website statistics

Archive for June, 2007

Exclusive! Must Credit Taipei Times!

Published by William Beutler on June 28, 2007 in Al Gore, Democrats, International, Misquotations, Seriously, Urban Legends and White House '08. 0 Comments

As you read this, the following item from the Taipei Times is being forwarded from Washington outbox to Beltway inbox, setting hearts aflutter and livers atwitter (emphasis added):

Al Gore visit postponed Former US vice president Al Gore will not be able to make it to Taiwan this September to address the issue of global warming, Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Tien Chiu-chin [Chinese symbols WordPress doesn’t recognize] said yesterday. Tien, who invited Gore to visit Taiwan to promote awareness on global warming, told reporters yesterday that she received an e-mail from the Harry Walker Agency, which has the exclusive right to arrange Gore’s speeches, saying that Gore had canceled all his scheduled events in the next six months. The visit to Taiwan had been postponed to next year, she added. Tien said the reason for the cancelation was that Gore was considering a presidential bid.

This amazing news exclusive just happened to come from a Democratic Progressive Party Legislator in Taiwan? Riiiight. But I could see this Tien Chiu-chin misinterpreting a canceled event or exaggerating to make himself sound more important. Or maybe the uncredited reporter simply misheard it.

But before this misbegotten blurb becomes a full-fledged urban legend, let’s dig a little deeper, because there’s both less and more to the story.

For anybody just coming across this story tonight, see Raising Kaine, where Lowell Feld apparently fact-checked this against Gore’s office and obtained the following denial:

It is completely and utterly false. 1. He never accepted an event in Taiwan 2. We have loads of events on the schedule in the next six months I don’t know how to spell bubkus but there’s no credibility to this whatsoever.

Wow, so much for benefit of the doubt. Does the Taipei Times have a Stephen Glass problem? Probably not, actually — Harry Walker Agency is no Jukt Micronics — and in fact it does represent The Honorable Al Gore.

If my hunch is right, then the biggest loser of all — besides the latent Gore supporters currently propping up Edwards and Obama — would be none other than Tien Chiu-chin, whose credibility on the 2008 U.S. presidential race may never fully recover.

P.S. Last summer I took to saying “All politics is national.” This time, let’s try “All politics is global.”

Has the Ron Paul Machine Given Up on Digg?

Published by William Beutler on June 27, 2007 in Apple, Digg, Ron Paul and Social Networking. 3 Comments

Over the past couple weeks, I’ve noticed fewer and fewer Ron Paul-related stories on the front page of Digg. Maybe Kevin Rose had the monkeys tweak the algorithm a little more? Nah, more likely they were out drinking beers.

To test my anecdotal observation that the Paulite obsession with Digg had subsided, I searched the site for “Paul” — “Ron Paul” is barely possible; Digg’s search function has never recovered from an “upgrade” from earlier this year — going back one week’s time.

Sure enough, just two stories involving Ron Paul had been made “popular” — with enough Diggs and comments to warrant front-paging — in the past week. As of 11:00 p.m. EDT, at 12 stories per page, by my count that’s 204 stories mentioning “Paul” (though some, admittedly, were about Paul Reubens’ latest comeback) that went absolutely nowhere.

The second-most popular was a Wired feature story about “how a fringe politician took over the web,” with 833 diggs. As if to prove the point, the only other popular story was about the congressman’s “Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act,” with some 1749 diggs.

And that was last Thursday. Compared to the cornucopia of Ron Paul stories following his breakout second debate, this is nothing. Where has the movement gone?

Fear not: the Paulites haven’t gone away, they’ve only shifted their focus. But the Paul Machine never really loved Digg. You could say they never really dugg it. Their participation was always contingent on making a point, and whether it’s done Paul any good or not, trust me, it has been duly noted.

Meantime, I’ll be digging yet another story about the iPhone.

Note: Standard FDT disclosure; as usual, all observations are my own.

P.S. AOAMO? Ugh. That’ll never work.

Bring the Noises Off

Published by William Beutler on June 25, 2007 in Asymmetrical Media, Blogs vs. MSM, Democrats, Harry Reid, Iraq, Leftosphere vs. Rightosphere, Netroots and The Politico. 0 Comments

Headline at Center for American Progress’ Think Progress blog, June 21:

The ‘Fairness Doctrine’ Myth: Right Wing Falsely Claims Progressives Want To Resurrect Mandatory Balance

Sen. Dianne Feinstein on Fox News Sunday, June 24:

WALLACE: So would you revive the fairness doctrine? FEINSTEIN: Well, I’m looking at it, as a matter of fact, Chris, because I think there ought to be an opportunity to present the other side. And unfortunately, talk radio is overwhelmingly one way.

