I've been thinking about this for a few weeks now. The campaign has to absolutely, without a doubt got to do this. 30 minutes, where he gets to explain himself (scripted). And I agree, there should be an interviewer asking him questions the way a an average Joe would. And if it were up to me, Tom Woods would help with the script.
Ron Paul, Buy a 15 Minute Block Of TV Time. Subvert The MSM! Speak To The People!
- Thread starter Andrew76
- Start date
angelatc
Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2007
- Messages
- 50,703
Well, if the campaign won't do it....I wonder if the grassroots could? It's a long shot, but if we raised the money, Paul might agree to shake off his handlers in order for the chance to get his message out. This could be his last big chance.
ETA - Tom Woods, Jack Hunter, Doug Wead....an excellent writing team. Have to stay away from being bitter and sarcastic, though, but we can do it.
ETA - Tom Woods, Jack Hunter, Doug Wead....an excellent writing team. Have to stay away from being bitter and sarcastic, though, but we can do it.
Last edited:
puppetmaster
Member
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 6,658
if we don't someone else may.......
Steve-in-NY
Member
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2011
- Messages
- 1,206
Ok, so Ive read through this thread. Points Id like to make:
1. I love the idea.
Ive been preaching Ron Paul for months now, and Ive had people ask me... Ron Paul, huh? Dont know much about him. What channel is he on? Fox? These are 40-50 yr olds (repubs?) /facepalm
2. The superpac could do it... but they would need the money.
3. The campaign could do it... but they need the money.
4. The grassroots could do it... but they need the money and Im a little worried about what it could be.
Now then... Reality time:
Heres what we need to realistically make this happen:
1. Money.
Thats it. Its simple. We need more money. We cant rely on moneybombs anymore either. This has to be an ongoing, sustained financial onslaught thats second to none.
THIS is where we will be able to have commercials, infomercials, full page ads, delegate/grassroots training classes, phone banking, direct mail, paid top staff, kites, blimps, skywriting and whatever. Money.
I stopped holding for the 2 upcoming money bombs because the campaign said it needed money NOW... So I sent it. I will now be donating much less to the 2 upcoming moneybombs - but I will be donating to them nonetheless.
From this point on, Im not waiting to donate. Ive watched the donation trackers go from ~7-8000/day to 20-25000/day in the past few months. I will donate as much and as often as possible from now on. If I may suggest you all do the same, and promote that idea as well.
The absolute last thing I want is for the campaign to say, "You know what would be great if we had the money...?" or be forced to make a decision on one tactic over another based on cost.
I want them to say, "Lets do ______ too, why not. We have the money."
Therefore I present the bottom line:
Money, people. Give it, and don't stop.
1. I love the idea.
Ive been preaching Ron Paul for months now, and Ive had people ask me... Ron Paul, huh? Dont know much about him. What channel is he on? Fox? These are 40-50 yr olds (repubs?) /facepalm
2. The superpac could do it... but they would need the money.
3. The campaign could do it... but they need the money.
4. The grassroots could do it... but they need the money and Im a little worried about what it could be.
Now then... Reality time:
Heres what we need to realistically make this happen:
1. Money.
Thats it. Its simple. We need more money. We cant rely on moneybombs anymore either. This has to be an ongoing, sustained financial onslaught thats second to none.
THIS is where we will be able to have commercials, infomercials, full page ads, delegate/grassroots training classes, phone banking, direct mail, paid top staff, kites, blimps, skywriting and whatever. Money.
I stopped holding for the 2 upcoming money bombs because the campaign said it needed money NOW... So I sent it. I will now be donating much less to the 2 upcoming moneybombs - but I will be donating to them nonetheless.
From this point on, Im not waiting to donate. Ive watched the donation trackers go from ~7-8000/day to 20-25000/day in the past few months. I will donate as much and as often as possible from now on. If I may suggest you all do the same, and promote that idea as well.
