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

Can Blogs Revolutionize Progressive Politics?

By Lakshmi Chaudhry, In These Times. Posted February 8, 2006.


Bloggers tout the rise of the netroots as changing how politics works, but will the internet just become a new method of conducting politics as usual?
020806_story
Can Blogs Revolutionize Progressive Politics?
Advertisement

We have no interest in being anti-establishment," says Matt Stoller, a blogger at the popular Web site MyDD.com. "We're going to be the establishment."

That kind of flamboyant confidence has become the hallmark of blog evangelists who believe that blogs promise nothing less than a populist revolution in American politics. In 2006, at least some of that rhetoric is becoming reality. Blogs may not have replaced the Democratic Party establishment, but they are certainly becoming an integral part of it. In the wake of John Kerry's defeat in the 2004 presidential elections, many within the Democratic leadership have embraced blog advocates' plan for political success, which can be summed up in one word: netroots.

This all-encompassing term loosely describes an online grassroots constituency that can be targeted through Internet technologies, including e-mail, message boards, RSS feeds and, of course, blogs, which serve as organizing hubs. In turn, these blogs employ a range of features -- discussion boards, Internet donations, live e-chat, social networking tools like MeetUp, online voting -- that allow ordinary citizens to participate in politics, be it supporting a candidate or organizing around a policy issue. Compared to traditional media, blogs are faster, cheaper, and most importantly, interactive, enabling a level of voter involvement impossible with television or newspapers.

No wonder, then, that many in Washington are looking to blogs and bloggers to counter the overwhelming financial and ideological muscle of the right -- especially in an election year. Just 18 months ago, the New York Times Magazine ran a cover story depicting progressive bloggers as a band of unkempt outsiders, thumbing their nose at party leadership. But now, it's the party leaders themselves who are blogging. Not only has Senate Minority leader Harry Reid started his own blog -- Give 'em Hell Harry -- and a media "war room" to "aggressively pioneer Internet outreach," he's also signed up to be the keynote speaker at the annual conference of the top political blog, Daily Kos.

Stoller predicts that as an organizing tool, "blogs are going to play the role that talk radio did in 1994, and that church networks did in 2002."

An Internet-fueled victory at the polls would certainly be impressive -- no candidate backed by the most popular progressive blogs has yet won an election. But electoral success may merely confirm the value of blogs as an effective organizing tool to conduct politics as usual, cementing the influence of a select group of bloggers who will likely be crowned by the media as the new kingmakers.

Winning an election does not, however, guarantee a radical change in the relations of power. Technology is only as revolutionary as the people who use it, and the progressive blogosphere has thus far remained the realm of the privileged -- a weakness that may well prove fatal in the long run.

In 2006, the biggest question facing blogs and bloggers is: Will their ascendancy empower the American people -- in the broadest sense of the word -- or merely add to the clout of an elite online constituency?

The birth of a revolution

Alienation may not have been the mother of blogging technology, but it most certainly birthed the "political blogosphere." The galvanizing cause for the rapid proliferation of political blogs and their mushrooming audience was a deep disillusionment across the political spectrum with traditional media -- a disillusionment accentuated by a polarized political landscape.

In the recent book Blog! How the Newest Media Revolution Is Changing Politics, Business and Culture, Web guru Craig Shirky links the rise of political blogs to the sharpening Red/Blue State divide. Both 9/11 and the Iraq war reminded people that "politics was vitally important," and marked the "moment people were looking for some kind of expression outside the bounds of network television," or, for that matter, cable news or the nation's leading newspapers.

Progressives were angry not just with the media but also with Democratic Party leaders for their unwillingness to challenge the Bush administration's case for war. That much-touted liberal rage found its expression on blogs like Eschaton, Daily Kos and Talking Points Memo, and continues to fuel the phenomenal growth of the progressive blogosphere. Like the rise of right-wing talk radio, this growth is directly linked to an institutional failure of representation. Finding no mirror for their views in the media, a large segment of the American public turned to the Internet to speak for themselves -- often with brutal, uncensored candor.

