Political use of social media: Edwards (1); Obama (.5); Clinton (NA)

Hey, Barack, have you met with any bloggers yet? Edwards met with dozens on his first media stops.

Also, has any non-political blogger met with either Hillary or Barack to find out if they are doing their own blog and/or if they are really transparently available to both bloggers and mainstream press? (Edwards let me follow him around 100% of the time, even when meeting with his staff and didn’t keep me out of the back rooms).

So far no one from PodTech has been approached by either of the other two candidates.

Barack does have a good podcast, though, and Beet.TV has links to some of his other online videos.

UPDATE: MyDD says that Barack is winning in gathering blog links.

UPDATE 2: Huffington Post says Barack made the first “direct to you” announcement. Funny that they missed my interview with John Edwards as well as meetings John had with bloggers in both Iowa and in New Hampshire.

Comments

  1. Robert we (Tris, Toby, Marianne and I) are trying to get the statements from these and more camps. I recently left a message with Congressman Tancredo’s group to find out where he is going with his social media plans. We have set up shop to follow campaign 2008 and the use of social media.

    http://www.campaign08blog.com/

    Keep an eye out for our stuff to get hot and heavy soon.

  2. Robert we (Tris, Toby, Marianne and I) are trying to get the statements from these and more camps. I recently left a message with Congressman Tancredo’s group to find out where he is going with his social media plans. We have set up shop to follow campaign 2008 and the use of social media.

    http://www.campaign08blog.com/

    Keep an eye out for our stuff to get hot and heavy soon.

  3. It’s no coincidence that bloggers are now credited with influence that resonates a lot like impression. Impression as in “ad impression” with more evidence every day that old media is not only catching up but using bloggers to meet their objectives.

    Powers that be are so boring (self-censoring, never address damaging topics, conflicted interests, …) that they need this new gig to move the attention elsewhere.

    All of that is actually free labor that others make money with.

    I am not sure one wants to participate in the whole thing. Take Second Life as the caricatural example of what’s wrong with the whole thing.

  4. It’s no coincidence that bloggers are now credited with influence that resonates a lot like impression. Impression as in “ad impression” with more evidence every day that old media is not only catching up but using bloggers to meet their objectives.

    Powers that be are so boring (self-censoring, never address damaging topics, conflicted interests, …) that they need this new gig to move the attention elsewhere.

    All of that is actually free labor that others make money with.

    I am not sure one wants to participate in the whole thing. Take Second Life as the caricatural example of what’s wrong with the whole thing.

  5. Actually, what’s been overlooked, and I guess my blog is the only place that’s mentioned it, is that Edwards announced his candidacy on his podcast (http://johnedwards.com/media/podcasts/20061226/). In the age of vlogs and tv, people flock to the video first.

    I hope Obama and others take Robert’s offer up. The vlog I saw of Obama was highly scripted compared to Edwards, and I think Robert can testify that Edwards is pretty comfortable with bloggers.

  6. Actually, what’s been overlooked, and I guess my blog is the only place that’s mentioned it, is that Edwards announced his candidacy on his podcast (http://johnedwards.com/media/podcasts/20061226/). In the age of vlogs and tv, people flock to the video first.

    I hope Obama and others take Robert’s offer up. The vlog I saw of Obama was highly scripted compared to Edwards, and I think Robert can testify that Edwards is pretty comfortable with bloggers.

  7. Obama did meet with a group of Ohio bloggers last summer at a democratic party shin-dig in Columbus. There’s audio of it somewhere that I’m not finding, but a semi-transcript is at Pho’s Akron Pages.

    Nothing like Edwards, but he has at least met with bloggers of the political stripe.

  8. Obama did meet with a group of Ohio bloggers last summer at a democratic party shin-dig in Columbus. There’s audio of it somewhere that I’m not finding, but a semi-transcript is at Pho’s Akron Pages.

    Nothing like Edwards, but he has at least met with bloggers of the political stripe.

  9. Since when is an interview on PodTech, a site that most geeks don’t understand and think is poorly designed, difficult to navigate, and plain obnoxious, a major audience with the “you” of America? More like “direct to a very small subset of the geeks… Is that you?”

  10. Since when is an interview on PodTech, a site that most geeks don’t understand and think is poorly designed, difficult to navigate, and plain obnoxious, a major audience with the “you” of America? More like “direct to a very small subset of the geeks… Is that you?”

  11. P.S. Clinton isn’t a candidate yet. Before you expect her to talk to you, shouldn’t she be allowed to say she’s running and talk to some people that actually matter first?

  12. P.S. Clinton isn’t a candidate yet. Before you expect her to talk to you, shouldn’t she be allowed to say she’s running and talk to some people that actually matter first?

  13. Maybe Obama doesnt see much of a distinction between “mainstream press” and the PodTech network/corporation.
    Face it Scoble, you were a mainstream corporate blogger, and now have PodTech – your image isnt that “indie”

  14. Maybe Obama doesnt see much of a distinction between “mainstream press” and the PodTech network/corporation.
    Face it Scoble, you were a mainstream corporate blogger, and now have PodTech – your image isnt that “indie”

  15. I can’t even see how you can quibble about this: Obama put a direct video announcing on his site at the moment of his announcement. You caught up with Edwards on his “official” announce date the day after he really announced because his announcement had already been leaked… you post an interview a day or two later. How is that “direct to you” at all?

  16. I can’t even see how you can quibble about this: Obama put a direct video announcing on his site at the moment of his announcement. You caught up with Edwards on his “official” announce date the day after he really announced because his announcement had already been leaked… you post an interview a day or two later. How is that “direct to you” at all?

