Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Does the Internet Spell the End of Political Spin?

By Tania Branigan, The Guardian. Posted June 15, 2007.


Internet guru Joe Trippi visited the UK to tell British politicians that the rules for dealing with "old media" no longer apply.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
What Can the Morass of the 1970s Tell Us About the Current Economic Crisis?
Alejandro Reuss

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton

Health and Wellness:
Does the House Bill's Public Option Kill Off the Senate's?
Booman

Immigration:
Recent Democratic Victories May Grease the Wheels for Immigration Reform in Congress
Marcelo Balive

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Obama Is Up Against in His Own Branch of Government
Russ Baker

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
How the Stupak Amendment Radically Undermines Women's Rights
Rachel Morris

Rights and Liberties:
"Women Are Being Killed All Over the World": One Reporter's Fight Against So-Called "Honor Killings"
Robert S. Eshelman

Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Radioactive Wastewater in New York Raises More Concerns About Oil Drilling
Abrahm Lustgarten

World:
Egyptian Marine: Soldiers Often 'Racialize' the Enemy to Cope With Stress
Aaron Glantz

More stories by Tania Branigan

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Internet activism is spelling the end for the age of spin, the online campaign guru Joe Trippi will warned two British politicians, suggesting that the rules for dealing with "old media" no longer apply.

"The game has changed in a way the top needs to understand," he told the Guardian.

"It may take a disaster: a leader saying something ridiculous in an unregulated moment, thinking no press are there, and then realising a person in the UK with a video cellphone could destroy you, [with the clip] getting passed through social networks.
"Before TV, what mattered was how your voice sounded. Then with TV it matters what your candidate looks like ... Anybody can fake it on TV: all the Joe Trippis and Alastair Campbells get really good at making sure our guy looks great for the eight seconds that are actually going on the news.

"We are now moving to a medium where authenticity is king, from what things look like to what's real ... You have to be 'on' 24 hours a day, seven days a week."

Tony Blair recently attacked the mainstream media as a "feral beast" which requires new regulation and lamented his lack of success in bypassing it through websites and press conferences.

But Mr Trippi believes the influence of the established media is waning and argues that politicians must allow activists to build their own online communities, not simply use the net to disseminate information.

He argues that, in an age of declining deference and empowered individuals, most voters will trust the opinion of peers who endorse a politician much more than a "top-down" message.

Rather than encouraging politicians to say one thing in public and another in private, this shift makes it pointless for them to try.

Platitudes will simply bore people, but the public will learn to filter out trivial gaffes: voters are unlikely to tolerate evidence of racism, but may learn to accept that senators occasionally drop off in hearings, for example.

But the switch will be particularly hard for incumbents, he suggested, who have to abandon the tactics which have made them successful.

"Parties that have had iron-clad message discipline -- in the US, the Republican party and in the UK, Labour -- have a tougher time," he warned.

"Command and control ... [is] a disaster in the peer-to-peer social network world."

Mr Trippi addressed Members of Parliament and other campaigners on the changing face of politics at a meeting in Westminster organised by the social networking group Bebo.

He was hailed as the man who reinvented campaigning after using the net to build an unprecedented grassroots movement around Howard Dean's bid for the 2004 presidential nomination: creating an official blog, raising huge amounts in small donations and using Meetup and other social networks to allow volunteers to organise themselves.

"The candidate lost, but the campaign won," argued Mr Trippi, who has now joined the John Edwards campaign.

"Most people think: 'My £10, or my four hours in my neighbourhood, can't make a hill of beans in this big mess of politics.'

"They come to realise that if 300,000 people put in £10 [or their time] we can change the whole country."

Labour's deputy leadership candidates have begun to learn his lessons -- Jon Cruddas has posted videos on YouTube; Alan Johnson is updating supporters on his whereabouts via Twitter -- but Mr Trippi suggested that the UK faces particular challenges.

Set election dates in the US make it easier to build momentum in the run-up to polling day.

