website statistics

Archive for the 'Blogging Officials' Category

Where The Campaign Blog Ends

A few days ago we counted up the dollars spent by federal campaigns and earned by their respective bloggers/new media consultants — so for this post, following the final concession/victory speeches of the campaign (George Allen and Jim Webb respectively), I thought it would be interesting to run through snapshots of the campaign blogs covered then. The results are telling.

First up, Allen’s late-starting and now late official blog, Allen HQ, written by Jon Henke. Though Allen conceded yesterday afternoon, his campaign blog is still under the impression that V must be GOT:

George Allen Campaign Blog

Joe Lieberman’s victory was apparent on election night itself, and his campaign blog reflected the fact:

Joe Lieberman Campaign Blog A

But when you click through…

Joe Lieberman Campaign Blog B

Huh? That’s it? (Actually, this isn’t a big surprise — Olly pointed out several weeks ago that Lieberman’s blog was saddled with that line imploring one to “READ THE FULL BLOG POST” regardless of whether there was more to read or not (Note: These screen shots were taken last evening; the site is now kaput)).

And how about his challenger, the August primary victor, Ned Lamont?

Ned Lamont Campaign Blog

It would seem Lamont’s contract with blog consultant Tim Tagaris ran longer than Allen’s with Jon Henke.

Bob Casey was a big winner — maybe the first-declared Democratic pickup, and his bloggers have kept it up since then, expanding its focus to congratulate other candidates:

Bob Casey Campaign Blog

Too bad the layout is a snore.

Bill Frist may or may not still be running for president, but his blog appears to be still active:

Bill Frist Official Blog

Too bad nothing on the blog he sponsors is necessarily reflective of Frist’s actual opinions. [Whoops. Definitely our bad. See the comments. So, uh, too bad there's no actual blog on the main page?]

James Webb’s campaign blog looks as if it might continue on:

James Webb Campaign Blog

But like Casey’s blog, and Webb and Casey both, it’s a tad on the boring side.

Same goes for newly elected Montana Sen. Jon Tester, Webb’s sort-of-lookalike:

Jon Tester Campaign Blog

Larry Grant did not win his campaign to represent Idaho’s first district:

Larry Grant Campaign Blog

Grant’s campaign was actually more successful than one might expect, winning 45% in very conservative ID 01. Add points for hosting the official campaign blog on Typepad — very bloggy. Subtract points for pretending the official campaign blog was the work of the “grassroots” — not very bloggy.

Mike Bouchard failed to unseat Sen. Debbie Stabenow in Michigan, but he did succeed in posting one final message to his official blog:

Mike Bouchard Campaign Blog

So did outgoing Sen. Rick Santorum:

Rick Santorum Campaign Blog

That underlined text? Not links, just emphasis — a staple of this particular campaign site, and no others on this list. Makes you wonder if the blog was written by the same people responsible for his fundraising letters.

Rep. Mark Kennedy lost his Senate bid to Senator-elect Amy Klobuchar, which is why the headline on his latest post will make you do a double-take:

Mark Kennedy Campaign Blog

Note the date and content; Kennedy’s is one of several campaign blogs that seem to have been abandoned prior to the election. But by more than a month? Pathetic.

Another pre-election abandonment, perhaps more surprisingly, was successful Senator-reelect Bob Menendez:

Bob Menendez Campaign Blog

Before Halloween? Not quite pathetic; merely lame.

Ditto re-elected Rep. Jan Schakowsky:

Jan Schakowsky Campaign Blog

Though SchaBLOGsky is a pretty good title, almost as cheesily amusing as Jim Webb’s “WebbLog.”

At least Ohio Gov-elect Ted Strickland managed to keep his staffers blogging into November:

Ted Strickland Campaign Blog

Nice use of Frappr and LiveJournal, too.

And Debbie Stabenow, like Allen, managed to get through to election day — but no further:

Debbie Stabenow Campaign Blog

I submit that failure to post a thank-you note after the campaign’s conclusion is a passive statement of a lack of commitment to engaging the political blogosphere. Maybe most people will never notice, but it can’t leave a good impression on those who do.

Worse, though, is the statement made by the current state of the blog promoting failed House candidate Bill Winter in Colorado:

Bill Winter Campaign Blog

404? Well, at least it’s fitting.

