Political Ad Observations - 2012 Edition

As someone who took multiple communication related courses during his Undergrad, I'm fascinated w/ political advertising.

My hometown is at the confluence 3 Congressional districts (2 of which are really competitive) & a few other races for the State Legislature. So I'm exposed to the broadcast advertising. I've noticed a few things.

We're all used to listening to the sinister, creepy, Scooby-Doo music if its an attack ad or the light, stringed or sentimental piano music if its a support ad. But I've noticed a change, the change being the source material.

For instance an attack ad could by running "Candidate X voted to increase your taxes by a whopping 55%" followed in tiny print stating something like "HR 1139-2019". Whereas others (particularly coming from any of the mysteriously named patriotic SuperPACs), will lay a claim to something "Candidate Y is in bed w/ (insert the National candidate of your choice) & has pledge to take away your Social Security. Are you going to stand for this?!"

I've noticed the more competitive the race is, the more likely the ads will respond to each other. "Candidate Y has claimed I bought a summer home in some foreign country. I want you to know that was a complete lie. I went to said foreign country because it was a fact-finding trip promoting the area in the hopes of creating jobs back home. While I was working hard for you, Candidate X was buying companies w/ the intent purpose of profiting from their layoffs."

I have to give Kirsten Gillibrand, my state's junior Senator, credit. Her ads alone are premised entirely on HOW she delivers her message. It just feels so enthusiastic & geniune. Of course except for the election where she unseated a 4-term incumbent back in 2006, she's won all her elections by 20 points or more & can afford to simply not acknowledge her opposition.


**********
In other news...
**********

This here is Shiloh.



Feel fee to comment on any part of this entry if you so desire.

Mythologizing the Past

I ran across this Washington Post news article that came out shortly after the recent passage of Health Care reforms.

I came across an interesting quote:

"I grew up in the '50s," said Hugh Pearson, 63, a retired builder from Bakersfield, Calif. "That was a wonderful time. Nobody was getting rich, nobody was doing everything big. But it was 'Ozzie and Harriet' days, 'Leave It to Beaver'-type stuff. Now we have all this MTV, expose-yourself stuff, and we have no morality left, not even by the legislators."

It makes for a great news-bite but let's look at this further. If its 2010 now & he's currently 63, that would mean he was born roughly in 1947. He was 3 when it began & 13 when it closed!

BTW, I'm doing the "face-palm" right now.

Back when I was that age, my biggest concern was catching the latest episode of the original Transformers cartoon. Or yelling at my sister for disassembling my latest Legos creation, or playing GI Joe w/ the neighborhood kids in the woods by my old house.

I guess its a testament to the effectiveness of the Madison Avenue cultural propaganda machine.


**********
In other news...
**********

This here is Ashley. We met each other many moons ago through the connection of a mutual friend. It didn't work out for quite sometime, she was coming as I was going & vice versa. That sorta thing.

Low & behold she was like 8 months pregnant or something & found herself in my area & inquired about a shoot. I made time the following week.

It was kinda tough considering Mother Nature forced us indoodrs, the limited time available, & not to mention, it was my first preggo shoot in like 7 years. I think both of us did a pretty darn good. Preggo shoots are always tough trying to hit the model at the right angle that shows off the bump (the thing everyone wants to see apparently) & remembering that the model won't have same movement mechanics.

Anyways, here's the lovely Ashley & her then pregnant self.



Feel free to comment away on anything written here, if you so desire.