Photo Evidence! Bill Maher finds Drudge Racist!

I'm a photographer.
Which is why I found this particular piece of "detective" work offensive, idiotic, and beyond the pale:


Yes, that's right. Bill is making the argument that since a news aggregater has 6 images of black men in one month (April)- and the images are not flattering - that Drudge is racist.

I love to research things, and this seemed kinda custom built for an investigation. So I set my criteria ahead of time, and went to work grabbing DrudgeReport images from the month of April.

My criteria:

• I would start at the archive calendar, and go to each date in April.
• On each date, there are several dozen links. I would pick two or three at random, and grab the photos.
• I would only grab the "headline" photo, but I'd grab it no matter what it was.
• I would then shrink the images so that you could see them close together and get an idea of what they looked like as a group.
  

The goal was not to grab every single photo... but to get a really, really good representation of what a month load of Drudge photos look like. Keep in mind, this was completely at random.

Here's what I found:

Now you might notice a few things about this first composite: there are a few photos of Obama smiling. An image of Santorum looking defeated. (He just kinda was.) And of course, a depressed Fed Reserve Chairman.

Next composite...



Tim Tebow looks great, but he's kinda the only one. Chavez looks like an overweight evangelist, Obama looks depressed, Romney looks like a Point Break reject, the Pope looks like an extra from an Indiana Jones film, Holder looks guilty, and the last image of Obama looks, well... just about right.
The point being, everyone seems to be made fun of. Would you agree?
Let's keep going...



An obvious image of Obama losing his cool, Santorum looking thrilled (when the image was connected with him bowing out of the campaign), two depressing images of Zimmerman, an image from India's quake, a family photo of the Romney's to accompany the story about how Ann "doesn't work", and that idiot from North Korea.
Next...



A few stories on the media, and how the candidates feel they are perceived by them. A flattering image of Obama, an unflattering one, and one where Warren Buffet looks like a tool. A sour image of Cheney.

Next:



Two unflattering images of Zimmerman, plus one of his bloody head. A secret service hooker. Nicolas Sarkozy, and two images of Obama which are neither pretty nor ugly.

Next:


Obama's lawyer. Two images of Romney looking good, one of him looking constipated. Another hooker. Biden looking confused. Unhappy Zimmerman... and some guy that none of us know in a big leather chair.

Next:

We're already into late April, btw. Six images of Obama... one that makes him look flattering. An image that reflects unkindly on Anarchists. A triptych of images of Murdoch that make him look like he's losing an argument.

Are we getting the pattern yet?
With few exceptions... Drudge uses images that are either making fun of the person in the story, or reflect the tone of the story.
Last ones...


Okay, an image of Romney that makes him look like a failed superhero, and Obama greeting Kagan.

And that's what I found.

So you might wonder... since I scoured the images from April in a random fashion - and I didn't come up with the same images that Bill Maher did - was I leaving something out purposely?
No, I was not. In fact, I made a point of it to just put up the images that I found, whether or not they reflected either what I thought of Drudge, or what I think of Bill Maher.
You can do your own experiment, and see if you find similar images.

The point is that Drudge uses images to make fun of everyone. And I mean everyone.
The fact that Bill Maher went through and found images of black men that were not flattering, and that he missed all of the images of other people who were not flattering? Well, that's Bill Maher. We can't even begin to think of what's going on in his head, but clearly, he went in with an agenda, and not with any intent of being honest.

Post Election Report: Part 2, Branding

The day after the election I was talking to a friend of mine who is a Democrat. I was trying to put my finger on what it was that I found so creepy about being in Grant Park on election day.

I've written before about the 7 ft. tall image in Barack's campaign office of his own face.

[Editors note: this image is from AP. The rest are my own.]

I thought it was weird. I still do. But it was the candidate's decision to put it there.
A candidate for president can be incredibly arrogant at times.

What's different about Barack's followers (its the only word I can think of that fits) is that they do things that are even more creepy. Like... they wear his face on their t-shirts.
I'm going to make a great over-arching horrible generalization. Ready for it?
When any populace starts wearing a politician's face on their shirts, its bad news. For everyone.
This guy was one of at least 30 people that I saw selling t-shirts that night. (I'm being conservative in my estimation.) Good for him celebrating the last vestiges of capitalism.
For some reason, I liked the gentleman above instantly. I think its because, unlike most of the crowd, he's an older dude. I can understand how an older black man would feel the history of the moment, whether he liked the candidate or not.
This dude was making bank. He literally had stacks on these posters and he was selling the "Hope" rhetoric as fast as he could roll them up. One guy bought 3 posters for his friends.
I want to - I need to - repeat that.
A guy bought 3 posters of a politician for his friends.