The Trouble With Harry

Don’t look now — wait, actually you really should — but Harry Reid’s visit to Daily Kos is going anything but swimmingly, even if it does happen to be raining in the District today. Reid’s posting, at the time of this writing the site’s top-ranked diary, all begins innocuously enough, with the Senate Majority Leader kissing the blogosphere’s ring:

YearlyKos seems so long ago doesn’t it?

Yet it was only five months ago when I asked you for three things:

1.    Call Republicans and their friends in the media on their crass and hypocritical political games
2.    Make it clear where Democrats stand
3.    Never give up

Thank you for doing all of this and more. Because of you, no attack went unanswered. Because of you no lie avoided the truth. Because of you no distortion became a distraction to Democrats.

If the sheer obsequiousness of the post doesn’t make you ill, consider this YouTube video, shot exclusively for the diary:

If there’s anything noteworthy about the content of Reid’s post, it’s that Daily Kos diarists are not allowed to post YouTube videos, and Kos has in the past made a point of not giving politicians special treatment, yet here Reid has somehow obtained permission to post this video in his first-ever diary at Daily Kos. Hmm.

But the fun doesn’t really start until you get into the comments. You don’t have to get very far, either, before you see:

Harry Reid challenged over his non-support of Ned Lamont at Daily Kos

Tough crowd. To be fair, a good number of Kossacks — perhaps even a majority — responded favorably, many even cheered him on (perhaps opening themselves to accusations of obsequiescence) or defended Reid against his detractors. And boy, does he have detractors:

The cult of personality around Harry “Keeping the Powder Dry in Perpetuity” Reid is truly mystifying. No one has betrayed Democratic principles more, yet Kossacks act like he’s Paul Fucking Wellstone.

Not to mention:

And what, Harry, did you do for Dems in CT?

Nothing.  Nada.  Zip.

Remember that the next time to put your hand out for anything from CT Dems.

Hope you and Joe and Bill and Hill and Chuck and Barack and Harold enjoy each other’s company.  Yuck!

And:

we could have unified around a REAL Democrat…NED LAMONT but i think you and others in DC didnt have enough faith is us to deliver the majority

for me THAT is one of the real shames of this election…..that we worked so damn hard to take back control of congress and the people who will benefit from our hard work didnt trust us enough to back our choices for candidates…or our belief in Howard Deans 50 state strategy.

And:

If Reid had done what he had to do he would have brought the full weight of the DC Dem establishment to support the rightful Dem nominee.  Not supporting Lamont is a failed strategy. I don’t give a rats ass about maintaining a relationship with Lieberman because even if nominally he sticks with the Dems, he is still going to stick it TO the Dems when it comes to his positions and votes.

Bullshit that supporting Lamont would not have made a huge impact on Lamont’s chances for today.

That said, Lamont WILL win today.

This, from the “reality-based community”? Credit goes to certain Kossacks, like Big Tent Democrat and cedubose, for trying to keep the peace. And the best line goes to lotlizard:

Ladies, please! Don’t squeeze the Chairman.

But by then, the thread had already been wrecked. And here’s the thing: Joe Lieberman is going to win today, and he’s going to be more powerful than ever before. Lamont will be gone, but Reid will still be the Democrats’ leader. And if this is how his ostensible allies will receive him, why bother?

This isn’t politics. In fact, you could say it’s the opposite: It’s impolitic, and it disregards the fact that, when they’re not out making nice to their various constituencies, politicians tend to hold grudges — more so than most people, even.

At this rate, watching the netroots come to terms with the reality of their team handling the responsibilities of political power promises to provide a great deal of inexpensive entertainment.

Nice Work If You Can Get It: A Closer Look at Campaign Blogger Remunerations

[Note: This post has been updated; for details, see the end of this post. Thanks to the campaign bloggers who wrote in with updates and corrections.]

Last week Danny Glover, my former colleague at the National Journal Group, went through the FEC reports of candidates for federal office to report just how much their campaigns were paying the bloggers and new media coordinators in their employ.

It was a fascinating and useful article, though it could have used a sidebar or two breaking out the details. Who is the best-paid campaign blogger? Which campaign spent the most? What would these bloggers make if prorated to a yearly salary?

