WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.020 Welcome to today's deep dive. We are looking 00:00:02.020 --> 00:00:06.160 at one of the most famous and honestly, I think, 00:00:06.179 --> 00:00:08.960 most relentlessly analyzed political advertisements 00:00:08.960 --> 00:00:10.740 in the history of the United States. Oh, absolutely. 00:00:11.240 --> 00:00:12.660 Unquestionably. Yeah. We're talking about the 00:00:12.660 --> 00:00:15.619 1984 campaign commercial officially titled Prouder, 00:00:15.619 --> 00:00:18.390 Stronger, Better. But if you follow politics 00:00:18.390 --> 00:00:21.649 or marketing or history even casually, you probably 00:00:21.649 --> 00:00:23.910 know it by its universal nickname. Right. Morning 00:00:23.910 --> 00:00:27.109 in America. Exactly. Morning in America. And 00:00:27.109 --> 00:00:29.809 our source material today is this really comprehensive 00:00:29.809 --> 00:00:33.090 Wikipedia article that details the ad's creation, 00:00:33.310 --> 00:00:37.060 the exact script that made it so potent. It's 00:00:37.060 --> 00:00:39.380 enduring cultural and political resonance over 00:00:39.380 --> 00:00:41.460 the decades. It really is just a fascinating 00:00:41.460 --> 00:00:43.799 piece of media. I mean, it is not an exaggeration 00:00:43.799 --> 00:00:46.579 to say that this single 60 -second spot fundamentally 00:00:46.579 --> 00:00:48.759 shifted the gold standard for what a political 00:00:48.759 --> 00:00:51.100 message could and perhaps should sound like. 00:00:51.200 --> 00:00:53.039 Yeah. We are literally still seeing the ripple 00:00:53.039 --> 00:00:56.200 effects of this one minute of television in modern 00:00:56.200 --> 00:00:59.439 campaigns. Which is wild to think about. And 00:00:59.439 --> 00:01:01.840 so our mission today is to uncover the mechanics 00:01:01.840 --> 00:01:07.010 of that legendary advertisement. echoes are still 00:01:07.010 --> 00:01:09.450 being heard in elections decades after it first 00:01:09.450 --> 00:01:12.329 aired. Right. Decades later. Yeah. And we really 00:01:12.329 --> 00:01:14.230 want to help you understand what makes a message 00:01:14.230 --> 00:01:17.030 truly stick in the minds of the public. If you 00:01:17.030 --> 00:01:19.150 are sitting there listening and you have an interest 00:01:19.150 --> 00:01:22.709 in marketing or history, or if you just want 00:01:22.709 --> 00:01:25.329 to decode the DNA of modern political messaging 00:01:25.329 --> 00:01:27.750 without suffering from massive info overload, 00:01:28.069 --> 00:01:30.670 you are going to get a lot out of this. Oh, for 00:01:30.670 --> 00:01:32.670 sure. There's a lot to unpack. We are aiming 00:01:32.670 --> 00:01:35.790 for those real aha. Moments. And just a quick 00:01:35.790 --> 00:01:38.010 note before we jump in. We are looking at this 00:01:38.010 --> 00:01:40.049 strictly through the lens of marketing, history 00:01:40.049 --> 00:01:42.230 and rhetoric. Yeah, that's an important distinction. 00:01:42.450 --> 00:01:44.810 Right. Because while our sources cover politically 00:01:44.810 --> 00:01:47.469 charged content spanning from Ronald Reagan to 00:01:47.469 --> 00:01:50.329 Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, we aren't endorsing 00:01:50.329 --> 00:01:52.650 any political figures, parties or parties mentioned 00:01:52.650 --> 00:01:55.950 today. We are just an impartial analysis of the 00:01:55.950 --> 00:01:58.870 mechanics. We are just conveying the ideas contained 00:01:58.870 --> 00:02:01.140 in the original source material. Which is really 00:02:01.140 --> 00:02:03.120 the most productive way to look at this stuff, 00:02:03.219 --> 00:02:05.780 because the mechanics of this ad are just a masterclass 00:02:05.780 --> 00:02:08.819 in persuasion. When you strip away the partisan 00:02:08.819 --> 00:02:11.979 layer, you are left with this brilliantly engineered 00:02:11.979 --> 00:02:14.800 piece of psychological communication. OK, let's 00:02:14.800 --> 00:02:18.639 unpack this. The year is 1984. OK. It is the 00:02:18.639 --> 00:02:21.379 presidential campaign of the Republican candidate, 00:02:21.539 --> 00:02:25.169 the incumbent Ronald Reagan. Out comes this 60 00:02:25.169 --> 00:02:28.449 -second ad, and it just completely captures the 00:02:28.449 --> 00:02:30.370 national attention. Let's look at the visual 00:02:30.370 --> 00:02:32.729 strategy first. What is actually on screen when 00:02:32.729 --> 00:02:34.770 this ad plays? Well, when you watch Morning in 00:02:34.770 --> 00:02:36.909 America, the visuals are striking specifically 00:02:36.909 --> 00:02:38.870 because of what they lack. What do you mean? 00:02:38.990 --> 00:02:41.090 There are no explosions. There's no dramatic, 00:02:41.250 --> 00:02:43.449 you know, red -tinted filters of crime scenes. 00:02:43.729 --> 00:02:46.250 No shouting politicians pounding their fists 00:02:46.250 --> 00:02:48.389 on a podium. You are simply seeing a montage 00:02:48.389 --> 00:02:51.129 of images showing everyday Americans going to 00:02:51.129 --> 00:02:53.370 work. Just normal people? Right. man backing 00:02:53.370 --> 00:02:55.990 a tractor out of a barn, a teenager delivering 00:02:55.990 --> 00:02:59.110 newspapers, a taxi cab moving through a city 00:02:59.110 --> 00:03:01.530 street, just regular people starting their day. 00:03:01.750 --> 00:03:04.650 And the use of the word morning serves a very 00:03:04.650 --> 00:03:07.389 deliberate dual purpose here. It operates on 00:03:07.389 --> 00:03:10.310 a literal level first, right? Matching the physical 00:03:10.310 --> 00:03:12.909 reality of a morning routine. People are heading 00:03:12.909 --> 00:03:15.590 to their jobs, commuting, starting their shifts. 00:03:15.729 --> 00:03:18.129 Exactly. But then it operates on a much deeper 00:03:18.129 --> 00:03:22.889 metaphorical level. Morning stands for national 00:03:22.889 --> 00:03:27.129 renewal. A fresh start. Yes. It implies a new 00:03:27.129 --> 00:03:29.689 beginning, a washing away of the dark, and the 00:03:29.689 --> 00:03:32.189 start of a bright, fresh chapter for the country. 00:03:32.469 --> 00:03:34.810 It signals to the viewer that the long night 00:03:34.810 --> 00:03:37.229 is over without explicitly demanding that they 00:03:37.229 --> 00:03:39.710 feel relieved. The visuals just do the heavy 00:03:39.710 --> 00:03:41.969 lifting of establishing a mood of calm and safety. 00:03:42.250 --> 00:03:45.349 So we have this soft, highly evocative imagery, 00:03:45.590 --> 00:03:48.379 but it doesn't feel like empty fluff. How did 00:03:48.379 --> 00:03:50.719 they ground that emotion so it didn't just float 00:03:50.719 --> 00:03:52.979 away into pure sentimentality? They used hard 00:03:52.979 --> 00:03:55.439 data. Right. This is where the script elevates 00:03:55.439 --> 00:03:57.800 the ad from a nice montage to a devastatingly 00:03:57.800 --> 00:04:00.979 effective political weapon. The ad script explicitly 00:04:00.979 --> 00:04:03.280 states that the economy had improved since the 00:04:03.280 --> 00:04:06.159 1980 election, but it doesn't just say the economy 00:04:06.159 --> 00:04:09.330 is better. It bakes incredibly specific statistics 00:04:09.330 --> 00:04:12.030 right into the poetry of the voiceover. The numbers 00:04:12.030 --> 00:04:14.370 they chose to highlight are so fascinating to 00:04:14.370 --> 00:04:17.810 me. The script points out that today, more men 00:04:17.810 --> 00:04:20.050 and women will go to work than ever before in 00:04:20.050 --> 00:04:23.110 our country's history. A huge claim. Right. Then 00:04:23.110 --> 00:04:26.170 it pivots to the housing market, stating that 00:04:26.170 --> 00:04:28.290 interest rates are at about half the record highs 00:04:28.290 --> 00:04:32.170 of 1980. But it doesn't stop at the macroeconomic 00:04:32.170 --> 00:04:35.790 level. No. It immediately translates that macroeconomic 00:04:35.790 --> 00:04:39.149 data into human terms. It says that because of 00:04:39.149 --> 00:04:41.569 those lower interest rates, nearly 2000 families 00:04:41.569 --> 00:04:45.009 today will buy new homes. 