How many readers subscribe to the NY Times? Political blogs have an unusually literate readership so I would guess about one in three. Now thanks to Malkin and about ten million other useful idiots on the right, two and nine-tenths of you are talking about it.
Ad pros would trade their second-favorite Porsche for that kind of ROI.
demimondian
Do you know many ad pros? In my experience, most of them can’t afford a soul to trade for that kind of ROI, much less a Porsche.
Tim F.
From what I have observed, the soul is the cost of the Porsche.
Zifnab
Tell it to Beauchamp, John. Just because wingers know how to really kick ass in a real war doesn’t mean they don’t know how to kick ass in a media war.
I can only hope someone thinks to put up billboards all over Times Square, warning people not to read the NYTimes MoveOn.Org ad.
Paul L.
I take it that you have no problem with the Swiftboat and Willie Horton ads.
I seem to remember some outrage over those.
Xenos
Yeah Paul L..
This is your game. Like playing it? Like watching good, honorable people insulted and dragged through mud for short term political gain.
At least there is a kernel of truth behind the “Betray-us” meme (that is, critics in the military invented it). The Willie Horton and Swift Boat campaigns were flat lies.
If jerks like you would grow up and be responsible then maybe the standards of conduct and communication could be a bit more respectable.
kchiker
A bit off topic but on Hardball Tweety is foaming at the mouth and Biden just about broke down in tears. Petraeus’s statement when Warner asked if the mission was making America safer was basically ‘I don’t know’.
Paul L.
I thought the Willie Horton ad was bad because it was racist.
What are the “lies” of the Willie Horton ad?
Tim F.
Paul, try to escape the assumption that every point is a moral point (a less fair blogger would say try to see the ‘W’ once in a while). I have not said a thing about whether I approve of the ad itself, only that the buyers more than got their money’s worth. From that perspective the Horton and swiftboat ads were clearly and undeniably effective ad buys. Slimy dishonest, whatever, in none of those cases did the ad client regret the money spent.
Warren Terra
I’m sure the ad ‘worked’, in a couple of senses: it raised MoveOn’s profile, especially as a major organization opposed to the war (and despised by the right), and it probably brought in more money than it cost.
I still maintain that it was a stupid ad, though, because its tagline was divisive. I agree with MoveOn’s assessment of the testimony, and that we should get out. But I worry that the visible media-defined representatives of the anti-war movement too often make statements and actions to mobilize their followers rather than to convince those who could be convinced. The greatest benificiaries of figures such as Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan are themselves and the wingnuts – and, as a distant third, maybe the anti-war cause.
P.S. w/r/t PaulL: please remember not to feed the trolls.
Randolph Fritz
Warren Terra Says:
But there is already a division; it’s not clear to me that there is anyone left to be convinced at this point. It seems to me that all the people who are going to be convinced have been, not by liberal arguments, but by the reality of the war. On the other hand, to the extent that it makes the political center and its media more visible, the ad may be working very well.
I don’t have the sense that moveon.org is that media-savvy, but I don’t think this ad was a particularly unreasonable thing for them to do.
r4d20
The American public holds professional, career, military personnel in much higher regard, overall, than they hold politicians and political activists.
The reason is simple – because political activists are seen as “agenda-driven” who say things to advance their agenda whereas career military people are often seen, right or wrong, as largely “agenda free”. People KNOW that MoveOn is passionately against the war – so passionate that they would be willing to tell lies if they thought the lies would advance the greater morality of ending the war. Most people DO NOT KNOW that Patreus has a wide political streak as well – all the critical reporting on Patreus has been done by blogs and most people dont read blogs.
If they wanted to run this ad they should have “prepped the battlefield” and mounted an entire ad campaign which started by introducing information calling his impartiality into question and ramped up the rhetoric over time. Instead we saw an amateur attempt to accomplish everything in a single ad – but people dont change unconscious assumptions, like how pretty much any general is more trustworthy than pretty much any activist, that quickly.
This was the media equivalent of a frontal charge against a fresh enemy occupying favorable ground and it fared about as well.
KCinDC
It worked, if you believe that there’s no such thing as bad publicity.
DougJ
Not true of Michael Moore. He’s made two very good films that tackled real issues and raised consciousness about them. I respect and admire him and everyone who cares about America should feel the same way. Is he over the top sometimes? Sure, but who cares?
DougJ
The ad worked. Nasty attacks almost always work. That’s politics in America.
Where did the civility go? Karl Rove dragged into the bathroom and strangled while David Broder was eating quail and admiring the view from Rove’s historic cabin in Texas Hill Country
JL
I get home delivery of the Times in GA. If you ever read the AJC you’d understand why. The ads headline took away from the message imo. Personally I’m tired of sound bites.
LarryB
To Iraq. Or maybe Guantanamo. No, wait! It must be stored in a locked room inside Verizon’s server center.