So with the help of Olly Ruff, my capable and mathematically-inclined co-blogger, we’ve done just that. And then some. Before we get started, some disclaimers are in order:

By “prorated salary,” we mean that monthly (approximate) salaries have been prorated to annual salaries; these figures are not meant to indicate the blogger actually made or will make this amount. Jon Henke of QandO, for example, has only been with the Allen campaign for a few months. Likewise, “lump sumps” refer to larger payments made at irregular times. They could be one-off or recurring. These figures are not meant to indicate an annual rate. Unless otherwise noted, numbers are from 2006.

It is also worth remembering that some of these advisers are bloggers, some are more senior advisers, and some are both. Additionally, some advisers may keep other jobs — Daou still does The Daou Report for Salon, but no longer writes commentary there; David All is merely on loan from a similar position with Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA).

Like a poll, this is a snapshot and only a snapshot. We didn’t have the time or resources to go back and look at how long each blogger had actually worked for a given candidate, so the prorated numbers should be taken with a dash of Morton’s. All numbers come from Glover’s piece, and if we haven’t made it clear already, some are approximate.

All right, that should do. Here’s how we’ve broken it down:

After the charts, we’ll share a few notes and observations. Just as you can click on the links above to take you to a specific chart, you can also click here to read those. Let’s go:

    a. By candidate, prorated salary paid (Democrats)

    Candidate Campaign Blogger/Adviser Payment/Expenditure
    Sen. Hillary Clinton NY SEN incumbent Jesse Berney; Peter Daou1 $15,600; $60,000
    (by way of
    FOH/HILLPAC)
    Sen. Debbie Stabenow MI SEN incumbent Laura Packard,
    Aaron Hofman
    $44,400; $26,400
    Rep. Jan Schakowsky IL 09 incumbent Alex Armour $38,400
    Treas. Bob Casey PA SEN Rick Santorum Jon Jones $33,600
    State Sen. Jon Tester MT SEN Conrad Burns Andrew Tweeten $31,200
    Sen. Robert Menendez NJ SEN incumbent Scott Shields $34,860 (up from
    starting $30,744)
    Rep. Ted Strickland OH GOV open Jesse Taylor $24,600
    Atty Larry Grant ID 01 open Julie Fanselow $15,600
    Atty Bill Winter CO 06 Tom Tancredo Aaron Silverstein $10,200

Return to top

    b. By candidate, prorated salary paid (Republicans)

    Candidate Campaign Blogger/Adviser Payment/Expenditure
    Sen. Rick Santorum PA SEN incumbent Mindy Finn; Luke Bernstein $52,800; $51,600
    Rep. Mark Kennedy MN SEN open Michael Brodkorb $55,200
    Sen. George Allen VA SEN incumbent Jon Henke2 $27,600
    Sen. Bill Frist WH’08 (prospective) Stephen Smith $22,400 (by way of VOLPAC)

Return to top

    c. By candidate, prorated salary paid (combined)

    Candidate Campaign Blogger/Adviser Payment/Expenditure
    Sen. Rick Santorum
    PA SEN incumbent Mindy Finn; Luke Bernstein $52,800; $51,600
    Sen. Hillary Clinton NY SEN incumbent Jesse Berney; Peter Daou $15,600; $60,000
    (by way of
    FOH/HILLPAC)
    Sen. Debbie Stabenow MI SEN incumbent Laura Packard,
    Aaron Hofman
    $44,400; $26,400
    Rep. Mark Kennedy MN SEN open Michael Brodkorb $55,200
    Rep. Jan Schakowsky IL 09 incumbent Alex Armour $38,400
    Sen. Robert Menendez NJ SEN incumbent Scott Shields $34,860 (up from
    starting $30,744)
    Treas. Bob Casey PA SEN Rick Santorum Jon Jones $33,600
    State Sen. Jon Tester MT SEN Conrad Burns Andrew Tweeten $31,200
    Sen. George Allen VA SEN incumbent Jon Henke $27,600
    Rep. Ted Strickland OH GOV open Jesse Taylor $24,600
    Sen. Bill Frist WH’08 prospective Stephen Smith $22,400 (by way of VOLPAC)
    Atty Larry Grant ID 01 open Julie Fanselow $15,600
    Atty Bill Winter CO 06 Tom Tancredo Aaron Silverstein $10,200

Return to top

    d. By candidate, lump sum (Democrats)

