a yogurt has more fruit at the bottom, it stands to reason that we should be able to expect a similar level of authenticity for our politicians’ claims beyond “I approve of this message.”

Of course the key issue here is the First Amendment. Freedom of speech is always used to defend the negative, deceptive claims found in political advertising. But I can’t help thinking, something’s got to give.

As individuals and as an industry, we should demand better. Surely there’s something we can do. Limit the spending. Limit the amount of time campaigns can advertise. Prescreen the ads.

Whatever the answer, our industry should be outraged and should act. Not just because of the volume of terrible communications being generated. Not because of the billions of ad dollars being wasted. Not even because everyone hates all the negative advertising. No, the reason we should act is because the public—the very people we’ve spent our careers trying to reach with truthful and meaningful communications to earn their trust and loyalty—believe the crap that has saturated the airwaves these past six months comes from us.

The public is unaware that political advertising comes from specialists.

To them, it’s just advertising—a profession we deserve to defend and be proud of.

I suggest we band together and act with haste, because there are just over 1,100 days left until we hear “I approved this message” once again.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Rick Boyko, former director and professor at the VCU Brandcenter, is the founding member of the Leadership Collective, leadership-collective.com.

Sunday, November 04, 2012

10691: Offensive Politics And The Ad Industry.

Can’t wait for Tuesday’s election—mostly because it’s painful to witness the poorly produced propaganda from advertising agency people.

Jeff Goodby and Rich Silverstein apparently pulled the embarrassingly bad video for The Future Children Project. The iconic duo undoubtedly hoped it would go viral; however, folks reacted like it was a virus. Besides being sophomoric pap, the piece represented everything President Barack Obama opposes about political advertising. The Commander-In-Chief would never have provided the tag, “I’m Barack Obama and I approved this message.” Needless to say, Goodby and Silverstein are no Clint Eastwood. And as others have pointed out, they are no Hal Riney either.

The latest mess—“Obama: Let’s Finish The Job”—comes from a concept initiated by SVA students and executed by Martin Agency CCO Joe Alexander and friends. While being a well-intentioned effort, this video may surpass The Future Children Project for offensiveness. Hyping the notion that Americans don’t leave a job half finished, the video included an image of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and asked, “What if Martin Luther King decided to quit halfway up the mountain?”

If Obama would have panned the garbage by Goodby and Silverstein, how might MLK have reacted to the work of ad students and professionals? After all, the famous “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop” speech was made in protest of discriminatory labor practices. Plus, MLK literally targeted prominent brands in his call for justice:

And so, as a result of this, we are asking you tonight, to go out and tell your neighbors not to buy Coca-Cola in Memphis. Go by and tell them not to buy Sealtest milk. Tell them not to buy—what is the other bread?—Wonder Bread. And what is the other bread company, Jesse? Tell them not to buy Hart’s bread. As Jesse Jackson has said, up to now, only the garbage men have been feeling pain; now we must kind of redistribute the pain. We are choosing these companies because they haven’t been fair in their hiring policies; and we are choosing them because they can begin the process of saying they are going to support the needs and the rights of these men who are on strike. And then they can move on town—downtown and tell Mayor Loeb to do what is right.

It all begs questions like:

• How would MLK feel about appearing in such a video brought to you by the advertising industry?

• Has Madison Avenue made any progress in the areas of diversity and non-discriminatory hiring practices since MLK delivered speeches and led marches?

• Would MLK denounce the separate-but-unequal conditions experienced by minority advertising agencies—and perpetuated by White advertising agencies and clients?

“Obama: Let’s Finish The Job” declared, “Americans don’t quit. We finish the job.” Yet regarding diversity—the very heart of MLK’s legacy—the video’s proposition does not hold up in the U.S. advertising field. On Madison Avenue, the job is far from finished and not even halfway started. Hell, it could be argued the job hasn’t begun. And history shows the problem won’t be adequately addressed, no matter which candidate emerges victorious on Tuesday.

Monday, October 22, 2012

10641: Atheists Don’t Heart Romney.

From The New York Daily News…

Atheist group sponsors billboard attacking Romney’s religion, but Mormons slam its accuracy

American Atheists prez slams Mormonism as ‘racist,’ ‘homophobic’ and ‘misogynistic.’

By Christine Roberts / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

A mobile billboard attacking Mitt Romney’s faith will accompany the GOP presidential nominee on the campaign trail this week.

The American Atheists-sponsored sign, which will park outside the site of Monday’s debate in Boca Raton, Fla., blasts the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for its views on African-Americans and gays, CNN reported.

“We feel that America doesn’t know or understand the possible ramifications of a Mormon president,” David Silverman, president of American Atheists, told the Daily News. “Mormonism is marketed to us as another sect of Christianity. But it is not.”

The LDS Church, however, says the billboard’s messages, “No Blacks Allowed (until 1978)” and “No Gays Allowed (Current),” are baseless.

“People are surely free to disagree with us on the facts,” church spokesman Dale Jones wrote in an e-mail to CNN. “This group seems not to know that there have been black members of the Church since our earliest history, and there are many faithful gay members of the Church today.”

The sign’s first statement refers to the church’s refusal to ordain black male members until 1978, when the church head said he had a revelation to change the policy.

People of all racial groups, however, have been allowed to be members of church since it was founded.

The second statement addresses what Silverman tells CNN is the church’s “intolerance” and “bigotry” towards members of the LGBT community, a characterization the church denies.

”The fact is that Mormonism is racist to its core. It’s homophobic in its behavior. It’s misogynistic through and through,” Silverman told the Daily News, adding that he “laughed” when he heard the church said his group’s statements were inaccurate.