Zing!

When I saw that TP headline last week, I was more than a little dubious. After all, Dennis Kucinich is an outspoken fan of the dead regulation, as are certain quarters of the leftosphere. But little did I expect that this absurd claim would be proved “false” (a favorite word of TP and Media Matters) by such a prominent Democrat, not to mention one known primarily as a moderate.

It reminds me of a brief controversy from earlier this month, where The Politico’s John Bresnahan reported that Harry Reid had called outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Peter Pace “incompetent.” Bloggers from the call didn’t remember it, accused Bresnahan of making the whole thing up, and when it turned out he hadn’t, they weren’t especially contrite about it.

What’s interesting about all this is that in both cases, prominent representatives of the liberal netroots strenuously denied something that was not only true but arguably even helpful to their side, simply because a political adversary had stated it. In both cases they went overboard, creating more negative press for themselves than if they’d just left it alone.

Think Progress would certainly be right if they merely argued that conservative bloggers talk about the fairness doctrine coming back more than progressive bloggers, but arguing that “progressives” have no interest in using the doctrine as a weapon against right-wing talk radio just won’t fly. And as James Joyner asked at the time, what part of the Democrats’ Senate leader calling a Bush appointee “incompetent” did they not like?

The key difference is that Think Progress tried to maintain a position that most observers knew was not true, then dropped the subject. Bresnahan’s critics, on the other hand, defended a point most probably didn’t know for sure and then, unwilling to end on a retraction, changed the terms of debate instead.

I don’t have a full case to make about what it all means, but it is interesting that here in the span of two weeks we have two examples of the left’s own noise machine being unsure of exactly what sound to make.

Wanna Buy Some John McCain Domain Names?

Published by William Beutler on June 23, 2007 in Cybersquatting, Domains, Entertainment, John McCain, Online Campaigns, Republicans, SEO, White House '08 and Yahoo!. 2 Comments

Disclosure: I figure any time I write about the presidential campaign, especially on the GOP side, I should note that my employer is on the web team for Fred Thompson’s “testing the waters” committee — and that all observations here are my own.

Once Stephen Colbert signs off, and I’m not supposed to be asleep, I’ll usually click over to “The Tonight Show.” Sorry, Dave, but it’s mostly because Conan follows on NBC (the headline is supposed to be a reference to your line from Cabin Boy, though the wording is more like a Dan the Automator album).

Jay Leno’s “found on eBay” segment* is his most Conanesque skit, down to the big reveal — whether the ridiculous item on the block (tassel hats for house pets, a penny for $10, etc.) found a bidder. It’s a simple game, not dissimilar from Colbert adding comments to Amazon and iTunes, and anyone can play along at home. In fact, I’ve been playing all week.

On Tuesday, Mickey Kaus posted a brief (arguably immigration-related) item pointing toward the auction page (#170121848086) for twenty-six John McCain-related domain names:

Fire Sale? McCain domain names, on sale cheap (so far) on E-Bay. … [Tks. to reader M.W.] 7:22 P.M.

$150 for the lot, not an unreasonable estimate of worth and certainly lower than many premium domain names change hands for. And hey, there’s even “free” shipping (i.e. e-mailing some passwords)!

And yet, no bids. Here’s what the page looked like as of Thursday night:

26 John McCain Domains Up for Auction on eBay

During the week I checked in to see how the bidding was going — or wasn’t — down to the final seconds (I said I was watching closely) at “14:51:26 PDT” or 5:51 p.m. EDT:

Final seconds of 26 John McCain Domains Up for Auction on eBay

But would an eBay sniper emerge at the last moment, from the McCain camp or possibly a rival, to secure the lot with a single bid?

Bidding Ends on 26 John McCain Domains Up for Auction on eBay

Nope. Apparently cheap isn’t what it used to be.

Despite being linked by Kaus, the counter on the page only recorded ~740 views by the end of bidding — dozens of them being yours truly. According to eBay policy, the seller can post it again once more free of charge, so a second round may be attempted.

If so, it will probably be at a lower price point. But even $150 for 26 domains surely represents a net loss for the seller. (The price per domain works out to $5.75, but an individual buyer isn’t going to get initial registration that cheap.) It’s clear this domain hoarder was bailing on the investment: McCain’s moment seems to be over and the owner was trying to cut his losses. But his timing was off, not just his pricing.

And to be fair to the McCain campaign, they have no use for the domains. They already have JohnMcCain.com, for one thing. And the McCain Internet team is unlikely to borrow a slogan that makes no sense from someone who doesn’t put McCain’s interests first.

These domains are all parked courtesy of GoDaddy, so they aren’t causing the campaign any trouble. The seller doesn’t sound interested in launching an anti-McCain network, but even if he did, the domain alone wouldn’t make it a hit. The other three GOP frontrunners have each inspired anonymous oppositional blogs — shady, personality-free repositories of oppo material that go mostly unlinked and must be found via search. I haven’t seen one for McCain, but if one did materialize, it wouldn’t be among the campaign’s top concerns.

To don my Captain Obvious cap (temporarily removing my P.I. shades), having the perfect domain name contributes nothing to sustaining reader interest and confers no intrinsic value. Several of the most popular political blogs started on or still operate on a blogspot.com subdomain.

The usefulness or danger of an independent McCain-themed website is not determined by domain, but content. Type-in traffic is neat but miniscule. Search traffic is worth more, but won’t build an audience. Still the best path to large and sustained volumes of traffic is by being interesting and getting bigger websites to link it.

These domains may be SEO optimal, but they sure sound canned.

Bonus: Full list of 26 domains that nobody wants, with analysis, excerpts of the sales copy — and a resolution to that dangling asterisk — after the jump.

Continue reading ‘Wanna Buy Some John McCain Domain Names?’

I Got a Crush… on the Obama Girl

Published by William Beutler on June 13, 2007 in Barack Obama, Entertainment, Online Campaigns, Seriously, Startups, Web video and YouTube. 12 Comments

In an attempt to demonstrate that the argument made by Adam Bonin and echoed by Not Paul Begala in the previous post is not fait accompli, and to generously devote a post to NPB’s favored candidate rather than my own, and… oh, who am I kidding? I just have a crush on the self-described “Obama Girl,” whose modeling career is likely to get at least a small boost from this soon-to-go viral video (and so should Barely Political, whence it came):

It’s grade-A YouTube cheesecake for sure, but it also helps that the R&B parody lyrics effectively deploy its political references, and it certainly doesn’t hurt that they also have that so-bad-it’s-good quality:

You’re into border security Let’s break this border between you and me

But not everyone is smitten with Obama girl. From the comments:

This video is the nail on Obama’s coffin. The Republicans will have a field day with this trash. I hope someone has the good sense to yank it. It is disrespectful and insulting to a serious candidate. Bill Clinton is still stuck with his womanizing legacy.

Well… maybe if this came from Blue State Digital, and not a video-blogging version of Wonkette. As with many a YouTube comment section, the best comments, are often the ones that make the least sense:

I hope you Omabmagirl gets kicked out of temple. Also I want this spot off youtue. This spot slanders, ombama and is a way the other contenders might get a leg up. SHAME ON OMAMAGIRL. SHAME. You have gave you your intregty to make yourself fame for yourself.

That may or may not be the case, but still you have gave you your watching to make yourself comment for this video.

Exactly Why I Don’t Give My Name

Published by Not Paul Begala on June 13, 2007 in Barack Obama, Blog Fights, Brick-and-mortar consultants, Daily Kos and Online Campaigns. 1 Comment

Adam Bonin from Daily Kos has a nice little post up on what happens when your real name is associated with your own thoughts on the internet and you work for a presidential candidate:

There are lines one could plausibly draw between those who serve on a campaign’s staff exclusively and those outsiders who consult with that campaign and others simultaneously, or between speech and actions which are germane to one’s campaign responsibilities and those which are not. But if these lines do exist, they don’t seem to be obeyed these days — everything that anyone connected with a campaign (in any way) does, says or writes is being attributed back to the campaign, and campaigns will continue to be be called upon to disavow, and there may be calls for more people’s heads, etc.

This, my dear bloggers, is why you don’t see more of us pros blogging. We eventually get our bosses into trouble.

Mentioned in the article is Obama General Counsel Bob Bauer’s thoughts on pardoning Libby. I have to say, I was mad when I saw the title, but I like Bob’s logic. I’m all for laying this at Bush’s feet. You game?

