Obama Skin Tone Darker In Clinton Ad?

America Blog:

Via America Blog:

I went and got the original footage from the Clinton ad, and then compared it to 3 different video clips of the same debate from 3 different sources. I did this so as to take into account any editing, or quality issues, that might have accounted for Obama having darker skin in any particular video. None of the 3 video sources I found showed Obama nearly as black as the Hillary ad does. Click the image above to see a larger version. Look at his lips. Look at his eyebrows. Look at how the red MSNBC background has turned more purple. Clearly the image was darkened. The question is "why."

Make the comparison yourself:

(Picture compiled by America Blog)

One Kos diarist recalls the infamous O.J. Simpson cover on Time Magazine:

One of the first times I distinctly recall this issue being brought to the forefront was the Time Magazine cover picture of O.J. Simpson after his arrest. Time was heavily criticized for darkening the shade of Simpson's skin in the cover photograph.

Whether intentional or not, the message was that a darker skinned Mr. Simpson somehow was more threatening or frightening than a lighter skinned Juice.

Check out the original picture comparison:

Read the whole story: America Blog

Comments

[MinneapolisBob]

I think it's safe to say that most of us expected racism to rear its head in this years elections, but not by a Democratic candidate. Bill Clinton has the classification in the African-American community as being America's first Black president.

It is very sad and disappointing to see Hillary Clinton allow her campaign managers to conduct things in this manner. Plus having an African-American campaign manager not withstanding. Hillary Clinton has said somethings which have been very insulting about Barack Obama. Yet he has kept the high ground. She has lost huge African-American support since the comments prior to the South Carolina primaries. She was taking their support for granted, and now African-Americans feel betrayed by the wife of the man they thought of as being the first Black president.

[sideways74]

Fact Check as ruled on this - read the article.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/did_clinton_darken_obamas_skin.html

[ordinaryguy]

Fact Check, "We're not mind-readers, so we can't say whether or not the makers of this ad intended to engage in "race-baiting" or were 'using racism to win'..."

[Roshi98]

Care to provide the ENTIRE quote?

Thought not.

We're not mind-readers, so we can't say whether or not the makers of this ad intended to engage in "race-baiting" or were "using racism to win" as some Obama partisans are claiming. Based on evidence at hand, we find those claims to be unsubstantiated.

[Rhouse]

"We're not mind-readers, so we can't say whether or not the makers of this ad intended to engage in "race-baiting" or were "using racism to win" as some Obama partisans are claiming. Based on evidence at hand, we find those claims to be unsubstantiated. "
Just a little bit more of the quote, frome the updated article.

[Tranquility]

It's very disheartening for people who are not racist, to be labelled racist, for political,or personal gain. But, it's a quick way to invalidate someone.

[S1m0n]

It's even more disheartening to lose because your opponant made coded appeals to racists.

[Tranquility]

Except that is highly unlikely as they've said it isn't their ad. sigh

[MariaHopeful]

And that is why if Hillary Clinton wins the nomination, the Democratic Party as we know it will be no more. Blacks and young Latinos will not vote for Hillary Clinton. The Democratic party will lose in November.

[samandally]

Mariahopeful, and I think that if Oblahma is nominated the same is also true!

[oshpd1]

According to interviews I saw with spanish group leaders in Texas, they said they will vote for Hillary becasue Obama is black and when the blacks had power they forgot about the spanish people. So if Hillary does get the nomination MariaHopeful is 100% correct. Many of the spanish voters have made this process about race by voting aginst a Black man. How sad this is.

[Ramirez]

My God, now the Associated Press is darkening his photos as well. Check THIS:

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//080305/480/e2c812a17ae545f4bcda0bd8fcf3da4e/


I blame Karl Rove.

[tehriaz]

you have GOT to be fucking kidding me. is this the best you can do?

[BeyondGoodAndEvil]

Additionally, in this attack ad from the Clinton campaign where they darkened Senator Obama's skin tone, yet whitened his teeth and shirt (from debate footage) they also made a false claim that Joe Wilson has been repeating and has been circulating around the web:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/4/21311/85811/447/468408

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-wilson/obamas-hollow-judgment_b_89441.html

The claim is that Senator Obama as chair of the subcommittee for European Affairs, is responsible for NATO or Afghanistan and has been derelict in his duties by not holding hearings on NATO and Afghanistan. This simply isn't true, as matters of importance regarding NATO are handled directly by the full US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, chaired by Joseph Biden.