2000. More than at 00:04:45.009 --> 00:04:47.910 any time in the past four years. Notice the phrasing 00:04:47.910 --> 00:04:50.910 there today. It makes a broad economic indicator 00:04:50.910 --> 00:04:53.329 feel immediate and tangible. I'd even go a step 00:04:53.329 --> 00:04:55.029 further and point out how they handled inflation. 00:04:55.350 --> 00:04:57.889 Oh, the inflation stat is brilliant. It really 00:04:57.889 --> 00:05:00.470 is. The script notes that inflation is at less 00:05:00.470 --> 00:05:02.470 than half of what it was just four years ago. 00:05:02.779 --> 00:05:04.819 And what does that mean for the average person? 00:05:05.100 --> 00:05:09.180 The script says, this afternoon, 6 ,500 young 00:05:09.180 --> 00:05:12.040 men and women will be married. They can look 00:05:12.040 --> 00:05:14.839 forward with confidence to the future. They took 00:05:14.839 --> 00:05:17.800 a concept that usually makes people's eyes glaze 00:05:17.800 --> 00:05:20.779 over inflation rates and turned it into a highly 00:05:20.779 --> 00:05:24.879 emotional, relatable milestone. 6500 young people 00:05:24.879 --> 00:05:27.000 having the confidence to start a family today. 00:05:27.079 --> 00:05:29.439 What's fascinating here is how the ad perfectly 00:05:29.439 --> 00:05:33.600 balances those cold, hard statistics like 6500 00:05:33.600 --> 00:05:37.860 marriages or 2000 new homes. With this overwhelming 00:05:37.860 --> 00:05:41.079 sense of emotional warmth. It isn't a dry economic 00:05:41.079 --> 00:05:43.839 report, but those numbers give the optimism an 00:05:43.839 --> 00:05:46.360 undeniable foundation to stand on. It's proof. 00:05:46.579 --> 00:05:48.319 Exactly. It tells the viewer you aren't just 00:05:48.319 --> 00:05:50.319 feeling better. The math proves things are actually 00:05:50.319 --> 00:05:52.839 better. And then it builds to this masterful 00:05:52.839 --> 00:05:55.100 clincher at the very end. A pivot. The pivot. 00:05:55.319 --> 00:05:58.139 After presenting this incredibly rosy, statistically 00:05:58.139 --> 00:06:01.060 backed picture of the present, the ad asks the 00:06:01.060 --> 00:06:03.660 voters a rhetorical question. It asks why they 00:06:03.660 --> 00:06:05.680 would ever want a return to the pre -Reagan policies 00:06:05.680 --> 00:06:08.100 of Democrats from less than four short years 00:06:08.100 --> 00:06:10.279 ago. It's such a gentle but devastating way to 00:06:10.279 --> 00:06:12.240 close the argument. It really is. It basically 00:06:12.240 --> 00:06:14.759 says, look how beautiful today is. Why would 00:06:14.759 --> 00:06:17.660 you ever risk going backwards? It frames the 00:06:17.660 --> 00:06:20.379 election not as an ideological battle between 00:06:20.379 --> 00:06:23.139 two competing philosophies of government, but 00:06:23.139 --> 00:06:25.259 as a simple choice between a beautiful sunny 00:06:25.259 --> 00:06:28.660 morning and returning to the dark. It is persuasion 00:06:28.660 --> 00:06:31.720 by contrast. but done so softly that the viewer 00:06:31.720 --> 00:06:33.759 doesn't even realize they are being aggressively 00:06:33.759 --> 00:06:35.959 pitched to. Which brings up a huge question. 00:06:36.060 --> 00:06:38.699 Who actually came up with this? Because you would 00:06:38.699 --> 00:06:40.399 think it was a massive committee of political 00:06:40.399 --> 00:06:43.160 scientists and pollsters agonizing over every 00:06:43.160 --> 00:06:46.540 frame. But the ad was actually written and narrated 00:06:46.540 --> 00:06:49.939 by a legendary ad man named Hal Reine. Hal Reine 00:06:49.939 --> 00:06:52.480 was a pivotal figure in this era of political 00:06:52.480 --> 00:06:54.959 advertising. If you study political rhetoric, 00:06:55.120 --> 00:06:57.779 you definitely know his work. He also wrote and 00:06:57.779 --> 