  17. I don’t think blogging is as important as you link. Most internet users probably don’t even vote, or are already liberally biased. They’d be better off going to churches.

  18. I don’t think blogging is as important as you link. Most internet users probably don’t even vote, or are already liberally biased. They’d be better off going to churches.

  19. Goeebbels: John Edwards announced “directly” via his podcast and via youtube (the day before his official announce). That was the plan. And those are the facts.

    David Dalka: I disagree firmly. I suggest that you visit blog.johnedwards.com and ask our community whether or not we listen. If you choose not to, please email me directly: oneamerica at gmail dot com and I will listen. Thanks.

    **Disclaimer: I not only work with John and Elizabeth Edwards, but I also support them.

  20. Goeebbels: John Edwards announced “directly” via his podcast and via youtube (the day before his official announce). That was the plan. And those are the facts.

    David Dalka: I disagree firmly. I suggest that you visit blog.johnedwards.com and ask our community whether or not we listen. If you choose not to, please email me directly: oneamerica at gmail dot com and I will listen. Thanks.

    **Disclaimer: I not only work with John and Elizabeth Edwards, but I also support them.

  21. Ryan, I could care less. Scoble is acting like his interview should be mentioned by Huffington. It shouldn’t. And don’t call the fact that Edwards announced three times over three days a purposeful strategy. If that’s your claim, then his strategy sucks and he has no chance.

  22. Ryan, I could care less. Scoble is acting like his interview should be mentioned by Huffington. It shouldn’t. And don’t call the fact that Edwards announced three times over three days a purposeful strategy. If that’s your claim, then his strategy sucks and he has no chance.

  23. Robert,
    As a spectator of US politics, (I live in Germany) It is fascinating to see a new form of political activism starting, and it is due in a large part to social media and blogging. Folks who didn’t really participate in the political process are now engaging, and this is a brilliant thing for the health of democracy. Not only in the US, but elsewhere.

    I’d like to see the blogger community take a much stronger stance on copyright reform. You complain regularly about DRM, how about raising it as an issue with the political crowd? Ask the politicians about their views on social media and copyright, and what they plan to do with for copyright reform? Perhaps even endorse candidates that have a copyright position that supports social media. Politicians have to take positions on guncontrol,war, and so on, why not DRM?

    I wrote a bit more here.
    http://theotherthomasotter.wordpress.com/2007/01/17/social-media-politics-copyright-blogswarm-and-activism/

  24. Robert,
    As a spectator of US politics, (I live in Germany) It is fascinating to see a new form of political activism starting, and it is due in a large part to social media and blogging. Folks who didn’t really participate in the political process are now engaging, and this is a brilliant thing for the health of democracy. Not only in the US, but elsewhere.

    I’d like to see the blogger community take a much stronger stance on copyright reform. You complain regularly about DRM, how about raising it as an issue with the political crowd? Ask the politicians about their views on social media and copyright, and what they plan to do with for copyright reform? Perhaps even endorse candidates that have a copyright position that supports social media. Politicians have to take positions on guncontrol,war, and so on, why not DRM?

    I wrote a bit more here.
    http://theotherthomasotter.wordpress.com/2007/01/17/social-media-politics-copyright-blogswarm-and-activism/

  25. Osama hasn’t announced yet and neither has Billary. So, your point is sort of moot. And the fact that both Billary and Osama are getting more press than Edwards about their UNANNOUNCED candidacies doesn’t do much to support your theory about “the power of blogging” in politics, does it?

  26. Osama hasn’t announced yet and neither has Billary. So, your point is sort of moot. And the fact that both Billary and Osama are getting more press than Edwards about their UNANNOUNCED candidacies doesn’t do much to support your theory about “the power of blogging” in politics, does it?

  27. I’m in Chicago as I write this, so I’m trying to follow “Obamania” as close as I can.

    My only question is this: Howard “Yeeagh!” Dean taught us that the social-media-geneity of a candidate isn’t the best — or even a “good” — measure of a candidate’s ability to get elected or even nominated.

    What steps can we recommend to this year’s candidates that would help them (and their supporters) avoid that trap?

  28. I’m in Chicago as I write this, so I’m trying to follow “Obamania” as close as I can.

    My only question is this: Howard “Yeeagh!” Dean taught us that the social-media-geneity of a candidate isn’t the best — or even a “good” — measure of a candidate’s ability to get elected or even nominated.

    What steps can we recommend to this year’s candidates that would help them (and their supporters) avoid that trap?

  29. **************************************************
    There would be a pingback here except that Askimet is classifying many trackback falsely as spam. Toni Schnieder and Matt Mullenweg are aware of my problem, yet have not fixed it.
    **************************************************

  30. **************************************************
    There would be a pingback here except that Askimet is classifying many trackback falsely as spam. Toni Schnieder and Matt Mullenweg are aware of my problem, yet have not fixed it.
    **************************************************

  31. Makes me wonder if Edwards can get elected primarily on his ‘cool’ factor. It works for Apple why not for presidential candidate? I still think that in 20 years, the president will be elected by some form of ‘american idol’.

  32. Makes me wonder if Edwards can get elected primarily on his ‘cool’ factor. It works for Apple why not for presidential candidate? I still think that in 20 years, the president will be elected by some form of ‘american idol’.

  33. In response to “Ryan M.”, who wrote:

    “John Edwards announced “directly” via his podcast and via youtube (the day before his official announce). That was the plan. And those are the facts.”

