Hot, Hot, Hot: Limited editions of The Obama Poster go up for sale today. These will be worth so so so much more than the measly $30 sales price. If you can get one. Good luck.
My buy: The August Cover of Vanity Fair featuring the McCains that follows, is in reference to, plays off of and balances out (and also further adding to the power of political art this campaign season) the very controversial July issue of The New Yorker featuring the Obamas.
I'm not sure if Barry Blitt did the cover of Vanity Fair but it is mimicking his style. I will frame these side-by-side and have already torn off The New Yorker cover by Blitt (as I have with other covers of his that are so culturally political).
The cultural commentary and power of campaign visual graphics is something I've followed and to have Vanity Fair cover this and move from photos of celebrities is a big statement and testament to this trend.
The Shephard Fairey poster of Obama might be the most famous art to come out of this political season. Created by the artist as a street poster distributed to activists to plaster the streets for the California primaries, the image went viral and even though Fairey stipulated that private use was prohibited, the consumer demand keeps escalating. When one was found being auctioned on e-bay for $60,000 last week, Fairey was very disappointed has responded that he will put out posters for sale on his site with all proceeds going back into the Obama campaign. He says he is also vigorously monitoring e-bay and trying to contain the viral desire to meet this huge consumer demand. Yeah, right. Good luck you talented guy.
The Obama Hope Poster will be produced in limited release (only 600) as numbered offsets, 24×36, signed and numbered. Prints can be purchased HERE. This offset prints will be $30, 1 per customer/household. He said these go on sale on his site today at a random time. My prediction: passionate fans will overwhelm the server and he won't be able to contain the image.
I predicted the graphic of Obama he created would become the most impactful one of this campaign and questioned if Fairey would be able to contain the use of his work once released. He now recognizes he will have to be more careful in how he conducts his business. This digital age in the new media environment makes this difficult. (see my post on The Obama Poster: Political Art and the Power of Visual Images).
Obama's graphics have been powerful. His campaign orchestrated the word CHANGE and it stuck to the candidate. HOPE became attatched, too.
Now it is Obama for America. One more new slogan has notched the branding of the candidate up to a new level. Smart political campaign communication strategy as the marketing and selling of the candidate evolves. No wonder influential and powerful others are noting Obama as "The One". The Obama for America tag popped up on a podium before Obama at a gathering last week of Democratic governors.
The same tagline was used as the distribution moniker for posters (at left) printed and distributed in Germany on Obama's World Tour. In German it says: distributed by Obama for America. Obama is now launched on the world stage with his new marketing motto.
Let's see. Change. Hope. Obama for America. The momentum is there for the selling of the candidate with the branding so far. Of course, something like Tainted Tylenol or Salmonella Tomatoes (Black Swan events) cause unplanned disruptions and changes in product preferences. But for now, Obama is winning by graphics and branding. Consumers don't dig deep for the most part. They buy what they (simply) know.
Wouldn't you love to own Warhol's graphic of Nixon? Now that is probably worth tons. I wrote Political Art: Powerful Tools in the Icon Age (it has Warhol's Nixon pictured) and if you think of it, Warhol knew pop mass culture. Nixon was the first candidate to be sold with Madison Avenue techniques (read The Selling of the President by Joe _____).
Obama? He's selling like soap. He's the Coke of the moment.
update: A Washington Post article on a study reinforces the idea that voter's use shortcuts to arrive at decisions (which reinforces my point that techniques of sales and branding are so powerful). The academics' question: How much has the American voter changed over the past 50 years? Their conclusion: voters are still dismally ill-informed creatures and...a lot of people just don't care about politics".
Related:
Obama Winning by Graphic Iterations
The Art of Words: Campaign Visuals
Presidential Campaign Visuals
Word Art: Talking Points
Semi-related and just listed as a read for the Professional Writing Course at the University of South Florida: Rhetoric From Aristotle to Obama (Yes We Can)...
