techPresident - Vote Different - Comments

So many people just use

johannabartley — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 07:27:49 -0500

So many people just use logos they find on the internet without caring about any copyright law. When it comes to politics there have been fliers made up with a party's logo payed and printed by another party, used to discredit the image of the first party.
___________
Payroll Services

opinion

HUSTON — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 06:25:11 -0400

ParkRidge47 is skilled, and probably liberal, but I’m not so sure he’s an operative in the sense that you are. Awareness of redstate and littlegreenfootballs means he reads KOS, or just surfs around the net like the rest of us.
t’s a much more egalitarian world in cyber space, but not to the extent that Marcus deserves a link back to his video, which is, uhhh, bad — like his grammar and spelling.
The two efforts aren’t comparable in any way. My 11-year old daughter produces more effective Power Point demos.avodart drug

Small world

Philip de Vellis — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 19:55:09 -0400

My father grew up in Tunisia. I had not seen this video until now, but I think it is wonderful that it played an interesting role in that country's politics.

It looks like the 1984 ad is becoming the equivalent of sample from a James Brown record that seems to make an appearance in every hip-hop album.

Since mash-ups are inherently a derivative genre, it doesn't really matter who did something first or better.

In this case, I think the mash-up artist did some amazing work and made a very powerful statement for change.

And it looks like he's been

cdharrison — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 12:01:10 -0400

And it looks like he's been fired? BetaNews has the story: http://www.betanews.com/article/Campaign_Consultant_Fired_for_Making_Ant...

Politubing entering main stream

Marisa — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 04:23:23 -0400

From the 10,000 foot level one of the aspects that gets lost in the heat of this story, is the tremendous impact these "politubers" (a term recently coined by a TubeMogul.com blog) will have on this election. The political campaign game rules have now forever been altered. This video is a brilliant example. Absolutely Phil's talents would be better served had it been more refined. But like him, there are many. This was bound to happen. The attention this story is getting will bring “politubing” to the main stream. By the next presidential campaign, "politubing" will be a more functional work of art. For now, candidates that embrace the power of this medium and adeptly guide their campaigns using this as a tool, will most likely reap the benefits.

Marisa

The modern way

tedlaskaris — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 00:26:45 -0400

Phil de Vellis has been fired from his job, but I think he won't have trouble finding people who would want to employ his talents right away. The Internet is a route to many things, political and otherwise, including making career changes on the fly. As for the video itself, I thought it was a very good job indeed.

Ted Laskaris

Mystery Solved

Kevin002 — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 00:06:36 -0400

Great Job, but I have this question , why did Obama say that he knew nothing about the Video and his camp had nothing to do with it ,when this guy is linked to the Obama Camp

It's not "new"

David All — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 23:37:09 -0400

...it's modern.

And yes, it is.
________________________________________
David All
The David All Group
http://davidallgroup.com
________________________________________

What blatnat lies

donsingleton — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:30:22 -0400

Kerry certainly did not like the swiftboat adds, and in some cases some people remembered things one way and others a different way, but I id not se aeny blatant lies in them

Hillary wasn't swiftboated

Joshua Levy — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 14:12:20 -0400

I agree with cfinnie that an amateur could have produced the video. I'm a video editor myself, and I have friends who could easily create the video -- it just takes a little knowledge of Adove After Effects or a similar program.

But I don't agree with the comparison to the swift boat ads; those ads contained outright fabrications about John Kerry's service in Vietnam, for political gain. This ad, while propagandistic, contains no blatant lies like the swift boat ads did. If we find out that the 1984 ad was funded by partisans, then it will share that with the swift boat ads, but the content isn't the same. Hillary wasn't swiftboated.

Lamer and lamer

cfinnie — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 12:21:30 -0400

You are right. This is unlikely to get as much traction as it's not nearly as well done. However, some of the other Hillary ones are. See previous comment. (Hey! I'm new here--just learning the interface.)

Same person, different skill level?

cfinnie — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 12:16:59 -0400

Interesting you should bring that up. I wondered the same thing about the first crop. What if the well-done, but fairly restrained one supposedly posted by ParkRiver47 was actually done by the same people who did the much nastier one with the Jennifer Flower interview from Fox News? When you view one, the other comes up on YouTube. Some people, as I did, must click on the second. Some people must go to the paranoid website listed at the end that accuses Mrs. Clinton of being a procurer for her husband's career as a serial rapist.

The Obama one, however, is not nearly as well done as the first ones. So I would question whether it comes from the same source.

And, yes, Micah, I am the Chris Finnie you interviewed for The Nation about the Dean campaign. Good to hear from you again too! Chris

Well-funded, but not professional

cfinnie — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 12:08:35 -0400

As a professional designer friend of mine pointed out, no real professional would do this. When I asked her why, she threw the question back at me. Though not a video expert, I am a professional writer and so work in a similar field. My response? "Steve Jobs would sue my ass off." That's especially true for the new Obama one that actually uses the Apple logo. As a professional in the field, I couldn't afford to do something that infringes on the copyright of a company as big and lawsuit-prone as Apple.

So, while I do believe somebody paid for it, I think you hit the nail on the head near the end of your post. When the whole thing is finally exposed, I expect to find well-heeled Republicans behind it--just as we finally found them behind the Swift Boat attacks. They found some bright young kid who had the skills to find the video and manipulate it. Had their lawyers tell the kid what to do. And put it out there to wreck havoc.

The chair of the Democratic Central Committee the next county over sent me an email last night from the local Republicans. It urges all Republicans to watch the Hillary 1984 video. He and I believe the Republicans want the video to vilify both Clinton and Obama. They claim it "aggressively points out the weaknesses and hypocrisy of the Clintons." It also puts Obama in a bad light as tolerant of political sleeze. It pits the two Democratic frontrunnres against each other. And paints the Democrats as dangerously divided--perhaps too much so to govern. What Republican wouldn't have been happy to finance that?

Obviously Not From the Obama Campaign

patachon — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 02:54:55 -0400

The Obama Campaign has got better things to do than compare Hillary to Big Brother.

I was tempted to shout 'vast rightwing conspiracy' as to who put this thing together -- especially after reading "Ghosts of Dirty Tricks Past" by Joe Conason -- but basically all that's required is an overly enthusiastic Obama supporter with a copy of Adobe AfterEx or FinalCut Pro.

P.S. It was kind of funny that Carla Marinuci in her San Francisco Chronicle piece calls the video a "mashup". You'd think someone coming from San Francisco of all places would be more tech-savvy.

Independent Illinois Grassroots: IllinoisDemNet.com

Barack 1984

Kevin002 — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 17:09:06 -0400

This could be the same person , doing the same thing but just with a different name,