What are media outlets reporting about the Clint Eastwood Chrysler 'Halftime
in America' ad, especially in response to the political finger-pointing it
inspired Monday? Plenty.
They're asking: Was it politically motivated? Or just a great two-minute pep talk to motivate consumers to buy some cars?
Here's a quick round-up of the chatter around the web today:
On ABCnews.com writer Z. Byron Wolf said: "Politics cannot be separated from this type of nationalistic appeal, particularly since the government bailout of GM and Chrysler promises to play so prominently in the 2012 campaign."
Wolf also points out that Eastwood, who starred in the ad, has said "nice things" about Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul.
On the Wall Street Journal's web site, in their Washington Wire blog (and first posted on the MarketWatch Blog) they posted a story under the headline: Chrysler's Eastwood Ad: Pro Obama?
From that post: "But the political overtones were easy to see as well: "Halftime in America" could be interpreted as a rallying call for a second term for President Barack Obama, who pushed ahead with a bailout of Chrysler and General Motors despite objections from Republicans, including his likely presidential opponent, Mitt Romney."
The Christian Science Monitor tackled the question "Was it Pro Obama?" as well and concluded everyone should: "Calm down people. Sometimes an auto ad is just a promotional tool for vehicles, not another division point in the endless war of words between the political red and blue. We think ordinary voters will see the ad as a good example of a common commercial category: the corporate flag-waver."
The Chicago Tribune pointed out a bit of hypocrisy involved: that an ad that points out the fine way Americans can come together results in partisan tongue-lashing. Oh and again, don't forget, they say: Eastwood is a conservative.
"The ironic thing about the small-scale brouhaha is that Eastwood is a Republican who opposed the bailout of the industry. (The Chrysler ad never mentions Washington's capital injection at all, which annoyed some Democrats.) Asked about his presidential leanings last week at an event, Eastwood only allowed some fondness for Ron Paul, saying the libertarian was "as good as anybody else" in the race."
In the Washington Post "In the Loop" blog, writer Emily Heil asked a few Washington movers and shakers their take on the political twinge to the ad. Here's one response: "We checked in with a few political ad and image-makers to get their impressions. Jon Downs, a partner at GOP firm FP1 Strategies, says viewers might be reading too much into the ad. "It's a pro-America ad," he says, and it's only the "oversensitized political climate we're in" that gives it political meaning. But did it have a pro-Democratic message?
"That was not my take-away," he said.
Most Popular Stories
- Chobani Counters Competition With Expanded Lineup
- Pope Francis, Huge Crowd Joyously Celebrate Easter
- Automakers Turn to China to Fuel Sales Growth
- GM Boosting China Production Capacity
- GOP Making Bold Play for Oregon Senate Seat
- Delay in Ferry Evacuation Puzzles Maritime Experts
- Report: Iran VP Says Row Over Reactor Resolved
- NASA's Space Station Robonaut Finally Getting Legs
- Confusion, Anger as Sunken Ferry's Relatives Wait
- Iran Denounces U.S. Ruling to Sell Property