As blogs have grown in popularity -- at the rate of more than one new blog per second -- they've begun to lose their vanguard edge. The very institutions that political bloggers often criticize have begun to adopt the platform, with corporate executives, media personalities, porn stars, lawyers and PR strategists all jumping into the fray. That may be why Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, the founder and primary voice of Daily Kos, thinks the word "blog" is beginning to outlive its usefulness. "A blog is merely a publishing tool, and like a tool, it can be used in any number of ways," he says.


Digg!

Lakshmi Chaudhry is a senior editor at In These Times, and a former senior editor at AlterNet.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! 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:
Too late
Posted by: citizen chump on Feb 8, 2006 12:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I gave up on blogs sometime ago --- no way to
validate the information without doing a considerable
amount of due dilligence ---- which is why folks used to
depended on their local newspapers -- you could actually
call up Perry White at the Daily PLanet or Mr. Bernstien
at the Inquirer or see their reporters having lunch at
the same dump you did --not any more , man - this digital stuff is going to end up eating democracy's lunch and if anything make the world a less democratic place--digital give's you the selective
option to be validated and stay home - insulated from the
realities of political / civic life - which have never been pretty regardless of the elected entities - and let some one else do the questioning and arguing for you --just like any other product or service. Now see blogs as infotainment ---to borrow from
Mr. George Carlin: "Might be meat, might be cake."

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

» RE: Too late Posted by: Starcatcher
» RE: Too late Posted by: crusty
» meatcake! Posted by: qrswave
the liberal blogs are echo chambers that restrict debate by banning
Posted by: cry0fan on Feb 8, 2006 4:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No, the progressive blogosphere is not the answer. What happens is that the GOP and Democratic leadership and the think tanks and foundations collaborate with elite media figures to craft two sets of political sets of thought. These sets of politcal thought are pretty much the sets of thought that are discussed on the blogs. Thus the blogs are simply echo chambers for the Dem and GOP elite, and effectively for the Big MOney that control both parties.

If anyone on the political blogs goes outside the boundaries, say, by mixing ideas from left and right, the blog will him ban him, thus enforcing the ideological hegemony of the elite.

For example, if you go on progressive Democratic blogs and say that the left is actually a fauxLeft that has a philosophy crafted to drive the white lower middle class away from leftism though white-hating identity politics, most blogs will ban you eventually. This is not a conservative idea. It is a Leftist idea. So this really illustrates that the American left is a fauxLeft.

Same goes for immigration--the American Left position on this is that if you are against mass immigration because it lowers working class wages and so you want to stop immigration, then you are a rightwinger. But wanting to raise wages is not rightwing, it is left.

THe blogs will ban you eventually if you say this.

Echo chamber for a restricted point of view on both the right and the fauxLeft.

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

» False Left/Right paradigm Posted by: Iconoclast421
» Bloggers take over within 5 yrs Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: False Left/Right paradigm Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: FALSE DICHOTOMY Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: FALSE DICHOTOMY Posted by: oceanye
» RE: FALSE DICHOTOMY Posted by: Roverton
Observations from a woman writer
Posted by: anothername on Feb 8, 2006 5:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. When I advertised my political t-shirts and Help America Vote Act issue board during the 2004 campaign in progessive publications, I had many hits on the t-shirts and less than a handful on the issue board. When the hyped bloggers started screaming about the elections after Nov. 3, 2004, I mentally flipped them off. They didn't want to listen to warnings from someone who had read and researched HAVA before hand, I was not going to listen to rants afterwards. (I also had an original essay blog that was started in 2003 andwent through November 2004 about the campaign. I kept pointing out the problems Kerry had.)

2. When Harry Reid or anyone else that can get their opinions heard without blogs start using blogs, it is merely another outlet. Similarly, Daily Kos and other often-cited blog sites are host to any number of other bloggers. I had one politician tell me to check out his blog on the Daily Kos. I couldn't find the particular blog and what I read of other blogs was not worth returning to read anew.

3. Why aren't women doing blogs? They are caring for children, working jobs, cleaning house, grocery shopping, and doing all the other tasks that have kept them busy over the years. The women I know who have time for blogs - either writing or reading - are single or are not kept busy with family.

