This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Journal of Visual Literacy, 2009 Volume 28, Number 1, 70-91-
“I’m In!”: Hillary Clinton’s 2008 Democratic Primary Campaign on YouTube
Amber Davisson Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Abstract In 2008, during the Democratic Primary, Hillary Clinton posted 353 campaign videos to YouTube. Each of these campaign videos demonstrated the candidate’s attempts to negotiate the complexities of emerging digital technologies, media interpretations of her political persona, and her role as a “non-traditional candidate.” This essay uses Mikhail Bakhtin’s notion of speech genres to discuss the rhetorical strategies present in three of Clinton’s campaign videos. The relationship between the speech genres used by the campaign and the culture of YouTube™ as a communication sphere highlights the gap between traditional methods of campaign rhetoric and what is persuasive about digital technology. Key words: YouTube, Speech Genres, Hillary Clinton, Parody, Democratic Primary
n January of 2007, when New York Senator Hillary Clinton announced her candidacy for president, she said she was “In it to win it.” Clinton was far from being the first female candidate to seek the White House, but she was one of the first female candidates to voice a very real expectation that she could win (Kunin, 2008). In the past, female candidates “wanted to push the conversation forward, make it easier for the next woman, but they never expected to be elected” (Kunin, 2008, p. 165). For a while, in 2007, it seemed like being elected was a very real possibility; some were even calling Clinton’s victory inevitable (Chait, 2007). In the Democratic Primary, Clinton received 17,267,658 votes, only 166,000 votes less than the victor, Barack
Journal of Visual Literacy, Volume 28, Number 1
Campaign on YouTube
Obama, and more votes than any candidate had received in any U.S. primary prior to 2008 (Cillizza, 2008). Throughout the race the Clinton campaign used digital communication tools such as blogs, YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, and MySpace to communicate the candidate’s political platform and develop her online persona. Hillary Clinton posted 353 videos to YouTube™ during her 18-month campaign and continued to post videos after she lost the primary. YouTube™ allowed Clinton to take her message directly to the voters, rather than simply relying on the sound bites chosen by mainstream media news outlets. This essay considers the speech genres used in three of the campaign’s videos in order to understand how the technology on the YouTube™ site socialized the candidate’s speech and influenced citizens’ interpretations of the campaign. As a presidential candidate, Clinton is fascinating, because her entire political career can be cast as a struggle to be politically powerful while responding to constant attacks regarding her performance of femininity. In an analysis of political cartoons depicting the candidate, Templin (1999) argued that the “nature of the discourse about Hillary Clinton signals the deep struggle still taking place in society over the role of women, and the attacks against her can be seen as part of the backlash against the professional woman” (p. 21). Conversations about Clinton as First Lady revolved around “unresolved relationships between concepts taken as antithetical for women by those of our grandmothers’ generation: women versus power, work versus marriage, childrearing versus career” (Jamieson, 1995, p. 22). Kathleen Hall Jamieson (1995), when discussing Clinton and the double-bind, echoes Betty Friedan’s assessment that Clinton is a Rorschach test for the position of women in American society. For many individuals, she embodies the struggle for women in the public sphere to maintain accepted norms of femininity while enacting typically masculine social positions (Campbell, 1998; Winfield, 1997). Online, scholars are offered a glimpse of Clinton’s attempts to communicate with voters in a way that conforms to the masculine persona of the presidency, but also matches the more conversational style associated with feminine social norms and the effeminate norms of mediated communication (Braden, 1995; Falk, 2008; Heldman, Carroll, & Olson, 2005; Jamieson, 1988; Jamieson, 1996; Kunin, 2008). The videos analyzed in this essay show three of the strategies Clinton attempted online, and demonstrate how the candidate worked to balance her persona and conform to the new technology. Some might question the choice to study Clinton’s YouTube™ videos: they were not as popular as some user-generated political videos and did not attract as many viewers as Obama’s videos. However, Clinton’s videos are interesting for a couple of reasons. First, female presidential candidates in
Davisson- “I’ m In!”: Hillary Clinton’s … ...
and this comprehension comes from “reservoirs of social knowledge” developed over time (Haskins. Volume 28. Number 1 . Aristotle’s treatment of each of the three genres of rhetoric “reveals an inherent tension between the generic division according Journal of Visual Literacy. 2008). 1995. female politicians “still face a series of double binds that are deeply entrenched in a set of gender stereotypes of what ‘real men’ and ‘real women’ are. Trippi.72 the past have faced difficult rhetorical choices when using televised media. Clinton ran a very centralized campaign online (Cottle. 2006. Jamieson. Unfortunately. 58). Kunin. These three videos demonstrate how certain rhetorical strategies can work with a centralized campaign and show how other rhetorical strategies may highlight the centralization to the detriment of the candidate. 1988. aided in the success of some of the videos. and are socialized within. 2005. Trent & Friedenberg. 2007. Harpine. These behaviors and patterns are what may be termed speech genres. Heldman. Speech genres rely on the speaker and the listener’s understanding of the appropriate speech for the appropriate moment. helps to explain how the physical and technical setting of Clinton’s speech constrained some of the speaker’s choices. Clinton’s campaign demonstrates how new media environments may increase or decrease the rhetorical choices of female candidates (Braden. 2004. 2008). as speech patterns developing out of the culture of a space. p. Tumulty. and the common wisdom is that online campaigns need to be decentralized to capitalize on the engaging features of digital technologies (Benoit. Haskins. 354). Clinton’s campaign went against this traditional wisdom. 1991). Previous works on the genres of rhetoric in political campaigns have focused on the Aristotelian notion of genre (Aghazarian & Simons. and this was met with a mixture of success and failure. 1986. 1986. and caused a negative perception of some of the campaign’s messages. Clinton demonstrates some of the deeply rooted tensions facing women in power today. The deployment of various types of speech requires an understanding of the way utterances interact with. The ultimate focus of this research is on understanding how ide to develop communication for a given space (Bakhtin. This conceptualization of genre. a given space. Carroll. 2004). Morreale. 1995. What may be forcefulness in a man’s speech is stridency in a woman’s” (Blankenship & Robson. 1986). Finally. These videos offer insight into how gender identity issues can be negotiated during online political campaigns. Second. 2004). A lot of research focus in previous election cycles has been directed toward decentralized campaign efforts. the different spheres in which communication takes place each develops its own set of behaviors and speech patterns (Bakhtin. & Olson. 2008. as mentioned above. p. Over time. This definition of genre centers on identifying the exact characteristics of a type of speech so that it can be identified without accounting for its situation.
