Sunday, September 19, 2010

DAISY GIRL EXHIBIT SERIES F: Modeling Payments and Miscellaneous Evidence

CONELRAD obtained the following evidence of Monique Corzilius’s professional modeling career from the Corzilius family. This evidence demonstrates that Monique was a working child model during the period of the Daisy ad. It also proves that her parents had a more than casual interest in the famous 1964 commercial.

Exhibit 1-F [Mary Ellen White company envelope postmarked September 17, 1964]

Mary Ellen White-Envelope-1964

This is evidence that Corzilius worked for a professional child modeling agency around the time of the Daisy ad.

Exhibit 2-F [Mary Ellen White company pay slip dated September 10, 1964]

Mary Ellen White-Pay Slip-1964

This is evidence that Corzilius worked for a professional child modeling agency around the time of the Daisy ad. The surname “Cozy,” as seen on the pay slip, was Monique’s modeling name.

Exhibit 3-F [Screen Actors Guild Summary of Earnings, 1965]


Per Monique’s parents she was not a member of SAG when the Daisy commercial was filmed, but joined shortly thereafter. 1965 was the first year the family had a SAG Earnings Summary for her.

Exhibit 4-F [Doyle Dane Bernbach Contract]


This contract cover sheet is evidence that Corzilius worked for Doyle Dane Bernbach. The surname “Cozy,” as seen in the letter, was Monique’s modeling name.

Exhibit 5-F [‘Busy Child Model’ Newspaper Clip]

Monique-Tells Time

This undated local New Jersey newspaper article image is another piece of evidence that proves Monique was a child model.

Exhibit 6-F [‘Given New Title’ Newspaper Clip]

Monique Given New Title

This 1967 feature article from an unidentified New Jersey newspaper is another piece of evidence that proves Monique was a child model. The twelfth paragraph of the article refers to the industry practice of a “principal” and a “substitute” being chosen for commercial work.

Exhibit 7-F [Daisy Ad Controversy Newspaper Clip # 1]

Daisy-Newark Evening News-09-17-64-low

This Newark Evening News article by Tom Mackin from September 17, 1964 describes how a preview reel of the Mickey Rooney comedy TV series “Mickey” mistakenly contained the Daisy commercial:

If you chose to skip Mickey Rooney’s new ABC series last night in favor of Cary Grant in “To Catch a Thief,” you made a wise decision. The Rooney film, called simply Mickey, was a bomb of thermo-nuclear proportions.

Interestingly enough, it was not the only bomb on the the 30-minute stanza as seen by previewers at ABC-TV in New York. Inserted in the film was the controversial commercial for Lyndon B. Johnson which features a little girl plucking a daisy and counting, “1,2,3, etc.,” followed by the explosion of a nuclear device with its awful mushroom cloud.

It turned out that the commercial, which caused a furor in Republican ranks when it first ran two weeks ago on NBC, had been spliced in by mistake. It is not known if or when the one-minute film will be released again.

The word is that the Democrats are holding it back for strategic purposes. Should the GOP deliver what the Democrats consider a “low blow,” look for this awesomely effective commercial to be inserted in prime time.

To get back to Rooney and the bomb that DID get on the air… 

Exhibit 8-F [Daisy Ad Controversy Newspaper Clip # 2]


In this undated letter to the editor of a New Jersey newspaper, the author Frank J. D’Aiello of Roselle Park, New Jersey complains about the Daisy Ad and suggests that those “responsible” for the commercial “should be arrested.”

Exhibit 9-F [Time magazine “Nuclear Issue” with Daisy image on Cover]


The Corzilius family saved two copies of this September 25, 1964 issue of Time.

Exhibit 10-F [Rod Serling form letter to Monique ‘Cozy’ Corzilius]


This correspondence from the Twilight Zone auteur to the Daisy Girl is included here more as a curiosity than anything else.

Fine Print: All of the archival images and documents used in this article were provided to CONELRAD by the Corzilius family and they are used with exclusive permission. No images or documentation from this article may be reproduced without the written permission of the Corzilius family.

1 comment:

blog said...

หาก “กำไร” คือหัวใจของการทำบริษัท แล้ว “ทุน” ก็ถือเป็นเส้นเลือดใหญ่ที่คอยหล่อเลี้ยงบริษัทก็คงไม่ผิดนัก ซึ่ง “ทุน”
ในที่นี่หมายถึง ทุนจดทะเบียนบริษัท หรือเงินที่ผู้ก่อตั้งบริษัททั้งหมดตกลงกันว่าจะใช้เงินลงทุนเท่าไรในการลงทุนก้อนแรก
เพื่อเริ่มดำเนินกิจการ รวมถึงต้องแจ้งข้อมูลไว้ตอนจดทะเบียนบริษัท โดยตัวเลขของทุนจดทะเบียนดังกล่าวก็จะมีปรากฏอยู่บนหนังสือรับรองบริษัทของเราด้วย
นั่นย่อมแสดงให้เห็นว่า บริษัทมีความน่าเชื่อถือมากน้อยเพียงใด ยิ่งทุนจดทะเบียนสูงความน่าเชื่อถือก็สูงตามไปด้วย

ภพ 09
ภาษีหัก ณ ที่จ่าย คือ
ทุนจดทะเบียน คือ