    You should know better than to use phrases like “And those are the facts.” That has a very arrogant, political feel to it that reminds me too much of politicians. You may be a representative of a politician but you should talk TO us Internetties rather than AT us. And that is a fact. :-)

    Also, you should have directed your comment to Robert rather than to Goebbels…he never mentioned the podcast or the youtube video, rather, he focused on his own interview with John Edwards and a couple of meetings with bloggers as evidence of a “direct to you” announcement. According to you he’s completely off base.

    Anyway, just a thought. Maybe we live in a different “Two Americas” than the ones John Edwards see–one where people talk like normal people and call people on their misstatements and another one where politicians pander to specific bloggers rather than to the Internet public as a whole. Best of luck!

  34. In response to “Ryan M.”, who wrote:

    “John Edwards announced “directly” via his podcast and via youtube (the day before his official announce). That was the plan. And those are the facts.”

    You should know better than to use phrases like “And those are the facts.” That has a very arrogant, political feel to it that reminds me too much of politicians. You may be a representative of a politician but you should talk TO us Internetties rather than AT us. And that is a fact. :-)

    Also, you should have directed your comment to Robert rather than to Goebbels…he never mentioned the podcast or the youtube video, rather, he focused on his own interview with John Edwards and a couple of meetings with bloggers as evidence of a “direct to you” announcement. According to you he’s completely off base.

    Anyway, just a thought. Maybe we live in a different “Two Americas” than the ones John Edwards see–one where people talk like normal people and call people on their misstatements and another one where politicians pander to specific bloggers rather than to the Internet public as a whole. Best of luck!

  35. Tim: I used the videos of Edwards talking with bloggers as examples because anyone can aim a video camera at their face and put the video up on Brightcove or YouTube. Meeting with bloggers who aren’t predictable (or professional) is a lot tougher of a challenge. Speaking directly to “you” is not really what’s going to matter here, as Goebbels points out.

    But taking questions from everyday bloggers (not just A-list ass***es like me, look again at the Edwards’ videos) is new and is newsworthy. So far Edwards has done it. The other two (and if you believe they aren’t yet running I have a bridge to sell you) haven’t yet that I’ve seen. I’m sure that’ll change.

  36. Tim: I used the videos of Edwards talking with bloggers as examples because anyone can aim a video camera at their face and put the video up on Brightcove or YouTube. Meeting with bloggers who aren’t predictable (or professional) is a lot tougher of a challenge. Speaking directly to “you” is not really what’s going to matter here, as Goebbels points out.

    But taking questions from everyday bloggers (not just A-list ass***es like me, look again at the Edwards’ videos) is new and is newsworthy. So far Edwards has done it. The other two (and if you believe they aren’t yet running I have a bridge to sell you) haven’t yet that I’ve seen. I’m sure that’ll change.

  37. Teresa: that doesn’t matter. Before Edwards announced he met with 400 bloggers at Gnomedex. No one else did that. And his wife met with hundreds of bloggers at Converge South and gave us an interview. Before they ran for president. In fact, if you go back and listen to Elizabeth Edwards’ interview with Maryam, she announced that John was seriously considering running for president way back then. That’s a lot more than Barack did yesterday (he talked to a video camera, not a blogger).

  38. Teresa: that doesn’t matter. Before Edwards announced he met with 400 bloggers at Gnomedex. No one else did that. And his wife met with hundreds of bloggers at Converge South and gave us an interview. Before they ran for president. In fact, if you go back and listen to Elizabeth Edwards’ interview with Maryam, she announced that John was seriously considering running for president way back then. That’s a lot more than Barack did yesterday (he talked to a video camera, not a blogger).

  39. “Speaking directly to “you” is not really what’s going to matter here, as Goebbels points out.”

    That’s not what I said.

    I’d rather have the candidates do a direct head shot and speechifying that watch some geek try to interview somebody.

    “The other two (and if you believe they aren’t yet running I have a bridge to sell you) haven’t yet that I’ve seen.”

    This shows you don’t know crap about political campaigns and aren’t worthy of being spoken to. Of course they are running, but how the hell is it rational to expect Clinton to talk to you before filing papers? before talking to the biggest DNC contributors? befote talking to regional boosters? to big media reporters? and the weekend news shows?

    This would certainly be newsworthy because it’s suicidal.

  40. “Speaking directly to “you” is not really what’s going to matter here, as Goebbels points out.”

    That’s not what I said.

    I’d rather have the candidates do a direct head shot and speechifying that watch some geek try to interview somebody.

    “The other two (and if you believe they aren’t yet running I have a bridge to sell you) haven’t yet that I’ve seen.”

    This shows you don’t know crap about political campaigns and aren’t worthy of being spoken to. Of course they are running, but how the hell is it rational to expect Clinton to talk to you before filing papers? before talking to the biggest DNC contributors? befote talking to regional boosters? to big media reporters? and the weekend news shows?

    This would certainly be newsworthy because it’s suicidal.

  41. Elizabeth Edwards interview is here (she also gave a presentation to hundreds of bloggers who attended the ConvergeSouth conference): http://scobleizer.com/2006/10/25/maryam-interviews-elizabeth-edwards/

    Goebbels: John Edwards spoke at Gnomedex (live, in a conversation with about 400 bloggers) and it was pretty clear that he was going to run for president all the way back then. Elizabeth Edwards made it clear that they were going to run for President several months ago, long before they were “officially” announcing.

    The official announcement is just done to get a series of photo opportunities and to get on all the talk shows. But it’s pretty clear, even now, who is running and who isn’t.