Bakhtin’s conception of speech genres is a much more useful tool for conceptualizing the interplay between the rhetorical strategies in the Clinton videos and media location where the videos are situated. 60). identifiable Davisson. There was so much tension surrounding her politically. Speech genres are different from Aristotle’s definition of genre in that instead of simply acquiring a list of techniques appropriate for various moments. “special emphasis should be placed on the extreme heterogeneity of speech genres” (Bakhtin. the mainstream news media greatly limited the amount of candidates’ speeches that were heard by average citizens. 2004). The discussion of speech genre in this essay should not be construed as an attempt to identify or classify a list of genres for future researchers.” and she did end up writing a reasonably successful column called “Talking it Over” (Bernstein. and throughout the campaign she used this technology to showcase different parts of her persona and her political positions. a polling consultant. p. 2006). but not for understanding the way speech is socialized by its situation. Speech Genres in Clinton’s Democratic Primary Campaign In 1997.. . that her biggest challenge during the election was to create a consistent. Clinton (2003) had experienced some success speaking directly to the public when she wrote articles for Newsweek on healthcare and welfare reform. p. The average news story is only 147 seconds and an entire political speech is often cut down to a nine second sound bite (Benoit.73 to fixed subject matter and reified political function on the one hand and the stylistic apparatus of a particular rhetorical performance on the other” (Haskins. the notion of genre in the Bakhtinian sense is a tool for understanding how the candidate perceives YouTube™ as a new media space and for conceptualizing how the technology and users’ perception of the technology influenced the reception of Clinton’s speech. 2007). understanding speech genres requires a combination of an accumulated cultural knowledge with a sense of kairos. At the time. Instead. 2008). In previous election cycles. to determine the type of utterance most appropriate in a given situation (Haskins. 1986. What Morris may not have envisioned were the opportunities digital media would offer to Clinton a decade later.. YouTube™ gave Clinton the chance to address more voters directly before her speeches were run through the framing and sound biting process. This treatment of rhetoric is useful for classifying types of speech. There is no definite list of speech genres that a critic can search for when researching a text. Morris was talking about Clinton developing a newspaper column similar to Eleanor Roosevelt’s “My Day. Prior to that.1 For Clinton’s campaign team. the goal was not to introduce the candidate to the public but to reintroduce her (Felchner.“I’ m In!”: Hillary Clinton’s … . 2008). 65). Clinton was advised by Dick Morris. 2004. to seek out media formats where she could address the people directly (Bernstein. the right or opportune moment.
1995. Volume 28. the technology on the site where the video is located functions as a filter for the speech (Burgess & Green. radio. the video can be filtered in multiple ways as it circulates through popular discourse. The Clinton campaign site. The candidate can post their original video without having to worry that on the site the news media will edit it down to an 18-word sound bite. Second. and in some cases the cues given by the technology can give the appearance of contradicting the speaker’s message. & Olson. When dealing with the myriad of modern media options there are almost an infinite number of filters that can be discussed.74 image (Braden. Warnick. Jamieson. no ratings section. she seemed to be taking Dick Morris’ advice literally and using the Internet as a place where she could be seen unfiltered. This essay will focus on two specific filters that worked to socialize the candidate’s discourse. Jamieson. Jenkins. 1929/1984). It is too simplistic to discuss YouTube™ as a purely unfiltered space. there must be an awareness of the extreme social and historical heteroglossia of speech (Bakhtin. 1988. which was the exclusive location of early videos. Kunin. 2007). or in some cases the lack of technology. it is important to recognize that just as social norms have developed for politicians speaking to citizens through newspapers. Heldman. and no view count. 2005. Jamieson. I’m In! Approaching the Campaign as a Dialogue When Clinton first started her online video campaign. The technology. 1998. New media spaces open up many possibilities for political candidates seeking to reach voters and get their ideas out to citizens. new media environments should be seen as communication spheres with constantly developing expectations (Burgess & Green. and television. This media form created a space for the public to reacquaint themselves with her. This social cue is used in the interpretation of the candidate’s speech. functions as a social cue to the speaker and the viewer. 1988. However. 2009. Falk. 2007. 2008. Number 1 . However. Heteroglossia refers to the many distinct ways a word or utterance is deployed by different speakers throughout a society and at different points in history. This facet of speech will always lead to some gap between the speaker’s and the listener’s understandings of the utterance (Bakhtin. viewers place social filters and their own personal filters on everything they see and hear. 2008). 2006. contained no visible user-feedback mechanisms: no comments section. This meant only posting videos to her Journal of Visual Literacy. This is in contrast with the YouTube™ site. Felchner. 2009). a later host for the videos. Carroll. 1996. Even if technology allows candidates to address voters directly. 1986). Selnow. First of all. which contains multiple options for users to interact with and around the campaign media. once it is posted.
1996). The expectation of intimacy works with the framing of the campaign as a conversation between citizens and Davisson. 2008. p. An email from Clinton’s campaign the day after the announcement quoted several positive reviews. 40). eager to bond over coffee” (Fineman. 2007.. but the section of her Web site where the videos were posted did not offer any conversational functions or features. 2007. announcing their candidacies simultaneously on the Internet and television (Dalton. January 21. The issues present in the early campaign videos. These quotes could have described several of the early videos that were posted to the Clinton Web site. 2008. While communication in the domestic sphere may have a wide range of flexibility. 2008). Clinton tells the audience: “I’m not just starting a campaign. I’m beginning a conversation. Most of these issues were created by a conflict between visual cues. By portraying the setting of this video as the domestic sphere. Site users complained that their interactions with the candidate were being screened by the campaign (Rigby.. and she came across as very warm and engaging. 2007. NPR’s Mara Liasson said the video setting “looked like her [Clinton’s] living room in Chappaqua. The problem with this choice was that the videos were supposed to take advantage of the conversational format of the Internet. using a Webcast from her site. All communication spheres have certain expectations. . 2007). such as the “Let the Conversation Begin” and the “Hillcasts” series. cold. the campaign created in the audience a set of expectations for Clinton’s speaking style. in February.“I’ m In!”: Hillary Clinton’s … . Winograd & Hais.” Clinton’s use of the announcement video to frame the campaign as a conversation encountered several issues. A Newsweek reporter.75 Web site and avoiding posting them to more interactive sites like YouTube. and the rhetorical choices as represented in the speech genres. there is a sense that this communication will be more personal and intimate than communication in public spaces. She was sitting on this big comfy sofa talking in a very conversational tone” (Quoted in Hillary Clinton. a persona Clinton would have to battle throughout the campaign (Parry-Giles & Parry-Giles. The videos created by the Clinton campaign in January would not be posted to YouTube™ until February and were only posted there after some very public complaints by site users (Rigby. In the video. or masculine. in the video and on the website. Hillary offered herself as an openhearted neighbor. saying that “on the Web. Duman & Locher. This portrayal of Clinton seems to be a response to previous media representations of the candidate as hard. personal correspondence. echoed Liasson’s sentiments. 2008). Obama and Clinton were the first to take advantage of the potential of online video in this election. are exemplified by Clinton’s first campaign video “I’m in!” Clinton announced her candidacy on January 20th. Winograd & Hais. 2008).
