A dissertation exploring the influence of design on the 2008 Obama political campaign. It looks to answer the question: 'Did the flawless design strategy of the campaign lead to Obama's victory?'

4.
In a democratic society voting, by its nature, should be an unbiased exercise resulting in a
fairly elected leader. Throughout history political campaigns have always done their best to
help sway the electorate to vote one way or another via the use of persuasive language and
imagery. It is after all a sale of ideology. These techniques have developed through the
decades and with the advancement of graphic design paired with a myriad of new media to
harness, there has been a paradigm shift in political campaigning. An article by Lamar
(2010) highlights this shift by stating “The 2008 Obama Presidential Campaign brought
social media marketing to mainstream political campaigns. The success of the Obama team
and the way this team used social media to spread their message should be a guide for every
political campaign”.
Well-executed political campaign design can influence the outcomes of voting as it has the
ability to portray a candidate as something they are not. Undecided voters can be swept up
in a cult of personality and branding techniques can embed the candidate in our minds
before the election process has even begun. Thus it raises the question: To what extent did
the design strategy of Obama’s campaign contribute to his mass popularity and victory in
2008, and also to the radical shift in public opinion that followed by the end of 2010?
During a personal interview the creative director of the Obama campaign touched on this
controversial question when he admitted, “You can use good design and to a certain degree it
blurs the lines a bit” Thomas (2010). This statement forms the basis of the following study,
which aims to investigate all elements of the Obama campaign to determine the influence of
design on its success.
Research Methods
Interview the creative director of the campaign to gain a concise overview of what was
required of the design team. Find out any specific communication strategies that might have
been imposed on them and explore the reasons behind their design choices (colors, fonts, use
of imagery, layouts etc). Investigate if any strategic marketing techniques were used to
promote Obama the same way a mass consumption product would be sold. Research all
journals, dissertations and articles relating to the topic of political campaign strategies, design
strategies, and communication techniques. Search news articles for pundit reviews and
opinions of campaign success and current backlash. Conduct a thorough analysis of the
‘Designing Obama’ book that contains the entire design strategy used by Scott Thomas.
1

5.
Limitations Of Study
Due to the fact that this is a very recent event the amount of detailed and concise
publications based on the topic are scarce. The bulk of the research will have to rely on
Internet sources of news articles, pundit blogs and a search for relevant dissertations
published by the academic community.
Organization Of The Dissertation
The study attempts to break apart the thesis and give substantial answers via a variety of
arguments. First the political landscape of America is analyzed, focusing on the years before
and leading up to the campaign to put the study into context and explain why America was
so hungry to jump on the first scent of change they were given. It also briefly looks at the
conventional wisdom of political campaign design to show how this was deliberately broken
to personify the change the campaign was advocating. It then continues to explore the
design of the campaign itself highlighting techniques that could have influenced its success.
These techniques are described and an explanation as to why they are effective creates the
arguments that answer the thesis. Finally an analysis of public opinion following Obama’s
victory aims to explore why it has dropped so suddenly and significantly considering the
hype of two years ago.
2

6.
Time For A Change
America in 2008 was not the beacon of hope it had once been. There was rising
unemployment and a financial crisis that had brought the country’s economy crashing down.
Social inequality was increasing rapidly and people were loosing homes due to foreclosures.
The country was massively unhappy that America was still participating in the Afghanistan
conflict and to top it all, there had been 8 years under the Bush administration that had seen
its lowest approval ratings of all time (below 40%). Based on the right track wrong track
polls taken in late 2008 it is clear the vast majority of the country wanted to take a new
direction, “In the face of economic upheaval in the United States, a record 89 percent of
Americans now say the country has pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track while just
7 percent of Americans say the country is going in the right direction, according to the latest
New York Times/CBS News Poll”. (Thee, 2009).
Running parallel to this was an America that was fully embracing the digital age and that had
become so utterly saturated by marketing that this was one of the only facets of
communication people would respond. A publication by Bratt and Smith (2009, pp. 3-4)
stated, “According to Nielsen/NetRatings and the U.S. Census Bureau, the United States has
an Internet usage household penetration rate of 72.5 percent, and a population of users
totaling 220 million”.
The huge obsession with celebrity culture in combination with the growing global social
networks had made it too easy to give rise to a cult of personality. America was begging for
change at this point, which left them susceptible to intelligent marketing and design
strategies. It was against this backdrop that in the run up to the 2008 Presidential Election
support and enthusiasm for Obama was increasing at a dramatic rate culminating in a frenzy
by the time of his victory and inauguration in January 2009.
Goodbye Convention
Every presidential campaign had looked the same before the innovation of the Obama
campaign, which enabled him to grab the attention of the watching electorate easily. It had
become tried and true wisdom that the best way to present yourself when running was to use
clean and masculine type, some reference to the American flag and an overall visual style
reminiscent of 50’s and 60’s modernism and neutrality. “Take Obama's rivals. Their visual
identities are in the conservative style that would-be presidents have used for decades.”
(Rawsthorn, 2008). As the following examples show the logos lack any kind of conceptual
3