4. How well can blogs change policy? In the few weeks that I have been reading AlterNet, which I learned about due to a link from a subscribed NOW e-mail newsletter, I have noticed policy articles receive very, very few posted responses. However, for emotion-laden articles, on topics such as European cartoonists and economically-challenged 30-somethings, the posts go well over 100. Compare this to the ideas this administration is enacting. Those ideas were posited decades ago, but had to wait until their chief advocates gained high positions in government to be implemented.

5. I have had some very interesting discussions via blogs, but nothing that I could not have had elsewhere hanging out with people who are politically savvy. It is interesting, though, that when new to a discussion forum, other posters automatically assume I am male, then change their level of tolerance when they find out I am female. I also encountered, for the first time in my life, a male who said that I was intelligent without first saying I was pretty. This is a major reason why I hesitate when some publications insist upon a picture for inclusion before accepting my work for pay.

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

» RE: Observations from a woman writer Posted by: amazed again
» RE: #3 Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: #3 Posted by: douglashoyt
BLOGS=EFFICIENCY
Posted by: drricklippin on Feb 8, 2006 5:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great topic- Thanks AlterNet!- Aren't we talkin about efficiency= speed of communications! News that took weeks to receive changed history because it arrived "late". The telegraph, radio and TV moved news much faster. Then came faxes -now e-mial and blogs. I do agree blogging takes time and some $ -both perhaps a luxury of the middle class. But middle class people with values have always been instruments of change. Bloggers ARE changing the world -one keystroke at a time. I am grateful to have joined as a 60y/o blogger Jan 2006 as "Blake" (handles are sort of silly) http://medicalcrises.blogspot.com

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

I'm part of a "Privledged class" now??
Posted by: owlbear1 on Feb 8, 2006 5:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
WOW!!

Color this poor indian from the reservation surprised...

The net and blogs are nothing more than a mass communication tool.
Unlike centuries of previous forms of mass communication this one is at full-duplex.

Talk about your paradigm shifts.

I wonder tho, if the internet is such a "Privledged" medium, how do you describe TV, Radio and Newspapers?

The biggest obstacle the internet faces right now is it is necessary to READ to use it. Frighteningly, for millions of Americans that reality is beyond there capacity to embrace.

But even that is changing...

http://www.podcastingnews.com/

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

Blogs are not as bad as talk radio and the current droopy one-sided TV news and newspaper media but
Posted by: SDres11 on Feb 8, 2006 5:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
don't expect much help from it. As it is, it is often a mistake that any of these things will help one political party or another. The only reason talk radio appeared to help the GOP despite its blatent extremism is the GOP made some use out of it to build their agenda. Contrast this with the Democrats who simply rely on the blogs and maybe some talk radio shows like the BIG EDDIE show that used to be in Fargo, ND and will even voice their complaints but look what happened. Dailykos.com was unable to brag and boast about helping John Kerry win. On the other hand, bloggers for John Thune were able to celebrate their supposedly hard work in helping Thune defeat Daschle when the real issue was that us South Dakotans were simply fed up with Daschle trying to appease too many rightwingers when he should have acted as a real Democrat. Blogs are no different from TV, radio, newspaper, etc ... in that they'll make you feel the way you're aiming to feel but the good side to this is that unlike the same old rightwing rants which are all you'll ever find on talk radio, Wall Street Journal, TV Media outlets such as Fauxnews, CNN, ABC, MSNBC, CNBC, CBS, etc ..., if you don't like what you're reading on the blog site, there are other bloggers with various viewpoints that you can always go to. It was amazing that at first bloggers were and still are mistaken as the new "liberal" media but there are various blogs with various viewpoints out there. And I got to hand it to the bloggers that if it weren't for them, I would not have realized that there was more to what liberalism and conservatism was all about than the political talking heads would have you believe.

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

We the People need to act as gatekeepers
Posted by: SufiLizard on Feb 8, 2006 5:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was struck by this line from the article:

"The danger is that many may come to feel the same way about the blogosphere in the coming years."

I think that it is aready starting to feel that way NOW. But if "we the people" take a more active role in promoting lesser-known blogs we can act as the gatekeepers rather than the A-listers.

What's killing our democracy is a certain kind of laziness. Everyone expects someone else to do "it" for them. They just go to the Daily Kos because its easier than searching out good blogs. And if you do stumble across a really good blog, with fresh ideas how much effort to you personally take to promote it?

There is NO solution the the entropy of ideas this country's leadership is facing without serious, and smart, effort by a large number of people.

The right took over the mainstream media because they worked tirelessly getting their base to write letters, organize boycotts, send faxes etc. everytime there was something they found remotely disagreeable.

The left has a small subset of people who do this, but we have yet to organize a real groundswell of motivated, active people. We used to rely on organized labor to handle the legwork, but that reliance means that the decline of labor corresponded with the decline of the left's political influence.

We need to rebuild the infrastructure from the ground up, and this time we need to broaden that infrastructure so the decline of one segment of the left doesn't sink they whole structure.

Blogging can definitely be one leg of this new structure, but it won't replace active particpation "on the ground."

Maybe we need to get more leftists to join the local Lions Club or Kiwanis or other civic organizations. Maybe we need to start our own "clubs" like Eagles, or Moose Lodge or something where people can network within their communities, participate in local fairs, march in parades, etc. and be a real, visible and respected presence in the community.

If you have any kind of "spiritual" side at all, start not only attending, but get active in a local church, synagog, mosque, etc.

We can sit back and indignantly bitch to our spouse or close friends about the state of the country, or we can actually get off our butts and do something about it.

When I was right out of college in the early 90's my friends and I had a little "bit" we would do when someone would get worked up about some issue or another. We would join in and build to a crescendo, then end with the same line, "...WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE WORLD -- as long as there's nothing good on T.V. tongiht."

Sadly, I think that's a good metaphor for a lot of today's left. I hope I'm proven wrong.

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

"We have yet to begin to realize the power of the Internet'-Charlie Rose
Posted by: eileenflmng on Feb 8, 2006 6:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since the 'birth' of WAWA, the Pro-Bono Public Service discourse confronting media and governments that shield the whole truth,
over 1,500 visits have come from the USA Government and Military.

WAWA is following the FREEDOM OF SPEECH trial of a Truth Teller in the democracy of Israel.

The first day of the trial January 25, 2006, was obfuscated by the Palestinian elections.

While the USA media ignores this landmark and explosive FREEDOM OF SPEECH trial WAWA will not.

Annually 3 billion USA tax dollars go to the democracy of Israel where FREEDOM OF THOUGHT, CONSCIENCE and SPEECH are on trial.


WAWA:
http://www.wearewideawake.org

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

Unfortunately, many politicians are Internet illiterate
Posted by: sausage on Feb 8, 2006 6:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Or so they seem to be. If bloggers are having a growing inpact on American political discourse, why do politicians of both major parties continue down the path of least resistance, the one strewn with campaign contributions from major corporate donors?

Why, for example, does Hillary Clinton support continuing the military occupation of Iraq? Either she is totally computer illiterate, not even knowing how to boot up a computer, or is she smelling the delicious aroma of sweet, light Iraqi crude and, perhaps, presidential campaign donations from the nation's energy giants?

We talk. They don't listen. We blog. They don't read.

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

» us = Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: us = Posted by: sausage
» RE: us = Posted by: Riverside
Whether a truly decentralized and "leaderless" netroots can function like a political party is debat
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Feb 8, 2006 7:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To me this is not debateable; it's doable. It only requires turning the political party system upside down.

Today the leaders of both politicalparties decide which issues they'll run on and their stand on each issue. . Then the voter passively chooses which platform he likes best, or in many cases which he dislikes least.

The Lincoln Initiative is a grassroots movement, not an organization, in which each member tells both parties his/her view on his/her most important issue and that he/she will not vote for a party or candidate who doesn't have a plan to accomplish his goal.

This puts the voters in the driver's seat. Both parties are forced to cobble together a majority based on the issues of the voters. This is "government of the people, by the people, and for the people"

Join The Lincoln Initiative a grassroots movement (not an organization) with no leaders, no dues, no contributions, no registration, no meetings, no marches, and no hassle. Click on Take Charge

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

rover
Posted by: Roverton on Feb 8, 2006 7:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cable news is not honest.

