William Donahue doesn’t speak for me, and doesn’t speak for the people who will help elect John Edwards president.
Who’s William Donahue? You don’t know? That’s exactly the point.
Update: John Edwards did the right thing.
Just about any politician could be made to look like a fool in under three minutes on YouTube with a proper agenda. However, John McCain is uniquely qualified for this honor due to the hypocrisy of the statements he’s made in an attempt to pander to conservative groups in preparation for his presidential run.
[kml_flashembed movie=”http://www.youtube.com/v/ioy90nF2anI” width=”425″ height=”350″ wmode=”transparent” /]
Kos summarizes a few blogger’s opinions on what name should be used to refer to Senator Hillary Clinton when writing about her. Some seem to think it’s disrespectful to call Hillary by her first name rather than by her title, Sen. Clinton.
Clearly, Hillary has no problem with it, since it’s the exact branding they’re going for. In fact, given their heavy use of the first name “Hillary”, it could be argued that bloggers are doing the Clinton campaign a favor by reinforcing brand Hillary. I haven’t seen the Clinton campaign’s bumper stickers yet, but I’d be willing to bet they’ll emphasize “Hillary!” on them.
I’m with Kos on this one. Hillary’s first name has become her brand and she isn’t running from it. I see that as a benefit over Joe, Dennis, Sam, Bill, and John. The only other candidate with a powerfully unique first name is Barack, although his last name qualifies as well.
Here’s a quick brainstorm of other first-name famous folks:
Can you pair up all 13 with their last names?
BAGnewsNotes generally reviews photos, but took a shot at analyzing Hillary’s announcement video today. He also had a problem with the panning camera:
Why was the camera slowly panning left, then right, throughout the video (except during the close ups)?
I’m sure it was inadvertent, but I’ll tell you what it made me think. On the credenza behind Hillary were three framed photos. In the one closest to Hillary was a photo of her with Bill. In the middle frame, I think the photo featured Hillary and Chelsea. I couldn’t make out the third.
It’s probably just my projection, but I read it as the campaign literally going back and forth, unsure how much to focus on Bill and Hillary as a couple (versus Bill) versus Hillary alone.
And thought the living room scene’s domesticity may not be the best choice for Hillary. I liked his idea of taping one on one conversations between Hillary and voters. She knows the issues and speaks well candidly. In fact, I think she’s better candid than scripted.
[kml_flashembed movie=”http://www.youtube.com/v/4p7KL87heVQ” width=”425″ height=”350″ wmode=”transparent” /]
And in Spanish:
[kml_flashembed movie=”http://www.youtube.com/v/YofibCbPcRE” width=”425″ height=”350″ wmode=”transparent” /]
Richardson’s presidential team is working all the angles with social media sites, including Flickr, YouTube, Facebook, Zanby, Myspace, and PartyBuilder, which he links to from his campaign site’s homepage.
Richardson’s delivery is pretty dry, but he’s a smart guy who can get stuff done. Does that make him electable nationally?
Kansas’ culture warrior, Sam Brownback, has also announced he’s running for president via online video:
Well produced, and professionally delivered using Brightcove rather than YouTube. Brightcove is an online video company started by an Macalester college grad, Jeremy Allaire (previously of Allaire corp and Cold Fusion web programming fame among techies). I doubt Allaire and Brownback share similar politics.
While I don’t agree with Brownback’s politics, I admire his ability to form a team capable of creating a professional online video presence.
Hillary Clinton has kicked off her presidential campaign with an online video. That’s certainly the trend, with Edwards and Obama taking the same approach to getting their message across. However, Edwards and Obama did something Clinton hasn’t done so far, which explains why both of the posts I made about their announcements contains videos while this one doesn’t: Clinton’s announcement video isn’t sharable from her site, and isn’t available on YouTube or any other site I could find.
That’s just dumb. The number of viewers gained – for free – by syndicating content to other sites is not something to take lightly. In fact, I bet most of you reading this won’t click through to watch Clinton’s announcement video, but at least some of you would have watched it if I embedded it directly into this page.
If you DO happen to watch it, take some Dramamine first. For some reason, the person running the camera likes swaying the shots back and forth for no good reason.Â Either that, or it was show on a boat made to look like a home’s living room.
In this case, we have two delivery issues (non-sharable video and weird camera work) taking away from an otherwise well-delivered message.
Hitwise is a service that aggregates Internet traffic to look for marketing trends. It’s pretty powerful stuff. Bill Tancer from Hitwise blogs about interesting and timely stats he mines from their data and pulled together some interesting stats comparing Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama based on search traffic for their names. Check out the post for a lot of interesting nuggets.
One I found particularly interesting shows which states each candidate is strongest in based on search volume for their names:
That’s very interesting, since Ohio, Florida, and Michigan are all important battleground states and Obama may have an edge in each.Â MO is also a battleground state and leans toward Clinton. I’m sure either candidate could take large blue states like NY, IL, and CA, so they’re less important from an electoral college standpoint. Hawaii and Kansas probably won’t be the deciding states.
Looks like Ben Sanfield of DraftObama was right when he predicted Obama’s presidential announcement a month ago on The Deets.
Online video announcements seem to be the rage this year. John Edwards started this, and now here’s Obama’s: