Biden’s run for president in his own right twice, and never got so much as a single delegate to show for it. He’s a motor-mouth, but he doesn’t bring charisma to the ticket. That’s Obama’s long suit. So even if there is some substance behind the de-emphasis of Biden’s name, that’s not really a surprise, nor much of a ground for criticism.

If they picked font sizes and colors based on prolixity, neither guy’s name could be contained by any bumper-sticker anyway.

You don’t want GO BAMA to confused with GOBAMA.

You know who would have been the best VEEP choice for Obama with his message of Changing Washington?
Michelle Obama.

Doug on August 24, 2008 at 3:39 PM

I had this idea a couple of days ago. I can’t find it right now, or else I would give you a link.

Are they embarrassed already by Biden, or can Obama brook no encroachment on his share of the spotlight?

Yes (as in, both). The encroachment thing is obviouos; but they are certainly not thrilled with Biden, while evidently finding any other option to be worse, for various reasons. There aren’t any other messiah’s out there to be his vice-messiah. So he had to settle for this false-prophet. It reamins to be seen how well the false-prophet will assume his designated role as the messiah’s personal fluffer.

For the record: I called Obama/Biden on August 18. However, as that photoshop shows, I assumed Barack Obama’s campaign would design a poster similar in style to the posters of the past. Seems I underestimated Obama’s ego. Captain Ed goes……

O(s)AMA
BI(nla)DEN

If I were a conspiracy theorist, I’d say it was an inside job.

And that I question the timing.

As these revelations come out. THEY WILL CHANGE BIDENS NAME INTO WHITE LETTERS. Any bets?

The Obama Campaign, ALWAYS IN DAMAGE controll mode.

…Obama bin Biden…
Romeo13 on August 24, 2008 at 10:39 AM

he he

Have you become so hyper-sensitive, looking for something that isn’t there?

You’re spending far too much time looking at something completely irrelevant

or can Obama brook no encroachment on his share of the spotlight?

that’s kinda what I thought at the 3 AM text message..

didn’t want to share his spotlight with anyone..

Then on second thought.. Obama’s website is ‘powered’ by hope.. maybe Biden is less hopeful (or more hopeless, 6 of one, half a dozen of the other) than Obama.. hence the darker shade..

How could he NOT pick Hillary?

It you’re looking for an abstract symbol, the O logo is a contrivance, a made-up herald or badge, and from an aesthetic perspective not as abstract as the Nazi swastika, which had been adopted by the German proto-Nazi Thule Society and has its own peculiar history. The O logo uses the letter, the flag, and a landscape format that manage to be both softy-puffy attractive and, to me at least, off-puttingly weird at the same time. Part of what’s creepy about it is that it’s so manipulative in its attempt to make us feel comfortable, removing all threatening sharp edges from this out-of-nowhere and -nothing individual and what he has in store for us. It’s a pure product of contemporary graphic arts, semiotics, and marketing – in other words it really does symbolize (both connote and express) the true socioeconomic and cultural roots of the Obama phenomenon. The Greens in Germany had roughly parallel social and cultural roots, and used some similar formats and branding strategies, but were only inadvertently through a few of their early leaders (like Petra Kelly) a highly “personalized” political movement.

Oh well, I’m getting that queasy feeling again. Time for lunch.

CK MacLeod on August 24, 2008 at 3:07 PM

My main point was just that you don’t have to risk some smarty-pants invoking the Godwin’s Law cliche on you by going right to the Nazis.

No, just because Hitler is invoked, doesn’t mean the game is over and we have to take our ball and glove and go home. I invoked it because, as I thought I very simply said, I can’t think of a recent association of a symbol and a person, campaign, or political party, except for the swastika. For me that’s just a subjective fact on my part, for better or worse. And you haven’t given me a counterexample. So let’s put Mein Kampf up on the shelf but not stop talking just because the swastika is the only other political symbol I can think of right now. The elephant and donkey are not meant to inspire as the Obama symbol, and the swastika, were meant to. Is there some other contemporary symbol I’m missing? Help me out here. And keep Mike Godwin out of it.

Actually, the Donkey is relevant: It’s a conventional symbol that we don’t see as controversial and threatening or positive or negative, or even notice, or much understand. It just is, like a sports team’s moniker that may or may not mean much of anything to anyone. The democratic revolutions of the last few years have had their own team-names: Rose, Orange, Cedar, etc. Frequently, in countries where elections are mandated but illiteracy is high, voters choose from among printed party symbols.

I could go on, but my point isn’t that there’s nothing unique about Obama’s branding, or that there isn’t something discomfiting about it. There is something unusual and yet peculiarly American about the O symbol, since it’s both personal and corporate at the same time. My main point was just that you don’t have to risk some smarty-pants invoking the Godwin’s Law cliche on you by going right to the Nazis.

CK MacLeod on August 24, 2008 at 2:38 PM

Parties and individual politicians, as well as sometimes overlapping religious and other cultural figures and movements, have deployed symbols and icons of different types going back to the beginnings of civilization.

I haven’t seen them recently. In other countries a party may associate itself with a symbol for voting purposes, but in that case most of the populace may be illiterate so voting by putting a mark on a symbol is helpful to them. Can you give a contemporary example of a symbol associated with a candidate or political party? Donkey and elephant, don’t bother with those. Or a cross for a Christian-related party. I suppose the Green party has a symbol.

Parties and individual politicians, as well as sometimes overlapping religious and other cultural figures and movements, have deployed symbols and icons of different types going back to the beginnings of civilization. What’s unique about Obama’s, if anything, is how totally contrived it is, and perhaps the fact that his personal symbol has been advanced in a way that effaces party symbols, but Nazis and corporations didn’t make up the idea of having logos. We can credit or criticize the O-Team for their media strategy, but let’s not go overboard.

terryannonline on August 24, 2008 at 1:33 PM

I don’t think they’re conveying embarrassment with Biden as much as they’re communicating subordination. I think any VP choice would get the same visual treatment.

As for the website address, that’s a convention they established months ago. It’s always less important than the headline text whether it’s “Judgment to Lead” or whatever is the topic of the day. As the “more info” line it occupies an appropriate, and consistent, space and weight.

I’m sure you’re correct that Obama has a young marketing team, along with some old pros, but the only innovation they’ve come up with is applying branding strategies long-established in other product sectors to the selling of a political candidate. That’s probably also the source of their biggest gaffes – they are not working with an accurate model of the target audience, they think the audience is themselves. Big mistake but not all that uncommon even among the most experienced.

You’re right about the Obamessiah branding and its sophistication, but I would make the argument that the McCain campaign’s response – especially via the web ads beginning with DR NO and up to and including THE ONE II – has shown an even higher level of sophistication, in particular an understanding of pop art subversiveness. Using the language of pop culture, and the form of the internet mash-up that can be passed on “virally” and also disseminated through the old media, they’ve pegged the Big O as just one more fad, one more product, one more media-friendly facade that may or may not have a real building behind it.

Foreshadowing this approach were independent initiatives like the “Is Obama the Messiah?” web site, and that great “Building a Religion” music video (I presume you’ve seen it). The web ad campaign is truly a new thing in politics, however – newer in a lot of ways than corporate branding.