7.
prowess. They are lifeless and deliberately neutral in an attempt to reach as many people as
possible but in doing so lack anything a viewer can really connect with.
fig 1. Comparison between Obama logo and the previous campaign winners.
In 2008 this traditional conservative approach to campaign design was demolished with the
unveiling of the Obama logo created by Sol Sender. This logo represented a step away from
convention as it removed itself from the usual passive and neutral forms of traditional
political logos and took a committed conceptual direction. The logo depicts a sun rising
over a ploughed field, which symbolized the historic nature of the campaign, and a
connection with the workingman. The reason behind this choice of concept was explained
by the logo creator, Sol Sender in an interview with Steven Heller, “When we received the
assignment, we immediately read both of Senator Obama’s books…There was [a] strong
sense, from the start, that his campaign represented something entirely new in American
politics – ‘a new day’ so to speak” (Thomas 2010, p. xxiii). The American people were
looking for a change and that’s exactly what the Obama campaign delivered. It was
paramount that the campaign step away from the norms of visual communication if they
4

8.
were to align the design aesthetic with their strategic goals of change and progress. It was a
bold step but the results were hard to ignore.
Harnessing The Media
Although the visual ambition of the Obama campaign is unrivaled in history there have been
other successful innovations in political marketing. Additionally this is not the first time a
candidate has harnessed the power of new media to gain huge momentum in his campaign
success. During the 1964 Lyndon B Johnson and Barry Goldwater elections, LBJ’s design
team (DDB) created and ran an ad featuring a small girl counting petals on a daisy. As she is
counting the voice of a loudspeaker mimics her numbers but it is clearly the countdown to a
missile launch. The final part of the ad shows a nuclear explosion with the voice over saying
“Vote for President Johnson on November 3. The stakes are too high for you to stay home”.
fig 2. Story board of the famous ‘Dasiy’ TV Advertisement.
The savvy design team had used the advent of TV to their advantage and propelled LBJ to a
landslide victory. This was the turning point in TV advertising history and from this point
every political candidate would try and gain the same success from TV spots. A negative
consequence of this success however was the increased aggression in smearing of political
opposition. In 2008 we saw the same intelligent use of new and existing media but on a
much larger scale. It is a well know fact that marketing techniques are used to help
politicians as stated by an article in Newsweek, “Every presidential candidate since Richard
Nixon in 1968 was actively "marketed" to the American public” (Ramano, 2008), but never
before have we seen such a flawless execution of political branding in the history of American
political campaigns. This was the catalyst Obama needed to begin his exponential rise to
success.
5

9.
Hiding Inexperience
From the very beginning of the campaign the design team knew they would have to subdue
the public perception of Obama’s inexperience via his visual presentation. This sentiment is
expressed in a New York Times article that states, “Every element of his visual identity has
been masterfully conceived and executed to depict Obama as perfect presidential material”
(Rawsthorn, 2008). According to a lecture by Scott Thomas, the strategy used was to
implement “the timeless…he’s already president feel” (Thomas, S. 2009) into his brand
image. The use of consistency was vital as “one thing that design can solve with consistency
is [to] establish…a sense of balance…it can also really…give the visual impression that he’s
incredibly experienced.” (Thomas, S. 2009). The Obama team “invented a new type of
presidential identity, intended to optimize their candidate's appeal to an increasingly
fragmented electorate in the media frenzy of the Web 2.0 era” (Rawsthorn, 2008).
fig 3. Expert use of consistency in the visual communication makes Obama seem organized, experienced
and competent.
6

