|
|
|
|
About Services Photo Gallery Before & After Contact Berry?s Landscaping Service Charlestown, NH 603-542-2871 800-974-2878 berrys1@localnet.com ____________________ |
Presidential campaigning covers a wide variety of mediums and audiences. As America has developed, and as technology has evolved, the means and strategies of campaigning have changed: from speech to newsprint to radio to television and now onto the Internet. Candidates, particularly those of the new millennium, have realized the convenience and wide-spread reach of the Internet and have begun taking advantage of the world wide web. The Internet is a very different medium than television and print because it is so interactive; it allows information to flow in multiple ways: candidate to voter, voter to candidate, and voter to voter. To explore the workings of online campaigning, I will look at the website of Democratic primary candidate John Kerry in relation to the previous research done on candidate websites, as well as in relation to other campaign techniques. I argue that Kerry has effectively used the Internet to disseminate information, create ethos, and reach his target audiences in a more productive and accurate way than is possible through other mediums and forms.
Internet use for political purposes has been growing and growing. Presidential candidates began experimenting with the Internet in 1994, however, the 2000 election was the first time it was used a considerable amount. The 2000 election was also when many Americans began using the Internet to research presidential candidates, get involved, and make donations. An American University poll found that 61% of Americans intended to use the Internet to get involved with the 2000 election, and considering that 30 million adult Americans spend 83.2 hours a year searching for political information online, that provides a lot of time and opportunities for presidential candidates to circulate their information online to a different audience (Faucheux 71). Research also has been done that shows that people who learn about campaigns on the Internet are typically much more knowledgeable than those using other information sources (Cable & Internet Loom Large). A possible explanation for this trend is that because Internet users are actively seeking out information, it is likely that they are already fairly educated and involved. While not everyone has access to the Internet, important groups of people are avid Internet users. Young people, ages 18-29, are the most difficult group of people to reach with political news, but they are the group that is quickly moving away from mainstream media for information. A Pew Research survey found that, in January 2004, 21% of 18-29-year-olds received the most campaign news from the Internet as opposed to only 6% in January 2000. These figures, as well as others, show that the Internet as a source of election news is becoming more and more popular among all genders, ethnic groups, ages, education levels, and political parties (Cable & Internet Loom Large). Since the Internet has become a larger part of the American political process, there has been debate over its effectiveness and effect on democracy. Because online campaigning is relatively new and there has been less research on it than other media sources, it is hard to track political success based on Internet campaigning. Dick Morris, author of Vote.com, proposes that the Internet has improved democracy because citizens are more informed and engaged in the political process. He also suggests that this active citizen participation works to weaken the power of the political elites in America. People can seek out the information they desire and become directly involved with other voters and the candidate. Citizens do not have to be involuntarily bombarded with campaign ads and information on television; they can instead go online and find only the information that they choose to pursue. Through this active participation, campaigning will be forced to change; campaign propaganda will contain more substance and information, rather than the repetition and attention-grabbing tools typically found in television advertisements. On the contrary, Cass Sunstein argues in his book, Republic.com, that the Internet is dangerous to democracy. He suggests that the Internet has not solved the problem of lack of participation by voters, rather the Internet has caused the decentralization and fragmentation of the political process. The media in general is becoming more personalized, allowing people to pick and choose the information to which they are exposed. While this personalization is convenient, it encourages separatism and possibly extremism. If one is able to completely ignore the news and thoughts of the majority, that individual could become isolated in his own world without any input or influence from others. While it is important the people have the freedom and choice to make their own decisions and form their own opinions, this freedom could become dangerous when exercised by extreme or irrational individuals. Sunstein suggests that in order to have a functioning system of free expression, people must be exposed to materials that they would not normally choose and citizens need to share a variety of common experiences. These common experiences are often acquired and shared through the media and are important because they provide the country with a shared source of information, making it easier to make decisions and address social problems. Sunstein?s theories would suggest that campaign websites are encouraging citizens to filter what they absorb by providing them with a specific source to find the information they want, without having to come across any opposing opinions. |