The absolute last thing I want is for the campaign to say, "You know what would be great if we had the money...?" or be forced to make a decision on one tactic over another based on cost.
I want them to say, "Lets do ______ too, why not. We have the money."
Therefore I present the bottom line:
Money, people. Give it, and don't stop.
matt0611
Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2011
- Messages
- 3,749
Maybe not a moneybomb, but something similar, like a donation counter on RevolutionPAC that we can have stay up long-term with a goal to hit and then once we hit it they can do it.
Kinda like the Ron Paul blimp? How did you guys raise money for that?
This could be the same kind of thing except for getting a 30 min TV spot.
How much would it cost though? I have no idea.
Kinda like the Ron Paul blimp? How did you guys raise money for that?
This could be the same kind of thing except for getting a 30 min TV spot.
How much would it cost though? I have no idea.
tangent4ronpaul
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2007
- Messages
- 21,101
We talked about this before. Short, one off ads are pricy. 60 seconds on fox during the day costs $2,800.
The way this works is there are tiers. Tier 1 has the largest viewership and Tier 3 the least. Also, Tier 1 is more likely to be carried by a local cable company.
Then it's broken down into day or night. This is for short ads on a single network.
Then there are clusters. you can get a 60 second ad to run on 10 networks once for $9,900 (comedy, ESPN2, ESPN classic, syfy, golf, comcast sportsnet, speed, spike, versus and TNT) for example.
but these are either 30 second or 60 second ads.
For an infomercial, total time is 28.5 minutes and you have to spend a minimum of $25,000 dollars. That gets your ad run twice on one network. cost per play is $12,500. To get it played 16 times on 1-3 networks costs $100,000 or a cost per play of $6,250. There are steps in between.
The problem with infomercials is that hardly anyone watches them.
As a solution, my suggestion was to buy a bunch of 30 second ads and advertize the infomercial across a large number of channels.
CNBC has slots in the day on the weekends 6a - 6p
FOX business is similar, but finding a station with a prime time weekday slot may be an issue.
as another possibility, we might ask a media personality if we could get them a vacation or something for a day and let us negotiate and rent their spot from the network for that day only. Neil Cavuto might be game - but that's about the only way I can see getting primetime on a major network.
-t
The way this works is there are tiers. Tier 1 has the largest viewership and Tier 3 the least. Also, Tier 1 is more likely to be carried by a local cable company.
Then it's broken down into day or night. This is for short ads on a single network.
Then there are clusters. you can get a 60 second ad to run on 10 networks once for $9,900 (comedy, ESPN2, ESPN classic, syfy, golf, comcast sportsnet, speed, spike, versus and TNT) for example.
but these are either 30 second or 60 second ads.
For an infomercial, total time is 28.5 minutes and you have to spend a minimum of $25,000 dollars. That gets your ad run twice on one network. cost per play is $12,500. To get it played 16 times on 1-3 networks costs $100,000 or a cost per play of $6,250. There are steps in between.
The problem with infomercials is that hardly anyone watches them.
As a solution, my suggestion was to buy a bunch of 30 second ads and advertize the infomercial across a large number of channels.
CNBC has slots in the day on the weekends 6a - 6p
FOX business is similar, but finding a station with a prime time weekday slot may be an issue.
as another possibility, we might ask a media personality if we could get them a vacation or something for a day and let us negotiate and rent their spot from the network for that day only. Neil Cavuto might be game - but that's about the only way I can see getting primetime on a major network.
-t
Last edited:
libertygrl
Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2007
- Messages
- 2,619
Study Obama's infomercials.
The program's production values were first-rate, as a variety of styles and points-of-view were used to keep the viewer engaged. After the opening segment, where Obama addressed the camera from an executive-looking office (MSNBC's Chris Matthews astutely observed how it resembled the oval one in Washington), the scene shifted to North Kansas City, where a middle-class mom identified as Rebecca Johnston told of struggling to make ends meet for her husband and four children.
