Hillary cast as big brother in 1984 ad spoof

Hillary cast as big brother in 1984 ad spoof

Summary: "It may be the most stunning and creative attack ad yet for a 2008 presidential candidate -- one experts say could represent a watershed moment in 21st century media and political advertising," Carla Marinucci reports for The San Francisco Chronicle. "Yet the groundbreaking 74-second pitch for Democratic Illinois Sen.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Apple
5

"It may be the most stunning and creative attack ad yet for a 2008 presidential candidate -- one experts say could represent a watershed moment in 21st century media and political advertising," Carla Marinucci reports for The San Francisco Chronicle. "Yet the groundbreaking 74-second pitch for Democratic Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, which remixes the classic "1984" ad that introduced Apple computers to the world, is not on cable or network TV, but on the Internet."

(Credit: Digg, Mac Daily News)

Topic: Apple

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

5 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • The perfect fit!!

    If having a politician using your attack ad isn't confirmation that Apple is a malicious, mean spirited, "focus on the negative" company, I don't know what is. When even politicians acknowledge that they can't create attack ads better than you, you [b]must[/b] be evil!
    NonZealot
    • Relax !!!!

      Relax !!!!
      zannetos
  • What Carla Marinucci didn't mention

    Is that if cable or broadcast TV ran the ad, Apple would storm their offices with lawyers over a copyright violation of using the commercial Ridley Scott directed. Clever indeed, as the message being sent is that Hillary has become the establishment candidate.

    I'm waiting for Al Gore to run, and tell the Supreme Court: "I told you so, bitches!"
    zaine_ridling
  • Thank you

    For showing us that your name is a lie: you are truly an anti-Apple zealot.
    Swift48
  • The "message" is a lie, too

    Listen to the words quoted by this terrible "dictator." "Let's talk," and the like.
    What's Big Brotherish about that? It's not. It's image over substance, in fact. Any
    candidate who tries to justify their election on smearing the image of an opponent
    doesn't have my sympathy.

    In fact, most leading speculation is that it's an ad that originated deep within the
    bowels of the RNC, who want to go after the front-runner. If you like this ad, wait
    till they go after your guy. Of course, it will be anonymous too. So they picked the
    "man in the middle" attack well-known to computer hackers. It's not much
    different from the attempt to blame the Obama/madrassa smear on someone "in
    the Clinton campaign." This is what Nixon supporters called "ratf**king."

    Would Apple go after this on TV? Of course they would. They might go after it on
    YouTube, though that would be bad PR.

    I think, if an Obama supporter truly made this, they should step forward and prove
    it, instead of lurking in the shadows like a coward.

    Apple might sue somebody who put this on TV, but put it on YouTube and FOX
    shows it ten times a day -- as "News."

    What is true is that a TV ad has to disclose where it comes from. Remember the
    statement at the end of campaign ads? "My name is [bleep], and I approved this
    message." YouTubers have some ethical considerations to think about.

    When George Allen called a Webb worker "macaca," that was actual videotape of
    the candidate saying something. It was immediately explained how the tape came
    to be, and that the Webb campaign was posting it. That spurred a lot of stories
    about what the term meant, Allen's past and so on. That's fair, I think, as well as
    the candid shots of Edwards combing his hair before a broadcast. It happened.
    There it is. Argue over its meaning.

    When some anonymous guy puts up a viral video that says nothing, and just
    places the opponent's message in a frame that implies that she's dictatorial, etc.,
    that's unethical.

    In fact, Obama doesn't believe that Hillary is "Big Sister." He's opposing her on a
    number of things called "issues." Who is it that is heavily-invested in saying that
    Hillary is a wacko dictatorial woman they call a word that rhymes with witch? Well,
    it's not any democrat, that's for sure. Listen to Rush and Drudge -- that's what
    THEY think of her.

    In my opinion, Obama should ask that it be taken down. If the maker is ethical,
    then he should step forward. (It might be that fat guy who's just been subpoenaed
    to testify.)
    Swift48