00:07:00.040 narrated Reagan's Bear in the Woods ad, which 00:07:00.040 --> 00:07:02.579 was a very different, much more tense geopolitical 00:07:02.579 --> 00:07:05.000 ad about the Soviet Union. And he did the answer 00:07:05.000 --> 00:07:07.160 to his back ad as well. He had an incredible 00:07:07.160 --> 00:07:10.399 range. But for Morning in America, his specific 00:07:10.399 --> 00:07:14.079 vocal delivery was the secret ingredient. The 00:07:14.079 --> 00:07:16.459 source material highlights how critical his voice 00:07:16.459 --> 00:07:19.680 was to the ad's success, describing it as, Rich 00:07:19.680 --> 00:07:23.420 and avuncular. Avuncular is the perfect word 00:07:23.420 --> 00:07:26.819 for it. Right. He had that tone like a trusted 00:07:26.819 --> 00:07:29.199 uncle talking to you over the fence. He didn't 00:07:29.199 --> 00:07:30.959 sound like a slick political operative trying 00:07:30.959 --> 00:07:32.939 to sell you a candidate in a 30 -second window. 00:07:33.160 --> 00:07:35.579 He sounded like a neighbor just casually observing 00:07:35.579 --> 00:07:37.720 how nice the neighborhood was looking lately. 00:07:38.079 --> 00:07:40.939 That projected an immense sense of wholesomeness 00:07:40.939 --> 00:07:43.870 and authenticity. We shouldn't give Rainey all 00:07:43.870 --> 00:07:45.810 the credit. He wasn't alone in crafting this. 00:07:45.970 --> 00:07:48.009 Right. There was a whole team. The art director, 00:07:48.170 --> 00:07:50.250 Bernie Vangren from How Rainey and Partners, 00:07:50.430 --> 00:07:52.290 and the director who actually filmed the ad, 00:07:52.449 --> 00:07:55.350 John Pitka of Levine Pitka Productions, were 00:07:55.350 --> 00:07:57.870 essential in creating that cohesive cinematic 00:07:57.870 --> 00:08:00.589 vision. They are the ones who made sure those 00:08:00.589 --> 00:08:02.889 visuals matched the gentle authority of Rainey's 00:08:02.889 --> 00:08:05.750 voice. Speaking of that cinematic vision, the 00:08:05.750 --> 00:08:08.829 ad feels like it encompasses the entire quintessential 00:08:08.829 --> 00:08:12.740 American experience. You watch it. And you assume 00:08:12.740 --> 00:08:14.959 they must have sent camera crews all over the 00:08:14.959 --> 00:08:18.439 heartland from Ohio to Kansas to the deep south. 00:08:18.579 --> 00:08:20.779 You would think so. But here is a great piece 00:08:20.779 --> 00:08:23.819 of trivia from the source. This ultimate piece 00:08:23.819 --> 00:08:26.240 of Americana was actually filmed entirely in 00:08:26.240 --> 00:08:29.360 Petaluma, California. That is amazing. It speaks 00:08:29.360 --> 00:08:31.579 volumes about the power of their filmmaking. 00:08:31.819 --> 00:08:34.220 They didn't need geographic accuracy. They were 00:08:34.220 --> 00:08:37.059 aiming for emotional truth. They capture the 00:08:37.059 --> 00:08:40.460 essence of the idealized American nation in one 00:08:40.460 --> 00:08:43.299 specific location in California. Yeah. And the 00:08:43.299 --> 00:08:45.720 advertising and political industries absolutely 00:08:45.720 --> 00:08:48.120 recognize the brilliance of what Reine and his 00:08:48.120 --> 00:08:51.220 team pulled off. The advertisement swept up numerous 00:08:51.220 --> 00:08:53.659 industry awards. The source includes a really 00:08:53.659 --> 00:08:55.740 telling quote from Republican strategist Dan 00:08:55.740 --> 00:08:58.379 Schnur about why this ad was so highly praised 00:08:58.379 --> 00:09:00.759 and why it stood out so starkly from everything 00:09:00.759 --> 00:09:02.779 else on television. What did he say? He said 00:09:02.779 --> 00:09:05.179 of Reini's work, most political advertising hits 00:09:05.179 --> 00:09:07.740 viewers over the head, while his work makes just 00:09:07.740 --> 00:09:10.600 as strong a point, but in a less confrontational 00:09:10.600 --> 00:09:13.320 and a more soothing manner. That word soothing 00:09:13.320 --> 00:09:17.340 is the key to unlocking the ad's legacy. Think 00:09:17.340 --> 00:09:19.440 about the political ads we are bombarded with 00:09:19.440 --> 00:09:21.519 today. How many of them would you ever describe 00:09:21.519 --> 00:09:24.879 as soothing? Almost none. It is incredibly rare 00:09:24.879 --> 00:09:27.159 in a media landscape that relies almost entirely 00:09:27.159 --> 00:09:30.799 on anxiety, urgency and outrage to drive engagement. 