Co-workers chide my “man crush” on Barack Obama, and it’s true—I’m a fool for this candidate. His suits and stoic eyes, oration style, lean stature, the timbre of his voice, largesse of his ears, hope, change, blah, blah, blah.
But lately Obama’s inept and shady communications team is souring my infatuation, and endangering his candidacy. Here’s the most recent—and obvious—example of this ineptitude.
You’ve all heard it. Bill Burton’s response to The New Yorker cover depicting Obama and his wife as Muslim extremists:
“The New Yorker may think, as one of their staff explained to us, that their cover is a satirical lampoon of the caricature Senator Obama's right-wing critics have tried to create. But most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive. And we agree.”
Wow! This is a PR disaster, cleverly obfuscated by the press. The New Yorker “may think” it is satire? So Burton, and in turn Obama, believe a venerated magazine that firmly supports the candidate actually believes he and his wife are Muslim extremists.
Burton just lent credit to every e-mail string and news commentator’s suggestion that Obama is a Muslim extremist. Instead of chuckling at it, or having no reaction, the campaign tucked its tail between its legs, cried foul and tried to get the public whooping mad and horribly offended.
Reminds me of allegations of fear-mongering that Obama’s camp leveled against President Bush, John McCain and Hillary Clinton.
With the cartoon, Obama’s communicators tried to shift public skepticism of the candidate onto The New Yorker and its tasteless cartoon—stupid move guys. Seems like you can’t take a joke.
Here’s what the response should’ve been, according to Jon Stewart.
“Obama is in no way upset about the cartoon that depicts him as a Muslim extremist, because you know who gets upset about cartoons? Muslim extremists, of which Barack Obama is not. It’s just a f****** cartoon.”






Hello!
Reassuring to see that BP oil spill is number one. I will take this to mean, being the eternal optimist that I a...
Comments (16)
Geez. Such egotism. Are we all that important that this web site can't also be a place of intellectual refuge -- a brief departure from the demands of our work environs? Lighten up on the hand-slapping. The sandbox is large enough for a little political discourse sometime, especially when someone so blatantly illustrates how much higher the bar is for Barack Obama than it ever was for George Bush.
Posted by Ronald E. Childs | August 4, 2008 11:33 AM
Posted on August 4, 2008 11:33
jon stewart hits the nail on the head. the obama campaign should have released a statement commending the sharp wit of the new yorker cartoon while reinforcing the message that it is in fact satire, merely an illustration of how the swiftboaters are attempting to depict him and his wife.
Posted by sean dailey | July 29, 2008 1:02 PM
Posted on July 29, 2008 13:02
>>> "A college education is the birthright of every American."
Let's qualify that by adding the words, "...who wants one, and who has the ability to complete the work necessary to get one."
If everyone has a college education, who is going to flip our burgers, sweep our floors and make the beds in our hotel rooms? Think really hard before you turn on me for asking that question. What would be the value of a college education that everybody has?
Will
Posted by Will Daniel | July 25, 2008 9:44 AM
Posted on July 25, 2008 09:44
The Ragan site should be about best practices for communications professionals, and not about someone's political likes and dislikes. The original blogger tried to make his views relevant to the site by tying them to the tactics of Sen. Obama's PR team. But a review, critique or comparison of political PR teams across party lines and among various candidates would have been more credible.
Posted by Valerie Bolden-Barrett | July 18, 2008 4:08 PM
Posted on July 18, 2008 16:08
@ Drew - Well said. Thanks for steering us all straight.
Posted by Eric Jones | July 18, 2008 2:30 PM
Posted on July 18, 2008 14:30
You know, I come to these blogs and the other features on Myragan for communications concepts, not for political debate. I don't give a fig for what the rest of you think of the candidates. That's not the point of this website.
What I am interested in are the opinions of professional communicators on how a campaign should respond to something like the New Yorker cartoon. I personally think the cartoon was tasteless and in an age where smears largely replace debate on issues, the cartoon feeds the effort by some on the right to tar Obama as "one of them."
In this I think the Obama team had to respond, quickly, and emphatically. We saw what the swiftboat libel did to Kerry when he refused to take it on. I despise the nature of modern political campaigns. I wish they were different. But any candidate that lets such stuff slide (chuckling at it)is a fool.
Posted by Drew | July 18, 2008 1:53 PM
Posted on July 18, 2008 13:53
I gotta say, Jon's a good salesman. Suddenly I'm sitting her questioning my own sanity.
Posted by Michael Sebastian | July 18, 2008 1:47 PM
Posted on July 18, 2008 13:47
"...pundits' reaction was to avoid the irony..."
They presented the option of irony--hence the tired "Is it this or is it that" leads—but, as you said, pundits chose to avoid irony and focus on the so-called truth. That's why I said this PR disaster was obfuscated by the media. Unfortunately, I described it as clever; that was a huge overstatement.
Mr. Jasbrain, if that is your real name, I haven't been called Mike since junior high. Are you the old lab partner stalking me on Facebook? I understand your argument about avoiding the arugula rap, however, I'm not sure this translates. One is a cartoon; the other is a batch of supposed veterans cooking up lies about Kerry's claims he was a hero.
Your notion of his defending his wife playing well in Peoria is valid, but considering observers heap endless praise upon Obama’s team I think they’re response should be more than a reflex.
Alex is right about it being overintellectualized--and I thought that was what they were trying to avoid.
Posted by Michael Sebastian | July 18, 2008 1:32 PM
Posted on July 18, 2008 13:32
It's the same inept, self righteous "intellectuals" that cost the Dems the 00' and 04' elections. The strategy is the same, as is the general behavior and tone. It's out of touch, grossly inept, and grounded in corruption and an over intellectualized understanding of the American populace.
Posted by Alex Berger | July 18, 2008 1:06 PM
Posted on July 18, 2008 13:06
"Jon, can you please remind me what substance there is behind what George W. Bush has said for the past 8 years? Wasn't it people like you who supported no child left behind? The republican party has made a hot mess of the country the past 8 years, and so you take to the low road. Only to find it begrudgingly occupied by the latest Obama-tack."
'Jasbrain' - No I can't. Just because I talk negatively about Obama, don't lump me into the Republican party. I'm a Libertarian. I wouldn't support a socialist program like No Child Left Behind if you put a gun to my head.
But if you want to be factual, most of the past 8 years have been very prosperous economcially save for late-2001/mid-2002 and mid-2007/2008. The Republicans didn't create the mortgage crisis - that was done by greedy banks and lending companies who thought that bad credit could be negated, and by people who took out loans they couldn't afford to pay back even though they knew their interest rates could go up.
And the price of oil you can blame on the Democrats and enviro-fascists for not letting America drill our own land or oceans and not letting us building a refinery or nuclear power plant in the past 30 years - basically minimizing our own supply and giving us no other choice but to look elsewhere for our oil. You can't reduce the supply, increase the demand, and expect the price of oil not to skyrocket. If the American public had a basic economic education - which they don't provide in your government schools - we wouldn't be making ridiculous statements like "it's the oil companies' fault!"
I blame the Republicans for two things - getting us into Iraq and for squandering the past 8 years to undo what the Socialists... sorry, I mean the Democrats have done to this country for the past 75 years, basically brining us closer to what the Soviet Union aspired to be than they actually were.
Even Bush and the new generation Republicans, who are trying to be more like the Democrats in order to get votes, are promising bigger government and something for nothing. Great. Apparently a $9 trillion national debt isn't quite high enough...our taxes aren't quite high enough... the government doesn't control quite enough of our lives... Let's give them control of our health care too! If we're going to bankrupt this country financially and ethically, let's stop f*cking around and get down to it. While we're at it, let's make food free and gas free too! Economics be damned!
