Why Are Gay Couples Missing From Anti-Prop. 8 Advertising?
Media Strategy Observation: One of the most interesting
strategic media moves related to California’s Proposition 8 (to define
marriage as between a man and a woman) is that the gay community (who is
against prop. 8) never appears in their TV advertising. There’s a
massive media campaign going on throughout the state promoting gay
marriage, but none of the spots actually feature gay
couples. In fact, most ads never even use the words “gay
marriage” or “gay.” I think they’re targeting swing voters
who aren’t actually comfortable with the idea of gay marriage, and are
trying to move them based on civil rights. But I do find it
fascinating that they’re trying to promote a cause without actually
showing the cause. Regardless of what you think of the issue of
homosexual marriage, the strategy is rather deceptive. What do you
think?
I believe they call it the "yuck factor". They probably won't show images or footage of gay couples because the majority of the world is still appalled by it. Then there's the fact that they are bringing this up as a civil rights issue which is fairly reprehensible. I don't recall any homosexual being enslaved for hundreds of years or sold into slavery.
The no on 8 campaign hasn't once mentioned the fact that it is gay marriage they are talking about. It's incredibly deceptive and evil. Which would be consistent with the agenda as a whole.
Sometimes the truth just just be too offensive. I remember a bus ad banned in Canberra about 12 years ago. It featured the words "Precious feet" an the image of a 26 week old baby's feet in the womb. It just shocked too many people that something that looked like a human could be legally killed.
Solution? Our community collectively put our heads in the sand.
Here in Fl, where we have a similar amendment on the ballot, the ads are just misinformation. "Vote yes on 2 and you will lose benefits, like being able to visit family in the hospital."
Seriously not even close to reality.
But somewhat effective. I was in line to early vote and heard folks behind me talking about the amendment. They are for it, until one said, "But won't we lose some benefits if this passes?" I couldn't stay quiet, so I explained things, and all four voted yes on 2. They would have voted against it because of those lying ads.
First the "Yes on Prop 8" campaign hijacked the images of children to promote a cause that we in no way, shape or form their parents supported. The footage used without authorization from the parents, was originally captured on Oct. 10 when the children took a field trip with their classmates and several parents to share the moment of their teacher’s wedding to her longtime partner. All parents were notified well in advance of the trip which was organized by some parents, and, in fact, two families chose to have their children not participate under California’s broad opt out law.
YouTube - Parents Demand Prop 8 ad Taken Down
Now the "Yes on Prop 8" who have spent a ton of money on Google ads are targeting blogs and computers based out of California. Progressive blogs who abhor Prop 8 have found "Yes on 8" ads pop up on their front page, because they have Google banner ads. This has led many web sites who use Google Ad Sense to get grief from their readers for supporting a homophobic agenda ... even though they knew nothing about promoting "Yes on 8" ads. Two of my blogs and the blogs of several of my friends were hijacked by the "Yes on Prop 8" campaign. None of these blogs are political. I have not heard of anyone from the "No on 8" side stoop to this sort of dirty trickery.I rather have my kids see a Gay Wedding than Dirty Politics.That's not dirty politics, that's the way Adsense works. I used it on this blog for a few months, but with no control about what pops up - even though I declined adult material - some pretty saucy stuff still filtered through. I eventually dropped it because it wasn't worth it. But I don't blame dirty politics, bad theology, or porn - that's just the way Adsense targets.
You are exactly right... I hadn't thought about this and I feel weird about it because it is so obvious.
It *MIGHT* be because pro-8 commercials do not put focus on the actual issue, either... looking mostly at how are kids will be exposed to the concept of "gay marriage." Perhaps the pro-8 campaign realizes that showing gay people getting married would lead many to think "what's the big deal?" Instead, focus on the kids.
I found it incredibly ironic that while watching the last game of the World Series, which presumably was being watched by a number of California children potentially affected, that pro-8 commercials were talking about the issue. Were my 22-month old able to make sense of it, I would've been explaining gay marriage rather than watching the Phils win.