Tsulagi
Yeah, here’s a shout out to RedState for a helpful link I clicked to a pdf of The Ad.
Wonder how many RSers actually read the text in the ad before they started hard-tapping their shoes loudly in protest? I read it.
Actually didn’t see any real hyperbole in the text. Basically it was saying Petraeus was going to show up with pretty charts having swell lines going down for the bad stuff and up for the good stuff with no numbers to back it up. While there are numbers and reports with actual stuff in them showing something different. Verifiable facts. Yeah, I can see why they want a congressional resolution condemning that shit.
AkaDad
Saying, “I’m tired of soundbites” is a soundbite. ;-)
Dug Jay
I don’t believe that the general feeling among actual members of Congress is the same as that expressed by many in this thread; in fact, several have been very blunt in telling the NYT and WaPo that they believe the ad sank all chances of accelerating a war shutdown this year.
DougJ
Total bullshit. Where’s the link?
Jeff Eaton
I hate to be snarky, but I think it’s fair to say that it would have taken some pretty impressive outside intervention to accelerate a war shutdown this year. Are the Congressional Democrats seriously claiming that they were this close to slamming on the brakes, but an ad by MoveOn scuttled their plans?
Dug Jay
Here’s another take from the WaPo under a headline, “MoveOn.Org: Momentum or Menace:”
Jess
I have mixed feelings about the ad. I hate the childish name-calling, and I agree with some of the points Warren and r4d20 make.
But on the other hand, would it have gotten any play in the media if it hadn’t been so abrasive? Would EP and MM have been interviewed on Hardball if the ad had been a polite, restrained suggestion that we might just maybe want to consider assessing the general’s report more critically? It’s pretty obvious that scandal and controversy get center stage, and reasoned discourse is ignored.
I think in the end MoveOn did what it had to do to get the issue into the spotlight, where it needed to be. The points made in the body of the ad are perfectly valid and should be debated in the MSM. How else was this going to happen?
JWW
Tim,
Do you know where Mosher Hill is?
Jess
Thanks for saying this, Doug. Too many people are scared to defend Moore’s contributions because of the right-wing attack dogs. And, of course, because he’s fat.
ThymeZone
One of the great propagandists of all time. A master craftsman. “Roger and Me” is a national treasure. I have seen it in its entirety probably ten times, and one never tires of it.
His takedown of New Gingrich back in the 1990’s might be some of the greatest television ever broadcast (he had a show).
Watching Moore’s work is an education in the use of mass communication.
DougJ
Dug Jay: link, motherfucker link!
DougJ
Fuck the right-wing attack dogs. They’re a bunch of pussies when push comes to shove.
TenguPhule
General Betray-us works perfectly.
Accurate, Catchy and annoys the other side.
What more can you ask from a slogan?
When the leaders both civilian and military sell their men and women out for advancement, they don’t deserve politeness. Just a big boot to the ass.
Jess
I particularly liked “The Big One”–it was pretty heartbreaking, though.
Jess
You go, Girl! …er…Guy.
The Other Steve
That’s funny consider all the headlines say Bush is going to withdraw troops.
Looks like the ad worked, Bush is running scared.
TenguPhule
Not quite.
Bush is just repeating what was pointed out before the ‘surge’ began. Those troops got to go back home unless they up the deployments to 18 months or more.
Another Bush Jackalope.
rachel
“We really wanted to swoop in and save our servicemen from Iraq, but that mean old MoveOn ad stopped us.” Bilge. What a bunch of wretched cowards.
Surabaya Stew
Interesting point you make there Tim, but you ought to know that a reverse commuter never subscribes to ANY newspaper; its called picking it up from the seat previously occupied by the regular commuter! (Over here in New Jersey Transit Rail Land, this fortunate New Yorker hasn’t paid for the Times in 4 years.) And I’m not the only fool doing it either… Anyways, you are quite correct re: readership levels; 1 third sounds about right.
over_educated
Whatever. The fact that the right is up in arms about this is the height of hilarity considering some of the vitriol they spew. Seriously, if it wasn’t this ad there would be some other “anti-Petraues” meme they would latch on to (maybe a post from Kos or Salon).
The ad works not only because it pisses off the right, but it works because it’s AGGRESSIVE. I would much prefer over-the top hyperbole than the wimptastic response of our democratic congress. The reason the right is so up in arms about this is because they see liberal groups taking a page from their playbook and they know it will work.
Now I’m sure in a few days Fox/opinon dynamics will come out with some BS poll that “Americans in general found the ad offensive.” Probably with questions like: “Do you think it is appropriate to question the loyalty of successful American general during a time of war?” or some such rot. Don’t let that fool you. The fact that folks who didn’t even think about it are now questioning Petraeus’s honesty and candor is enough.
