Remote, Controlled
Here is what you really learn about the four major candidates in
their 30-second campaign spots
By JEFF GREENFIELD
November 22, 1999
Web posted at: 1:25 p.m. EST (1825 GMT)
If you want to learn the darkest strategic assumptions of a
presidential campaign, you could spend weeks enticing operatives
to reveal their confidential polling data, focus-group surveys
and off-the-record-deep-background-not-for-attribution-
expose-me-and-I'll-kill-you thoughts. Or you could watch
television commercials.
People like me are supposed to disdain campaign ads as simplistic
and demagogic. But these ads reflect a campaign's efforts to
distill its themes into the purest form. And why not? It's where
the lion's share of the budget is going. Watch these ads, and
they'll tell you exactly what these campaigns most hope--and fear.
Is the campaign of Governor George W. Bush afraid that Steve
Forbes will launch a round of attack ads like those that so
damaged Bob Dole four years ago? Listen to Bush talk about why
we're so cynical about politics. "I believe oftentimes campaigns
resort to mud throwing and name calling, and Americans are sick
of that kind of campaigning," he says, chatting with an unseen
listener. "I'd like to run a campaign that is hopeful and
optimistic and very positive." It's a textbook effort at
inoculation. If you hear anything bad about me, the ad's subtext
says, it's that mud throwing and name calling I warned you about.
Another Bush ad, by far the most striking and unusual of this
campaign, reflects an effort at a different kind of inoculation.
As a worried little girl wanders around what seems to be an
abandoned military base, Bush tells us that "we live in a world
of terrorists, madmen and missiles." The girl suddenly
disappears, as Bush says that "a dangerous world still requires a
sharpened sword." When he promises a "foreign policy with a touch
of iron," the girl reappears, reaching out her hand to a
uniformed arm. While the ad was produced well before the Governor
flunked that geopolitics pop quiz, it clearly reflects a central
campaign concern: that Bush might be seen as a lightweight, a
silver-spoon child of privilege without the heft to deal with the
presidency. The disturbing images, the edgy music in a minor key,
the unsettling language aim at one point: No mindless frat boy
here.
The ad also aims at defusing the appeal of the Republican
candidate whose biography stands in sharpest contrast to Bush's.
More than half of Senator John McCain's bio ad details his
horrific experience as a Vietnam prisoner of war. There are
black-and-white photos of the angry mob that dragged the downed
Navy pilot off to 51/2 years in prison. There is no reference to
policies or programs, only an assertion that McCain has been
"taking on the Establishment and defying special interests and
never forgetting those heroes with whom he served." (A neat way
of referencing heroism without claiming it for himself.)
Look at two Bill Bradley ads, and you can see his entire campaign
in microcosm. In one, Bradley sits at a desk, surrounded by a
flag, framed photos, an Oval Office-style window in the
background. "Wouldn't it be better if we had more than sound
bites and photo ops when we were choosing a candidate?" he asks.
"I think so. That's why my campaign will try to be different.
It'll concentrate on issues, ones that concern you." There's not
a single word of substance in the ad. Instead, Bradley is talking
about talking about issues, hoping that voters will credit him
with substance when they see him on the news or in debates.
So why is Bradley, the "unpolitician," using two Senators in his
bio ad? Maybe because polls show most voters still think of him
first as a former basketball player--and because he trails far
behind Bush and Vice President Al Gore in "leadership" ratings.
Sometimes you can read a campaign in a single slogan. Gore's bio
ad is filled with pictures of his younger days as an Army
journalist in Vietnam and as a newspaper reporter, probably to
erase his image as someone who was born in a blue suit with a
briefcase in his hand. But listen to the end of an otherwise
routine commercial on health care: "Change that works for
working families." Now subject that phrase to political parsing:
"Change"--I'm not Bill Clinton--"that works"--I'm not a
wild-eyed liberal like Bradley--"for working families"--I'm for
you, the tax-paying middle class, the folks Clinton brought back
to the Democratic Party.
All these campaigns have one common note: there's not a single
direct attack on anyone else. In a time when the "angry voter"
has all but disappeared, no one is trying to draw blood--yet.
MORE TIME STORIES:
Cover Date: November 29, 1999
|