Slashdot Log In
Maker of Anti-Clinton Video Outed, Loses Job
Posted by
kdawson
on Thu Mar 22, 2007 11:40 AM
from the on-his-own-time dept.
from the on-his-own-time dept.
Raul654 writes "Philip de Vellis, the author of the anti-Hilary Clinton viral video was outed yesterday on the Huffington Post. The company he worked for, Blue State Digital — a Democratic Internet strategy company that does work for Barack Obama — has now fired him as a result. Said Vellis: 'I made the "Vote Different" ad because I wanted to express my feelings about the Democratic primary, and because I wanted to show that an individual citizen can affect the process.'"
Related Stories
[+]
Protests Move From the Streets To YouTube 156 comments
weighn writes "One factor driving the move of political statements to YouTube, and away from old-style street protest, is that on the Internet the chances of being personally associated with a protest are lower. Mounting your political message online is also safer in countries where taking part in a protest can result in your death or injury at the hands of your country's army. We've seen how street protests and online polls alike are being shunted aside and ignored. What is the future for the common person who yearns to be heard?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Maker of Anti-Clinton Video Outed, Loses Job
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 401 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Was good (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.outpimp.com/?x=57020 | Last Journal: Wednesday September 12, @09:15PM)
Re:Was good (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://ofteninspired.com/ | Last Journal: Sunday April 01 2007, @05:49PM)
That he did. He also demonstrated that if you stand up for something, be prepared to be slapped down.
Here's hoping he can get back up.
Re:Was good (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Tuesday August 07, @01:18PM)
Re:Was good (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Was good (Score:4, Interesting)
In the 2004, U.S. Presidential election:
State: Margin (Electoral Votes)
New Mexico: 5,988 (5)
New Hampshire: -9,274 (4)
Iowa: 10,059 (7)
Wisconsin: -11,384 (10)
Nevada: 21,500 (5)
Delaware: -28,492 (3)
For less than 38,000 votes, you could have swung New Mexico, Iowa, and Nevada (20 electoral votes), and changed the outcome.
Re:Was good (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Was good (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://unixbeard.blogspot.com/)
It does not guarantee us freedom from the consequences of our speech.
Re:Was good (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.timeforplanb.net/smokee)
A rip-off of a Mac ad shows imagination?
Must be some definition of imagination that I'm not familiar with.
Re:Was good (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://seenonslash.com/ | Last Journal: Friday May 11 2007, @04:02PM)
Coming up with the idea in the first place required imagination.
Maybe I'm clueless, but I just don't see what the "effective point" of that ad was.
The original Apple ad carried no additional information either, but made a very effective point. Anyone familiar with the concept of Big Brother can see the point. Therefore it's effective in its simplicity. If instead it just displayed negative information about Hillary it would be very boring and not get people talking about the actual point.
Re:Was good (Score:5, Insightful)
Her ramblings showed the entire point of the ad. The ad was implying that Hillary speaks in meaningless and empty rhetoric that the masses eat up like mindless brainwashed drones. It was THIS, rather than any implications of fascism as said elsewhere in this thread, that the ad was presenting. The ad was trying to encourage people to try something fresh and different. It was effective in the internal coherence of this message and in the appropriateness of the analogy for relaying that message, which is why it has received so much attention and popularity.
Re:Was good (Score:4, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Tuesday June 12, @07:38PM)
As for the rest, can we stop calling people we don't like fascists? The word has lost almost all meaning now.
Re:Was good (Score:5, Funny)
(http://slashdot.org/)
> The word has lost almost all meaning now.
Don't you tell me what's lost meaning, you fascist.
Re:Was good (Score:4, Funny)
(Last Journal: Wednesday March 21 2007, @11:19AM)
I agree. Let's all pick a NEW word, everyone! I hear Anne Coulter has suggested 'faggot'.
