ARTFUL DISHONESTY: POLITICAL FUNDRAISING 2

ARTFUL DISHONESTY: POLITICAL FUNDRAISING, 2000

Continued...

James R. Rosenfield

< Back

DEMOCRATIC INNUENDOS, DISTORTION, AND SLEAZE

The Democrats are clearly taking advantage of a segmentation opportunity: people who have contributed to mailings tied to, or signed by, Bill Clinton.

My friend Drareg Ocsor falls into this camp, and as a result he received a large brown envelope festooned with a picture of the White House, and the copy “2000 Presidential Photo Enclosed…DO NOT BEND!!!”

The faux-personalized photo has Clinton in the foreground, Gore in soft-focus in the background – perfect for the audience addressed, wouldn't you agree? A piece of translucent paper covering the photo tells us “This is President Clinton's last official DNC Presidential Photograph. He wants you to have this personal copy as a token of thanks for your friendship & support.”

Like the Republican survey form, the Democratic response form –“2000 Presidential Photo Delivery Confirmation” – uses the “get the head nodding” technique. You're given a “MEMBERSHIP IDENTIFICATION NUMBER” and a “PHOTOGRAPH REGISTRATION NUMBER.” Then after your “DATE SHIPPED TO RECIPIENT JUNE 29, 2000” you're asked to “PLEASE CONFIRM DELIVERY BY: JULY 27, 2000.”

Right below that copy block: “YES, I have received in good condition my personal copy of the 2000 Presidential Photograph on the following date:_________.”

And then, right below that, the kill: “YES, I also want to offer my support…”

And then, after you make your contribution, you're asked to sign: “Signature Verifying Receipt of Presidential Photograph.”

Good, good slippery-slope technique!

In a moment of high spirits, I called the Democratic National Committee and told them that my photograph had arrived in an abysmally and forlornly mutilated state. I was passed around like a hot potato, put on hold more times than Clinton has stonewalled, and finally told that someone would call me back the next day. I of course never heard a word from anyone.

SOME DUMB GORE LETTERS

My friend received a smaller Gore package with just “Bill Clinton” on the outer envelope, using the same quite reasonable segmentation logic as the photograph mailing. I think there's a mistake here: The paper used for the letter looks expensive, which is out-of-tune with Gore's supposed environmental consciousness. Better to use something cheaper looking, and to pat yourself on the back for being a good guy, ecologically. Gore's direct marketing flacks, in fact, in a profound gaffe, use the recycled paper symbol without the words “RECYCLED PAPER.” Horrible communications practice—this particular logo, lacking, you would agree, the brand recognition power of Coca-Cola, needs the words to explain it.

Another letter, this one from Al himself: “As I travel across this great country, I am inspired everyday by Americans' famous determination and resolve.”

C'mon, Al, we're the richest, softest bunch of people since the halcyon days of pre-Caligulan Rome, for Pete's sake!

“I have just left Minnetonka, Minnesota...where I spent the day with approximately 900 students and their teachers...Spending a day with the students, teachers and staff...gave me great insight into how we can improve the way we teach our children and ensure their safety so they will be prepared for the future.

“Today, in the heart of the most important elections we have ever faced, I need to make sure that you are still on board...”

This will cost Gore money, simply because it's too incredible even for Americans to buy into. How can you call the year 2000 elections in rich, peaceful, post -Cold War America “the most important elections we have ever faced?” I mean, a good case can be made for these being the least important!

The Gore letter, in fact, is so disjointed, and so technically out of phase, that I can't help but think that Al himself, in one of his notorious bursts of micro-management, actually wrote the damned thing.

For example, after a page filled with homilies about Minnetonka and education, Al tells us that we also need to “preserve Social Security and Medicare...keep up the momentum of our strong economy...To compete long-term in a technology-driven global economy, America must have the best educational system in the world...”

And then, in the middle of all this blandness Al tells us that “...unlike George W. Bush, I will not sell out America's youth and America's future to the NRA, big tobacco lobbies and the powerful HMOs—all contributors to the Bush campaign.”

Much, much better to start out with all of this—the problem—and then propose solutions. Al starts with the solutions, and then in effect says, “Oh, yeah, and here's the problem we're trying to solve.”

The P.S. is really bad: “Let me know that you are still on board...” Evidently, this mailing is designed for people who haven't contributed for a while. Don't remind them of this—much better to be positive, and tell them how much their donations would be appreciated. Again, the wooden touch of Al himself seems visible in this mailing.

The response card is sort of dumb. “Yes!” is good—it's iconic, it's positive. “Yes Al!” is stupid—the displacement of the exclamation point away from “Yes” to “Al” really screws up the reader's ability to process this information.

HILLARY!

Dear reader, by the time you read this Hillary will either be history (at least temporarily) or she will be preparing to take up the cudgel for New York. Let's hope her cudgel-taking is better than her direct mail:

“URGENT UPDATE ENCLOSED...IMMEDIATE RESPONSE REQUESTED” is tried-and-true direct mail technique. But it sure reinforces the impression that Mrs. Clinton is one tough babe!

“REPUBLICAN PARTY KINGMAKERS HAVE SELECTED REPRESENTATIVE RICK LAZIO.”

Pretty terrif, no? This actually reaches back and pulls out American cultural attitudes towards authority, rooted deep in the American revolution itself. Again, one should never underestimate the importance of historical, literary, myth-ological, and biblical echoes when it comes to direct mail, ostensibly the most mundane of media.

“WE KNOW THAT MY OPPONENT WILL RECEIVE UNLIMITED FUNDING...”

Anecdotally, I must say I've never observed so much accusation on the part of both parties about “unlimited funding.” Must be the times, I guess.

Scale is 1 to 10. 1 = dreadful, 10 = terrific

Copy 9 (exquisitely manipulative, albeit often over-the-top)

Design 9 (cunning, for the most part)

Topography 9

Scanability 8

Offer/Call-to-Action 10

Clarity 1

Logic 1

Involvement 10

Net Index: 5.7