home

The "Power" of Blogs: What Atrios Said

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 12:24:31 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I have been hard on the Left Blogs/so called "Netroots" lately on Iraq. My main reason is they have been wrong about it. But I have also been hard on them because it seemed to me they were abdicating a critical role the Left Blogs play in the political debate. I thnk Atrios explains that role nicely:

Overall what blogs have been able to do is create an unfolding political narrative which has been largely absent elsewhere. Sometimes it's about emphasizing different things, sometimes it's about combating DC conventional wisdom, sometimes it's about highlighting things which are being ignored. But taken all together it's about telling the story of politics in a different way.

When the Left blogs/Netroots decided to cheerlead the House Supplemental, playing the "pragmatic" insider, they ceded their real power in the debate. Move On and others simply failed to understand what their power is. It is not in settling for inadequate proposals and cheerleading inevitable compromises. It is describing the progressive postion and providing a narrative that keeps the Beltway, Media and politicians honest.

The Left Blogs/Netroots forgets this at its peril. If it goes down that road, and comes to resemble the Right blog relationship with the GOP in its relationship with the Democratic Party, it will be considerably weakened as a force in the political debate.

< A Study in Contrast | Sentencing Commission Takes First Step Towards Reducing Crack Cocaine Penalties >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    The "Power" of Blogs: What Atrios Said | 29 comments (29 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    We Give Away That Power At Our Peril n/t (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by MO Blue on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 12:40:29 PM EST


    Amen, Brother (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by JHFarr on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 07:11:38 PM EST
    Move On and others simply failed to understand what their power is. It is not in settling for inadequate proposals and cheerleading inevitable compromises. It is describing the progressive postion and providing a narrative that keeps the Beltway, Media and politicians honest.

    Absolutely right. ARTICULATE THE VISION, hold the highest ground. All this dicking around with individual bills, playing strategists, etc. is pissing away the real prize.

    Howard Zinn spoke to this (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by janinsanfran on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 08:49:59 PM EST
    The author of A Peoples' History of the United States offered this knowledgable comment in the Progressive. It doesn't seem to be online, so I stuck it on my blog.
    "When a social movement adopts the compromises of legislators, it has forgotten its role, which is to push and challenge the politicians, not to fall in meekly behind them.

    We who protest the war are not politicians. We are citizens. Whatever politicians do, let them first feel the full force of citizens who speak for what is right, not for what is winnable, in a shamefully timorous Congress....

    We have no office to hold on to, only our consciences, which insist on telling the truth.

    That, history suggests, is the most realistic thing a citizen can do."

    I think he's right. That's the needed long view.

    So what now? n/t (none / 0) (#2)
    by andgarden on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 01:09:46 PM EST


    Wow, (none / 0) (#3)
    by Freewill on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 01:13:02 PM EST
    BTD, I really hope that this post is only meant as a way to demostrate your dislike of the current funding bill and not that you are proposing a position for watering down one of the last tools available to the public to actually air their concerns and comments?

    When the Left blogs/Netroots decided to cheerlead the House Supplemental, playing the "pragmatic" insider, they ceded their real power in the debate. Move On and others simply failed to understand what their power is. It is not in settling for inadequate proposals and cheerleading inevitable compromises. It is describing the progressive postion and providing a narrative that keeps the Beltway, Media and politicians honest.

    The Left Blogs/Netroots forgets this at its peril. If it goes down that road, and comes to resemble the Right blog relationship with the GOP in its relationship with the Democratic Party, it will be considerably weakened as a force in the political debate.

    I'm sorry but the tone of those two paragraphs sound as if you are fearful of the internet and its collective powers. Yes, everyone has issues and not everyone's wishes on positions will reflect what our elected leader's say and do.

    Please be careful! Take what you will from discussions across the internet but please don't sound the same alarms that those who are in favor of Internet Regulation are producing.

