Air Wars and Campaign Ads, Looking Further

One of my favorite segments from 3380 this semester was Professor DeWitt's phenomenal powerpoint presentations 11A and 11B, which encompassed a thorough investigation and analysis of campaign ads through the years (part A) as well as their production techniques (part B). I was fascinated after watching these videos; the disparity between them was undeniable, and I found myself appreciating their differences because it added to the overall perspective. Some ads relied on subtle hints and clues to convey their tone, invoking an ideal or motif only revealed by a slight visual nuance or audio cue, while others played strictly on viewers emotions.

I guess it's pertinent to include the first televised ad in this post, so



The first thing I noticed when we watched this in class was the unevenness of the text in the beginning of the video. "A Paid Political Announcement" is clearly at an upward right angle. Not that it's anything significant, but it does show how far our textual production techniques have changed over the years. Nowadays, people would lose there jobs if the supporting text in an ad looked less than perfect. That is to say, technology and visuals play a much bigger role in the media and political ads than they used to, almost more than the message itself.

This video is almost whimsical in its production. It's like I'm watching the Wizard of Oz. Cartoonish, innocent, upbeat, friendly, did we as Americans truly used to have such an innocent competition in politics?



Now what I see here, only four years later, involves an entirely different production technique. Although being an attack ad, the message is straightforward and to the point. The narrator addresses the public informatively and delivers the message straight to the camera, a technique rarely used by today's standards. It's interesting to note though that by 1956 the editors were already making video cuts. The "what's that again general" line along with his reiteration was surely effective in taking his message out of context.



Convention has to be one of my favorites. The disbarring audio droning involved made the video almost surreal, like watching something straight out of a Stanley Kubrick film. Combined with Hot Town in the Old Town Tonight and images referencing turmoil and tension all the while conveying an arrogant, smiling Humphrey, this ad was genius and way ahead of it viewers. Even today I don't think it could ever be properly appreciated. It's like something you would watch as a film student.



Now obviously in 1984 you see an increased production value, but only slightly. The added benefit here is that we had available to us images from space, which as far as this message is concerned, involves drawing lines from the heavens, which I think is hilarious because after that narration in the video a line proceeds to surround earth, invoking a specific location to "the heavens." If only heaven was that close...

Next



Now as much as I HATE this video, it may be because it encapsulates (I love that word) EVERYTHING in a political campaign ad that makes its message effective. I mean, it's like watching a Disney movie or something. Go ahead, watch it again, and see if you understand what I'm referring to.

First of all, no more are the still images of conveyance employed. Here, this video employs brief audio video interleaves, which basically means there's motion involved! Motion annotates realism, which adds to the relation the viewers grasp when watching the video. They feel as if they are there, or at the least, sitting in a near observable spot as to what is happening in front of there eyes.

Added to that, the serene, calming music, the hopeful, smiling civilians, the dedicated, sympathetic leader, it's almost too beautiful. I'm starting to wonder if the Democrats are just more naturally gifted at gaining an emotional response than the GOP, at least in relation to their discordance with attacking the opponent.

"We are more secure, we are more prosperous." Clinton conveys optimism in his tone, and the text throughout only helps to buffer his claims, without being too overt. Casual, white text, "taxes cut for 15,000,000 families," (which, when I think about it, really isn't that many Americans) "Death Penalty for Drug Kingpins" (wait, what happened to Rick Ross) "$1500 tax credit for college tuition/job training," damn... it's all good baby. This video has me believing Clinton even after the fact that I know he's a dirty liar like everyone else, it's that good! "Building a bridge to the 21st century," how kodak is that?



What's funny, after watching this, is that is's almost identical to the Clinton ad. Same production techniques, same everything. However, the one difference I noticed, which actually impresses me, is Obama's segments where he looks straight into the camera and delivers his message, a technique I hadn't noticed many politicians use in decades.

Of course, I have to include an obligatory Republican ad for the same campaign...



which is terrible! Why are Republicans so bad as ad campaigns? I don't understand it. What's the point of reverting to the image of surfing over an unidentifiable marsh over and over again in a political video? IT'S POINTLESS.

This is getting super long, but I still need to include one or two videos from Part B.



Now this is actually a GOP ad that emulates Democratic techniques (see Clinton ad). This isn't anything supremely significant, but it does employ some effective textual/visual techniques. It's pure association, but do you see how easy it is to let your subconscious compare "prescription drug prices have sky-rocketed" with the cascading red line? It's almost as if that red line is official!



This obviously plays on emotion, and it's pretty damn good (Scarlett Johansson is hot!) but it doesn't really pull any political message beyond hope and change. It's code words and that's it. Yes, we can. Yes we can what???

So there you have it, I'm trying to nail down some decent blog posts and this is one of them. If you're someone in the minority of actually reading these before they're due the day after tomorrow post and tell me what you think!