I nominate the current iPhone 7 ad for a Daisy Award

For lack of a proper term, I’m calling it the “Daisy Principle” because I heard it described when Seattle’s ACT theater group mounted a play “Daisy,” which had its run last summer. It was all about the Daisy Ad, famously used by Lynden Johnson to defeat Barry Goldwater in the 1965 presidential elections. Here’s a link to that original TV ad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDTBnsqxZ3k

The play is about the creation of that ad, and focuses quite a bit on the theories of Tony Schwartz, a sound designer who came up with the original concept for the ad. Part of his theory was that there was no need to name the target of its attack. People, he argued, were already afraid Goldwater might be a loose canon, so there was no need for names or facts, the audience would fill in the blanks. An example of this phenomenon, put forth in the play, is counting one, two, three, and your brain auto-fills “four.”

            A reviewer, quoting from the play, put it like this: “our brain actively co-constructs our reality.” The idea was to create a “fact” out of thin air, by connecting to audience emotions rather than persuading them with actual details. “The most successful campaigns don’t control our minds—they reflect our feelings back at us. We don’t go with the product or president we understand, we go with the product or president who makes us feel most understood.” I’ll leave it to you to ponder how that 1965 concept fits modern times.

            Here, I’m focusing on a bit of word play: the Daisy Ad is known as the first political attack ad, that is, the first negative ad on TV. Moreover, it employs the use of negative space to accomplish its negative goal. Therein lies the pun and the principle. The ad is spare, like tight poetry. Jazz music is all about negative space when they play everything but the real note, forcing our brains to hear a melody that our ears did not. In typography, negative space fonts also rely on our brains to fill in the blanks. They look like this:

There is no S here, we create it in our mind.

            It’s that poetic use of negative space, coupled with a reliance on emotion to conjure fact, that I’m calling the “Daisy Principle.” I think the all time best Daisy ad would have to be the original Apple Macintosh 1984 ad, directed by Ridley Scott. It was intensely Daisy, a heavy attack ad with great use of negative space and emotional appeal. To watch that ad, click here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtvjbmoDx-I

Unlike the original Mac ad, the current iPhone 7 spot is not an attack ad at all. Nonetheless, it effectively relies on our brains to fill in what isn’t being said. And for that, and reasons I’ll describe below, I’m nominating the current Apple iPhone 7 ad for a Daisy Award. I’m not lauding the iPhone 7 here, but the advertising or movie-making technique used to promote it. The iPhone ad has great editing, pure poetry, and is definitely in the spirit of Daisy. If you want to watch the ad, click here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=La4HRfL5tV4

           The music is “La Virgen de la Macarena.” She is patron of bullfighters and this is their classic song. It sets a heroic tone of courage, confidence and style. The man’s iPhone sits in a puddle, next to his drink. We, the audience, without claim or warranty, assume the phone can take it. He turns up the volume and the bass notes make waves in the standing water, while sound fills the diving pool amphitheater. The glint of sun, reflected off the face of his iPhone, visually reinforces the man’s sonic connection to the tiny device far below. Through his perfect dive the music track soars, even as he plunges below the surface, where in real life, even loudspeakers would be obscured. It’s an editing convention we’ve all been trained to accept. We were listening to a sound track but our brain heard an iPhone playing by the pool. The underwater sequence is the finger snap that releases us from hypnotic bondage, while the orchestra and the final splash on the phone quickly and gloriously returns us safely to where we started, happy but changed. The ad relies on no statistics or facts. It’s pure greater-than-life movie magic. As our minds filled in the convincing details, we sold the product to ourselves.

            I love how sparely this ad was edited. The rousing music is truncated perfectly. Each visual cut moves the action just enough and sells the story. Tension mounts and releases with a perfect landing. “Stereo Speakers on iPhone 7, Practically Magic” reads the end titles, but the magic was in the movie making.

            I’m quite sure I wouldn’t have appreciated the iPhone ad’s technique nearly so much if I hadn’t seen the play, “Daisy.” Proof, I suppose, of the value to be found in live theater. 

Remembering a Positive Future

The first time American voters broke my heart was in 1968, when they voted in Richard Nixon. He was a red-baiting racist hater, whose right-wing politics were as ugly as that guilty scowl he wore. I couldn’t believe that Nixon, oh fucking Nixon was elected.

 

It was much like today, where the Democrats weren’t all that much better. In the streets we were chanting “Hey, Hey LBJ, How many kids did you kill today?” Dry Balls Humphrey was the Democrats’ more-of-the same candidate, so the country went for Nixon, the right-wing asshole, whose lying lips promised a “secret plan to end the war.” That, as you might expect, turned out to be a huge escalation in bombing, the invasion of Cambodia, and the rest.