"What I see happening [here] is people saying, 'Let's try this on the net,' when the election is going to be in 60 days.
"Then [they just assume] it doesn't work like it does in the States. The party that pushes through that and understands that the future is bottom-up and that continues through false starts will be the party that destroys other parties over the long haul.

"The parties are also stronger here organizationally; they're top-down [from the leader] ... There's almost a feeling that 'we don't need riff-raff telling us what to do'."

Mr Trippi argued that the parties had to learn to utilise the networks created by supporters, rather than corralling activists into party structures.

"Social networking is building an army of Davids. You don't want to be Goliath. So how does Labour or the Conservatives provide slingshots for the armies out there who want to do something on climate change?" he asked.

"What happens if the president of the EU tells US citizens to go sign the Kyoto treaty for themselves and 20m Americans do? It would have no legal standing -- but what does the president of the US do?"

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: internet, uk, joe trippi, politicians

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:
I'm about to cancel my newspaper subscription
Posted by: UnEasyOne on Jun 15, 2007 12:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I paid a year in advance last July. No way I'm gonna renew. I got the internet in August. Now I get the actual news, unfiltered by the Hearst corporation. I was a news junkie before I got the net but never could really satisfy my craving. That is history.

I knew I was being fed a load of crap at the time, you understand - I just had no choice. Now I do. Too bad for my one paper town.

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

love the Net
Posted by: paschn on Jun 15, 2007 5:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While you can! Because "knee Walkers" like McCain WILL SELL IT TO THEIR CORPORATE JOHNS IN A HEART BEAT! As for it making a difference in politics? A lying prostitute is a lying prostitute. They'll find, invent, and use any tricks they can to bow before their Johns, the corporations. Look at Pelosi et al. They got elected largely because of the net and immediately betrayed the people that put em there. Look at Israel, The granddaddy of covert terrorist nations and they've done their best work POST net and STILL the drones worship 'em. Now, if you were to NATIONALIZE ENERGY which would take trillions used to buy our "leaders" out of their control, Then force our "leaders" to sign in a bill allowing voters who are betrayed by them to vote them out in WEEKS through a "no confidence" pole via the net, THEN you'd see change. The betrayal of Pelosi and friends just shows how much fear they DON'T have of their constituency it simply means they need to whore themselves out to their purchasers and make their fortunes FASTER than they have been because they may have only years to screw us instead of DECADES. Never, EVER over-estimate the intelligence of the U.S. sheeple.

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

Did you know
Posted by: wawa on Jun 15, 2007 6:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. From Amnesty International:

"Chat rooms monitored. Blogs deleted. Websites blocked. Search engines restricted. People imprisoned for simply posting and sharing information.

"Governments – with the help of some of the biggest IT companies in the world – are cracking down on freedom of expression...Internet repression is reported in countries like China, Vietnam, Tunisia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria. People are persecuted and imprisoned simply for criticising their government, calling for democracy and greater press freedom, or exposing human rights abuses, online.

"But Internet repression is not just about governments. IT companies have helped build the systems that enable surveillance and censorship to take place. Yahoo! have supplied email users’ private data to the Chinese authorities, helping to facilitate cases of wrongful imprisonment. Microsoft and Google have both complied with government demands to actively censor Chinese users of their services.

LEARN MORE

http://irrepressible.info/

2. Did you know that on February 22, 2006 in a Jerusalem court it was revealed that Israel had asked Microsoft to hand over all the details of Mordechai Vanunu's Hotmail account before a court order had been obtained and that Vanunu faces more jail time simply for speaking to media in 2004,

But, NOT any of the media he spoke to has reported on this historic FREEDOM OF SPEECH TRIAL in the democracy of Israel;

But, this civilian journalist has been reporting on the continuing trials of the whistleblower of Israel's WMD Program and is FREELY STREAMING

