First Ad Analysis: Ron Paul is Catching On!

They should have added a "Google Ron Paul" message at the end. I'm sure every other candidate could get a bunch of yahoos to say that their choice "really gets" and blah blah. How much did that ad cost?? lol

http://www.nolanchart.com/article254.html

Well here it is, same complaint.. the ad did not TELL us anything. That is what I felt, I could not remember the message.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/10/29/16530/485

And don't forget about avoiding the fake tan. A Presidential candidate faking a deep tan (with tan circles around the eyes) is a very bad idea. Paint your face pumpkin-orange and then take a walk around your neighbourhood: only on Halloween day. JF Kerry got mocked for that in 2004.

I agree that it's a fine ad. If the target audience were truth-seekers, they would already know Ron Paul and his message. It looks awful to us because we want substance, not emotion. If you want Ron Paul to become mainstream, though, then it has to be done mainstream. And most older (not necessarily geriatric) people do not want the Apple type or Britney Spears type commercial. Too much pizzaz actually turns them off because they think you are selling too hard. This ad does not sell too hard. Also, if we keep calling and emailing the campaign with our criticisms, we just might take their optimism away faster than Brit Hume and Sean Hannity ever could. Ron Paul and his staff may not know the internet so well, but they do know mainstream voters - or else he wouldn't have been a 10-term congressman.

I think the comparison to the head on commercial is appropriate. As others have said, it is important to put yourself in the position of someone who has no idea who Ron Paul is. If I saw this ad as my first introduction to Ron Paul I would think "man, what a ridiculous ad and horrible acting. Is this seriously an ad for a presidential candidate?" It would catch my attention as a departure from all of the other "hip" commercials on television. This is the sort of ad that, due to its absurd degree of corny, can actually elicit laughter.

The point is that it can catch the attention of the viewer and be memorable--which is the primary goal of an advertisement. I don't think that people vote for a candidate based on the coolness of a campaign commercial. I don't know if it was the intention of the producers, but I think that corny can be effective. The goofy guy at the end saying "He's catching on, I'm tellin' ya" is most notable--that image sticks with me.

Hire professionals! Hire a cool hip studio like

http://www.psyop.tv

They can create a political campaign commercial like we have never seen before...one which would look like Apple's iPod ads or ?

Ron needs to be fresh, alive, colorful, loving, new , invigorating -- like the constitution! Like America! Imagine the bright colorful characters in the original iPod commercials dancing around -- FOR RON PAUL! New fresh alive bright hopeful free! Be bold -- think of something new!

"He's catching on!"

Excellent analysis, Michael.

These ads will add "tv watchers" to our ranks. Ron Paul already owns the Internet.

May I respectfully suggest to the people employing the First Amendment by criticizing the ad to go ask 5 new people tomorrow "Have you heard of Ron Paul? He's catching on", and hand them a card, slim jim, etc.

We have come this far mostly by word of mouth and I believe it how we will ultimately take the White House. Envision that.

I think you would have done better to build on the theme of ad#2. The voters are intelligent and this ad#1 seems rather desperate. No one benefits when we see hippies voting for Dr. Paul. My two cents: stick to the message.

I think the ad is perfect, even though my initial reaction was one of disappointment.The revolutionaries are mostly on board. The rest of the people, who make up the majority, need to be comforted. Here is a candidate much different than the others. They just need to know that the world won't end if Ron Paul is elected. From that point, they can gradually get to know more, but in the beginning we need to gently introduce Ron Paul.

If only the people were sincerely talking to the camera (audience) rather than to each other in that canned bad-acting style.

Check out this great YouTube video, Legalize Freedom - Vote Ron Paul!. At 2:38 minutes into the video, there is a question session with random people. The responses are genuine, intelligent, witty, honest, and candid. It was exciting watching real supporters be real! This is the way this first ad could be. It would be easy to get 30 seonds of material from this video alone to make an absolutely superb TV ad.

