The ad appears on Roll Call and The Hill today. It lays out the case for the US to stay away from the UN’s Durban III conference this September.
The UN’s ONLY growth industry: Holding racist “anti-racism” conferences
“Durban III,” the next UN racism conference will be held on September 22nd 2011 in New York City. As a world summit for heads of government, it will include Holocaust-denier and nuclear weapons-builder, Iranian President Ahmadinejad, even though he remains focused on committing genocide against the state of Israel. The United States and Israel walked out of the Durban I hatefest held in South Africa in 2001 and refused to sign on to its end product, the Durban Declaration. The Declaration uses false accusations of racism to accomplish Israel’s diplomatic isolation and defeat. The United States, Canada and other Western nations refused to attend Durban II held in Geneva 2009, which reaffirmed its earlier declaration and was headlined by Ahmadinejad himself. Ironically, Durban III is intended to “commemorate” and celebrate Durban I, elevating the very hate that motivates radical Islam in New York City just days after the 10th anniversary of 9/11.
See the full ad here (PDF). The original Durban conference in 2001 turned into such a ridiculous spectacle of anti-Semitism that the Bush administration walked out on it. The Obama administration boycotted its sequel in 2009, and several European diplomats walked out when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad launched into an anti-Israel tirade.
I hate to say it, but ads like this are a waste of space. If I had $10,000 to put up, I would lay all of it on the proposition that nobody reads them. I mean nobody.
Such ads are too long, too wordy, too unattractive for people to look at. They wr 2 lng B4 the days of txt msgs—and they are far, far too long now. They are in tiny and usually ill-chosen type, with lousy layout, and they try to make too many points at the top of their lungs.
Ads need to have an arresting visual, first of all, to make their point; then an arresting and brief message in attractive type to reinforce the point the visual has already made, or the groundwork it has already laid.
Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign managers understood this; it was the best graphic campaign of the last 30-40 years, easily; good type, good graphics, lots of variety.
I fully agree with EyeOnTheUN’s points and objectives, so it grieves me to observe that they are not only not furthering those objectives, but working against them, with the art and design they are using.