 

Many stepped up to join the movement, in one aspect or another, and the battle raged on many militant fronts. Here’s how it turned out: Although he initially very heavily escalated the war against Viet Nam, eventually Nixon had to shut the war down with a complete American retreat. Nixon also ended the Draft.

 

Nixon presided over the defeat of 30 years of US foreign policy against China. After the US couldn’t beat China on the battlefields of Korea, our policy had been to isolate China using trade embargos, and preventing China from joining international organizations, like the United Nations. That all finally fell apart under President Nixon, and China burst out of the box. Nixon even looked defeated when he was over there shaking Mao’s hand, heh, heh, “opening China.” We also got détente with the Soviet Union under that Republican Nixon, and the first nuclear arms deals (SALT I and then the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty).

 

Domestically, the Nixon years saw the beginning of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), passage of the Clean Air Act, the initiation of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the National Environmental Policy, which required environmental impact statements for Federal projects. Meanwhile, the Federal government continued to enforce desegregation in the South, as we were struggling to put the death knell to Jim Crow. You can bet that none of those victories were right-wing agenda items!

 

For our side, fighting wasn’t easy. Nationalism, and all sorts of divide and conquer are tough things to go up against. Hardhats against hippies. White against black. The Black Panthers were being gunned down, African Americans were oppressed, but they weren’t the only ones who suffered from the effects of racism. For a while in those days it wasn’t uncommon in Chicago for the police to drop white activists off into ghettos ruled by the Blackstone Rangers, a black gang. Nobody official cared what happened next. I was in a vet’s group with a Native American Army stockade guard. He was used by the prison administration to beat up white anti-war prisoners, which he willingly did, because of the hatred he had developed while growing up in racist America.

 

Divide and conquer was--and is--the low road, and it’s ugly. Like today, all too many people back then bought in to the scowl. But many more came to our side. The Army became unreliable, the country all but ungovernable. Nixon finally resigned in disgrace. We kept détente, and the nuclear treaty. We welcomed China, pushed the last helicopters into the seas off Viet Nam. We still have OSHA and the EPA, and Rock n Roll is here to stay.

 

The Nixon years are proof that we can win great victories after losing an election. Trump is all about divide and conquer, all about the scowl. Michael Moore, the lefty film maker, described Trump as a hand grenade thrown into mainstream politics by disgruntled voters. I kind of think that's a good analogy. If Clinton had won, we would have had four more years of stalemate on domestic policy, and a more hawkish foreign policy, but the legions of Democratic Party faithful would have stood down, making it hard to build a movement that really pushes things in a positive direction.

 

Trump makes shifty-eyed Nixon look honest, but we are way ahead of where the movement was at this point back in the 60s. For one thing, it’s not jocks against the peaceniks any more. The message coming out of American sports is the high road; of inclusion, team spirit, and racial unity. Some professional athletes are leaders of today’s movement.

 

Lately, my wife and I have been watching the Seattle Seahawks football games each week at our neighbor's house. A couple games back, the Hawks were defensively on the one yard line, which they are famous for defending. The other team was first and goal, which meant they had 4 tries to move the ball that final yard. The Seattle defensive line held, try after brutal try. The team motto of "defend every blade of grass" was in play here and through shear force of will, the Hawks kept them from scoring. That's the attitude being bantered about in Seattle with regard to Trump.

 

We are, I think, moving into a period of dramatically increased struggle with the possibility of significant progress. Historically, it seems that high points in movement foment are accompanied by leaps in art and culture as well. I can just feel the 60s coming on again. We didn't win every struggle back then, but my generation really did change the political landscape, even with a Republican president. Tough as it was, we proved it can be done. Many paid a price, but we had a great time doing it.

 

You know, in some ways, being an activist in my early years gave me a purpose, made me feel my life was dedicated to something bigger than myself. I'm pretty sure WW II did the same thing for my father’s generation. Things have been building up these last few years and now the Battle for the Soul of America might well give today’s youth that sense of sacrificing for something bigger, which would be a good thing for society in general, and a great benefit for the individuals involved. I feel like my life meant something, that I made a difference. That's a good feeling, and I wish it on the youth of today. They face many challenges and probably need all the good feelings they can get. 

Thoughts based on the WA caucus results

Bernie carried the WA State caucuses, winning 72%. The bigger story is that here in King County, the most populous county, the bastion of Seattle liberalism, Bernie only got 64%. That means that those Hinterland Democrats, the ones who actually rub shoulders with Republicans, voted overwhelmingly for Bernie. They must have voted the Bern by 85 or 90% to drag his state average up to 72%. They live among Republicans and in their collective wisdom, almost to a voter, they think Bernie has the best shot at beating the GOP candidate.