Did you ever think you'd live to see the day when the only one telling the truth on the news is THE WEATHER GUY?

There are things we'd ALL rather be doing, but not at this time in our lives. Not here. We're stuck with this task.

The intial trauma state of Obliterated-Culture-Shock is wearing off and eyes are clearing to see that we're trapped in something not unlike a digital FARENHEIT 451, forcing us to be the living books.

The REAL Man/Woman-on-the-street report.

One day, all our Tinker Toys may go dark at once. Then we'll have to become our own Palm Pilots again!!!

How much RAM do WE still have? Drop in an upgrade?

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

The Internet scares the powerbrokers
Posted by: doodles on Feb 8, 2006 7:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While we aren't sure if the internet and bloggers are having any real effect on the political landscape, megacorps are sure and they don't like it. That's why they are proposing that service providers be allowed to basically charge for the time you spend on the net, like we used to be charged for long distance or cellphone time. Plus they want to be able to control content.

I'd say that means it's doing something. Everyone needs to pay serious attention to this particular threat to freedom of speech. The internet belongs to everyone, not the corporations. You know like the airwaves belong to the people. So if you value this form of discourse, get off your duffs and raise hell about this new threat.

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

NOTHING TRUMPS TV
Posted by: drricklippin on Feb 8, 2006 9:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
TV is passive and cheap. And you can eat snacks when watching TV which is hard to do when you blog but I try. Hey you can even sleep while watching TV. Seriously you blog leaders out there need to buy some TV stations.Some of you don't like when I say you are the mainstream media leaders in 5 years or less! GO BLOGGERS!

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

Kos's response
Posted by: JoshuaHolland on Feb 8, 2006 9:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let me say that I'm not a big fan of Kos, simply as a matter of political taste, and I am a fan of Lakshmi and always was when she blogged here. But, in the interest of fairness, I thought I'd just point to his response to Lakshmi's article. It's typically snide, but he has a point:

Another article with tedious whining about the supposed lack of diversity in the blogosphere. Fact? The top five progressive blogs, per TTLB's ecosystem: Daily Kos, Eschaton, Crooks and Liars, Washington Monthly, and Firedoglake. (John Aravosis' AMERICAblog would be in there if they had public stats.) Daily Kos, the largest political blog in the world by a factor of five, is run by a Latino and currently has five guest bloggers -- four of them women. Firedoglake, dominated by two women, is the hottest and fastest growing progressive blog at the moment. AMERICAblog, among other things, ably represents gay issues. Two more women-run blogs round out the top ten.

In my own bookmarks, there are plenty of blogs by white folks, but I read Steve Gilliard and Oliver Willis regularly, and among my favorites are a whole crop of really pissed-off feminist blogs that would never get any traction in the rest of the media. Have you checked out I Blame The Patriarchy? Great, great writing that would never get printed in any "dead tree" publication.

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

» RE: Kos's response Posted by: drone
» RE: Kos's response Posted by: JoshuaHolland
What a bunch of crap.
Posted by: djtyg on Feb 8, 2006 10:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't believe alternet is attacking its own on this one. I don't know what they were smoking when they felt like publishing this garbage, but I'm sure that I don't want any.

The liberal blogosphere was created for the purpose of getting news out there that wasn't being shown on the major T.V. new channels. It's an excellent way to get information out to the masses, and I'm grateful that it exists.

I can't believe that alternet, of all newssites, would feel justified in publishing an article that accuses liberal activists of racism and sexism and class warfare. When I couldn't afford a computer, I WENT TO A LIBRARY to look up the news on Kos and mydd and Democratic Underground. Anyone who feels passionate about progressive politics has access to it.

And if their blogs were as good as those three listed above, I'd have no problem going to a blog written by a female, a black person, or any other non-white group.

Alternet should be ashamed of themselves. They may want to stop blogging themselves, lest they be hypocrites as well.

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

The First Blogs
Posted by: Riverside on Feb 8, 2006 10:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Check out early cave drawings, check out grafitti, check out rap, etc. Blogs are just one channel for vox populi. We will find a way to have our say, and when enough say it again, and again, we will be heard.

