Presidential candidate website tech, compared

Re:Presidential candidate website tech, compared by maxcasey on Monday April 13, 2015 @01:20PM (#9368955)

I would assume they made the video internally, but I have no idea. If a firm did it then they'll probably be locked up with a lot of Hillary work this cycle so they don't need to promote themselves.

Those types of videos aren't cheap by any means. That being said I think it was done really well -- especially in comparison to announcement videos like Rubio's[0], which is a mess of random clips pasted together.

[0] https://marcorubio.com/landing/stream/

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Presidential candidate website tech, compared by pen2l on Monday April 13, 2015 @02:53PM (#9369597)

> I would assume they made the video internally, but I have no idea.

It would seem to be too good to have been made internally.

> Those types of videos aren't cheap by any means.

I'm still very curious to get an exact amount. Let's say the Hillary video... what, $200k? Maybe a lot of agencies will be unwilling to create a single video, in light of the argument that any campaign video has to fit in a bigger strategy... and the agency would rather work toward a bigger, cohesive strategic campaign which goes in millions amount?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Presidential candidate website tech, compared by maxcasey on Monday April 13, 2015 @06:59PM (#9371072)

EDIT: I was half right. They're using Hardpin Media[0][1]

[0] http://www.hardpinmedia.com/

[1] http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presid...

[ Parent | on HN ]