In these and three other stories (all but one of which were filmed in a swing state), Obama did not appear but narrated. In other segments, he stood or sat side by side with people in group settings, listening to their concerns. These scenes were filmed from multiple angles to maximize the connection between candidate and voter.
There was a biographical segment, in which Obama ingeniously retold the story of his mother's death from cancer in order to address a current concern about his candidacy.
While in the past he has talked about hearing his mother on the phone arguing with the insurance company, this time he talked instead about her death as a wake-up call that taught him that "life is short" -- and thus a rationale for his audacious run for the White House.
Another segment used black-and-white photography effectively to present Obama as a statesman who had earned the respect of his elders, including Republican Sen. Dick Lugar of Indiana, the foremost authority on arms control in the Senate.
And every few minutes, Obama would re-establish intimacy with the viewer, addressing the camera to tick off a few more action items for his first term in office. These have been recited countless times in 30-second TV ads, but as they stacked up throughout the program, they acquired a kind of momentum that's simply not possible in a conventional commercial.
The program ended with one last deft production touch, as viewers were whisked live to an Obama rally in Florida, where the candidate implored the audience -- both the cheering thousands surrounding him and millions watching on TV -- to vote.
With Obama continuing to widen his lead in battleground states, the question can fairly be asked why he would spend millions to buy a half hour of prime time network television.
Well, if he wanted to spend more of his colossal war chest on TV ads, he had no choice. All available commercial inventory in many markets is already spoken for. The breaks are stuffed with political ads, especially in swing states, and that goes double for border markets like Kansas City. In the minute before his paid program aired on KCTV-5, a feel-good ad for Kansas congresswoman Nancy Boyda was airing; at that same time on KSHB, Peter Kinder was roasting his opponent for lieutenant governor of Missouri.
There's a fair amount of industry research to suggest that certain products can only be sold effectively with infomercials. Because it's not a simple sale, the viewer must be eased into making a buy. That would describe Obama's relationship to the undecided voter, and I doubt his campaign strategists were unaware of such research.
But it may also be that Obama may have been seeking a broader impact. As his party pushes toward the ambitious goal of winning a filibuster-proof 60-seat majority in the U.S. Senate, the positive momentum from Obama's ad buy could be the rising tide that lifts all boats.
Roger Ailes, the Nixon aide who helped fashion the 1968 TV campaign, freely admitted his candidate had negatives. "That's why these shows are important," said Ailes, who would go on to create Fox News Channel. "To make them forget all that." In that sense, little has changed in 40 years.
But wait, there's more!
Following the Obama infomercial, the candidate made his first joint campaign rally appearance alongside former president Bill Clinton. And once again, Bubba was in his element. Grizzled political observers no doubt paid more attention to how many times he talked about himself than what he had to say about Obama, but I have to say, no one can outline a speech better than Bill can.
Like a tent preacher, he barked out four (four!) reasons that audience members should go out and try on their friends who aren't sure about Obama. And then he proceeded to drive them home ... such that I can remember them now, 20 minutes later (better philosophy; better policy; better judgment; ability to execute).
http://blogs.kansascity.com/tvbarn/2008/10/the-obama-infom.html
First Barack Obama’s campaign made political and broadcast history by buying $5 million of advertising in NBC Universal’s Olympics programming. Now it’s marking another political first, running the first infomercial of the 2008 presidential campaign.
If you hadn’t noticed, that may be because the nearly 30-minute program aired at 1:30 a.m. Sunday, Aug. 10, on Ion Television.
The Obama campaign late Tuesday described the ad as an effort to reach voters who don't see normal ads.
"This was one more effective way for us to communicate with folks who may not normally see other communications we have with voters who are paying closer attention to the race," the campaign said in a statement.
The mostly biographical, 28-minute, 30-second program included scenes of the Illinois senator’s keynote speech to the 2004 Democratic National Convention, as well as scenes from other campaign appearances, background about Sen. Obama and frequent call-in numbers.