    No reason why Clinton or Obama couldn’t talk to bloggers right now, even before “officially” announcing.

  42. Elizabeth Edwards interview is here (she also gave a presentation to hundreds of bloggers who attended the ConvergeSouth conference): http://scobleizer.com/2006/10/25/maryam-interviews-elizabeth-edwards/

    Goebbels: John Edwards spoke at Gnomedex (live, in a conversation with about 400 bloggers) and it was pretty clear that he was going to run for president all the way back then. Elizabeth Edwards made it clear that they were going to run for President several months ago, long before they were “officially” announcing.

    The official announcement is just done to get a series of photo opportunities and to get on all the talk shows. But it’s pretty clear, even now, who is running and who isn’t.

    No reason why Clinton or Obama couldn’t talk to bloggers right now, even before “officially” announcing.

  43. So what? Why do I care? It was yet another speech. It’s supposed to mean more because it’s an even tinier niche of people that I don’t care about?

    “No reason why Clinton or Obama couldn’t talk to bloggers right now, even before “officially” announcing.”

    Sure, there is. There’s no benefit to it, it’s not a part of a winning strategy, it marginalizes them, it’s a waste of time, there’s better things to do.

    There’s plenty of reasons, you just don’t like them.

  44. So what? Why do I care? It was yet another speech. It’s supposed to mean more because it’s an even tinier niche of people that I don’t care about?

    “No reason why Clinton or Obama couldn’t talk to bloggers right now, even before “officially” announcing.”

    Sure, there is. There’s no benefit to it, it’s not a part of a winning strategy, it marginalizes them, it’s a waste of time, there’s better things to do.

    There’s plenty of reasons, you just don’t like them.

  45. Again, so? Are you claiming it’s talking to geeks at Gnomedex that put him in the lead?

    Really, you get so far away from logic sometimes. I’ll find one state where he leads the polls; therefore, my lame PodTech interview must be responsible and he will win because he gets bloggers. It’s absurd. It’s one state, 2 years early, and there are many potential factors.

    For example, could it be that Iowa is more likely to be a little bit racist and sexist, maybe?

  46. Again, so? Are you claiming it’s talking to geeks at Gnomedex that put him in the lead?

    Really, you get so far away from logic sometimes. I’ll find one state where he leads the polls; therefore, my lame PodTech interview must be responsible and he will win because he gets bloggers. It’s absurd. It’s one state, 2 years early, and there are many potential factors.

    For example, could it be that Iowa is more likely to be a little bit racist and sexist, maybe?

  47. @28. Robert, seriously, are you really that naive? He’s leading because he’s the only one that has officially announced. And it has nothing to do with PodTech, a vblog, or anything. Show us the data where there is a correlation. Yes, it is likely that Billary and Osama will eventually throw their hat in the ring, but until then, as Goebbel’s points out..what’s the benefit of them engaging with “bloggers”? They are getting plenty of exposure right now relying on the “old school” outlets. Why work harder than they have to at this point when there is no upside to it. Your Zogby poll would have more relevance if it was polled against other officially announced candidates. Remember, Dean looked pretty strong a year before goign into Iowa, too. That Zogby poll means nothing at this point.

  48. @28. Robert, seriously, are you really that naive? He’s leading because he’s the only one that has officially announced. And it has nothing to do with PodTech, a vblog, or anything. Show us the data where there is a correlation. Yes, it is likely that Billary and Osama will eventually throw their hat in the ring, but until then, as Goebbel’s points out..what’s the benefit of them engaging with “bloggers”? They are getting plenty of exposure right now relying on the “old school” outlets. Why work harder than they have to at this point when there is no upside to it. Your Zogby poll would have more relevance if it was polled against other officially announced candidates. Remember, Dean looked pretty strong a year before goign into Iowa, too. That Zogby poll means nothing at this point.

  49. @24. Hey, how ’bout that. So he talked to a bunch of dorks. What did that get him? Osama goes on “Meet the Depressed” and drops a subtle hint about running and next thing we know his picture is all over the news weeklys and he’s on the nightly news every night. I submit that majority electorate had no idea Edwards was still relevant until he “announced” and since then he’s been virtually non-existent in the “real world”. You keep on believing that the blog thing will make a difference. So far it hasn’t registered with the voting public.

  50. @24. Hey, how ’bout that. So he talked to a bunch of dorks. What did that get him? Osama goes on “Meet the Depressed” and drops a subtle hint about running and next thing we know his picture is all over the news weeklys and he’s on the nightly news every night. I submit that majority electorate had no idea Edwards was still relevant until he “announced” and since then he’s been virtually non-existent in the “real world”. You keep on believing that the blog thing will make a difference. So far it hasn’t registered with the voting public.

  51. Concerning post number 33, the comment is about the MSM, which is also what Scoble is talking about. Edwards was the first to by-pass the MSM with the announcement first to the bloggers, then to the MSM. But I would argue that plenty of local newspapers carried information about Edwards regarding:

    1) Hotel Unite — in which he stood up for SEIU and workers in the hotel industry
    2) Raising the minimum wage ballot initiative in 6 states–and all of them passed it (NV, MO, AZ, OH, MT, and CO)
    3) Helping many local, state (including 3 successful gov races in CO, IA, OH), and congressional candidates with fundraising and rallies: 2 in Iowa (which is why the Iowa poll does matter) used to be Republican seats and now are Democratic, 1 in Texas,1 in PA, 2 in NY, 1 in NC (and another one almost went to a Dem)–and also for Senate Races in VA, MO, FL, OH, and MN. Do a search on Topix.net and you will find plenty of local press. Yes, many voters read Time and watch Meet the Pumpkinhead, but they also watch Hardball, Charlie Rose, Good Morning America, The Daily Show and Today, in which he appeared on those shows, plus local radio about 6 weeks before he announced his run, but the die-hard voters, those 55 and up still read the newspapers. Pew Internet reported not long ago that bloggers also still read newspapers, although in the last election, Pew also reported that “Twice as many Americans used the internet as their primary source of news about the 2006 campaign compared with the most recent mid-term election in 2002. ”

    Yes, social media matters and will in the next election. And voters will want someone who appears more authentic to them. The Gnomedexers were among the first to say that. Edwards heard them and invited him, Charles Olsen, and a few others to do some behind the scenes reporting.