Re:Was good (Score:5, Funny)
Old Strategy (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.themeuge.com/)
1. Get somebody to make an offensive attack ad
2. Get it noticed by the press
3. Enjoy seeing your attack ad on the air FOR FREE for a dozen news cycles or more.
4. Offset the blame, since you never "approved" the ad.
5. Profit!
Re:Old Strategy (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Tuesday September 13 2005, @03:45PM)
1. The guy worked at a tech company that assisted in Obamas campaign we well as other campaigns. You'd be surprised by the number of subcontractors in a campaign who don't give a hoot about it, they just have a job of keeping the web server running, or whatever.
2. Did you watch the video? Its not even an attack ad really. It just says that 2008 won't be like 1984. It seems that the choice to use Hillary was fairly inconsequential to the message.
Translations of previous two posts: (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Friday December 13 2002, @11:52PM)
-- TheMeuge (645043)
"I support Barack Obama."
-- MindStalker (22827)
Re:Was good (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.cursor.org/)
It's general politics, not a Democrat or Republican thing. You want all good to stick to the candidate, and all bad to stick to "anyone but the candidate". And I'm not even saying that this is a case of the candidate deliberately passing the buck off to someone else; this guy's story seems reasonable enough. Gee, a person who works on political ads being A) a political enough person to want to make an ad in his spare time, and B) knowing how to make a high quality ad: who'da thunk it?
Just wait until the REAL truth comes out... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.college-paintball.com/)
Think about it - Hillary looks bad, AND Obama looks bad! This has to be the work of Republicans.
Or maybe it was Edwards.
What's the beef? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:What's the beef? (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://slashdot.org/)
His employer, being that it works in the "politics industry", had a policy forbidding employees from political activity to avoid any impropriaties. He violated the policy and was fired.
An employer I used to work for was creating lottery systems. It forbid employees from playing lottery games. Violations were dealt very harshly.
Before the end he realized... (Score:5, Funny)
And a boot descended over mankind's face, forever.
Ryan Fenton
Re:Before the end he realized... (Score:5, Funny)
That's no boot..
That's Hillarys thighs.
Re:Before the end he realized... (Score:5, Funny)
>
>It's a space station!
Clinton II: "It's a TRAP!"
Bush II: "We shall rule the Galaxy, as Father and Son!"
This is how liberty dies. With thunderous quoting of Star Wars.
Clarification (Score:5, Informative)
I've resigned from my employer, Blue State Digital, an internet company that provides technology to several presidential campaigns, including Richardson's, Vilsack's, and -- full disclosure -- Obama's. The company had no idea that I'd created the ad, and neither did any of our clients. But I've decided to resign anyway so as not to harm them, even by implication.
Re:Clarification (Score:4, Informative)
De Vellis was an employee with Blue State Digital, an Internet company that provides technology to presidential campaigns, including Obama's. De Vellis said he resigned from the company "so as not to harm them, even by implication." The company issued a statement Wednesday, saying he was terminated.
"Pursuant to company policy regarding outside political work or commentary on behalf of our clients or otherwise, Mr. de Vellis has been terminated from Blue State Digital effective immediately."
From: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/21/clinton.you .tube/index.html [cnn.com]
The CNN version has quotes from Blue State Digital's spokesperson saying that he was in fact terminated.
Re:Resigned, Fired: Just word games (Score:4, Insightful)
It was not a hard choice for his employer at all. According to the news, all employee contracts for that company specifically prohibit off-the-clock political productions of this sort by its employees, precisely because perception is more important than reality in their business. They cannot afford to have the perception that a contractor of one political candidate made X advertisement through under the table money, so they have to prohibit all such connections in the terms of their employee contracts.
Fired? (Score:5, Informative)
I heard on the radio this morning that he quit when he realized he was going to be unmasked. That's quite a bit different than being fired.
Vast, left-wing conspiracy (Score:1, Troll)
(http://www.networkmirror.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday July 05, @04:34PM)
cant have that (Score:1)
(http://freedomsforums.com/)
I guess someone who makes national news and reaches millions isnt something you want in your "Internet Strategy".
In his own words (Score:1, Redundant)
(http://www.thepickupartist.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday January 11 2005, @04:44PM)
Pioneering? (Score:1)
Heck, we're seeing it already on campaign websites and MoveOn has some pretty vitriolic (and usually baseless) stuff.
