Author (#1)March 2008 Archives
I wish I could expand on this further, and perhaps I will at a later time. I just had a quick thought (I miss the days when blogging was nothing but quick thoughts) and I noticed that online there is a lot of consolidation in candidate support depending on the site.
As an example, Daily Kos is definitely Obama land. So much so that the Clinton supporters recently declared a "strike" on the site and all twelve of them left in a huff. MyDD has culminated into Hillary Clinton land where grand delusions of winning run high.
Digg is interesting in that it was a total Ron Paul stronghold and the front page often had several Ron Paul stories. Today, it is much more docile and the majority of support seems to be behind Obama at this time. So much for the Ron Paul revolution. Didn't realize it took a string of losses to stem a revolution.
YouTube was also Ron Paul land but recently has shifted to Obama Country. Both candidates seem to have found favor there though early on.
I wonder why Ron Paul and Obama both had that early net appeal even before their candidacies really took off in the mainstream media world. One theory I have is how fast information flows online and the tendency for group mentality to take place in large groups. It appears that as information is gathered there is a filtering affect that occurs. Clinton had a strong disadvantage online as the "Establishment Candidate" and I believe that turned a lot of users off. They wanted a fresh face. Early information favored Obama and as far as the internet was concerned for the most part, he was the candidate of choice.
What happens now is that the other candidates not favored receive bad press and information is filtered by the community at large. It is, in essence, a snowball effect. The more good information about a favored candidate, the more they will filter out good information on opposing candidates. An early advantage could mean everything and could tilt a particular community for overwhelmingly supporting a particular candidate.
This of course bars any major news that may slam a candidate. The Wright story has made Digg though many users there took a sympathetic stance towards Obama despite the overall negative light by the mainstream media. There are also straggling support for other candidates and some stories, if extraordinarily good, may leak through and paint a previously unfavored candidate in better light.
On YouTube Hillary Clinton videos tend to get slammed with negative ratings. The infamous Hillary4U&Me video was lambasted for its canned feel and unimaginative lyrics. Her recent "lie" is getting wide coverage and several videos regarding it have gone viral.
This is only a quick look at a few communities. I'm not too immersed in other communities but I'm wondering if anyone out there knows which way their own forum or website community leans election wise.
As an example, Daily Kos is definitely Obama land. So much so that the Clinton supporters recently declared a "strike" on the site and all twelve of them left in a huff. MyDD has culminated into Hillary Clinton land where grand delusions of winning run high.
Digg is interesting in that it was a total Ron Paul stronghold and the front page often had several Ron Paul stories. Today, it is much more docile and the majority of support seems to be behind Obama at this time. So much for the Ron Paul revolution. Didn't realize it took a string of losses to stem a revolution.
YouTube was also Ron Paul land but recently has shifted to Obama Country. Both candidates seem to have found favor there though early on.
I wonder why Ron Paul and Obama both had that early net appeal even before their candidacies really took off in the mainstream media world. One theory I have is how fast information flows online and the tendency for group mentality to take place in large groups. It appears that as information is gathered there is a filtering affect that occurs. Clinton had a strong disadvantage online as the "Establishment Candidate" and I believe that turned a lot of users off. They wanted a fresh face. Early information favored Obama and as far as the internet was concerned for the most part, he was the candidate of choice.
What happens now is that the other candidates not favored receive bad press and information is filtered by the community at large. It is, in essence, a snowball effect. The more good information about a favored candidate, the more they will filter out good information on opposing candidates. An early advantage could mean everything and could tilt a particular community for overwhelmingly supporting a particular candidate.
This of course bars any major news that may slam a candidate. The Wright story has made Digg though many users there took a sympathetic stance towards Obama despite the overall negative light by the mainstream media. There are also straggling support for other candidates and some stories, if extraordinarily good, may leak through and paint a previously unfavored candidate in better light.
On YouTube Hillary Clinton videos tend to get slammed with negative ratings. The infamous Hillary4U&Me video was lambasted for its canned feel and unimaginative lyrics. Her recent "lie" is getting wide coverage and several videos regarding it have gone viral.
This is only a quick look at a few communities. I'm not too immersed in other communities but I'm wondering if anyone out there knows which way their own forum or website community leans election wise.
Out
