home

Fake Obama Ad Attacks Hillary on Civil Liberties

This is a very weird campaign ad. The Obama campaign denies any knowledge or approval of it. I don't doubt them.

The San Francisco Chronicle call its "ground-breaking" for its remix of an Apple Computer Superbowl ad in 1984. Personally, I didn't like the ad and found it creepy.

The public won't ever see the ad on television. But, as one person quoted says,

...the success of "Hillary 1984" means that now "every candidate will have to worry about some guy with a video camera and a Mac being able to do whatever he or she wants."

< PurgeGate: Just Misteps or Were Crimes Committed | Phil Spector's Murder Trial to Begin >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    The original ad (none / 0) (#3)
    by pico on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 12:37:34 AM EST
    was gorgeous and well-directed, but made no sense.  Apple computers... or totalitarian dictatorship?  What?

    The new ad makes even less sense.  If I wanted to paint Hillary as an ideologue, those are probably not the snippets of her speech that I would edit in.  "I want people to disagree with me... I want to have a dialogue."  Oooh, creepy: sounds like she wants to stifle conversation.   I think .. Wait, no.  Not at all.

    It's a dumb commercial, although updating sledgehammer girl with an iPod is kinda cute.

    This is a good thing (none / 0) (#4)
    by Pete Guither on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 12:47:13 AM EST
    Official paid campaign ads are generally atrocious, full of lies and exaggerations.  But they have tended to work -- people respond to them under some moronic belief that they must be true.

    But if everybody with a YouTube account can make a campaign ad, just think of the cacophony of chaos that could ensue.  Every point of view, every fringe hatred and conspiracy theory, obvious fabrications, and Hitler ads for each and every candidate -- all looking just like regular campaign ads.

    The remedy of free speech.  Eventually, people might get trained into figuring that if it looks like a campaign commercial, it's probably not true.  And they might have to actually, you know, read something (I know, it's a big step, but I can dream).

    We're now in an era when anyone (none / 0) (#5)
    by Light Emitting Pickle on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 12:52:47 AM EST
    with a computer, but lacking a conscious, will make ads (or videos, generally) about their detractors, enemies, slightly irritating co-workers and neighbors. This is scary, given that there is no mechanism to counter these ads/videos.

    WRT this instance, anyone can assemble an ad claiming to be the work of a particular campaign. This is the way of the future, I'm afraid.

    the problem (1.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Deconstructionist on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 07:30:09 AM EST
    "anyone with a brain could figure out who to vote for on real issues"

      Oh really? Who would that be?

      I'm guessing it's the person you support. How convenient: Anyone could reach the same conclusion if only he was as smart as you and anyone who doesn't isn't as smart as you.

     

    Parent

    huh. (none / 0) (#8)
    by s5 on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 03:53:12 AM EST
    I felt very underwhelmed by the issue presented by the SF Chron. It reminds of the panic during the early days of desktop publishing that people will get confused by randoms with computers printing "official" looking documents. Civilization managed to stay together.

    the original ad, which i saw when it aired (none / 0) (#10)
    by cpinva on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 08:38:46 AM EST
    during the superbowl, was about the tyranny of ibm based pc's, in the marketplace, and the apple alternative. didn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. it was a great ad, but i doubt many apple pc's got bought because of it.

    as for this one, i'd be surprised if both apple and the obama campaign don't sue to have it removed, since it probably violates multiple laws.

    with regards to its effectiveness, the sound clips played were in stark contrast to the visual, ms. clinton hardly came off as "big brother", assuming that was its intent. it failed.

    I thought it was (none / 0) (#11)
    by Deconstructionist on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 08:48:53 AM EST
     technically pretty impressive. The editing from the original was hard to detect.

      As for the message, it's superficial and probably not particularly appropriate. How much less than Clinton of an "establishment" candidate pushed by an elite group manipulating imagery is Obama?

      Probably very little, but then maybe that false image is precisely what the ad is trying to foster. One might call it ironic.

    Parent

    Good point..... (none / 0) (#14)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 04:55:22 PM EST
    the ad might work for a Ralph Nader...not Barack Obama.  Last I checked Obama is in the same senate as Clinton, playing the same crooked game.

    Parent
    It's nonsensical (none / 0) (#13)
    by eric on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 03:27:47 PM EST
    Apple computers... or totalitarian dictatorship?  What?
    by pico

    Exactly my thoughts.  I haven't a clue how HRC has anything to do with 1984.

    Hillary and 1984 (none / 0) (#15)
    by diogenes on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 10:26:12 PM EST
    In 1984, it is said that "War is Peace"
    Hillary within a month supported total withdrawal in 2008 and said that if elected she would keep troops in Iraq indefinitely but simply stop policing the streets.  Or, in other words, "War is Peace".


    I thought it was pretty funny (none / 0) (#16)
    by roy on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 11:00:46 PM EST
    But only because I thought it was a reference to Futurama.

    Are they implying that Hillary advocates feeding Republicans to squirrels?