A few days ago, there was some discussion on whether political bloggers are influencing the landscape. They are in Nevada, and certainly elsewhere, and mainstream media is taking note.
Jon Ralston is one of the most recognized political analysts in the state of Nevada, particularly in southern Nevada, reaching readers in print, online, and on television. Last Sunday, he made a candid observation about social media, especially in politics, in his Flash Point column header that appeared in the Sunday combined edition of the Las Vegas Review-Journal/Las Vegas Sun.
"These are embarrassing times for those of us in the MSM. That's mainstream media for those of you not savvy to the acronymic insults hurled our way by bloggers. We sit idly by and watch the bloggers do what we so rarely can: Move political establishment. And now it is on both sides.
First, the Democratic blogosphere types pummeled the Nevada party for partnering with Fox. What was just noise eventually catalyzed action and forced the dissolution of the partnership. Now, on the GOP side, led by activist Chuck Muth, the bloggers have forced the party to reconsider its caucus date, which now may be moving to Jan. 19 to compete with the Democrats. So I guess I should ask the cyber hit men: What's the next big story?"
Indeed. It's very telling when political analysts share observations with some apparent frustration over social media. It's not surprising to me that political bloggers are at the front of the social media pack, but not just because they blog. However, as I've said before, it's not the tool, but who wields it.
Muth wields it pretty well over at Citizen Outreach. Citizen Outreach is self-described as a limited-government public policy organization dedicated to putting the “public” back in public policy. Whereas Muth has always been adept at shaping policy and writing columns for various publications around the state, he has found blogging to be the best place to make a case for everything else. In Nevada, he is not alone.
The reasons are pretty simple. In politics, blogs are becoming especially impactful, primarily because politics has always been a forum where squeaky wheels either get the grease or, in some cases, get greased. Blogs are extremely useful in this quarter because unlike accepting the burden of becoming a print publisher, there is virtually no real overhead (print publications are exceedingly expensive to print and time consuming to publish if you want to do it right).
More and more legislators and elected government officials on every level, for better or worse, are also discovering that blogs can be a great way to keep in contact with their constituants, defend their positions, and perhaps maintain a base against future challenges. (Unfortunately, most will likely get in trouble because they write it themselves with little or no help from consultants, doing little more than penning the groundwork for their next campaign's potential hit pieces. Oh well.)
Regardless, as the MSM, as Ralston calls it, continues to see the influence it has enjoyed in the past erode, some will get grouchy about it. Others will recognize it for what it is: a redefinition of the landscape and the roles people play in them.
The way I see it, social media is suggesting the mainstream media take on new marching orders, asking them to cover the news rather than set it or have an agenda. Or, in other words, maybe traditional media was never meant to move the political establishment, but rather to report that movement. You know, tell the truth and shame the devil. It's an honorable profession, one devoid of stating which party you belong to or whether you personally think more taxes are in order.
Certainly, in some cases, mainstream media took the wrong path somewhere along the line with too few actually acting as political analysts and too many acting like the political activists they were supposed to cover. It seems to me this is precisely why online self-proclaimed media watchdogs such as Media Matters and News Busters broke onto the national scene to begin with, each claiming that media bias is too conservative or too liberal (sometimes both at the same time, depending on the topic).
Labels, labels, everywhere labels. So let's set the record straight. There are no cyber hitmen. There are only political activists with a new tool.
There is rampant media bias, except in rare instances when the truth actually overpowers political leanings (newspapers have been known to aggressively support candidates, but wash their hands of them if any corruption is exposed, preferably before people realize the paper chastising them today helped get them elected last month).
There is little difference between what Ralston did in 1993 when he began publishing the political newsletter "The Ralston Report," except that bloggers have less overhead and don't ask their readers to pay an inflated subscription price.
There really are no "bloggers" beyond those citizens who write online diaries, even though the label is often bandied about with ardent enthusiasm or apparent attempts to discredit (sometimes at the same time). In actuality, there are simply new political activists who never had a voice before, or, as in my case, industry experts who are willing to share their insights or business people who see the natural crossover to employ blogs as a tool not all that dissimilar from politics.
How so? While I maintain it's not for every CEO to have a blog, it does provide an answer to management consultant Laurence Haughton's question here: "But what tells you that 'all the talk about how companies need to have a dialogue with customers' is serious talk?"
A few graphs up, I mentioned legislators beginning to use blogs to have contact with their constituants, defend their positions, and perhaps maintain a base against future challenges. Is that so very different from one of several business blog uses: connect with customers, promote products, and build brand loyalty? Unless you're hung up on semantics, not really.
Given this, recruiters might even ask themselves if they are up to challenge of doing what was said they don't do: influence the recruiting industry and perhaps the various industries they serve. Given some seem to be willing to coach the importance of Emotional Intelligence and shape the culture of some companies, let alone their social media prowess, one might wonder.
Great post Richard, this is the first outlook that I've seen from a careered MSM blogger. Up until this point I've been engaged with other bloggers that usually give more of a personal perspective on blogging whether political, or industry specific. One thing I'd like to touch on is your mention of bloggers influence in a political flux. I believe that the political group in general, especially the Bush Administration has played a role in the need for a personal message to viewers who have been tired of being given one sided views on situations and this has created the need for the social involvement of "a real world view" and not what's been provided in the past via the normal media channels. I think that this years Presidential canadites & campaigns, the message and the focus clearly shows this. It's not about what you should know or hear, it's about what's real and whats needs to be told and that will be the focus of the future.
Posted by: Donovan Roddy | May 08, 2008 at 11:26 PM
There is little difference between what Ralston did in 1993 when he began publishing the political newsletter "The Ralston Report," except that bloggers have less overhead and don't ask their readers to pay an inflated subscription price.
There really are no "bloggers" beyond those citizens who write online diaries, even though the label is often bandied about with ardent enthusiasm or apparent attempts to discredit (sometimes at the same time). In actuality, there are simply new political activists who never had a voice before, or, as in my case, industry experts who are willing to share their insights or business people who see the natural crossover to employ blogs as a tool not all that dissimilar from politics.
----------------------------
varun kasliwal
-----------------------------
real estate-real estate
Posted by: varun kasliwal | June 25, 2009 at 04:47 AM
A few graphs up, I mentioned legislators beginning to use blogs to have contact with their constituants, defend their positions, and perhaps maintain a base against future challenges. Is that so very different from one of several business blog uses: connect with customers, promote products, and build brand loyalty? Unless you're hung up on semantics, not really.
Given this, recruiters might even ask themselves if they are up to challenge of doing what was said they don't do: influence the recruiting industry and perhaps the various industries they serve. Given some seem to be willing to coach the importance of Emotional Intelligence and shape the culture of some companies, let alone their social media prowess, one might wonder.
---
varun kasliwal
--------
{url=http://www.fastrealestate.net}real estate{/url}-real estate
Posted by: varun kasliwal | June 25, 2009 at 04:49 AM
Varun,
What a difference a few years make. The entire landscape it changed.
I tend to agree with you. Blogging is used a verb as opposed to a noun. In terms of politics vs. business, not at all with the exception of political risk because politicians tend to overstate away from their core beliefs. Companies are less and less included to do so.
I think, and still do, that recruiters have the potential to shape industry. Do they? It's hard to say. Social media has become much more crowded than it used to be. Of course, I might point out that I'm not a recruiter. :) However, I am friends with many of them.
Best,
Rich
Posted by: Richard Becker | June 25, 2009 at 03:27 PM