US Videos for TV news come under scrutiny

[T_Bone]

Guess I better post this before the other side does ;-)

US Videos for TV News come under scrutiny (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/15/politics/15VIDE.html?ei=5062&en=54335bbfb5679db0&ex=1079931600&partner=GOOGLE&pagewanted=print&position=)

[Glaucus]

T_Bone wrote:
Guess I better post this before the other side does ;-)

US Videos for TV News come under scrutiny (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/15/politics/15VIDE.html?ei=5062&en=54335bbfb5679db0&ex=1079931600&partner=GOOGLE&pagewanted=print&position=)I can now see why Putin and George Bush get along so well. :roll:

So what are your thoughts on this T_Bone?

- Mike

[FluffyMcDeath]

T_Bone wrote:
Guess I better post this before the other side does ;-)

US Videos for TV News come under scrutiny (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/15/politics/15VIDE.html?ei=5062&en=54335bbfb5679db0&ex=1079931600&partner=GOOGLE&pagewanted=print&position=)

Ties in with this:

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/8164060.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp

This bill was very important to the industry. Far too important to let facts stand in the way.

[cecilia]

thanks for the links. before we completely lose free speech, lets get out as much info as possible. I just emailed a bunch of people with this stuff!

[Wilse]

Howyadoin' T_Bone?

Guess I better post this before the other side does

Demo of iBrowse - can't open new window :cry:

Is this the thing about the staged crowds supposedly
supporting chimpster's policies?

No less than expected if it is.

[cecilia]

for those with Ibrowse demo's:

"Federal investigators are scrutinizing television segments in which the Bush administration paid people to pose as journalists praising the benefits of the new Medicare law, which would be offered to help elderly Americans with the costs of their prescription medicines."


"chimpster" :roflmao:

[Fade]

I hate to burst everyone's bubble here, but having made gobs of political tv spots for both Democrats and Republicans, I think you should know that there is very little usage of talent for these things that isn't paid talent.

Even when there is volunteer talent to be used, once you put the release form in front of them to sign, and they read it and find out how their image & voice might be used, and for how long, most balk and want to be paid.

Another problem with using "free" talent is it can be very expensive. By the time you have had to reshoot most of these inexperienced people sometimes 30 or 40 times to get it right, they want to quit and let somebody else do it.

After you have shot your budget in extra studio time, then comes the edit room where that cost will probably be quadrupled because of the extra footage to be edited because of the "free" talent. Guess what the client wants you to do then? Yep, he wants you to suck up the extra cost or maybe even ask for a freebee.

As about 95% of a political budget is spent on advertising and most© experienced politicians know that their chances of getting elected is directly related to the quality of their tv and radio exposure, they usually don't take the chance of blowing it using so called "free" talent or trying to have a friend do the production.

Ask Howard Dean about it; $40 million spent on poor advertising and not one delegate for him.

[T_Bone]

Glaucus wrote:

T_Bone wrote:
Guess I better post this before the other side does ;-)

US Videos for TV News come under scrutiny (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/15/politics/15VIDE.html?ei=5062&en=54335bbfb5679db0&ex=1079931600&partner=GOOGLE&pagewanted=print&position=)I can now see why Putin and George Bush get along so well. :roll:

So what are your thoughts on this T_Bone?

- Mike

Well, I'm not a fan of this plan. What's the use in voting Republican, if the Republican is just going to adopt the Democrat platform to get votes?

[FluffyMcDeath]

Fade wrote:
I hate to burst everyone's bubble here, [....]


You're not bursting the bubble. You're just blowing it bigger.
Nobody cares whether actors are paid to do commercials.
The point is that it is dishonest to try to portray commercials as news, and actors as non-actors. It isn't the logistics that bothers people, but the ethics.

[Speelgoedmannetje]

T_Bone wrote:
What's the use in voting Republican, if the Republican is just going to adopt the Democrat platform to get votes?Why not make your own political party T-Bone :-)

[Fade]

@ Fluffy
"The point is that it is dishonest to try to portray commercials as news, and actors as non-actors. It isn't the logistics that bothers people, but the ethics."
-------------

I think I am bursting your bubble Fluffy.
About the only time you see non actors on TV, is on the 10 o'clock news, and they are saying something like, "Yeah I sar the hole thang. I wuz on my way down to the tar sail at Wallmark and thar she wuz mineing her on bizzness when that grayhoun bus jus skushed her like a bug."

Now a good example of a non professional doing his own commercial was Michael Dukakis riding around in that tank. Remember that one.

[FluffyMcDeath]

Fade wrote:
@ Fluffy
"The point is that it is dishonest to try to portray commercials as news, and actors as non-actors. It isn't the logistics that bothers people, but the ethics."
-------------

I think I am bursting your bubble Fluffy.


If you think that, then you are not understanding the point about it being unethical to lie.