    Blog discussions and Organizations like MoveOn.org are a way for common, ordinary individuals to express their concerns. You never know when one of our Elected Officials might learn and grow from the wisdom and fact gathering capabilities that one ordinary, commoner can produce thus changing the World altogether!

    There is power in this medium. I for one am not ready to hand that power over to a select few only allowing them to set the agenda of what is and what is not appropriate to be displayed.

    I am thoroughly perplexed by your comment (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 02:00:01 PM EST
    It seems to meyou havenotunderstood my post.

    Read it again.

    Parent

    More than likely I did misunderstand (none / 0) (#9)
    by Freewill on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 03:33:06 PM EST
    and I hope how I interpreted you post wasn't at all the overall message you meant to portray.

    Here's how I took these particular lines:

    I have been hard on the Left Blogs/so called "Netroots" lately on Iraq. My main reason is they have been wrong about it.

    They might have been wrong and by all means you have expressed your concerns about these so called decisions. I take it that you believe the netroots have made their decisions. I believe that they have commented and engaged in debate. IMHO if a group of my peers collectively advocates for something I strongly disagree with, I will do my best to honor my side of the debate.

    When the Left blogs/Netroots decided to cheerlead the House Supplemental, playing the "pragmatic" insider, they ceded their real power in the debate.
     

    I received the e-mail from MoveOn asking me to vote on whether or not to support the supplemental bill. I believe that Congressman Murtha who was being lobbied by MoveOn and others requested that MoveOn ask its membership how they felt on that particular issue. I enjoyed the comments, debates and the participation that was brought about by that particular vote.

    No were do I believe that anyone or any organization ceded any type of power to debate this issue simply because they polled their membership. To me that is what I strongly disagree with. A poll is a poll without any legally binding results. By no means was Congressman Murtha or anyone legally bound to abide by the results of that poll. If no one is legally bound how can anyone or anything be dismissed from further debate?

    Move On and others simply failed to understand what their power is. It is not in settling for inadequate proposals and cheerleading inevitable compromises. It is describing the progressive postion and providing a narrative that keeps the Beltway, Media and politicians honest.

    If you read what MoveOn.org itself explains in their page called About,
    nowhere do they state that their mission is to simply narrate the progressive position and to keep the Beltway, Media and Politicians honest. They are a P.A.C., with a membership. Because you disagree with them doesn't necessarily make them wrong and you correct. Collectively, as an Organization, they exercised the same Constitutionally guaranteed rights that you and I  have exercised. In today's world everyone can find groups of like minded individuals who we can find similarities with however, it is very rare to find that one group that you will agree with 100% of the time.

    To me, if I agreed with everything 100% of the time life would be extremely boring.

    The Left Blogs/Netroots forgets this at its peril. If it goes down that road, and comes to resemble the Right blog relationship with the GOP in its relationship with the Democratic Party, it will be considerably weakened as a force in the political debate.

    Please don't take this wrong for I'm not attacking you in anyway. I'm simply making a comparative analogy. When did you become the netroots overlord with the power to foresee the future? Like I said, I'm not really attacking you and please don't take it as a personal attack. I agree with you that the RightWing has this weird relationship with its bloggers. Hell, RedState.com (.com at the time of this particular post) posted job positions for full time bloggers that would be backed by Corporations

    I've studied numerous individuals who typically comment on various RightWing sites and I'm amazed about how my posts they were able to generate in the time frame from when they first started posting to the current date. It's amazing that some of those supposed bloggers create posts as if it were their full time job. And yet, many people will never believe that our Government would stoop so low as to spend our tax monies to hire drumbeating parrots to spread their propaganda. I do fear, just as I believe you have stated that this is not what the left blog is and should ever be about.

    About being weakened in political debate. I again disagree as long as our Internet rights are not infringed upon like those who were trying to reign in what can and what can not be posted on the net by legislating their version of "Net Neutrality", regardless if this organization or that left leaning organization takes this or that stance there will always be another left leaning group that advocates the 180 of the position.