"30 Minutes With Vanunu"

http://www.wearewideawake.org/

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

» AOL restricts websites Posted by: Whitecliff
» I got thrown off AOL for Posted by: Ellie1
NO, THEY CAN STILL SPIN THE NEWS
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jun 15, 2007 7:13 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The difference is, they don't have the final word. People have the ability now to get to the truth and have an opinion. We don't 'sell' anything. Everything is open to comment/criticism and debate. I believe that the blogs as they are now in 2000 would have kept Bush out of the White House. So they continue to spin their news, but it has less impact. Blogs get close scrutiny by journalists and news reporters. Some Laugh, but they don't think it's funny. Thanks, ANNA

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

The lies are starting to break down
Posted by: ReallyBearish on Jun 15, 2007 9:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The biggest lies coming out of Washington have to do with the economy, and we just had a wopper today: the CPI. Inflation is actually running at near 10 percent (Google Shadow Government Statistics), but the talking liars on CNBC blather on about the mythical "core rate" inflation.

With inflation at 10 percent, we've been in a recession for the past 4 months. How many people are starting to doubt this? There must be quite a few since the talking heads at CNBC tried to justify the numbers to the doubters this morning. Of course they ignored most of the statistical flim-flam that leads to low inflation numbers.

We will have to replace the term BS with BLS-- a reference to the Bureau of Labor Statistics-- who work night and day coming up with the fraudulent stats regarding inflation, unemployment, jobs, growth, etc.

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

Shortly, they will spin the net!
Posted by: Darrell Kern on Jun 15, 2007 10:50 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The government and major high tech institutions are lobbying to re-build the net. In other words, gain control of it for censorship- under the guise of protecting our children from porn an/or other lame excuses.

Just Google search re-building the net. There are plenty of links about it.

Soon the net will be just another propaganda tool.

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

The cat's out of the bag
Posted by: willymack on Jun 15, 2007 11:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No matter what happens to the existing internet, news censorship is long gone. Something even better will emerge from neocon attempts to muzzle forums such as this one. All that needs to be done is to convince enough people to at least breifly peruse the REAL news online and engage their brains, for a change.

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

New Labour can try and spin on the 'net, but it ain't going to work
Posted by: Bobsays on Jun 15, 2007 12:33 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The British Labour Party politicians think they are cool and suave and on top of the internet. But on the 'net. they stink. Nobody is falling for their fake attempts to connect with the people.

They have been the most ideologically controlling, politically correct government in the country's history. The internet is against all of that. The more they fear the internet (and they do because their government is rife with scandal), the more they try to control the flow of ideas.

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

New Labour can try and spin on the 'net, but it ain't going to work
Posted by: Bobsays on Jun 15, 2007 12:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The British Labour Party politicians think they are cool and suave and on top of the internet. But on the 'net. they stink. Nobody is falling for their fake attempts to connect with the people.

They have been the most ideologically controlling, politically correct government in the country's history. The internet is against all of that. The more they fear the internet (and they do because their government is rife with scandal), the more they try to control the flow of ideas.

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

Not yet
Posted by: opeluboy on Jun 15, 2007 3:12 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This all depends on what you read on the net. There will always be Free Republics and Little Green Footballs as well as Fox online and the hundreds of right wing fascists like Coulter, O'Reilly, Savage, Prager and Rush.

Yes, there is truth online, but there is every bit as much bullshit. Those that appreciate bullshit will gravitate to those sites that support their ignorant views.

I am hopeful though that more and more people are accidentally stumbling across the truth.

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

Consumer Alert
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Jun 15, 2007 3:33 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whenever someone tells you we're entering a whole new era where all the rules have changed for the better, it means they want you to buy their book.

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

interesting article
Posted by: off-the-radar 2 on Jun 17, 2007 8:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with the article's premise, people want authenticity, not spin, and the internet provides people the power to check facts and decide for themselves.

And good point from many of the commenters. The corporate elite can't stand that the internet significantly empowers people. For sure the elite feels threatened and will be looking at how to develop corporate control over the internet.

