Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Bryan Parker’s Visually Stunning New Ad

OAKLAND | MAYOR | A new campaign commercial from mayoral candidate Bryan Parker airing on Oakland cable may be the best of this election cycle.

The 30-second spot, titled, “The House Divided,” features an elaborate editing sequence that makes Parker appear to be simultaneously walking toward the viewer at over 30 iconic locations in Oakland.

The commercial created by a Bay Area production company named Rockbridge was shot over many days, said Parker, and was inspired by an Australian tourism advertisement.

Parker says his campaign wanted to use the commercial to highlight Oakland City Hall as divided and ineffective. “However, there are beautiful parts all over Oakland that can fully thrive if given equal opportunity,” said Parker.

The commercials began airing Monday on BET, CNN, CNBC, ESPN and additional networks the Parker campaign believes captures its target base of Oakland voters.


  1. Once they start shifting the cuts, its one every second.
    They would have done far better to have one every two seconds.
    The commercial is irritating and you can barely catch half of the locations.
    Either cut the locations in half, or do a 60 second commercial,.
    I give it a grade "D"... for dislike.
    Especially irritating for anyone over 50, and guess who votes the most?

  2. Looks like Anon at 2:16 PM will be voting for Jean Quan or one of the two Council members running for mayor. Lots of 50-something old farts hate the idea of anything new, even if the current situation, as Parker rightly points out, is unnecessarily bad.

    Personally I thought the ad was right on, positive and effective. I've been around a couple of decades longer than the 50-something old fart and I look forward to someone new in city hall.

  3. 4:03 PM makes the most idiotic post I've seen in years.

    He/she jumps from someone not liking a ad, to assuming they favor Jean Quan. Uh, hello, there are well over a dozen other candidates in the race besides Quan and Parker.
    Point of fact I have not excluded Parker from consideration.
    I was ONLY saying I didn't like the ad.
    Mainly because they tried to cram too many locations into the herky jerky 22 seconds as they flipped from site to site..

    Nice to also know you consider everyone over 50 to be a "old fart".... I guess that includes most of the candidates for mayor. Apparently you favor Parker, given how upset you seem.
    I'm guessing he doesn't hold your views about those of us over 50.
    Come to think of it, Park looks about age 50 himself.

  4. Someone who can't deal with a contemporary video style calls someone who can an idiot.

    Someone whose sensibility is that of an "old fart" is called out by someone who is significantly older who is capable of deal with an up-to-date communication style.

    Someone doesn't quite get it about chronological age and emotional and intellectual age.

    Someone seems a lot like a person in a rut. Just like Oakland's government.

  5. OK, I guess the ad is effective for all "contemporary" video enthusiasts. Tell me, what portion of the electorate do they comprise. Who was the ad tested on?
    If you see it once, how many sites can you digest.
    I count about 27, and I think the ad would be more effective with about 18.
    I suppose it will do well with "contemporary" video game players.
    Tell me, what is their participation in elections vs "old farts".

    I guess you know best about voting patterns of the hip.

  6. Wonder when Oakland will start hearing more about when Bryan pulled the gun on an old girlfriend and his other abusive behavioor towards women - complete with restraining order activity? Joel Young Part 2??

  7. 11:40.... Of course you have SOMETHING to base this on.
    Not just throwing out some imagined rumor, are you"

    And I'm sure, if this ever happened, it was in the past 5 or 10 years, right? Not something from 25 years ago? right?

  8. 25 years ago is the defense to beating the shit out of your girlfriend?

  9. Again, if you have a specific charge. A specific conviction.
    A specific year and date.

    Or are you just throwing stuff up against a wall....with no facts.

    One would assume if you have specifics, you would put them out. Right now, we in the general public, have not one fact to back up your claims.

    After you present such, we can then decide if a crime 15 years or 25 years ago is relevant.
    Until then, you're just some anonymous nut.

    From what I hear, you robbed a 88 year old lady a while back and broke her hip in the process.
    What do you have to say for yourself?

  10. This video by Parker is a straight copy cat from a youtube where a guy travels all over the world.