You'd have to be living under a rock or a Mike Huckabee supporter to have not seen the Obama "yes we can" video floating around. You might have also seen "Hillary and the Band" on the internets as well. However, there's a big difference in the pedigree of the two videos. One of them is put together by a group of supporters (even if they happen to be some Hollywood bigshots) and the other is made by and for the Clinton campaign. Obama's video has over three million viewers (for one version, at least) while Hillary's has drawn half that, if even.
The Politico is claiming to have predicted that Web 2.0/user generated content would be the "wild card" in this election:
We’ve been writing in this space since early last year about how voter-generated content would be the wild card in the 2008 election. However, it’s important to note that “voter-generated content” doesn’t just mean a piece of media created by voters; it can also be a piece of media created by either voters or campaigns and then forwarded widely from one voter to another, complete with comments and mashups.
While I'm not so sure that they were the first to say that, they do have a pretty good understanding of the average viewer's ability to detect campaign-produced spin schlock. Look how they dissect the two videos...
While the “Yes We Can” video was produced by professionals in the entertainment industry ? including Jesse Dylan, son of Bob ? it was not vetted or approved by the Obama campaign, and it has struck an emotional nerve with millennials and Obama supporters of all ages.
In comparison, the “Hillary and the Band” video has, at first glance, the veneer of authenticity, but you can quickly tell that it features actors playing roles rather than grass-roots supporters making a statement. (The video purports to show a rock band in the doldrums until its “star,” Hillary, returns to the stage.)
The perceived authenticity of a piece of media in politics, whether created by supporters or a campaign, is critical to its success. Most of us are bombarded with so many online messages that we’ve acquired a new sixth sense for making instant judgments about what is or isn’t worth our time and attention.
Not only do they "get it" but they call out Clinton's video for exactly what it is. Awful.
Despite its appearance, the “Hillary and the Band” video is not voter-generated and fails in convincing anyone that it is. At first, it looks sufficiently lo-fi and homespun to have been created by a supporter armed with nothing more than a Macbook and Final Cut Pro. And the Photoshopped images of Hillary wielding a toy guitar are funny at first.
But when one member of the band utters the line, “The blogs were going crazy,” we know someone is trying to fool us. That’s the kind of line that boomers would expect young people to say. Boomers like the folks running Clinton’s campaign.
"The blogs were going crazy?" Who talks like that? Did they discuss their online strategy by sending each other Internets? To be honest, I had not even heard of the Hillary video before Politico mentioned it. I had not seen it, been sent it, or heard anyone reference it. However, I had seen the Obama "yes we can" video so many times, I was hesitant to post it here out of fear of overexposing the damn thing. On the other hand, I have noticed that Senator Obama's campaign puts out alot of raw, editable content, and people do cool stuff with it. Politico notices too, and says it better than I can off the cuff:
The Obama campaign understands the Web, and it has figured out quickly that to win in this networked age, it has to be more than just a campaign. It’s a media operation that not only knows its audience but also understands where its audience is located online and how it will use the material the campaign produces.
That’s why the campaign made video of Obama’s victory speech after the South Carolina primary instantly available the moment it ended, and that’s why it had a pre-taped response by Obama to President Bush’s State of the Union online the same night as that speech.
Like other savvy media operations that understand the realities of the Web, the Obama campaign offers online content to its supporters without fear that it will be reused, mashed or appropriated. In fact, the campaign understands that it may well be used that way.
Maybe Professor Lessig won't run for Congress after all. With people like this in Obama's campaign, he might be asked to serve a higher purpose. We need a Department of Technology filled with people who "get it" to shape the nation's policies with respect to developing infrastructure and incorporating new technologies to improve communication between citizens, media and the government, as well as each other.
Lessig for Secretary of Information? I can dream...
Leave a comment