5 posts tagged “1992”
I thought this was a good laugh, from Newsbusters. This was run at the time when the media were attacking Gov. Sarah Palin on her foreign policy experience. The writer, Tom Blumer, points out in 1992, The New York Times wrote, of then-Gov. Bill Clinton (his emphasis):
Under the pressure of a Presidential campaign, Gov. Bill Clinton has
been trying to outline his own unique foreign policy, while at the same
time fending off criticism from the Bush White House that he is a
closet dove masquerading as a hawk and that his experience in world affairs is limited to breakfast at the International House of Pancakes. …
As a man who has spent his entire career in state government in Arkansas,
Mr. Clinton has no foreign policy record to run on or be judged
against. Therefore, critics say, he has had the luxury of defining
himself purely through a series of speeches. None of his ideas have had
to meet the test of the real world.
He did feel there was media bias at work. There was certainly sexism. I liked the IHOP reference more than anything else.
If I ever had to give a political speech, then this is a good model.
This is no surprise given the promotions that Sen. Obama has been getting in the media: ‘Obama elicits more excitement than McCain’, according to USA Today.
I want to be the voice of reason but 21 years in communications tell me that this is important. If your brand, personal or organizational, elicits excitement among its constituents, then you have a greater chance of mobilizing those people when you need them.
Even when it comes to politics, to get messages across to voters, one has to resort to the tried and trusted techniques of branding and marketing.
There are few in the present generations who will, as many bloggers do, investigate someone’s voting record or dig deeply into their histories. It would be nice to say that presidents are not elected based on how much excitement they can generate. Or that we should place greater emphasis on other qualities like honour and sincerity.
While some might point to exceptions, such as the Tory victory in the UK of 1992, I beg to differ. That campaign was hard fought by the Conservatives and depended on party unity—which was sorely lacking in 1997 when Tony Blair was elected. The National victory in New Zealand of 1990 was a result of the cry for change and the belief that Labour was leaderless.
And the cry for change is such a powerful message in politics, because politicians understand our nature: even the vaguest change is better than the strongest, best defined policies if a party has been in power for too long.
Labour in the UK in 1997, National in New Zealand in 1990, Labour in New Zealand in 1999, Clinton in 1992—all these are examples of that message. And that, too, “excites”.
Sen. McCain should not pursue an excitement route himself, but he should capitalize on mistakes that the Obama campaign is making with greater regularity. The New Yorker gaffe—where Sen. Obama felt the need to comment rather than appear presidential and above satire—was an opportunity missed. Meanwhile, I wonder if people appreciate the maverick, go-it-alone style of John McCain, which plays well in the Senate, but could be symptomatic of future Cabinet divisiveness under his administration.
A winner is by no means clear, and a week remains a long time in politics. Months, as Sen. Clinton will attest as she went from dead cert to second-best, are an eternity.
From the Associated Press:
Former President Clinton says Democrats concerned about what the deadlocked presidential contest between his wife and Barack Obama may be doing to the party should just “chill out” and let the race run its course.
Not great advice: ‘Chill out about my wife’s lying.’ This is effectively the idea.
Sorry, Bill, been there before.
In 1992 and 1996 we were told by then-Governor and President Clinton to ignore his past and focus on the future. Well, we all know what ignoring the past gave us: a controversial president distracted by the Lewinsky scandal, making him an easy target for the Republican Party.
The trouble is, they all seem pretty controversial.
But Americans should not forget a candidate’s background and choose not from one who can play the people or promise the earth. That past will impact on how (s)he does the job.
Of course Mr Clinton has to ask us to forget in order for his wife to be in with a chance. I just would not be surprised if this becomes Sen. Obama’s catchcry if any controversies stick to him.
My advice, nevertheless, will remain the same. Never forget, America. Not about your values, your freedoms, and certainly not about 9-11.
I have been a regular reader of Autocar since 1980 but did not know about this hidden message in the 1992 Road Test Yearbook, which I bought 15 years ago. James May, of Top Gear fame, was one of the team that put the Yearbook together and was known for his regular column in the magazine in those days. He was fired over an incident where he put in a hidden message, using the initial caps of each road test summary in the Yearbook.
It took Wikipedia to tell me—so it is good for something after all. The message is, with punctuation, ‘So you think it’s really good, yeah? You should try making the bloody thing up. It’s a real pain in the arse.’
No one had spotted it internally, but readers eventually asked the magazine if they had won a prize.
On Radio 2, May said in an interview, ‘So I had this idea that if I re-edited the beginnings of all the little texts, I could make these red letters spell out a message through the magazine, which I thought was brilliant. … It took me about two months to do it and on the day that it came out I’d actually forgotten that I’d done it because there’s a bit of a gap between it being “put to bed” and coming out on the shelves. When I arrived at work that morning everybody was looking at their shoes and I was summoned to the managing director of the company’s office. The thing had come out and nobody at work had spotted what I’d done because I’d made the words work around the pages so you never saw a whole word. But all the readers had seen it and they’d written in thinking they’d won a prize or a car or something.’
Shame he was fired over this. I thought the British sense of humour would have seen him through. But then, he might not have gone on to do his other things.
PS.: I got out my copy of the September 23, 1992 issue and note that eight pages are missing from the above thumbnails. That makes 16 missing characters. The full message is, with punctuation: ‘Road Test Yearbook. So you think it’s really good, yeah? You should try making the bloody thing up. It’s a real pain in the arse.’