    Regarding the announcement over a period of time, I think it was a good move. It least it happened in a short period. Ryan M and Online Communications Director Matt Gross (Dean’s old Internet guru who created one of the most successful fund raising web sites for netizens) implemented an excellent strategy for Edwards’ message to be truly ground-up and not top down via the Netroots.

    Obama is a parrot in my view who gets a lot of credit for someone else’s initiatives, which is what Scoble was sort of getting at, but he would never criticize Obama for that. But he is setting the record straight.

  52. Concerning post number 33, the comment is about the MSM, which is also what Scoble is talking about. Edwards was the first to by-pass the MSM with the announcement first to the bloggers, then to the MSM. But I would argue that plenty of local newspapers carried information about Edwards regarding:

    1) Hotel Unite — in which he stood up for SEIU and workers in the hotel industry
    2) Raising the minimum wage ballot initiative in 6 states–and all of them passed it (NV, MO, AZ, OH, MT, and CO)
    3) Helping many local, state (including 3 successful gov races in CO, IA, OH), and congressional candidates with fundraising and rallies: 2 in Iowa (which is why the Iowa poll does matter) used to be Republican seats and now are Democratic, 1 in Texas,1 in PA, 2 in NY, 1 in NC (and another one almost went to a Dem)–and also for Senate Races in VA, MO, FL, OH, and MN. Do a search on Topix.net and you will find plenty of local press. Yes, many voters read Time and watch Meet the Pumpkinhead, but they also watch Hardball, Charlie Rose, Good Morning America, The Daily Show and Today, in which he appeared on those shows, plus local radio about 6 weeks before he announced his run, but the die-hard voters, those 55 and up still read the newspapers. Pew Internet reported not long ago that bloggers also still read newspapers, although in the last election, Pew also reported that “Twice as many Americans used the internet as their primary source of news about the 2006 campaign compared with the most recent mid-term election in 2002. ”

    Yes, social media matters and will in the next election. And voters will want someone who appears more authentic to them. The Gnomedexers were among the first to say that. Edwards heard them and invited him, Charles Olsen, and a few others to do some behind the scenes reporting.

    Regarding the announcement over a period of time, I think it was a good move. It least it happened in a short period. Ryan M and Online Communications Director Matt Gross (Dean’s old Internet guru who created one of the most successful fund raising web sites for netizens) implemented an excellent strategy for Edwards’ message to be truly ground-up and not top down via the Netroots.

    Obama is a parrot in my view who gets a lot of credit for someone else’s initiatives, which is what Scoble was sort of getting at, but he would never criticize Obama for that. But he is setting the record straight.

  53. Random comments:
    @30 – Actually, quite a few candidates have announced. Chris Dodd, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Tom Vilsack and Joe Biden have e all officially announced.

    Also, a year before the Iowa caucus, Dean was not even on the radar.

    @33 – Yup. I’m a dork. I’m glad that at least one politician isn’t too full of himself to try to reach all Americans, and not only the small subset of really cool Americans. But then again, I believe we should have a representative democracy.

    I find Robert’s comments about ‘non-political bloggers’ particularly interesting. Only five to ten percent of bloggers consider themselves political bloggers and I’ve long advocated for candidates to reach out beyond the narrow confines of the political blogosphere and to encourage broadbased multilateral discussions. Edwards is clearly the leader in this front which is one of the reasons I’m talking with Ryan M. about how I would like to work for the Edwards campaign.

  54. Random comments:
    @30 – Actually, quite a few candidates have announced. Chris Dodd, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Tom Vilsack and Joe Biden have e all officially announced.

    Also, a year before the Iowa caucus, Dean was not even on the radar.

    @33 – Yup. I’m a dork. I’m glad that at least one politician isn’t too full of himself to try to reach all Americans, and not only the small subset of really cool Americans. But then again, I believe we should have a representative democracy.

    I find Robert’s comments about ‘non-political bloggers’ particularly interesting. Only five to ten percent of bloggers consider themselves political bloggers and I’ve long advocated for candidates to reach out beyond the narrow confines of the political blogosphere and to encourage broadbased multilateral discussions. Edwards is clearly the leader in this front which is one of the reasons I’m talking with Ryan M. about how I would like to work for the Edwards campaign.

  55. Those numbers from MyDD…well, I don’t trust them. The media numbers are skewed by the bias in AP, from a comment I left there:
    taking AP out of the equation, by using the advanced Google news search, you get the following:

    Barack Obama: 5,668
    Obama and President: 4,264

    John Edwards: 5,385
    Edwards and President: 4,155

  56. Those numbers from MyDD…well, I don’t trust them. The media numbers are skewed by the bias in AP, from a comment I left there:
    taking AP out of the equation, by using the advanced Google news search, you get the following:

    Barack Obama: 5,668
    Obama and President: 4,264

    John Edwards: 5,385
    Edwards and President: 4,155

  57. Robert: it’s clear that Obama is the front-runner with the press. Dan Batz of the Washington Post told me that, too.

    Why? Well, the press likes an interesting story. And, let’s face it. Obama’s race and background makes for a much more interesting story than Edwards’ does.

