Obamacare 'Glitch Girl' Removed From Healthcare.gov Website

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 12:21 PM
link   
FYI: The Obamacare website (Healthcare.gov) just dumped the only thing about the site worth saving: the cute, smiling model on the homepage.

I wonder if they'll eventually replace her with a huge grinning image of Kathleen Sibelius.


The unidentified model, whose image came from a stock image library, has been removed from healthcare.gov after media agencies tried to identify her — especially after the website experienced difficulty managing the number of people who tried to sign up through the Affordable Care Act.

The poster girl for Obamacare has gone into hiding.
The youthful looking brunette who welcomed the non-insured to enroll for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act became the object of scorn and her image has been deleted from the site.

Her face sparked massive intrigue, with multiple news outlets searching high and low for the stock photo model's identity given the problem plagued rollout of the Affordable Care Act.
Dubbed "Adriana" by BuzzFeed, based on the image's file name, and "Glitch Girl" by frustrated users, there was no information on her identity or where she came from.


www.nydailynews.com...
edit on 28-10-2013 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)
edit on 28-10-2013 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by IAMTAT
 


This poor girl. Now her face will be synonymous with the failure of Obamacare, and because the government took her photo down, even if they fix the site she won't be able to shake this image of her. I seriously hope the media companies fail to find her. No one deserves this notoriety for just trying to make a little money by selling images of her pretty face to use on websites such as healthcare.gov. I mean look random people who know nothing about her, are calling her "Glitch Girl" like she had any control over the government's botched roll out of Obamacare.



posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Wow... Really?! Stock graphics for THIS level of a project? Are they kidding?? We paid over 600 million dollars for the first design ...so they could use nickel and dime stock graphics off an internet service???

Totally aside the "cheapest way possible" for the most expensive website yet made, there is what this highlights as the obvious issue and it blows my mind ...they could be so tone deaf as to not even consider it.

It's a HIGHLY controversial program, to understate this, from a very controversial President. Anyone even remotely connected as a public face that isn't immediately identifiable will BE identified in short order. The Media will see to that for "Human Interest" if nothing else (and I doubt they'd work that hard for a human interest sidebar).

I would have expected...for over half a BILLION dollars...they would have hired a photographer an a live model to do a photo shoot ..or two..or twenty..for promo material on what is the centerpiece of this administration's policy initiatives.

This only rated something off a site like Stockphoto, eh? Yeah.... I really have to agree, but that isn't the message I think THEY had meant to convey. Some of this is staggering.



posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


They were too busy counting money they scooped up in $ allocations. I was largely supportive with ACA (A "wait and see" approach), but, when I heard the same people responsible for a 2 billion debacle in Can were responsible for 100 million on the ACA site, it seems like nothing more than allocation of government dollars through shady distribution, hidden in the face of the law.



posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 12:48 PM
link   
I guess I don't understand this.
If everyone knew it was a stock photo, why in the heck would the media care to find out who she is? That is just dumb. It's not like it was her picture, with a blurb from her stating how much she loved it.

The media ought to try actually reporting the real news.



posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 02:50 PM
link   
if this was a sock photo, or even if it WASN'T, why is EVERYONE mad at her???
She's a MODEL, not the webpage designer or anything
Some people are so frakking STUPID
Complete MORONS out there



posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by HomerinNC
 


Exactly, stop blaming some random face on the website. If you feel you need to blame someone, blame the person whose name is on the nickname for the bill.



posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Everyone is trying to find who the Obamacare 'Glitch Girl' model truly is....but to no avail.



Who is that girl? The mysterious face of Healthcare.gov

www.foxnews.com...

Amazingly, I think I've found her right here("I'm Lisa"...she first appears about six seconds into this video):
www.youtube.com...
Check out the video at the 3:18 mark....IDENTICAL, I tell ya!
...Am I wrong?
Can someone post a side-by-side for me?
edit on 28-10-2013 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 04:20 PM
link   

HomerinNC
if this was a sock photo, or even if it WASN'T, why is EVERYONE mad at her???
She's a MODEL, not the webpage designer or anything
Some people are so frakking STUPID
Complete MORONS out there


Welcome to the Internet.

1. Everyone is an expert
2. Everyone armchair quarterbacks everything
3. People are convinced they know more about medicine because they read a blog then a trained doctor or nurse.
4. Witch hunts are commonplace.
5. Being judge, jury and executioner is cool if you append "Expect Us" onto the outcome.



posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by IAMTAT
 



...Am I wrong?
Can someone post a side-by-side for me?


This one? ...not the same girl.



posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 

Thanks.





 
3

log in

join