00:09:31.240 --> 00:09:33.840 Morning in America proved that you can make a 00:09:33.840 --> 00:09:36.480 devastatingly strong political argument by actually 00:09:36.480 --> 00:09:38.899 lowering the audience's blood pressure instead 00:09:38.899 --> 00:09:40.980 of raising it. Here's where it gets really interesting. 00:09:41.399 --> 00:09:44.480 Because an ad that famous, with a tone that specific, 00:09:44.740 --> 00:09:47.059 eventually stops being just a political tool 00:09:47.059 --> 00:09:49.379 and becomes a piece of ingrained pop culture. 00:09:49.460 --> 00:09:51.860 Absolutely. And when something becomes that universally 00:09:51.860 --> 00:09:55.059 recognized as a symbol of pure, wholesome optimism, 00:09:55.419 --> 00:09:58.440 it becomes the absolute perfect target for subversion. 00:09:58.639 --> 00:10:01.259 That is the inevitable life cycle of iconic media. 00:10:01.519 --> 00:10:03.860 Once a piece of art or advertising achieves that 00:10:03.860 --> 00:10:06.539 level of cultural ubiquity, it gets turned inside 00:10:06.539 --> 00:10:10.889 out. Which brings us to Super Bowl XXX. During 00:10:10.889 --> 00:10:13.769 that massive broadcast, Hulu aired a trailer 00:10:13.769 --> 00:10:16.610 promoting the third season of their series, The 00:10:16.610 --> 00:10:19.629 Handmaid's Tale. And they completely hijacked 00:10:19.629 --> 00:10:21.990 the legacy of Morning in America to do it. It 00:10:21.990 --> 00:10:24.769 was a brilliant and genuinely chilling piece 00:10:24.769 --> 00:10:27.370 of marketing. The mechanics of the parody relied 00:10:27.370 --> 00:10:30.090 entirely on the audience's subconscious familiarity 00:10:30.090 --> 00:10:33.629 with the 1984 ad. If Morning in America wasn't 00:10:33.629 --> 00:10:35.950 already hardwired into our cultural memory as 00:10:35.950 --> 00:10:38.629 the baseline for optimism, the Hulu trailer would 00:10:38.629 --> 00:10:40.940 have completely fallen flat. The execution of 00:10:40.940 --> 00:10:43.679 it is wild. They started by mimicking the original 00:10:43.679 --> 00:10:45.700 commercial almost perfectly. They use a very 00:10:45.700 --> 00:10:47.720 similar saccharine soothing style of narration. 00:10:48.019 --> 00:10:51.240 The music had that same gentle waking up quality. 00:10:51.340 --> 00:10:53.860 Right. But they slightly shifted the focus of 00:10:53.860 --> 00:10:56.419 the script to specifically highlight women and 00:10:56.419 --> 00:10:58.659 their newborn children, adapting it to the themes 00:10:58.659 --> 00:11:00.919 of the show. So it lures you in with that exact 00:11:00.919 --> 00:11:03.179 same sense of warmth and those reassuring demographic 00:11:03.179 --> 00:11:05.500 statistics. And then they violently interrupt 00:11:05.500 --> 00:11:08.200 that soothing montage with horrific scenes from 00:11:08.200 --> 00:11:10.039 the series setting the totalitarian Republic 00:11:10.039 --> 00:11:13.059 of Gilead. Just a massive tonal shift. Huge. 00:11:13.259 --> 00:11:15.820 The contrast of women stripped of their rights 00:11:15.820 --> 00:11:18.120 against the mourning in America aesthetic is 00:11:18.120 --> 00:11:21.080 jarring. It uses the visual language of safety 00:11:21.080 --> 00:11:24.340 to introduce a nightmare. It builds up that familiar, 00:11:24.519 --> 00:11:28.399 cozy optimism just to shatter it. And the punchline 00:11:28.399 --> 00:11:30.340 of the whole trailer is delivered by the lead 00:11:30.340 --> 00:11:32.700 character, June Osborne, also known as Offred. 