Loading_border




79

Obama's 100 Days -- The Mad Men Did Well




Change Text Size a- | A+


The BBC's American television soap Mad Men offers a rare glimpse of the power of corporate advertising. The promotion of smoking half a century ago by the "smart" people of Madison Avenue, who knew the truth, led to countless deaths. Advertising and its twin, public relations, became a way of deceiving dreamt up by those who had read Freud and applied mass psychology to anything from cigarettes to politics. Just as Marlboro Man was virility itself, so politicians could be branded, packaged and sold.

It is more than 100 days since Barack Obama was elected president of the United States. The "Obama brand" has been named "Advertising Age's marketer of the year for 2008", easily beating Apple computers. David Fenton of MoveOn.org describes Obama's election campaign as "an institutionalised mass-level automated technological community organising that has never existed before and is a very, very powerful force". Deploying the internet and a slogan plagiarised from the Latino union organiser César Chávez - "Sí, se puede!" or "Yes, we can" - the mass-level automated technological community marketed its brand to victory in a country desperate to be rid of George W Bush.

No one knew what the new brand actually stood for. So accomplished was the advertising (a record $75m was spent on television commercials alone) that many Americans actually believed Obama shared their opposition to Bush's wars. In fact, he had repeatedly backed Bush's warmongering and its congressional funding. Many Americans also believed he was the heir to Martin Luther King's legacy of anti-colonialism. Yet if Obama had a theme at all, apart from the vacuous "Change you can believe in", it was the renewal of America as a dominant, avaricious bully. "We will be the most powerful," he often declared.

Perhaps the Obama brand's most effective advertising was supplied free of charge by those journalists who, as courtiers of a rapacious system, promote shining knights. They depoliticised him, spinning his platitudinous speeches as "adroit literary creations, rich, like those Doric columns, with allusion . . ." (Charlotte Higgins in the Guardian). The San Francisco Chronicle columnist Mark Morford wrote: "Many spiritually advanced people I know . . . identify Obama as a Lightworker, that rare kind of attuned being who . . . can actually help usher in a new way of being on the planet."

In his first 100 days, Obama has excused torture, opposed habeas corpus and demanded more secret government. He has kept Bush's gulag intact and at least 17,000 prisoners beyond the reach of justice. On 24 April, his lawyers won an appeal that ruled Guantanamo Bay prisoners were not "persons", and therefore had no right not to be tortured. His national intelligence director, Admiral Dennis Blair, says he believes torture works. One of his senior US intelligence officials in Latin America is accused of covering up the torture of an American nun in Guatemala in 1989; another is a Pinochet apologist. As Daniel Ellsberg has pointed out, the US experienced a military coup under Bush, whose secretary of "defence", Robert Gates, along with the same warmaking officials, has been retained by Obama.

All over the world, America's violent assault on innocent people, directly or by agents, has been stepped up. During the recent massacre in Gaza, reports Seymour Hersh, "the Obama team let it be known that it would not object to the planned resupply of 'smart bombs' and other hi-tech ordnance that was already flowing to Israel" and being used to slaughter mostly women and children. In Pakistan, the number of civilians killed by US missiles called drones has more than doubled since Obama took office.

In Afghanistan, the US "strategy" of killing Pashtun tribespeople (the "Taliban") has been extended by Obama to give the Pentagon time to build a series of permanent bases right across the devastated country where, says Secretary Gates, the US military will remain indefinitely. Obama's policy, one unchanged since the Cold War, is to intimidate Russia and China, now an imperial rival. He is proceeding with Bush's provocation of placing missiles on Russia's western border, justifying it as a counter to Iran, which he accuses, absurdly, of posing "a real threat" to Europe and the US. On 5 April in Prague, he made a speech reported as "anti-nuclear". It was nothing of the kind. Under the Pentagon's Reliable Replacement Warhead programme, the US is building new "tactical" nuclear weapons designed to blur the distinction between nuclear and conventional war.

Perhaps the biggest lie - the equivalent of smoking is good for you - is Obama's announcement that the US is leaving Iraq, the country it has reduced to a river of blood. According to unabashed US army planners, as many as 70,000 troops will remain "for the next 15 to 20 years". On 25 April, his secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, alluded to this. It is not surprising that the polls are showing that a growing number of Americans believe they have been suckered - especially as the nation's economy has been entrusted to the same fraudsters who destroyed it. Lawrence Summers, Obama's principal economic adviser, is throwing $3trn at the same banks that paid him more than $8m last year, including $135,000 for one speech. Change you can believe in.

Much of the American establishment loathed Bush and Cheney for exposing, and threatening, the onward march of America's "grand design", as Henry Kissinger, war criminal and now Obama adviser, calls it. In advertising terms, Bush was a "brand collapse" whereas Obama, with his toothpaste advertisement smile and righteous clichés, is a godsend. At a stroke, he has seen off serious domestic dissent to war, and he brings tears to the eyes, from Washington to Whitehall. He is the BBC's man, and CNN's man, and Murdoch's man, and Wall Street's man, and the CIA's man. The Madmen did well.