Furthermore, NATO matters in relation to Afghanistan and it's current deterioration would also be handled by the US Senate Committee on Armed Services, of which Senator Clinton is a full member. This fact was purposefully omitted by Joseph Wilson and the Clinton campaign.

The lie that was perpetuated by Joseph Wilson and incidentally appeared on the attack ad on Obama by the Clinton camp, appear to be a co-ordinated and malicious attempt to misrepresent Senator Obama's responsibilities and concurrently cast aspersions on Obama's commitment to his Senate duties.

Visually manipulating voters with the doctored debate footage and spreading outright lies about Senator Obama, seem to be acceptable tactics by Clinton supporters. Are these the kind of campaign tactics that a respectable and ethical Presidential Candidate should be undertaking in this campaign? Are these the kind of tactics that Democrats or the DNC endorse? They seem closer to GOP smear tactics, than something that belongs in a contested Democratic primary race.

[Silpat]

So dark is considered to be bad, is that what we are saying here?

Why?

[jmaroon]

No, I think the point of the post is that the Clinton Campaign purportedly darkened Obama's skin tone; if that is true (and the pics are disturbing to say the least) it would suggest that either a.) Clinton equates darker skin with negative connotations, or b.) the Clinton Campaign believes voters equate darker skin with negative connotations.

Either way, it is very troubling that the Clintons elected to pursue such tactics. Unfortunately, this is in line with her other tactics of the past weeks; the "Red Phone Ad", her offensive comment on 60 Minutes relating to the malicious smear campaign against Senator Obama and offensive to Muslim Americans (“Of course not. I mean, that, you know, there is no basis for that. I take him on the basis of what he says. And, you know, there isn't any reason to doubt that... No. No, there is nothing to base that on. As far as I know,”) or her comment that she and McCain (yes, the GOP Nominee) are better qualified than Obama on National Security.

The Clintons will employ whatever tactics necessary to win. This is the leadership we can expect... I can't wait for four years of that administration.

[tehriaz]

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/did_clinton_darken_obamas_skin.html

[jp5472]

Unfortunately, psychological studies have shown this to be true. In general, people have an inherent "draw" and also have it ingrained within them from infancy that the color white represents positive, the color black negative. There have been many studies with these results. There has even been a recent report that dogs are less likely to get adopted if they are black in color as opposed to lighter colors. Throughout the last century there have been many usages of this "strategy" to implant a fear within the white population that a black is threatening their status quo. It can be so subtle that it has an almost subliminal effect, but the "seed" is planted and just like the language used in her 60 Minutes interview, you plant the seed and let it take its course on the underlying fears of the populous that have been a part of the American mindset for centuries. There are so many studies and books on this, it is amazing, yet people question it as if these strategies don't exist or are not subversively carried out within politics.

[cassieblue]

The Clintons think it is. That is the reason for the darkend photo.

[PhoenixtheUndying]

Clearly that is darker than any other photo I've seen of him. Why is a good question, especially when you consider the ad's audience. Her staff did say it was a "kitchen sink" strategy and she meant to throw everything at him.

[Silpat]

So are people here agreeing that dark skin is bad and lighter skin is good? If so, then aren't you in fact the racists?

[jp5472]

Unfortunately, psychological studies have shown this to be true. In general, people have an inherent "draw" and also have it ingrained within them from infancy that the color white represents positive, the color black negative. There have been many studies with these results. There has even been a recent report that dogs are less likely to get adopted if they are black in color as opposed to lighter colors. Throughout the last century there have been many usages of this "strategy" to implant a fear within the white population that a black is threatening their status quo. It can be so subtle that it has an almost subliminal effect, but the "seed" is planted and just like the language used in her 60 Minutes interview, you plant the seed and let it take its course on the underlying fears of the populous that have been a part of the American mindset for centuries. There are so many studies and books on this, it is amazing, yet people question it as if these strategies don't exist or are not subversively carried out within politics.

[Destardi]

OH PLEASE.

Obama supporters will latch onto ANYthing, won't they?

Here's an explanation from: http://reddit.com/info/6ashp/comments/c03cj3o

I work in broadcast advertising, so two things from a professional standpoint:

1) The aspect ratio shift is exactly 0.9; which is the difference between "square pixels" and "dv pixels," DV pixels are slightly squished for technical reasons relating to the difference in the way TVs and computer screens display images. A squished face happens all the time if footage from one source is not properly imported, or converted when exported. It looks to me like the entire commercial is squished, meaning someone captured this in a DV file format without correcting the aspect ratio for accurate viewing on a computer screen.