When big change is brewing, the middle erodes as the population polarizes. The "same-o same-o," is untenable, so both the left and the right have seen a flood of voters surging their way. Objectively, one side represents the future, the other the past. So when they each gather their strength the one side suffers bouts of desertion, and the other wins by a knockout.

Wouldn't you love to see a Bernie vs Butt Trumpeter contest? Bernie, the straight shooter, consistent, dignified and principled vs Mr. See Me Comb Over. A revolutionary situation is commonly defined as when the people can't go on living in the same old way, and the rulers can't go on ruling in the same way either. We're pretty much there on both counts. Think about the seeming suddenness of the gay rights sea change. Sure, there's more to fight in that regard, but we just went through the most amazing transformation. The future's on a roll.

Bernie, the social democrat vs the guy who represents all the lack of vision and empty, mean bravado that the Republican Party has come to embrace. In that race everyone becomes a Sandernista. And then runs every one of those obstructionist ass-holes out of Washington DC once and for all.

Of course, if voting actually changed anything, they'd make it illegal, which pretty much sums up the Republican strategy over the years, maybe a hint at something. This time around I expect them to count on terrorist bombings to "panic the herd" to the right, but that shows how desperate they are. Those guys are dinosaurs, over-stepping the paleogenic boundary,  who don't know their time is past. Maybe this is the election where it all falls apart for them.

Those Hinterland Democrats, seeded in Republican communities, are our forward observers, our embedded intelligence team. They know the people we have to win over, and they backed Bernie massively, a peep hole into what time it is in America. Let Trump, with his trophy wife, take cheap shots at Mrs. Sanders. Every woman in the country will vote him right to hell. Maybe it takes a Trump to get a Bernie elected. So be it. The middle erodes and the greatly expanded peripheries put up the best they have, representing their dream of the future, and one side wins. Then appoints Supreme Court judges, and does the right thing, over and again. Those Hinterland Democrats can see the tsunami that saves America--and maybe the world. It's a tidal wave of Berniecrats.

Randy Rowland

celebrating Giordano Bruno, Feb 17, 1600

I made a card to send to my father, who instilled in me a love of science. I used the first photo in this series for the card. Then I sent some extra cards to kids and ran out of photos, so you have to settle for this email, originally written to be sent in time for the anniversary of Bruno's execution.

The text inside the card:

2/17/2016

On the anniversary of the execution of
Giordano Bruno in 1600, 

greetings:

Bruno was a Dominican friar who came to believe in the new findings of science, shortly after the dawn of the telescope. Among his beliefs, he thought the earth revolved around the sun, as described by Copernicus, rather than the earth being the center of the universe. He also believed the universe was infinite, with no center at all. Stars, he felt, were other suns, but very far away. Bruno even wondered if those other suns might have planets around them, same as ours. He refused to recant his “heretical” beliefs, and was burned at the stake by the Roman Inquisition, after about seven years in their prisons. Turns out, of course, that Bruno was correct. Giordano Bruno is widely considered a martyr of science.

Only 10 years after Bruno’s execution, Galileo, famous for his telescope, came under pressure from the Church for his Copernican beliefs. Knowing full well what became of Bruno, Galileo is said to have recanted his theories to avoid a similar fate. Galileo continued, however, to work on his scientific pursuits while under house arrest for the rest of his life.

As of January 2016, over 2,000 planets have been discovered orbiting Bruno’s “other suns.”

Giordano Bruno, 1548-Feb 17, 1600

to which I add, since an email can contain more than a greeting card:

You may remember his story from the Cosmos series. Bruno was a sometimes professor & philosopher, 

living outside of Italy (thereby avoiding the Inquisition).

He returned to Italy and was arrested by the forces of reaction, to face a 7 year trial and torture ordeal, but refused to recant.

On Feb 17th, 1600, Giordano Bruno, condemned by the Pope as a heretic, was burned at the stake.

On the very spot in Rome where he was put to the torch, there now stands a monument to Bruno, erected in the late 1800s in spite of objections from the Vatican. My photos were taken of that monument in Rome, back in 2004.

Keep the faith,

Randy

A Bias For Butter

     It was 1968. I was living underground, and after a few close calls with the law, I escaped to my hide-out. It was a cabin in the woods of Northern California, that somebody friendly to the movement had let us use. Aside from furniture, there was nothing in it except an old 1925 World Book Encyclopedia. For entertainment, while we were laying low, my wife, Sue, and I would sit in the glow of the fireplace each evening, reading that old encyclopedia to each other.

