13 responses so far ↓

• 1 Anti-Corporate // Oct 4, 2008 at 3:53 am

  How much money does the Barr campaign have to get this on TV? They’ve raised a million dollars, right? So they could play this commercial once during Survivor … if they still have all of those million dollars.

• 2 Andy Craig // Oct 4, 2008 at 4:24 am

  That commercial says absolutely nothing about what libertarianism is. Of the the three two-word phrases offered to describe what Barr advocates, we get two that could be from any Republican ad. (“smaller government” and “few(er) taxes”) The other one- “more freedom” is completely meaningless to the vast majority of voters without any explanation.

  It’s the same mistake Paul made with all his ads. He went with conventional pol-speak soundbite ads rather that what actually grabs people’s attention- a thoughtful explanation of the libertarian position. Barr, while hardly on Paul’s level, is certainly capable of doing that in a manner that would be much better than this substance-less ad.

• 3 Steven R Linnabary // Oct 4, 2008 at 11:59 am

  In fairness, I think it would be difficult to cram a treatise on Austrian economics into a thirty second ad. The only way to get a message out in thirty seconds is to use focus-group tested sound bites.

  I suspect that this ad will play in a few select markets such as on the New England News Channel or Ohio News Network, I’m sure other regions have similar outlets.

  PEACE
  Steve

• 4 Michael Seebeck // Oct 4, 2008 at 12:32 pm

  It’s actually a well-produced ad, except for the cheesy music. Yes, it does not mention much on the party beliefs, but for a simple “Hello, here I am” ad, it’s good.

  The only thing wrong with it in that sense is that the info came late. I would put the websites (both LP and campaign) up at the beginning and leave them up for the full 30.

• 5 SEXYJC // Oct 4, 2008 at 2:44 pm

  I like it . what most of you forget is that the average American doesn’t even know about Bob Barr or that there is a Libertarian Party or what it means for that matter. so not bad for 30 seconds, thing is the Barr campaign does not have the money raised to air it.

• 6 AnthonyD // Oct 4, 2008 at 3:00 pm

  I gotta agree that that music is awful. So awful, I wonder if it was chosen precisely because the bad music would get people’s attention.

  However, in terms of the substance of the ad, my personal feeling is that I dont know if I would mention libertarian philosophy at all. To me, the most difficult obstacle to overcome is the oft-mentioned, well-known WVS, or Wasted-Vote Syndrome.

  What needs to be figured out is how you can convince people in 30 seconds to “waste their vote.” If you do that, they may vote for you anyway, with only a faint knowledge of what libertarianism is. I don’t think this ad accomplished that.

• 7 paulie cannoli // Oct 4, 2008 at 3:29 pm

  I actually like the music. But I think I would like it better with some K, G or X or something. It’s been so long since I’ve taken any of that shit, I can’t remember which.

• 8 svf // Oct 4, 2008 at 6:12 pm

  better than Ron Paul’s TV ads, for sure. better than the average political ad.

  not as clever or hard-core Libertarian as Browne’s ads, but look where that got him. besides hardly anyone ever saw them anyway.

  the music is… odd. they’re probably showing this on mid-to-lowbrow cheap cable channels like WGN, ComedyCentral, SpikeTV, Animal Planet, etc. in the wee hours of the morning, though, so with that in mind maybe the music and general tone are about right.

  not likely to make a big impact, but at least they’re out there doing something with the money they have rather than just sitting on it (see also: Ron Paul.)

• 9 svf // Oct 4, 2008 at 6:14 pm

  … and yes the website/phone number needed to be on the screen the whole time. that’s just basic shit, they dropped the ball there.

  … and don’t they have a better photo of Barr to use for this stuff?

• 10 der // Oct 4, 2008 at 9:11 pm

  Andy Craig,

  Ads are supposed to be exactly what you described. They need to be vague and leave the watcher with questions. That way they will check out Barr’s website and where he stands on positions.

  Just saying “more freedom” is perfect to attract people to finding out more.

• 11 Melty Rox // Oct 5, 2008 at 6:39 am

  Sounds like Indian Pop. I like it.

• 12 johncjackson // Oct 5, 2008 at 12:50 pm

  TV ads can’t cram in everything in 30 seconds. That is just one of the reasons why you can’t blow your whole load in 1 shot. Plus, it really takes repetition to get people to notice. I mean the average person needs to see the same ad dozens of times to even notice. Multiply that by the many different types of ads you need if you want to get deeper into issues.

  Sorry, but vague ads to get people to check out a website don’t work. For one thing you need a great ad, not just vague. For another the website actually has to be good. Most importantly actual VOTERS are still not likely to just go “check out a website” for someone’s views.

  In 2000, looking online at the LP website and reading about Harry Browne worked for ME. But even in 2008 this is not how most voters find or choose candidates.

  There was the whole joke about Ron Paul only getting support “on the internet,” but there was some truth in it. The average voter has no idea who Bob Barr is and probably has only a vague idea who Ron Paul is. The percentage is much higher for internet savvy people- most of whom are familiar and probably have formed an opinion.

  I have done 90% of my shopping online, made a living through internet ventures, used the internet for most of my news and information since around 1999 or earlier. It’s hard to remember that millions of people do not do any of those things. My grandmother just told me the other day that she finally managed to buy a book on Amazon for the first time, but she’s still afraid to try eBay. And she’s had internet access for several years. One thing she does do is vote. And so do her siblings, cousins, in-laws, and the 40% of her children and their families who don’t even go online.

  For someone like Bob Barr to reach voters he has a lot of work to do. It can’t be done with a Ron Paul copycat website and 1 commercial. He needs to let people know that Bob Barr even exists and that he’s running for president. Repeatedly. Then let people know what he stands for on the issues they care about. Repeatedly. And ask for the sale-repeatedly.

  Barack Obama might have a TV ad with a website for his economic plan, BUT he has a 2 minute thematic commercial to go along with it. After having dozens of commercials introducing himself and talking about things people care about ( no matter how stupid they seem to us). So after people hear him talk about his economic plan and have an idea of what he’s talking about, THEN they can get to the site and get more info. He’s not banking on a vague commercial leading people to a vaguer website with vague principles and irrelevant articles.

  It’s too late for any of that, and the budget was too low, anyway. But that’s what presidential candidates do.

• 13 paulie cannoli // Oct 5, 2008 at 1:11 pm

  See also here

  http://lastfreevoice.wordpress.com/2008/10/05/barr-tv-ad/

Leave a Comment