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

» RE: The First Blogs Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: The First Blogs Posted by: Riverside
BLOGGERS NEED MORE IMAGES-(TOO MANY WORDS)
Posted by: drricklippin on Feb 8, 2006 11:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mostly on blogs including AlterNet I see words and more words..... Hey Bloggers- US TODAY discovered the power of image- preferably color over 20 years ago.! I know many people post personal photos on personal blogs but I'm talkin about less damn egghead words and more images i.e.-charts, graphs, cartoons (like on header to this AlterNet article), etc. I guess technology has to adapt to my proposal- feedback sought-thanks

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

» uh... Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: uh...IMAGE LITERACY TOO! Posted by: drricklippin
Whining about diversity? Part one
Posted by: Lakshmi Chaudhry on Feb 8, 2006 11:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's the response I posted over at ITT to this issue -- in two parts since it seems too long for one comment field. Though I'm delighted that "drone" already made the point far more concisely than I ever could:

When I worked on the cover story on blogs for In These Times, the idea was to take a comprehensive look at the development arc of the progressive blogosphere, and assess its strengths and limitations. It started out as a 7000-word Frankenstein, which was rewritten, edited, and honed down to its present form.

I've been following the discussion of the article online and found a lot of it interesting and edifying. One of the bits that got edited out of the piece was a line about how blogs have transformed the way public knowledge is created: "Knowledge in the blog world is cumulative, collaborative, and collective. And its supporters would argue that it offers a richer understanding of the issue at hand than contained in any article written by an individual reporter." And so I'd hoped that people would find the article important enough to add to its strengths and address its weaknesses. And many have done exactly that.

But in the spirit of this public debate, let me rebut the idea that this article represents "tedious whining" about diversity -- a charge made by Markos over at Daily Kos, and partly validated by the very smart and insightful Josh Holland in the comments section of the story on AlterNet.

One, the story addresses diversity within a very specific context: Can blogs create a truly effective grassroots movement? Within this context, the fact that the blogosphere remains predominantly the realm of white, well-educated males represents a challenge to be overcome. So the "tedious whining" charge makes the article sound like some rant from some unhappy Indian chick, when it's an extensively reported, researched piece that does its best to offer a fair assessment of an important political phenomenon. And it says nothing about the broader question of effectiveness. So it doesn't really add to public knowledge of the issue or carry the discussion forward. But rather suggests that any attempt to even raise the issue of representation is to be dismissed outright, irrespective of its context. The Republicans do that well enough without our help.

Two, listing a bunch of women bloggers or talking about people you personally read doesn't begin to address the the homogeneity problem. Every report on the blogosphere -- penned by blog advocates like Stoller and Bowers or Mike Cornfield -- say the blogosphere remains very homogenous, and extremely skewed in terms of traffic. In terms of visibility and attention outside the blogosphere, none of the women bloggers except former Wonkette, Ana Marie Cox, even compare to the men. And this will be a problem as long as blogs continue to depend on traditional media to reach a larger audience, affect national debate etc.

To suggest that A-listers could make it a priority to highlight and point traffic to the new folks joining the blogosphere in order to boost their traffic is hardly presumptuous or asking for some kind of "affirmative action". Diversity enriches debate and dialogue -- if much of the dialogue occurs in the top blogs, wouldn't it be helpful to ensure that these blogs reflect the broadest spectrum of views, both in terms of authors and readers?

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

Whining about diversity? Part Two
Posted by: Lakshmi Chaudhry on Feb 8, 2006 11:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In any case, the article mentions the growing number of women and people of color in the blogosphere, and even suggests that the make-up of the blogosphere in terms of race and gender may in fact be very different in five years. The biggest hurdle is class -- an issue that can hardly be overlooked when talking about a Democratic Party that is now a party of urban professionals. Not sure why the issue of class got brushed aside, but that's really where the article ends up. The conclusion of the article is as follows: any one trying to build or participate in a digital grassroots movement needs to prioritize including as many people as possible, especially those who are most marginalized by the existing political establishment. What's so tedious or whiny about that?

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

» RE: Whining about diversity? Part Two Posted by: Iconoclast421
Why white male bloggers supposedly dominate
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Feb 8, 2006 11:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When it comes to politics in washington, white males dominate, so it is no surprise that white males initially had an advantage in the political blog world.