Silverman maintains that the sign, which will cost about $8,000 to run for the week, is not aimed at Romney specifically.

Rather, he said it’s designed to make people realize that they know next to nothing about Mitt Romney’s “views on equality and tolerance.”

“We want to know if he can guarantee every American citizen equality,” Silverman said. “We want to know if he’ll be open to diversity. And we want to hear it from him tonight.”

Sunday, May 27, 2012

Sunday, July 17, 2011

9016: A Pack Of Elephants In The Room.


When considering how Spiriva discussed COPD…


Pfizer hawked pharmaceuticals for erectile dysfunction…


Scott Heidepriem ran for Governor of South Dakota in 2010…


…and the Texas Lottery hyped its $500,000,000 Blockbuster game, it appears the elephant in the room is everyone’s unwillingness to admit that the elephant in the room is a contrived and overused commercial concept.

Thursday, October 28, 2010

8105: Martinez Meets Mad Ave Minutemen…?


At Advertising Age, Laura Martinez examined a racist political ad from Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle that rivals the shit expelled by Louisiana Senator David Vitter—and Martinez ultimately ignited irate comments from Madison Avenue Minutemen.

Saturday, October 09, 2010

8042: Political Race And Racism.


In Louisiana, a political battle is being waged between Senator David Vitter and Congressman Charlie Melancon, with Vitter creating attack ads that cross the border of good taste.

Monday, November 17, 2008

6153: Conceding The Non-White Vote…?


The letter below appeared in the latest issue of Ad Age. A brief MultiCultClassics comment immediately follows…

McCain could have swayed blacks

RE: Al Ries’ “What Marketers Can Learn from Obama’s Campaign” (AdAge.com, Nov. 7). What many in the “mainstream” ad/marketing community fail to observe is that the Obama brand had “loyalty” in the African-American community that was not challenged by his competitor at all. Obama built on that brand loyalty by spending more than $4 million with our African-American-owned newspaper network nationwide, which his competitor did not do. In today’s marketplace, you can’t just let 90% of African-American consumers sit there and patronize your competition. With the right media choices, black consumers/voters can be swayed. For instance, a full-page ad in our newspaper network of 121 black newspapers highlighting Martin Luther King Jr., who was a Republican, could have at least been done by McCain.

Mark Kimber
Kimber Kimber & Associates
Black Newspaper Network
Fresno, Calif.

Kimber makes a few interesting points, but the idea of McCain running a Martin Luther King Jr. advertisement is probably not a good idea. After all, even Wikipedia notes the following:

“Former Presidential candidate John McCain voted against the creation of the holiday to honor King, and later defended Arizona Republican Governor Mecham’s rescinding of the state holiday in honor of King created by his Democratic predecessor. After his opposition grew increasingly untenable, McCain reversed his position, and encouraged his home state of Arizona to recognize the holiday despite opposition from then-Governor Evan Mecham.”

In McCain’s case, trying to link with the iconic civil rights leader would have appeared patronizing at best, and outrageous at least. If McCain hoped to connect with non-Whites, the self-proclaimed Maverick needed to show how his record has benefited such audiences. The decision to not run messages in Black newspapers spoke volumes on the reality. Advertising has never succeeded in creating complete fabrications, especially in the political arena.

Thursday, September 11, 2008

5935: What Obama Teaches Madison Avenue.


The Franklin Blog noted two other blogs—FiveThirtyEight and Crooks And Liars—insisted Barack Obama must create better ads. Crooks And Liars wrote, “The Obama campaign needs to think a little more outside of the box. They should aim to produce ads that are either more creative/funny than a typical campaign ad, or more sincere.” MultiCultClassics posted initial comments at The Franklin Blog, and here they are again with elaboration.

Perhaps Obama realizes traditional ads don’t influence voters’ decisions. After all, has anyone ever cast a ballot because of a commercial?

It’s hard to recall positive and memorable TV spots for presidential candidates. The last one that comes to mind is Hal Riney’s “Morning in America” hyping Ronald Reagan. On the flip side, there are plenty of spots that result in ridicule and worse. How many parodies were inspired by Hillary Clinton’s 3 a.m. nonsense? John McCain has generated loads of problems for himself via broadcast bullshit. You’d think the Arizona senator would opt for direct mail and telemarketing versus continuing to set up people’s punchlines.

The truth—if such a thing exists in advertising and politics—is that Obama has been running great ads. But he’s using nontraditional ad techniques. His digital skills make McCain look downright analog. Plus, Obama lets influencers literally sing praises for him. Meanwhile, numerous recording artists have demanded McCain stop playing their tunes.

There’s been controversy with minority media feeling slighted by Obama. But why buy ad space when the publications put him on nearly every cover? That’s called free publicity.

Obama’s “Change” theme has been consistent and memorable. Could anyone recite McCain’s “Country First” tagline until maybe a week ago?

Obama has displayed an active dislike for the standard political games, and it appears his annoyance extends to the standard political ads. Like successful and breakthrough brands, Obama has established a leadership position without regular marketing schemes. TV spots are not the primary vehicles delivering his messages. And the “product” is ultimately selling itself.

There are lessons here for the ivory towers on Madison Avenue.

Saturday, January 26, 2008

5033: Politically Correct Advertising?

What’s with the staging for political candidates advertising their commitment to education?


The Black candidate shows up in a predominately White school…


The Indian American candidate meets with a predominately Black group of kids…


The Latino candidate opts not to appear at all, displaying a United Nations classroom…

What’s the lesson to be learned here?