This kind of thing really split me in half. On one hand, I'm thrilled that the man above was able to make his living for the next month by selling people useless shit. That's what America is about.
On the other hand...
What is it about the people in Grant Park that has made them so insecure in themselves that they trust in someone that they've never met to make their lives better???


This is America, folks. You can literally accomplish anything you set your mind to.
The guy above is proof of the 'land of opportunity.' He's selling images of a president-elect!
Then there was this giant horrible painting, above. It was put up across from the big video screen, in the un-ticketed part of grant park. At around 7pm, there were scores of people, like the ones above, taking photos of themselves in front of the giant painting.

Think that's weird?
It gets weirder.
What are all of these people photographing, post-Barack-election?
They are photographing the sign. -And themselves in front of the sign. -And their friends in front of the sign. The sign that says "Obama Presidential Rally Parking."

Anything that said 'Obama' or 'Barack' was selling. -And that doesn't even include the Official Obama Store, below.

I haven't even talked about the Obama watches that I saw. But I might as well include the light-up buttons, that you can put on your hat.

There were tables of merchandise that people had trucked in.
It was a marketing wet dream.

That's when it hit me.
The word is Branding. I learned about it in college in a marketing class. It basically refers to the ability to sell something by making people feel good about the product.

If you're good at Branding, then people want to buy your product based on name recognition. If you're really good at Branding, then people talk about your product in glowing terms.
If you're brilliant at Branding, then people start to wear your brand. If you're wearing a Guinness t-shirt or own a Coca Cola clock, you're a product of branding. Someone spent gazillions of dollars to make you think that you're cool for wearing and buying their stuff.

Which is why its creepy to see so many people vote based on great branding.

By the way, when I wrote this post, I wanted to make sure that I was using the term correctly. While doing a web search, I ran across this article. Tragically, they cock-blocked my point by getting there first:

Like any great brand, Obama has built up a bond of trust with the American people. His election has also given the US the opportunity to reestablish its moral leadership around the world. But like any brand, he has to deliver now on his promises, both actual and perceived. In the current economy, that will not be easy.

In my marketing class, they taught us that good branding needs to be followed up by a product that delivers. Otherwise, the brand will fail.

I'm not sure if that's going to be true with Obama. Already, both his campaign and his supporters are suggesting that if he isn't able to deliver, it will only be because of Republicans.

In political terms, this is called innoculating your candidate from the opposition.
From this point on, when Republicans take positions that are... well, Republican, Obama supporters will tell us that conservatives are just trying to make Obama fail, rather then support the policies that they've always supported.

This creates a president that truly has unlimited power.
That was what I found creepy about the tens of thousands of people that I ran into in Grant Park and on Michigan Avenue. Its what's been disturbing me for the past few months, as Obama-fever ran past critical mass.

So many Obama supporters identify so strongly with their candidate through branding, that they can't separate themselves from the candidate. Thus, if you attack the candidate, you are attacking them.

At the beginning of this post, I mentioned my friend who is a Democrat, who voted for Obama. He's also a black man who has become annoyed with Barack supporters. He told me something that has given me much... er... hope, to use the most over-used word of 2008.

My friend said that he was annoyed with the people wearing the t-shirts too. Not because they were "supporting" Obama, but because there were so many people that - to him - seemed to be jumping onto the bandwagon. That they were trying to be cool by showing their friends how not-racist they were.
My friend then told me about how he took a subway train home that night. A "white suburban girl" sat next to him, and then pulled her purse close to her as she sat down. He couldn't help but think to himself that she had probably just came from Grant Park that night.

If the people in Grant Park want to prove to me that they really do believe in Change, I'd love it if they would start with themselves.
You are in charge of your destiny. Not your president.
If you want to prove how you aren't a product of branding, then please stop wearing those stupid T-shirts. Stop doing the group-think, and get out of the line of lemmings.
Change your own lives, and stop being a complete jerk to the people who aren't in Grant Park.

Change isn't a slogan.
Its what you're capable of all on your own.