    Candidate Campaign Blogger/Adviser Payment/Expenditure
    Rep. Sherrod Brown OH SEN Mike DeWine Jerome Armstrong;
    Tim Tagaris
    $100,000 (2005-2006);
    $17,000 (2005)
    Ex-Navy Sec. James Webb VA SEN George Allen Abraham (Josh) Chernila;
    Lowell Feld
    $7,700; $3,600
    Sen. Jon Corzine NJ GOV ‘05 won Jerome Armstrong;
    Matt Stoller
    $39,000; $31,000
    Ex-Gov. Mark Warner WH’08 withdrawn Jerome Armstrong $65,000
    Sen. Joe Lieberman CT SEN incumbent Dan Gerstein $21,000 (Sept 2006)
    Cable exec Ned Lamont CT SEN Joe Lieberman Tim Tagaris $21,000 (Jul-Sept 2006)

Return to top

    e. By candidate, lump sum (Republicans)

    Candidate Campaign Blogger/Adviser Payment/Expenditure
    Sen. John McCain WH’08 prospective Patrick Hynes $31,500
    Sheriff Mike Bouchard MI SEN
    Debbie Stabenow
    David All $6,468 (Sept 2006)

Return to top

    f. By candidate, lump sum (combined)

    Candidate Campaign Blogger/Adviser Payment/Expenditure
    Rep. Sherrod Brown OH SEN Mike DeWine Jerome Armstrong;
    Tim Tagaris
    $100,000 (2005-2006);
    $17,000 (2005)
    Ex-Navy Sec. James Webb VA SEN George Allen Abraham (Josh) Chernila;
    Lowell Feld
    $77,00; $3,600
    Sen. Jon Corzine NJ GOV ‘05 won Jerome Armstrong;
    Matt Stoller
    $39,000; $31,000
    Ex-Gov. Mark Warner WH’08 withdrawn Jerome Armstrong $65,000
    Sen. John McCain WH’08 prospective Patrick Hynes $31,500
    Sen. Joe Lieberman CT SEN incumbent Dan Gerstein $21,000 (Sept 2006)
    Cable exec Ned Lamont CT SEN Joe Lieberman Tim Tagaris $21,000 (Jul-Sept 2006)
    Sheriff Mike Bouchard MI SEN
    Debbie Stabenow
    David All $6,468 (Sept 2006)

Return to top

    g. By blogger/adviser, prorated salary (Democrats)

    Blogger/Adviser Payment/Expenditure Candidate Campaign
    Peter Daou $60,000
    (by way of
    FOH/HILLPAC)
    Sen. Hillary Clinton NY SEN incumbent
    Laura Packard $44,400 Sen. Debbie Stabenow MI SEN incumbent
    Alex Armour $38,400 Rep. Jan Schakowsky IL 09 incumbent
    Scott Shields $34,860 (up from starting
    $30,744)
    Sen. Robert Menendez incumbent
    Jon Jones $33,600 Treas. Bob Casey PA SEN Rick Santorum
    Andrew Tweeten $31,200 State Sen. Jon Tester MT SEN Conrad Burns
    Aaron Hofman $26,400 Sen. Debbie Stabenow MI SEN incumbent
    Jesse Taylor $24,600 Rep. Ted Strickland OH GOV open
    Jesse Berney $15,600 (by way of HILLPAC) Sen. Hillary Clinton NY SEN incumbent
    Julie Fanselow $15,600 Atty Larry Grant ID 01 open
    Aaron Silverstein $10,200 Atty Bill Winter CO 06 Tom Tancredo

Return to top

    h. By blogger/adviser, prorated salary (Republicans)

    Blogger/Adviser Payment/Expenditure Candidate Campaign
    Michael Brodkorb $55,200 Rep. Mark Kennedy MN SEN open
    Mindy Finn $52,800 Sen. Rick Santorum PA SEN incumbent
    Luke Bernstein $51,600 Sen. Rick Santorum PA SEN incumbent
    Jon Henke $27,600 Sen. George Allen VA SEN incumbent
    Stephen Smith $22,400 (by way of VOLPAC) Sen. Bill Frist WH’08 prospective

Return to top

    i. By blogger/adviser, prorated salary (combined)