As for an assualt on “favorable ground…” That’s totally absurd. Anyone supporting this mess of a war has an uphill battle with the American people, EVEN A HANDSOME GENERAL.
John Rohan
Seems a bit hypocritical, for someone that just slammed Michelle Malkin in a recent post. Aren’t you just giving her more free publicity as well?
What are they supposed to do? Criticize the Moveon.org ad without mentioning it?
And the publicity was not exactly beneficial for Moveon. It was also criticized by many on the left, even by some diaries at the Daily Kos, believe it or not.
Also, the character assassination of Petraeus didn’t start with this ad. I wrote about this same thing going on back in early July.
Tim F.
1. You apparently think that I am John. 2. I’m not advertising. 3. Apparently some people will never realize that anybody who wants to can write a diary at Kos. Try it for yourself. 4. In fact Petraeus’s inappropriate political activity goes back to late 2004, hence July of this year seems rather late.
Zifnab
Well, that’s the rub. The ad was designed to make a big hubbaloo, get people talking, and raise the specter over Petreaus’s head that he’s not telling the truth.
The ad succeeded in all of those fronts, in small part at least because right-wingers gave it so much attention. If Malkin, et al had just ignored the ad or blown it off as unimportant, we probably wouldn’t be talking about it today.
Instead, Petreaus’s credibility has been successfully punctured, the ad has reached well beyond the NYTimes readership audience, and rightwingostan has been once again backed into the corner of defending a liar.
r4d20
The ad works not only because it pisses off the right, but it works because it’s AGGRESSIVE. I would much prefer over-the top hyperbole than the wimptastic response of our democratic congress
I think you’re missing the point.
the problem isn’t “nasty” language.
The problem is the target.
Over-the-top language could work against Bush because he really is unpopular and a laughing stock – people think he deserves it. Patreus negatives are largely unknown outside certain small circles, has been lionized by the press, and is popular – people dont think he deserves it.
Anecdote: I have a close relative who is a former officer and has more than once semi-joked that Rumsfeld “must be a conscious agent of the North Koreans” and wouldn’t object to almost ANY attack on Bush or Cheney – but he was pissed by this attack against Patreus.
John Rohan
To Tim F.,
1) Sure enough, you got me. I confused you with John Cole. But the point is still the same. Who wants to bet that if I go through your past posts here, I’ll find at least one website you criticize and link to at the same time?
2) Neither were the Republicans
3) Anyone can write a diary there, but not a popular one. This one got 151 comments:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/9/10/134643/832
4) What “inappropriate political activity”? Honestly, leftwingostan isn’t going to like any General, unless he tries to throw a coup against the President.
capelza
You know, at first, I thought that was a very dumb thing to do on MoveOn’s part, but now..I’m not so sure.
It did give the GOP a bright shiny object to try to distrtact from the hearing’s actual content..dumb.
But at thia point, crap, I don’t care. Somebody did something and peopple are talking about whetthe he is or not. And as has been pointed out here and elsewhere, MoveOn isn’t the first to call him that.
Not a fan of MoveOn, but I’ll tell you this. When Katrina happened, it was through MoveOn that a family of five left homeless by the hurrican found a place to live. It was a simple thing, you just sign up and offer your home as a refuge. I did. Those folks now live 30 miles north of me. MoveOn did something very positive there.
Gus
I’m with the “it depends on what you mean by worked” folks. It certainly got some attention for MoveOn.org, but it allows the right to focus attention away from Petraeus’ testimony and any inconsistencies and problems therein. I think it’s an unwanted distraction. A local radio show in Minneapolis that isn’t particularly partisan (maybe leans a little right) spent most of the afternoon talking about the ad rather than giving callers an opportunity to talk about the substance of Petraeus’ testimony. Not that any substantive discussion would necessarily have happened anyway.
over_educated
“Anecdote: I have a close relative who is a former officer and has more than once semi-joked that Rumsfeld “must be a conscious agent of the North Koreans” and wouldn’t object to almost ANY attack on Bush or Cheney – but he was pissed by this attack against Patreus.”
*shrug* Ancedotally my republican mother who loves the military is now questioning Petraeus’s honesty. It cuts both ways, we will have to see it will play out, but from past experience, attacks on individual military members have not raised the ire that you are suggesting (eg. Scott Beauchamp).
Nancy Irving
I read the NYTs almost daily for twenty-five to thirty years, even though it was often hard to get–they won’t deliver to my neighborhood (too poor), or supply enough copies to the stores/boxes in nearby (rich) neighborhoods.
Now I can get my news (and views) from the internet, so I don’t bother with the Times anymore. In fact, I hardly ever even go to their home page online, although I will sometimes read an article if it’s linked to by one of my regular blogs.
Too bad for them. Sometimes you can play *too* hard-to-get.