PARC Analysis "Who Knows"

The Republican National Committee (RNC), Bush-Cheney ticket, and like-minded conservative organizations read an opportunity when John Kerry's October 10, 2004 , interview with the New York Times Magazine was released. In the interview, Kerry talks about his desire to lessen the threat of terrorism, saying, ''We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance.” CNN reported the next day that the Bush-Cheney campaign planned to make a campaign advertisement based on those remarks. This began a “war of words” on both sides that has continued as Bush frequently speaks about the “nuisance of terrorism” on the campaign trail.

The visual and aural elements of the ad inspire a sense of horror and fear in the audience. The simplicity of the ad contrasts sharply with the modern, technologically-advanced ads that were released by both sides. The historical style resembles war-time propaganda films, making it stand out from the large variety of ads saturating the swing states. Inspiring a sense of fear and horror in viewers is not a new practice to campaign advertisements. Nelson and Boynton (1997) discuss how color schemes and images can work together to create a sense of fear in the audience. These ads have historically relied on a mixture of black and red images and text, as the RNC uses throughout this ad.

The ad begins on a sinister note with a large shot of John Kerry. The filter is a harsh red and a shadow dulls the scene and blackens the area around Kerry. His mouth moves slowly, while his eyes look almost black. Kerry is looking directly into the camera, with a nondescript woman sitting behind him in the audience. Closer examination of the shot reveals that it was a scene from the second presidential debate. An audience member asked Kerry to look into the camera and promise he would not raise taxes. Parry-Giles (2000) notes that images in the media are manipulated from their original context to fit other narratives (213). In the original context of this shot, Kerry is speaking about taxes, not terrorism. To see the effect of the filter and shadow, visit the Washington Post's Media Center for the original footage.

In the next scene, Kerry's frozen face from the previous shot appears framed by a black box in the upper left corner. The background is a huge splash of red, fading into black edges of the screen. In this setting, Kerry appears demonic. Large, thick, capital black letters fill up the screen, stating, “ TERRORISTS ARE A NUISANCE,” quickly replaced by “ TERRORIST LIKE GAMBLING AND PROSTITUTION.” With Kerry's demonic face still frozen in the corner, “ TERRORISTS A NUISANCE?” appears, growing in size. The scene this flashes blood red, signaling a change in the ad.

In the next scene, a figure in a headdress and white pants is sitting against a rocky background, adjusting a weapon. The image is distorted and the audience is unable to determine exactly what the presumed terrorist is doing. A brownish-red filter also works to distort the image. Huge, blood-red letters, stating “WAR” appear over the screen and remain as the scene changes to a group of masked men, sitting in a cave with presumed hostages. The word “WAR” is replaced by “MURDER” during this scene. The visual with the text create a sense of distress in the audience, who understand that terrorism is an important issue for the country.

The blood-red background with picture of the demonic John Kerry reappears with bold, black, capital letters stating “ AGAINST TERRORISM ” and “ IS JOHN KERRY WEAK?” As the narrator begins to answer the question “ JOHN KERRY VOTED AGAINST BODY ARMOR ” fills the screen. This is replaced by “ TERRORISM WHAT WOULD JOHN KERRY DO ?” The ad ends with black and white text stating the RNC is responsible for the content of the ad. The visual text does not match the narration exactly, but gives an arguably damaging summary of Kerry's “soft” handling of terrorism.

The narration and music play an important role in the ad, complementing the visuals by building suspense. The narrator is a man whose deep, harsh voice makes the listener feel uneasy. His slow, deliberative pace and low tone reinforces the visual attacks being made. He is accusatory and questions Kerry's competence on what is considered the most important issue this election.

The word choice also reinforces the ad's intentions. “John Kerry” and different forms of “terrorist” are both used four times in 31 seconds, as the narrator reminds the audience of Kerry's “weak” positions against them. Arguably, if John Kerry is weak against terrorism, he will make a “weak” president that will not be able to overpower the grave danger terrorist pose. The end of the ad goes beyond the “flip-flop” theme to a question of intelligence: “What would John Kerry do as President? No one knows. John Kerry doesn't even know.” The question of competence has been raised about Bush during this election, but the RNC turns it around to build doubt about Kerry's ability to be a strong president.

The music also works to build suspense and horror within the ad. A muted drum beats throughout the ad, while non-melodic trumpet notes build an ominous sense of dread in the listener. When the narrator questions Kerry's policy on terrorism, off-tune notes reinforces the disdain and contempt in his voice.

“We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance," the Massachusetts senator said. Bush has been telling supporters at rallies that he couldn't disagree more. "Our goal is not to reduce terror to some acceptable level of nuisance," he says. "Our goal is to defeat terror by staying on the offensive."

Excerpt from Rudy Giuliani's remarks on a conference call to Bush-Cheney 2004 headquarters:

I'm wondering exactly when Senator Kerry thought they were just a nuisance. Maybe when they attacked the USS Cole? Or when they attacked the World Trade Center in 1993? Or when they slaughtered the Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972? Or killed Leon Klinghoffer by throwing him overboard? Or the innumerable number of terrorist acts that they committed in the 70s, the 80s and the 90s, leading up to September 11?

Sen. John Kerry has just explained, clearly and lucidly, the difference between the Democratic and Republican approaches on how to fight terrorism: He told the New York Times Magazine that, as a "former law-enforcement person," he knew that we could not wipe out terrorism, but hoped we could repress it until it became a "nuisance," not a mortal threat. Kerry's likely secretary of State, Richard Holbrooke, chimed in, saying the War on Terror can only metaphorically be a war, like other "wars" against poverty, drugs or crime.

Ad Analysis

Ad Context