When a message just doesn't connect

I got an e-mail this morning from a "Mr.Mohammed Yusuf, in Angola." As if this pitch doesn't sound familiar, think about the imagery it brings up in your mind:

I was a patient in the Medivaal Hospital situated in Angola , During my stay I was previledge to share the same room with a Woman who is a public Figure in our in Angola, She is the wife of a prominent politician here in a Angola.

Her husband, Mr. Abdulwahad Ahmed, was arrested and charged to court for a multibillion dollar arms deal fraud which she said was politically motivated by his enemies as her husband was the chairman of parliament in Angola. She also told me that he accented to plead guilty in exchange for his acquittal on corruption charges but was later convicted on trumped-up
charges.

This led to his bank accounts in Angola and abroad being frozen. Now, things are really bad for her husband and children.

Okay, aside from the fact that this is just a twist on the bank scam from Nigeria, whose main export nowadays is e-mail, think about the imagery it brings up. We're supposed to emotionally connect with a corrupt Angolan multibillion dollar arms dealer? Just because things are tough on his family?

This is of course silly, but it's a pretty good illustration about the portrayal of your candidate or cause.

Remember back several years ago when Jim Beddow ran for Governor with Jim Abbott as his Lt. against the Janklow/Hillard ticket. I hardly remember anything about that race - except for the Beddow farm commercial.

It was such insipidly bad imagery. Here was the epitome of academia - DWU President Jim Beddow - on a farm in a flannel shirt. And if my dim recollection is correct he was talking about moving manure while holding a grain shovel. It was so bad it bordered on parody.

I can't imagine that I wasn't the only one who just didn't buy it. Yet, year after year we're assaulted by pitcures of politicians dressed in flannel in the same kinds of commercials. And 9 times out of ten, they look utterly ridiculous. Because the image they are trying to portray is so contrary to what people already know about the person.

"Hi! I'm a university liberal arts professor. But now that I'm dressed in stylish flannel and pictured on a farm - POOF! - I can relate to you farming type farmer folks."

I actually was standing outside of a room once where a kind of focus group was being conducted. And one of the campaign staff played one of these commercials for the "focusees." They politely viewed it and in typical South Dakota style, told the staffer what a good job they did, and how much they liked it.

Then, not 5 minutes after the staffer left, these same people started talking amongst themselves as to how the commerical sucked, and how out and out bad it was. The scene was too atypical of what they knew of this person, and they thought it quite insincere. But they also didn't want to hurt the staffers feelings. (Awww. Wasn't that nice). Needless to say, that candidate lost.

I can't tell you what imagery is correct all the time. It really depends on who your candidate is. Clint Roberts could certainly get away with riding a horse in his commercial. If Dusty Johnson (and yes, Dusty - consider this advice) tried that, it would not likely be considered a good fit.

When developing a theme and the visual stylings that represent a campaign, don't stray too far from what is already established about your candidate. Keep in mind who they are, and what they do. If they don't at all feel comfortable doing it, they aren't going to be convincing.

And remember: Don't bring a grain scoop to a manure spreading contest. And quit wearing flannel. (It's so five years ago).