Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Election 2008

Progressive Media Have Really Helped Stop the Spread of Dirty Political Rumors

By Ari Melber, TheNation.com. Posted November 3, 2008.


This Internet-driven, hyperactive presidential race is forcing accountability on two of the oldest tricks in politics: dog whistles and secret smears.
Advertisement

Everyone can hear it now. This Internet-driven, hyperactive presidential race is forcing accountability on two of the oldest tricks in politics: dog whistles and secret smears.

With a "dog whistle," politicians use code words to signal unpopular stances to one target audience, while avoiding a backlash because the reference is lost on others. Many people miss President Bush's layered language for evangelicals, from hinting that legal abortion is like slavery to his odd prediction that history will see Iraq as just "a comma." (It only makes sense if you know the proverb, "Never put a period where God has put a comma.") Code words don't fool everyone, but from "states' rights" to "welfare queens," GOP campaigns have tapped racial resentment without facing widespread opprobrium. Secret smears run on a similar axis, enabling politicians to undermine an opponent without taking responsibility for the attack. But the times are changing.

From his race to his name, Barack Obama seemed like the perfect target for such coded attacks. Indeed, some Republicans were eager to run the old playbook on him. "Count me down as somebody who underestimates Barack Hussein Obama, please," said GOP strategist Ed Rogers, speaking on MSNBC's Hardball in the headier days of 2006. Yet Rogers, like the McCain campaign, underestimated not only Obama but a new media model that swiftly blasts would-be Swiftboaters.

Partisan and muckraking bloggers now fight political operatives' efforts to keep unseemly attacks below the radar. Take automated "robo" phone calls, which often deploy the sharp attacks that campaigns don't want exposed in the mass media. Previously, the calls were obscure, rarely drawing major media coverage, let alone sustained criticism. Now they can be recorded, uploaded and dissected in a single news cycle. Sites like TalkingPointsMemo and Daily Kos use crowd-sourcing by readers to track the attacks and pin them squarely on John McCain. Insider political sites, like Ben Smith's Politico blog, also disseminate the audio recordings to media and political elites, converting a "targeted" message into a mass broadcast. And organized campaigns like the National Political Do Not Call Registry use the web, Twitter and e-mail to track and map every call.

As a hub for intelligence, the web can enlist people in "bubbling up reports" of everything from robo-calls to US attorney firings, explains TechPresident co-founder Micah Sifry, a web activism expert who heralds the trend as a new era of "crowd-scouring" the presidency. He argues that information can whip around online with or without a political agenda. "Even without central direction, the crowd is scouring the world for interesting news and sharing tidbits constantly."

Once exposed, McCain's robocalls were unpalatable even to his allies in the party and the media, adding another "Hey, Rube" squabble to his already contentious campaign. Republican senators condemned the calls. Fox News's Chris Wallace pressed McCain on the issue, reminding the senator that he once denounced such tactics. Even Sarah Palin felt compelled to respond to criticism of the campaign's robocalls, telling reporters that while she did not renounce them, she would prefer to do personal and retail campaigning instead.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: election 2008, smear, online activism, rumors

Ari Melber is a regular contributor to The Nation magazine and writer for The Nation's Campaign '08 blog, and a contributing editor at the Personal Democracy Forum. He served as a Legislative Aide in the U.S. Senate and was a national staff member of the 2004 John Kerry Presidential Campaign.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Election 2008! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
We've Heard It All Before
Posted by: ranchero42 on Nov 3, 2008 1:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
May be the main reason smears and innuendo don't easily gain traction on this series of tubes. Rumors may not be easy to clear up, but they are very easily countered by a more lurid one aimed at the opposition. Lower expectations while raising the stakes is too tempting for imaginative, politically aware people. Or at least, that's why I stopped trying to spread filthy, vicious lies like manure amongst y'all. When I say stopped, I mean slowed down somewhat.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If only...
Posted by: astockton on Nov 3, 2008 3:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The term "compassionate conservative" is another dog whistle; it's from a book or sermon by some preacher unfamiliar to us non-evangelicals. By repeatedly using it, Dubya signaled to evangelicals that he was one of them. Perhaps if we'd had YouTube in 2000, more voters would have realized that Chimpy did not intend to govern as a moderate, and the whole right-year nightmare never would have occurred. [sigh]

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

some of Morning Joe's rant
Posted by: Lauren on Nov 3, 2008 4:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
was just 'edited' from my viewing. Hmm...

What was it they didn't want me to hear and who didn't want me to hear it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Internet Edited???
Posted by: d1no on Nov 3, 2008 4:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I found this when I googled Sarah Palin on Sept 3rd. Can this information be reconstructed? Defunct web sites can be reconstructed, I don't know about posts???

The Alternet comment area limits "words" to 60 characters so I had to place a space after the "?" that does not belong.

I can be reached at denise@wcnet.org and can send a better "link". The headline in capital letters was in blue and started to connect to a link too, then nothing.


SARAH PALIN BURNED THE AMERICAN FLAG! - Rants & Raves - AOL ...
Sep 3, 2008 ... Sarah Palin burned the American Flag at Hawaii Pacific College in Honolulu, Hawaii, in a rally where she was proteseting in mid 1983.


messageboards.aol.com/aol/en_us/articles.php? boardId=544758&articleId=444411&func=6&channel=R - 4 hours ago - Similar pages

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Here's how to use links in Alternet Posted by: KeepsonTickn
» RE: Internet Edited??? Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
» RE: Internet Edited??? Posted by: Lauren
Here's the cold reality. CALL BUSH AND TELL THEM NOT TO STEAL THE ELECTION
Posted by: cori on Nov 3, 2008 12:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1 202 456 1111 TELL BUSH YOU DON'T WANT HIM TO STEAL THE ELECTION.

that's the nightmare. Here's the cold reality.