but ultimately her speeches more closely resemble judicial or forensic rhetoric. Elements of feminine style come out of scholarly work on how the social construct of gender influences public address (Blankenship & Robson. p. Stylistic cues often work with setting to create generic expectations (Bakhtin. According to Karlyn Kohr Campbell (1998). our basic bargain. if you work hard and play by the rules you can build a good life for yourself and your family. not a dialogue. which reinforces these expectations. Clinton incorporates aspects of feminine style into her speech. not all speakers will adopt the gendered characteristics of speech traditionally associated with their sex. 1989. she vows to “renew the promise of America. Clinton talks about citizenship as a “bargain. it gives the effect of making her seem rehearsed and inauthentic. Additionally. which originated out of women’s communication in the domestic sphere and would naturally complement the setting shown in the video and the larger tradition of campaign videos (Blankenship & Robson. As a rhetor. brings domestic issues to the forefront. but the Web site offered no visible way for citizens to talk back. her language and tone are more indicative of legal discourse. Unfortunately. but as their speech is socialized within larger cultural context they may be held accountable for choices that fall outside social norms (Blankenship & Robson. they are not exclusive to female candidates. This may reflect on the persuasive capabilities of their speech. Number 1 . drawing on her early career as a lawyer. 1996). Clinton’s speech emphasizes the role of the audience in the process. 1995). These are all traditional elements of feminine style. Because Clinton seems out of place in this sphere.76 the candidate. 1996). 1993. 1995. and uses anecdotes from her life as evidence for her policy choices. Volume 28. Campbell. 1986). In the video announcing the campaign. the candidate says she wants to talk to citizens. Jamieson.” a legal term. Clinton often speaks in a forensic style.”2 While Clinton is talking about having a conversation. Dow & Tonn. While they are directly related to modes of communication common to the private sphere. other aspects of the candidate’s communication seem out of place in this space and more appropriate to a courtroom. As she discusses her campaign platform. in the past Clinton used elements of feminine style in her speech. Additionally. Parry-Giles & Parry-Giles. and this form of speech seems out of place within the domestic sphere.” One gets the sense these videos are the beginning of a debate. Visually. the video is surrounded by links for site users to learn more about Journal of Visual Literacy. Bakhtin (1986. that no matter who you are or where you live. 80) points out that “many people who have an excellent command of a language often feel quite helpless in certain spheres of communication precisely because they do not have a practical command of the generic forms used in the given spheres. 1995.
sociopolitical. as a technological location. the primary genre of dialogue lost its connection to its typical social form (Jamieson. So. Secondary speech genres are “more complex and comparatively highly developed and organized cultural communication (primarily written) that is artistic. In the case of the video “I’m In. 1988. and so on” (Bakhtin. within the secondary genre of political video as it was understood before the Internet. and when the primary genre of dialogue is placed in that context there is an expectation it will maintain some of its traditional meaning. as the setting for utterances which attempt to invoke conventions of the primary speech genre of an intimate dialogue. Individuals may have encountered political communication online in the settings of political blogs or message boards. but within secondary genres.“I’ m In!”: Hillary Clinton’s … .” the campaign uses the secondary genre of political video. Primary speech genres are simple genres that are picked up through socialization to various types of discourse (Bakhtin. These two secondary genres point to different interpretations of the primary genre.. It could be argued that presidential campaign videos on YouTube™ were new in the 2008 election cycle. which has its own developed set of cultural expectations. site users did have previous experiences of online communication Davisson. 1996). when Clinton says she is initiating a dialogue within the context of the secondary genre of the Internet. Parry-Giles & Parry-Giles. What the campaign fails to take into account is that the primary genre of dialogue is also being situated within the secondary genre of online communication. So. 62). This gave the impression that Clinton was conversing at viewers instead of with viewers. self-disclosing style that draws public discourse out of a private self” (Jamieson. primary genres “lose their immediate relation to actual reality and to the real utterances of others” (p. p. 1986). However. p. In the past. Parry-Giles & Parry-Giles. However. . online communication can also be seen as a secondary speech genre. 1986. there is some expectation that users will have a place to provide their feedback and make comments. Bakhtin (1986) also pointed out that secondary speech genres often contain primary speech genres. political speech on television invited a more “personal. scientific. all places where they have the ability to respond to the opinions with which they are presented. 2008). the conversational style allowed the speaker to create a sense of intimacy without the audience having a real expectation of two-way discourse (Jamieson. but the only contribution users are invited to make is their support. 1996). 1988. The issue here can be seen as a conflict between primary and secondary speech genres. Within the setting of the political video the Clinton campaign may have felt it appropriate to eliminate some of the social conventions of a dialogue. 62).77 Clinton. and there was not a lot of time for citizens to have developed expectations (Duman & Locher. 1988.. However. 84). on television.