2) As you can see in the obvious difference in saturation values; the gamma curve is completely different for the hillary commercial. This is a little more complex, but essentially, the gamma dictates the slope of how the image shifts from dark to light, and is another broadcast vs. computer issue. For example, any image that looks bright and crisp on TV will look too dark and tough to see if played on a computer, while a normal computer image, will look bright and washed out on a television unless it is properly color corrected. This suggests to me that when the spot was compressed for the internet, someone did it wrong, leaving the broadcast colorspace since even the scenes without Obama in them are too dark and contrasty.

Either whoever made the ad simply didnt know what they were doing, OR whoever digitized and captured the ad, and posted it to youtube, didn't know what they were doing; either way, it wasn't an intentional move by the Hillary campaign.

If they had intended to make Obama look "blacker" they would have gone about it in a very different fashion. You would not be able to see any difference in the image, except for his skin tone; extensive and transparent color correction is not difficult to do, happens on a daily basis and is done for every commercial you watch.

I haven't had time to look into the truth of the statements made in the ad, and I hope they're not lies because I think Obama's great, but these accusations are ridiculous. If they wanted him blacker, they would have done it in a way that no one would notice except with a side by side comparison, and the Photoshop color picker. Someone that has a KOS account, please post this in the comments there. They're going crazy over nothing.

Edit: As an aside, the idea that its "almost impossible" for "color profiles" to be responsible for that significant a difference shows an utter lack of knowledge on the part of the article's author. Not only is it easy, its almost certain that an untrained amateur will make these kinds of mistakes when manipulating footage across devices. This is one of many reasons why I still have a job even with iMovie out there.

2nd Edit: I should point out that they're also basing their leaps off of two YouTube clips; because YouTube is the end-all and be-all of high-quality reference picture. The DailyKos article is pure sillyness.

Edit 3: I did a test:

http://img222.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gammabk7.png

Straight 2 pass gamma conversion of debate footage (debate encoded using tv gamma, then imported using PC gamma) using Apple's Compressor. Looks pretty close to me, though it's crappy youtube quality. If you add a slight color correct to the whole image itll match perfectly. If you were trying to make him look blacker, you'd just pull his skintones. QED.

Pixel-aspect correction is so obvious I don't even need to demonstrate. Whether the editor screwed up, or the uploader screwed up, is irrelevant, its an amateur hour mistake.
----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------


Who raised this issue originally? Anyone ask themselves that?

Ever read Bill and Hillary's actual "racially undertoned" comments in their entirety?
How are THESE racist, in an Obama supporter's own words?
http://mediamatters.org/items/200801130004

Now, was Obama right or wrong in allowing a "leaked" memo (AKA WHISPER CAMPAIGN!) Convenient right after Hillary's win in New Hampshire, huh?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12/obama-camps-memo-on-clin_n_81205.html


My God people.

[ndolomar]

can you then explain why his teeth are whiter in the ad's image? having worked with adobe and jasc, that's a pretty amazing glitch.

[tehriaz]

thank you SO much.

[soylentgreenleftovers]

Confucious say: if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullsh#

[shinybear]

Can you explain why they couldn't take all yopur mumbo jumbo explanations into account and correct the ad before it was released?

[Tranquility]

Is this article and headline designed to stir up racial tension and solidify the black vote against Hillary Clinton?

[TheInsomniac]

Have you looked at exit polls? The black vote is already solidified against the Republicans, I mean Hillary.

[VillyVal]

To me, the most interesting aspect of the photo array is that Obama's complexion is different in all four pictures.

[Silpat]

I don't get it, should dark colored skin be considered a bad thing?

[FogCityJohn]

If Hillary Clinton's campaign is behind this, then she doesn't deserve the Democratic nomination. This is something that I'd expect from the Republicans, but not from a Democrat. Her fearmongering was bad enough, but this is inexcusable. Doing this sort of thing is unquestionably racist. If it turns out she's responsible for it, then I won't vote for her even if she is the nominee. Nobody who would stoop to this deserves my support.

[tehriaz]

haven't we been over this?

[epistrophy]

apologies.­...that post was supposed to be somewhere else...

[epistrophy]

...see, i was laughing so hard i misspelled LMAO.