Gubernatorial/Statewide Social Media Monitor

[Beet]

Using this thread to track the ways that social media continues to transform the political scene for Gubernatorial/Statewide races. As I have said, I think an extreme potent cocktail combining the trends of rising interest in politics at a mass level (2000-present), rising political polarization (1980-present), the media revolution (1980-present), and the world wide web content explosion (1995-present) is coming together and the 2008 Presidential elections were only a preview.

The 2010 Gubernatorial/Statewide elections will be characterized by certain Rules.

Rule #1: Top-down driven campaigns attempting to create a bottom-up image and "viral" marketing campaigns that are really massively backed by money at the highest level

Rule #2: Political advertising will start to look more like commercial advertising

Rule #3: A revolution in social media and online networking that will absolutely dominate everything politics from media memes to fundraising to mobilization

Rule #4: in a continuation of 2008, a trend towards a focus on "big stars" and dominating personalities, but to a lesser extent than Presidential races.

Rule #5: when reading articles online, the comments will be more interesting than the story.

This thread may just be forgotten, but if not, I may be posting articles here from time to time chronicling these exciting developments.

[Beet]

First story

Meg Whitman’s FAIL Blog FAIL
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/06/meg_whitmans_failblog_fail.html

I can't tell whether this is an illustration of Rule #5, "when reading articles online, the comments will be more interesting than the story," or the exception that proves the rule.

[War on Want]

I kinda disagree with #5.

[Beet]

I kinda disagree with #5.

Reporters are restricted from saying what they really think. A typical story will go like this: "Obama says we are doing everything we can to clean up the gulf."

Nothing could be more boring or pro forma. But Obama has to say it, and the press has to report it.

In the comments section you learn what the reaction is; how effective his words are; what the mood of the people is. Of course, you don't take everything literally, you must know your context. And online commentators tend to come more often from the party out of power. But the more interesting part often is the comments section.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

In my experience, the comments section of any news site is a vast wasteland of idiocy.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

In my experience, the comments section of any news site is a vast wasteland of idiocy.

Yea they are.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

First story

Meg Whitman’s FAIL Blog FAIL
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/06/meg_whitmans_failblog_fail.html

I can't tell whether this is an illustration of Rule #5, "when reading articles online, the comments will be more interesting than the story," or the exception that proves the rule.

Lawl at "Fail Blog"s sense of self-importance. Don't hold your breath waiting for that apology, guys.