Ron Paul NH TV Ads: They Know What They're Doing

Thom1776 said:
They are experts and professionals, you people are not. So stop all the bitching and moaning over the ads.

My brother helped make political ads for one of the largest firms of its kind in NYC back in the 80s and 90s. He was involved in the production of ads for many campaigns. When I ran for congress in 1992, he helped me make two TV ads for next to nothing. They were highly effective and a huge factor in the large number of votes I received.

Ron Paul is running a series of five ads in NH over the next six weeks.

The first ad, the one that so many of you seem to have a problem with, is perfect:

It's simple, down-to-earth and meant to be nothing more than an introduction to the overwhelming majority of people in NH who have never even heard of Ron Paul. Its supposed to look cheap, the people are supposed to look like they are not professional actors, its supposed to be cheesy or campy or corny or whatever you want to call it. Why? Because its part I of V.

There are four ads to follow. Each ad is going to hit people in an increasingly deeper and more meaningful way. The impact of each ad in the series will be incremental. It's like the old saying: "You have to crawl before you walk, walk before you run." The effect of the first ad is NOT to overpower people. You can't get Ron Paul's message out to new people in thirty seconds.

The first ad is just saying: "There is this guy named Ron Paul running for President and a lot of regular people here in NH seem to like him". Now this is in the backs of their minds and they are at least AWARE of him. Next they are going to get the mailers, they will hear radio ads, they see the signs and bumper stickers.

By the time the SECOND ad comes out, they are going to want to pay attention to it because of the seed planted by the FIRST ad.

That is why the first ad seems so "bad" to many of you. Do you honestly think that they just threw some piece of crap together because they were rushed or didn't know how to make a good ad? They know exactly what they are doing. You will see by the time all five ads have been run.
Click to expand...

I agree with most of your statement. However it I have seen experts and professionals destroy campaigns. Sometimes they slap together ads really quickly because they take on too many clients. I could go on and on.

Ron Paul supporters have the right to critique the ads and make suggestions. In fact many of the Ron Paul supporters are professional film and television commercial producers and editors who have worked on very large accounts with more marketing research at their disposal than the most well financed campaigns.

The people have to like the ads so they keep donating. You can't dismiss them out of hand like that. Luckily we like the newer ads and the booklets and the radio ads so everything should be just fine.
 
fj45lvr said:
Over-reaction?? Well that is how much I care....kind of like being an avid fan and having to turn off the TV cause you don't want to see them getting blown out.
Click to expand...
Exactly - and just to elaborate on the analogy...

Not only are you a fan but you have gone out and run your mouth about how incredible your team is and now you know those people are watching the same pathetic peformance that you can't even bear to watch.
 
JS4Pat said:
Exactly - and just to elaborate on the analogy...

Not only are you a fan but you have gone out and run your mouth about how incredible your team is and now you know those people are watching the same pathetic peformance that you can't even bear to watch.
Click to expand...

The sports analogies fall flat on their face. The videography team that made this works with Dr Paul on his congessional campaign vids. They know what they are doing. Perhaps the running of mouths needs to stop.

Randy
 
TVMH said:
We need a new sub-forum that is to be used solely for "Rants"...but I agree with the OP. :D (LOL...I wonder if the ad was targeted at people who know what "OP" means).
Click to expand...


OMG seriously we do need another sub forum... "rants" -- if you have something to bitch about do it here and no where else! PLEASE MODS can we add this?
 
Thom1776 said:
They are experts and professionals, you people are not. So stop all the bitching and moaning over the ads.

My brother helped make political ads for one of the largest firms of its kind in NYC back in the 80s and 90s. He was involved in the production of ads for many campaigns. When I ran for congress in 1992, he helped me make two TV ads for next to nothing. They were highly effective and a huge factor in the large number of votes I received.

Ron Paul is running a series of five ads in NH over the next six weeks.