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

If You are Connected
Posted by: gary_7vn on Jun 18, 2007 9:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been on-line with usenet, and then the internet since 1993. In 2000 I got a wireless router. I now have two laptops and a desktop which are always on. I have not had cable tv since then either, nor have I purchased a single newspaper or magazine. Why? It's all there. I used to read a local paper that is now owned by a right wing, likudnik media conglomerate, that every day has a new story about the GWOT, all of them scare stories, loosely based on fact if at all. I am supposed to read this nonsense, swallow it, and march out to fight the "islamofascists".

Now I can read anything: Al Jazeera, the Washington Post, Haaretz, numerous blogs, and alternative news sites like Raw Story, Alternet, et al. It's amazing. If it were not for the internets (a series of tubes) there would be no 9/11 Truth Movement and Matt Tabbibi would be out of a job.

Yet, there are still many problems, not everyone has access, especially in the United States where education is needed the most, and there is still a stigma (promulgated by old media and older attachments to Peter Jennings and Dan Rather) attached to the web. Many still consider it an unreliable source. I have a friend who sneers when I tell him I read it on the web, as though this means something. He has a Masters degree and still thinks that the truth is in books and yes, on TV. When I told him about the planned attack on Iran he laughed at me, because he said it was not going to happen. When I asked him how he knew that, he said he saw it on CNN. You can see the problem.

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

Direct news & more information will not cure apathy
Posted by: Mad Max Bullshit on Jun 26, 2007 3:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I love the net as a source of news - especially sites like AlterNet, Axis of Justice, DailyKos, Democracy Now, the great blogger sites, directly from the candidates / social justice groups / scorecard groups.

I personally do not read the paper and do not watch TV news of any kind - I get all my information from reliable sources on the Net. And I can only hope that this trend continues to grow, so that we get less corporate-owned, corporate-spun news, and more direct news.

However, several problems exist with this trend:

(1) The corporations are beginning to invest more & more in the internet, to try to control & censor it.

(2) The corporations are beginning to bribe the government to censor the net in some very direct ways, such as the recent Copyright Royalty Board rate increases for internet music, which severely limits consumers ability to stream &/or download music that has legitimately been paid for! (see http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/5/2/24755/55110)

(3) The TV and print media are competing - primarily by become more sensationalized. It's like the final throes of the beast. Fox News invented the awful format of hyper-sensational, editorialize everything, turning regular news into the Hannity & Colmes/Bill O'Reilly-style screaming at each other, etc. And now, CNN, MSNBC, and others are following suit.

(4) People don't know how to use the net yet. Some do, but most don't know how to distinguish between legitimate alternative news, and conspiracy theory.

And, (5) probably most important, more information and better news doesn't solve the problem!

Everybody knew, before the Iraq invasion, that the WMD intelligence was falsified. The UN knew. Other countries knew. UN weapons inspectors (namely Scott Ritter) were screaming at the top of their lungs - at Congress, on the news, etc., telling people the intelligence was false. Hundreds of progressive groups, such as MoveOn.org, were lobbying their congressmen to vote against the war. And yet, the moderate Democrats voted for it anyway. Hillary voted for it. Edwards voted for it. Kerry voted for it. And even after the fact, now that we know there are no WMDs, that Saddam's dead, that they don't want us there, and that there is no legitimate reason for us to be there - Obama & the others are STILL voting for every single escalation and funding increase that Bush gives them.

The problem isn't information. The problem is that we are too scared, too weak to do anything with the information. Democrats are too afraid of losing, so we put forward three candidates (Hillary, Obama, Edwards) who are hardly progressive at all - they all support torture, the war, the patriot act, & homeland security. They are all against campaign finance reform, against corporate welfare reform, or substantial health care reform. (see Know Your Democrats.com).

So I suppose that's my bottom line - the internet is not going to save us from the mainstream news. Better information has never really been the problem. It's getting the moderate Democrats to listen to & act upon the information. (By the way, did you know "moderate" is another word for flip-flopper?)

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

  • 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