With sincere respect and no less indignation, I refer to the campaign promoting the Yes to CAFTA in Costa Rica. Last week I published a couple of videos showing examples of this regrettable creative path chosen for a crucial cause in the immediate destiny of our country.
That said, and in no particular order, someone explain to me the most absurd character of this campaign: the man in a suit and tie, with silver hair and Anglo-Saxon appearance. Please help me to understand the background of the “believe it or not”, as well as the classist and arrogant attitude of this character who speaks as if he owns the truth.
I do not understand the message or what is being proposed, and because of this, I assume that this campaign believes that we are stupid, that we do not read, that we do not care about the content of the treaty and that discussing ideas is too much for us clumsy Costa Ricans. After all, a cheesy, poorly produced mini-novel, their creatives must have said, is going to make more of an impact than talking seriously, telling it like it is and building in healthy controversy.
The music for the first message feels imported from “I love Laura”, a Spanish campaign that may have inspired this short film, or music from an old Derby commercial. The models are southern cut, where especially the model looks like cut from an Argentinian commercial. Everything is so foreign that they even seem to toast with cider or champagne, to later appear in a shift from other latitudes with imported stuffed animals.
The actress in the testimonial commercials in the heart of Yes, acts very well and carefully attends to the direction received. In fact, she subtly mocks the people demonstrating in the streets, going beyond what is acceptable when sarcasm appears in reference to the trova, a musical genre that needs no defense on my part. It is true that it is better to work than to block streets, as it is also true that transparency and respect are preferable to the murky and tangled message of this paradoxical and contradictory Yes campaign.
The “Yes” people do have heart. Although you may not believe it”, is a phrase that requires explanation, or again we will have to resort to speculation. Is the intention to deepen the division? Is this a deliberate desire to further polarize our society? Now it turns out that some have and others do not have heart? Please, let them explain such nonsense and let someone put heads on their necks, as all this seems to reflect an attack of collective dementia.
Not saying the proposals as they are, speaking without saying things by name, turning ideas around and accommodating them to a single purpose, is a questionable way for any noble and healthy cause. In order to move forward with NAFTA, we should have recognized that it is not a black or white, all or nothing, yes or no issue. I believe that NAFTA is a path of progress and development, of prosperity that reaches many more than in the current model and that, at the same time, it is an opportunity for change that we cannot let pass, even if it is not perfect.
The No side is wrong and defends stagnation and formulas that have failed. The Yes side is proposing a change, a new path that is more in line with the times and the world we live in. We have a crucial difference of opinion, but this does not make a sector better, it is not a reason to offend, mock or resort to sarcasm. On the contrary, it is time to debate with intelligence, to truly open our hearts and connect with each other through truth, transparency and tolerance.
We are in time to straighten the path. Let us hope that this offensive campaign for the Yes is abandoned immediately, we do not want what happened to Ottón Solís to happen to us, who would have won the Presidency of the country, had it not been for his publicity campaign. We are in time for the Yes to win with a campaign that builds bridges between the sectors of the country, that promotes the triumph of the Yes to NAFTA, without the need of roads that separate, divide and polarize.
After all, at the end of the referendum we will have to become one people again, although if we were a family, we would still be as dysfunctional as ever.