    That is the beauty of being, call it what you want, progressive, liberal, left etc... This side of the aisle doesn't simply take orders from the Supreme Leader and parrot that leader's lines. This side of the aisle engages its members to be active in the actual debate and allows dissenting arguments because we know that we as individuals can not alone know everything and participation in debate makes us stronger. Just because the opposition and its media tries to paint the left as not being in unity on decisions please don't take that as a bad thing. In reality it means that we are free thinkers with the ability to debate the issues without having to be told how to interpret the Supreme Leader's message or agenda.

    It is only those Media organizations (like Faux, AM Talk Junkies, and the majority other Corporate Controlled Media) who tell us daily to believe that the LeftBloggasphereians are nothing but wackos that are trying to influence the whole flock of us sheep against opposing views in America. I become defensive when I sense any of those type of tactics being deployed by any members of this side of the aisle.

    No body can talk our powers away! NO BODY! The only way that is possible is if we allow them to take those powers away!

    Once again, I'm not attacking you BTD in anyway. I just want to ensure that we (as a particular side of the aisle) don't implode simply because we disagree with a few particular outcomes of policy. I only hope that lumping and attacking the "Left Blogs/Netroots" together like you did in your post is extremely unfair to reality.

    I do agree we should never become like the G.O.P. blogs! Sorry for the length of this however this is something I feel very strongly about!

    Parent

    Freewill, the problem with MoveOn (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by conchita on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 04:46:30 PM EST
    is the way that they engineered their poll to build the appearance of support for Pelosi and the House Supplemental bill.  From Salon:

    What precipitated the recent scuffle between MoveOn and its former allies was an e-mail that Pariser sent to MoveOn's members on Sunday, March 18, asking them to help guide the group's position on the war debate in Congress. As Salon's Michael Scherer has noted, the e-mail read like a push poll; Pariser described Pelosi's plan and Bush's opposition to it, and made only cursory mention of progressives' concerns. He did not describe plans floated by members of the House's Out of Iraq Caucus that would have funded a quick withdrawal from Iraq. "Should we support or oppose the Democrats' plan?" Pariser asked in the e-mail. Slightly more than a hundred thousand MoveOn members voted in the poll. The vast majority -- 84.6 percent -- sided with "the Democrats."

    btd is dismayed (and i think rightly so) by the netroots who he sees as potentially becoming too tightly aligned with the beltway dems and compromising principal for politics.  my guess is that if you reread his post you will come to a different understanding.

    Parent

    I have read it, re-read it over and over (none / 0) (#13)
    by Freewill on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 05:00:33 PM EST
    I appreciate the information. And yes I do have the same concerns however, I also know that BTD is an adamant objector to the Supplimental Spending Bill. He does strongly favor Reid/Feingold. Because of that, is he not predispostitioned to attack those who he strongly disagrees with? I understand the concerns however the way some of his post was written (and I explained the lines) I still believe that it is a Stereotyping attack against a position he differs with. Based with the knowledge how stongly he feels about the spending bill and how animated he is attacking it, I read this particular post as yet another attack on that position.

    Amen, brother, I salute you and hold you in a high regard of respect for your position. However, just because an organization differs from your view point don't Stereotype the whole complete left. That's not being honest.

    Who are the netroots? Who controls the netroots? How do they simply overnight become to tightly aligned with the beltway dems? How do we stop that from happening? Why do we give power to the netroots if they are not promoting our viewpoints?

    Just some questions to ponder.

    Parent

    Others will have different thoughts. I HOPE. (none / 0) (#16)
    by Edger on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 06:20:16 PM EST
    Here are my thoughts on your questions:

    Who are the netroots? NOT an organization. A collective shorthand name for independent liberal bloggers.

    Who controls the netroots? No one.

    How do they simply overnight become to tightly aligned with the beltway dems? By falling into the trap of compromising principles when they feel that speaking their minds or not supporting the DLC might result in loss of power, house/senate/seats, etc., by democrats. IOW by selling their soul.

