VOTE IN THE AD AGE WEEKLY ONLINE POLL BACKGROUND: Ever since George Bush was reelected on a platform of “moral values,” the Democratic Party has been gnashing its teeth over whether to embrace a stronger public stance on “morality.” The word, as vague as it is loaded, has been one of great concern for advertising executives as well. Shortly after the election, industry authorities expressed concern that public sentiment was turning toward more conservative values that could ultimately curtail the use of edgy advertising creative material that is now viewed as the primary tool for cutting through market clutter. In recent weeks, Illinois Democratic Sen. Barack Obama took an unusually strong stand on the new Kaiser Foundation study that detailed how the amount of sexual content on prime-time TV has steadily increased since 1998. Sen. Obama blamed media companies for “coarsening the culture” with their content. Since his election as National Democratic Party Chairman earlier this year, Howard Dean has pressed Democratics to take up the call for a more moral America. In his latest round of TV and radio apperances, he is explaining that “Democrats should not be afraid to speak about moral values. We are the party of America's values.”THIS WEEK'S QUESTION: Is Howard Dean correct in saying the Democrats need to focus on a morality message?
VOTE & COMMENT for possible publication in next week's issue of the Advertising Age print edition at http://www.adage.com/poll.cms
(free registration required)
What an asinine question. The word, morality, is loaded with all sorts of connotations, mostly religious in nature, and mostly unfortunately mouthed by the faux Christian evangelicals so assiduously courted by Karl Rove. Even if one were to restrict one's definition of morality to what the Christian New Testament proscribes as dogma, the Bush platform of 'moral values' reveals itself to be nothing but cynical advertising chatter aimed at these same Christian fundamentalist mouth-breathers. The New Testament calls for Christians to give away their wealth to the poor, eschew marriage and family, and devote one's life to spreading the gospel of Christ. I'm not familiar with too many politicians who actually follow the precepts of Christ.
Rant against faux Christians aside, I sincerely hope that Dean and Obama are not calling for the U.S. to become a Christian Taliban-like nation, but rather to reclaim the word, morality, to mean virtuous conduct. Adequate health care for all U.S. citizens, stewardship of the earth's natural resources (aka environmentalism), freedom from starvation, want, even the guarantee to receive education, if desired, are moral concerns that the United States government should be interested in achieving. Dean better not be calling for mashups of Church and State, or we are moving to Vancouver, economy be damned.
Pastafarianism better not be ignored either.
Tags: Advertising, /Barrack_Obama, /Chicago, /FSM, /Howard_Dean, /religion, /taliban
I always wonder whose "morality" they're talking about.
Also, I have a cure for the Problem of TV: if you don't like what's on it, don't watch it.
But, hey, I'm not in charge.
Dean and Obama don't glow with the same brightness for me as for others. They strike me as somewhat daring, but in the end, competent politicians; that's as close to a compliment as I can get. And Obama vs. Keyes was a joke from the gitgo, so where, really, is Obama's triumph in that? Yes, great speech at the Dem Convention, but there were a lot of great speeches that night, and bush is still president.
You say,
"I sincerely hope that Dean and Obama are not calling for the U.S. to become a Christian Taliban-like nation, but rather to reclaim the word, morality, to mean virtuous conduct."
Duh! Double-duh!