McCain Adviser Making Life Difficult for McCain

Published by Not Paul Begala on June 7, 2007 in Barack Obama, Brick-and-mortar consultants, Hotline, Internecine Battles, John McCain and White House '08. 1 Comment

Man, is this ever an interesting month for campaign memos. First Mike Henry’s missive about Hillary skipping Iowa and now this little bombshell from McCain adviser Mark McKinnon (hat tip: Political Wire).

The casual reader might wonder why strategists put their names on documents that, if made public, could eventually hurt them or their client’s standing. Reasons vary, but ultimately internal memos should have something to do with the candidate winning.

Speculation abounds John Mercurio at Hotline is a leading proponent) that Henry’s memo was leaked on purpose to lower expectations, but let’s assume that it was in fact a legitimate memorandum. Henry might have been tasked with the responsibility in the campaign or he might have long been the main proponent and was the victim of an internal fight over strategy.

But McKinnon’s memo is something all together different. He basically gave notice that he won’t help his client win if he faces a certain opponent.

McKinnon wrote that while he opposed Obama’s policies, especially on Iraq, he felt that the Illinois senator–as an African-American politician–has a unique potential to change the country. Therefore, McKinnon argued, he wanted no part in any efforts to tear down Obama’s candidacy.

Say what you will about Henry’s memo damaging Clinton, at least it advocated for a way to win the Iowa Caucus. McKinnon is laying down a marker that says “I won’t help if you run against him.” That essentially tells donors that one of McCain’s top advisers isn’t 100% on board with his campaign. It also signals to independents (and reporters) that Obama is a guy who crosses party lines.

True or not, that’s not a strategist’s job. It’s to help your client win. Henry’s name to paper makes sense; McKinnon’s does not.

Blog P.I. 2008 Disclosure Form

Published by William Beutler on June 6, 2007 in Barack Obama, Democrats, Fred Thompson, Libertarians, Metapost, New Media Strategies, Online Campaigns, Republicans and White House '08. 25 Comments

Since the very beginning, Blog P.I. has put an emphasis on transparency in online politics, and now comes a point where we, the bloggers who keep this website (more or less) updated, think it best to apprise you of who in 2008 we are are supporting/working for.

William Beutler:

New Media Strategies, my employer and the folks who pay the bills around here, has been contracted to advise on Internet outreach for Fred Thompson’s nascent presidential campaign. I’ll be working under Howard Mortman (aka Blog P.I.’s Higgins) alongside Jon Henke (he’d be our Face Man, if Blog P.I. was named for The A-Team; see his concurrent announcement at QandO) and others from the crack Public Affairs staff here in scenic Rosslyn, Virginia. As everybody knows by now, Fred’s campaign is putting an emphasis on using new online tools in innovative ways, and we’re honored to take part in the effort. I generally keep my own politics off Blog P.I., but I’ll make an exception here: Thompson will have my vote, even though I live in the District, where the Republican party might as well not even have a presidential primary. For what it’s worth, I’d describe my politics as right-libertarian; I’m a pragmatist with a preference for limited-government solutions. And as Cato@Liberty wrote of Fred last week, “On federalism, there may be no better candidate.”” Not to mention his strong record of fiscal conservatism, something the GOP could stand to stand for again. He’s also been realistic about Iraq, that we are left with no “good options,” the war was a good one but done badly, and leaving it to the Qaedists is the worst option. He’s a solid conservative and a “happy warrior” with more ideas than he’s given credit for (so far) and is already running a whole new kind of campaign. If you’re at all inclined to cast a Republican ballot, Fred Thompson is definitely the best choice. Regular readers (I assume you exist) will notice that I have mentioned Thompson a few times over the past few weeks. For most of that period, I knew it was a possibility that we’d be working for the campaign — though we certainly weren’t being paid. Even so, I only mentioned him where the analysis would suffer for his absence. And for what it’s worth, I did write about him (favorably) before this even started. What does this mean for Blog P.I.? The site will remain “an ongoing series of investigations into, studies about, and commentaries on uses of the Internet in U.S. politics” where “the writers have their ideological blindspots like anyone else” but “aim for observation and reason, not assumption and opinion.” You may start noticing more overtly positive comments about Fred Thompson, but they’ll stay rooted in analysis — and I’ll post a disclaimer whenever his name comes up.

