Well, I suppose you're right, at least about bungling. What's amazing is that anyone could think that hidden messages work. Push polling does work, and these guys have results that prove it. But, as the Times points out, nobody's been able to demonstrate the efficacy of subliminals, and you'd think advertising people would know better. I fully expect all politicians to be hypocritical, and to do anything to win. Does anyone take those "no negatives" pledges seriously? Demonizing the other guy is a political tradition older than America, but why risk backlash over something that doesn't even work? I guess what worries me is the target audience: who are these people who don't know who they are going to vote for? Most people in my circuit have well-formed political viewpoints, but I get the idea that lots of folks decide on the basis of some nebulous feeling which is much more susceptible to advertising. This is probably the group that decides the election. Is that good or bad? Are our leaders chosen out of ignorance, or do these voters practice a sensitivity to content (as opposed to ideology) which may in fact reveal the better candidate (or at least the lesser of two evils (oh, why glorify it, they ain't even evil, just lesser and lesser))?
I like the little old lady who said, "oh, I don't vote; it only encourages them".
NYT say it pops up in one frame for 1/13th of a second and is the largest piece of text in the 30 second spot. Does video have frames ?
Video has frames. 30 of them a second. I believe the text in question was in 1 frame (visible for 1/30th of a second.) I didn't mention before, but it might be interesting to note that the word choosen was 'rats.' I know it somehow morphed out of 'bureaucRATs' in the video, but I can't help thinking 'democRAT.' In fact, all day I've been seeing the rat in democrat. I never saw that word within that word before. I'm not saying there is any proof about subliminal images working, but if they could work, that was a pretty good choice of words I think. Did anyone see it? I'd be curious to know if the voice-over was saying the word democrats when rats was flashed.
|
I like the little old lady who said, "oh, I don't vote; it only encourages them".
- alex 9-12-2000 5:15 pm
NYT say it pops up in one frame for 1/13th of a second and is the largest piece of text in the 30 second spot. Does video have frames ?
- anonymous (guest) 9-13-2000 12:09 am [add a comment]
Video has frames. 30 of them a second. I believe the text in question was in 1 frame (visible for 1/30th of a second.) I didn't mention before, but it might be interesting to note that the word choosen was 'rats.' I know it somehow morphed out of 'bureaucRATs' in the video, but I can't help thinking 'democRAT.' In fact, all day I've been seeing the rat in democrat. I never saw that word within that word before. I'm not saying there is any proof about subliminal images working, but if they could work, that was a pretty good choice of words I think. Did anyone see it? I'd be curious to know if the voice-over was saying the word democrats when rats was flashed.
- jim 9-13-2000 12:34 am [add a comment]
Is this really hardball politics? I seem to remember "rats" as Charlie Brown's favorite curse. Or was it Jimmy Cagney's favorite epithet? Maybe it does reflect rePUblican values.
- alex 9-13-2000 1:45 am [add a comment]