Slashdot Mirror
New Apple Campaign Target PC Flaws
sodul writes"Apple just started a new campaign to emphasize the advantages of Mac versus a regular tasteless PC. The ads represent a young cool looking man (Mac) and a white collar in his 40's (not cool, PC).
In one of the ads the PC repeat itself several times because it had to reboot. In an other one (and maybe the most aggressive of all) PC is sick because of a virus, while Mac is healthy.
You can watch the new spots on Apple's site "
I've got one. It is a very nice machine but it suffers from the strange high pitched whine. It's not bad, just a little irritating. Everyone should have a mac, just wait for the second generation hardware to arrive before getting one.
Sure did, and Kerry lost votes because of Democratic hate campaigning.
I'm not saying there wasn't a log of negativety coming from the right, either, but that was generally through right wing "pundits" like Limbaugh and Coulter... the TV ads from the Democrats, and groups like MoveOn.Org, were almost all negative.
Again, I'm not saying there's any angels here... the republicans didn't have to run ads like that because there were other outlets doing the negative campaigning for them, but Bush came off looking good because he wasn't personally attacking Kerry.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
The Kerry campaign directly attacked George Bush, George Bush ran on issues. Now, you can agree or disagree with how well Bush did on issues, but Kerry's campaigned revolved around pointing out what Bush did wrong - not pointing out what Kerry would do right.
People notice those things. The third party ads/campaigning was another matter; they come off as "look, that disinterested third party is saying bad things about so and so". We know they are not disinterested third parties, but the point is that the Bush campaign distanced itself from the negativety, the Kerry campaign did not - they were much more directly involved in it.
I'm not trying to start a debate about who was a better candidate - they were both horrible in my opinion, but Kerry's campaign was about what Bush did wrong, Bush's capaign was about what Bush did right. Kerry's campaign ran on the "anyone but Bush" philosophy.
We're talking TV ads... not the debates, not the pundits... the actual advertising campaign that both parties used.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Bottom line: You can not definitively that Kerry lost more votes than Bush due to Negative-Campaign Backlash. There's an argument either way.
I will agree that the "Anybody but Bush" was a bad strategy that did not work, and to address the other guy's point, Kerry ran a "War Hero", when in fact his real reputation was as an "Anti-War Hero", which is why Bush was able to successfully pigeon him as a "flip-flopper" and he could respond correctly to SBV.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
Modded Troll?? Don't any of you /. people ever watch South Park???
"But this one goes to 11!"