So, who won last night’s debate? The answer: “the people of America,” of course. Yes, it’s true: democracy has, in fact, been restored.

In all honesty, the debate is now making me rethink my candidate preferences, as there were several times where “my boy” spoke and I had the intense desire to smack my head against the cinder blocks that keep my bed up (it’s an IKEA frame).

As part of the YouTube/CNN debates last night, each Democratic candidate was asked to submit their own “YouTube-like” video segment. I thought it’d be interesting to take a closer look at each of these videos. How true do they stay to the medium? Did they use the opportunity well? Did the videos make them stand out a bit from the crowd, and has it prompted citizens to take any sort of action? Was it an opportunity used well, or squandered?

Let’s start, shall we?

Tier 1: Obama, Clinton, and Edwards

Obama: “Join Us”
Several videos, I expected the most out of. Obama’s was one of them, because of his long association with noted political media consultant David Axelrod. Slightly disappointed:

Besides the “lower third” that asks for supporters to “text CHANGE to OBAMA,” feels like your standard 30-second campaign ad, doesn’t it? I’m not sure about the music, the ad’s subject matter is unfocused and extremely broad/vague. Overall, my feeling is that it tries to accomplish too much: lays out Obama’s hopes for his possible presidency, gets people to SMS, and uses too many cuts in editing for it to seem organic or YouTube/like.

It’s not bad, but it’s not great.

My grade: B-

Clinton: “By The Numbers”
Hillary’s team come up with a more “organic” style of a YouTube video. Low-budget, no cuts, non-focus group tested (probably). It describes America’s biggest problems, by the numbers, and then argues that the best man for the job is sometimes a woman. Here it is:

Ah, yes. The “writing on white poster board” device. Where have I seen this before?

The answer is, of course, the music video for “Subterranean Homesick Blues” from 1965, a solid 18 years before I was born. It was innovative then, because other than some productions made by both Dylan and The Beatles, music videos wouldn’t be invented for another 16 years. Now, it’s just a tacky device.

Hillary, I know Bob Dylan. And you, ma’am, are no Bob Dylan.

My grade: B-

Edwards: “Hair”
Really, I’m inclined to believe that the Edwards camp was the only team to truly come up with something innovative, smart and true to the medium. As you know, John’s $400 haircut has gotten him into some hot water, and the Edwards camp want to position it as a distraction issue. Trying to leverage Edwards’ releases of policy plans, the campaign designed this ad to bring the focus to issues:

The ad itself is clever, poignant, and actually seems to make a big emotional impact upon myself. It’s not an “organic” ad, but instead, tries to appeal to “viral/punchy” tactics. The ad incorporates the “YouChoose” monicker (the name of the YouTube politics channel), and the Edwards website prominently displays the ad, alongside a nice little campaign donation form. Good form, sirs, good form! Makes me wonder how much of a role Joe Trippi had in this — as I’ve been saying, I expect Edwards’ videos to be spectacular, given Trippi’s past “media consultant” life.

However, I’m going to have to deduct a grade point for promising an “after the debate” webcast where you’d answer additional questions that were voted upon by JohnEdwards.com community members. Edwards was 45 minutes late, proceeded to answer merely two completely random questions (that were not voted upon), and then headed offline. The webcast was the main reason as to why this blog post was not written last night.

My grade: A B

Tier 2: Richardson, Dodd and Biden

Richardson: “Candidates”
Richardson has been airing some “humor-driven” campaign ads designed to separate him from the competition, and showcase his leadership experience. The campaign is banking on the fact that Americans choose governors to lead the country, and that he is the only candidate with executive experience. This one is no different:

The ad isn’t quite true to the medium. It feels like (and is, really) a traditional ad with a slightly offbeat plot. And I don’t know, it seems slightly defeatist to me. I think its sole purpose was the make people laugh. If that was the case, then the mission was accomplished. If the goal was to impress, I don’t think it did.

My grade: C+

Dodd: “White Hare”
Dodd has taken a more traditional ad approach, up until this point. His team decides to go for the humor, and tries to let people know that he’s really not that old…he just has white hair. Hey, it worked for American Idol Taylor Hicks, right?:

I don’t understand why there’s a rabbit here. I guess they were trying to be cute. White hare = red herring, I suppose? And overall, it is cute. I’m undecided about this one. I think it serves its purpose, but there’s no “wow” factor for me. It’s also completely un-”YouTube”-like, which is surprising, as Dodd has been one of the candidates that’s really gone ahead and embraced the YouTube video style.

My grade: C+ to B-

Biden: N/A
Biden’s ad does not appear on either his website or on YouTube. From what I can remember, it was a standard, traditional 30-second spot.

My grade: Three strikes. F.

Tier 3: Kucinich and Gravel

Kucinich: “Apply Directly to the Forehead”…I mean…”Text for Peace”
Let’s think about Kucinich’s goals here. If I were creating this ad, my goal would be to show everyone that, simply, he’s not annoying, and that he’s actually a respectable person. This is probably the campaign’s one shot of getting a large audience of viewers for any kind of ad. So, what’d his team come up with?:

At first, I thought this had to be a purposeful parody of the “Head On” commercials. Similar layout, same kind of repetition.

But then I thought about it, and I’m not so sure — why would you parody a year-old spot that has to be one of the most-hated commercials ever? Either way, it’s quite annoying. Thank you for reinforcing the stereotype.

They did get the whole “text message/SMS” thing going, however. I’ll give them credit for that.

My grade: D

Gravel: “30 second spot for CNN”
The fun thing about ex-Senator Mike Gravel is that he’s completely senile, and yet, sometimes he says something that makes you wonder if he’s the only sane one on the stage. Then he carries on, and you realize that…no, in fact, he’s quite crazy:

This ad seems to personify that. When I read the text on the right, and paired it with the words coming out of his mouth, I actually found him to be almost-rational and sensical. But without the text, however, the things that he opines on seem like the disjointed thoughts of a schizophrenic. No favors here.

My grade: C-

The winner in my book? Edwards.

Technorati Tags: YouTube, CNN, Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Richardson, Dodd, Biden, Kucinich, Gravel, ads, politics, 2008