Political Communication and Design posts:
Rhetoric, from Aristotle to Obama
The Obama Poster
Presidential Campaign Logos
Political Art: Powerful Tools in the Icon Age
latest:
The O for All: A New World Logo
Hottest Political Art for the Presidential Campaign
Obamanos! Obama Logos
Funny this marketing a candidate like Coke. Beneath this I'm discovering a lot of ambivalence about Obama, not just in myself but in most people I talk to about him, not the 100% enthusiasm among supporters I remember for figures like Eisenhower or Reagan. Perhaps younger people have a different take on him. But in a recent discussion on Grit TV with Laura Flanders, a young black man, when asked how he felt about Obama seemed to think he was OK but nothing to get excited about.
It could be that the lack of nuance in his ads and his campaign speeches is bothering voters.
Posted by: Hattie | July 25, 2008 at 01:19 PM
You, like the rest of the press, make political commentary. Your story is supposedly about BOTH candidates and their marketing. Funny that it takes you four Obama photos to one for McCain and roughly 90 percent of your text to get your information across. John McCain may be old, stodgy, boring, whatever you like, but he is one of two candidates for the highest office on earth. Last time I looked at the poll of polls by CNN, Obama leads 44% to McCain's 41%. So that leaves 15% undecided. Therefore 56% of America is not ready to crown Obama King quite yet, even as he takes victory laps around the world. However, the press spends 80% of their political space on him. When I was in first grade, the teacher used to give the slow kids a head start when we ran races, just to be fair! How much help does the guy need? Open any paper today and add up the coverage difference. Its embarrassing that the journalists are running the campaigns. I am not even a McCain fan. This is not a Miss America contest, so the fact Obama is cool, young or more interesting is immaterial. But, your writing is superb and I will read you everyday.
Posted by: anthony | July 26, 2008 at 07:46 AM
After holding back on political communications topics, I couldn't resist a pop back in. I think I touched on the unsettling nature of (yes, Hatte - ambivalence, too) and I'm getting feedback from regular readers that the campaign is unsettling, and even though I feel my coverage is unbiased, it is still "Obama, Obama." Voter sentiment has intrigue and fear - isn't that a new thing? The WSJ just came out with an article of how this is not Obama's race to lose, but his to win and voters remain uncomfortable with the candidate and have jitters whether he is "safe" while issues are playing a big role. 74% of voters feel the candidates are on the wrong track.
Posted by: MotherPie | July 27, 2008 at 05:23 AM
Slogans, what a great topic, and how hard it is to see how they work on us, prepare us for events.
Take the remarks attributed to Pres. Ahmadinjad of Iran which have become the rallying cry for an attack on Iran.
You know the one, Iran will "wipe Israel off the map." What could be more chilling or repugnant, especially given the tragic history of the Jewish people and the crime of the Holocaust.
Even with the extreme war fatigue in the US and elsewhere, if Israel or the US do bomb Iran, the raids will ride on that slogan.
That slogan will crush moral debate.
But alarm bells should be ringing since similar slogans, crafted out of fear and hate, paved the way for Iraq.
We now know those were clever lies. Who reading this knows that this quote is a lie as well? Ahmadinejad never spoke of wiping Israel off the map.
He spoke of the inevitability, as he saw it of regime change in Israel, of the Zionist govt disappearing from the pages of time.
Now that was very presumptious on his part, indeed very hostile, but it's not a genocidal threat.
This will happen, he predicts, due to Israel's not giving a fair deal to the Palestinians.
Agree or not, we have a seriously distorted quote, fuelling another war
That he did not mean Iran would attack, is shown by reading his whole 2005 speech and noting the examples he uses.
The kicking out of the Shah in his own country, is his first example. Then, the break up of the Soviet Union, and lastly the departure of Iran's arch enemy, Saddam Hussein, not due to Iran but the US.
The BBC has retracted its earlier translation and now is quietly switching over to
"The Iman said (Ahmadinejad was quoting Khomeini) this regime (the Zionist one) that is occupying Quods (Jerusalem) must be eliminated from the pages of history."
My brackets
We may be dragged to war on an intentionally falsified quote, one meant to demonize and instill fear. Mike
Posted by: Mike Rubbo | July 28, 2008 at 09:35 PM