White House Lawyers Look to Limit Commercial Use of President

by: AdamGreen

Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 19:06

I got taken on an unexpected political and emotional roller coaster ride when reading this AP article by Julianna Goldman:

White House Lawyers Look to Limit Commercial Use of President

My first reaction to that headline was to picture a crackdown on the little-guy vendors I see around DC proudly selling their Obama t-shirts, pins, and other wares. (Who could be against that guy on the right?)

But then I read this, and I got a little more open minded to a crackdown:

Obama’s calls for change and his “Yes We Can” campaign mantra are being evoked to sell assembly-required furniture in Ikea’s “Embrace Change” marketing campaign, bargain airfares during Southwest Airlines Inc.’s “Yes You Can” sale...

I've noticed this sort of advertising all around DC. I'd have to see the legal rationale for limiting such speech before truly being open to any sort of legal crackdown, but from a moral/political/consumer perspective, it just rubs me the wrong way.

Corporate America wasn't exactly embracing the message of change before the election, so for them to spend mass amounts of money trying to tap into it now -- as if millions of silly people will go out and buy a mattress because Obama slogans are repurposed on a billboard -- is rather insulting. (Then again, I stopped and took pictures of a billboard and blogged about it, so who's the dummy here?)

Less creative -- but also kind of funny -- the Rhino Bar and Pumphouse's "Barack-O-Bomb" mixed drink.

(If the Rhino Bar sounds familiar, congratulate Chris on his 2006 Google bomb.)

The roller coaster ride continued. Just as the idea of taking on the Obama profiteers was growing on me just a tad, the AP added:

...and "Yes Pecan” ice cream at Ben & Jerry’s Homemade Inc. shops.

Noooooooooooooooooo!!!!!! How could you, Obama lawyers?! Leave Ben & Jerry alone!!!

Then, I ate some ice cream and pulled myself together.

I continued my reading, and saw this other example of Obama's image being used:

The National Education Association is running a TV ad with excerpts from a speech Obama gave on July 5, 2007, with the group’s logo behind him.

The educators’ group has previously shown remarks by Obama in Web videos and is confident the president shares a “clear and longstanding” commitment to “real change and real reform in education,” said Steve Snider, NEA’s manager of advertising and broadcast services.

The NEA is using Obama's image to hold him accountable for a campaign promise? How could they?

I'm actually not sure why this was in the AP article, aside to show that Obama's image is universally handy to anyone who can work it in. I can't imagine that the White House would crack down on this political, non-commercial speech. But, regardless, examples like this would (hopefully) make anyone skeptical of attempts to crack down on the free speech that comes with using Obama's image.

Until...you read this:

Obama’s face is on a full-page newspaper advertisement by the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, a lobbying group in Alexandria, Virginia...The group also began running a TV ad in December that shows footage of Obama promoting clean-coal energy during a campaign event last September.

Damn you, Obama lawyers!! Why are you taking so long? Can't you do something about this?

(Obliatory shout out: There is no such thing as clean coal.)

Honestly, as I scanned the rest of the article and saw references to Sasha and Malia beanie babies and Michelle Obama sporting J Crew, the roller coaster ride just got to be too much. I love J Crew, hate Beanie Babies, love free speech, hate corporate abuse, and the idea of having to mesh all these things together and endure more ups and downs was too much. I had to get off this ride and stop reading.