I do. You ad apologists are entirely missing the point. The problem with the ad is NOT the concept. Nobody would be complaining if they made a good ad with the same exact concept. There are two ways of doing the kind of ad they wanted to do:

1. Make a scripted ad like they made. But if you make a scripted, ad, you need ACTORS. "Real People" generally can't read scripts and look like real people. If you spent weeks canvasing NH I suppose you might be able to find 5 folks with enough natural acting talent to pull it off, but that wasn't what the campaign did. These actors (and yes, once you work off a script they are actors, no matter what their real profession) stunk. And that made the entire ad look like a HS media project. That's no exaggeration either. Look at the other candidates ads. Some of them are running concepts quite similar to this ad, but they look professional. This didn't.

2. The other way to do this concept is to get real people. But if you do that, working off a script isn't the way to go. You have to get people in an setting that looks nice (local diner, front porch, dinner table, ect), and ask them leading questions about Paul, or have them engage in discussions about Paul amongst themselves. Record enough to this, and you should be able to get a few seconds of usable material. Edit that together and you have an ad with the same concept as the one they ran, except it looks professional and sincere.

These are pretty basic media 101 concepts, and the reason people are freaking out is because the first ad makes it look like the campaign doesn't have anybody who has the slightest clue how to make a professional commercial. And the fact that they would end the ad by giving the dubious, "He's catching on, I'm telling you" line to the absolute worst actor of the lot sent me from scared as hell to complete meltdown mode.

I'm not saying we should stop contributing. That's crazy talk. But we do need to let the campaign know there is a serious problem here. The quality of the first ad didn't cut it. The second ad was fine, but it was an easier concept to pull off. The underlying problem still might exist. They need to address it. If that means spending the money to bring in an experienced, competent, media professional, then so be it. Spending a million dollars on ad time and then throwing up crappy, dollar store ads is absurd.

I do. Old people, as a generality, don't like to march in the streets or make signs or do too many things out of the ordinary.

They may not ever get out of the house except to see their doctor.

They like comfort, familiarity, they like TV (and feel like those on TV are their friends). They like to do what the crowd does and not make waves. They like finding out that someone is a doctor and can help them with their healthcare. They like to see a few shots of some young people who may remind them of their grandchildren.

When you look at it that way, the ad is genius marketing. Ron Paul is an old-fashioned kind of politician who's honest, a doctor, and he's "catching on" with old and young people.

----------------
Sorority Girl Gets Ron Paul License Plate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtdaK1UPNkQ

This ad is terrible. The people in it may be sincere Ron Paul supporters, but their words sound scripted and forced. I think this is the only serious problem with the ad, but it is a very big problem - it ruins the whole ad. I were in charge of the campaign, I would reject the ad without hesitation. I think this is going to make a negative first impression with people who are not already familiar with Ron Paul.

I should mention that I am supporter of Mike Gravel. However, I am an admirer of Ron Paul and a potential supporter, should he win the Republican nomination. I wouldn't think twice about voting for Dr. Paul over Hillary Clinton or well... let's face it... the Dems are going to nominate Clinton. Anyway, my point is I want Ron Paul to win the nomination, and this ad gives me less hope.

The ad may have zero appeal to some, but believe me when I tell you, these techniques do work. Even though you may hate the stupid 'Head On' Commercial, you still know a lot about the product.
I bet the majority of you know what 'Head On' is and what it does. The same proven techniques are being used in this ad but, in a much more positive way. People spend a good chunk of money buying an education in this particular field. 8-)
We already know about Ron Paul and his message. To us, this ad is stale and redundant. To the general public who have never even heard of Ron Paul, this is an introduction to the Name. The revelations will come later when they decide to look him up.

This is just my humble opinion.

