Perhaps it’s a sign that we’re outgrowing our britches, but a couple recent developments have shown that dealing with new media can make for a dangerous servant and – particularly – fearful master. (Indeed, under the person in question government may become even more forceful.)
In browsing the internet yesterday I came across this post on the Maryland site DMV Daily. written by Hassan Giordano, which alleged that Anthony Brown’s campaign denied his requests for comment on what they considered “slanted coverage” favorable to the campaign of opponent Doug Gansler. “(We) were rebuffed our attempt with the firm statement that ‘the Brown campaign doesn’t acknowledge or respond to bloggers’,” Giordano wrote.
Of course, that assertion came with the caveat “they would make an exception for the senior political writer of this publication,” for which Giordano wisely refused the bait.
So let’s compare this to the way new media is treated on the Republican side.
In compiling my dossier on candidates for future publication, I’ve come across candidate interviews for all three GOP hopefuls (as well as a possible fourth) and participated in a couple myself. While I use Jackie Wellfonder’s Raging Against the Rhetoric site as an example, the candidates have been open to other sites as well, particularly Red Maryland and their various radio shows. Certainly I’ve found the candidates willing to speak with me and answer questions; in fact Ron George woke me up this morning responding to a Facebook post (because my phone whistles with these notifications.)
I’ll grant that all candidates, regardless of party, have their list of bloggers and media people (in both traditional and new media) that they have found friendly or at least fair. Even back in the early days of this site there was the question of whether untrained journalists could be fair, and the situation continues to this day despite the fact new media is much more prominent and (almost) mainstream.
So this leads to my question of the day: if a candidate doesn’t want to answer legitimate tough questions from citizens, is he or she worthy of support? I would certainly place a black mark next to their name.
Why would they deign to answer questions from mere citizens who are also bloggers? You need a journalism degree from an acknowledged journalism school to question our masters, and then only if you work for an approved media source. Tsk, Tsk Michael.
Thanks for the link love Michael 🙂 Great article!
Excellent approach. Bloggers are merely voters voicing their opinion. On the Republican side of the blog-a-sphere candidates beware – Bloggers know how to research and they know how to dig way deep and they are not afraid to use it. Some people call that ugly, some call it jealousy, or submarine tactics from opposing candidates. As a former blogger during the 2008 Presidential election I know this – whatever their bent – it is their opinion and as long as they speak factually and about something they witnessed personally and offer an Opinion that is “their opinion” then to use a phrase I hate hearing and/or using “It Is What it Is.” An opinion. If a candidate can’t take opinionated constituents – then they are in the wrong business as it is their constituents they need to be listening to because they vote.