10.
Thomas (2010, p. 78) stated “Because of their evocative power, design and branding
elements can create a stable bond between voters and the candidate…we wanted to elicit the
feeling that he was a familiar figure whose attributes and values they could relate to and
trust.”
Another strategy to compensate for Obama’s perceived weakness was to make elements of
the design look reminiscent of such important documents as the Bill Of Rights and the
original American Constitution to emphasize how historically important for America the
campaign was. Rather than simply stating this in the communication the entire aesthetic
was designed around old archival materials. “We wanted to pull from imagery of the past to
communicate the historic atmosphere of the campaign” (Thomas, S. 2009).
fig 4. Certain information was designed using real historical documents found in local archives for an
authentic vintage feel.
This strategy not only highlighted the importance of the campaign but also using imagery
that resembled historical documents, elicited a sense of patriotism and American sentiment,
which could have a strong subliminal effect.
Another way the Obama campaign was able to achieve impeccable consistency was due to
the versatility of Sol Sender’s Obama logo. It became capable of being used in isolation of
the word ‘Obama’ in the same way the Nike swoosh is synonymous with the word Nike.
This meant visual communication needed only the small circle to be a part of the Obama
brand package. It was also tailored to function as a visual identity for the myriad of
7

11.
supporting groups associated with the campaign. Thomas explains “To create these
specialized logos, we integrated symbolic forms that signified a demographic’s distinct
qualities into the visual centerpiece of the logo.” (Thomas 2010, p. 15). The team also
created a set of logos for each state that included elements of the original Obama logo into
the letters which when combined showed the country as one cohesive unit.
fig 5. Complete logo set of each state shows the country as one untied unit
“The next coup was to customize Obama's identity to appeal to different voters…Axelrod
has planned Obama's campaign on the Web 2.0 principle that we live in such a frenzied
media landscape…and we only respond to imagery that seems to be directed at
us personally” (Rawsthorn, 2008). The following selection of Obama logos highlights this
technique of targeting individual groups through visual imagery.
8

12.
fig 6. Small collection of customized Obama logos that talk directly to constituent groups.
9

13.
“This approach balanced diversity with unity, using variety to highlight the power of
individuals while maintaining a unified and consistent visual identity.” Thomas (2010, p.
15). These techniques had a powerful effect that gave the country a real sense of solidarity.
Combining this with the other forms of consistency already in place create an overall brand
image that seems as effective as high end consumer brands. This sentiment is once again
expressed by an article on the New York Times site, “Obama's marketing is much more
cohesive and comprehensive than anything we've seen before, involving fonts, logos and web
design in a way that transcends the mere appropriation of commercial tactics to achieve the
sort of seamless brand identity that the most up-to-date companies strive for.” (Rawsthorn,
2008).
Never before had such an innovative and consistent execution of a political candidates visual
communication been attained in America. Steven Heller admitted, “Everyone I know agrees
that Barack Obama won the design race. Whatever reason, his campaign knew early on that
coordinated graphics were beneficial and that modern typography would signal change”
(Thomas 2010, p xxi)
An American Typeface
To help the campaign attain maximum consistency and elicit a feeling of American
sentiment the design team was going to need a special font for the job. During the
beginning of the campaign the two primary fonts used for the Obama visual identity were
Gill Sans and Perpetua. Both of these were created by British type designer Eric Gill and
had a subtle British style. Perpetua had been created for use in English churches and Gill
Sans had been inspired by the London Underground signage. According to Thomas
“…these qualities also made then seem stylistically formal, and somewhat reminiscent of a
European black-tie affair” (Thomas 2010, p. 99).
After evaluating which typeface would be more suitable the design team turned to a modern
and well-known typeface called Gotham created by Johnathan Hoefler and Tobais Frere-
Jones. This typeface had originally been commissioned for GQ magazine and had a fresh,
masculine feel. It had been inspired by signage at the New York Port Authority Bus
Terminal and produced nostalgic feelings of old New York. A New York Times article
commented “no typeface could seem better suited to a dynamic, yet conscientious, American
public servant.” (Rawsthorn, 2008). This unassuming typeface was perfect for the campaign
as it could be used in a variety of ways but more importantly subtly contributed to the visual
feeling of 20’s and 30’s Americana. Thomas describes this effect as “…delicate and often
subliminal” (Thomas 2010, p. 100).
Finally the secondary fonts were chosen which included Liberation Serif for body text and
Snell Roundhand for special ornamental text elements. This was the second design touch
that contributed to the visual communication seeming reminiscent of the historical
documents of America such as the Bill of Rights.
10