Selnow. Duman & Locher. The implication here is that Clinton’s campaign videos are really just an attempt at brainwashing.” that received many more hits than any of Clinton’s campaign videos (“Viral Politics. Stromer-Galley & Foot.” or “Vote Different. The candidate’s early videos repeat a mistake that Internet campaigns have been making since 1996. By showing her talking at the audience. 2009. Carlson & Strandberg. 2008).” directed by Ridley Scott for the Apple Corporation. but the technological environment where the speeches were delivered (the campaign site) contradicted her statements. 1998). Number 1 . The video was made by Phil deVillas in March 2007 and was viewed over 3 million times in the first month (Winograd & Hais.3 The video points to Clinton’s violation of generic expectations. Clinton attempts to give audience members a presence within the text. Clinton’s speech was incompatible with the private sphere environment where it was filmed and with the technology that was used to deliver it to voters. The expectations associated with the form of the genre of dialogue and the genre of online communication conflicted with the genre of the political video. Volume 28. 2006.78 to draw on when reading the rhetorical form (Burgess & Green. “Apple 1984. The early rhetorical choices made in the campaign reflected Clinton’s misunderstanding of the persuasive nature of digital environments. This created a gap between the campaign’s and the users’ understandings of the utterance. Interactivity is a large part of what makes digital technologies persuasive. Warnick. The tone and style of Clinton’s speech became fodder for at least one individual opposed to the campaign. 2003.” 2007). Footage from Clinton’s video “Let the Conversation Begin” was used to make a mash-up video called “Clinton 1984. Those later videos seem to overcome Journal of Visual Literacy. The major problem with many of the early Clinton campaign videos was incompatibility. 2008). 2008). The video used the popular 1984 Super Bowl commercial. the video highlights the candidate’s failure to create an authentic dialogue. caused hostility toward the Clinton campaign (Winograd & Hais. and begin using rhetorical styles that made use of the digital environment. 2007). The hostility prompted the candidate to move the videos to YouTube. In the mash-up version of the video. This user-generated viral video highlights the sense of Clinton’s authoritarian speaking style that even the cozy backdrop of her living room could not soften. The limitations of the official campaign site. and the speech that drew attention to those limitations. Clinton treated the Web as a place to publish videos instead of a fully interactive social networking platform (Benoit. the image of David Graham as the talking head of big brother is replaced by Clinton’s “Let the Conversation Begin” video. 2002. That is 500 times as many views as the original Clinton video used in the mash-up. and when users feel limited by a site it causes negative feelings (Fogg. 2008.
there has always been speculation about who is in control (Anderson. 255). 2007. 2003. woven by socio-ideological consciousness around the given object of an utterance. When Bill and Hillary Clinton have campaigned together in the past.4 However. Troy. Double-voicedness. Kelly. p. in relationship to feminine style. Parody is the result of two active voices within a double-voiced text. only multiple interpretations of the text.. 2007)? Bill Clinton’s involvement in the campaign created what. Clinton’s video parodying the Sopranos was the first campaign video from any of the Davisson. 1929/1984. 57). Kelly. Trent & Short-Thompson. He argued that any utterance “cannot fail to brush up against thousands of living dialogic threads. it cannot fail to become an active participant in social dialogue” (Bakhtin. 2002. While Clinton’s early campaign videos may have failed. he noted the presence of several cultural forces acting on an utterance at any one time. 2001. was an old problem: the couple’s perceived power tradeoff (Anderson. Troy. 2002. In digital spaces identity is often fragmented. The ability to construct multiple interpretations of a singular text is how the parodic style works with the generic constraints of digital technology.“I’ m In!”: Hillary Clinton’s … . Parry-Giles. Scheckels (1997) argues that in some instances. 2007). creating multiple interpretations of both the speaker and the text. 2000). 1986) discussed the utterance. 2003. The strategic ambiguity in this text is derived from the double-voiced discourse present in the video. 1998. 2001. Trent & Short-Thompson. This type of discourse is ambiguous in that it is constantly commenting on itself. or what Robert Hariman (2008) refers to as “comic doubling” (p. reporters commented that Clinton’s husband’s role in the race made people nervous: are citizens voting for Bill or Hillary (Greider.79 Clinton’s compatibility problem. for the Clintons. is a discourse “in which the overt—oftentimes derived from the dominant culture—is subverted by a stated or implied other message…a kind of parody frequently used by post-modern women in which a narrative pattern defined by the patriarchy is used but undermined” (Scheckels. p. feminine style can represent a special case of double-voicedness. 276). this would have raised suspicions about whether or not he supported his wife’s candidacy. 2000. parody fragments the voice of the speaker and works with the disjointed nature of digital speech (Warnick. Parry-Giles. There is no overt meaning for the text. 2000. When Bakhtin (1929/1984. the simultaneous and conflicting nature of the voices leads to what Bakhtin (1929/1984) calls the hidden polemic. . if Bill Clinton were absent from the campaign. 2000). Lizza. 2007. Sopranos Parody: Using Strategic Ambiguity At the early stages of the campaign. Clinton responded to these issues using a combination of humor and strategic ambiguity. 1997. Lizza.. In the Sopranos parody video.
At this point in the scene. about his new job. The presence of Chelsea Clinton in the video is implied by the image of a car outside trying to parallel park. and his daughter Meadow at a local diner.J. and Tony Soprano.5 The Clintons’ choice to take on the role of the fictional mob family functions as a response to the media dialogue surrounding the couple’s position as “Washington Powerbrokers.J.80 candidate’s official campaigns to be called a “viral video” (Gloede. like you always say. but she is still parodying the role of the male character.. talk about the son’s new job. Clinton even stares down a potential mobster eating lunch at the counter. Carmela arrives first and then Tony.” Journal of Visual Literacy. There is a symbolism there for passing the torch from father to son. Later in the video. and A. Bill alternately plays the roles of Carmela and Tony Soprano. One critical difference between the Sopranos scene and the Clinton video is the way the sex-roles are played out.” The double-voiced nature of the parody allowed the candidate to take on this powerful role and simultaneously mock the conspiracy theories that have plagued her since she was First Lady. and the three eat onion rings that Tony has ordered for the table. Hillary takes on the role of the dominant character when she tells Bill she has ordered the food for the table: carrot sticks. and Danny Levinson (Gloede. his son A. At one point during the video. The campaign used this video to generate excitement about the contest to choose a campaign song. the audience is led to believe she is the driver. taking on the role of the famous mobster allows Clinton to say: “yes. In the scene from the original Sopranos episode.” In the Clinton video. 2007).J. This image can be read as a statement about Clinton’s ability to take on the role as a powerful leader.” In that moment. From the dialogue. Tony meets his wife Carmela. her current job. 2007). the humorous nature of the video allows Clinton to poke fun at individuals who propagate conspiracy theories about the Clintons’ power. On the Sopranos. I am this powerful. Bill takes on the role of the father and Hillary the son. 2007).J. complains that it is monotonous. On the one hand. Tony ordered onion rings for the table. These three are among many of the well-established PR strategists the campaign employed (Berman. Meadow is shown outside trying to parallel park.J. Bill asked Hillary about the campaign. Then. Hillary says she is “looking out for him. In the original scene. he stops complaining and quotes his dad’s advice to “focus on the good times. and she responds: “well.” On the other hand. Jimmy Siegel. focus on the good times. as Hillary travels down the same road Bill took sixteen years ago. Tony and A. Number 1 . and she enters the restaurant last just before the scene cuts to black. Volume 28. Hillary does take on a subordinate role. Tony talks to his son A. In the parody. When Bill complains about the carrot sticks. The idea for the Sopranos parody video was conceived by Mandy Grunwald. and Hillary alternates between playing A.
