Post from John Riley's Blog:
The Changing Campaign and Those Left Behind
Bad? Brilliant?
You can rate this post.
Register or login now and
tell us what you think.
So today I attended a symposium sponsored by Google and National Journal entitled the First 21st Century Campaign at Google’s DC headquarters. The first panel, which included Time's Mark Halperin, right wing blogger Mary Katherine Ham, The Politico’s James Kotecki, Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Communications Director Phil Singer and Mitt Romney’s Communications Director Kevin Madden, focused on the future of political coverage in light of the changing power and influence of the players involved. In my opinion, what was the perfect opportunity for a dialogue concerning how the interactions among campaigns, mainstream media and the electorate are changing devolved into the common dispute between old and new media.

To be honest, I blame Mark Halperin. He began his remarks by criticizing “angry” voices that, in his opinion, pervade new media platforms and their “hypocrisy” in complaining about trashy or horserace journalism from the mainstream media (insinuating that blogs are the main purveyors of those types of stories). Then Halperin’s true issue with new media platforms was revealed. He proceeded by going on this rant regarding the fact that the rise in the online news media is making the economics of traditional media impossible. It was at this point that Halperin virtually transformed from a respected journalist into an angry old man upset at the fact that he’s no longer in control. It got so bad that Halperin began to wax nostalgic for the days when the all-powerful, all-knowing news media, backed by big corporations, could act as a responsible disseminator of information in the interest of the public good. Luckily, the other members of the panel and numerous questioners repeatedly critiqued his characterization of the media of yesteryear. More Luckily (and surprisingly), is the fact that Mary Katherine Ham articulately countered the grumpy old man’s criticisms and cited the fact that some of the most pointed, insightful and thorough analysis is being done by public citizens- for free.

The second panel, featuring new media operatives from the Obama, Clinton, McCain and Romney campaigns, was much more… cordial. Although nothing new was discussed, the most striking aspect of the panel was how each campaign's representative reflected their candidate. Mark Soohoo, John McCain’s Deputy eCampaign Director, was inarticulate and had nothing new or innovative to add. Mindy Finn, the Romney representative, was slick and had some good sound bites, but just wasn’t believable. Peter Daou of the Clinton campaign was such a partisan that every mention of the rise of new media being good for democracy was followed by an “as long as democrats win” comment. Joe Rospars of the Obama Campaign, donning thick-brimmed glasses and a hipster beard, was cool, collected and generally uninterested in the bickering. …I think this phenomenon prevented me from developing any interesting commentary on what was discussed.

Apparently Google and National Journal will continue to sponsor these events, which feature freed snacks and goodies along with all the enterprising, suit-wearing interns your heart could desire. I’d recommend them as long as Mark Halperin isn’t invited.

Today’s sartorialist image. She’s so cool. Also, here’s a little pick-me-up for those of you jealous of your friends abroad this summer. Apparently Shanghai isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.

Reader Comments
No comments have been written yet.
Campus Progress

Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.

Campus Progress