RECENT POSTS
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
- White House State Dinner – Who Made the Exclusive Guest List?
- Admiral Mike Mullen To Geneva for START Talks
- VP Biden to Indian Prime Minister: “You’re the Hottest Ticket in Town”
- FLOTUS on the State Dinner: Like a Swan, "Calm and Serene Above Water, But We're Paddling Like Mad, Going Crazy Underneath"
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Liberal Bloggers: Clinton Campaign Darkened Obama's Skin in New TV Ad
March 04, 2008 5:15 PM
Some liberal blogs are questioning whether in Hillary Clinton's new TV ad attacking Barack Obama for not holding any subcommittee hearings on Afghanistan, he has been given the same treatment TIME magazine once infamously gave OJ Simpson -- his skin being made artificially darker.
The question was first raised by a diarist on DailyKos who asked readers to look at the original debate clip of Obama saying he hasn't held hearings because he's been too busy running for president and compare it to Obama's hue in the new Clinton ad, which you can watch HERE.
Americablog's John Aravosis screen-grabs three images of Obama from the debate and compares it to the Clinton ad. (Which to be fair, is dark and foreboding throughout the ad.)
Aravosis writes: "It just keeps happening again and again and again. The Clintons keeps doing things, saying things, that sound awfully racist. And we're to believe that this, the - what? 8th, 10th time? - this has happened is again just a coincidence."
I do wonder what the reaction would be were the McCain campaign to darken Obama's skin in a TV ad. Front-page of the New York Times, perhaps? (Recall the democRATS ad?)
Asked for comment, Clinton campaign spokesman Jay Carson said, "this is a bogus assertion. Ads look different based on software, screens, computers, television, etc."
The Obama campaign did not have any comment -- on or off the record.
Anyway -- check it out for yourself. What do you think?
- jpt
March 4, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (136)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
are all pictures of HRC and McCain the exact same skin tone? Both of them are about the colour of a sack of baking flour, so they could use a little colour.
Posted by: Aaron | Mar 5, 2008 9:37:15 PM
"Nothing in advertising is accidental. It is over-thought and then subjected to second thoughts and second guessing then over-thought and re-looked at again. I've been doing this ten years. It is my professional opinion that the film was made darker, and it has obviously been stretched. I will not comment on their reasons, as I can't offer an informed case for that."
Posted by: J.K. Bowman | Mar 5, 2008 8:59:16 PM
Obama disputing the "shade" is in itself racism. I like the darker color.
It has different hues.
This is what his campaign has been based on all along. Racism and McCarthyism. Instead of going on the defense, I'm astute enough to see that his whole platform is based on reverse psychology. In other words, blame the opponent for what you yourself are guilty of or what you are about to do.
Watch closely and you will see this whole thing in a different light.
This Obama campaign is based on the past. JFK, MLK, reverse psychology of the 70's and old worn out ideas like going to meet tyrants in person to solve things. Have you ever heard anyone talk so much and say nothing as Obama? He can't toot his horn beacuse there is NOTHING to toot about so he attacks with false accusations and mid games. Don't fall for it people. Forge ahead Hillary camp. Igmore this liar.
Posted by: reverse_psychology | Mar 5, 2008 7:14:49 PM
Just one thing i observed about race in this election.If i' as a white man , voted for a white, because he was white, and running against a black canidate. Would i be a racist? Wellll what are all the blacks for voting , overwellmingly for obama? Just an observation. Frankly i wish Ms rice would have run. She would be bullet proof and would have crushed these 3 bozo's handidly.Of course we,d be seeing the aunt jemimah pictures again , from the dems(their so non racist)
Posted by: marine 43 | Mar 5, 2008 5:01:51 PM
I have seen countless negative ads where a candidate is darkened. Its called persuasion, not racism. It would be racist to suggest Obama shouldnt get the same treatment because he is black.
Posted by: matt | Mar 5, 2008 4:55:36 PM
I don't have cable, so I watch major press conferences and State of the Union addresses on over-the-air broadcasts. Sometimes during a broadcast, the signal will weaken, and I'll flip to the next channel. I've never seen such a broadcast where the color was the same on each of the networks, despite being contemporaneous pictures of the very same event. While I don't trust the Clintons any further than I could throw them, I think this is much ado about nothing.
Posted by: Grant | Mar 5, 2008 4:54:29 PM
To the Obama camp....So what are YOU all saying? There are better hues of black? Anyone who uses movie clips in video streams knows that the image is always off color with a tendency to be darker or more maroonish. Don't defend yourself by putting darker tones down, DUH!
Posted by: irma | Mar 5, 2008 4:37:42 PM
Interesting that ABC would have this story. It was ABC that had the Rush Limbaugh story about Curious George using a Curious George picture next to a photo of Obama with his lips puckered. Something I thought made an ugly situation even more disgraceful. Why are you all choosing to do that? Are you all trying to fan the flames of racism? Is the media looking for an all out rebellion from the people against it? I think the media does not reflect the people at all. They seem to join in thinking with the small minority of racists.
Posted by: irma | Mar 5, 2008 4:25:54 PM
Okay, anyone pushing this bogus mess needs to re-examine exactly what desperate looks like. Give me a break.
Posted by: Jen | Mar 5, 2008 2:49:31 PM
I think the whole add is dark, this is just trying to get Hillary of her campaign , so the whining has really started now that she has took away his MO. Have you noticed every time she wins people start yelling racism. This is why he should just drop out now, it is tearing the party and the country apart.