    How do we stop that from happening? By learning and thinking, and by not compromising principle to help someone to power simply because they call themselves 'democrat'.

    Why do we give power to the netroots if they are not promoting our viewpoints? You don't. You are the netroots.

    Those are not all inclusive answers,obviously. They are meant to be take off points for discussion.

    Parent

    Freewill (none / 0) (#17)
    by Edger on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 06:38:30 PM EST
    BTD's answer to your "How do we stop that from happening?" was:
    [by not] settling for inadequate proposals and cheerleading inevitable compromises


    Parent
    Freewill (none / 0) (#7)
    by Edger on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 02:19:06 PM EST
    He was referring to Right Wing blogs never criticizing Bush and the GOP, but simply abjectly supporting them out of a desire for power at any cost... and too many left/netroots blogs doing the same thing re the DLC and Democratic Party Leadership over the supplemental. That is what weakens their power.

    Parent
    Thank you Edger for stating it in that manor... (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Freewill on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 03:48:37 PM EST
    I've just heard for too long the daily reminders about how weak and unorganized this side is by the media and the G.O.P. daily talking points and in reality it is the opposite. And that view point usually gets edited out by the "Liberal Media" (snark)

    I don't want people on this side thinking that those types of messages are true because that is simply a mind controlling type of message they want us to engage in.

    I agree there are those left sided blogs that do mirror the leaders regardless however, IMO there are not that many. No where as many as the Right has. Each side, regardless, will have its 15% to 30% Authoritarian types who, without blinking, will follow the leader's marching orders. I just don't like to lump and label everyone and everything into one category. Stereotyping terms like "Left Blogs/Netroots" implies the complete whole and that simply is not the case. Stereotyping tactics are deployed by the other side. I hope that because I or anyone doesn't like the outcome of a particular bill that we don't engage in Stereotyping tactics to try and paint an entire side as being this or that.

    Thanks for the clarification and sorry Big Tent for receiving your message wrong.

    Parent

    If it goes down that road, (none / 0) (#4)
    by Edger on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 01:16:39 PM EST
    and comes to resemble the Right blog relationship with the GOP in its relationship with the Democratic Party... it might as well BE the Right blogosphere. It will produce the same result for the Democratic Party.

    Never has that been so obvious for me (none / 0) (#5)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 01:55:33 PM EST
    than the Iraq issue.  We are talking about real lives, flesh and blood and lust for power and oil.  If the left blogs give away their power to present the many aspects of truth that exist for the safety of the party stamp of approval they will lose that truth and all of that raw human power that fuels it.  They will replace a renewable energy sourse with one that is nonrenewable, contributes to pollution, and has a determined lifespan.

    speaking entirely for myself (none / 0) (#8)
    by profmarcus on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 02:24:02 PM EST
    yes, as atrios said, i do see myself offering up "a competing version of political reality..." however, even more than that, maintaining my blog day after day helps me keep a grasp on my OWN reality... the mere act of putting up a post requires me to visit, read, absorb, digest, and, via my own mental processes, regurgitate a spectrum of current events selected on the basis of what i believe to be the most meaningful in the context of today... i can't sit on the sidelines and pretend that i know what's going on or that my opinions are static... one of the most fundamental elements of my life is to continue to learn and grow... blogging facilitates that as well or better than anything i have ever done... besides, there's always the anonymous commenter to keep me humble...

        What a bunch of BS this blog is !!
        cchas | 04.28.07 - 2:02 pm | #

    And, yes, I DO take it personally

    bloggrrrr (none / 0) (#12)
    by Sumner on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 04:53:12 PM EST
    Like Athena, the Greek goddess of wisdom, war and craft who sprang fully-grown, from the head of Zeus, blogs are but one entity that sprang from the mind of Jorn Barger.

    Bill Moyers on his April 27, 2007 show, "Blogging for Truth" credits the blogosphere with countering the controlled media.