There was immediate speculation that the airing was a late-night test of whether the infomercial format could successfully generate contributions and calls.
It's the first time a campaign has done this since Clinton and Perot in the early 1990s.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0808/An_Obama_infomercial_.html?showall
The program's production values were first-rate, as a variety of styles and points-of-view were used to keep the viewer engaged. After the opening segment, where Obama addressed the camera from an executive-looking office (MSNBC's Chris Matthews astutely observed how it resembled the oval one in Washington), the scene shifted to North Kansas City, where a middle-class mom identified as Rebecca Johnston told of struggling to make ends meet for her husband and four children.
In these and three other stories (all but one of which were filmed in a swing state), Obama did not appear but narrated. In other segments, he stood or sat side by side with people in group settings, listening to their concerns. These scenes were filmed from multiple angles to maximize the connection between candidate and voter.
There was a biographical segment, in which Obama ingeniously retold the story of his mother's death from cancer in order to address a current concern about his candidacy.
While in the past he has talked about hearing his mother on the phone arguing with the insurance company, this time he talked instead about her death as a wake-up call that taught him that "life is short" -- and thus a rationale for his audacious run for the White House.
Another segment used black-and-white photography effectively to present Obama as a statesman who had earned the respect of his elders, including Republican Sen. Dick Lugar of Indiana, the foremost authority on arms control in the Senate.
And every few minutes, Obama would re-establish intimacy with the viewer, addressing the camera to tick off a few more action items for his first term in office. These have been recited countless times in 30-second TV ads, but as they stacked up throughout the program, they acquired a kind of momentum that's simply not possible in a conventional commercial.
The program ended with one last deft production touch, as viewers were whisked live to an Obama rally in Florida, where the candidate implored the audience -- both the cheering thousands surrounding him and millions watching on TV -- to vote.
With Obama continuing to widen his lead in battleground states, the question can fairly be asked why he would spend millions to buy a half hour of prime time network television.
Well, if he wanted to spend more of his colossal war chest on TV ads, he had no choice. All available commercial inventory in many markets is already spoken for. The breaks are stuffed with political ads, especially in swing states, and that goes double for border markets like Kansas City. In the minute before his paid program aired on KCTV-5, a feel-good ad for Kansas congresswoman Nancy Boyda was airing; at that same time on KSHB, Peter Kinder was roasting his opponent for lieutenant governor of Missouri.
There's a fair amount of industry research to suggest that certain products can only be sold effectively with infomercials. Because it's not a simple sale, the viewer must be eased into making a buy. That would describe Obama's relationship to the undecided voter, and I doubt his campaign strategists were unaware of such research.
But it may also be that Obama may have been seeking a broader impact. As his party pushes toward the ambitious goal of winning a filibuster-proof 60-seat majority in the U.S. Senate, the positive momentum from Obama's ad buy could be the rising tide that lifts all boats.
Roger Ailes, the Nixon aide who helped fashion the 1968 TV campaign, freely admitted his candidate had negatives. "That's why these shows are important," said Ailes, who would go on to create Fox News Channel. "To make them forget all that." In that sense, little has changed in 40 years.
But wait, there's more!
Following the Obama infomercial, the candidate made his first joint campaign rally appearance alongside former president Bill Clinton. And once again, Bubba was in his element. Grizzled political observers no doubt paid more attention to how many times he talked about himself than what he had to say about Obama, but I have to say, no one can outline a speech better than Bill can.
Like a tent preacher, he barked out four (four!) reasons that audience members should go out and try on their friends who aren't sure about Obama. And then he proceeded to drive them home ... such that I can remember them now, 20 minutes later (better philosophy; better policy; better judgment; ability to execute).
http://blogs.kansascity.com/tvbarn/2008/10/the-obama-infom.html
First Barack Obama’s campaign made political and broadcast history by buying $5 million of advertising in NBC Universal’s Olympics programming. Now it’s marking another political first, running the first infomercial of the 2008 presidential campaign.