00:11:32.779 --> 00:11:34.480 She looks directly at the camera and states, 00:11:34.639 --> 00:11:37.639 wake up, America. Morning's over. If we connect 00:11:37.639 --> 00:11:39.580 this to the bigger picture, this Super Bowl trailer 00:11:39.580 --> 00:11:41.379 proves something incredible about the original 00:11:41.379 --> 00:11:45.019 1984 ad. It shows that mourning in America is 00:11:45.019 --> 00:11:47.500 so deeply ingrained in the American psyche as 00:11:47.500 --> 00:11:50.620 the unquestionable symbol of good that it serves 00:11:50.620 --> 00:11:53.200 as the absolute perfect baseline to contrast 00:11:53.200 --> 00:11:56.039 with a dystopia. Wow. Yeah. The parody only works 00:11:56.039 --> 00:11:58.000 because Hal Rennie was so incredibly effective 00:11:58.000 --> 00:12:00.720 at establishing what optimism looks and sounds 00:12:00.720 --> 00:12:02.559 like in the American consciousness. It's the 00:12:02.559 --> 00:12:04.840 ultimate compliment in a weird, twisted way. 00:12:04.980 --> 00:12:07.309 But the echoes of more. Morning in America aren't 00:12:07.309 --> 00:12:09.870 just found in pop culture parodies on Hulu. They're 00:12:09.870 --> 00:12:12.370 constantly surfacing in actual modern political 00:12:12.370 --> 00:12:15.169 races. Politicians have been trying to bottle 00:12:15.169 --> 00:12:18.509 that 1984 lightning again for decades. It's the 00:12:18.509 --> 00:12:21.250 holy grail for campaign managers. Let's look 00:12:21.250 --> 00:12:24.649 at the 2016 presidential election. Candidates 00:12:24.649 --> 00:12:27.590 across the spectrum were actively trying to harness 00:12:27.590 --> 00:12:30.269 the magic of that specific ad. During the 2016 00:12:30.269 --> 00:12:32.730 Republican primaries, both Marco Rubio and Ted 00:12:32.730 --> 00:12:35.129 Cruz heavily referenced. mourning in America 00:12:35.129 --> 00:12:37.669 rhetoric. They were actively trying to reflect 00:12:37.669 --> 00:12:39.370 the politics and the spirit of Ronald Reagan 00:12:39.370 --> 00:12:41.629 to appeal to their base, positioning themselves 00:12:41.629 --> 00:12:44.590 as the heirs to that specific brand of optimism. 00:12:44.929 --> 00:12:47.509 Marco Rubio actually ran a television ad titled 00:12:47.509 --> 00:12:50.690 Mourning Again in America. He went all in on 00:12:50.690 --> 00:12:53.330 recreating it. He featured a montage of everyday 00:12:53.330 --> 00:12:56.210 American life, showing both cities and suburbs 00:12:56.210 --> 00:12:58.509 trying to capture that same Hal Reine magic. 00:12:58.929 --> 00:13:01.730 But there was a catch. A huge catch. The execution 00:13:01.730 --> 00:13:04.830 failed spectacularly in one specific way. The 00:13:04.830 --> 00:13:07.370 very opening shot of this tribute to everyday 00:13:07.370 --> 00:13:10.370 American life was actually stock footage of Vancouver, 00:13:10.669 --> 00:13:13.070 British Columbia, Canada. A critical error that 00:13:13.070 --> 00:13:15.659 completely shattered the illusion. It highlights 00:13:15.659 --> 00:13:17.860 how difficult it is to authentically recreate 00:13:17.860 --> 00:13:20.820 the genuine feeling of the original ad. You can't 00:13:20.820 --> 00:13:23.019 just slap a title on stock footage and expect 00:13:23.019 --> 00:13:25.320 it to resonate the way Reini's meticulously crafted 00:13:25.320 --> 00:13:28.399 piece did. Obviously not. Ted Cruz, on the other 00:13:28.399 --> 00:13:30.200 hand, used the concept slightly differently. 00:13:30.830 --> 00:13:33.129 He didn't try to recreate the ad visually. He 00:13:33.129 --> 00:13:35.909 used the phrase itself as a continuous rhetorical 00:13:35.909 --> 00:13:38.549 drumbeat throughout his campaign. The source 00:13:38.549 --> 00:13:41.870 notes several instances of Cruz using it, often 00:13:41.870 --> 00:13:44.210 right at the climax of his speeches to whip up 00:13:44.210 --> 00:13:48.269 the crowd. Years earlier, back at the 2014 Conservative 00:13:48.269 --> 00:13:51.330 Political Action Conference, or CPAC, he told 00:13:51.330 --> 00:13:54.149 the crowd, we will bring back mourning in America. 