I don't see anything wrong with using supporters , but I think it would be better to use people that have been taped at actual events. A whole lot of the things put on Youtube would be much better. There have been a lot of people interviewed and just in general "doing their thing" for RP and they are very fun to watch. It is just a little staged, and it doesn't have a good "punch" to it. Ron Paul is EXCITING! I think there should be a little more of that... We have been spoiled by the home made things on You Tube. : ))) It certainly is no personal criticism about the people in the video - I think we are a little touchy about that. I find it more embarrassing that everyone is bickering about it. Let's all keep our talk "nice" and give criticism in a nice constructive way, and those who are being "instructed" take it ... a little bit better.

Go, Ron Paul!!!!

This ad was very disappointing, and not just because it's crap. It's most disappointing because the official Campaign Office doesn't seem to understand RP's support base.

The public can smell a fake a mile away. Ron Paul is genuine, and speaks from the heart. That's why we love him, and trust him, even if we don't agree with *everything* he says. Then you go and put out an ad that you admit is scripted/faked. And whether you use professional actors or amateur actors, it's still *acting*, and people can tell. That is exactly the sort of stuff the *other* candidates would produce. It is *not* something RP should produce.

Here's what I suggest:
Get a commercial grade camera, and set-up around various places within NH, preferably in front of obviously recognizable landmarks. Do man-in-the-street interviews. Real arm-and-microphone-in-shot type stuff. As RP is at 7.4% in NH, asking 100 people at each location should uncover about 7 supporters. Just have these supporters speak from the heart about why they support RP. No scripts. Then pick out the best ones, that cover the points you wanted to make. These people then become mini-celebrities in their own communities, and the word-of-mouth goes through the roof.

And it's CHEAP!! And replicable - the same strategy can be done in every state, simply by shifting to interviewing locals near their landmarks in each state around the country.

I don't know if they planned it or it just fell in their lap. But this is the best starting place. It's like starting at leave it to beaver. and then quickly move the people up through the 20th centery at a quick leason. Every ad should progerss through the 70s 80s 90s 2000 2004 2007. Also the ad's should get more modern every time. At the 2007 ad we should be running ads that we see online. bring them into the boat 2 by 2. If this first ad was an accident then the campaign should hire one of the online video makers immediatly or a professional.

I've read most of the comments here and on youtube. They range from "it's a destructive attack from the other side" to "It's a good ad, but"
and everything in between. There is a common thread however, THE AD COULD BE IMPROVED.

HQ, Please, please, do the right thing, Scrap it and start over.

The main complaints as I see them:

1. Real supporters comments are better when left natural and scripted comments are better left to professional actors.

2. The ad starts with a negative and a half hearted vote of support and ends with a half hearted attempt to convince somebody that we are gaining.
People do not want to waste their vote.

In Summary:
This ad is worse than a waste of money.

Have you gone to your parents and asked them what they think of Ron Paul? Have you gone to your grand parents and asked them about Ron Paul?

What is their response, What would we do if there were no taxes?
What would we do with out Social security?

most do not what all this change right now they are comfortable where they are at. They do not want to fight. So you need to approach these people in a whole different way. The Seniors are the ones that get out and vote. So we have to look at them and see what makes them want to change to vote to help us and the country out.

As I was standing on the street corner holding signs and shout out. young and old were saying who is Ron Paul and what is he running for ? People do not even know that it is for President of the united States?

Some of these old corny ads may seem bad to us but what about the others out there?

If we start nick picking and stop supporting what we have now then what do we have? More Hillary???

Lets all work to get every one involved in may ways and many ideas not every thing will be perfect. But we can all try together to improve and set our great country back on track.

We have to start some where and here is the place to start.

Have you made a packet with bumper sticker and DVD or VCR and literature to go hang on every door in your city?

If we don't like the ad's let make our own and put out there?

How many have been on your local TV or radio talk shows?

Have you been on TV just to say you support RON PAUL?

How about making your own local ads 30 or 10 sec ones collect about 1500 dollars plus 750 for making the ad will get you 10 or so ads on your local TV.

