Search
Trunzo hits the airwaves; they hit back
Okay, this is really good stuff: Caesar Trunzo has the first spot of the general election up in his district, running, apprently, mainly or exclusively on cable.
Here's the transcript:
Woman 1: Many people on Long Island are having a very tough time.
Woman 2: I definitely believe our property taxes are through the roof.
Man 1: I think a cap on property taxes would definitely be a good thing for us.
Woman 3: Senator Trunzo is working to cap property taxes, and that's important for me and my family.
(Screen text: Caesar Trunzo is leading the fight to cap property taxes)
Woman 1: Trunzo very much cares about working people.
Man 2: I don't know of anyone else that has worked harder than Trunzo in the Senate to get things done.
Man 3: Experience absolutely matters, I can tell you that. Absolutely.
Voiceover over campaign logo and beach sunset: (male voice) I can't imagine anyone could do a better job. (female voice) You don't fix what's not broken.
That's some really discordant messaging. To go from 'many people are hurting' to 'you don't fix what's not broken' - all the rich ironies of that aside - is a startling disconnect. If many people are hurting - and that's without question true - then the logical answer to that is change. Not to mention that the idea of Caesar Trunzo fighting for anything other than a better time slot for Florida shuffleboard is kinda ludicrous.
Yes, but...
Even John McCain is running the same strategy -- admit times are tough, but then position yourself as the savior.
Unless these ads are answered, and quickly, they'll have an effect. Both Barack Obama and Brian Foley must get on the air NOW with ads that blame McCain/Trunzo for the failures that led to our problems.
That's correct.
But my point really went t the structural weaknesses of the argument being made. Whether those are exploited is another question, but they are there nonetheless.
And my point
My point is that whie the ad has glaring holes in its logic, TV ads are designed to appeal to emotions, not logic. That's why shampoo ads all feature people with long, beautiful hair.
You and I, and presumably everyone who reads this blog, get it. We understand the logical holes in the ad. But "Joe Voter" doesn't give a damn -- he's not watching television because he wants to exercise his brain, he's watching television to avoid exercising his brain. What he will hear is that there are problems, and Caesar Trunzo will solve them. That's the message. On television, as with comedy, logic has little to do with effectiveness.
That's why Foley needs to get on the air with a competing ad blaming Trunzo for the problems we face (there are problems, and Trunzo is to blame -- only Foley can provide real hope). It's a simple message that has the advantage of truth.
Again...
...I do not disagree with you on the proper response. But the reactions I see as likely to it are visceral, not logical. That it's possible to logically describe them and predict probable reception responses doesn't mean that what I'm talking about is confined to political insiders. It's just a bad ad, and come to think of it, it's made worse by the fact that Trunzo doesn't even appear in it except as a tiny little picture.