14.
fig 7. Examples of the chosen typefaces and their possible executions.
11

15.
Misleading And Subliminal Imagery
Many people are suggesting a form of subliminal advertising and messaging was at work
during the Obama campaign. One article tries to compare the subtle use of subliminal
imagery by the Obama design team with the Illuminati, stating “they know that when
looked at, most people do not consciously know what the symbols (corporate logos, etc), all
carefully chosen, and each with definite and specific meanings, that are put before them
mean, but the human subconscious and race group mind does understand and reacts to
them” (Fobes, 2008). In June 2008 the design team created a seal to be displayed on
Obama’s lectern that very closely resembled the Presidential seal. This caused controversy in
the media and when Steven Heller ask Scott Thomas to name the most heated design battle
of the campaign “Thomas brought up the infamous ‘presidential seal’ debacle” (Kessler, B.
2008).
fig 8. Obama in front of the controversial custom presidential seal with Latin slogan saying ‘yes we can’.
Imagery such as Obama standing in front of a presidential looking seal before he is president
can have subtle subliminal effects. It implies that he has already won before the election has
taken place and can be a powerful persuasive device if used strategically. Sol Sender, the
designer of the Obama logo suggested “although the ‘presidential seal’ was used by the
campaign only briefly, seeing Obama-the-candidate standing behind that familiar regal eagle
had a lingering effect in the minds of voters” (Kessler, B. 2008). In addition to this the
12

16.
voters have been subject to rock solid consistency in the visual communication that has
strengthened the Obama brand deep in their subconscious minds. Another more subtle
portrayal of the presidential seal can be seen on the Obama website itself which shows
momentarily before the content loads. This graphic has been changed to fit the site but it
clearly has a ‘presidential feel’ about it that once again reinforced the subliminal idea that
Obama was already president before the elections.
fig 9. Presidential style seal in the background of the Obama website.
A final example of using misleading imagery can be seen in the complete redesign of
Obama’s campaign plane. The classic tail design of the American flag has been stripped
away and replaced with the Obama logo. This could be considered unpatriotic but it seems
the idea was to strengthen the connection between America and Obama. Also the campaign
slogan is positioned in such as way that when Obama stands in the open doorway to wave to
the crowds he is visually connected to the word ‘change’ in bold to his right, which could
have subtle subliminal effects on spectators.
13

17.
fig 10. Comparison between original campaign plane and Obama’s re-branded plane.
Ambiguous Communication
Just as the visual communication was at times verging on being misleading and deceitful so
too was the verbal communication of the whole campaign. Ambiguity was the technique
used to ensure the communication was inspiring but at the same time free to individual
interpretation. From the outset of the campaign the three keywords used to inspire the
nation were Hope, Change and Progress, which were the three ideals that the American
14

18.
people were so desperately seeking in 2008. Thomas (2010, p. 78) commented on how
important this was when he remarked, “our strategy would not have worked if Obama’s
message hadn’t rung so true and hadn’t resonated so deeply with the American public”.
These words however inspiring are somewhat empty unless the exact implementation of each
is explained but this was rarely the case when used by Obama. Regardless of this, they
became woven into the visual language of the campaign to the point that the word Hope had
become synonymous with Obama. A news reporter commented about an Obama rally he
witnessed “Obama almost never got into specifics. It was change, change, save the country,
change, yes we can, change” (Wendel, J. 2008).
A False Revolution
One of the most signature visual elements of the Obama campaign shows what a convoluted
collection of socialist, historical and patriotic visual influences went into directing the
campaign. In order to allow the global community of artists to contribute, the campaign
team initiated the Artists For Obama poster series. According to Thomas (2010, p. 127)
“[the] idea was to invite artists to participate in the creation of a new kind of campaign
poster, one that would be the expression of the individual artist rather than a reiteration of
campaign materials.” The first contribution to this initiative was a poster by Shepard Fairey
and to many, his invitation seemed counter intuitive. Fairey grew up in the 80’s and from
an early age was influenced by skating and punk rock, both of which are classically anti
establishment and against the status quo. He built his fame by defacing public buildings
with street art but it wasn’t until the Bush presidency that his work began to be overtly
political. He used art to express his criticism of what the government was doing and how all-
consuming mass media advertising was becoming. Regardless of this he created an art piece
for the initiative in 2008 and his campaign poster was deemed the most iconic image of
Obama ever created, yet it’s unclear if the visual of Obama above the word HOPE was
intended to be ironic.
15