The first ad, the one that so many of you seem to have a problem with, is perfect:

It's simple, down-to-earth and meant to be nothing more than an introduction to the overwhelming majority of people in NH who have never even heard of Ron Paul. Its supposed to look cheap, the people are supposed to look like they are not professional actors, its supposed to be cheesy or campy or corny or whatever you want to call it. Why? Because its part I of V.

There are four ads to follow. Each ad is going to hit people in an increasingly deeper and more meaningful way. The impact of each ad in the series will be incremental. It's like the old saying: "You have to crawl before you walk, walk before you run." The effect of the first ad is NOT to overpower people. You can't get Ron Paul's message out to new people in thirty seconds.

The first ad is just saying: "There is this guy named Ron Paul running for President and a lot of regular people here in NH seem to like him". Now this is in the backs of their minds and they are at least AWARE of him. Next they are going to get the mailers, they will hear radio ads, they see the signs and bumper stickers.

By the time the SECOND ad comes out, they are going to want to pay attention to it because of the seed planted by the FIRST ad.

That is why the first ad seems so "bad" to many of you. Do you honestly think that they just threw some piece of crap together because they were rushed or didn't know how to make a good ad? They know exactly what they are doing. You will see by the time all five ads have been run.
Click to expand...

Nicely said, but you are dead wrong. Experts would believe that you cannot ask people who are not trained in acting to read from a script and come up with something that people think is authentic. If the campaign simply asked the 100 nearest Paul supporters: "Why do you support Ron Paul". They would have an ultra-high impact very high quality advertisement. They did not do that.

Secondly, experts would NEVER think that focusing on a disagreement would be a good thing. Its simply bad to focus on the negative, and they chose to do so. I believe that no person trained to create commercials or campaign ads would think that was a good idea. Sure, that line can be there, but no it cannot be the first thing said.

The very deep and real flaws in the video are that they focused on the negative and they asked non-actors to read from a script. If they are trained experts, they are making trained expert mistakes.

Lastly, IT IS NO BIG DEAL. The important thing about the ad is that it gets Ron Paul's name out. It does that. So stop commenting about it! It really is no big deal because it accomplishes the objective of getting Ron Paul's name out in the open where it belongs.
 
Think about it this way. Would you want them to play that ad at the Youtube debates? Yikes!

The good thing is we can always improve. We have the best candidate, we're right on the issues. We just need an advertising dept that can blow people away.

It kind of reminds me of that music video for Chris Issac's song Wicked Game. The first version was horrible, they tossed it and brought in a new director and hit a grandslam. Made one of the greatest music videos EVER.
 
Eric21ND said:
Think about it this way. Would you want them to play that ad at the Youtube debates? Yikes!

The good thing is we can always improve. We have the best candidate, we're right on the issues. We just need an advertising dept that can blow people away.

It kind of reminds me of that music video for Chris Issac's song Wicked Game. The first version was horrible, they tossed it and brought in a new director and hit a grandslam. Made one of the greatest music videos EVER.
Click to expand...

And here is exhibit number one. A person who thinks Chris Issac made the best music video ever. Now this here is a good reason not to pay no mind to the second guessers on here.. Like they have impeccable taste and viewing habits..heh..

I don't care what y'all say. He's catchin' on I'm tellin' ya!

Best
Randy
 
James Reiher said:
Secondly, experts would NEVER think that focusing on a disagreement would be a good thing. Its simply bad to focus on the negative, and they chose to do so. I believe that no person trained to create commercials or campaign ads would think that was a good idea. Sure, that line can be there, but no it cannot be the first thing said.

The very deep and real flaws in the video are that they focused on the negative and they asked non-actors to read from a script. If they are trained experts, they are making trained expert mistakes.
Click to expand...

reckon that might just be the idea?
 