    Which is why even many so-called moderate government officials hate blogs:

      ERIC GOLDMAN: So but what about blogs? . . .
      JUDGE ALEX KOZINSKI: I hate them, hateful things.

    making the profound blog observation all the more poignant:

    "government will have to be thoroughly vetted" -- TexDem

    bloggers bring diverse interpretations to the understanding.

    one example might be of the recent Democratic First Presidential debate:

       QUESTION: Mr. John Edwards, you received a $400 haircut. What were you thinking?
       ANSWER: [in paraphrased blog-speak] To the Barber Shop.mp3

    Nice (none / 0) (#14)
    by squeaky on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 05:04:24 PM EST
    blogs are but one entity that sprang from the mind of Jorn Barger.
    And what a mind it is.  

    btd and others, (none / 0) (#15)
    by conchita on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 05:10:50 PM EST
    this may be slightly ot here, but i am going to take a chance that some here may have some thoughts about something i find myself contemplating frequently.  there seems to be a disconnect between progressive blogs and activism, particularly when it comes to working with blogs to generate activist participation.  if blogs are, as i think, the new media, and press releases/press kits are the traditional way of reaching the conventional media, are they still relevant wrt to blogs?  or is there a new vehicle out there and do we need to develop one?  

    case in point, i attended an impeachment action today in central park that did not generate the crowd of thousands i expected.  those who came were enthusiastic and those who organized were indefeatiguable and resolute in their plan to make this a kickoff event to the summer of impeachment.  one of the organizers asked me to become involved to help them with their media outreach.  

    as i mentioned above, i have long been considering how to make a better marriage of blogs and activism.  btd, georgia10, and mcjoan were outstanding leaders at dkos in the fight against alito.  any thoughts here about how and if it is possible to build symbiosis between blogs and activism?  it seems all too often those who read online don't leave their computers to support actions and activists don't realize they have an audience through the blogs.  with the exception of afterdowningstreet.org it seems that the activist blogs do not provide coverage of daily political goings on and the blogs do not necessarily publicize actions.  for example, i wrote a diary early this morning at dkos about the impeachment action which received 4 comments before it rolled off the page.  if it had been written about by a front pager it might have stayed up long enough to generate interest.  there were impeachment actions across the country today - check out a28.org - yet i wonder who is talking about them, not just in the traditional media, but also the netroots.  any thoughts about this?

    Activism & websites (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by walt on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 07:49:20 PM EST
    In a different form, I commented to BigTentDemocrat about my posting on some websites & my desire for anonymity.  My activism is in force elsewhere.  And, as a matter of fact, it would not be good if these 2 things were in some way connected.

    My activist efforts depend, in a very large part, on my not being especially perceived as a wild & crazy liberal, progressive, supporter of left wing Democratic party politics.

    I also feel the need to comment at some websites & express my views about some issues.  I do not blog.  I do not diary/essay.  I try to stay below the radar.

    I often choose not to comment on the area of my activism because writing about my experiences may expose me to a knowledgeable reader.  I have left some websites & let things drift into archives because of things such as seeing my comment turn up in a Google search or have an entire diary & thread suddenly show up on another website.

    I can give one example other than myself.  This description is just enough off target to maintain the person's neutrality.  A very influential lady who is well known by me is a power player in, shall we say (because it's not true), the League of Women Voters.  For her to have a blog, or to diary on any of the various left or progressive websites, or for her to comment in ways that may give out her identity would be very negative.  And her on-going business relationships could be very drastically affected.

    My point: it may be difficult to mix blogging, writing diaries/essays, and commenting into the very obvious contexts common to many forms of activism, such as marches, vigils, public forum events, panel discussions, etc.

    A further complication for me is that I worked in Afghanistan for a time, which comes out in some of my comments.  It would be unhelpful if some folks were to match my actual identity with the comments I make on some websites.

