The creator of the unauthorized, viral, Internet pro-Barack/Anti-Hillary, “Vote Different” campaign ad has been revealed. He is Phil de Vellis, a a former Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) staffer and itinerent blogger. In a post on the Huffington Post, de Vellis reveals his reasons:

“Hi. I’m Phil. I did it. And I’m proud of it. I made the “Vote Different” ad because I wanted to express my feelings about the Democratic primary, and because I wanted to show that an individual citizen can affect the process. There are thousands of other people who could have made this ad, and I guarantee that more ads like it–by people of all political persuasions–will follow.

This shows that the future of American politics rests in the hands of ordinary citizens. The campaigns had no idea who made it–not the Obama campaign, not the Clinton campaign, nor any other campaign. I made the ad on a Sunday afternoon in my apartment using my personal equipment (a Mac and some software), uploaded it to YouTube, and sent links around to blogs.”

In a different post, also at Huffington, Martin Lewis, a British-born, Hollywood-based humorist, commentator, producer and radio host argues that while de Vellis (an admitted Democrat) is certainly talented, he may have just used his talents more to harm his party than for the party’s greater good.

First we here at SiteSurfin.com say, “bravo” to Mr. de Vellis. He has acute skills to be able to create such sophistication in his own apartment, on his own Mac. Then we say, “Very good Mr. de Vellis. Now put the mouse down and step away from the computer.”

We believe that if his two reasons for making the “Vote Different” ad are true, then he actually undermines his own credibility and the political campaign process, too.

Mr. de Vellis first reason is “that Obama represents a new kind of politics, and that Senator Clinton’s “conversation” is disingenuous. And the underlying point was that the old political machine no longer holds all the power.”

In his second reason, de Vellis states that his ad is “not the first citizen ad, and it will not be the last. The game has changed.”

For better or for worse, his first point boils down to a simple truth–Anyone can now make and distribute compelling propaganda. Great. Now any Tom, Dick or Phil can up the noise and eye candy levels while vying for our votes.

De Vellis’ second point is even less certain. Yes, he may have leveled the propaganda playing field with his successful beta test of guerilla campaign ad production and distribution. But does proof that anybody can champion their favorite candidate in this way make for a better campaign process? Does underground admaking prove our candidate truly better than their candidate on merits any better than “approved” ads? Will this power shift actually get out the vote?

No. No. And no. Imagine how the myriad images of unauthorized, homegrown political ads will blend with “approved” political ads and flood the Internet. Imagine how they will come to remind us of the cacaphony of those guys on the stock exchange floor, frantically yelling and signalling to us. We will not be transformed by the process. We will instead be overwhelmed by it. Our nerves will deaden. Our political sensibilities will numb. Our passion for real, positive change will extinguish.

Eventually, someone will have to design a search engine to find the truth in our political candidates.

Now there’s a killer app.