Ad Analysis Ehrlich "More Time"

The central feature of Governor Ehrlich's ad is his use of "people in the street" testimony. Typical of his ads titled "Leader," "Still Changing Maryland," and "One Shot," he uses "typical" Marylanders to once again populate the ad in "More Time." A wide selection of people is present, incorporating African Americans, whites, the elderly, the middle aged, and the young adults of Maryland in this 30-second spot. The rapid-fire, snapshot symbolism of the ad encompasses a wide range of people, as "a quick shot of a white-haired woman may represent age. The part, in other words, will be substituted for the whole so that in a given period of time it will be possible to consider a larger number of wholes" (Stephens 1998, 185). A brief glimpse of each person allows the individuals to represent their own group. All of the representatives have one thing in common—a combined disappointment in Martin O'Malley's work as mayor of Baltimore. According to Amy Gutmann, it is their "mutual identification (which) draws individuals together to identify with politically relevant groups, sometimes in pursuit of instrumental ends" (Gutmann 2003,12). In spite of their cultural differences, they are drawn together because of their opposition to the apparent failed crime and education policies of Mayor O'Malley. Gutmann would call their ad a "coalescing of individuals around a shared instrumental goal that preceded the group's formation" (Gutmann 2003, 13). Such "people in the street" ads are often designed to create voter identification, providing "motivating reasons of mutual identification to organize politically" (Gutmann 2003, 15). Through this sense of distinctiveness, such ads often target the undecided voters in particular.

Mayor Martin O'Malley is clearly the villain in the ad. The spot openly criticizes Baltimore 's "rising crime rate," "schools (that) were out of control," and Mayor O'Malley's alleged blindness to the problems and stubborn refusal, the ad suggests, to accept Governor Ehrlich's proffered help. The ad asserts that Governor Ehrlich, in his role as hero, was willing to help Baltimore out of its educational challenges, but his efforts were completely rebuffed. "More Time" continues the O'Malley/Ehrlich themes of crime and education, and is the fourth Ehrlich campaign ad to extend the thesis that Mayor O'Malley makes negligent excuses that he just needs "more time" to accomplish his goals.

"More Time" is visually different from other Governor Ehrlich ads because, while it makes use of the "person in the street" format of direct address and close-ups, it also uses a great deal of movement, flashbulb lighting, and an unpleasant mixture of sounds. The ad is at times unsettling, as if to "purposely disorient the viewer by ‘moving' him around too violently" (Gumpert 1982, 229). As the characters speak of Mayor O'Malley's failures, the camera zooms in on dirty school windows (in contrast to Mayor O'Malley's "Strength" commercial's pristine classroom) and litter-strewn playgrounds devoid of children (compared to the patty-cake kids in "Strength"). Blurred and smoky black and white pictures suggest crime-filled streets and rundown schools that stand in stark contrast to the rest of the color-filled ad. Weird objects hang from telephone poles, suggesting gang influences. Camera movement is swift, and frequently focuses on chain link fences that seem to imprison the viewer or at least the school children from within. Mitchell Stephens (1998) has suggested that the videos of today "arrive in fast-cut moving images (that) open the possibility that more profound concepts might arise and longer arguments might be assembled" (182). This is to say that the ad raises many questions in the viewers' minds, questions that might lead to increased scrutiny about the individual candidates' fitness to serve the people of Maryland.

One who is merely viewing the ad (and not listening to the urgent pleas of the speakers) would be struck by the horror-genre likeness of the "sudden cuts and reorientations of the viewer without warning or transition" (Gumpert 1982, 228). One looks through unkempt trees at dilapidated school buildings, as a bell tolls. Snapshots of headlines burst uncomfortably into sight, disappear, and reappear hanging in midair. We see newspaper mastheads, with clippings suspended in the upper part of the television screen. Short quotes from the articles are typed in newsprint fonts below the identified newspaper. The newspapers' words seem to jump out at viewers, as the New York Times declares Baltimore to be "the deadliest city in the nation" (Ehrlich), The Sun claims that Mayor O'Malley is "out of control" (Ehrlich 2006), and the Washington Times states that "O'Malley: (was) blindsided" (Ehrlich 2006). The suggestion is that Mayor O'Malley was surprised by the problems with crime and schools within his jurisdiction, and it was this shock that made him unable to deal with those challenges in a timely manner. The light from the flashbulbs is momentarily blinding, which makes the repeated statement that Mayor O'Malley was "blindsided" even more appropriate; the viewer is temporarily taken aback by the uncomfortable lighting. Furthermore, the ad itself "gives the viewer "the sense of having lost his ground" (Gumpert 1982, 229). The ad violates our sense of place as we literally "jump from scene to scene" (Stephens 1998, 187). Graphics and the constant movement of the ad images seemingly overwhelm the viewer. The final graphic, another newspaper-like sentence, asks the rhetorical question of Mayor O'Malley, "More time for what?" (Ehrlich).

The "music" of the ad is quite nontraditional. Compared to other ads that use pleasant but nondescript background melodies, this negative ad uses dissonance to make its point. Politicians and their handlers have come to realize that "the musical soundtrack can play an integral role in commanding attention, communicating feelings, and persuading listeners" (Nelson 1997, 119). A bell tolls in the opening second of the commercial, and it continues to peal throughout the spot. It is rung again in seconds four, fourteen, twenty-four, and then clashes in seconds twenty-five through twenty-eight. While the bell is heard, a grumbling sound rumbles underneath with a cacophony unlike any previous Ehrlich campaign ad. The noise almost seems to swoop; it serves to underscore the negative thoughts being expressed about a potential Mayor O'Malley governorship. The music communicates and summarizes all of the negative comments made during the ad, as the "sounds induce viewers to feel specific and diffuse emotions for what the ad (is) representing" (Nelson 1997, 128). It reinforces the concepts of discord sown from beginning to end. The ad ends with the disharmony of jarring sounds colliding with the bells. As Nelson and Boynton explain, "the words in ads tell you about these threats, the pictures show or symbolize them, but the musics and sounds of threat are what help you to feel them" (Nelson 1997, 136).

The urgency underscored by the tolling bell is highlighted by camera shots that bring the speakers closer and closer to the television screen. Initially seen from the midriff and up, the camera moves in and pulls the speakers' faces closer and closer to viewers. The view was originally a comfortable (yet close) distance which was still far enough away to view backgrounds. It quickly becomes an "in your face" perspective as part of a male speaker's face, framed by the ever-present chain link fence, comes so near that his entire face can no longer be seen by the closeness of the camera angle. According to Joshua Meyrowitz, "the way a person is framed may suggest an interpersonal distance between that person and the viewer" (Gumpert 1982, 225). The sense of exigency is heightened by the lack of space between the speaker and the viewer; many assert that "distance is a significant factor in shaping viewer response" (Gumpert 1982, 226). While the speaker is almost uncomfortably close, the urgency of his appeal is increased by the forced intimacy of the moment.