    Of course, that doesn’t mean much in Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and South Carolina (the only for states that matter).

    Remember, Howard Dean was the press (and blogger) favorite going into Iowa too.

  58. Robert: it’s clear that Obama is the front-runner with the press. Dan Batz of the Washington Post told me that, too.

    Why? Well, the press likes an interesting story. And, let’s face it. Obama’s race and background makes for a much more interesting story than Edwards’ does.

    Of course, that doesn’t mean much in Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and South Carolina (the only for states that matter).

    Remember, Howard Dean was the press (and blogger) favorite going into Iowa too.

  59. “Actually, quite a few candidates have announced. Chris Dodd, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Tom Vilsack and Joe Biden have e all officially announced.”

    Who knew? And yet they, and even Edwards, is getting drowned out by Billary and Osama speculation. Point is, the people who vote, which are far more numerous than the political junkies the political junkies are, and will continue to be influenced by what they see on TV and the articles they see in their local newspapers.

    @38. Scoble, thanks for proving my point. No amount of blogging is going to change that. Osama’s story will only get MORE interesting… “can an ex cocaine user get elected President?” (we can excuse that, I guess, cuz he’s a Dem)

  60. “Actually, quite a few candidates have announced. Chris Dodd, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Tom Vilsack and Joe Biden have e all officially announced.”

    Who knew? And yet they, and even Edwards, is getting drowned out by Billary and Osama speculation. Point is, the people who vote, which are far more numerous than the political junkies the political junkies are, and will continue to be influenced by what they see on TV and the articles they see in their local newspapers.

    @38. Scoble, thanks for proving my point. No amount of blogging is going to change that. Osama’s story will only get MORE interesting… “can an ex cocaine user get elected President?” (we can excuse that, I guess, cuz he’s a Dem)

  61. Forget about the frontrunners. Bill Richardson spent last year stumping for Democratic governors and candidates, all the while, meeting with bloggers in various states. I put together a meeting last July in Seattle, that was attended by about 20 bloggers in Washington state. The meeting was not about Governor Richardson running for President, but of his wanting to engage bloggers in the political process and have an ongoing two-way dialogue on the issues of the day.

  62. “Yup. I’m a dork. I’m glad that at least one politician isn’t too full of himself to try to reach all Americans, and not only the small subset of really cool Americans. But then again, I believe we should have a representative democracy.”

    That’s great. Nothing wrong with that. But among those who vote, we are a minority. Look at the demographics of voters in Presidential elections. This medium doesn’t reach them to the point to make a difference. And, at the end of the day it’s about winning. So, the candidates will gravitate to where the votes are. Today, the majority don’t look to the internet for their political information. Over time that will change. But I don’t think 2008 will be that point.

  63. “Yup. I’m a dork. I’m glad that at least one politician isn’t too full of himself to try to reach all Americans, and not only the small subset of really cool Americans. But then again, I believe we should have a representative democracy.”

    That’s great. Nothing wrong with that. But among those who vote, we are a minority. Look at the demographics of voters in Presidential elections. This medium doesn’t reach them to the point to make a difference. And, at the end of the day it’s about winning. So, the candidates will gravitate to where the votes are. Today, the majority don’t look to the internet for their political information. Over time that will change. But I don’t think 2008 will be that point.

  64. Forget about the frontrunners. Bill Richardson spent last year stumping for Democratic governors and candidates, all the while, meeting with bloggers in various states. I put together a meeting last July in Seattle, that was attended by about 20 bloggers in Washington state. The meeting was not about Governor Richardson running for President, but of his wanting to engage bloggers in the political process and have an ongoing two-way dialogue on the issues of the day.

  65. David: Oh my god, your follow up post is really pathetic.

    Your title should be changed to “I’m sad nobody subscribes to my RSS feed. Please subscribe to my RSS feed. Woe is me.”

    Obama may have the traditional media’s hearts and the drive-by online political junkies all atwitter and buzzing… the most solid backing online and online infrastructure building has been done by Edwards.

  66. David: Oh my god, your follow up post is really pathetic.

    Your title should be changed to “I’m sad nobody subscribes to my RSS feed. Please subscribe to my RSS feed. Woe is me.”

    Obama may have the traditional media’s hearts and the drive-by online political junkies all atwitter and buzzing… the most solid backing online and online infrastructure building has been done by Edwards.

  67. @43, Again you show your inability to comprehend the things your link to (notice I didn’t say “read” because it is clear you don’t). What this report says is that ONLY 17% of voters of BOTH PARTIES used the internet as their source for political information. True is also says only HALF OF THE INTERNET USERS used it to get political information. That’s 31% of he general population. What is not said is how many of those 31% VOTE on Presidential elections. Just because someone uses the internet to get political information doesn’t mean they are also voters in Presidential elections. Pew says only 17% of VOTERS use the internet for political information. If Edwards thinks getting 17% of the voters will put him in the White House,more power to him.

  68. @43, Again you show your inability to comprehend the things your link to (notice I didn’t say “read” because it is clear you don’t). What this report says is that ONLY 17% of voters of BOTH PARTIES used the internet as their source for political information. True is also says only HALF OF THE INTERNET USERS used it to get political information. That’s 31% of he general population. What is not said is how many of those 31% VOTE on Presidential elections. Just because someone uses the internet to get political information doesn’t mean they are also voters in Presidential elections. Pew says only 17% of VOTERS use the internet for political information. If Edwards thinks getting 17% of the voters will put him in the White House,more power to him.