    Finally, I consider it disastrous that a citizen of the USA feels the need to hide behind some degree of anonymity because of the insane krazee rethuglicans who may, can, or will take action against people who express "libbrrrrruuul" views.  Even on this relatively moderate site, there are posts by some folks who seem totally unhinged, stupidly deranged & hopelessly addicted to the Bu$hInc kewlade.

    Parent

    walt, thanks for your thoughts (none / 0) (#23)
    by conchita on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 11:26:33 PM EST
    we all have different lifestyles and needs that come to play with the anonymity question.  i too write under a moniker, but these days it is more a matter of habit than a need to remain anonymous.  my lifestyle allows me to be pretty much the same person in print as i am in life, but i do understand that not everyone is in that position.

    Parent
    Further thoughts on identities (none / 0) (#27)
    by walt on Sun Apr 29, 2007 at 01:28:14 AM EST
    After posting the above, I read some deadtree stuff that reminded me of long ago when I wrote book reviews.  In direct terms of BigTentDemocrat's post on the lefty, liberal, netrootz kind of folks it struck me that some of the blog dudes & dudettes are in fact well known.  As a result, sans the sham, their names & reputations are out there.  If the money or the fame takes hold, then it becomes important not to offend the DLC, DSCC, DCCC, DFA, etc.

    It is possible for a parallel form of netrootz groupthink to take place alongside conventional wisdom, Beltway punditry, insider gossip & the various straitjackets of the rightwingnutz.

    Soooooo . . . if a known-by-name Ms. Xyz is going to be at an Edwards rally on Friday, there may not be the same kind or degree of negative vitriol on Monday as compared to if her presence were anonymous.  And, yes, it's also clear that some other person may choose to be more vehement, yea or nay, depending on the nature of the blog, the blogger, the type of contact with the politico or bureaucrat or media star, etc.  Cheerleader or detractor, it's much easier to pull out all the stops from behind the cloud of unknowing.

    I rarely pay attention to the personalities of bloggers & commenters because the biological fallacy is all-pervasive.  Ideas need stand on their own whether it's the divine Devore or the rogue BTD.  BUT, several of the bigblogboys seem to take their personae "way whole bunch" serious.

    Parent

    Blogging/Activism/Grassroots (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by Maryb2004 on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 08:53:06 PM EST
    You might find something that Kid Oakland wrote a few months ago of interest. It isn't exactly what you're talking about because it focuses specifically on how blogging interacts with grassroots political party-related activities, rather than activism outside of a party structure. But you can extrapolate from it and use it as a jumping off point to think about these things.

    I've been turning it over in my mind since I read it, along with my own thinking about blogs in general.  So far I've seen nothing that has led me to conclude that national blogs, alone, have the ability to mobilize large groups of people to converge in one physical location for successful activism. I think they can occasionally be used to mobilize large groups of people to utilize their computers toward a cause. But only if the mobilizing bloggers are very specific in what they want people to do and the activities are of limited duration and of limited time commitment (the Alito hearing actions are a good example).

    I do think the internet, including national blogs, has the ability to mobilize fairly large groups of people to take actions at a local level - but it happens rarely.  I tend to think that the more successful mobilizing actions need to work with some kind of established on-the-ground organization that already understands how to manage people in the flesh. Either that, or be of a kind (like campaign activities) that attract people who have been involved previously in on-the-ground actions and know enough about on-the-ground organizing that they can lead the newbies around.  The Howard Dean campaign was a good example of nationwide internet-inspired activity that happened mostly at a local level.  But the people at the local level often (usually) included at least some people who had participated in organized political activity at some point.  So they weren't completely making things up from scratch.  

    Anyway, it's an interesting question you raise.


