Political Therapy
Posted in: UncategorizedThe art of mass disassociation.
by
Franco Berardi Bifo
From Adbusters #100: Are We Happy Yet?
What if society can no longer resist the destructive effects of unbounded capitalism? What if society can no longer resist the devastating power of financial accumulation?
We have to disentangle autonomy from resistance. And if we want to do that, we have to disentangle desire from energy. The prevailing focus of modern capitalism has been energy: the ability to produce, to compete, to dominate. A sort of energolatria, a cult of energy, has dominated the cultural sense of the West from Faust to the Futurists. The ever growing availability of energy has been its dogma. Now we know that energy isn’t boundless. In the social psyche of the West, energy is fading. I think we should reframe the concept and practice of autonomy from this point of view. The social body is unable to reaffirm its rights against the wild assertiveness of capital because the pursuit of rights can never be dissociated from the exercise of force.
When workers were strong in the 1960s and 1970s, they did not restrict themselves to asking for their rights, to peaceful demonstrations of their will. They acted in solidarity, refusing to work, redistributing wealth, sharing things, services, and spaces. Capitalists, on their side, do not merely ask or demonstrate, they do not simply declare their wish: they enact it. They make things happen; they invest, disinvest, displace; they destroy and they build. Only force makes autonomy possible in the relation between capital and society. But what is force? What is force nowadays?
The identification of desire with energy has produced the identification of force with violence that turned out so badly for the Italian movement in the 1970s and 1980s. We have to distinguish energy and desire. Energy is falling, but desire has to be saved. Similarly, we have to distinguish force from violence. Fighting power with violence is suicidal or useless nowadays. How can we think of activists going against professional organizations of killers in the mold of Blackwater, Haliburton, secret services, mafias?
Only suicide has proved to be efficient in the struggle against power. And actually suicide has become decisive in contemporary history. The dark side of the multitude meets here the loneliness of death. Activist culture should avoid the danger of becoming a culture of resentment. Acknowledging the irreversibility of the catastrophic trends that capitalism has inscribed in the history of society does not mean renouncing it. On the contrary, we have today a new cultural task: to live the inevitable with a relaxed soul. To call forth a big wave of withdrawal, of massive dissociation, of desertion from the scene of the economy, of nonparticipation in the fake show of politics. The crucial focus of social transformation is creative singularity. The existence of singularities is not to be conceived as a personal way to salvation, they may become a contagious force.
When we think of the ecological catastrophe, of geopolitical threats, of economic collapse provoked by the financial politics of neoliberalism, it’s hard to dispel the feeling that irreversible trends are already at work within the world machine. Political will seems paralyzed in the face of the economic power of the criminal class.
The age of modem social civilization seems on the brink of dissolution, and it’s hard to imagine how society will be able to react. Modern civilization was based on the convergence and integration of the capitalist exploitation of labor and the political regulation of social conflict. The regulator state, the heir of the Enlightenment and socialism, has been the guarantor of human rights and the negotiator of social equilibrium. When, at the end of a ferocious class struggle between labor and capital – and within the capitalist class itself – the financial class has seized power by destroying legal regulation and transforming social composition, the entire edifice of modern civilization has begun to crumble.
I anticipate that scattered insurrections will take place in the coming years, but we should not expect much from them. They’ll be unable to touch the real centers of power because of the militarization of metropolitan space, and they will not be able to gain much in terms of material wealth or political power. Just as the long wave of counterglobalization’s moral protests could not destroy neoliberal power, so the insurrections will not find a solution, not unless a new consciousness and sensibility surfaces and spreads, changing everyday life and creating Non-Temporary Autonomous Zones rooted in the culture and consciousness of the global network.
The proliferation of singularities (the withdrawal and building of Non-Temporary Autonomous Zones) will be a peaceful process, but the conformist majority will react violently, and this is already happening. The conformist majority is frightened by the fleeing away of intelligent energy and simultaneously is attacking the expression of intelligent activity. The situation can be described as a fight between the mass ignorance produced by media totalitarianism and the shared intelligence of the general intellect.
We cannot predict what the outcome of this process will be. Our task is to extend and protect the field of autonomy and to avoid as much as possible any violent contact with the field of aggressive mass ignorance. This strategy of nonconfrontational withdrawal will not always succeed. Sometimes confrontation will be made inevitable by racism and fascism. It’s impossible to predict what should be done in the case of unwanted conflict. A nonviolent response is obviously the best choice, but it will not always be possible. The identification of well-being with private property is so deeply rooted that a barbarization of the human environment cannot be completely ruled out. But the task of the general intellect is exactly this: fleeing from paranoia, creating zones of human resistance, experimenting with autonomous forms of production using high-tech low-energy methods – while avoiding confrontation with the criminal class and the conformist population.
Politics and therapy will be one and the same activity in the coming years. People will feel hopeless and depressed and panicky because they are unable to deal with the post-growth economy, and because they will miss their dissolving modern identity. Our cultural task will be attending to those people and taking care of their insanity, showing them the way to a happy adaptation. Our task will be the creation of social zones of human resistance that act like zones of therapeutic contagion. The development of autonomy is not totalizing or intended to destroy and abolish the past. Like psychoanalytic therapy it should be considered an unending process.
Future Possibilities For OWS
Posted in: UncategorizedAn interview with Adbusters Editor-in-Chief Kalle Lasn.
From Adbusters Blog
Earlier this month, reporters from Canadian Business sat down with Adbusters Editor-in-Chief Kalle Lasn to ask his thoughts on what Occupy might look like in 2012. Here’s what he had to say.
Canadian Business: On the U.S. presidential election:
Kalle Lasn: Most young people, 99% of the occupiers I would say, are pretty disillusioned with Obama. We feel that he has become a kind of a gutless wonder who didn’t do what he had promised. He has disappointed us bitterly. When it comes to a choice between somebody like Rick Perry and Obama, then of course people will vote for Obama, but not in great numbers and without much enthusiasm.
I think the really interesting thing that could happen leading up to the presidential election is that there will be rumblings of third parties. Especially people in the Occupy movement are totally sick of this Coca-Cola/Pepsi kind of choice that Americans have had for so long. They’re yearning for a real choice, for real democracy, and we may well see the beginnings of a third party rising next year. Of course, I don’t think that it will suddenly challenge the Republican and Democratic parties, but it could well play the role of the spoiler in the way that Ralph Nader and Ross Perot and the Green Party have never quite been able to do.
Read the entire interview:
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/article/66423–interview-kalle-lasn-publ…
How to Start a Revolution
Posted in: UncategorizedWeaponized architecture
Posted in: UncategorizedSimon Critchley: What Is Normal?
Posted in: UncategorizedThe surprising power of the political imagination.
by
Simon Critchley
From Adbusters #99: The Big Ideas of 2012
You are missing some Flash content that should appear here! Perhaps your browser cannot display it, or maybe it did not initialize correctly.
We are living through a dramatic and ever-widening separation between normal state politics and power. Many citizens still believe that state politics has power. They believe that governments, elected through a parliamentary system, represent the interests of those who elect them and that governments have the power to create effective, progressive change. But they don’t and they can’t.
We do not live in democracies. We inhabit plutocracies: government by the rich. The corporate elites have overwhelming economic power with no political accountability. In the past decades, with the complicity and connivance of the political class, the Western world has become a kind of college of corporations linked together by money and serving only the interests of their business leaders and shareholders.
This situation has led to the disgusting and ever-growing gulf that separates the superrich from the rest of us. State politics in the West in the past four decades has become a machine for the creation of gross inequality whose patina is an ideology of ever-more vapid narcissism. As the Eurozone crisis eloquently shows, state politics in the West simply exists to serve the interests of capital in the form of international finance, which exerts a human cost that Marx could never have imagined in his wildest dreams. No matter how much people suffer and protest in the street, it is said, we must not upset the bankers. Who knows, our credit rating might drop.
It is time to take politics back from the political class through confrontation with the power of finance capital. What is so inspiring about the various social movements that we all too glibly call the Arab Spring, is their courageous determination to reclaim autonomy and political self-determination. The demands of the protesters in Tahrir Square and elsewhere are actually very classical: they refuse to live in authoritarian dictatorships propped up to serve the interests of Western capital, corporations and corrupt local elites. They want to reclaim ownership of the means of production, for example through the nationalization of major state industries.
The various movements in North Africa and the Middle East – and one is simply full of admiration for their individual and collective courage and peaceful persistence – aim at one thing: autonomy. They demand collective ownership of the places where one lives, works, thinks and plays. Let’s be clear: it is not just democracy that is being demanded all across the Arab world; it is socialism. And the tactics that have been developed to bring it about are anarchist.
There is a deeply patronizing view of these protests – common among Western politicians and their intellectual epigones – namely that they want what we have: the liberal democracy and neoliberal economics of our fine regimes. On the contrary, the movements in North Africa and the Middle East should be held up as a shining example for European and North American societies of what suddenly seems not only possible, but increasingly probable: that another way of conceiving and practicing social relations is not just possible, it is practicable.
Politicians in the West should be scared, very scared. The clock is running down. What we see emerging across our societies with increasing boldness, coherence and clarity are movements that refuse the separation of politics and power and who want to take power back through the invention of new forms of political activism.
It is in this spirit that I’d like to celebrate and congratulate the protesters in the Wall Street occupations and their followers all around the world.
We should not predict the future, but I think we are entering into a period of increasingly massive social dislocations and disorder which harbors within it countless risks, dialectical inversions, defeats, dangers, false dawns and fake defeats. But I think we are all coming to the powerful and simple realization that human beings acting peacefully together in concert can do anything – and nothing can stop them.
Something is happening. Something is shifting in the relations between politics and power. We don’t know where it will lead, but the four-decade ideological consensus that has simply allowed the creation of grotesque inequality has broken down, and anything and everything is suddenly possible. What we require now is solidarity, persistence and the endlessly surprising power of the political imagination.
Delta Nigeria – The Rape of Paradise
Posted in: UncategorizedKrzysztof Wodiczko: The Abolition of War
Posted in: UncategorizedEmily Jacirs Stazione. In Turin and uncensored this time
Posted in: UncategorizedInstances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad 1798-2006
Posted in: UncategorizedWhite House Attacks Fox News
Posted in: UncategorizedIt must be slow in the Capital these days; it seems that although our world is going crazy, the president and his staff have taken time out to wage a media attack on Fox News, making the rounds on all the Sunday morning talk shows, with one glaring exception: Fox. The gloves were certainly off as Obama’s team struck back at Fox News accusing the network of opinionated reporting. Some of the quotes from the barrage include:
Fox is “not really a news station,” said David Axelrod.
Fox, said Rahm Emmanuel, “is is not a news organization so much as it has a perspective.”
They also urged the other networks not to treat Fox News as a news station because the White House certainly did not think of Fox as news-oriented. A week ago, communications director Anita Dunn opened the White House offensive on Fox on a Sunday show: “Let’s not pretend they’re a news organization like CNN is.” She then stated that Fox was the communications arm for the Republican Party.
The cable news networks are highly competitive, and Fox is not only the second highest- watched cable TV network, but it carries 9 of the top 10 cable news shows as of Q1 of 2009. Despite the heavy competition, the White House’s attack has actually begun to backfire.
Helen Thomas, the senior White House reporter in Washington (serving from JFK to
present) warned the Obama administration: “Stay out of these fights,” and Washington Post’s blog stated: Where the White House has gone way overboard is in its decision to treat Fox as an outright enemy and to go public with the assault.
Some have even called the attack “Nixonian” in nature. However, the White House has an out. If the strategy fails, Anita Dunn can be tucked away easily, as she is expected to leave the administration by the end of the year.
While Fox has not attacked Obama directly, they’ve unloaded on his aides, especially Dunn. Her statement naming Mao Tse Tung as one of her favorite politicians did not help nor did her speech explaining the censorship-like control exercised during the election. If team Obama felt they couldn’t control the message, or the press, they would use YouTube, Twitter, or Facebook to communicate.
While America thought that the Obama Campaign was tech-savvy, it was really just an exercise in message management.
Jeff Louis has over ten years of brand-building, media strategy, and new business experience. His passion is writing and his strong suit is sarcasm. You can follow Jeff on Twitter or become a fan on Examiner.com.
Radio Advertising Still Annoying (and Dangerous?) as Ever
Posted in: UncategorizedThroughout life, people become programmed to react in certain ways to certain stimuli. Fire drills, car alarms, and air-raid sirens all mean imminent danger and usually make us spring into action. If you are like me, police sirens have a special place in your heart, and you have an uncanny ability to be the person singled out from a group of speeding cars, forced to begrudgingly hand over a license and registration. Anytime I hear a siren closing in, my heart jumps up into my throat and I take my attention off the road in front of me and start looking for those ominous flashing lights.
Just last week as I drove along on my way to a meeting, I heard a shrill siren that almost made me drive off the road into the storefront of a McDonalds. I strained to see a police car or ambulance through the rain, but there was none. The siren was from a commercial on the radio. This brought to mind an episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm in which Larry David takes a friend’s new car out for a spin and hears a loud car horn. Thinking the sound came from the driver behind him, he slams on the brakes and is rear-ended. The two drivers holler for a while, and then Larry realizes the car horn was actually from an AAMCO commercial on the radio. It was a funny moment in the show, but it probably really happens to some unlucky drivers.
Seriously, how is putting loud sirens and car honking in radio commercials even legal? Faux sirens or car horns can be extremely unsafe for those on the road, causing unnecessary distraction and serious accidents. Furthermore, scaring the crap out of potential customers is definitely not going to get a company more sales or positive brand recognition. With all the energy the FCC expends fining DJ’s for saying “butts” on the air, it’s surprising the FCC hasn’t focused on an issue that potentially puts people in actual danger while on the road.
Anna Vortmanis a marketing and advertising manager specializing in branding and new media. Contact her at avortman@gmail.com.
Olympic Bid Split Chicago, Local Agency
Posted in: UncategorizedIn case you were unaware, the competition for the 2016 Olympics host city’s been won and the waiting is over.
It was a controversial ride, but in the end, Chicago got knocked out immediately and Rio de Janiero was bestowed the honor, marking the first time a South American country’s been chosen to host an Olympic Games. The news is bittersweet in Chicago; the city was split 54% For, 46% Against according to recent polls. The city’s debt, added traffic on over-burdened streets, and additional taxes were main contention points that kept Chicagoans from supporting the bid. Plus the knowledge that recent host’s were still paying off Olympic-sized debt.
Skepticism rose to National levels last week when President Barack Obama, and wife Michelle, agreed to attend the final stage of the Olympic pitch in Oslow, adding their political weight to a field filled with political, and royal, notables: A King and Queen (Madrid), Prime Minister (Tokyo), and another President (Rio).
Competition between Rio and Chicago was especially fierce, and accusations of unfair play were voiced by both sides: One of the larger controversies a website Chicagoans for Rio 2016. The Chicago Olympic Bid team accused Rio of setting up the site (makes sense), but it turned out that it was an inside job…really inside.
Meanwhile, a Chicagoan named Kevin Lynch is confessing that he’s the man behind the cheeky ChicagoansForRio.com, the Web site that’s been anonymously trashing Chicago’s prospects in the past couple of weeks.
Okay, so he was from Chicago. No biggie. The real impact of the story is that Kevin Lynch is one of the top creative execs at Energy BBDO’s Proximity Unit. Energy BBDO, and owner Omnicom, were both in support of Chicago’s bid for the games, providing creative services as part of their endorsement. Plus, there’s the fact that Energy BBDO’s largest client, Wrigley (Wrigley Field, Wrigley Gum, etc), supported the city’s bid.
Which led to “Drama, drama, drama”! Energy BBDO released a statement to Ad Age last week:
“I want to be clear: The agency is and has been fully behind the Chicago 2016 bid,” said Energy BBDO CEO Tonise Paul. “Our clients are aware of our position and understand the situation. The individual acted on his own accord without the agency’s knowledge.”
