Share/E-mail This Story

Email This



Campaign Says It Was Duped Into Believing Morgan Freeman Would Do A Political Ad For Their Candidate

from the publicity-rights? dept

Apparently, the campaign of BJ Lawson, who just lost in his bid to take a Congressional seat away from Rep. David Price in North Carolina, claimed that actor Morgan Freeman did the voiceover on their recent campaign ad:
The campaign claimed that the ad was "resonating" with voters. However, after the press started asking about the ad, Lawson's campaign announced that Freeman had recorded the voiceover for the ad (at less than his usual rates, implying his further support of Lawson's campaign), Freeman denounced the campaign as lying, saying that he did not record the commercial, does not support the candidate and that "no one who represents me ever has ever authorized the use of my name, voice or any other likeness in support of Mr. Lawson or his candidacy."

Following that, the Lawson campaign pulled down its press release announcing that Freeman had done the ad, and replaced it with an announcement claiming they were scammed by a contractor named MEI Political, and going so far as to actually post the contract and emails that had gone back and forth over this (which show a fee of $4,500, which you have to assume is way below Freeman's going rate):


If you look at the emails the campaign had initially suggested a play on the "Priceless" Mastercard commercials, and the guy from MEI warns them that Mastercard has been known to sue over such copying, so at least that time MEI knew to warn about potential intellectual property issues.

The guy from MEI Political, Ben Mathis, has responded with a press release and by releasing other emails himself, claiming that all along he was clear that it was Morgan Freeman's "voice double" and stating that the campaign could not claim Morgan Freeman made the ad:
Reading through all of this, it does sound like there was some pretty serious miscommunications going on. From what's been presented by both sides, it looks like MEI told the Lawson campaign that it had some actual celebrities and some voice doubles, making it clear in the initial email that with the doubles, you couldn't name the celebrities (even though many people would "recognize" the voice). However, it was in a later email that MEI appears to have lumped all of the available "voices" together in one list, and the Lawson campaign either did not remember the difference or chose to ignore it. However, it sure does look like the contract the two parties signed flat-out names Morgan Freeman, and not his double, which could put MEI in hot water. MEI also claims that it made clear, via a phone conversation, not to use Freeman's name, and the Lawson campaign did so anyway. Also, amusingly, he asks them to keep his name out of it, which the campaign clearly did not do.

Of course, it will be interesting to see if any lawsuits actually come out of this, and who, exactly, sues whom? Freeman, conceivably, could have a publicity rights claim against the campaign and against MEI. The campaign could have a suit against MEI as well if it can make the argument that the contract indicates it would actually be Freeman, not his voice double. And, you could even see how MEI might have a case against the campaign, after the campaign claimed it was "tricked" by "a political mercenary." Of course, with the election over, and Lawson losing, they all might just let it slide... Either way, while some might claim this is a perfect example of where publicity rights make sense, it seems like good old traditional fraud statutes and contract law could handle any necessary legal lifting here instead.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    Mike C. (profile), Nov 3rd, 2010 @ 8:17am

    Voice double actor could be the big winner...

    I'd really love to see the voice double come out ahead on this one...

    "I had a major political campaign think I was Morgan Freeman. What do you want to bet I can convince your customers too? Contact my booking agent at xxx-555-1212 for more information."

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    icon
    imbrucy (profile), Nov 3rd, 2010 @ 9:20am

    Good voice, but the pacing is not Freeman

    The pitch of the voice is pretty much spot on, but the pacing and inflection used gives it away as a double. Especially when he inflects his voice upwards you can easily tell the difference.

    I still must admit that the voice double did a really good job, but he is no Morgan Freeman.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    BBT, Nov 3rd, 2010 @ 9:52am

    Oblig

    obligatory xkcd reference
    http://xkcd.com/462/

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Matt K., Nov 3rd, 2010 @ 12:35pm

    How many campaigns were doing this?

    Apparently Scott Walker's successful re-election campaign also used Not Morgan Freeman. See here: http://www.wisn.com/news/25558766/detail.html

    That story suggests that the agency that created the Wisconsin ad is local, where MEI seems to be in California.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Matt K., Nov 3rd, 2010 @ 12:35pm

    How many campaigns were doing this?

    Apparently Scott Walker's successful re-election campaign also used Not Morgan Freeman. See here: http://www.wisn.com/news/25558766/detail.html

    That story suggests that the agency that created the Wisconsin ad is local, where MEI seems to be in California.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), Nov 4th, 2010 @ 3:15pm

    Re: Good voice, but the pacing is not Freeman

    I would guess if he voiced over video of Morgan Freeman talking you wouldn't notice (if done with professional quality). Certainly most people wouldn't.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This