19.
fig 11. An example illustrating the visual similarities between the Obama ‘Hope’ poster and
socialist/communist propaganda posters.
The reason this poster had such an impact was due to the simple fact that visually it was so
far away from the traditional conservative campaign aesthetic everyone was used to. It had a
strong connection to socialist and communist propaganda posters from the 30’s but this
irony didn’t seem to register with the mass majority. To most people this poster symbolized
the revolution that was coming but considering the lost enthusiasm following Obama’s
presidency the question is if this powerful image created a false anticipation of revolution in
the minds of the American people. Thomas (2010) commented in an interview, “I’ve kind
of heard that tone, where…Shepard Fairey’s poster…had this very anti-establishment
aesthetic that could have played into the minds of those that thought this was going to be a
revolution…changing Washington DC from the inside out.”
16

20.
Obama’s Cult Of Personality
A cult of personality is formed via the use of mass media and propaganda to generate a heroic
image of an individual. By the end of Obama’s campaign it was clear that this was beginning
to become reality. Imagery of Obama appeared in galleries, on billboards and around the
city as street art or graffiti, the vast majority of it in full support of him. In addition there
were huge varieties of Obama merchandise being sold by independent street vendors all over
the country. Social networks were buzzing with his name, independent bloggers were
watching his every move and grassroots events, using the same Obama visual design for flyers
and posters, were happening on a daily basis. Even though the ‘visual tapestry of Obama’
that had been weaved across the country was a collaborative effort from hundreds of
individual contributors outside the reach of ‘brand control’, it still maintained high levels of
visual consistency. This was due to the highly efficient and transparent branding principles
that required only the use of the Obama logo and typeface to make any visual production
appear part of the overall marketing strategy.
To a rock solid and seasoned democratic or republican supporter the choice of political
candidate would still have been easy, but people who didn’t necessarily need the programs
suggested by Obama, for example upscale voters and the young demographic, would
probably find the high end brand image appealing and allow themselves to be swayed by it
come election time via “communication based on persuasion in which voters, lacking
enduring political convictions, are induced to support a particular candidate or party at
election time” (Swanson, 2004).
This would be particularly effective given the cult of personality bestowed upon Obama by
the media coverage of him and from his rock star status fuelled by regular endorsements
from celebrities and musicians.
fig 12. Obama featured in a music video by the Black Eyed Peas that turned his slogan into an anthem
It is possible that due to this ‘Obama frenzy’ it had become fashionable to be an Obama
supporter and the thought of not voting for a candidate that was fresh, young, creative,
energetic, and whose very ideals were adorning the city, seemed worthy of ridicule.
Comedian Chris Rock best articulates this sentiment during one of his stand up
17

