In order to show Trump has support from certain demographic groups, like young women, the campaign launched Facebook ads showing some of these supporters. Problem is, they aren’t real, nor even American in some cases. They are lifted from iStockPhoto, and Tracey from Florida is actually on a beach in the Mediterranean while Thomas from Washington Is in a cafe in Tokyo. Sad!
KAG!
This is pretty standard practice.
There’s apparently a teeny tiny disclaimer in the ad that states “actor portrayals, actual testimony” or some shit. That’s fair, I guess.
This is the example I use frequently in those free association arguments here, where I advocate for private businesses and citizens full freedom to enter into commerce with whomever they choose, or choose not to. My example is that of a paid actor or model essentially being forced to become the new face of X product, which the actor or model may find objectionable and doesn’t want their likeness or work being associated with it (tobacco products, incontinence or erectile dysfunction medication, etc. Whatever.). The models in this ad were compensated for their original appearance and likely signed away any rights to usage, I assume, but shouldn’t they have the right to not be circulated worldwide as a face of the Trump reelection campaign? Say they had to sign off on every usage of their stock photo; shouldn’t they have the right of refusal? Why is that any different than a wedding singer not wanting to sing (i.e. participate and help celebrate) at a same-sex marriage, or the heterosexual marriage of a known serial abuser to a naive insecure woman who thinks she can’t do better?
I get the protected class thing and the legalities involved. It’s the principle behind the law and the inconsistent application I’m referring to.
And some of the photos they use for their “huge†July 4 celebration were actually from the women’s march in the winter. Unless of course, they suddenly had plunging temperatures in July in Washington DC which made everyone put on winter coats and hats.
but shouldn’t they have the right to not be circulated worldwide as a face of the Trump reelection campaign? Say they had to sign off on every usage of their stock photo; shouldn’t they have the right of refusal?
They have every right to put that in their contract but then if they do they may not get the job. Signing off on every photo would be ludicrous. The job would go to the people that don’t care.
This is pretty standard practice.
Even the Chevvy commercial says “not paid actors.”
When you’re telling viewers that “Al from Texas was a lifelong Dem voter but has now switched to Trump” you might actually want to find a genuine Al.
A Dem political strategist said he would be fired if caught doing that.
but shouldn’t they have the right to not be circulated worldwide as a face of the Trump reelection campaign? Say they had to sign off on every usage of their stock photo; shouldn’t they have the right of refusal?
They have every right to put that in their contract but then if they do they may not get the job. Signing off on every photo would be ludicrous. The job would go to the people that don’t care.
A Dem political strategist said he would be fired if caught doing that. ******
breathes heavily…….
but shouldn’t they have the right to not be circulated worldwide as a face of the Trump reelection campaign? Say they had to sign off on every usage of their stock photo; shouldn’t they have the right of refusal?
They have every right to put that in their contract but then if they do they may not get the job. Signing off on every photo would be ludicrous. The job would go to the people that don’t care.
A Dem political strategist said he would be fired if caught doing that. ******
breathes heavily…….
Huh? What does that have to do with stock photography sign off?
but shouldn’t they have the right to not be circulated worldwide as a face of the Trump reelection campaign? Say they had to sign off on every usage of their stock photo; shouldn’t they have the right of refusal?
They have every right to put that in their contract but then if they do they may not get the job. Signing off on every photo would be ludicrous. The job would go to the people that don’t care.
A Dem political strategist said he would be fired if caught doing that. ******
breathes heavily…….
Huh? What does that have to do with stock photography sign off?
Nothing. The whole subject of the thread lacks credibility or importance. As evidence by the need of the Big Kahuna of the Left here needing to cite an unidentified “dem pol strategists” theoretical position within the first 5 posts in an attempt to legitimize the original position.
No surprise here at all. This is the guy who had paid actors cheering for him when he came down the golden escalator and who has lied thousands of times as president. And of course they did it poorly with pics of people in winter clothes, because they are inept and their fans will accept it.
This is the guy who brought you this BS 4th of July Campaigne rally paid for by You!
This is pretty standard practice.
Even the Chevvy commercial says “not paid actors.”
When you’re telling viewers that “Al from Texas was a lifelong Dem voter but has now switched to Trump” you might actually want to find a genuine Al.
A Dem political strategist said he would be fired if caught doing that.
LOL! That’s cute…