and allows the candidate to critique the discussions of the gender roles involved in the image of the traditional power couple. and Hillary is looking out for Bill. an event where the President. The video is framed by user comments. “through the shifts. p.“I’ m In!”: Hillary Clinton’s … . and changed hairstyles in every scene to comment on the press fascination with her appearance (Clinton. Bill is still offering advice to Hillary. the doubleDavisson. 256). Clinton performed in a parody of the film Forrest Gump.81 The parody in this video gives voters a sense of the couple’s relationship. While she was First Lady. the site creator. Using the Internet to release the parody gave Clinton the opportunity to deal with some of the personal issues of her campaign while bypassing traditional broadcast media. 2009). By acting out their partnership in this way. In 1994. The following year. In contrast. and members of the press all perform musical numbers and skits (Clinton.. Parody has been a comfortable way for Clinton to comment on complicated gender issues. 2000). user ratings. 58). and silliness of parody…the prior text become(s) an obviously contrived performance” (Hariman. it invites the users to engage in the construction and interpretation of the text and participate in the critical process. In this space. even though he has passed the torch on to her. even as she is on the campaign trail. Both performances received standing ovations. if it is understood as a text. 2003). Clinton had used parody in the past to deal with difficult political issues. the video interface is designed to showcase the potential for interaction (Burgess & Green. and the site users. . the Sopranos video not only critiques the gendered conversations that have troubled the Clinton campaign. on YouTube. the use of double-voiced discourse becomes metonymic for a more difficult-to-verbalize critique and subversion of cultural norms” (p. and other videos that relate to the topic. the invitation to interpret a text becomes an invitation to dialogue. Clinton’s parody calls into question cultural norms about the relationship between husband and wife. the Clintons externalize their relationship for public discussion.. It comments on the positive nature of their relationship without directly answering media speculations. 2008. 2003). Online. slippage. Broadcast media relies on a one-to-many format that has the potential to stifle citizens’ political conversations (McChensey. Scheckels (1997) noted that “double-voiced discourse allows the feminist writer to critique and call into question culture as if it were a text. Parody encourages a level of interactivity that was missing in Clinton’s previous videos. is a multi-voiced text: it reflects the input of the video creator. Hillary and Bill did a skit together parodying the “Harry and Louise” healthcare commercials. The interface. she performed twice at Washington’s annual Gridiron Dinner. This type of ambiguity as a rhetorical strategy has many advantages in digital spaces. In fact. First Lady.
and several other groups. Selnow. This shows a critical adaptation to online political campaigning. 1994. Videos like the Sopranos parody are good for creating large-scale awareness of the campaign online because humorous videos on sites like YouTube™ tend to generate a lot of views. 1998. where she failed in previous videos. and think more about how their messages operate within digital communities. 2006). Number 1 “Ask Hillary”: The Polyphonic Campaign . Smith. beauticians. they do demonstrate the candidate’s attempt to respond to the needs of certain communities. such as the actual episode of The Sopranos. The same can be said for building a voting base. 1998. Apartment buildings. 2007). to complete text (Hariman. Offline. The ambiguity of the text calls on the viewers to bring in their own knowledge of cultural symbols. However. neighborhoods. while they were not the most popular videos Clinton released during her campaign. Ultimately. and classrooms assemble people into groups embedded with norms. This is the broadcast approach to political campaigns. Online. Online. see also Lenart. Anderson (2006) argues that the architecture of the Internet relies primarily on small sites and small groups of people spread out throughout the Web. 2008. 13. candidates need to focus less on the one-tomany format. Clinton achieves the illusion of interactivity here. the strategy needs to be reversed: making more “product” and reaching out to smaller audiences (Anderson. Trippi. Volume 28. 2004). informal rules of behavior. stores like WalMart are successful because they sell fewer types of products but target large audiences. offices. standards of beliefs. The campaign made videos addressing the policy concerns of college students. 2001. 1998. to engender long-term support the candidate must find a way to identify herself with the personal interests of individual supporters. Online.82 voicedness of parody and the multi-voicedness of YouTube™ work together to promote dialogue. mass media political campaigns tend to put more money into creating fewer commercials designed for larger audiences (Benoit. it is in small groups and interpersonal interactions that Journal of Visual Literacy. congregations. Warnick. Research has shown that while the mainstream media may set the agenda for political conversation. 2006. nurses. These videos are interesting because. One way to do this is to situate her policy platforms in relationship to the interests of specific voting groups. Offline. Small groups are critical during elections because “most voters form political decisions in the context of networks and groups. p. Clinton released several videos aimed at the policy issues of specific voting groups. and patterns of interaction” (Selnow. 1966). the style of this video seems more appropriate to the generic constraints of the communication sphere.