Kevin Lynch, the “instigator” of the controversy, said he had stopped supporting the Olympic bid for Chicago when Mayor Daley’s statements that Chicagoans wouldn’t be taxed for the games were reversed. (Chicago already carries the heaviest sales tax in the Nation at 10.25%.)
Now that the host city’s been decided, it will be at least a week to discover what becomes of Mr. Lynch…
Jeff Louis: Strategic Media Planner, Brand Project Manager, blogger, and aspiring writer. Please leave a comment or contact him on Twitter. As always, thanks for reading!
Book Review – Blank Spots on the Map: The Dark Geography of the Pentagons Secret
Posted in: UncategorizedPresident Obama Spoofed as Socialist ‘Joker’
Posted in: UncategorizedDuring his rapid ascent from a senator to President of the United States, Barack Obama effectively rewrote the rules of political marketing. By embracing the Internet and relying on strong grassroots fundraising, Obama raised enough money to dominate opponent John McCain with television ads that included an unprecedented 30-minute documentary style ad that delayed the start of the MLB World Series.
Predictably, President Obama’s marketing methods have been embraced by the rest of the Democratic Party (note the similarities between the White House homepage and the Democratic Party’s homepage). Of course, it’s not just friends of the President who have taken to alternative advertising, but his enemies, as well.
Recently, images of President Obama made to resemble Heath Ledger’s Joker from the blockbuster film The Dark Knight have popped up all over Los Angeles. Illustrated in a style somewhat similar to Shepard Fairey’s famous Obama ‘Hope’ portrait, the poster splashes the word socialism underneath the President’s creepily smiling face.
It is unclear at this point whether the Obama/Joker posters are the work of a lone individual or if they are tied to a formal guerrilla marketing campaign. For some reason, I’m inclined to believe the latter. We’ve seen Astroturfing campaigns from both side of the political aisle, so I wouldn’t be shocked to find out in a month that this was conceived by some Conservative organization. If so, the question is, “Why?”
Why appropriate such a well-known image from The Dark Knight? Is the artist implying that the President, like the Joker in the movie, is a terrorist? That tactic didn’t work in the Presidential campaign, so why would it work now? Furthermore, if these posters are indeed being bankrolled by members of a conservative group, why would these people risk being tied to such a blatant attack?
If Obama/Joker is actually part of a greater campaign, I can’t see how it will be effective. Despite the President’s slipping approval ratings, I believe that in these fragile times, Americans aren’t interested in getting back to divisive politics. What do you think?
Rob Frappier is a marketing copywriter and blogger working in the social media sphere. To reach Rob, visit his blog, or follow him on Twitter.
Advertising is Irrelevant?
Posted in: UncategorizedAdWeek and Harris recently released a poll asking those not involved in the advertising trade what they thought of advertising’s “relevancy.”
The results show that most find that our jobs, as a whole, are rather irrelevant.
Advertising’s down, no doubt, and now Adweek’s heaping salt on the wound!
Well, Mr. and Mrs. America, let’s look at a life without advertising. A life of relevance.
First of all, without advertising, we would not have free access to television. Advertisers in essence pay for the shows we watch by running commercials. By the same logic, the web in that state would not be as comprehensive as the one we experience now. Radio would be a paid service with subscribers. Programs and shows with relatively lower ratings would be immediately slashed since they would no longer be able to support themselves.
The cultural art form of advertising would be lost. The circle of life would be disrupted. Just as life influences advertising, ads influence culture.
Without advertising, creatives would be cubicle-bound and non-imaginative. Serious. Boring. Sex would not sell, and neither would honesty. No one would fight for the cause. PETA would consist of two guys fighting for animal rights, and no one would care. Animals wouldn’t be cool to wear. Or not wear. Or own. Times Square would be dimly lit. Your favorite beer would be just “BEER,” as the term ‘generic’ would dominate store shelves. Color would be sparse. Trendsetters would be trend-less. No brands, no logos, no icons or spokespeople. No sexy models, sexy shows, or suggestive commercials. We wouldn’t know who to vote for, or why. Four hour erections? Who’d need the pills, let alone use them? No body-image, no silicone implants, no tummy-tucks. No Jon & Kate. Michael Jackson would just be another singer. No Hollywood trailers, stars, starlets, tramps, red carpets, or blockbuster openings. No E! TV, no TMZ. No Paris, Lindsay, Nicole, or reality TV. No Tila Tequila.