  69. #45: no, you are the one who isn’t comprehending things here. You first say that online isn’t being consumed enough to make a difference. I show that there are substantial numbers of people getting political info online.

    What you are forgetting, or ignoring, is that sometimes only a few votes make a difference. In Washington State the governor’s race was down to a few dozen votes difference.

    So, if online threw, say, 100 votes to a different way, then it would have made a difference.

    That article shows that a substantial number of people are getting their info online. What you are also forgetting is that a lot of people who are influencers get their info online, then tell their neighbors what they think over the backyard fence.

    In the four states that matter (Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Carolina) politics is done largely on the ground. But who is it done by? People who were informed online.

  70. #45: no, you are the one who isn’t comprehending things here. You first say that online isn’t being consumed enough to make a difference. I show that there are substantial numbers of people getting political info online.

    What you are forgetting, or ignoring, is that sometimes only a few votes make a difference. In Washington State the governor’s race was down to a few dozen votes difference.

    So, if online threw, say, 100 votes to a different way, then it would have made a difference.

    That article shows that a substantial number of people are getting their info online. What you are also forgetting is that a lot of people who are influencers get their info online, then tell their neighbors what they think over the backyard fence.

    In the four states that matter (Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Carolina) politics is done largely on the ground. But who is it done by? People who were informed online.

  71. Robert, you are wrong because you don’t really grasp that the 17 percent who use the Internet for information on politics likely also read newspapers, watch television and subscribe to magazines. The information gathering is cumulative. (For example, I am sitting at a Starbucks with the NYT and the Oregonian, which I will read while doing some downloads, as I write this. I have both Obama and Edwards’books, as well. Already read Clinton’s.) For people who are really interested in information, sources used are cumulative. So, even blog readers don’t necessarily rely on blogs for information. We can take or leave blogs, and more and more, I am leaving them.

  72. Robert, you are wrong because you don’t really grasp that the 17 percent who use the Internet for information on politics likely also read newspapers, watch television and subscribe to magazines. The information gathering is cumulative. (For example, I am sitting at a Starbucks with the NYT and the Oregonian, which I will read while doing some downloads, as I write this. I have both Obama and Edwards’books, as well. Already read Clinton’s.) For people who are really interested in information, sources used are cumulative. So, even blog readers don’t necessarily rely on blogs for information. We can take or leave blogs, and more and more, I am leaving them.

  73. Podesta: if you go there, then you must also acknowledge that most newspaper readers are also getting information from the Internet. Why? Cause the journalists who cover politics are watching blogs and other online news sources to get some of their information.

    What you must posted still doesn’t change my point, though, that online will have a sizeable (and measurable) effect.

  74. Podesta: if you go there, then you must also acknowledge that most newspaper readers are also getting information from the Internet. Why? Cause the journalists who cover politics are watching blogs and other online news sources to get some of their information.

    What you must posted still doesn’t change my point, though, that online will have a sizeable (and measurable) effect.

  75. “In the four states that matter (Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Carolina) politics is done largely on the ground. But who is it done by? People who were informed online.”

    Really? Where’s your proof of that? You need to back up statements like this with facts. The research you provided says that only 31% of those people were informed on line. And only 17% of VOTERS were informed on line. That hardly sounds influential. Politics has been done on the ground in this country since the 1600′s.The internet hasn’t changed that.

    At the end of the day only 17% of VOTERS got information from the internet. Voters get their information from a multitude of sources, the internet included. I’m not disputing that. But to suggest that the internet is going to be the difference is not supported with the data you provided.

    As I understand the Wash State governor election, I don’t think the internet was able to create votes that weren’t there during the recounts.

    Look, I understand that when your whole reason for existence is built around blogging that you want to believe it is the only thing anyone will need to be informed. But, in the real world that is not the case. Again, the report you cite shows that more people still rely on traditional MSM sources for their political information.

    “Cause the journalists who cover politics are watching blogs and other online news sources to get some of their information.”

    Yes, agreed. To get SOME. Blogs are yet another source of information…(more often than not an unreliable source if we are to use yours as an example). But, FOR THE PEOPLE WHO VOTE, it is not a primary or even major source.

  76. “In the four states that matter (Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Carolina) politics is done largely on the ground. But who is it done by? People who were informed online.”

    Really? Where’s your proof of that? You need to back up statements like this with facts. The research you provided says that only 31% of those people were informed on line. And only 17% of VOTERS were informed on line. That hardly sounds influential. Politics has been done on the ground in this country since the 1600′s.The internet hasn’t changed that.

    At the end of the day only 17% of VOTERS got information from the internet. Voters get their information from a multitude of sources, the internet included. I’m not disputing that. But to suggest that the internet is going to be the difference is not supported with the data you provided.

    As I understand the Wash State governor election, I don’t think the internet was able to create votes that weren’t there during the recounts.

    Look, I understand that when your whole reason for existence is built around blogging that you want to believe it is the only thing anyone will need to be informed. But, in the real world that is not the case. Again, the report you cite shows that more people still rely on traditional MSM sources for their political information.

    “Cause the journalists who cover politics are watching blogs and other online news sources to get some of their information.”

    Yes, agreed. To get SOME. Blogs are yet another source of information…(more often than not an unreliable source if we are to use yours as an example). But, FOR THE PEOPLE WHO VOTE, it is not a primary or even major source.