Not Paul Begala:

My choice for president and the only candidate that I want to work for is Barack Obama. It comes down to a simple formulation championed by his main opponent: change vs. more of the same. This country is in desperate need of change. I am not one of those Dems that says Hillary Clinton cannot win the presidency. If she is the general election nominee in fact, I’ll guarantee she will win. There is no more strategic and ruthless political family in the country and 2004 showed that the mechanics of campaigning can win elections regardless of issues and facts. As a serial campaigner, I can admire that. But I don’t want to win on a technicality. I want change, I want a movement, I want a governing philosophy and a majority that implements it. Obama’s mantra — that individual achievement is amplified when done through collective action is the antithesis to the “every man for himself” mantra of conservatism in the past 20 years. I want a nominee who will not only battle for people’s votes, but their hearts, minds and souls.

Olly Ruff:

I am not an employee of New Media Strategies, and I don’t aspire to work for the Obama campaign. In fact, as a non-resident alien, I don’t think I’m supposed to do things like endorse candidates for President. So, in what is either a principled ethical stand or simply a craven attempt to preserve my visa status, I pledge to carefully maintain my neutrality and objectivity throughout, and to eschew the cheap partisanship of my colleagues as I advocate for what I hope will become the moderate consensus position.

R.I.P.: Craig Thomas, R-WY

Published by Not Paul Begala on June 4, 2007 in National Politics, Obituary and Senate Control. 12 Comments

Senator Craig Thomas, R-WY, died earlier tonight.

For those deplorable calculators like myself who know that Wyoming governor Dave Freudenthal is a Democrat, let’s not get ahead of ourselves: the seat won’t be changing hands.

Title 22:

(i) If a vacancy occurs in the office of United States senator or in any state office other than the office of justice of the supreme court and the office of district court judge, the governor shall immediately notify in writing the chairman of the state central committee of the political party which the last incumbent represented at the time of his election under W.S. 22-6-120(a)(vii), or at the time of his appointment if not elected to office. The chairman shall call a meeting of the state central committee to be held not later than fifteen (15) days after he receives notice of the vacancy. At the meeting the state central committee shall select and transmit to the governor the names of three (3) persons qualified to fill the vacancy. Within five (5) days after receiving these three (3) names, the governor shall fill the vacancy by temporary appointment of one (1) of the three (3) to hold the office. If the incumbent who has vacated office did not represent a political party at the time of his election, or at the time of his appointment if not elected to office, the governor shall notify in writing the chairman of all state central committees of parties registered with the secretary of state. The state central committees shall submit to the governor, within fifteen (15) days after notice of the vacancy, the name of one (1) person qualified to fill the vacancy. The governor shall also cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the state notice of the vacancy in office. Qualified persons who do not belong to a party may, within fifteen (15) days after publication of the vacancy in office, submit a petition signed by one hundred (100) registered voters, seeking consideration for appointment to the office. Within five (5) days after receiving the names of qualified persons, the governor shall fill the vacancy by temporary appointment to the office, from the names submitted or from those petitioning for appointment;

Personal memory: Senator Thomas was one of those really approachable people who always smiled when he met young folks like myself on the Hill. I remember talking with him about a 5K or something that he was participating in that week. That guy loved to run.

I Am My Blogger’s Keeper

Published by William Beutler on June 4, 2007 in Edit Wars, Netroots, Tough Crowd, Virginia Politics and Wikipedia. 2 Comments

At MyDD’s Breaking Blue miniblog, contributor Texas Nate is alarmed that the Wikipedia entry for the late Steve Gilliard had been nominated for deletion.

I didn’t agree with Gilliard much, and I don’t know Texas Nate at all, but I agree this development is worrisome. As I pointed out last week, it’s not the first time entries for bloggers have been so nominated — and as that effort was beaten back then, so should it be now.

As a Wikipedian in good standing, I added my two cents, reproduced below:

Argument to keep Steve Gilliard's entry at Wikipedia

The article certainly needs work — indeed, it was only begun upon the announcement of his passing on Sunday — but more to accord with Wikipedia style polices rather than meet NPOV guidelines.

When the big book on the liberal netroots is written, Gilliard will be more than a footnote. Wikipedia has the ability to record that now, and I believe it should.

Update: Good news — after a string of “keeps,” the silliness is over:

Easy call here. The only arguments for deletion are thinly veiled personal attacks. The New York Times only does obits if you are notable. Also, the claim that one must be notable enough to be in a paper encyclopedia is patently absurd. Agreed, notability should be considered, but in Mr. Gilliard’s case there is absolutely no question about that.
« Older Entries