    Blogger/Adviser Payment/Expenditure Candidate Campaign
    Peter Daou $60,000
    (by way of
    FOH/HILLPAC)
    Sen. Hillary Clinton NY SEN incumbent
    Michael Brodkorb $55,200 Rep. Mark Kennedy MN SEN open
    Mindy Finn $52,800 Sen. Rick Santorum PA SEN incumbent
    Luke Bernstein $51,600 Sen. Rick Santorum PA SEN incumbent
    Laura Packard $44,400 Sen. Debbie Stabenow MI SEN incumbent
    Alex Armour $38,400 Rep. Jan Schakowsky IL 09 incumbent
    Jon Jones $33,600 Treas. Bob Casey PA SEN Rick Santorum
    Andrew Tweeten $31,200 State Sen. Jon Tester MT SEN Conrad Burns
    Aaron Hofman $26,400 Sen. Debbie Stabenow MI SEN incumbent
    Scott Shields $34,860 (up from starting
    $30,744)
    Sen. Robert Menendez NJ SEN incumbent
    Jon Henke $27,600 Sen. George Allen VA SEN incumbent
    Jesse Taylor $24,600 Rep. Ted Strickland OH GOV (open)
    Stephen Smith $22,400 (by way of VOLPAC) Sen. Bill Frist WH’08 prospective
    Jesse Berney $15,600 (by way of HILLPAC) Sen. Hillary Clinton NY SEN incumbent
    Julie Fanselow $15,600 Atty Larry Grant ID 01 open
    Aaron Silverstein $10,200 Atty Bill Winter CO 06 Tom Tancredo

Return to top

    j. By blogger/adviser, lump sum (Democrats)

    Blogger/Adviser Payment/Expenditure Candidate Campaign
    Jerome Armstrong $204,000 Jon Corzine;
    Sherrod Brown;
    Mark Warner
    NJ GOV ‘05 (won);
    OH SEN Mike DeWine;
    WH’08 (withdrawn)
    Abraham (Josh) Chernila $7,700 James Webb VA SEN George Allen
    Tim Tagaris $38,000 (2005-2006) Sherrod Brown;
    Ned Lamont
    OH SEN Mike DeWine;
    CT SEN Joe Lieberman
    Matt Stoller $31,000 Jon Corzine NJ GOV ‘05 open
    Dan Gerstein $21,000 (Sept 2006) Sen. Joe Lieberman CT SEN incumbent
    Lowell Feld $3,600 James Webb VA SEN George Allen

Return to top

    k. By blogger/adviser, lump sum (Republicans)

    Blogger/Adviser Payment/Expenditure Candidate Campaign
    Patrick Hynes $31,500 Sen. John McCain WH’08 prospective
    David All $6,468 (Sept 2006) Mike Bouchard MI SEN
    Debbie Stabenow

Return to top

    l. By blogger/adviser, lump sum (combined)

    Blogger/Adviser Payment/Expenditure Candidate Campaign
    Jerome Armstrong $204,000 Sen. Jon Corzine;
    Rep. Sherrod Brown;
    Ex-Gov. Mark Warner
    NJ GOV ‘05 won;
    OH SEN Mike DeWine;
    WH’08 withdrawn
    Abraham (Josh) Chernila $7,700 Ex-Navy Sec. James Webb VA SEN George Allen
    Tim Tagaris $38,000 (2005-2006) Rep. Sherrod Brown; Cable exec Ned Lamont OH SEN Mike DeWine; CT SEN Joe Lieberman
    Patrick Hynes $31,500 Sen. John McCain WH’08 prospective
    Matt Stoller $31,000 Sen. Jon Corzine (won) NJ GOV ‘05 open
    Dan Gerstein $21,000 (Sept 2006) Sen. Joe Lieberman CT SEN incumbent
    David All $6,468 (Sept 2006) Sheriff Mike Bouchard MI SEN
    Debbie Stabenow
    Lowell Feld $3,600 Ex-Navy Sec. James Webb VA SEN George Allen

Return to top

And now, as promised, some additional thoughts:

  • So, which blogs are they running, anyway? Here’s the list of blogs sponsored by the aforementioned campaigns.
  • Which candidates have hired new media consultants but do not have blogs? They are none other than McCain and Clinton, whose 2008 presidential campaigns have yet to get underway (assuming they both run, which in the latter case is no certainty). Among the campaigns concluded, the only one still active is Mark Warner’s Forward Together Blog; currently it’s giving updates on Warner’s travels campaigning for Jim Webb.
  • Corzine Connection and Sherrod Brown’s Grow Ohio, however, are more than defunct — not only are they no longer online, they cannot be found at the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine. nor in Google’s cache.