21.
performances joking, “…Cause you’ll be real embarrassed if he won and you wasn’t down
with it” (Chris Rock, 2007). Another compelling argument for the existence of this
favoritism is raised by a Newsweek article stating, “if policy was all that mattered in [2008],
Hillary Clinton would've won five or six of the…11 contests instead of losing them all.
When it comes to specifics, there's simply not that much space between the candidates”
(Romano, 2008).
The Age Of Disillusionment
It is clear that the intelligent and consistent marketing strategy that helped propel Obama to
victory may have now revealed its misleading nature due to the amount of people who have
become disillusioned about what Obama was actually offering. “His campaign was based on
the man more than any set of ideas or clear vision of the future. Everyone knew what
Reaganism stood for. No one knows what Obamaism means, which has allowed his enemies
to fill in the blank” (Packer, 2010). Packer continues to explain the current situation by
stating “Obama has no larger movement behind him; the one he had ended on election
night” (Packer, 2010).
Since Obama has been in office the frenzy has subsided at an alarming rate, which has left
many people confused as to where it went. One explanation seems to be that the campaign
was effective because it was deceitful and generated false expectations. The following article
describes the sentiment that was developing, “there were many Americans seduced by the feel
good Madison Avenue campaign of Obama, but the trouble with hype is that after all the
BS, you must be able to produce something, four years is a long time to run on
hype”(Skookum, 2010). A downward spiral of disappointment, anger and lost enthusiasm
swiftly followed and continued to the end of 2010. Senate elections in November saw the
Republicans taking back the House, and the American public rejected many of Obama’s
policies of ‘Change’, most notably the healthcare reform suffered a 59% opposition
(although a fraction of this reflects people who didn’t think the reform went far enough). In
addition to this, his approval rating had fallen from 65% in 2009 to 45% in 2010. The
current Rasmussen right track wrong track poll as of 13-19 December 2010 shows that only
23% of the American people think the country is going in the right direction compared to
63% in early January 2009.
The reason for such a huge turnaround in public opinion after Obama’s monumental success
can be attributed to two possibilities. Either the American public developed and overzealous
expectation of Obama and his intentions based on the strategic design of the campaign, or
they were not as open to ‘change’ as they seemed to imply. Another element contributing to
the inevitable collapse of opinion was the fact that the Obama electorate was a fractured
coalition of people with paradoxical interests, but they were held together because the design
strategically took influences from many places to appeal to as many demographics as
possible. This is effective in attracting a large base of supporters but when the difficult
decisions have to be made more people are at risk of being disappointed.
18

22.
Since the Obama frenzy has subsided it is clear that the revolution people were hoping for
hasn’t happened. In an interview with the National Journal, Shepard Fairey commented on
his plan to contribute work to help Obama in 2012 but stated “he couldn’t design the same
Hope poster today, because the spirit of the Obama campaign hasn’t carried over to the
Obama presidency” (Madhani, 2010). A final word from Scott Thomas encapsulates the
sentiment of most people regarding the meteoric raise and fall of Obama’s public image, “It
seems that whatever can or will be said about the Obama years, design does matter” (Thomas
2010 p. xxiii).
19

23.
This study has drawn together many arguments that clearly show design can influence the
success of a political campaign. Specifically it has highlighted many techniques that were
successfully used by the Obama design team to take him to a historic victory in 2008
followed by a monumental fall. “Ruff said, ‘He’s achieved highs no president has ever
achieved before and plummeting at probably the worst rate of any president I’ve ever seen in
my lifetime, and I’ve been around a long time.’ Ruff is nearly 80” (Mondoreb, 2010). This
showed that without real substance design trickery could not continue to generate false
expectations indefinitely. Regardless of this even people with strong convictions were swayed
by the compelling design but finally “independents and Democrats are admitting to
themselves that the Obama image [created] is nothing more than an allusion that they
wanted to believe, against common sense” (Skookum, 2010).
Looking to the future at the 2012 elections it is unclear if Obama will run again but many
political pundits are already predicting he won’t “No, Obama won’t run in 2012, although
he’ll be coy about it for at least a year.” (Mondoreb, 2010). Regardless of who runs it is
unsettling to concede that today’s political landscape is almost completely media and
marketing centric, which means it is impossible to run a straight up campaign that is
completely honest and without the creation of false expectations. This is a historical
moment in political campaign design as the full possibilities of harnessing all forms of media
have finally been demonstrated and will undoubtedly be emulated from now on. This raises
an important question regarding what it takes to win an election. Traditionally it was
mainly the strength of the policies that would draw people to the polling booth; in 2012 it
could be more about the brand image. John Stewart articulates this concern perfectly when
he suggests, “the campaigns are now so intricate and so all consuming that the ability it takes
to win a campaign is not the same skill set to govern and are we raising a generation of
leaders that can win campaigns but not adequately govern?” (Stewart, 2009).
20