Swing state Colorado. Before this election, two Republican secretaries of state purged 19.4 percent of the entire voter roll. One in five voters. Pfft!

Swing state New Mexico. One in nine voters in this year's Democratic caucus found their names missing from the state-provided voter registries. And not just any voters. County by county, the number of voters disappeared was in direct proportion to the nonwhite population. Gore won the state by 366 votes; Kerry lost it by only 5,900. Despite reassurances that all has been fixed for Tuesday, Democrats lost from the list in February told me they're still "disappeared" from the lists this week.

Swing state Indiana. In this year's primary, ten nuns were turned away from the polls because of the state's new voter ID law. They had drivers' licenses, but being in their 80s and 90s, they'd let their licenses expire. Cute. But what isn't cute is this: 566,000 registered voters in that state don't have the ID required to vote. Most are racial minorities, the very elderly and first-time voters; that is, Obama voters. Twenty-three other states have new, vote-snatching ID requirements.

Swing state Florida. Despite a lawsuit battle waged by the Brennan Center for Justice, the state's Republican apparatchiks are attempting to block the votes of 85,000 new registrants, forcing them to pass through a new "verification" process. Funny thing: verification applies only to those who signed up in voter drives (mostly black), but not to voters registering at motor vehicle offices (mostly white).



Here's an ugly little secret about American democracy: We don't count all the votes. In 2004, based on the data from the US Elections Assistance Commission, 3,006,080 votes were not counted: "spoiled," unreadable and blank ballots; "provisional" ballots rejected; mail-in ballots disqualified.

This Tuesday, it will be worse. Much worse.

That's what I found while traveling the nation over the last year for BBC Television and Rolling Stone Magazine, working with voting rights attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr. This we guarantee: there will be far more votes disappeared by Tuesday night than the three million lost in 2004. A six-million vote swipe, quite likely, shifts 4 percent of the ballots, within the margin of error of the tightest polls.

Begin with this harsh statistic: since the last election, more than ten million voters have been purged from the nation's vote registries. And that's just the start of the steal.

If the noncount were random, it wouldn't matter. But it's not random. A US Civil Rights Commission analysis shows that the chance a black voter's ballot will "spoil" or be blank is 900 percent higher than a white voter's.

Does that mean the election's stolen and you should forget voting and just go back to bed for four years? Hell, no. It means you vote and vote smart, learn how to pry their filthy little hands off your ballot (there's a link at the end). From Robert Kennedy Jr.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wealth redistribution monies are earmarked -----
Posted by: symcokid on Nov 3, 2008 12:23 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
for Slave reparations - some people will dispute that fact but various Black factions have been hell bent toward attaining that goal for years and now with Obama all but officially in it is a sure thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

These Statistics Aren't Rumors but Facts
Posted by: Elurby on Nov 4, 2008 4:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
#######
#######



Read this article about hidden statistics
on black-on-white crime (mainstream media
refuse to report the awful impact black
men have had on society):

"Paul Sheehan, an Australian reporter, dug out the following Information for an article in the Sydney Morning Herald, May 2, 1995.

Sheehan based his statistics on crime data compiled by the FBI and partially reported each year in The FBI Uniform Crime Report . These reports can be researched At the FBI's website, www.fbi.gov.

"Since the FBI doesn't distinguish between Hispanics and whites, Sheehan's statistics don't adequately reflect the black-white crime situation.

"Only about 10-15% of Hispanics are white, with the rest being Indian or a mixture of white, American Indian, and blacks.

"Hispanic crime rates are almost as high as black crime rates. This means that the data Sheehan compiled on inter-racial crime is probably grossly understated since a considerable portion of the "white against black" crime actually is Hispanic-against-black crime. (Information about this aspect of inter-racial crime will be presented in a related article.)

"Here is the information Sheehan uncovered in his analysis of the FBI's crime reports:

-"Blacks murder more than 1,600 whites each year.

-"Blacks murder whites at 18 times the rate whites murder blacks.

-"Blacks murdered, raped, robbed, or assaulted about one million whites In 1992.

-"In the last 30 years, blacks committed 170 million violent and non-violent crimes against whites.

-"Blacks under 18 are more than 12 times more likely to be arrested for murder than whites under 18.

-"About 90% of the victims of interracial crimes are white.

-"Blacks commit 7.5 times more violent interracial crimes than whites, although whites outnumber blacks by 7 to 1.

-"On a per capita basis, blacks commit 50 times more violent crime than whites.

-"Black neighborhoods are 35 times more violent than white neighborhoods.

-"Of the 27 million nonviolent robberies in 1992, 31% (8.4 million) were committed by blacks against whites. Less than 2% were committed by whites against blacks.

-"Of the 6.6 million violent crimes, 20% (1.3 million) were interracial.

-"Of the the 1.3 million interracial violent crimes, 90% (1.17 million) are black against white.

-"In the past 20 years, violent crime increased four times faster than the population.

-"In the last 30 years (1964-94), more than 45,000 people were killed in interracial murders compared to 38,000 killed in Korea and 58,000 in Vietnam.

-"Sheehan commented that the contents of his article could not possibly be published or discussed in the U.S. mainstream media.

-"In the last 50 years, the white part of the American population has declined from 90% to 72%. The U.S. now has about 33 million blacks and 25 million Hispanics (legal and illegal). By the year 2050, American whites will be a minority, just 49%. By 2100, whites will be 25% of the population.

-"What will life for whites be like in the future?"

-end of report

#######
#######

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]