Why Didn't Hillary Darken Obama in This Ad?

[berni_mccoy]

Run time: 00:31 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9e7B4g1GMLY   Posted on YouTube: March 10, 2008 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: March 10, 2008 By DU Member: berni_mccoy Views on DU: 1056

 
Description from the video posting on YouTube:
Look at this video and compare it to her True Ad. Why didn't she darken Obama's face in this Ad? Probably because this Ad wasn't released before the Ohio election where race was important to more than 20% of the voters.

Note: This video is a direct posting of Hillary's own High-resolution file for the Ad downloadable from http://static.hillaryclinton.com/i/video/vids/ad_20080213_debate.zip

[trumad]

1. I gotta say....

Out of the thousands of posts that I've read on DU, this one leaves me completely speechless.

[berni_mccoy]

2. I know. It's hard to believe that a Democratic politician

Would engage in such behavior. But there it is. She did. She darkened video of him when it would make a difference.

[trumad]

5. no dude...

you read me wrong.

[rodeodance]

7. why do you continue to engage in this behavior---telling LIES!!

I know. It's hard to believe that a Democratic politician
Posted by berni_mccoy


Would engage in such behavior. But there it is. She did. She darkened video of him when it would make a difference.

[berni_mccoy]

9. Why do you have to lie about it? From FactCheck: "The Obama frames from the ad do appear darker"

[maddiejoan]

26. I notice your avatar of John Conyers is noticeably darker

why is that?

[berni_mccoy]

29. Nice try. Not even close to the point though.

[maddiejoan]

30. better try than your OP

which has zero validity and even less of a point to make.

[unapatriciated]

37. Fact check is not speechless....

In fact the poster misrepresents their conclusion and the two bloggers at Kos also said they found no fault with factchecks conclusions about the charges of racism. "Troutnut said he didn't "contest assertion that the netroots' accusation of race-baiting is ‘unsubstantiated,’ " and Jeff Cronin admitted the “Race-Baiting” headline on Kos "was phrased in starker terms than I would have liked." The poster is cherry picking statments to further inflame supporters of both Clinton and Obama.


"And in fact, when we compared the frames in the ad to frames from the debate video using the "eyedropper" tool in Photoshop image-processing software, we found that the frames in the Clinton ad are uniformly darker. We found no pronounced difference in the degree to which Obama's skin, as opposed to his tie, his shirt, or the backdrop was darkened.

We're not mind-readers, so we can't say whether or not the makers of this ad intended to engage in "race-baiting" or were "using racism to win" as some Obama partisans are claiming. Based on evidence at hand, we find those claims to be unsubstantiated. And the many potential differences between source footage, encoding manipulations, and other variables only make it less likely that any such attempt could be proven.

A final note: The last time we became aware of any clear example of digital manipulation was two years ago, when the Republican National Committee posted a Web image of Howard Dean with a hint of a little Hitler mustache. And charges of foul play were confirmed when the RNC posted a revised version, without the apparent mustache.

-by Emi Kolawole and Justin Bank

Update, March 6: We received several e-mails about our article that attempted to further the discussion. The two Kos bloggers who originally posted the story contacted us separately with thoughtful e-mails arguing generally that the matter deserves serious discussion but not challenging the substance of our article. Both said they found no fault with our conclusions about the charges of racism. Troutnut said he didn't "contest assertion that the netroots' accusation of race-baiting is ‘unsubstantiated,’ " and Jeff Cronin admitted the “Race-Baiting” headline on Kos "was phrased in starker terms than I would have liked."

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/did_clinton_darken_obamas_skin.html

Another blogger who posts under the handle Berni_McCoy on DemocraticUnderground.com falsely accused us of having "POSTED A DOCTORED VIDEO" of Clinton’s ad. Since his mistaken claims are attracting some notice in the blogosphere, we will point out his error here.

He compared the Windows Media video of the ad posted on our site with a QuickTime version of the ad that he obtained from Clinton’s campaign Web site. He then displayed frame shots from these two versions and stated "the difference is clear." He concluded that we are "completely wrong" or "directly falsifying the 'facts.' "

McCoy, however, falsely said that our Windows Media video is derived from the Clinton QuickTime version, which it is not. Our video is a copy of the high-quality video recorded by CMAG as it appeared on the air in Texas. So what McCoy imagines is evidence that we "doctored" video obtained from the Clinton Web site is actually evidence that supports what we said in the first place:Versions of the Clinton ad from different sources show different shadings, and the YouTube version on which the "racism" claim rests is the darkest of the lot."

[Rageneau]

3. Obama is a Muslim and that's why Hillary darkened his face.

People who do not like their candidate being lied about should not lie about other people's.

NEVER did Hillary (or her people) darken Obama's skin color. That was an nasty lie promulgated by the wannabe-wingnuts over at Daily Kos. It has been disproven as fully and as frequently as the "Obama is a Muslim" rumors. And yet, still we see it turning up here, day after day, at DU, where people are supposedly a little more honest than at Free Republic.

Consequently, I've decided to bring up the 'Obama is a Muslim' lie every time I see the "Hilary darkened his skin' lie, so that both lies will stay fresh in the public's minds.

It is better that both lies be believed than one be believed and the other not. Because both could determine the election, and, merit-wise, both lies are the same, (except the one About Hillary is fouler, because it intimates she is dishonest and racist.)

Either both lies should cease right away, or both lies should follow their candidate all the way to the convention. I hope other Hillary supporters will help me fight back against Obama campaign lies, by promising to mention the 'Muslim" rumor every time any of us sees the phoney "Hillary darkened his skin" lie --or any of the other standard anti-Hillary lies that backsliding Democrats have been spouting lately.

Fair, after all, is fair.

[berni_mccoy]

4. FactCheck even says Clinton's camp darkened the video.

They just don't know why.

Well, the video above says that they do it selectively. And timely. I wonder why?

[rodeodance]

6. Both of the obove posts say you are WRONG--SHAME ON YOU--YOU

were in gd-p doing the same thing.

[berni_mccoy]

8. rodeo, why do you insist in calling anyone who isn't a Clinton supporter a liar? From FactCheck:

"The Obama frames from the ad do appear darker than other video of Obama from the same event"

[rodeodance]

11. also says both look darkened. You are RACIALIZING this issue--when

you have NO prove.

[berni_mccoy]

14. If you compare the MSNBC Digital Source of the Debate to Clinton's Digital Source for the Ad

You would realize that they did indeed darken the video. FactCheck is comparing YouTube videos, which is meaningless.

[Rageneau]

12. FactCheck also says that Obama is definitely a Muslim.

I checked into what FactCheck says about this 'darkened skin' rumor, and Factcheck says that you are a big fat liar!

Yes, they checked into the 'darkened skin' story. But unlike what you say they concluded, they are adamant that Hillary's campaign did NOT darken any video!

See for yourself.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/did_clinton_darken_obamas_skin.html

But since you and I both know that many people don't read beyond an accusing headline, it's possible some lazy person read what you posted about Factcheck, and accepted it as truth instead of errant nonsense.

Consequently, because you cannot be bothered to seek out and to speak the truth, you have furthered a well-known lie, with the result that there are easy-to-fool people out here who STILL believe the 'darkened skin'lie you are telling.

I just hope those same gullible people are as willing to believe that Obama is a Muslim, because I intend to go on saying that he is over and over as long as I hear lies about Hillary.

If we are going to reject a candidate based on lies others tell about them, then let's hear ALL the lies told about ALL the candidates, including Barack Hussein Obama, that famous Black Muslim.

[berni_mccoy]

15. Why don't you quote the article: "The Obama frames from the ad do appear darker"

Right from the article. What they say is that they can not conclude WHY they darkened it.

[Rageneau]

36. I don't quote that line because I am smart enough to know it is not germane.

You want to lie, so you nitpick one sentence from Factcheck's report and ignore the rest of it -- the part that says (and I quote):

Others will speculate about the Clinton campaign's intentions and motives, as they already have. But without further evidence to the contrary, we see no reason to conclude that this is anything more than a standard attempt to make an attack ad appear sinister, rather than a special effort to exploit racial bias as some Obama supporters are saying.

[unapatriciated]

38. berni berni bernie...

did you think some of us would not read the entire article? Factcheck even addressed YOUR incorrect assumptions. To continue cherry picking statements to further your own agenda is wrong, I don't think your candidate would approve. I know mine wouldn't. btw I voted for Edwards.

[rodeodance]

10. Why did Obama Girl darken his image? (debunking of racism claim against Hillary ad)

more details here including factck.