Prove your ads work Locally then bring them to the Campaign head quarters.

I hope to have funds available to you all who need.

Thanks, and may GOD Bless each and every one of you out there.
Tim

Go on watch it about 10 times.. and see what you think.

Only other thing I would suggest looking at;
The lady, and her head bob. "person privacy, and personal freedom" (Bad acting - but like people said, they're actual supporters - and shouldn't be trying to act) So no offense intended.

Also the editing when it pans back to the lady [head bob], it goes to the table view of them (for about half a sec or less) then cuts to her and she goes "the mans a doctor.." its like theres too much flicking going on. They should take out the table view, because it doesn't add much, and not up for long enough either. And just go straight to her.

The rest I think do real good. I'm pleased, - and when I see the 7% has increased, I know that'll have worked... along with all the other grassroots support. :)

I do think we're all analyzing it too much. BUT we want it to be so good. And represent RP well.. But its only 30 seconds; I think some of the 60 seconds bits are better... plus there are alot of classy material out there on the web done by professional video editors. But like Mike said, difference target audience so different message / style.

The official campaign has my support. WHY? Because they have no alternate agenda, they're transparent, they ARE the message of HOPE for America - they WANT to win & succeed. They WANT to save this great nation, and the constitution. And that's enough for me.

NOW, for those that think they [the campaign] could do better. Fine, send in your suggestions as always etc. And yes, Just "chill" or "calm the ---- down"... It's an ADVERTISEMENT, for those that watch the idiot box... Some of you are acting like MORE HYSTERICAL THAN WHEN you heard about the THOUGHT CRIME BILL being passed. Yes, GET SOME PERSPECTIVE.

Ron Paul, bringing it home!

There's a whole large voting block out there that we're gonna miss because they are different. The seniors are huge and they vote, always. They may not want to be hit over the head with a revolution. They may not want to march in the streets. But they may like a bad political ad because it's what they've heard all their lifeand it's what they're comfortable with. They're not going to catch your enthusiasm but they may catch your message if you will give it to them in their language.

It takes different bait to catch different fish. It appears you're willing to restrict yourself to one "school" of thought...errrrr, fish.

When WE ALL win NH you folks will be saying, yeah maybe they did know what they were doing after all. This is for a targeted demographic! I've traveled and been thru NH extensively and I think this ad is spot on for it's intended purpose!

Take it easy folks!

WE WILL WIN NEW HAMPSHIRE!

Chin up...Chest out!!! C'mon!!

What a joke... =(
#RonPaul @ irc.freenode.net

This ad looks like it was for Dr Pauls 1988 presidential campaign :(
The money raised was supposed to be used to present Dr Paul as a 'top tier' candidate, not this...

People need to stop complaining and do something! Get the GOOD ron paul ads on TV by donating to the causes for that.

http://ronpauloxfordms.chipin.com/ron-paul-tv-ads-in-a-low-d...

Ron Paul for President 2008

Just take a look at the ads from other candidates. We don't have to look at other candidates on the issues, because (hm, I'm not even gonna bother to say why :-), but I don't think we have to re-invent marketing by showing lousy ads. Don't say "trust the campaign, they know what they're doing", either the other candidates (and all the people here who dislike the ad) are right about the matter and this ad just sucks, or some people at the HQ have a very special insight about how to target a very special audience that apparently none of the other candidates wants to target and apparently none of the 'critical Paulites' here at DP belongs to or can even imagine to exist.
There's something called "cognitive dissonance", and I think a lot of the people defending the ad suffer from it; when you have two conflicting ideas ("I really like Ron Paul" and "This ad is really horrible") they try to smoothen the psychological conflict by saying that 'the ad isn't that bad after all'. Well, the ad IS that bad, and I still like Ron Paul. We're not in a situation where it's "either you support every single decision of the campaogn, or you're against Ron Paul and everything he stands for", right?

