Theoretically... but not actually, this could be a breaking point. A very interesting insight of what's to come.
After howard dean's campaign for 2004 the mainstream media and related beuracratic powers re-asserted themselves in a dark moment... the yee-haw heard around the world, replaying it over and over until it had erased all the gains howard dean had made in mainstream america through a campaign based almost entirely on the interent. It was a radical example of power in transition. 2008 however is a new story. The question is... has the internet and so called internet based media become more important than cable, sat and tv news? What about newspapers and radio? Will politicians and can politicians afford to play one off the other... or will they tiptoe a middle ground to avoid alienating either... like Steve Jobs in the DRM vs. anti-drm debate. Clearly this post from edwards campaign manager indicates a coming war. War between the liberal voice of new media and the conservative voices of old media. It's going to be extremely interesting to see it play out. I hope to see a candidate stand on a completely new platform of representative democracy based on internet support... instead of a platform mediated by the powerful, the rich and other forces at work in mainstream media. I suspect that given the overwhelming disgust with the current president and a republican dominated congress that democrats will have the upper hand and that this will play into the heavy use of internet based media to build support. And of course we can count on atleast some mainstream media players whom have already shifted to this new reality... from colbert and daily... to the NYtimes and many web focused newspapers.... but all in all... wether you're a conservative or liberal or any of the thousand complex realities in between the message is clear... the most important aspects of the 2008 election may not be played out on the newspaper, radio or television... the internet may well be the dominant deciding factor in "decision 08". It's going to be a fantabulous war of words, photos, video, and audio on the web and it's going to be awesome... because it's going to revitalize the debate and take it well beyond the "yee-haa" sound bites of the mainstream media. It's not just "long tail" media whom will benifit. With a huge increase in the breadth of the conversation also comes an increase in the depth of the conversatioon. AND, I suspect while mainstream media news rooms will be under tremendous pressure I suspect despite their battle scars they will ultimately be some of the great benifactors in the move of the political debates online... quite simply BECAUSE the greatly revitalized interest in the political debate will bring more people not to just the web, but for news media too. It is an everyone wins scenario though it may not at times feel like it for mainstream media. The parrellel is to be found in the music, television and movie entertainment world too. P2P filesharing and above all open web based distribution... distribution that is on the open net and therefore gaining infinite SOCIAL benifit... particularly through widespread *conversation*... is actually helping musicians, artists, producers and creators... certainly NOT the middle men, not the distributors no... but it's helping creators and makers because it stimulates greater conversation and interest... which ultimately can, will, and DOES translate into more album sales, more viewers, more RELEVANCE. Even if mainstream entertainment media cannot pull their heads out of their asses and start selling and distributing their media on the internet (sans DRM), the mainstream NEWS media is MUCH better prepared to benifit from internet based media phenomonon. It's going to be really interesting to watch the political debates shape up in 2007. I actually really really hope that John Edwards and others take a stance on which side of the media they're on (though I don't think it will work), because by doing so it will much more clearly indicate where the power base is. Will the political power largely rest online, or will television media still hold the ultimate sway as they re-asserted with Howard Dean in 2004? I don't know how far along well be in the 2008 election, but I do think that by 2012 or 2016 that the 2004 presidential will look like the dark ages. You might look at it this way. Some have compared Myspace to a country. You might think of the online blogging community and social networking sites as a "new world" and 2004 was the start of the rebellion... 