There is a wealth of social science evidence that helps us explain why white males have a few small but measurable advantages in America. But none of those advantages can easily be transferred over into the blogoshpere. I do not believe there is a correlation at all, except in the case of wingnut political hackjobs who write blogs just so they can promote their right-wing-friendly books. There are many of these people because most publishers love to publish a right-wing book. And of course, no one can deny that the right-wing wall street "profits-over-people" corporate apologists are predominately white males.

These types of corporate hackjob bloggers can usually be dismissed because their writing hardly ever comes across as genuine. But their blogs get alot of financial support anyway, because they were willing to put out a rightwing propaganda piece.

I think that if you filter out the people who are only trying to make money from the people who are serious about activism, you will see that there is no racial bias in the political blogosphere.

That is a good thing because I can't understand how you could have it any other way. Most of the blogs I read I have no clue of the author's race. And if/when I see a picture of them, I do not suddenly decide that I am not going to read them anymore just because I thought they weren't good looking. Why would anyone read someone based on whether they're white, rich, or whether or not they have a pee pee? The issues are what matter.

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

Didn't mean to validate Kos ...
Posted by: JoshuaHolland on Feb 8, 2006 12:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... above, just thought it should be out there.

I agree with Lakshmi's argument, and while I welcome the greatly increased participation of women in the blogosphere, they are overwhelmingly white and affluent.

I think those who believe that blogs will build some shiny new movement -- and there are many who do -- are deceiving themselves because of a larger issue: we don't have fora on the left for personal contact, and it's personal contact that is critical to developing a powerful grassroots. People have developed a great deal of cynicism about what they hear from the media, be they blogs or cable news. When people talk to other people, there's much greater potential for breaking through those defenses.

The right has made churches the center of their outreach and grassroots organizing. As has been noted to death, those on the left attend church far less regularly than those on the right. What's more, many of the more "liberal" churches eschew political organizing, while their counterparts on the right embrace it.

We used to have union halls as a place for personal contact, but union membership is at an all-time low. Exit polls following the 2004 election showed how important those face-to-face contacts could be: white evangelical Christians who attended church regularly AND were a member of a union went for Kerry (I don't remember the numbers). That's a powerful indicator.

I was chatting (electronically) with Drone earlier, and he was talking about ACORN. Well, aside from ACORN, there isn't a lot of progressive effort to reach out and talk to people, especially people in poor communities, about the political issues that are important to them.

My father's Rep, Mo Hinchey, has a mixed district: very liberal parts of upstate NY (Woodstock) combined with very rural parts where some of the state's most conservative voters live. I asked Hinchey how he keeps winning by large margin in those "red" zones, and he told me: "I go and talk to them at every opportunity." It's true: he goes to every pancake breakfast and county fair he can, and they love him. Same goes for Bernie Sanders in the conservative enclaves in Vermont.

Blogs are a great way to disseminate information that's outside of the mainstream discourse. They're a good way to organize targeted campaigns -- like getting tens of thousands of people to call and write their senators about Alito -- and they're a good way to raise money for candidates. But they'll never be a substitute for getting people together to talk about their common interests and goals. That's the piece that's missing.

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

» RE: Didn't mean to validate Kos ... Posted by: Lakshmi Chaudhry
» RE: Didn't mean to validate Kos ... Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: Didn't mean to validate Kos ... Posted by: Lakshmi Chaudhry
» FLESH TIME IS NECESSARY Posted by: drricklippin
» FACE TIME=FLESH TIME Posted by: drricklippin
The Power is in YOU
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Feb 8, 2006 12:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you're looking for the way to 'revolutionize' the world, start with yourself. From there it does'nt matter if you're ablogger, editor,T.V. producer, YOU are the revolutionary. So if you want a better world,how do you go about getting there? With violence? How about Force? Do you make your desisions based on gossip or observation? Is there the slightest chance that your rehtoric has changed but your message is still that of which you say you oppose? Check yourself out.
The power to stand against the current is within you now. If you've ever said,'This shit don't make sense!',your mind is begining to open. In standing up you face what's wrong head on and that's the start of the revolutionary counterpoint. As long as you don't sell out, you're a revolutionary. If you think for yourself,you're a revolutionary. If you tell the truth,you're a revolutionary. If you're an environmentalist, you're a revolutionary. If you're a civil rights activist,you're a revolutionary. If you're an animal rights activist,you're a revolutionary. If you're a spiritualist,you're a revolutionary. If you believe in Peace,you're a revolutionary.
If on the other hand you're a racist,KKK,'Biznuss' as usual,
abortion bomber,Bushie.......You're on your way out,you lost.