24.
Adolphsen, M. (2008) Branding in Election Campaigns: Just a buzzword or a New Quality of
Political Communication?. Published MSc dissertation. London School of Economics and
Political Science.
Bratt, E. and Smith, K. (2009) The Obama Playbook: How digital marketing & social media
won the election. [Online]. Available at:
http://www.marketingprofs.com/store/product/20/the-obama-playbook-how-digital-
marketing-and-social-media-won-the-election (Accessed: 20 December 2010).
Carter, D. (2008) Obama’s Online Campaign: A Top-Down Brand sensation, or Bottom-Up
Revolutionary?. Unpublished Thesis.
Chris Rock (2007) Chris Rock Introduces Barack Obama. YouTube. [Download]. Available at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PW7EbURS2h4&feature=player_embedded#! (Accessed:
23 October 2010).
Deborah, L.G. (2001) ‘Voting Preferences and the Environment in the American Electorate’,
Society and Natural Resources, 14, pp. 455-469.
Fobes, S. (2008) A War of Illusions. Available at:
http://warofillusions.wordpress.com/2008/10/30/so-what-does-the-obama-logo-mean-
anyway/ (Accessed: 21 December 2010).
Lamar, M. (2010) Spiral16. Available at: http://www.spiral16.com/blog/2010/09/social-
media-political-marketing-virtualization (Accessed: 21 December 2010)
Madhani, A. (2010) ‘Famed Obama ‘Hope’ poster artist losing hope’, Yahoo News, 24
September [Online]. Available at: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews_excl/ynews_excl_pl3712
(Accessed: 21 November 2010).
McGirt, E. (2008) ‘The Brand Called Obama’, Fast Company, 19 March [Online]. Available
at: http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/124/the-brand-called-obama.html (Accessed: 22
October 2010).
Mondoreb (2010) ‘Unconventional Wisdom: Barack Obama Can’t Win, Won’t Run in
2010’, Death by 1000 paper cuts, 22 November. Available at:
http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2010/11/unconventional-wisdom-barack-obama-cant-
win-wont-run-in-2012/ (Accessed: 22 December 2010).
Packer, G. (2010) ‘Tom Perriello’s lonely battle’, ‘The New Yorker’, 20 October. Available
at: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/georgepacker/2010/10/tom-perriello-
midterms.html (Accessed: 25 November 2010).
21

25.
Rawsthorn, A. (2008) ‘Brand Obama, a leader in the image war’, The New York Times, 4
June [Online]. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/04/arts/04iht-
design7.html?_r=3 (Accessed: 21 December 2010).
Romano, A. (2008) ‘Expertinent: Why the Obama “Brand” is Working’, Newsweek, 27
February [Online]. Available at:
http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/2008/02/27/expertinent-why-the-obama-quot-
brand-quot-is-working.html (Accessed: 20 December 2010).
Skookum (2010) ‘Obama’s ‘Hope Poster’ Artist, Says It’s Hopless’, Flopping Aces, 25
September. Available at: http://www.floppingaces.net/2010/09/25/obamas-hope-poster-
artist-says-its-
hopeless/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Floppin
gAces+%28Flopping+Aces%29 (Accessed: 21 November 2010).
Stewart, J. (2009) The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Comedy Central [Download]. Available
at: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-november-3-2009/david-plouffe (Accessed: 15
October 2010).
Thee, M. (2009) ‘Poll: Record High for Wrong-Track Rating’, The New York Times, 14
October [Online]. Available at: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/14/poll-record-
high-for-wrong-track-rating/ (Accessed: 23 December 2010).
Thomas, S. (2010) Designing Obama. U.S.A: Post Press.
Thomas, S. (2009) Scott Thomas: Designing the Obama Campaign. Vimeo [Download].
Available at: http://vimeo.com/5943199 (Accessed: 22 October 2010)
Thomas, S. (2010) ‘Personal Interview’. Interviewed by Jamie Foulston for The influence of
design on political campaign success, 26 Oct.
Wendel, J. (2008) ‘Obama: Cult of Personality?’, The Group News Blog, 12 February.
Available at: http://www.groupnewsblog.net/2008/02/obama-cult-of-personality.html
(Accessed: 21 November 2010).
22

26.
Fig 1. Page 4, image montage using logos from 4President.org
Fig 2. Page 5, collection of screen captures from a YouTube video
Fig 3. Page 6, screen capture from a Vimeo video
Fig 4. Page 7, screen capture from a Vimeo video
Fig 5. Page 8, extracted from the ‘Designing Obama’ book
Fig 6. Page 9, montage using Google images
Fig 7. Page 11, extracted from the ‘Designing Obama’ book
Fig 8. Page 12, montage using Google images
Fig 9. Page 13, taken from Google images
Fig 10. Page 14, image montage using a SunTimes blog as reference
Fig 11. Page 16, montage using Google images
Fig 12. Page 17, collection of screen captures from a YouTube video
23