2008 might well be the year the rebellion succeeds and rest power from the current powers that be. God help us all. :) Cheers, -Mike mmeiser.com/blog mefeedia.com On 3/10/07, Jan McLaughlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Extraordinary. Particularly if folks begin to speak out in great numbers > against this kind of 'journalism'. > > Jan > > On 3/10/07, andrew michael baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Interesting email I got. Attacking the msm for a presidential politician > > is very risky, but you can almost imagine the implications as it reads. > > > > The potential is great which we all know, but it feels like we may soon > > reach a tipping point. > > > > Email: > > > > You may have heard by now that John Edwards was the first candidate to > > officially say no to the Fox News debate in Nevada –- and because of > > the hard work of so many grassroots and netroots Democrats, news > > is breaking tonight that Fox is out. > > > > Fox has already started striking back at John for saying no. (There's > > a surprise – Fox attacking a Democrat.) Last night, Roger Ailes – the > > life-long Republican operative who is now Chairman of Fox News > > Channel – said that any candidate "who believes he can blacklist > > any news organization is making a terrible mistake" and "is impeding > > freedom of speech and free press." > > > > And John's not their only target. Tonight Fox News Vice President > > David Rhodes is telling news organizations not to get involved in the > > Nevada Democratic Caucus because of "radical fringe" groups – > > meaning grassroots Democrats (that would be you) – who objected to > > Fox's long history of spreading Republican propaganda at the expense > > of Democratic leaders. > > > > The whole right wing is getting in on the attack; the Drudge Report is > > blaring the headline: "War! Dems Pull Out of Fox News Debate." > > > > Enough is enough. It's time to send a clear message to Fox News and > > their allies that their right-wing talking points and temper tantrums > > won't go unchallenged anymore – when it comes to what Democrats > > should do in the Democratic primary, we'll decide – no matter what > > they report: > > > > http://johnedwards.com/r/7146/53693/ > > > > Fox News has already proven they have no intention of providing "fair > > and balanced" coverage of any Democrat in this election. > > > > In recent weeks they have run blatant lies about Senator Obama's > > background. And Fox was only too happy to give Ann Coulter a platform > > to spew more hate a few days after her bigoted attack on Senator > > Edwards and the gay community. > > > > Now it's time for Democrats to stand together and send a clear message > > to Roger Ailes, Fox News and all the rest of them: bias isn't balance, > > but turning tables is fair: > > > > http://johnedwards.com/r/7147/53693/ > > > > The truth is, Fox News can "report" whatever they want. And when it > > works for us, we'll deal with them on our terms. But this campaign is > > about responsibility and accountability, and we need to send the > > message to Fox that if they want to be the corporate mouthpiece of > > the Republican Party more than they want to be an impartial news > > outlet, they shouldn't expect Democrats to play along. > > > > You can send that message by contributing today, and remind Fox News > > that in this election, Democrats won't take their spin lying down: > > > > http://johnedwards.com/r/7148/53693/ > > > > Thank you for standing up for what we believe in. > > > > Jonathan Prince > > Deputy Campaign Manager > > John Edwards for President > > > > P.S. If the folks at Fox wonder why nobody thinks they play it > > straight, they should take a look at what Roger Ailes said > > about debates in 1988 when he was a top Republican > > spinmaster for then Vice President Bush: He told the Washington > > Post, "I don't know that we need to do more than one [debate]. > > There's no reason to think we'd need more than one." And he > > told the New York Times, "I don't think you learn anything about > > the issues" from debates. So please send Roger Ailes a message: > > Hypocrisy isn't fair and it isn't balanced; it's just hypocrisy - > > and we've had enough of it from you. > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > > Help support John Edwards for President with a contribution today: > > > > + http://johnedwards.com/r/7149/53693/ > > > > Spread the word. Tell a friend about John Edwards for President: > > > > + http://johnedwards.com/r/7150/53693/ > > > > If a friend sent you this message, join the campaign: > > > > + http://johnedwards.com/r/7151/53693/ > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > > Make sure you receive email updates from Senator Edwards. > > Add [EMAIL PROTECTED] to your Address Book: > > > > + http://johnedwards.com/r/7152/53693/ > > > > If you would like to unsubscribe from email communications sent > > by John Edwards for President, please paste the following > > address into your web browser: > > > > + http://johnedwards.com/optout?p=MjAwLDUzNjkz%0A > > > > Paid for by John Edwards for President > > 410 Market Street, Suite 400, Chapel Hill, NC 27516 > > (919) 636-3131 / www.johnedwards.com > > > > Contributions to John Edwards for President are not deductible > > for federal income tax purposes. > > > > > > Sent via CrackBerry > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > -- > The Faux Press - better than real > http://fauxpress.blogspot.com > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