00:13:54.330 --> 00:13:56.409 That's why we're here, and that's the future. 00:13:56.549 --> 00:13:58.909 And he kept using it as a victory cry. After 00:13:58.909 --> 00:14:01.009 winning the Republican caucus in Iowa on February 00:14:01.009 --> 00:14:04.789 1st, 2016, Cruz declared, Tonight, Iowa has proclaimed 00:14:04.789 --> 00:14:07.289 to the world, morning is coming. Morning is coming. 00:14:07.409 --> 00:14:09.409 And shortly after, when competing with Rubio 00:14:09.409 --> 00:14:11.789 in South Carolina on February 20, he declared 00:14:11.789 --> 00:14:13.970 again, We can bring back morning in America. 00:14:14.370 --> 00:14:16.769 He was leveraging the nostalgia of the phrase, 00:14:16.870 --> 00:14:19.070 using it as shorthand to tell voters that he 00:14:19.070 --> 00:14:21.710 could resurrect that 1984 feeling of safety and 00:14:21.710 --> 00:14:24.440 prosperity. But it wasn't just Republicans trying 00:14:24.440 --> 00:14:26.679 to claim the phrase. Hillary Clinton actually 00:14:26.679 --> 00:14:29.500 used it as a weapon during the 2016 campaign. 00:14:30.139 --> 00:14:32.940 In her Democratic nomination acceptance speech, 00:14:33.139 --> 00:14:35.480 she referenced Donald Trump's own acceptance 00:14:35.480 --> 00:14:37.720 speech from the previous week. Oh, this is a 00:14:37.720 --> 00:14:39.919 very clever rhetorical move. She said that Trump 00:14:39.919 --> 00:14:42.000 had taken the Republican Party a long way from 00:14:42.000 --> 00:14:44.639 mourning in America. to midnight in America. 00:14:44.919 --> 00:14:48.700 It's a very sharp rhetorical judo move. She accused 00:14:48.700 --> 00:14:50.679 him of wanting the public to fear the future 00:14:50.679 --> 00:14:53.659 and to fear each other, directly contrasting 00:14:53.659 --> 00:14:56.259 his tone with the famous optimism of the Reagan 00:14:56.259 --> 00:14:59.059 ad. Flipping it back on them. Exactly. By doing 00:14:59.059 --> 00:15:01.399 so, she was trying to claim the mantle of optimism 00:15:01.399 --> 00:15:04.299 for herself while using a reviewed Republican 00:15:04.299 --> 00:15:06.620 touchstone to criticize a Republican nominee. 00:15:06.879 --> 00:15:09.340 She was essentially saying, you have abandoned 00:15:09.340 --> 00:15:11.980 your own gold standard. Fast forward four more 00:15:11.980 --> 00:15:14.539 years to the... 2020 election, and the echoes 00:15:14.539 --> 00:15:17.500 of 1984 are still bouncing around. But this time, 00:15:17.519 --> 00:15:20.340 they took on a much darker twist. The Lincoln 00:15:20.340 --> 00:15:23.200 Project, a political action committee, released 00:15:23.200 --> 00:15:25.659 an ad that directly riffed on the famous title. 00:15:25.779 --> 00:15:29.039 They called their ad Mourning in America, but 00:15:29.039 --> 00:15:35.120 they spelled it M -O -U -R -N -I -N -G. Mourning, 00:15:35.120 --> 00:15:38.419 as in grief. It was a direct, highly critical 00:15:38.419 --> 00:15:40.279 response to the conditions in the country at 00:15:40.279 --> 00:15:42.559 the time. The themes of this Morning in America 00:15:42.559 --> 00:15:45.320 ad focused heavily on the deaths from the COVID 00:15:45.320 --> 00:15:48.059 -19 pandemic and what the creators viewed as 00:15:48.059 --> 00:15:50.440 the debatable inaction of President Donald Trump. 00:15:50.580 --> 00:15:52.940 It completely inverted the original premise from 00:15:52.940 --> 00:15:55.500 a celebration of life and renewal to a lamentation 00:15:55.500 --> 00:15:57.759 of loss. They didn't just release one generic 00:15:57.759 --> 00:16:00.200 version either. They targeted it heavily. They 00:16:00.200 --> 00:16:02.279 released state -specific versions tailored for 00:16:02.279 --> 00:16:04.899 key battlegrounds. Morning in Iowa. Morning in 00:16:04.899 --> 00:16:07.200 Florida. Morning. in Pennsylvania and mourning 00:16:07.200 --> 00:16:09.960 in Ohio. And they even released a specific version 00:16:09.960 --> 00:16:12.620 called Mourning in Republican Party, which lamented 00:16:12.620 --> 00:16:14.139 the change of direction the party had taken. 