We Are the Cavalry

Atrios , Armando, and Kos have commented on Crowley's upcoming New York Times piece in which I am quoted.  Editor and Publisher has a preview in which they quote me as an 'activist' who ran a blog for Corzine.  To clarify, I was a staffer for Corzine who ran the official campaign blog.  Like Atrios, I'll withold my full thoughts until the piece comes out and I can read the whole thing.  

Here's what guided me as I talked to Crowley.  By the end of the Corzine race, both a left and a right wing blogosphere existed in New Jersey, and they were probably of roughly analogous size.  The right-wing blogosphere, whose leader was an anonymously authored blog, projected beyond its web readership.  This one right-wing anonymously authored blog could, for instance, get its content onto large scale drive time right wing radio.  Our blogosphere, which is much cooler and more credible, was centered at BlueJersey.  The best they could hope for was getting in the Hotline or on Dailykos, both media outlets which hit limited and non-NJ audiences.  So while their blogosphere could talk to 5-10% of New Jersey's electorate, and was clearly read among Republican operatives, our blogosphere could talk to a few thousand immediately relevant people, at most.  This is changing, by the way.  Bluejersey is starting to be read by the machine in New Jersey, and it is becoming an important place.  

Theirs is a replicable model that was first used in South Dakota, and it will be used again in 2006.  Senator Thune brags about it all the time, apparently, to other Senators, and the bloggers who were paid by his campaign (for non-blogging work, apparently), are reportedly on his Senate staff.  Are we ready for this onslaught?  I don't know.  The question though that most campaigns ask is 'should I start a blog?'  The real question they should ask is 'how am I going to deal with smears and rumors?'  And not just on the internet.  The right smears people on every medium.

When talking to Crowley, what I didn't make clear enough is that the right framework is not right versus left on the blogs, but the whole conservative message machine as a whole versus the left-wing blogs.  In other words, Peter Dauo's triangle.  While right-wing blogs currently drive message on a local level, they really aren't powerful in and of themselves.  Liberal blogs by contrast are new infrastructure, but we haven't figured out how to make that new infrastructure useful to electoral politics yet.  

Right wing blogs have a much easier task than we do.  One, the right-wing message machine, including their network of shock jocks, launders their content, and the nonpartisan media often aids this unwittingly.  Two, Democrats by and large don't use the liberal blogosphere like the Republicans use the right-wing messaging apparatus.  For instance, on average our research is much better than their stuff.  However, the right sends their research to their own media and uses the pressure their media brings to get it into the mainstream press.  Our people by contrast send our stuff to mainstream outlets, largely to maintain negotiating leverage with reporters.  Imagine someone leaking the news of faked national guard documents to Democratic Underground, for instance.  It wouldn't happen.  That story would go directly to the New York Times, and it would become a relatively milquetoast process story.

And finally, the right-wing blogs are full of experienced pundits like Michelle Malkin and Hugh Hewitt. Our leaders are actually much more capable than these people, seeing as they built what we have now from scratch. But the liberal blogosphere isn't quite as experienced.  The right-wing gets the media cycle, how to keep a narrative going, how to embarrass a journalist, and how to craft a story that makes for good TV.  This is not our fault.  They have experience and connections, having done it for twenty years, and they go to cocktail parties with the people they are trying to influence.  We are learning quickly, but we haven't yet gotten to the point where we can consistently create political force from the internet in every nook and cranny of American politics.

Don't get me wrong. We already do a huge amount, for almost no pay, but there's even more to do. Figuring out how to do what we do bigger, better, and more credibly - that's the only way we're going to win this. Because there's no cavalry coming. We're it.

Tags: Blogosphere (all tags)

Comments

16 Comments

Blogs are Irrelevant
When it comes to elections that is, the power of the blogs, especially locally, or state wide is the power to project what is written on the blogs into the mainstream press.

I wholly expect 2006 to be vicious, with Thune type blog efforts in many many races. Knowing and expecting this is the key. So that when the slime comes the ground work is already done to deal with it.

That means having local blogs blogging local races, and being able to feed that stuff up to bigger blogs and into the press.

Of course that is now, as people think the blogs are more and more important, so they will be - it is almost self fulfilling.

What we really need is a political blogger university, to train activists in political blogging. How to frame, how to talk to the press, how to push back and push forward and how to do effective oppo etc.