I'm not so sure the first ad is *supposed* to look cheap and campy. That sounds like an excuse. But won't criticise them for it, because people can make mistakes.
 
billv said:
Maybe it will be a good ad, the first one, but that doesn't change the fact that I don't like it. It leaves me at "OK, Ron Paul, so what." The second commercial I found was much more to the point and differentiating between candidates. If you are right, then the whole thing will work together but until then, I don't like the first ad.
Click to expand...

but you're already a Ron Paul supporter.. you can't genuinely put yourself in the shoes of those who the ad targets.
 
I was one of the haters of the first ad...but it has since grown on me.

It's a good intro.

I think many of us fall into the trap of forgetting how cluless the rest of society is. I know I do...

I want to shove Austrian economics and CFR/NAU warnings down people's throats because I know the subjects so well....but the sheep are babes in the woods.

I believe in hard hitting stuff...and I pray we will see some strong attack ads....but I also agree that in a 30 second TV spot aimed at people who never heard of him....the first commercial should only be a basic intro.....

Unlike written text, 30 second TV isnt enough time to get in depth...


By the 4th and 5the commercial...the sheep will be ready for the good stuff
 
Thom1776 said:
They are experts and professionals.
Click to expand...

I believe experts and professionals make a lot of mistakes and do many dumb things. I believe that the Ron Paul campaign generally makes more mistakes and does more dumb things than average. My advice to them is to learn to accept and embrace criticism.

A good leader takes time to listen to the people, especially those at the bottom who "upper management" step on and ignore. A leader carefully collects the consensus opinion from those people, and considers himself veto'd if it is strong enough. He then attempts to change the consensus opinion if he thinks it is wrong, and quickly changes course when he sees a fresh new idea with consensus support.

Ron Paul HQ rarely listens to what we say. In fact, they fired the person who listened to us the best. Sure, the campaign is "expert" and "professional". Yet as Ad#1 shows, all the expertise in the world is not relevant when you don't listen to people on the front lines regularly and value their comments highly. I would like to think they learned their lesson given that they saved the Philly rally, but then they fired one of the people who was most responsible for saving the rally. So whether they learned anything or not about listening is still up in the air.

EDIT:
I see there are people who like ad #1. Ad #1 was not done in line with Marketing 101. First it focuses on the negative from the start. Bad idea. Secondly it asks non-actors to perform a scripted act. I think they've accomplished what some local ads do: be so ridiculously bad that you actually like it and it actually works. But, I don't see anyone copying that strategy. ANYWHERE. I can imagine someone putting something up as a parody on YouTube, but not something similar that actually thinks it will change people's minds about Ron Paul. Imitation is a true yardstick of success. The Ron Paul money bombs... now those will be imitated. As for cheesy ads that are so stupid you actually like them... that one isn't being imitated on YouTube. If they really were that effective they would be imitated.
 
Last edited:
I heard in an interview (I think wolf on Cnn) after we raised 5 million in Q3 that RP likes to be involved in the making of ads and his staff wasn't going to hire professionals to do it.

And I'm sorry but the first ad is horrible. And I am a professional - I majored in media production and worked in television as a director. They are cheap and the actors are bad and incredibly fake.

I like the message of the other tv ads but again they are cheap. Just standing in front of a blue screen with a cheesy constitution picture - lame.

I mean COME ON this is 2007! I saw much more professional ads for people running for local judge positions recently. I believe in being fiscally conservative but DAMN you need to spend the money you've raised if you want to win!

I will say the radio ads are VERY good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

osan
What Is The Public Trust?
Replies
0
Views
363
osan
osan
Bryan
Greatest Ron Paul videos
Replies
0
Views
350
Bryan
Bryan
Swordsmyth
DOGE Works: First of Thousands? Crooked Government Official Jailed After Trillions Stolen from the Biden Administration – Here’s What We Know!
Replies
8
Views
83
unknown
unknown
Brian4Liberty
D.O.G.E.: End The Global Engagement Center!
Replies
0
Views
3K
Brian4Liberty
Brian4Liberty
Anti Federalist
Stop whining!
Replies
0
Views
524
Anti Federalist
Anti Federalist
Back
Top