    Additionally, Corzine was elected to New Jersey’s governorship a year ago, put away the blog with his campaign site then, and for what it’s worth, has battled back from low approval ratings without a presence in the blogosphere. Yet Brown shut down his site not long after announcing for Senate; he understandably shied away from the ’sphere, as it seemed to cause him nothing but headaches.

  • Clearly, and none too surprisingly, Democratic candidates are hiring more bloggers and new media advisers than Republicans. (They are also more enthusiastic about paying in lump sums.) It seems to me that if your party is on the outs, you’re more likely to embrace new methods of reaching people than if you’re already in power and relatively complacent. The exception is if you’re an outsider in your own party (read: McCain), or behind in your own race. Santorum has been spending like there’s no tomorrow (about $11,000/month on bloggers alone) — and in his case, there probably isn’t.

    The only question is why more Republicans didn’t start blogs this time. Well, Allen didn’t until he had no choice, and more than a few vulnerable Republicans this time didn’t find themselves in real trouble until late (Chris Shays), can’t really face up to the scrutiny (Don Sherwood) or both (Curt Weldon).

    Wait for 2008.

  • And it isn’t just Santorum who’s putting down a lot of money. Republicans may have hired fewer bloggers than have Democrats, but on the whole they’re paying them more. This may have something to do with fundraising, and especially the fact that all bloggers listed here are incumbents — even though Rep. Kennedy is running for the Senate, he of course has been in Washington for some time already. But if you’re going to be a Democrat heading off to work for a member of your party, it’s highly advisable that you write for MyDD first.
  • There is sure to be a fallow period after the election; between Nov. 8 and sometime next year, chances are there will be very few candidates employing bloggers — because the only “candidates” will be those mulling a run at the White House.

    But a year from now, the numbers will surely return to this level, and in 2008 it’s highly probable many more bloggers and new media this-or-thats will be working for various incumbents and challengers. Blogging may be well-entrenched in the mediasphere, but politicians have been slower in recognizing their utility.

  • And because we are never entirely above cheap shots here at Blog P.I. there is one additional moral to be divined from these numbers: Astrology works.

What do you think? Any angles we’ve missed? Let us know in the comments.

P.S. I think we knew this would happen:

    1. The most significant update concerns Peter Daou. As Danny Glover corrects at Beltway Blogroll today, Daou draws a $3,750 monthly check from Friends of Hillary in addition to $1,250 from HILLPAC. This moves Hillary Clinton into first place as among Democrats in spending (second overall only to Santorum), and Daou to number one among consultants in terms of compensation.

    Another note: This is in addition to Daou’s consulting for other clients including Media Matters and the AARP, but since we’re just talking about electoral campaigns, we’ll leave them aside. As noted above, these numbers are not meant to be taken as the individual’s total salary.

    2. I’ve added a note to Henke’s name (which Olly had put in but I took out) noting that this number here is almost certainly off. Of course, we might’ve added this to virtually all of the numbers, but Henke being the last-hired among the goup here, there was even less information to go on. Just FYI.

    3. I also goofed and listed SantorumBlog as the official campaign blog. The actual official blog has now replaced it in the list above.

More to come as necessary.

Hot Or Not: From Beltway Insiders To Blogosphere Outsiders

HotSoup LogoWhat to make of HotSoup, the non-partisan, non-ideological, mostly non-everything political discussion/debate site just out from Beltway insiders Carter Eskew, Matthew Dowd, Joe Lockhart and Mark McKinnon plus media types Ron Fournier and Allie Savarino (and top-heavy with yet more executive co-founders)? It’s difficult to be polite; I won’t always be.

Toward the end of its debut week, there isn’t much talk at the site. Nor are too many non-”Hardball” news outlets talking about it. Among those who have, appraisals tend toward the grim.

