I was pointed to this site by Laird Wilcox, founder and curator of the Laird Wilcox Collection at the University of Kansas. Mr. Wilcox has built the nation's largest trove of extremist literature—dating back at least a century—for research use. His expertise on the subject of media/message makes his opinions on the subject invaluable to my eyes. With his permission, I am quoting from the e-mail comments he appended to the above link:
This is a great video, although it necessarily simplifies some things for the sake of brevity. One thing he didn't get into is that different personality and character types respond differently to certain symbolic styles. In this case, the Obama symbol has certain stereotypically feminine and collectivist characteristics (rounded, smooth, vaguely pastel) while the Bush symbol has masculine and individualistic features (strong, angular, high contrast). "Branded" is a good term for this.In spite of the symbolism, Republican and Democrat are basically "brands" that mean relatively little. Like "Dodge" and "Chevrolet" they are far, far more alike than different, but the differences are crucial to the brand loyalists. The key to the future is to think outside the conventional brands and construct something that more directly addresses the problems we face.Both political parties are so compromised by special interests, bureaucratic staff constraints, media pressure and conventional prejudices that making major changes in direction is nearly impossible. Outsourcing of jobs and manufacturing has been an unmitigated disaster, for example, but the pressure on both democrats and republicans to resist significant alterations to this arrangement is overwhelming. Only an independent movement outside of the two-party system can change it.
I agree completely with his comments.