This is not that kind of speech adaptation. 1929/1984. Jenkins. 2003. Katz & Lazarsfeld. each of which exhibits agency separate from that of the author. she would quickly get caught. This video starts with Chelsea and Hillary on the campaign trail shaking hands with lots of college-age voters. 2000..” The candidate uses the video format to relate her policy experience with the day-to-day problems of her voting base. and these voices function together to create a single text. McClurg.“I’ m In!”: Hillary Clinton’s … . 1955. The goal of reaching out to different voting groups online is to provide each group with an understanding of how the candidate’s overall policy agenda impacts them personally. Bakhtin (1929/1984) used the notion of polyphony to discuss the way discourse functions in the work of Dostoyevsky. The Web is not an anonymous space for a politician. Within the novels of Dostoyevsky. we are all supporters of Hillary.83 most individuals process the information they are given and form opinions (Druckman & Nelson. political missteps online are quickly noticed and publicized by offline media (Burgess & Green.6 An African American teen says. Hagen & Wasko. McClurg. . In the age of convergence culture. Online. 2006b). “We are all supporters.” Similar testimonials are used throughout the video to help Clinton identify her policies with real voters. In “Ask Hillary. The film techniques used in this video seem to exhibit a form of what Bakhtin (1929/1984) referred to as polyphony. 2006a. candidates have the chance to be more specific in their messages by targeting precise voting groups. Druckman. Hillary’s plan for helping students repay their student loans and get a higher education really meant a lot to me. my family.. If Clinton created a different version of herself for each group she addressed online. and this is interspersed with college students talking about Clinton’s appeal as a future president. 2006). It is easy to think of “targeting” voting groups as an attempt for candidates to be deceptive. These videos allow candidates to meet that need. Voters have a higher level of satisfaction with candidates online when they are able to find information specific to their personal policy interests (Stromer-Galley & Foot. there are often multiple voices.” the candidate targets college age supporters. The presence of a “plurality of independent and unmerged voices and consciousnesses” (Bakhtin. Davisson. 2002). my best friend and I. 2004. 2009. One interesting example is when Clinton talks about her plan for helping students pay for college. Clinton is shown on her campaign bus responding to questions from voters’ posts on Facebook. the term may bring to mind images of politicians who alter their persona for each group they address. Clinton’s answer is reinforced by testimony from college students talking about their problems paying off their debt and how Clinton’s plan would solve their problems: “Currently my student loan payments are more than my rent.
this use of the technology received a better audience response. Volume 28. This video was among the strongest in Clinton’s campaign because it made use of the forensic style. this speaking style has made Clinton look too severe. the portrayal of the candidate at home on her couch seemed to conflict with her rhetorical style. This video maintains the multi-voicedness of the Sopranos parody. The rhetorical style the candidate uses when answering questions seems very appropriate for her location. In this video. Journal of Visual Literacy. Additionally. In the early videos from the campaign. and also demonstrates the campaign gaining a greater awareness of the importance of communication spheres. These videos make use of elements of feminine style by relying on personal testimony and narrative as evidence. This created a set of viewer expectations that were more in line with the way the campaign was operating. Traditionally. they are offered images of other fully realized. This gives Clinton a sense of authenticity she lacked in the early videos. This is demonstrated in part by the choice to place Clinton on the bus answering questions. Number 1 . Clinton really seems like she is at her best when she is on the campaign trail talking about her policies. the campaign had a difficulty dealing with asynchronous nature of video conversation. The video portrays individuals stating their own personal narratives and Clinton discussing the various policy initiatives of the campaign. The viewers were promised a dialogue but the way communication was filtered violated viewer expectations. This is the persuasiveness of polyphony. These independent agents in the text help the viewers to better locate themselves in relationship to the candidate. 6) gives the text a sense of multi-voicedness that is lacking in some novels. this is the style that the candidate has traditionally been the most comfortable with. In the early videos. which the candidate has had success with in the past. individual characters with whom they may identify. The persuasiveness of this technique comes in part from the sense of agency maintained by all individuals involved. individuals were invited to post questions on Facebook and told that some questions would be chosen for the video and others would not. Clinton is shown on the campaign trail answering policy questions. For this video.84 p. and in these videos. when the forensic style is juxtaposed with images of individuals offering personal testimony. the campaign makes better use of the technology as a communication sphere in this video. All voices in the text maintain an agency and individual consciousness throughout the text. Additionally. Overall. As mentioned earlier in the essay. Even if a voter does not identify with Clinton directly. the voices work together under the guise of a single text. However. Clinton’s policies seem more accessible. This form of multi-voicedness is separate from the active double-voicedness of parody in that it contains no hidden polemic.
” and for a while that seemed a distinct possibility.85 while allowing Clinton to continue to speak in the forensic style where she is most natural. and her failures may offer valuable information for the candidates who follow in her footsteps.. and the focus of the Democratic Party was on moving away from the establishment. In later videos. too scripted. 165). 2008). Early videos were supposed to give the impression of a conversation with supporters. Additionally. relatively unfiltered. When Clinton entered the primary race.“I’ m In!”: Hillary Clinton’s … . her rhetorical missteps and later adaptations to YouTube™ as a communication sphere offers insight to future politicians attempting to understand the culture of this space. 2008. Clinton’s use of parody and polyphony allowed the candidate to simulate forms of interactivity with her rhetoric. the nearly 18 million votes Clinton received demonstrate the progress female candidates have made. However. Many individuals began to view Clinton as part of the Washington establishment. 2008. 2008). Wheaton. “the irony is that Senator Clinton is the first woman to be qualified for the presidency…but having reached this threshold. Winograd & Hais. and because of this she did not adapt well to the new medium at first (Bernstein. but the campaign’s lack of interactive technology made the dialogue appear inauthentic. she said she was “In it to win it. Davisson. p. 2008. With the Clinton campaign. and test out new strategies for overcoming boundaries to public office.. later attempts involving parody and polyphony demonstrated some of the possibilities and potential of these emerging campaign tools. Although Clinton did not win the election. 185). too ‘same old’” (Kunin. This impression turned into a problem later in the campaign as it appeared she believed she was entitled to win (Alter. the combination of elements of feminine style and forensic style allows the candidate to access feminine social norms while still speaking in a form that is considered presidential. Conclusion . Clinton has always worked to control media coverage of her and her husband. Overall. one can see that while early attempts to use the technology failed. New media technologies offer candidates a chance to speak directly to voters. she is considered by some to be too qualified. Clinton’s early campaign videos focused on the campaign as a dialogue. 2007. This may have cost her a lot during the campaign: “her overall inability to freely embrace the free-form chaos of online campaigning eventually caused the campaign to lose its biggest asset—the appearance of inevitability” (Winograd & Hais. The advantage Clinton held early on in the campaign was the impression that she was the inevitable winner. p. This showed a critical adaptation to new media rhetorical spaces.
