« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
04/30/2009
The ad that landed with a zzzzzzzz
Box Turtle Bulletin writer and frequent G-A-Y commenter Timothy Kincaid has a nice, thoughtful, six-point assessment of NOM's boring Prejean ad. Consider:
Here are the problems I see with this ad:
1. It relies on old and trivial news. By now everyone has seen the little tiff between Carrie Prejean and Perez Hilton. And while some may sympathize with Carrie, it’s hardly the sort of incident upon which to base a significant political position.
2. It gives voice to NOM’s opposition. When your dear friend indignantly says, “she called me FAT!!”, it may not be admirable but the very first thing you automatically do is look to her waist to see if it’s true. So it isn’t wise to remind viewers that some consider NOM to be bigoted and untruthful; it places the association in their minds.
3. It has no point. The theme is “gay marriage supporters are bad because they called me names”. And seeking to demonize your opponent may not be the wisest choice when you’ve just reminded your viewer that you are being called a bigot.
KEEP READING...NOM’s New Ad is Unimpressive [BTB]
*SEE ALSO: Washington Blade was at Prejean's equally unimpressive morning presser:
We have never more quickly tired of a personality's 15 minutes. We suspect America is feeling the same.
Your thoughts
Is anyone else disturbed that they keep putting up the question in type, rather than show us the question being asked? Doesn't that just seem that they are taking things out of context a bit?
"There are those who accused me of forcing my religious beliefs on them, but as I told Matt Lauer, it isn't about being politically correct, it's about being biblically correct."
So, yes, she is trying to force her religious beliefs on us. I'm glad she just came out and said it...kind of.
Do you plan on getting into politics? "I don't plan on it any time soon, that's for sure."
Well outside of campaigning for or against bills depending on where they stand in terms of gay marriage is what she forgot to add. Or they cut it off.
Posted by: Jack | Apr 30, 2009 6:08:33 PM
And in her response to the last question, she simply rehashed what she said in the beginning, about representing 7 million blah blah blah. She didn't even answer the question! I guess she had not been fully coached for that one.
Posted by: fakeplants | May 1, 2009 2:11:24 AM
comments powered by Disqus