No PSA’s warning that your brain on drugs was scrambled. Or that kids shouldn’t smoke crack and that crack kills. Rather than axing the marketing budget first, corporations would axe employees. And that would be just fine, because there would be no PR effort, no big news story, therefore no downside.
Life would go on, but it would be bland and tasteless. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and MySpace: no need for them.
Take a picture of the Cold War-era Russia and apply it to a life without advertising. Cold. Drizzling. Muddled.
The link to this study is now unavailable. Was the issue so unimportant that Adweek pulled the article? Or was the study published on the wrong day?
Luckily, I printed it:
In an AdweekMedia/Harris Poll last month, respondents were given a chance to say they don’t feel strongly about the industry one way or another, and nearly half of them took it. Asked to characterize their overall impression of “the advertising industry in general,” 47 percent said it’s “neither negative nor positive.” Predictably, those with a negative view of the business (9 percent “very,” 28 percent “somewhat”) outnumbered those with a positive view (2 percent “very,” 15 percent “somewhat”). (The total exceeds 100 percent due to rounding.)
If such numbers count as not-so-bad news for the ad business, responses were less positive on the question of whether consumers find advertising relevant to their lives (”By relevant,” Harris told respondents, “we mean how it connects to things that are ongoing in your daily life”). Given the effort put into aiming the right ad at the right target, the numbers here were pretty lackluster. Eight percent of respondents said advertising is “very relevant” to their lives, and 42 percent said it’s “somewhat relevant.” Thirty-two percent termed it “not that relevant” and 14 percent “not at all relevant,” with the rest unsure.
Can you say “OUCH!”?
Jeff Louis: Strategic Media Planner, Project Manager, and New Business Account Coordinator. His passion is writing. Reach out and touch him: www.linkedin.com or www.twitter.com.
Clever and Current: Reaching the Information Age
Posted in: UncategorizedThe Internet. The greatest enabler perhaps ever known. The ability to acquire and distribute information at a furious and daunting pace has proven to be the downfall of many a business, political candidate, celebrity etc. However, those who seize control have experienced unprecedented success. Capturing the minds of those fluent in Internet language proves to be the primary goal of advertisers for the future.
In May, the International Society of Human Rights (ISHR) released a group of 3 ads which succinctly and adroitly summarize both the fears and triumphs of widespread Internet distribution.
The political implications are clear: target and mock those who seek to suppress the free spread of information. Labeled “To Teach Dictators a Lesson”, the sharp simplicity and wit of the ad depicts perfectly the conflicting opinions of those on both ends of the spectrum. The brilliance of the ad lies in the subtle usage of the imagery of the stifled flow of information.
Subtlety is an art form lost on many advertisers who often go for gross exaggerations in the name of attention grabbing. As depicted in my last blog, such strategies often undercut the intended message. Quite oppositely, the subversive humor of this ad strikes a poignant note.
Delivering a meaningful but catching message to those who can rapidly attain information from a variety of sources proves difficult. However, those who succeed do so in slight-of-hand subtlety rather than slap-you-in-the-face bravado.
Dan Davis is a Freelance Writer carving out his growing resume, specializing in copy writing, and subjects from sports to the arts. Contact him on LinkedIn.
Why do people desire walls?
Posted in: UncategorizedDoes The Ad Industry Need A Scandal, Too?
Posted in: UncategorizedINTRO
For the 2008/2009 Year in Advertising Review (if there were such a thing), most of the pages would be filled with stories on Social Media Marketing, lay-offs, the automotive industry’s effect on the ad industry, and the economy. With much of the hard news skewing negative, now is not the best time to face a scandal, albeit a small one.
Based on a story released in The St. Petersburg Times (Florida), as well as their website TampaBay.com, it is been reported that a scandal is nearing hurricane force in the Sunshine State. Worse yet, it’s a political scandal. Finally, to top it all off, it involves a prominent Tampa Bay ad agency, a federal inquiry, and the FBI.