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

Precisely
Posted by: Ming on Feb 8, 2006 12:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The internet in general and blogs in particular are just quicker forms of transmitting information to a larger audience. There may be some nominal groups that affect minor change, but overall people will remain disconnected with reality and adverse to rocking the boat on their little piece of the pond.

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

» RE: Precisely-OUCH! Posted by: drricklippin
knock on doors
Posted by: gtk on Feb 8, 2006 1:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is no substitute for face to face contact with your fellow citizens and I fear that entirly too much emphasis and attention are being given to technological fixes: as Thoreau noted, the telegraph may be a wonderful invention, but it presupposes folks at long distances have something worth saying to each other.

I say, turn off the TV and the computer and start walking as a canvasser for progressive candidates: listen to people, and tell the story of progessivism that can help make people's lives better and government truly representative rather than the plutocracy it's become.

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

Wouldn't blogs have revolutionized Progressive Politics by now if they were going to?
Posted by: Deidzoeb on Feb 8, 2006 3:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wouldn't blogs have revolutionized Progressive Politics by now if they were going to?

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

Blogs are not perfect...
Posted by: akdave on Feb 8, 2006 3:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but what is the alternative. We live in a world of information overload and it is often difficult to make sense of it all, especially when you work, live in the sticks, care for kids, etc. (What we lack most in this country is time.) I depend on blogs, especially those linked to by Aletnet's the Peek and The Mix to provide different views on what I read in the MSM and elsewhere. Keep it up, what you are doing is very worthwhile.

Great article and posts! And Lakshmi, I also miss your blog...

Peace,
David

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

Blogs no substitute for bodies
Posted by: boygranddakar on Feb 8, 2006 3:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with gtk, above; and I question the simple acceptance of the idea that more voices in the debate equal more effective democracy. I do see blogs as a nice tool, but I'm not seeing the revolutionary potential that blog fans proclaim.

Chaudhry ably points out that blogs are only effective when used in conjunction with the media establishment. Blogs, for the most part, aren't news per se, but really for news analysis and op-ed junkies (and I admit I am one).

But while some commentors, above, have praised the speed of blogging as part of its revolutionary aspect, the fact is that blogs are time-consuming. I barely have time to keep up with "normal" news, without which I'm lost on blogs.

Many of those who might benefit from the alternative points of view and information enrichment of blogs are just too busy holding down one or more jobs (many of those jobs without internet access, either), making their way through phone menus trying to understand their health benefits, attending PTA meetings, or engaging in any number of the bureaucratic activities that are currently taking over life in the U.S. Dear god, who has the time?

And leisure time - now more than ever a sign of privilege - could be the factor that definitively divides the bloggers and the blog-nots. Cornfield's comment that "low-income" people need to make "a concerted effort" and find the "motivation" to participate is simply patronizing.

For me, more voices in the debate simply leads to an incomprehensible cacophony. With blogs, it's too easy to read the ones I agree with and ignore the ones I don't. I don't think that virtual voices in virtual space can substitute equally for "real world" voices in RW space... and real places. I am more likely to listen to someone who is physically in front of me, who may be my neighbor or a colleague, someone I have to co-exist with and get along with, and try to understand their point of view. I won't make the same effort when I read dis-embodied text.

When Moulitsas says, "I don't give a shit about what you look like," he's echoing what Republicans are trying to do in creating a "color-blind" society. Differences in race, gender, sexuality, nationality, class, age, etc. etc. are easy to ignore if you don't deal with real people. Blogs, as they exist right now, flatten difference, which is contrary to a true progressive movement.

As I said above, blogs are a tool, b