If you hadn’t noticed, that may be because the nearly 30-minute program aired at 1:30 a.m. Sunday, Aug. 10, on Ion Television.
The Obama campaign late Tuesday described the ad as an effort to reach voters who don't see normal ads.
"This was one more effective way for us to communicate with folks who may not normally see other communications we have with voters who are paying closer attention to the race," the campaign said in a statement.
The mostly biographical, 28-minute, 30-second program included scenes of the Illinois senator’s keynote speech to the 2004 Democratic National Convention, as well as scenes from other campaign appearances, background about Sen. Obama and frequent call-in numbers.
There was immediate speculation that the airing was a late-night test of whether the infomercial format could successfully generate contributions and calls.
It's the first time a campaign has done this since Clinton and Perot in the early 1990s.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0808/An_Obama_infomercial_.html?showall
Napoleon's Shadow
Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2011
- Messages
- 2,714
We don't care about the average viewer, we care about the average Republican voter! That's a MUCH smaller audience.
Not only that but the average likely Republican voter can be found and identified, and thus directly targeted, because they are guaranteed to be on a list somewhere.
libertygrl
Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2007
- Messages
- 2,619
OBAMA'S FIRST INFOMERCIAL PART 1:
THIS IS PRACTICALLY NEAR PERFECT IN EXECUTION, SUBSTANCE & EMOTION. RON NEEDS TO DO THIS!!
(But it needs to be planned the right way - strategically speaking that is)
THIS IS PRACTICALLY NEAR PERFECT IN EXECUTION, SUBSTANCE & EMOTION. RON NEEDS TO DO THIS!!
(But it needs to be planned the right way - strategically speaking that is)
tangent4ronpaul
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2007
- Messages
- 21,101
Costs are in post 88
another way to do this is to get Paul to do a talk / speach - maybe at the Washington Press Club and ask C-SPAN to cover it. If we can make both those things happen, it would be free, and we should get a rebroadcast or two. We could also advertize such a broadcast and C-SPAN has a huge viewership! Couldn't do it when Congress was in session unless it wasn't live. But not being live has it's own advantages.
-t
another way to do this is to get Paul to do a talk / speach - maybe at the Washington Press Club and ask C-SPAN to cover it. If we can make both those things happen, it would be free, and we should get a rebroadcast or two. We could also advertize such a broadcast and C-SPAN has a huge viewership! Couldn't do it when Congress was in session unless it wasn't live. But not being live has it's own advantages.
-t
Steve-in-NY
Member
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2011
- Messages
- 1,206
Double the networks (5-6) and add for surprise costs. = ~250k.
Production = ~50-80k (guessing)
Total:
~$330,000
Dare I say we could do it in a few hours?
tangent4ronpaul
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2007
- Messages
- 21,101
Or pick up the infomercial slot one day a week on Fox business right before they come back on the air for regular broadcasting during the day and we've got a TV show through super Tuesday for the same money.
Well, it looks like they filled in their day schedule - maybe on the weekend or a different channel.
trey4sports
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 12,588
don't think this would work. Direct-mail can do similar things at a much better cost and is a proven tactic. I know it isn't sexy, but historically direct-mail is much more cost-effective than political infomercials.
tangent4ronpaul
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2007
- Messages
- 21,101
I'm going to vote for the infomercial.
I think we could get it for a lot less if we are talking expanding views. The more you buy, the less it costs.
And remember - this is National.
I think we could get it for a lot less if we are talking expanding views. The more you buy, the less it costs.
And remember - this is National.
tangent4ronpaul
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2007
- Messages
- 21,101
bump! - lets do this!
See post 88 for costs
See post 88 for costs
No Free Beer
Member
- Joined
- May 11, 2011
- Messages
- 3,317
all i have to say is...REVPAC! i emailed them. you all should do the same!