00:16:14.299 --> 00:16:16.460 This raises an important question. Why does this 00:16:16.460 --> 00:16:20.000 keep happening? Why does a single 60 -second 00:16:20.000 --> 00:16:23.820 television ad from 1984 remain the absolute gold 00:16:23.820 --> 00:16:25.899 standard for measuring the political mood of 00:16:25.899 --> 00:16:28.559 the country? Whether it is being used by Ted 00:16:28.559 --> 00:16:31.440 Cruz as an ideal to strive for, by Hillary Clinton 00:16:31.440 --> 00:16:34.340 as a standard that has been lost, or by the Lincoln 00:16:34.340 --> 00:16:37.500 Project as a tragic pun to highlight grief, they 00:16:37.500 --> 00:16:39.740 are all still orbiting around a narrative created 00:16:39.740 --> 00:16:42.240 by Hal Reine over 40 years ago. It's incredible. 00:16:42.480 --> 00:16:45.320 It suggests a profound hunger in the electorate 00:16:45.320 --> 00:16:49.039 for that specific brand of unifying, calm optimism, 00:16:49.259 --> 00:16:51.639 even if politicians are currently struggling 00:16:51.639 --> 00:16:54.169 to deliver it. So what does this all mean? Let's 00:16:54.169 --> 00:16:56.049 bring this all together. We went on quite a journey 00:16:56.049 --> 00:16:58.450 today. We started with a soothing 60 -second 00:16:58.450 --> 00:17:00.690 spot that was filmed in Petaluma, California. 00:17:01.009 --> 00:17:03.230 It was narrated by an ad man with an avuncular, 00:17:03.350 --> 00:17:05.930 trusted voice who simply listed some positive 00:17:05.930 --> 00:17:08.369 economic statistics over footage of people going 00:17:08.369 --> 00:17:10.710 to work. And somehow, that specific combination 00:17:10.710 --> 00:17:12.910 managed to permanently define the rhetoric of 00:17:12.910 --> 00:17:15.450 American optimism. It is a testament to the power 00:17:15.450 --> 00:17:18.329 of tone, the brilliant integration of hard data 00:17:18.329 --> 00:17:20.670 into an emotional narrative, and the profound 00:17:20.670 --> 00:17:22.829 impact of lowering the temperature in political 00:17:22.829 --> 00:17:25.390 communities. So my takeaway for you listening 00:17:25.390 --> 00:17:28.670 right now is this. The next time you are sitting 00:17:28.670 --> 00:17:31.990 on your couch being absolutely bombarded by aggressive, 00:17:32.130 --> 00:17:35.069 loud campaign ads designed to make you panic, 00:17:35.150 --> 00:17:37.710 watch out for that powerful blend of hard data 00:17:37.710 --> 00:17:40.990 and soft emotion. Look for that soothing approach. 00:17:41.269 --> 00:17:44.309 It is rare, but as we've learned today, when 00:17:44.309 --> 00:17:47.009 it is executed perfectly, its impact doesn't 00:17:47.009 --> 00:17:49.369 just win an election. It lasts for generations. 00:17:50.079 --> 00:17:53.420 It is a high bar to clear. And I'd like to leave 00:17:53.420 --> 00:17:55.759 you with a final lingering question to ponder. 00:17:56.119 --> 00:17:58.539 We've seen that morning in America worked so 00:17:58.539 --> 00:18:00.579 brilliantly because it successfully defined a 00:18:00.579 --> 00:18:03.140 shared national present as a dramatic improvement 00:18:03.140 --> 00:18:05.960 over a shared past. It relied on a collective 00:18:05.960 --> 00:18:08.400 experience. The shared reality. Exactly. But 00:18:08.400 --> 00:18:11.099 as we move further and further into a hyper fragmented 00:18:11.099 --> 00:18:13.259 digital age where everyone consumes different 00:18:13.259 --> 00:18:15.200 news, lives in different media ecosystems and 00:18:15.200 --> 00:18:17.900 experiences a different reality, is it even possible 00:18:17.900 --> 00:18:21.069 to create a single. unifying metaphor for an 00:18:21.069 --> 00:18:23.769 entire nation's experience anymore? Or are we 00:18:23.769 --> 00:18:25.529 destined to only ever have mourning in our own 00:18:25.529 --> 00:18:26.450 personalized algorithms?