Sunday, November 09, 2008
MARKETING OF THE PRESIDENCY
Marketing is an interesting thing. I suppose there are many things like this in life but Marketing can really only move forward. It really cannot, by its very definition, go backward because, if it did, it would drive whatever it supports into extinction.
In some ways, though, there are things to be regretted when Marketing moves forward. Things always be come glossier and have greater spin. It becomes increasingly difficult to find the nitty gritty reality of things.
It was interesting to watch the two presidential candidates this year. It was very apparent that Obama started planning for the marketing of his campaign two or more years ago. Yesterday, I saw an interview with him from October 2006. He was coy about it but it was obvious that he was well into the planning stages of his presidential campaign at that time. One interesting comment he made was that being a celebrity (which he said that he was) made campaigning so much easier -- that money would just come in rather than him have to work to get it. That was pretty interesting on many levels. Especially in that it was a year later he when he made the pledge to accept public funds for his presidential campaign -- a pledge he later went back on.
Anyway, I'm not here to pick on the guy. Honest. He ran a very intelligent and well-marketed campaign. I have a lot of respect for that. He was light years ahead of the McCain campaign which found itself having to switch strategies mid-stream and then found itself so behind the eight ball that all it could do was attempt character assassination of its opponent. It really wasn't fun to watch ... not for any of us I don't believe.
But, still, as marketing of a politician becomes more slick, I cannot help but wonder what is being lost. I believe that our constitution was written from the context of a people who discussed and knew the issues. Yes, later there was yellow journalism and all that but I still would like to think that when the constitution was drafted, there was an assumption that the people would always be involved in politics ... be aware of the issues and make decisions from there.
By and large, I don't believe that happened this year. I am NOT saying the outcome would be any different had it happened; I am just saying that it didn't happen.
Yes, there are thoughtful folks out there who read and studied and discussed and ruminated ... and really I'd hope that anyone who reads my blog is among that group ... but by and large unfortunately this was a year of either voting fear (as in "I sure don't want the other guy") or similarity (as in "Wow, Sarah Palin seems just like me!")
(Really? You ever gut a moose?)
You betcha.
What has been lost ... can it ever be regained? I doubt it. Because marketing tends to always progress, looking to the future, is the outcome of someone who is "marketed into the presidency" the outcome we really want? I don't know. Maybe. Maybe not.
I have been emailing the RNC to start some sort of formal campaign to encourage people not only to vote but to vote the issues. I'm doubting I ever hear anything from them though.
In some ways, though, there are things to be regretted when Marketing moves forward. Things always be come glossier and have greater spin. It becomes increasingly difficult to find the nitty gritty reality of things.
It was interesting to watch the two presidential candidates this year. It was very apparent that Obama started planning for the marketing of his campaign two or more years ago. Yesterday, I saw an interview with him from October 2006. He was coy about it but it was obvious that he was well into the planning stages of his presidential campaign at that time. One interesting comment he made was that being a celebrity (which he said that he was) made campaigning so much easier -- that money would just come in rather than him have to work to get it. That was pretty interesting on many levels. Especially in that it was a year later he when he made the pledge to accept public funds for his presidential campaign -- a pledge he later went back on.
Anyway, I'm not here to pick on the guy. Honest. He ran a very intelligent and well-marketed campaign. I have a lot of respect for that. He was light years ahead of the McCain campaign which found itself having to switch strategies mid-stream and then found itself so behind the eight ball that all it could do was attempt character assassination of its opponent. It really wasn't fun to watch ... not for any of us I don't believe.
But, still, as marketing of a politician becomes more slick, I cannot help but wonder what is being lost. I believe that our constitution was written from the context of a people who discussed and knew the issues. Yes, later there was yellow journalism and all that but I still would like to think that when the constitution was drafted, there was an assumption that the people would always be involved in politics ... be aware of the issues and make decisions from there.
By and large, I don't believe that happened this year. I am NOT saying the outcome would be any different had it happened; I am just saying that it didn't happen.
Yes, there are thoughtful folks out there who read and studied and discussed and ruminated ... and really I'd hope that anyone who reads my blog is among that group ... but by and large unfortunately this was a year of either voting fear (as in "I sure don't want the other guy") or similarity (as in "Wow, Sarah Palin seems just like me!")
(Really? You ever gut a moose?)
You betcha.
What has been lost ... can it ever be regained? I doubt it. Because marketing tends to always progress, looking to the future, is the outcome of someone who is "marketed into the presidency" the outcome we really want? I don't know. Maybe. Maybe not.
I have been emailing the RNC to start some sort of formal campaign to encourage people not only to vote but to vote the issues. I'm doubting I ever hear anything from them though.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home