Bloggy Good Copy
Monday, November 20, 2006 :::
Owing to a backlog of real life projects, I wasn't able to write up anything regarding Jeff Schapiro's Sunday column which, wonder of wonders, took a look at Virginia's political blogs.
The main focus was Chad's departure from the daily scene, coupled with Lowell's crankiness and a rare slip-up from Jim (the coverage of which Jim expounds upon here, with an assist from Brian Kirwin).
But the one nugget Jeff unearths that fits into the wider discussion regarding the role of blogs in campaigns here at Q and O and here and Shaun's place is that blogs are a tail that sometimes wag the media dog.
Sometimes they do -- and in the late Senate contest, those short, scruffy tails wagged the daylights out of the media pooch. Whether it was the macaca frenzy, the deer head in the mailbox (yes, they were taking that one seriously) the Jewish Question, Jim Webb's fiction and, if there had only been enough time, the sealed Allen divorce papers, the sticky bits that once fed whisper campaigns were splashed across the blogs and found there way into the press.
Considering the content, it looks like the dog has fleas. Or is that mange?
Looking ahead, there can be little doubt that blogs will continue to have at least some degree of influence on what appears in the press, particularly if campaigns continue to feed bloggers material that pressies would not otherwise touch. From some of the campaign emails I saw during the election, there's a reason why the press wouldn't go near the stuff.
It was downright goofy.
Or worse, it was just B.S. And I cringed every time I saw the stuff in the emails posted on individual sites (not for attribution, of course).
So it really wasn't the blogs that were influencing the press so much as it was the campaigns, using the blogs, that were doing what they have always done.
::: posted by Norman Leahy at 11/20/2006