Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Blog Comments Fuel Negative Campaigns
Blog Comments Become Fodder For Attack Ads - washingtonpost.com
A political television advertisement in a race for the state legislature in Virginia cites a comment posted on a blog as a source for an attack on a rival candidate. The ad cites the blog as the source despite the fact that it is citing a reader's comment posted on the blog and not something written by the blogger.
A political television advertisement in a race for the state legislature in Virginia cites a comment posted on a blog as a source for an attack on a rival candidate. The ad cites the blog as the source despite the fact that it is citing a reader's comment posted on the blog and not something written by the blogger.
"The ad by Del. Timothy D. Hugo points to a new form of negative campaigning in which information for an attack ad is sourced to comments posted on the Internet instead of more authoritative sources such as news reports or public records.Campaigns are using blogging and material from blogs in creative ways to compete for publicity. Should blogs be treated with the same respect as "official" news sources? What is the value of a blog comment in this case?
Hugo's ad highlights critical comments about his Democratic opponent, Rex Simmons, that someone with the screen name "Pitin" posted on the Democratic blog Raising Kaine.
Ads that quote from blogs, on which it is often difficult to identify the author, represent a benchmark in increasingly negative political campaigns, several political analysts said."
Comments:
<< Home
Just to help you get your facts straight.
It wasn't a "comment".
I was a diary on a blog that is part of the local net roots community posted by one of the members, who had always been open about who he has to that community.
Rex Simmons sent some negative mail pieces, breaking the clean campaign pledge he crafted.
The diary discussed the surprise and outrage at Rex Simmons for breaking his word and attacking another Democrat in the primary.
It was backed up by other commentary in previous discussion about the race on the same website.
I leave to you to decide, if these previous blog postings are valid once Rex starting attacking his general election opponent.
I think they point to a pattern of behavior. Rex Simmons signed a clean campaign pledge and broke it to make sure he won. Now he is going negative again. He will do anything to win again.
It wasn't a "comment".
I was a diary on a blog that is part of the local net roots community posted by one of the members, who had always been open about who he has to that community.
Rex Simmons sent some negative mail pieces, breaking the clean campaign pledge he crafted.
The diary discussed the surprise and outrage at Rex Simmons for breaking his word and attacking another Democrat in the primary.
It was backed up by other commentary in previous discussion about the race on the same website.
I leave to you to decide, if these previous blog postings are valid once Rex starting attacking his general election opponent.
I think they point to a pattern of behavior. Rex Simmons signed a clean campaign pledge and broke it to make sure he won. Now he is going negative again. He will do anything to win again.
# posted by 
: 11:20 AM
: 11:20 AM
Thanks for the correction. But was the "diary" an officially sanctioned part of the blog or could anyone write a diary? Should the diary be attributed to the blog or to the author of the diary?
This blog is not concerned with the specifics of the Rex Simmons campaign, We are discussing how new media and the web are transforming campaigning in general. How should blog content be used in political ads?
Also why the anonymouus comment? I don't doubt the truth of your comment but anonymous comments always seem less credible. Perhaps that is just my own bias. This discussion is about how sources of information should be assessed after all.
This blog is not concerned with the specifics of the Rex Simmons campaign, We are discussing how new media and the web are transforming campaigning in general. How should blog content be used in political ads?
Also why the anonymouus comment? I don't doubt the truth of your comment but anonymous comments always seem less credible. Perhaps that is just my own bias. This discussion is about how sources of information should be assessed after all.
Thanks for the correction. But was the "diary" an officially sanctioned part of the blog or could anyone write a diary? Should the diary be attributed to the blog or to the author of the diary?
This blog is not concerned with the specifics of the Rex Simmons campaign, We are discussing how new media and the web are transforming campaigning in general. How should blog content be used in political ads?
Also why the anonymouus comment? I don't doubt the truth of your comment but anonymous comments always seem less credible. Perhaps that is just my own bias. This discussion is about how sources of information should be assessed after all.
Post a Comment
This blog is not concerned with the specifics of the Rex Simmons campaign, We are discussing how new media and the web are transforming campaigning in general. How should blog content be used in political ads?
Also why the anonymouus comment? I don't doubt the truth of your comment but anonymous comments always seem less credible. Perhaps that is just my own bias. This discussion is about how sources of information should be assessed after all.
<< Home