Go ahead. Support Obama. And let's talk again four years from now when you discover that...shockingly...nothing has changed. Remember the definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Obama's no Washington outsider, and you're about to find out the hard way.
Bob Barr in '08
Posted by Jon | July 18, 2008 12:36 PM
Posted on July 18, 2008 12:36
You do realize that the pundits' reaction was to avoid the irony and to point out the purported "grains of truth" in the cartoon?
Posted by Anonymous | July 18, 2008 12:05 PM
Posted on July 18, 2008 12:05
@ Anonymous -- please keep the conversation relevant to "PR Junkie," there are political blogs in which to spew your venmon. Go there. And, for Pete's sake, Rezko wasn't a convicted felon when Obama associated with him. But Obama did associate with radicals who had been charged with felonies (http://tinyurl.com/BillAyers). You reveal your own stupidtiy when you actually have some facts to support your thesis, but ignore it in favor of being petty and venal. I feel sorry that you've chosen to live in fear and ignorance. I hope you don't infect those around you. And posting anonymously? Jeez. Grow a pair!
@ Michael - Nice post. Fair points all. Natch, it would be The Daily Show to cut through it all when the wonks just get it wrong.
Posted by Eric Jones | July 18, 2008 11:54 AM
Posted on July 18, 2008 11:54
Jon, can you please remind me what substance there is behind what George W. Bush has said for the past 8 years? Wasn't it people like you who supported no child left behind? The republican party has made a hot mess of the country the past 8 years, and so you take to the low road. Only to find it begrudgingly occupied by the latest Obama-tack.
Posted by hugh jasbrain | July 18, 2008 11:41 AM
Posted on July 18, 2008 11:41
Yeah but Obama's just sticking to his gameplan here isn't he? To blow it all off would've been a John Kerry move, and in the wrong hands, inaction could've proven much worse than a little jab from John Daly or Mike Sebastian. Remember what happened to Kerry and that Obama still has the arugula-reputation.
So the nuance snobs are disapointed that we couldn't all chuckle over our designer coffee. But he's not worried about us, because we'll still vote for him. Obama's more concerned with the masses, maybe a certain Nascar Vote, who might miss the nuance but appreciate it when a guy stands up for his family, etc.
This is Obama not getting swift-boated as weak and indecisive by conceding the high road. This round.
Posted by hugh jasbrain | July 18, 2008 11:30 AM
Posted on July 18, 2008 11:30
What about the fact that there's nothing behind the fine suits and suave voice? He's very much like Bill Clinton in that he's a great speaker and extremely charasmatic. But if you listen to him - whether he's using a teleprompter or not - there's no substance behind what he says.
"A college education is the birthright of every American." What does that mean??? How does he qualify that? Just because you're born, you automattically deserve to go to college? How about people who just don't work hard enough to be in college - do they still have a God-given right to a college education? Am I still supposed to support them with my taxes regardless? How about people who'd rather work than go to college? Should they feel bad if they don't go and don't take advantage of their birthright???
I know, I know. He's a politician and I shouldn't really inject logic into the words of a man whose sole purpose in life is not to help but to get elected.
But the infatuation of Obama by people like yourself - even an expert in communications - just goes to show that politics is a popularity contest. Old people aren't popular. African-Americans with a good voice that don't blame Whitey for all their problems are popular. Forget principles, past actions or judgments, or a lack of substance in speeches... let's just go for the one who looks good and speaks well.
Posted by Jon | July 18, 2008 11:22 AM
Posted on July 18, 2008 11:22
"lately Obama’s inept and shady communications team is souring my infatuation"
As if his total lack of experience, radical left-wing policies, bigotry, racism and association with convicted felons like Antoin Rezko and should-be-convicted Chicago pols wasn't enough? Did you see the front page of today's Chicago Tribune? Go take a look at Hussein Obama's Abu Ghraib. Talk about a PR crisis...
Posted by Anonymous | July 18, 2008 10:47 AM
Posted on July 18, 2008 10:47