The lies will get worse, but one of the more interesting things is that it will be a LOT easier to debunk bad ads. Places like factcheck.org have done a REALLY good job at research, and stuff like that is only going to get more prolific as well.
So, in other words, politics ain't going to change all that much.
BTW, Frist P00st.
Re:Pioneering? (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.outpimp.com/?x=57020 | Last Journal: Wednesday September 12, @09:15PM)
Man...I sincerely HOPE so...this is so much cheaper, maybe it will reduce the insane amounts of money political machines have to generate, and hence how beholden to the donors at the end of the race.
Anything to take some of the money out of the politics, I think, would be useful thing.
Primary Season (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Tuesday June 12, @07:38PM)
All the "outrage" is a farce (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=buzzblog)
http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/127
Some obersvations..... (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGA
Three key points from the article:
* How will Web content outside the control of campaigns affect voters?
* How should campaigns react to anonymous but highly viewed attacks?
* When is Web content, no matter how provocative, newsworthy?
Also worth noting. Apple has decided NOT to sue the creator as it would be unlikely that they'd win:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGA
Apple not suing somebody? I'll believe it when I see it.
their loss (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Wednesday September 07 2005, @06:09PM)
Political Statements beget Unemployment? (Score:1)
Neither Side Knew That He Made the Video (Score:4, Informative)
The campaigns had no idea who made it--not the Obama campaign, not the Clinton campaign, nor any other campaign. I made the ad on a Sunday afternoon in my apartment using my personal equipment (a Mac and some software), uploaded it to YouTube, and sent links around to blogs.
He will be hired with lightning speed (Score:1)
(http://www.webgeekworld.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday April 27 2006, @07:47AM)
So they found him (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Friday November 09, @01:36AM)
Viral video (Score:1)
(http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday May 16, @11:41AM)
The fact that I've never heard of this, until now, probably means I hang out with the wrong people (both off and on line).
Either way, if it does do anything, it is a good example of an individual affecting the political process. Another good example would be Bill Gates giving shit loads of money to a campaign for one candidate or another.
It doesn't mean debate, it just means propaganda.
So? (Score:1)
(http://beplacid.net/)
Basically, this isn't news.
No problem finding a job (Score:1)
Was that an Ipod? (Score:1)
(http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday May 16, @11:41AM)
And Apple apparently gives money to the Democrats
Something is going on Mister Jones. And I don't know what it is. But something is going to change.
"Because something is happening here
But you don't know what it is
Do you, Mister Jones?"
On the one hand... (Score:2)
(Last Journal: Wednesday November 07, @10:09AM)
It shows his concern for the political system. OTOH, it shows his political naïveté -- you're not going to get away with smacking Hilary Clinton. This combination of chutzpah and bad judgment is rare in Washington... for good reason.
Apple Legal (Score:1, Troll)
Why isn't Apple's legal department all over this? Much as we love to hate copyright laws on slashdot, I think this is a shining example of the kind of copyright abuse that really should be prosecuted.
That aside, I don't really understand this ad's message. It's a hell of a stretch to compare Hillary Clinton to Big Brother (the current administration, on the other hand...)
Huffington? (Score:1)
(http://www.xenonsoftware.net/)
damn bush administration (Score:1, Troll)
Queue the mindless responses! (Score:1)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Video Covered the Droning Point On... (Score:2)
Pointing out the laborious droning on of political speech by a particularly notworthy practitioner in a quirky way has made it memorable.
That is what advertising is ALL about.
He's right. (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Democratic voters feel their principles have been betrayed. That their party is beholden to monied special interests (especially the mafIAA). Is it any wonder that a stooge like Bush can win?
I'm not sure that I'm comfortable with Obama as a candidate (his views on Gun Control are pretty wacky - the NRA will slaughter him, even with the weak field of Republican candidates). I'd rather see the Democratic Party take someone like Bill Richardson a lot more seriously. He has a lot more experience, and his views are a lot closer to the mainstream of America. Plus, he *is* a minority; but he doesn't use that status as a political tool, like Clinton and Obama do.
