Team Zebra on point


Mr. Schmidt at Team Zebra notes:

Don’t get me wrong – I’m a big fan of the Glazer/Capp campaign’s poster designs – one year, two days ago, I came up with them. It was to my great surprise, thus, to see the same design popping up all over campus and facebook profiles one year later, virtually unchanged… There are a dozen other factors on which the campaign could better be judged, but on this particular factor, the best they could offer is a slightly jumbled rehash of the poster used by last year’s winning candidate.

Read more here.

Advertisements

4 responses to “Team Zebra on point

  1. wow, those are really similar (so similar that they forgot about this year’s new rules regarding split-ticket elections and didn’t put both names on the posters).

    of course, this sort of “borrowing” from previous campaigns happens every year. remember when rohit filed a complaint with the election commission because matt and mike copied his platform?

  2. That is pretty crazy. That said, I wouldn’t discount the Voith campaign’s strength. It strikes me this is all about the “ground game”, and that a website and posters are kind of the bare necessities that you need to appear legitimate but beyond that won’t help you much. Also, I think most people don’t remember what Glazer’s posters looked like. Voith’s main strength is interpersonal relationships and connections, so we’ll see where that gets him.

    Still undecided,
    Stephen Dewey

  3. If Voith’s strength is interpersonal connections, then it bodes ill for him that he’s been consistently losing to Haddock in the number of facebook supporters.
    – Ben Milder

  4. Matt and Mike didn’t copy Rohit’s platform – if I remember right it was that they used the similar phrasing on subject headings. Here’s the quote from the Crimson article:

    “While some have accused Mahan and Blickstead of recycling many of the ideas of Chopra and Council Vice President Jessica R. Stannard-Friel ’04, the anonymous complaint alleged that the ticket copied portions of the 2002 winning platform word-for-word.

    According to an e-mail obtained by The Crimson, the investigation of the plagiarism allegations centered around three headings that appear on the Mahan-Blickstead website: “Make Harvard’s financial aid second-to-none,” “Organize class-wide events” and “Fight for student representation on the Ad Board.”

    The comparison by the election commission singled out these phrases because of wording similarities to three headings from the Chopra-Stannard-Friel platform, which read “Make Harvard’s financial aid second to none,” “Create class-wide events” and “Representation on the Ad Board.”

    Mahan and Blickstead said that any similarities between their platform and the Chopra-Stannard-Friel platform is due to the fact that council candidates often talk about the same issues.

    “I mean, how else do you say student representation on the Ad-Board?” Blickstead said.

    Chopra said he does not believe Mahan and Blickstead committed plagiarism.

    “I don’t believe at all that there was any plagiarism,” Chopra said. “Similarities in UC platforms from year to year will always exist.””

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s