He's really catching on...

and I'm really scared to see the other four.

I've now watched the ad about 10 times. I still think it is a good ad and here is why:

Think about how TV ads are viewed - they aren't watched with intense scrutiny the way we all have analyzed this one. Most people don't even pay attention to the ads. Maybe they catch some of it while flipping through channels; maybe they hear some from the kitchen as they get up and get something to eat, etc.

Ads are emotional, not intellectual experiences. What this ad has going for it is a relentless hammering away of positivity, smiling, and concise, easy to remember points that people can take away and - as I said above - repeat to others with the complete confidence of being validated because they've heard it before on TV. That is how TV works. Sad, but true. Repeat these points enough times, and listeners will come to accept them as truth. Fortunate for us, the statements are true:

"He's a doctor, he understands the health care mess."
"He's the only one who makes sense."
"You always know where he stands."
"Get out of Iraq"
"Cut government spending"
"Protect personal freedom"
"I'm going to vote for him"
"He's catching on"

The fact that it isn't well acted isn't as big a deal as the message that is being hammered away by all these smiling, positive, happy people. No one will notice the acting is bad. For most people, the fact that it is on TV means that they won't question anything about it. The fact that it is on TV is self validating: After all, its on TV, isn't it? That must mean it's good!

Was George Bush a good actor? How did he manage to sell the war? REPETITION! Iraq - WMD - Danger - Iraq - WMD - Danger. It was a very simple message (unfortunately not true). How many of us could look at him and see something fishy going on? Most of us, I'm sure, but it was the relentless repetition that eventually got enough of the others (the TV watchers) to believe.

Sad but true - that is why and how television works. (And also why I don't watch it). It is a method of hypnosis. People won't think, "these are bad actors." They'll see the smiling, happy people and as a result, they will identify and internalize the messages these people are delivering.

Go watch a commercial for some fabric softener, or some shampoo. One commercial has a talking bear. A TALKING BEAR?! People don't think twice about it. They go out and buy the fabric softener because the talking bear told them to.

Shampoo commercials show women who are unnaturally happy just washing their hair. Who smiles like that when they wash their hair? Not me, nor anyone I know. Then these women shake their hair with an even bigger smile. Stupid, stupid, stupid, but most people don't think twice about - they just buy the shampoo.

I think we're all giving the commercial too much scrutiny and in the wrong areas.

Repeat these statements over and over to people and they'll eventually accept the facts as true:

"He's a doctor, he understands the health care mess."
"He's the only one who makes sense."
"You always know where he stands."
"Get out of Iraq"
"Cut government spending"
"Protect personal freedom"
"I'm going to vote for him"
"He's catching on"

It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, and we should all adopt the takeaway phrase when talking to people:

Have you heard of Ron Paul? He's really catching on...

Repetition - it is the only thing that really matters. In order for this to work, they'll need to play this commercial on heavy rotation.

that the message is spot on and that it needs to be dumbed down?! That's not the problem we have! The concept and message is fine....they just executed it horribly....that's what we keep saying! and yet everyone keeps responding that we 'can't have too intense of a message' or whatever....we just wanted them to make the ad professionally...they didn't....it'll probably be looked at as a joke....that's it

The good thing about the ad is that it doesn't come off as slick or menacing. Ron Paul seems too angry in the beginning but when people see this, they might say "well who this who couldn't afford to make a good ad? Maybe we should check him out more."

Remember "Where's the Beef?" That's the height of goofy. What about those commercials against Hillarycare that the Republicans ran talking about how bad Hillary's health care plan was? The height of goofy and old-fashioned, but they worked extraordinarily well.

----------------
Sorority Girl Gets Ron Paul License Plate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtdaK1UPNkQ

about the ad seeming "goofy."

You know what else is goofy, that "Head-On: Apply Directly to the Forehead" commercial. It may be goofy, but the first time I saw it, it stuck. :-)