This Obama staffer made a bad move. It was a clear, ethical, conflict of interest, and possibly a violation of campaign finance law. But he made a damn important point. Is anyone at the DNC (and especially, the DLC) listening?
Re:He's right. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:He's right. (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Obama did not hide this fact - because it was never a fact. He went to a private school; one that was NOT a madrasa in any sense of the word.
- Though he claimed to be a Christian now, how come no muslim want his head like they did with the Afghan guy who converted out of Islam?
Because he was never a muslim?
- He claimed to be an Israeli supporter but he said Palestinians are the most oppressed people on Earth (Darfur anyone?)
Support of Israel means turning a blind eye to human rights violations?
One can support Israel, and still care about innocent Palestinians caught in the middle in this conflict.
One can also support Palestinians without supporting the terrorist tactics of a radical minority.
Darfur is a tragedy. But the US is not supplying the Sudanese government with $3 Billion in military aid each year. Now tell me who is more oppressed.
Re:He's right. (Score:5, Interesting)
There is a lot of frustration among Democratic voters right now, about the crappy selection of presidential candidates. We felt like we got railroaded with Dukkakis in '88, and while Clinton was a pleasant surprise in '92, there was a lot of consternation about Lieberman in 2000 (and it should be clear by now, that Lieberman did more harm to Gore's campaign than Nader could ever dream to) - and Kerry in '04. Democratic voters feel their principles have been betrayed. That their party is beholden to monied special interests (especially the mafIAA). Is it any wonder that a stooge like Bush can win?
Never understood it myself. I'm independent, no party affiliation. I've watched with dismay in the last 10-15 years as the Republicans have crawled into bed with religious nutjobs. In response, the post-Clinton Democrats, rather than seizing the opportunity and crushing the Reps with a centrist candidate who could establish long-term dominance, have responded by throwing out a series of candidates who are more and more hard-line, shrill, and utterly unappealing to independent voters. They haven't put forth a coherent plan aside from their (rightful) disdain of Bush. They've tossed their support of the first amendment in their push to cozy up to the media companies (MAFIAA) and to be seen as more family values oriented (Gore/Lieberman/Hilary with their anti-violent music/games push). I think the growing tendency of the Democrat leadership toward condescending wanna-be intellectualism and truly venomous campaigning is really turning off a lot of the country, never mind the selling out.
Put another way, in the run-up to the 2004 election Bush was saddled by a 9/11 economy that had not fully recovered, a war we were by that point not winning, and no idea where Osama was. Even a remotely appealing candidate would have destroyed him. Who gets nominated? A condescending stereotypical Massachussets Democrat with a lot of baggage. Of course, he is destroyed in the red states by 20+ point margins and loses enough of the peripheral states (Ohio, Fla) that he loses. This, while Lieberman or Edwards probably would have beaten Bush. Lieberman probably takes Fla, Edwards probably a mix of SC, VA, NC, or OH, possibly others.
To more properly address your points, I'm not comfortable with Obama because he's an inexperienced ideologue, and I find that incredibly scary (I don't even want to ponder the fate of Universal Health Care in this country). Hilary has experience, but I have no idea what she'll do when president because the only thing she seems to stand for is her own self-aggrandizement. I assume it's a two-dog race now, so no point discussing the also rans.
As an independent, *I* feel betrayed, because I'd like one party to have the sense to go more centrist. Don't much care which party.
Regarding Dem presidential candidates, I completely agree with you - the Dems haven't come up with a truly appealing candidate that they actually planned to run since, what, Kennedy? LBJ was an accident, Carter won because he wasn't Nixon/Ford, and the frontrunners like Cuomo bailed in early '92 when Bush I had a 90% approval rating, leaving the surprising win to Bill.