    Parent

    thanks maryb2004 (none / 0) (#24)
    by conchita on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 11:41:16 PM EST
    i will follow your link to ko.  about blogs being able to mobilize, i think you have some good points about possible limitations.  however, it does seem that organizations like answer and ufpj and moveon (if it is an organization) have the ability to mobilize people to participate in actions beyond their keypads.  i was also reading tonight about an interesting organization, avaaz founded by moveon's eli pariser and several others to develop grassroots global response to issues faced by the world.  like moveon, they are combining tools like advertising campaigns with email and text  message action alerts, but on a global scale.  this coming week they are organizing an action within iraq to send a message to a group of u.s., iraqi, iranian, and syrian leaders meeting to empower an international role in negotiating the future of iraq and to acheive the withdrawal of the u.s. forces from iraq. to sign their global petition, go to avaaz.

    Parent
    Moveon's (none / 0) (#25)
    by Maryb2004 on Sun Apr 29, 2007 at 12:07:44 AM EST
    strategy for local action seems to be to get local people to sign up to be on the ground leaders -- host a party, be the organizer of a local action, host the showing of a movie ...

    Once the local host has signed up, he or she provides motivation to the people who are willing -- just not willing to do any planning.  It seems likely that many (although not all) of the people who volunteer to be "hosts" are either natural born organizers and/or have done similar things before.

    I should say that this strategy is a far second to what seems their prime strategy -- raising money.  They also get a lot of people to sign on-line petitions like the one you linked to.  I have my doubts as to how effective on-line petitions are -- except to get people on mailing lists so they can ask for more money. (I don't mean to disparage moveon -- but they've sent me a LOT of requests for money in the past few weeks.)

    Parent

    disparage moveon all you like (none / 0) (#26)
    by conchita on Sun Apr 29, 2007 at 12:31:41 AM EST
    they have been blacklisted by me since the supplemental resolution "poll".  told them not a single dime more after that stunt.

    sorry i haven't read the ko diary yet.  got caught up in the drama at dkos.

    Parent

    Leaving their computers (none / 0) (#29)
    by Alien Abductee on Sun Apr 29, 2007 at 02:03:44 AM EST
    Using a mobile social networking tool like Twitter as an adjunct to blogging could help mobilize action. Apparently Obama likes it.

    Twitter is a social networking and micro-blogging service that allows users to send "updates" (text-based posts, up to 140 characters long) via SMS, instant messaging, the Twitter website, or an application such as Twitterrific. Twitter was founded in October 2006 by San Francisco start-up company Obvious Corp.

    Updates are displayed on the user's profile page and also instantly delivered to other users who have signed up to receive them. The sender can restrict delivery to those in his or her circle of friends (delivery to everyone is the default). Users can receive updates via the Twitter website, instant messaging, SMS, RSS, or through an application. For SMS, currently two gateway numbers are available: one for the USA and a UK number for international use. While the Twitter service is free, posting and receiving updates via SMS may incur charges from the wireless carrier.

    Maybe that's why there's always a crowd wherever he shows up. :)

    Parent

    I think ... (none / 0) (#22)
    by chemoelectric on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 09:20:02 PM EST
    ... it is important to distinguish one's opinions from the outside world and from the opinions of others. Then we can be more appreciative and tolerant when others do not agree, and as a consequence we ourselves can be much happier and less anxious.

    I personally believe that George W. Bush should be actively taunted by Congress, button after button pushed, taking into account Bush's abnormal psychology, to precipitate his personal downfall and prove for once the importance of having a truly healthy President (at the expense of the risk that Bush-Cheney would do some drastic, unforeseen act), but I am able to distinguish this personal opinion from, let's say, the less provocative, more nuanced opinions expressed here at TalkLeft.

    Really, the role of a blog is only whatever the particular blogger thinks it ought to be. The problem is to reconcile oneself with this physical reality, and with 'reality' in general. I suggest taking some time to think about it (twenty years is a good start).

    I remember (none / 0) (#28)
    by Che's Lounge on Sun Apr 29, 2007 at 01:52:11 AM EST
    that Myspace really helped the immigration rallies last year. That was just one example of the potential.

    The "Power" of Blogs: What Atrios Said | 29 comments (29 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment