08/22/2007

Hillary Clinton "Invisible" Ad Gets the Grade

Via Slog comes this interesting study from Slate. 450 Democrats and Republicans were asked to watch the spot and grade it in real time, based on how "believable" they thought it was. Not a lot of surprises, but still an interesting way to assess a candidate's marketed image.

Posted 3:21 PM EST by Andy in Advertising, Democratic Party, Election 2008, Hillary Clinton, News, Republican Party | Permalink

Like it?

Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!

RECENT STORIES:

• Ian McKellen: Please Don't Call Me 'Sir' or 'Dumbledore'

• Suspects Arraigned in Gang Rape of Lesbian in Richmond

• News: Larry Craig, TB, Wicked, White House, Seacrest, Twitter

• Book Tackles Football, Undies, and Moisture Management Systems

• Towleroad Guide to the Tube #408

Comments

1. I especially like how the Republican believe-o-meter went slightly up just as the end slate appeared. Apparently the thought process was as such:

   SLATE APPEARS: "Hillary Clinton"

   THOUGHT PROCESS: "Do I believe that that IS Hillary Clinton I am seeing? Hmm... well... yeah... I guess." *click*

   Posted by: M@ | Aug 22, 2007 3:53:38 PM

   
   

2. This is disgusting.

   Progressives are always willing to listen to other people, its the right-wing conspiracy that continuously refuse to listen to the other side of the story. That, ultimately, is why I think Repubs will win the next round.

   Posted by: Landis | Aug 22, 2007 3:56:24 PM

   
   

3. Godspeed Hillary's delvery to the Oval Office on January 20, 2009!!!

   Posted by: el presidente | Aug 22, 2007 4:02:19 PM

   
   

4. I think it's interesting that when she mentioned that the troops were invisible the Republicans evened out and went up slightly, very very slightly.

   Posted by: Mike | Aug 22, 2007 4:18:25 PM

   
   

5. Only 2.
   Landis should look in a mirror from time to time.

   The ad seems to be packaged fluff. Nothing specific. No policies. Probably perfect for the modern age where thought and reasoning are gone. The primary question when it comes to getting another's opinion is now "How do you feel..." not "What do you think..."

   Posted by: James | Aug 22, 2007 5:23:55 PM

   
   

6. You watched a different video Mike if you think that. It actually went down, leveled just a tad and then kept going down.

   What I found interesting is that when she mentioned families and health care, the Rep. response went from minus 15 or 20% to slightly above zero.

   But this illistates the problem she has, which is many people just tune her out immediatly. Even the Dem. response wasn't all that great and what they didn't show here was how Independents view her. Since all the polls are showing her with just under 50% negatives among Independents, I would have thought they would have been very interested in that result....without Independents, she can't win...and she will need OVER 50% of them even if she takes 80% of the Dems.

   Posted by: Joshua | Aug 22, 2007 5:26:33 PM

   
   

7. i think the campaign planners believe those kinds of ads work, given that during the last election people were so much more concerned with the strength of W's convictions than with whether any of those convictions were true. he was elected as "the kind of guy i can trust" rather than "a guy who's got his facts straight and has a good plan."

   Posted by: le_sacre | Aug 22, 2007 5:28:51 PM

   
   

8. A new Rasmussen poll shows that Mitt Romney had higher negative ratings than Clinton. In that poll 25% of Republicans said that they would vote against Romney.

   Its not a surprise that Republicans are anti-Clinton. They have been listen to attack after attack against by the Republican attack machine for 15 years. They will not vote for her period. If she is the nominee Democrats will circle the wagons around her in the face of Republican attacks and be more motivate to vote for her. The independents will be the key.

   Posted by: Bloggernista | Aug 22, 2007 5:32:31 PM

   
   

9. Does it really matter what she or any other "republican and democrat" candidates say?

   I'm still voting Ron Paul 2008

   Posted by: lopezgjr | Aug 22, 2007 5:47:30 PM

   
   

10. I've been voting for a long time - and the way things are looking for this election - truly - leaves me a bit scared. I really didn't see anything progressive happen during the past four years - let alone the four before that. I have a child that will grow up and be impacted greatly by this next administration - whomever it is - and I don't have confidence in any of them. Not at this point. Let's admit it - we all want change for the better and I just don't see it coming.

    Posted by: TyInTenn | Aug 22, 2007 6:52:36 PM

    
    

11. What I found interesting is that every time she referred to segments of the population being ignored by George W. Bush her believability index went down on the words 'this President'. Odd considering how we've been hearing that his poll numbers are low even among Republicans.

    Posted by: peterparker | Aug 22, 2007 7:04:50 PM

    
    

12. That was so funny how it started going back up when the republicans knew the ad was over. To bad only 60% of democrats believed her. Thats about 30% of the country.

    Posted by: Zeke | Aug 22, 2007 8:54:58 PM

    
    

13. I fuckin'hate Hillary and would almost rather vote for a repug than for her...almost...in all likelihood I'll do a "symbolic" vote and vote for one of the candidates who in all honesty don't have a pray but I will not have to sacrifice my principles. I know some here hate to hear it but that's the way it is for a lot of people.

    Posted by: Desi | Aug 22, 2007 10:55:11 PM

    
    

14. Joshua,

    Watch the video again and read excatly what I said. At the end of the video, when she says "The troops are invisible", the Republican feed back levels and actually bounces back a point or two and then coninues down. It's JUST when she mentions the troops. Learn to read.

    Mike

    Posted by: Mike | Aug 23, 2007 8:27:46 AM

    
    

15. James: Perhaps you care to explain what you mean.

    The ad is perfectly truthful, in my opinion. Yesterday an American friend just told me how much cancer treatment will cost ($1M) and all the potholes the insurance industry have to limit claims.

    Posted by: Landis | Aug 23, 2007 10:18:30 AM

    
    

16. Watching a red line go across a graph isn't reading Mike....it's show and tell.
    I watched it 2 more times and had a friend watch it as well....what we see is an extreamly short level and a very short drop....then it rises a bit on the next batch of words.

    Posted by: Joshua | Aug 23, 2007 4:45:21 PM

    
    

Post a comment