 

     We got all the way to “Butter” before I noticed something wrong. The entry for butter was an unfair rant against the newly created margarine industry. We were butter lovers, but the article was an attack masquerading as truth. From my perspective in 1968, that anti-margarine 1925 bias just reached out and slapped me in the face. After that, we went on to find other offending entries.

 

     I was forced to realize the encyclopedia—the ultimate trusted authority—was not the truth I always believed it to be. It was biased. And along with that thought came another; if the 1925 World Book was so biased, but folks back then couldn’t tell, then a new 1968 encyclopedia was probably just as biased, only I might not see it. I was too close, lacking the 50 years perspective I had on that dusty one.

 

     Like a lot of my generation, I had, step-by-step, lost respect for just about every American institution and authority figure. But until that moment, I’d always trusted the encyclopedia. It hurt to have my bubble broken by that butter bias. They say you have to hit bottom before you can claw your way back out of the hole, on the side of revolution. My disappointment in the encyclopedia was just about bottom.

 

     So now fast-forward to today, and we have Wikipedia. Not only can anybody with an internet connection search for anything they want, for free, but what makes it really cool is it’s an encyclopedia with a built-in mechanism to weed out the bias. Now I’m like most folks, I usually just skim the articles for a quick reference, but if you want to go deeper, you can see the arguments, follow the literature, and get down in it.

 

     I’ll never think of any sort of reference material as The Truth again. But I think Wikipedia is on a whole different level from things back in the day. It turns the old-fashioned encyclopedia into a sort of self-correcting and democratic Theory of Everything. So starting a few years back, when those little pop-ups ask for it, I give them money, while I remember hunkering in that hideout, so long ago, reading the World Book.

 

     This year, in addition to my donation, I bought a small bag of Wikipedia buttons to distribute as gifts to family and friends. With each button, I’ve told my story, and why I believe Wikipedia is such an improvement. I know it’s likely that only a knowledge geek will recognize the Wikipedia logo, I didn’t. But wear the button and perhaps it will rank you among the few. And if you’re yearning for something positive, some proof of human progress, something worth wearing a button about, here it is; Wikipedia.

Tarantino's new movie

We went to see Quintin Tarantino's latest, The Hateful Eight the other day. I had high hopes, given how much I liked Django Unchained. If you remember, in that one Tarantino put slavery smack dab in the middle of a cowboy western, where the biggest horror of the movie was slavery itself. (Hello-Texas was a slave state, but how often has that come up in westerns?) What's more, Tarantino carefully refused to apply his characteristic clown-act violence filter to slavery and earned my eternal respect. The Hateful Eight is not quite that cool, but still is a hell of a movie. Set just a few years after the Civil War, not in Texas, but rather in Wyoming or Montana or someplace cold and snowy, it stars Samuel L Jackson. Like Django, it's a hell of a ride, and all about race relations in America. 

It opened in select theaters in 70mm, a format that came and went in the 60s. Now it's in wide release in the more common digital format as well. We went to the 70mm version at the Pacific Place. I was flabbergasted when the ticket price, even with senior rate applied, was almost $15. The box office guy said, "Well, there's a $4 surcharge for the new format." I almost laughed myself off my feet, since 70mm is an atavistic format, hardly new. Once the flick started, I looked carefully to see what I predicted would happen. The screen was, of course, the same size as always. 70mm, which was twice as wide as the more standard 35mm wide-screen film format, had an aspect ratio that was relatively wide compared to the height. Projecting this 70mm film onto a standard modern screen meant they had to letterbox it, sort of like watching a regular "widescreen" movie which wasn't formatted to fit your old square TV. So really the 70mm thing was just hype, and an excuse to up-charge. I can sort of understand when theaters charge extra for 3D. They take 50¢ glasses, charge you $4 for them. OK, I know it's a rip-off, but sometimes I'm willing to pay the extra for the hope of flash-bang effects. But to charge $4 for a letter-boxed 70mm format is something akin to charging extra if the movie was shot in black and white, instead of color.  And the entire second half of the flick was shot indoors, where there was no chance of any sort of panorama anyway, unless you count two guys standing on opposite sides of the screen firing away at each other.

Format carping aside, I really liked The Hateful Eight. The Seattle Times only gave it a 2 star rating. Of course they only gave Django Unchained one star (and that film went on to win an Academy Award!). The Times clearly doesn't get Quinton Tarantino's views on race in America. I'd venture to say that if Hateful had been done by a black director, it would have garnered a better review. Hateful 8 is an excellent movie, Django was truly ground-breaking.

Randy Rowland