What is also needed is a viable funding model. Blogging is very time consuming, and doesnt support the blogger - the best folks arent going to do it forever and for free.

by Pounder 2005-12-09 02:15PM | 0 recs
Community Building
This conversation seems to overlook the incredibly important community building aspect of blogging. Blogs aren't just old media on shiny screens, they are opportunities for people to build relationships.  

Kos and Instapundit, for instance, do two completely different things.  There's almost no point calling the two the same thing.

by dtmky 2005-12-09 03:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Community Building
Yes.  The conversation is narrow by design.
by Matt Stoller 2005-12-09 03:13PM | 0 recs
Three sides
Unfortunately, "Dauo's Triangle" is far from being realized on our side. Is a serious attempt being made to rectify that?

I don't know, I'm not a blogger. I do know the Democratic leadership seems to have regular conference calls with bloggers, so to some extent there seems to be coordination taking place.

I'm sure this happens with the mainstream media journalists/pundits as well. But the mainstream media folk are not on our side -- they can go either way. So in that regard, one gigantic side of the triangle is missing.

I often wonder what exactly those with power/influence on the Left are doing. The Right Wing Noise Machine isn't a secret -- it's been discussed to no end. So where is our version of that? Is anyone making a serious attempt to create a Left Wing Noise Machine comparable with the Right's?

I've often heard DLCers mention that the Democratic party needs to move to the center, because our base is smaller than the Republican base. What I never hear them talk about is what to do to change this.

I get incredibly frustrated whenever this discussion comes up. Because I have to keep asking myself, what are our guys doing? Are they just incompetent? Inert? You cannot keep relying on the mainstream media to convey your message to the people, because the mainstream media is unreliable. So where's our Fox News, or Washington Times, or Wall Street Journal? And why are there only a handful of liberal talk-radio hosts, when there seems to be an unending supply of conservative ones?

Does anyone know?

(BTW, it's not that I'm not acknowledging the work of Air America, Ed Schultz, or the various lefty blogs, or the numerous liberal writers out there. It's just that all these efforts still pale in comparison with the Right's, and I'm wondering if there is a concerted attempt being made to fix this.)

by LiberalFromPA 2005-12-09 02:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Three sides
LiberalfromPA,

Because I have to keep asking myself, what are our guys doing? Are they just incompetent? Inert?

No, they are incumbents.  And as such, they get reelected with the system we have.  If we want new people to lead the party, we have to elect them, which means running people in primaries.

Like Jonathan Tasini, in New York State.  1000 $100 donations to him will be a story, and will force a debate on the issue of party leadership (or Iraq, which is the same thing).

If you're so mad, give to Tasini.

Or Christine Celgelis.  You can give to her.

by Matt Stoller 2005-12-09 02:53PM | 0 recs
Why? Money and Time
The engine which drives all US media (except public TV/Radio) is advertising dollars.  It isn't a bad system on it's face--certainly better than state run propaganda.  

The other reason the right wing noise machine works so well is that it has been around for a while.  And for most of their history (if you go back 40 years) they've been in the political minority, so they have developed the skills and infrastructure necesary to obstruct and attack the majority.  Now that the attack mode is starting to seem a bit dumb (given that they are in charge of everything) they are faltering.  

The rMachine has only one message they are good at getting out and that's the left is bad.  So it's funny how quiet and "messageless" the right seems to be until Howard Dean speaks.

OUR side needs to develop a different set of skills and a more fluid distribution system.  And we need to make it one that is good at delivering a postitive mesage about ourselves rather than a negative message about our opponents.  It's a much harder task, but when the left is back in power it will likely not self destruct as quickly as the right has in the last 15 years.

And they key to that will be Money and Time.

by David in Burbank 2005-12-10 04:50AM | 0 recs
Aren't we getting a bit self-referential?
Let's keep our eyes on the ball, everyone, and stop worrying about how we're SEEN in the greater political world. That simply gives too much power to some of the very people we're trying to disempower. It doesn't make sense.

