TV ads don't tell us what candidates believe.
TV ads tell us how candidates hope to position themselves.
We get impressions from TV ads. There is nothing in a four-second statement saying, for example, "We need to fix the problem of homelessness" that tells us what an officeholder would do--if anything. It is political babble. No one will remember the comment because there is nothing to remember. A TV ad like this, however, would draw attention:
On the day I take office I will direct the state police to remove every tent and RV on public property in Oregon within ten days, using bulldozers if necessary. We will reclaim our sidewalks and parks. Some of the people we move out will finally go into treatment. Good. We have treatment facilities available. Some will just complain and leave the state. Bye. We have indulged them too long.
A Democratic candidate wouldn't run that ad, but it would get noticed. Many people would complain that it is too harsh, that living under tarps in parks is a human right, that people are too addled by drugs to move. There would be an uproar. People would remember the ad and the uproar.
Trump did something equivalent to this when he announced his campaign: "They don't send their best. They bring drugs. . . ."
The ads of leading Democratic candidates for governor are inoffensive. They say mushy, anodyne things. If they have any impact at all it will be with the lingering impression they leave.
The intended message of Tobias Read's ad is that he is discontented with the status quo. He supports "real change" and Oregon can "do better," the narrator says.
 |
| https://youtu.be/qrcCAUDKKrw |
The ad is illustrated with sweet photos of Read looking casual and relaxed. There is typical Democratic narrative about community. Read supports lifting up Oregon families, whatever that means. He supports affordable child care, and universal pre-K. Nice. Read suggests he will clean up the homeless encampment problem because "we help the homeless get into stable housing" as if doing that were easy, or even possible. The ad essentially has no content beyond the fleeting impression that Read is an easy-going guy who favors change and the nice things Democrats wish we could afford. It is pie-in-the-sky, but it is change. Or would be, if pie were free.
The Tina Kotek ad leaves a different impression. She isn’t taking my unsolicited advice. I had suggested to her that she position herself as a change agent. Instead, her ad proudly takes credit for Oregon government. "Just look at what she's done as Speaker of the House," the voice-over says. The ad says those good, progressive things are because she is so tough and effective. Kotek says to the camera, "It's one thing to talk about the problems. It's another to make the tough calls to actually get things done."
 |
| https://youtu.be/IKLa2oW9xag |
I had shared my opinion with Kotek that casual voters might conflate Kotek and the current governor, Kate Brown. They are both Portland women in late middle age, neither are heterosexual, and both are unabashedly progressive. They have about the same policy positions, as far as any voter knows. Kotek's ad has a progressive feminist vibe, with women making straight-to-the-camera endorsements. It leaves an implication and impression of women in leadership: “If you like Kate Brown, you will love Tina Kotek.”
Am I trivializing these ads? I suspect the two campaigns would think so. After all, I am saying the denoted content of the ads flies by unnoticed. But each ad leaves an impression. For better or worse, here is what I think sticks:
Tobias Read: Nice easy-going guy, says he will change things. No real answers.
Tina Kotek: Another feminist from Portland with a progressive agenda. Same as now, but more and tougher.
[Note: I have contributed approximately similar amounts to both campaigns.]
12 comments:
In the quest for power, lying is just part of the job. Almost all politicians make promises they know they can’t deliver on, like Biden’s pledge to unite us. For the most part, they’re just letting us know what they would do if they could. Then we have the outliers who lie compulsively, like the Trump cult. They’re just sick.
To distinguish themselves, politicians need a good jingle in their ads. Advertisers pay for them because they work. For example, even though I don’t have much hair left, I can still recall the old Brylcreem commercial:
Brylcreem, a little dab’ll do ya. Brylcreem, you’ll look so debonair.
Brylcreem, the gals’ll all pursue ya. Simply rub a little in your hair.
See, you don’t even have to comb it. it’s a lot like a political promise.
I watched Tina Kotek’s ad and noticed that there was only one white male visible, and he was only there for about 1/10 of a second.
Under the woke administration of Tina Kotek, things here in Oregon will go from bad to diverse.
And then there is Betsy Johnson...
There are a gaggle of Republican candidates, a few Democratic candidates, and then there's Betsy. Willamette Week is trying to cover many of them, and even spent several weeks defining her for its readers.
I've had the opportunity to meet and talk to Betsy several times of the years when she partnered with Tim Knopp about Measure 97 back in 2016. They were both opposed to this flawed tax measure as the Oregon Legislature was looking to raise revenues by taxing gross receipts for certain sales in Oregon above $25M. Companies like Intel and Nike were likely targets. Unfortunately people did not understand that neither company likely even had Oregon sales exceeding $25M.
In any case, Betsy is still a breath of fresh air for Oregon, and is likely to attract a number of voters, especially those unaffiliated with either the Democratic or Republican Party. There are more NAVs than either of them.
Some say she will draw from Ds, and others from Rs. It remains to be seen. She has quite the campaign chest, too, and she does have a broad level of support. Even pundits from outside Oregon have their eyes on Oregon, and Betsy's chances.
Of course there will be detractors, including many who read this blog.
Really? That's what matters to you?
I suppose you don't eat Wheaties because their boxes are "too diverse" and you don't want to upset your tummy by seeing people who don't look like you.
Mc,
That’s not “what I care about.” That’s one thing I care about. I care about it because excessive and gratuitous “diversity“ in a commercial demonstrates more of an attachment to virtue signaling about wokeness than I want to see in a candidate.
I am a practitioner of cereal monogamy. I eat Cheerios, and I do so regardless of the race of whoever might be portrayed on the box. But thanks for your concern about my tummy.
Hmmm - from bad to diverse sounds great! Maybe a few white Nationalists, who think teaching Black history is too "discomforting" for those poor, oppressed White kids, would get woke.
And meanwhile white kids in K-12 can get guilt-tripped over their “white privilege” by teachers in thrall to critical race theorists like Ibram X. Kendi and Robin DiAngelo.
It’s not just black history, which no one objects to. It’s about things like this.
That’s funny – no one objects to Black history, but they don’t want students to feel any “discomfort.” Anybody that can read Black history without feeling discomfort is either reading a whitewashed version or has no heart.
By the way, Dr. Ibram X. Kendi, winner of the National Book Award, doesn’t teach K-12 in Oregon or anywhere else. Neither does Robin DiAngelo.
Kendi and DiAngelo are two of the most prominent promoters of the ideas that form the basis of critical race theory. The article I linked previously describes how those ideas have infiltrated the educational establishment.
I guess not reading the article I posted makes it easier to ignore my point.
Kids in school should not be made to feel discomfort over things they didn’t do in a time before they were born.
The link provided is to Areo, a right-wing online magazine that prints a lot of alt-right crap about race. The infliction of discomfort on kids in school is taking place mainly in the fevered imagination of white nationalists. On the other hand, I felt a lot of discomfort during trig class. Maybe I should sue.
When someone who disagrees has nothing substantive to say in response, all that’s left to them is an ad hominem attack full of empty invective.
Post a Comment