Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

The Web as Political Weapon 146

cultrhetor writes "John Harris of the Washington Post has noticed that the three largest recent political controversies have stemmed from work done by digital inhabitants. In the article, New Media a Weapon in the New World of Politics, he notes the connections between the recent scandals involving Mark Foley, George Allen, and Bill Clinton were representative of the new, web-driven age of American politics." From the article: "Each originally percolated in the world of new media — Web sites and news outlets that did not exist a generation ago — before charging into the traditional world of newspapers and television networks. In each case, the accusations quickly pivoted into a debate about the motivations and alleged biases of the accusers. Cumulatively, the stories highlight a new brand of politics in which nearly any revelation in the news becomes a weapon or shield in the daily partisan wars, and the aim of candidates and their operatives is not so much to win an argument as to brand opponents as fundamentally unfit."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Web as Political Weapon

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 06, 2006 @05:26PM (#16342041)
    Every weekend /. seems to get deeper into the political articles that are geared for creating more heat than light. It's becoming an end in itself and looks bad.
  • by rewt66 ( 738525 ) on Friday October 06, 2006 @05:41PM (#16342241)
    It's not that the Internet has become a deadly effective political weapon. It's that the Internet lets anyone who has enough time, skill, and motivation to find out the truth.

    Note well: By "tbe truth" I don't mean "the truth about someone's character", but rather "the truth about an event" or some such. That is, if someone said or did something, ever, in any context, there's probably someone who can find out about it on the net.

    So what's really going on is that the Internet has turned the truth about people's past actions and statements into a deadly effective political weapon.

    This is good and bad. It's bad because, as far as I can tell, it can only be used to destroy people. It's good because I think that the fewer politicians with enormous gaps between their public image and reality, the better.
  • by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Friday October 06, 2006 @05:44PM (#16342271) Journal
    This Harris guy from the Washington Post is a well-known wanker. He and another tool named Halperin have just written a book (it came out this week) with the 5-alarm EXTRA! EXTRA! bit of news that the Internet is now having a big effect in American politics.

    Harris and Halperin have been running around the big news shows saying that Drudge is "The New Walter Cronkite". Give me an effin' break. Drudge is the guy who's been saying that the real criminals in this Foley scandal are those demonic teenagers who "baited" Foley into asking them to measure their hogs and send him pictures. Excuse me, but no amount of "baiting" is going to get me to ask somebody to send me a picture of their apparatus. Most people I know aren't going to be "baited" into becoming sexual predators.

    So Harris and Halperin are saying that "Gee, the news media really is so liberal that the only answer is to make sure that every single story is as "fair" and "balanced" as possible. To them, this means that if you have Republicans taking millions of dollars from Jack Abramoff in order to change their votes on the floor of Congress, you also have to point out that Democrats took $184.35 from Abramoff's next door neighbor and pretend that their equal.

    Really, there comes a time when a government is so out of hand that the last thing you want is a news media that's trying its best not to offend anyone, while at the same time you've got douchebags like Hannity and Limbaugh telling people that "Liberals Must Die".

    Fact is, Harris and Halperin, as top representatives of a media structure that has failed to make a peep while an insane Administration is sending young Americans off to die in order to make the President and VP feel like they've got big dicks OUGHT to go down the tubes. They OUGHT to be ashamed of themselves, but not for being liberal, but for being stenographers in a period of American History when we sorely needed some voices of outrage.

    Oh, and "Sgt Doom"... if you think you're getting more "factual" news from Fox than you do from the New York times, you've really got to lay off huffing cleaning fluid. It's messing with you, dude.
  • by sgt_doom ( 655561 ) on Friday October 06, 2006 @06:18PM (#16342669)
    PopeRatzo, I think you've got me mixed up with someone else -- I've never watched Fox News in my life - nor would I ever, ever recommend that total crapola network. I said I received more factual news from reading blogs and web sites than I ever do reading any American newspapers or American TV news. (And I am in full agreement with your outstanding post.)

    Cases in point: (1) On an Italian site many months ago we first learned that Accenture had been contracted to bring in rigged voting machines for the Italian elections by former - and ousted president - Berlisconi. Their exit polls showed Berlisconi losing by 1 million votes - while the rigged count displayed only 25,000 votes. Either way - he lost - but we now realize Accenture's activity in the matter. (2) Foreign news reports stating that some British SAS (their special ops organization) refused to return to Iraq to fight beside the American forces as they strongly disagreed with the American strategy and behavior over there. No where did these stories appear in the popular, MSM American news....

  • by admiralh ( 21771 ) on Friday October 06, 2006 @06:20PM (#16342689) Homepage
    We see yet again another example of the so-called "non-biased" media equating a pedophile (Foley) and a racist (Allen), both Republicans, with a former president upset about being misrepresented in a movie purporting to be based on real events, when it was based on what the right-wing wanted you to believe were the real events.

    In this case, the Clinton scandal was really the Clinton-haters lying (yet again). But that's beside the point.

    What this is is the typical example of balance

    1. Show a major Republican gaffe
    2. Show a minor Democratic gaffe
    3. Claim that both parties are guilty, so neither has the moral high ground.
    4. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker

Working...