Posted by: Debby | Mar 5, 2008 2:18:05 PM
Note that it is NOT the Obama Campaign, not any representative of the Obama Campaign that brought this up. This is what the Clintons do. Whine about how they are getting unfairly picked on by the press, not the press has to find negative stories about Obama in order to look balanced. There is a reason why there are so many negative stories about HRC, she, and her husband do a lot of questionable things. They take money from the Saudis to fund her campaign, they refuse to release documentation that they have had since January to show her experience. They use innuendo and shaded answers to destroy reputations and most of all they count on the American people to be too stupid to see the manipulations. There is no, NO difference between her an McCain. She will not get us out of Iraq, look at her answers, she has said she would study it, and then go with the reccomendations of the Generals that will still be in place fromt he Bush adminsitration. She will for a committee on Social Security, just like Bush, forcing people to buy health insurance for themselves will only benefit the insurance companies and does nothign for health care. She has no education plan whatsoever, and her plan for the Economy does not involve getting people back to work.
Posted by: Louis | Mar 5, 2008 2:00:06 PM
Not that it is NOT the Obama Campaign, not any representative of the Obama Campaign that brought this up. This is what the Clintons do. Whine about how they are getting unfairly picked on by the press, not the press has to find negative stories about Obama in order to look balanced. There is a reason why there are so many negative stories about HRC, she, and her husband do a lot of questionable things. They take money from the Saudis to fund her campaign, they refuse to release documentation that they have had since January to show her experience. They use innuendo and shaded answers to destroy reputations and most of all they count on the American people to be too stupid to see the manipulations. There is no, NO difference between her an McCain. She will not get us out of Iraq, look at her answers, she has said she would study it, and then go with the reccomendations of the Generals that will still be in place fromt he Bush adminsitration. She will for a committee on Social Security, just like Bush, forcing people to buy health insurance for themselves will only benefit the insurance companies and does nothign for health care. She has no education plan whatsoever, and her plan for the Economy does not involve gettign people back to work.
Posted by: Louis | Mar 5, 2008 1:56:12 PM
When you make a political ad of your opponent, do you use their best looking picture for the ad?
Get a grip, you bloggers. I use to think that liberals are more sophisticated. If they are crying about an ad that uses a bad picture of Obama, then I question their level of thinking.
The whole idea of a political ad of your opponent is to cast them in the worst possible way.
Review Obama's ad of HRC and you will get the picture.
Posted by: SO | Mar 5, 2008 1:18:11 PM
Any time HRC overcomes the media jurganots, they always find ways to discredit her.
Both Bill and Hillary are not racist and have done more for African Americans than any media group has ever been.
Get it?
Stop the whinning and accept defeat.
Posted by: Sam1 | Mar 5, 2008 1:10:27 PM
Yeah, I think the charge of racism is barely tenable in this clip - the entire thing is bluetoned.
But who's fault is it? That's right. Clinton. She played all the race cards, so now, EVEN IF she didn't deliberately tone his skin, EVEN IF she didn't fudge on whether or not Obama is muslim, EVEN IF she didn't send those emails to Drudge...
The first thing people thing is "Yes She Did". Because she's done it countless times already in this election. It's too late to take the high road.
Way to go Hillary. Reap what you sow. Thank you for destroying this country.
Posted by: chicka | Mar 5, 2008 12:09:24 PM
OK, the photo is a frivolous issue for many, let's stick to a real one about Hilary's conduct, like her activities as lawyer and board member for Walmart, which has fought unionization and fair wages for workers... NOT A PEEP about how Hilary sees that, nor where she stands on that issue. Not a word anywhere about that. No hard hitting questions from the press. HMMMMM!!! what could that all mean?
Posted by: karvictho | Mar 5, 2008 6:11:55 AM
Has anyone noticed John McCaine's neck? Sometimes it looks like a second head is growing under his chin. I hadn't considered the possibility that the neck may be a digital ruse. Maybe John McCaine doesn't really look old and saggy. Maybe none of the candidates (or any public figure) looks anything like the images that are portrayed in ads or in newsclips. How did democracy survived prior to the advent of television? Aside from the widespread use of such wholesome tactics as vicious political cartoons, yellow journalism, propoganda, and a wagonload of othe dirty tricks, how did candidates for political office persuade the voting public?
Posted by: falla c | Mar 5, 2008 6:06:02 AM
Actually this looks like a pathetic unprofessional job. It seems as though they captured the images from a digital feed with the extended width (this takes a 3x5 and makes it a 4x16)function on. You've seen it if you have a hi-def tv. The image was not color corrected and is clearly out of phase. BTW the Baltimore Sun regularly runs unflattering pictures of Sen. Clinton and the Baltimore affiliate of NBC showed her campaigning in the MD, for the whole 20 second clip her back was to the camera. We know that she had faced the front of the hall at least once in the hour she spoke, but this is what the producer had decided to air. Don't let the press cheat you from the real issues or manipulate you. This is a real non-issue, and says more about the press and bad video producers than either candidate. Just stay aware.
Posted by: JB | Mar 5, 2008 5:28:37 AM
I like the Obama orange look. There are a lot of pictures of Hillary out there where she looks lighter, darker, her teeth are yellow or white. I haven't heard an outcry saying someone gave Hillary big yellow teeth! Please. This is a stupid assertion. I'm going to go water the marshmallows now.
Posted by: falla c | Mar 5, 2008 5:07:58 AM
I do a lot in photography, and on monitors, a lot is influenced by one's settings (monitor type, age of the monitor, and the photo software's workspace).
Add that basic lighting makes a big difference. In the pics you present the one on the left is lobster orange on my screen. Maybe some would prefer that!
My experience is that people look darker or lighter depending on the light and also, in photos, on the exposure.
But there'll alwyas be people looking for these things, and whatever makes one happier ...
It's not as if we don't see Obama everyday for ourselves and don't know what he looks like. I don't think anyone would think twice were it not for people bringing this up after looking for things.
Posted by: Andrys B. | Mar 5, 2008 4:53:31 AM
Post a comment