Rhetoric & Public Affairs. 236(7). Blankenship. Riding the Web 2. 44-45. 1(1). Speech genres & other late essays. & Strandberg. (2006). M. Elizabeth Dole. (2009). (1986). (C.washingtonpost. MN: University of Minnesota Press. A. Braden. 1-19. Washington whispers. Newsweek. J. W. Setoodeh. 16-18. K. February). June). K. NY: Hyperion. Cillizza. NY: Peter Lang Publishing. J. M. & Green. and the study of political discourse. 5(2). Columbia. News & World Report.S. 353-366. Trans). (1986). From spouses to candidates: Hillary Rodham Clinton. New York. Emerson. New York. (2008). Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Steep hill. Nation. Campbell. June). MA: Polity Press. H. Chelsea come lately. KY: University Press of Kentucky. genre. A “feminine style” in women’s political discourse: An exploratory essay. Bakhtin. January). & Robson. Austin. (2008. C. J.86 References Aghazarian. (2008. 105-132. (2006). K. 151(2). J. Campo-Flores. Newsweek. YouTube. SC: University of South Caroline Press. Form. (1995). M. Lexington. M. C. Volume 28. 12-14. & Hansen. The long tail: Why the future of business is selling less of more. Communication Quarterly.0 wave: Candidates on YouTube in the 2007 Finnish national elections. (1998). Volume 1. 11-18. (2007. P. R. Malden. Anderson. D. February). C. Burgess. (1989). 151(7). Alter. L. June).html?hpid=topnews Journal of Visual Literacy. M. Carlson. TX: University of Texas Press. T. Man cannot speak for her. 83-84. (2008). A. 5(1). McGee. A. (1995). J. Benoit. 42.. CT: Greenwood. & Simons. A woman in charge: The life of Hillary Rodham Clinton. 43(3). K. Minneapolis. Berman. New York. Communication in political campaigns. How tomorrow became yesterday. Austin. Westport. Retrieved December 21.S. Anderson. 159-174. 2008 from http://blog. Chait. Trans). Bernstein. (work originally published 1929) Bakhtin. Women politicians and the media. 284(22). (2008. Bedard. 142(21). New Republic. President. and the gendered office of U. (2007. Brant. Discursive performance of femininity: Hating Hilary. Campbell. (1984). Rhetoric and Public Affairs. Journal of Information Technology & Politics. NY: Vintage Books. Clinton puts up popular vote ad. Number 1 .com/ thefix/2008/06/clinton_puts_up_ popular_vote_a.. Pages: 22. (2002). (V. Washington Post. (2007. Hillary Inc. U.
Senator inevitable. J. (2007. (2007. Polity. McKinley: Epideictic rhetoric in songs from the 1896 Presidential campaign. March).” National Democratic Party. B. New Republic. Party ideologies in America. 13. Continuites of Democratic ideology in the 1996 campaign. Clinton. 1828-1996. Campaigns & Elections. Cambridge. April). (2008). & Locher. . (2003). Remembering old man Bacala. Druckman. June). N. Let’s start a dialog’: An analysis of the conversation metaphor employed in Clinton and Obama’s YouTube campaign clips. American Political Science Review 98. (1997).87 Clinton. K. M. 28(7). Living history. A. 19-20. 729-745. 29 Aug. R.. (2007. 17(26/27). Dalton. IL: University of Illinois Press. San Francisco. B. (2008). I. Gerring. The digital road to the White House. Hagen. deliberation. American Journal of Political Science. Cottle. Gloede. N. Let’s chat. Rhetoric Society Quarterly. Druckman. 73-88. (1993). 27(3). J. Champaign. Putsch in Hillaryland.. (2004) Political preference formation: Competition. IL. J. Quarterly Journal of Davisson. (2001). Winter2004). Many a hurdle for Hillary. & Tonn. B. Political parody and public culture. Hariman. M. S. 79. 238(2). Fineman. “Acceptance speech to 1996 Democratic National Convention.J. 10. (2000). Chicago. Felchner. July). H. Persuasive technology. February). (2003). Duman. 1996. 5-8. New York. E. W. (2007. 47(4). 30(1). Gerring. Consuming audiences? Cresskill. 286-302. Editor’s note. National Convention. NJ: Hampton Press. & Wasko. Quarterly Journal of Speech. 167-186. NY: Simon & Schuster. “Feminine Style” and political judgment in the rhetoric of Ann Richards. R. Dow. (2008). (2007. and the (ir)relevance of framing effects. Framing and deliberation: How citizens’ conversations limit elite influence. M. J. 34(1). B. (2003). W. Falk. J. Newsweek.“I’ m In!”: Hillary Clinton’s … . Women for president. Greider. 671-686. 14-15. (2004. ‘So let’s talk. 193-230. Harpine. PC Magazine. MediaWeek. Multilingua: Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication. 26(9). February). Nation. CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. Fogg. M. (2008. We want yer. 284(12). & Nelson. UK: Cambridge University Press. 40. H. 149(6)..
I’m in [video]. (2008. Number 1 . Katz. (2007. 83(27). New Yorker.H. McChensey. Jamieson. (2007. Hillary Clinton Sopranos parody [video]. NY: NYU Press. (2006b). 50(3).. (1994). R. NY: Oxford University Press. The rhetoric of First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton: Crisis management discourse. S. Lenart. 2008 from http://www.88 Speech. E. SC: University of South Caroline Press. com/watch?v=9BEPcJlz2wE HillaryClintonDotCom (Producer). Haskins. Kelly. 737–754. NY: Oxford University Press. 349-366. New York. S. Jenkins.V. New York. Beyond the doublebind: Women and leadership. C. Packaging the presidency: A history and criticism of campaign advertising. New York City. (1995). January 10). F. McClurg.YouTube. Kunin.H.. (2007. Westport. Columbia. Convergence culture. power & politics: How women can win and lead. NY: New Press. Political Communication.com/ watch?v=SJuRQZ2ZGTs HillaryClintonDotCom (Producer).YouTube. K. Jamieson. Rich media. Volume 28. Retrieved September 16. American Journal of Political Science. (2000). E. NY: Oxford University Press. January 22). C. Pearls. Heldman. (1996). McClurg. S. Political disagreement in context: The conditional effect of neighborhood context. (2006a). R. E. Morreale. 38-44. disagreement and political talk on electoral participation. poor democracy: Communication politics in dubious times. J. (2005).com/ watch?v=WqibBRlF3EE Jamieson. S. (2006). H. 2008 from http://www. 247-272. “She brought only a skirt”: Print media coverage of Elizabeth Dole’s bid for the Republican presidential nomination. K. September). Logos and power in Isocrates and Aristotle. & Olson. S. M. 2008 from http://www. The political campaign film: Epideictic rhetoric in a Journal of Visual Literacy. Eloquence in an electronic age: The transformation of political speechmaking. The legacy problem. & Lazarsfeld. White River Junction. New York. New York. (2008). June 19). The electoral relevance of political talk: Examining disagreement and expertise effects in social networks on political participation. Ask Hillary [video]. 94(3). (2004). Lizza. CT: Praeger.. Glencoe.YouTube. Carroll. VT: Chelsea Green Publishing Company. 28(4). P. IL: Free Press. Retrieved September 16. Political Behavior. 315-335. HillaryClintonDotCom (Producer). Retrieved September 16. K. (1988). (2001). Personal influence: The part played by people in the flow of mass communication. (1955). Shaping political attitudes: The impact of interpersonal communication and mass media. H. Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage. 22(3). (1991).