Susceptible Journalists

By Small, Brian at Apr 29, 2009 20:31 PM

Of the 64% of eligible voters that bothered, 52% voted for Obama, 46% for McCain. What percentage of the population believe{d|s} the branding? It makes you want to go back to Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent and countless web writings about how the 'mandarins' or intellectuals are most susceptible to PR propaganda, (sorry for the redundancies) How many regular people are as taken with the new brand? How much do they really expect???

No one knew what the new brand actually stood for. So accomplished was the advertising (a record $75m was spent on television commercials alone) that many Americans actually believed Obama shared their opposition to Bush's wars. In fact, he had repeatedly backed Bush's warmongering and its congressional funding. Many Americans also believed he was the heir to Martin Luther King's legacy of anti-colonialism. Yet if Obama had a theme at all, apart from the vacuous "Change you can believe in", it was the renewal of America as a dominant, avaricious bully. "We will be the most powerful," he often declared.

Perhaps the Obama brand's most effective advertising was supplied free of charge by those journalists who, as courtiers of a rapacious system, promote shining knights. They depoliticised him, spinning his platitudinous speeches as "adroit literary creations, rich, like those Doric columns, with allusion . . ." (Charlotte Higgins in the Guardian). The San Francisco Chronicle columnist Mark Morford wrote: "Many spiritually advanced people I know . . . identify Obama as a Lightworker, that rare kind of attuned being who . . . can actually help usher in a new way of being on the planet."

Reply this comment


1984

By Mason, Mark at Apr 29, 2009 17:15 PM

Oh, I needed to read this blog entry by Pilger today! Right on. Obama is a total sell-out. How he fails to take a moral position on waterboarding is disgraceful. He's a slick opportunist. No other word comes to mind than "opportunist" when thinking of American presidents. No on can reach the White House without exhibiting the appropriate obedience to corporate power and the military-industrial-congressional complex.

I would surely leave the US for parts unknown without Z-Space. Knowing that we're not alone is crucial to combatting cynicism and resignation. It's so painful to look at the corruption of American government. It's bad enough that the workplace is a tyranny of corporate masters. Has Obama no shame? Doesn't he have any part of his personhood which reacts violently to his own corruption. Doesn't he know that he's a sell-out. Doesn't Obams know that his behavior is inprincipled and mere opportunism? Doesn't Obama have any shame that he puts his rhetorical skills to use as a tool to cover up high crimes and misdemeanors? The corporate media is in collusion.

They really aren't "one of us." The US does have a power elite which has no moral footing. There are people unlike anyone I know. It's so hard to imagine anyone willing to drop bombs and pretend that it's okay for the past president to engage in torture, and to take money out of the pockets of the many to put in the pockets of the powerful bankers.

What happened to my country? FDR didn't do this during the depression. He put people to work. Where is the WPA (Works Progress Administration) when you need it?. Who stole my country?

Who stole my country? The only way to get it back is to organize resistance, but I don't see anyone in the streets. Where is everybody? Where are the unemployed, the homeless, and the exploited working poor?  The most disturbing element of modern life is that it's so quiet. 1984.

Reply this comment


Obama's 100 Days -- The Mad Men Did Well

By Forbes, Donald at Apr 29, 2009 07:09 AM

I don't know what to think of this column. Pilger is my favorite reporter. I have been a critic of Obama's foreign policy but hopefully this column was a little harsh. We will have to wait and see how some of the things Pilger predicted come to pass. The system demands some of the Obama's policies if he wants to remain effective. Hopefully he will see the error of his ways if enough people demand it.

FDR once said to a group whose policies he agreed with "I agree with you that this should be done now make me" A politician in this country has to be made to do the right thing. It is time to take to the streets.

Reply this comment

Comment_reply

Re: Obama's 100 Days -- The Mad Men Did Well

By Shapiro, Tali at May 09, 2009 14:34 PM

Donald,
Amy Goodman told the story of this quote of FDR. The rest of her story was that a group of people (I don’t remember the Issue) went up to Obama and told him their problem. Obama told them the FDR quote.

Frankly, I’ve got to snicker at both incidences. The people have to make their democratically elected leader do the right thing? The system must be flawed to begin with. I have to agree with you- take it to the streets- if you don’t now, you’ll do it later anyway, when you’ve got nothing to loose.

I don’t agree that this column is harsh. Maybe predictions should be kept to one’s self (if only not to give anyone ideas), but keep in mind that the majority of this article has already happened. Criminals, such as your president, my government, other governments, should be tried (they’d have to consider themselves lucky, because facing the angry mob would have been much less pleasant).

Reply this comment


Re: Obama's 100 Days -- The Mad Men Did Well

By Wolfe, Marthe at Apr 29, 2009 12:12 PM

Actually, it is way PAST time to take to the streets.

I drew up a blurprint for taking Washington DC on the plastic progressive site CommonDreams almost 3 years ago.

Folks whined and puled and sniveled that it wasn't convenient and that a few people might get killed.

Look what you have now

 

Reply this comment