THE PLAYERS

Schifino Lee Advertising and Branding, founded in 1993, has a well-rounded client list: Jaguar, AT&T, Mobley, Seminole Hard Rock Casino, Gunn Allen Financial, The Reproductive Medicine Group, and WellCare Health Plans. Absent, however, is political experience; yet, it’s often the best creative that wins, regardless of the competition’s experience. In this case, the agency was awarded the account.
THE STORY
Buddy Johnson realized that he was in the fight of his political life; in February 2008, the former County Commissioner, Phyllis Busansky, filed to run for the same position and had surpassed Johnson in campaign contributions by March. Schifino Lee was retained to keep voter education at a premium. The campaign, paid for by county taxpayers, originally started to “educate voters” about an optical voting system that was idiot-proof. The debut of the system provided Johnson’s office the excuse to hire Schifino Lee.
But getting Johnson’s name and image in front of voters was a main goal from the outset, said the owner of a marketing firm who was hired by the elections office to conduct an outreach campaign for Hispanics.
The $40,000 educational campaign turned into a $640,000 re-election campaign, sixteen times the original amount, and ads began to focus on Buddy Johnson, rather than education. The campaign ran the media gamut, from campaign buttons and stickers to television spots and online ads. Few of the ads had anything to do with voter education. The agency claims they simply followed their client’s requests and handed files over to investigators. The agency also provided copies to The St. Petersburg Times. While all information at this point is speculation, The Times mentions the following:
• Schifino Lee won the contract in a no-bid process
• Many of the ads were political in nature, but about Johnson
• Several pieces were identical [but charged individually]
• Some of the pieces were never used, and had little or no valueAn article by Johnson that was ghost-written by the firm was never published. A two-page flier cost $1,854, but there is no indication it was ever used. Another flier told voters how to fill the oval on the ballot. “Completely,” it advised, a tip that cost taxpayers $765.
The Federal investigation was launched to review various aspects of Mr. Johnson’s management of the county’s elections office, and there are estimates that he overspent by $2.35 million before losing the race.
Rather than heaping insult on top of injury, it’s quiet possible that Buddy Johnson will receive insult on top of felony.
Please remember that all parties are presumed to be innocent until jailed.
Jeff Louis: Strategic Media Planner, Project Manager, and New Business Coordinator. His passion is writing, contributing to BMA as well as freelancing. He’d love to hear from you, so leave a comment or follow the links: linkedin.com or twitter.com.
Health Care For Everyone
Posted in: UncategorizedIn the United States, there are currently over 44 million people with no health insurance. HealthJustice is introducing five TV spots featuring B.J. Hunicutt (Mike Farrell) of the hit televisions series M*A*S*H. Mr. Farrell has graduated from TV doctor to author and activist. HealthJustice produced a series of five ads with B.J. speaking to doctors and nurses about “Single Payer” health care.
What is Single Payer Health Care?
Single-payer healthcare is the payment of doctors, hospitals and other healthcare providers from a single fund and is one of the systems used to provide Universal Healthcare. A bill has been introduced to Congress, H.R. 676, that outlines the “health care for all” strategy.
The Campaign
There will be five ads in rotation coordinated with a nationwide calling, emailing and faxing campaign to Congress and the White House. As of Friday, May 8th, over 25 thousand faxes, 2000 voicemails/phone messages and numerous emails had been sent to Congress and the White House, all requesting single payer health care.
The campaigns and the TV ads are funded entirely with donations to HealthJustice, typically less than $100 each. Seed money came from Physicians for a National Health Program and from the Leadership Conference for Guaranteed Health Care.
Who Pays?
In short, we do. Although there are no specifics, the bill does cover where funding would originate:
The bill is hitting at an opportune time as more and more Americans find themselves without jobs and health care. For more information, or to get involved, visit www.1payer.net.
Jeff Louis: Strategic Media Planner, Project Manager, and New Business Coordinator. His passion is writing, contributing to BMA as well as freelancing. He’d love to hear from you: linkedin.com/in/jefflouis or twitter.com/jlo0312..