and Mrs. Halloway (Eds. (1998). S. and images (pp. Scheckels. 169(14). S. 63(1). Warnick. 171(18). (2004). 20-36. C. K.89 documentary frame. Senate debate over the impact of Tailhook ’91 on Admiral Frank B. B. Tell me how this ends? Time. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. (2001). W.E. (1998). Hillary Clinton as a threat to gender norms: Cartoon images of the First Lady. A. Electronic whistle-stops: The impact of the Internet on American politics. B. 306-324.0: A practical guide to using Web 2. Parry-Giles. (1999). rhetoric. (2002). Parry-Giles. S. Journal of Communication Inquiry. C. Lawrence. Citizens perceptions of online interactivity and implications for political campaign communication. Critical Studies in Media Communication. 18. J. CT: Praeger. NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 23(1).) Images. Critical Studies in Mass Communication. NY: Rinehart and Winston. codes. G. The Southern Journal of Communication. 187-202). From First Lady to United States Senator: The role and power of image in the transmogrifying of Hillary Rodham Clinton. (1996). Biocca (Ed. Selnow. and engage youth. Mediating Hilary Rodham Clinton: Television news practices and image-making in the postmodern age. Time. B. Troy. (2007. A. J. CA: Jossey-Bass.0 technologies to recruit. Mr. Political campaign communication. In F. 15(3). The revolution will not be televised: Democracy. (1966). (1997). Trippi. Hillsdale.’ Communication Monographs. R. (2007). Trent. Warnick. Tumulty. 8(1). Westport. President: From the Trumans to the Clintons. May). 337-353. KS: University Press of Kansas. CT: Praeger Publishers. organize. In R.L. J. Denton and R. New York. Television and political advertising: Signs. Rigby.. & Parry-Giles. New York. San Francisco. Gendered politics and presidential image construction: A reassessment of the ‘feminine style. . 56-68. April). J. Templin. and Davisson. Critical literacy in a digital era: Technology. Mobilizing generation 2. Stromer-Galley. (2000). 17(2). the Internet and the overthrow of everything. Communication and culture. & Short-Thompson. 63(4). Smith. NY: Harper Collins. (2008). (2003). V. S.). 26-28.“I’ m In!”: Hillary Clinton’s … . 205-226. Trent. & Foot. and Communication Strategies of the Clinton Presidency. Westport. CT: Praeger. Appearance of reality? Political parody on the Web in campaign ‘96. (2000). Scandal. K. G.. The rhetorical use of double-voiced discourse and feminine style: The U. Viral politics. & Friedenberg.S. T. Westport. Kelso II’s retirement rank. (2008. T.
However.. Early on in Clinton’s campaign. Political Communication. (2007).” and this language also manifest itself in party’s platform and legislative agenda (Gerring. 1997. & Hais. airing. E. This is not meant to downplay the importance of the role of the mainstream media in picking up. Newsweek. the notion of bargaining is a common trope in the rhetoric of the Democratic Party that goes back further than either of the Clintons. Darman. 1. Rhetoric online: Persuasion and politics on the World Wide Web. band plays on. Candidates for the Democratic party often discuss their platforms as “deals” or “bargains. D. H. 241-253. YouTube & the future of American politics. 3. 78(39). Wheaton. Winfield..This impression was further reinforced by press commentary during those early months.90 public interest. during the 2008 election campaign videos from YouTube™ were routinely replayed and critiqued by the mainstream news media (Jamieson. (1997). there was a sense that she Journal of Visual Literacy. NY: Peter Lang Publishing. Warnick. 2.Some might remember the phrase “basic bargain” from Bill Clinton’s 1996 Democratic National Convention speech. Mainstream media outlets aired many of Clinton’s YouTube™ videos. for more information on media framing of Hillary Clinton prior to the 2008 election see Parry-Giles (2000). Millennial makeover: MySpace. future researcher may want to explore the role of the mainstream news media in filtering and redistributing these campaign videos. & Clift. this project will be limited to an analysis of the videos as they were situated on the campaign site and the YouTube™ site. However. and critiquing these videos. Florence. 14(2). R. (2007. 2001). KY: Lawrence Eribaum Associates. The language Clinton uses here has a long history. M. Just as in previous election cycles with campaign ads. Winograd. (2008). (2007. B. New York. J. B. K. Advertising Age.. Wolffe. New Brunswick. 1988). October). The end of inevitability. Number 1 Endnotes . Jenkins (2006) argues that it is important to understand that we live in a convergence culture where texts often flow from one medium to the next.The primary focus of the rhetorical analysis in this essay is the speeches as they were situated within the YouTube™ site. Additionally. Volume 28. Bailey. April). 149(16). M. Cash rolls in. In order to give some depth to the discussion of the interaction between Clinton’s rhetoric and the digital technology used to distribute it. 30-31. NJ: Rutgers University Press. The making of an image: Hillary Rodham Clinton and American journalist. 20.
2008. Clinton. especially since Clinton wanted to shelter her 27-yearold daughter from negative media attention (Bedard. Darman & Clift. but caused a lot of negative attention from the press about an unelected official holding so much power (Bernstein.91 would not listen to comments from individuals outside the campaign (Wolffe. 2008.. Davisson. 2003). Brant & Hansen. . Bailey. This is one of the only videos where Chelsea Clinton makes an appearance. 2008). 5.. giving more speeches and becoming more visible (Campo-Flores. Kelly. Clinton. 6. Chelsea Clinton increased her role in her mother’s campaign. 4. 2007). 2003). Clinton said during his campaign in 1992 that with Bill and Hillary you “buy one. 2003.“I’ m In!”: Hillary Clinton’s … . Clinton. get one free” (Bernstein. The idea of a Co-Presidency seemed appealing to the Clintons. 2001). 2003. In February of 2008. there had been controversy over Chelsea’s role on the campaign trail. 2008. Clinton. 2007. 2001). Setoodeh. The choice for Chelsea not to appear in the video may be a reflection of the candidate’s constant attempts to keep her daughter out of the media spotlight (Bernstein. Kelly. In June of 2007.