Excuse Me Sir, You’re Blocking My Shot
by Christine Stuart | Feb 1, 2012 3:16pm
(7) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Election 2012, Town News, New Britain
He set up quietly in the back of the Pulaski Club Wednesday morning with his flip camera and tripod, but the presence of the opposition tracker didn’t go unnoticed.
After all there were maybe a dozen people in the room decorated with hanging hearts for Valentine’s Day, and the only other video camera belonged to Chris Donovan’s congressional campaign.
As he tried to maneuver around the room Elizabeth Esty’s campaign tracker, an intern, was followed by a Donovan campaign staffer named Rob, who tried to block his shot.
The emergence of trackers is nothing new on the campaign trail.
Trackers became a campaign necessity after Republican U.S. Senator George Allen’s “Macaca” video in 2006.
The video captured Allen calling a volunteer for his Democratic opponent “Macaca” at a campaign event. The term is an anti-Indian slur; the volunteer was of Indian descent. Allen lost the election to Democrat James Webb. The video was believed to be the turning point in the campaign, and established YouTube as an important new campaign tool.
Trackers become more prevalent toward the party’s nominating conventions in May, but they‘re no longer an unusual sight on the campaign trail.
What didn’t the Donovan campaign want Esty to see?
Secretary of the State Denise Merrill and State Comptroller Kevin Lembo endorsing his congressional campaign and saying nice things about the current Speaker of the House.
Donovan is vying for the Democratic nomination against Esty, a former state representative from Cheshire, and Dan Roberti, a young political newcomer from Kent.
“For a guy who thinks he can take on the Republicans in congress, he sure is afraid of a kid with a video camera,“ Jeb Fain, a spokesman for Esty’s campaign said. “What’s he hiding?”
Donovan seemed blissfully unaware of what had happened when he was questioned about the incident after the press conference.
“Oh, was there an Esty tracker? I didn’t see him,” Donovan said.
“We put all of our videos up online,” Gabe Rosenberg, a spokesman for Donovan’s campaign, said explaining how unnecessary it was for her campaign to send a staffer.
“Today, a staffer took it upon himself to do something that we find inappropriate and it won’t happen again, it only distracts from Chris’ efforts to bring jobs and security to the middle-class,” Josh Nassi, Donovan’s campaign manager, said in a statement Wednesday afternoon. “All of our public events are posted online, and the video of the endorsement will be available at donovanforcongress.com this afternoon.”
Tags: Chris Donovan, tracker, New Britain, endorsement, campaign, Congress, Elizabeth Esty, Dan Roberti
(7) Comments
posted by: Matt W. | February 1, 2012 4:11pm
Good article in exposing, to the donors of these campaigns, the foolishness their donation dollars are being used to perpetuate.
In theory I have nothing against the tracker concept. If you cannot run a campaign without blurting out some racial epithet, you’re not fit for elected office and the tracker in such cases is probably saving everyone a lot of time and money. However, its not always such a noble assignment. I have no doubt that the tracker is often accompanied by a “guest” whose job it is to agitate the candidate so that a melt-down can be captured on tape.
posted by: Noteworthy | February 1, 2012 4:41pm
Donovan has less to fear from the video reel than he does his real record of outlandish spending, debt, inability to balance a budget, make cuts and budget adjustments. Hells bells, he couldn’t even get rid of all the legislative staffers tied to incumbents who lost the last election.
Look up irresponsibility and you’ll see Donovan’s picture next to it. That he thinks incompetence is a road to higher office is just scarey.
posted by: Commuter | February 1, 2012 6:38pm
Trackers are largely a poor investment of resources. That said, any event deemed appropriate for the press to be present is fine for opposition operatives - it has always been done, it’s just that now any campaign can afford to capture video.
And keeping your opponent honest is legitimate, but it is silly to think that you’re going to get some sort of silver bullet unless your opponent is a George Allen. Or a Joe Maturo.
In the latter case he’ll let you ask him questions while he loads the gun, presses the muzzle to his temple and repeatedly squeezes the trigger. In this case a tracker would be an excellent investment.
What isn’t OK is attempting to irritate, intimidate, and intrude on a candidate and her one on one conversations. The professional press isn’t allowed to do that, either. So, respecting the boundaries and practices as journalists understand them is good protocol for campaigns.
Paparazzi practices make poor politics.
posted by: ProgressiveandPrudent | February 1, 2012 9:10pm
This is an act of intimidation on the part of Donovan’s campaign. Donovan can’t be held responsible for every inappropriate action on the part of his staff, but Donovan is the leader of his campaign and sets the tone for his staff.
What is so wrong with an opponent’s campaign taping elected officials making a positive endorsement?
posted by: ... | February 1, 2012 10:03pm
I’ve seen much more eleborate treatment of trackers. Once a campaign knows about a tracker, they’ll find ways of impeding on his/her job. One example I recall several years back was having campaign volunteers park extremely close to a tracker’s car (most campaigns get to know their trackers, since they have one too). They’ll sandwiched his vehicle between two volunteer cars and be the last ones to leave an event. So he/she will definitely be late to the next event, or skip it altogether.
Most trackers today though also provide their video feed to the ad-men of the campaign. They’ll take any video/still shot and warp the context to give it a negative light, or utilize it in comparative ads. Especially for easy YouTube ads that spread faster/farther than traditional paid media outlets.
posted by: Tessa Marquis | February 2, 2012 10:16am
Congrats. Good article on the history and reasoning behind “trackers” The article on this incident in CT Mirror was exclusively about the ages (unknown) of the actors in this - the words “kid” and “young” were used repeatedly.
I think you can’t underestimate the effect of a video blogger for capturing side conversations or special moments in a campaign.
At a 2008 town forum in Bridgeport in I asked Chris Shays “When do you estimate we can end the occupation of Iraq?” and he leapt from his seat and lunged at me screaming. The videographer decided not to release the tape of this incident, which I thought was telling of the temperament and hidden tension of Chris Shays. Too bad. It ws a semi-macaca moment to be sure, and historically valuable as we see him returning to Connecticut politics.
posted by: Commuter | February 3, 2012 8:31pm
@ Tessa - perfect!
Thank you for demonstrating exactly what is wrong with the practice.
Deploying a tracker to play gotcha - trying to embarrass people, setting out to capture something that can be used in the sort of ad hominem way you’re describing, is nothing but naked paparazzi tactics.
If an individual really is a bad gal, they’ll make it plain enough without hounding them to capture a “special moment” and intruding on side conversations with usually unsuspecting constituents.
“telling of the temperament and hidden tension…”? Gimme a break.