Where is the typical /. outcry? (Score:1, Insightful)
"Unnamed sources exposed Bush as being behind propoganda lie for political reasons, claims "First Amendment" (meaning Patriot Act in dubya-speak) gives authority to release anti-terrorist video anyway in time of war. Democrats to issue supeanas against the entire US population in all red states until they expose every right-wing youtubers as the unintelligent racists we know they are. In related news, big oil and tobacco companies suspected of making money on the day this video was released, causes temperatures to rise an alarming 10 degrees between 8 am and noon."
The new volunteerism (Score:2, Interesting)
*Obama distancing himself from company.
*Company distancing itself from employee.
What is slightly disturbing is that this form is required.
No one has anything to be ashamed of. Obama should say,
"I had nothing directly to do with this. I am glad, however, that
I have inspired people to do such creative work. I will continue to
do what I am doing so one day, when I am president, I can inspire
such creativity in more americans"
Hillary should say "Hey, this thing struck a chord. Maybe I am doing something
wrong"
My hope is that similarly creative works continue after the democratic primaries.
This is really lame... (Score:2)
(http://youtube.com/thedarkener)
2) It's a rip off of an old, dumb commercial.
3) All politicians are douche bags.
That is all.
Outed as a Lying Jerk (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://slashdot.org/~Doc%20Ruby/journal | Last Journal: Thursday March 31 2005, @01:48PM)
If he had not signed it "Obama", he might not have been fired. If his boss hadn't had Obama as a client, he might not have gotten fired.
This guy is a jerk. He's got the right to publish whatever video he comes up with, except when he lies in it. He has no right to frame Obama with that attack ad. And his boss has the right to fire a guy who pisses off the clients.
NO, he showed the opposite ! (Score:2)
No question that he had a big impact with this video, but the average voter is 100% incapable of producing a video like this, and even if they could they are too busy with their own job and kids to do so.
What this reinforces is that those with the time, skill, and (usually) the money to produce entertaining spots will have a big influence.
For me, this reinforces the impression that the 'average' voter will continue to spend less time doing their own research and thinking, and more time absorbing the influence of those who produce the commercials, sock puppets, and blogs written by people who are quietly being paid for their work.
(The evidence of this is growing rapidly here in Canada too. One of our two national papers was setup with an explicitly political purpose by the fellow on trial in Chicago at the moment.)
1st shots (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Monday September 25 2006, @07:02PM)
I remember the questions about when a Vice President moves up due to the senility/mental competence of the President during Reagans second term. After seeing how the press and other candidates treat everyone running, I question the sanity of anyone who want's the damn job! Colin Powell might be the smartest man of our times. He refused to put himself or his family through this asinine process, that's character!
There's more to this than "standing up" (Score:1)
I dont believe any of this (Score:2)
(http://www.gargoyleslanding.com/)
With an IPod? (Score:2)
(Last Journal: Thursday November 17 2005, @05:12PM)
So did he use the original old commercial (and add the IPod himself) or a newer, updated commercial?
Sincerely curious? (Score:2)
Seriously.
m
viral propaganda by a professional (Score:1)
If this kind of propaganda is what "citizen participation in the political process" is going to be, I want no part in it. This kind of ad would have been a low point even if it had been made by a political opponent, which is probably why Obama is distancing himself from it. Fortunately, it looks like this is not actually citizen participation, it's a political propagandist using his skills for his private amusement.
Why does the girl have an iPod? (Score:1)
(http://www.dailygrrl.com/)
What a rip-off (Score:1)
Re:I don't see the problem. (Score:3, Informative)
Remember Socialism is not the same as Communism, despite what some Republicans try to tell everyone.
Re:I don't see the problem. (Score:4, Informative)
(Last Journal: Tuesday August 07, @01:18PM)
In any case, I think the post you were responding to was not raising a critique on that level. I think it was more along the lines of "They wants to take mah propurtai!"
Re:Hillary 1, Humor 0 (Score:2)
(http://www.electric-escape.net/)
Re:Freedom of speech (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.livejournal.com/users/sinistertim101 | Last Journal: Saturday March 24 2007, @12:32PM)
It sucks but thats how it goes. Yes you can run around office screaming the star spangled banner like a maniac and have security escourt you out and its your right to do so and lose your job of course. It only means the government can not prosecute you for doing so.