Making The Least Out Of New Media

Let’s take a look at Dale Cardwell’s latest ad in his campaign for U.S. Senate. Cardwell has a terrific message: Washington is broken. (Boy, do we all know that.) And he, Dale Cardwell, newsy man, is outsider enough to fix it – presumably by not working for just the corporately-inclined, fat-cat lobbyista who are busily destroying our nation’s middle class.

Let’s face it though, Cardwell’s kinda dorky looking on-cam. And what’s with the 1990’s corporate-style, studio-based video production value in the video? The fakey lighting on the pointless, flowing drapery? If only the backdrop was green, then he could at least evoke Scarlett O’Hara’s green poteers she wore to call-on Rhett Butler, residing temporarily in an Atlanta jail, when she desperately needed some quick cold cash, something Cardwell could use too I hear.

Now might be a good time to take a moment and review the life and times of Tony Schwartz, the creator of the infamous and deceptively simple “Daisy” ad that sunk the Goldwater campaign in 1964. Schwartz died three days ago. And Cardwell’s campaign is gonna die soon too if his team can’t think up anything better than nicely lit drapes and a boring suit & tie.

One thing working in local TV news as a career path never does, alas, is help promote the slightest bit of media creativity. If Cardwell’s gonna get any attention between now and the July primaries, he’d better get new media clever… real quick.

Suggestion #1: take a look at what is hot, hot, hot right now in political ads.

Suggestion #2: See Andre’s post above.

4 comments

  1. evets says:

    You perpetuate what is wrong with the electoral process when you state how dorky someone looks on camera. That’s one reason government is less than it could be – the slick ones are elected.

  2. SpaceyG says:

    You misunderstand me. I think dorky looking people should certainly be elected to public office. Their dorkiness alone probably keeps them less distracted from the numerous pitfalls that go with being stunningly fabulous. (Don’t I know all about that?!) I’m only saying the dork doesn’t need to go on-cam himself/herself. They didn’t put Johnson in the Daisy ad, right? Just a kid, and an atom bomb. So maybe Cardwell should just put his message in the ad, not himself.

  3. Icarus says:

    Spacey, I’m trying to follow the logic.

    Cardwell made his living and has his name ID because he made his living in front of a camera.

    Now he’s added a political message to his views, and he shouldn’t be in front of a camera.

    Seemed to me that he did fine on camera without a political message, and now doesn’t work on camera with a political message.

    And your conclusion is that he’s the problem and that the message needs to be on camera?

Comments are closed.