  77. barak obama made a critical mistake in attacking the baby boomer generation. he is trying to differentiate himself but unfortunately we want a leader who tries to unify, and not alienate a large and influential and knowledgeable generation of people. what was he thinking? and, it begs, why? and if he is so short sighted and age descriminatory, do we want him running our country. frankly, even if he had not blurted this little absurdity out, he does not have the experience to tackle running the most influential country in the world. and he is clearly not mature or contemplative enough or he would have not put his big foot in his even bigger mouth as illustrated above. my feeling is this guy needs to drop his over inflated ego and learn some diplomacy before we hand him the reins to anything beyond where he is right now. grow up obama then contact us when you have gained some wisdom and some class and some manners.

  78. barak obama made a critical mistake in attacking the baby boomer generation. he is trying to differentiate himself but unfortunately we want a leader who tries to unify, and not alienate a large and influential and knowledgeable generation of people. what was he thinking? and, it begs, why? and if he is so short sighted and age descriminatory, do we want him running our country. frankly, even if he had not blurted this little absurdity out, he does not have the experience to tackle running the most influential country in the world. and he is clearly not mature or contemplative enough or he would have not put his big foot in his even bigger mouth as illustrated above. my feeling is this guy needs to drop his over inflated ego and learn some diplomacy before we hand him the reins to anything beyond where he is right now. grow up obama then contact us when you have gained some wisdom and some class and some manners.

  79. [...] sites like YouTube, Flickr, Facebook and blogs have done to the public relations landscape. Rob Scoble recently mused about the presidential candidates and their recent use of “direct to you” media and I [...]

  80. [...] That would be unfair (and would underplay Hillary’s role 1992-2000.) I’m just saying that, failure to use the internetz appropriately aside, she has the collective wisdom of the boys and girls who have been at the top of the political game [...]

  81. Michelle Obama should be ashamed.

    “GLORK” Michelle Obama should be ashamed of her separatist-racist connection to Farrakhan and Chicago’s Trinity United Church trumpeting Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama as the second coming of the messiah. Beneath that Darth-Vader-Mace-Windu-Jedi-Me ssiah Helmet Hairdo of Michelle Obama lurks a Wildabeast. If Michelle Obama new what her husband — the Hope-A-Dope, Fonster Monster — Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama did in Harlem, she would wash her wide-open, Hus-suey loving MUSILM mouth out, with twenty-four (24) mule-team double-cross X-boX-BorraX. The Lexis-Nexis-Albatross-Abacus-Complex of Barack and Michelle’s relationship with MUSLIM “PATWANG-FWEEE” Rev. Wright, Louis Farrakhan, and black demagoguery of Obama’s Stump Lines Echo Malcolm X; is about as much of a Hoax as Oxfam volunteers believe in HIV– AIDS Witch Doctors in Africa they feed.
    “God damn America” – Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama.
    “God bless America” – Pope Benedict XVI and Hillary Clinton –
    Michelle Obama AKA Wildabeast — failed the Illinois Bar Exam. If Barack Obama had married Shaniqua instead of the leftist-separatist-racist-beast-’ist Michelle, his jackanapes’ excitedly-fixed-elitism, Nemet-Oure-Saxas Our Father Our King — black rage, and “GLORK” black demagoguery of Obama’s Stump Lines Echo Malcolm X; would be taken a lot more expeditiously. Its expected that Obam will manage his explosive MUSLIM JIHADI — FATIMA EXTREMISM obsession bitter. He is a MUSLIM “Glork” It’s time to introduce this false, fake “GLORK” Xerox – X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke Xerox – X box to meet the Buffalo “GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA” Police Department Buffalo Creek. He’s MAD!!!

    http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/

  82. Michelle Obama should be ashamed.

    “GLORK” Michelle Obama should be ashamed of her separatist-racist connection to Farrakhan and Chicago’s Trinity United Church trumpeting Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama as the second coming of the messiah. Beneath that Darth-Vader-Mace-Windu-Jedi-Me ssiah Helmet Hairdo of Michelle Obama lurks a Wildabeast. If Michelle Obama new what her husband — the Hope-A-Dope, Fonster Monster — Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama did in Harlem, she would wash her wide-open, Hus-suey loving MUSILM mouth out, with twenty-four (24) mule-team double-cross X-boX-BorraX. The Lexis-Nexis-Albatross-Abacus-Complex of Barack and Michelle’s relationship with MUSLIM “PATWANG-FWEEE” Rev. Wright, Louis Farrakhan, and black demagoguery of Obama’s Stump Lines Echo Malcolm X; is about as much of a Hoax as Oxfam volunteers believe in HIV– AIDS Witch Doctors in Africa they feed.
    “God damn America” – Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama.
    “God bless America” – Pope Benedict XVI and Hillary Clinton –
    Michelle Obama AKA Wildabeast — failed the Illinois Bar Exam. If Barack Obama had married Shaniqua instead of the leftist-separatist-racist-beast-’ist Michelle, his jackanapes’ excitedly-fixed-elitism, Nemet-Oure-Saxas Our Father Our King — black rage, and “GLORK” black demagoguery of Obama’s Stump Lines Echo Malcolm X; would be taken a lot more expeditiously. Its expected that Obam will manage his explosive MUSLIM JIHADI — FATIMA EXTREMISM obsession bitter. He is a MUSLIM “Glork” It’s time to introduce this false, fake “GLORK” Xerox – X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke Xerox – X box to meet the Buffalo “GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA” Police Department Buffalo Creek. He’s MAD!!!

    http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/