Forum Name General Discussion: Primaries
Topic subject Why did Obama Girl darken his image? (debunking of racism claim against Hillary ad)
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5002249#5002249
5002249, Why did Obama Girl darken his image? (debunking of racism claim against Hillary ad)
Posted by Nine on Mon Mar-10-08 11:03 AM

http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2008/03/kos-is-klown-or-why-did-obama-girl.html

[berni_mccoy]

13. Because ObamaGirl is not a Pro? Clinton's Ad People Are? They know what they are doing.

[Rageneau]

16. People who call Obama a "Muslim" know what they're doing also -- reporting the news.

Go on, keep repeating the well-known lie that Hillary's camp darkened Obama's skin in that video, and I will go on repeating the equally true, equally damaging 'fact' that Obama is a Black Muslim (probably masquerading as a quasi-Christian in order to get elected).

I hope people decide to vote against Obama because they believe him to be a Muslim -- just as I know Obama's people hope people will decide to vote against Hillary because of her 'underhanded tactics' -- like darkening this video she did not darken.

Next time, I hope Hillary's video editors stick a turban on BO's head and a Koran in his hands. If we're gonna keep up with the Obamans, we're gonna have to lie like there's no tomorrow.

[berni_mccoy]

22. "Obama is lucky he is black" -- Clinton Aide Ferraro

Still think they aren't engaging in any racist attacks?

Link here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5008021

[psychmommy]

35. she already did that

sent that pic to drudge.

[Catherine Vincent]

17. Time to put Bernie on ignore.

You're nothing but a liar and a racebaiter.

[berni_mccoy]

21. You are nothing but a denier of the truth.

[ACanadianLiberal]

34. You are a mentally ill person, we should ignore you graciously

[happygoluckytoyou]

18. More importantly.... why did the Obama ad flatten Hillary's chest?

[rodeodance]

19. Continuing to call Hillary racist with NO evidence is about as low as anyone can go!!

[berni_mccoy]

20. Who called her a racist? I certainly didn't. I'm asking why she didn't darken his face?

She darkened it in one, but not the other.

[rodeodance]

24. Your implications are sickening.

[berni_mccoy]

28. No. What her campaign is doing is sickening.

[berni_mccoy]

23. Almost forgot: "Obama is lucky he is black" -- Clinton Staffer Ferraro

Your candidate's team is full of racist b.s.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5008021

[rodeodance]

25. Stick to the topic of OP.

[berni_mccoy]

27. You've made race the topic now. live with it.

[ACanadianLiberal]

31. You know what, what does Hillary want to fake up now?

It's her own skin. I guess it would be very helpful for her to paint her skin blacker at least than Obama's.

You have gone way too far on this pity thing. You are proving yourself a racist. The point you are trying to make is that Mr. Obama is whiter. You are worrying about him not white enough.

[berni_mccoy]

32. Man, what is it going to take. Clinton had reasons to darken his skin. This ad aired just before

The Ohio election, a state where 20% of the voting population says race is a factor in their choice.

It's not about pity. It's about Clinton using racial fears to get what she wants.

[BrklynGreenDog]

33. What is it going to take? Uh... objective fact checking?

I simply went to Google Image and searched on Obama. More then half the images that came up were darker than the image you claim was intentionally darkened, and many were wider, including photos from pro Obama sites! Its obvious, GOOGLE ENGINE IS RACIST!!!!! How else do you explain its deceitful non-darkening!

Some people on this site are beyond belief, and below a minimum level of coherent thought. And you people want to mock the wing-nuts? Please, have at 'em...

Go ahead now... try it yourself... it takes less time than your rant... go on...

[unapatriciated]

39. What will it take...

to get SOME DUers to stop with the "he said she said" bullshit and get back to the issues...Iraq War, Economy and Healthcare?????

Factcheck has addressed your accusation personally and you still ignore that.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/did_clinton_dar...

Another blogger who posts under the handle Berni_McCoy on DemocraticUnderground.com falsely accused us of having "POSTED A DOCTORED VIDEO" of Clinton’s ad. Since his mistaken claims are attracting some notice in the blogosphere, we will point out his error here.

He compared the Windows Media video of the ad posted on our site with a QuickTime version of the ad that he obtained from Clinton’s campaign Web site. He then displayed frame shots from these two versions and stated "the difference is clear." He concluded that we are "completely wrong" or "directly falsifying the 'facts.' "

McCoy, however, falsely said that our Windows Media video is derived from the Clinton QuickTime version, which it is not. Our video is a copy of the high-quality video recorded by CMAG as it appeared on the air in Texas. So what McCoy imagines is evidence that we "doctored" video obtained from the Clinton Web site is actually evidence that supports what we said in the first place:Versions of the Clinton ad from different sources show different shadings, and the YouTube version on which the "racism" claim rests is the darkest of the lot."