Fuhgettaboutit.

by ColoDem 2005-12-09 02:25PM | 0 recs
The problem is not the right wing blogs
It is that there is no effective way for a public figure to sue for defamation. What should probably happen is that when a liberal politician is smeared, he/she should sue the person who did the smearing alleging that there was a reckless disregard for the truth. A few lawsuits here and there might have a very salutary effect.
by mrgavel 2005-12-09 02:44PM | 0 recs
Re: The problem is not the right wing blogs
Public figures can't sue for defamation.
by Matt Stoller 2005-12-09 02:50PM | 0 recs
Re: The problem is not the right wing blogs
Not even over an outright lie?  Could we, the public sue for false advertisiment or something?  There ought to be some way to assure a semblace of accuracy--even in a smear campaign.
by David in Burbank 2005-12-10 04:52AM | 0 recs
Re: The problem is not the right wing blogs
Sure they can.  But it must be an actual, known falsehood.
by Adam B 2005-12-10 12:21PM | 0 recs
Spine Transplants don't work on Democrats
. . . because spines are only useful in organisms with central nervous systems.

Seriously . . .

Right Wing Blogs are effective because they are a coordinated extension of the Right Wing Noise Machine.

The Democratic Party and the Left Wing has no central message, and no message cooridination -- which makes it much more difficult to have a meaningful impact.

In South Dakota, the the GOP campaign operative bloggers successfully intimidated several MSM reporters; the best thing we can do to help our team is attack and expose the phony right wing blogs, and defend the MSM from this new line of attack.

by ck 2005-12-09 02:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Spine Transplants don't work on Democrats
In my opinion, the Democratic Party and the Left Wing have no connection - period.   They play to the Republican position that their left wing is full of wacko liberal nuts.   They think we need to be kept in our place.  Until they value this party of their party, how can we help?   We do something, they take it, and then they distance themselves from us and the act.  Look at what Michael Moore did with his movie, campaigning and working for Clark, and look what Michael Moore got for it.  Michael Moore got demonized by the right for helping the Dems, and the Dems distanced themselves from this "crazy liberal" and let him hang.   We don't get no respect from the Dems.  If we had a third party option (viable), we'd all be long gone.
by oakland 2005-12-09 08:51PM | 0 recs
we're only behind in timing
the vrwc has had more than 20 years to build up their infrastructure, and has had drudge for almost 15.

conversely, dkos, mydd, and other fine liberal blogs (including my own) have only been around for 4 or 5 years tops.  leftwing radio has only been picking up steam for about the same amount of time.

granted, right wing politicos (or at least, their staffs) pay more attention to right wing blogs than their counterparts on the left (and much to the left/moderate politician's detriment).  but even that is changing.

albeit slowly.

the solution?

if you're a blogger, create relationships with actually msm reporters (even locally).  that's what the rightists did and do.

if you're simply a citizen, don't be afraid to call media and politicians' offices and decry misinformation or provide real information.

don't criticize the media.  become the media.  (sorry we forget who said that first, it was not us, although we did coin the phrase "blogtopia"!!)

by skippy 2005-12-09 04:34PM | 0 recs
The peculiar circumstances of Thune
South Dakota, we were told, had a major newspaper and many locals including weeklies.  The locals picked up coverage from one paper, the Argus Reporter.  Intimidate or color the coverage from one newspaper and the Thune camp had a major victory.  A similar attempt in NJ failed because there was no center.  The "local powers": the Star Ledger and Record, were offset by the Ny Times, Philadelphia Inquirer, etc.

South Dakota is not a unique situation but it is a rare situation.  The Des Moines Register, for example, has an outsized influence in Iowa.  But a model built on influencing ONE newspaper will not work as well in nearly all of the states as it did in South Dakota.

We may find that influencing Associated Press reporters and editors has more effect than working on individual newspapers.  And my own experience shows that the editors are reasonable and can be moved.

Right now I suspect that Daily Kos is far more influential than any GOPer blog.  It has already been givn the Michael Moore demonizing treatment.  When one GOper attack centered on the evils of Armando it was a sure sign that dKos was having an impact.

Beyond that, liberal blogs, as mentioned above, serve a more vital function than conservative blogs.  They provide information and opinion beyond what "even the SCLM" like the NY Times, LA Times , and Washington Post manage.  

 

by David Kowalski 2005-12-09 05:52PM | 0 recs
Demonizing
Let's not forget the Daily Show, which Bill O'Riely went after on his show over the so-called Secular Progressive's Attack on Christmas (SPAC)-- and given that John Stuart is Jewish, Bill's attack has an odd anti-semtiic after taste to it.
by David in Burbank 2005-12-10 04:58AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------