One is GOP Internet strategist Mike Turk, who once worked on a similar project called Grassroots.com. Upon HotSoup’s announcement this summer, Turk warned of the pitfalls at Personal Democracy Forum. But as he wrote this week at his blog, Kung Fu Quip, the problems were bigger than he’d thought:

Perhaps the most vexing thing about the site is the apparent lack of any correlation between the name and the content. Their content is divided into “Issue Loops” but that bears little relationship to Hot Soup. They might as well have called the site Eggplant.com.

Honestly, I don’t get it. I have a lot of respect for the people involved in this, but it may be the most poorly conceived idea since Kevin Federline.

Earlier in the week, Paul NcManara of NetworkWorld.com had pled for sanity:

This group cannot be operating under the illusion that all they have to do is provide a platform and the Lincoln-Douglas debates will break out. They must know there’s a good chance that not every Hotsouper will come willing to bridge divides, celebrate differences and gain enlightenment.

Yes, they can be, but to their credit, they seem to: This week Fournier or somebody posted a message in the non-blog front-page meta window, “Hot Corner,” admitting that things need to be retooled:

We knew HOTSOUP.com would go online as a figment of its future potential, and that the finishing touches would come from you. That’s exactly what’s happening …. By scores, we’ve received your comments and criticism through feedback@hotsoup.com. Even better, many of you felt empowered enough to use the site itself to post your critiques in Issue Loops …. This take-matters-in-your-own-hands approach is confirmation of the core value behind HOTSOUP: It’s about you …. That’s why we’re hard at work at this work-in-progress … Among the problems we’ve fixed or are fixing: 1) Speed and performance of video …. 2) Content cutoffs in Loops …. 3) Discussion board display order …. 4) Loops ranking on homepage …. Thank you for your suggestions, and keep them coming. Only you can make the Soup the hottest site around.

It’s since been pulled (in favor of a blithering anecdote about their MSNBC appearance and something about the ONE campaign) — whisked away to who knows where. As I said, it’s not a blog. It’s just a square called “Hot Corner.” Once an announcement is pulled, it disappears into the aether. Please, people. Get a blog.

But there are many more problems than (I think it’s) Fournier addresses. For one, the registration process asks for too much information, and gets unpleasant when you don’t tell it where you live, what’s your job title, how you vote and where your ancestors came from:

HotSoup registration information required

Did I mention the site looks awful? The color scheme is unappetizing, its navigation tools are scattered, no RSS feeds are provided, and they have pictures on the front page where the content should be (c.f. Digg). The actual content (aside from “Hot Corner,” which apparently is not considered as such) is relegated to a narrow column just off-center:

HotSoup Front Page

Check the source code, and you’ll see the site is almost entirely rendered in Flash. Or, turn off your Javascript and watch the site disappear. There’s scarcely an indexable ASCII keyword on the page, so it isn’t likely to rank well in Google searches. This site should be rebuilt from the ground up. Most of the web-oriented co-founders arrive from a social networking site called SisterWoman.com that exhibits none of these amateurish flaws, which makes this venture’s absurd failure to launch all the more perplexing.

One of its selling points appears to be bringing famous-for-DC types to the blogosphere. But The Huffington Post — which was proclaimed to be the failure that HotSoup actually is — already did. (Still, I can’t let it go without noting that Arianna promised Gwyneth Paltrow, yet has so far only delivered Lynne M. Paltrow.)

HotSoup is closer to George Clooney’s “post” at HuffPo than a real meeting of the minds: It’s painfully obvious that most celebrity HotSoupers didn’t sign up themselves, their assistants or HotSoup did. Will we ever see them jump into the fray? How about you, Mary Matalin? Donna Brazile? (Seriously, John Ashcroft?) Hey, maybe even at some point Mark McKinnon and Allie Savarino will weigh in — you know, two founders of the site.

·      ·      ·

For the next part of my act, let’s roll the blooper reel. First, at the top of the main page you can find a link titled “Issue Loops,” and if you click on it even tonight, you will see:

HotSoup, No Issue Loops

Assuming there were threads to be found here, this is what you would want on the front page. This isn’t amateur hour; this is the afternoon before.

And this one is less a blooper, if anything more of a practical joke:

HotSoup marijuana question

The second blooper, now apparently changed but still not actually fixed at the time of this writing, occurs on the celebrity pet issue page for Lance Armstrong, where an unidentified patronizing author/moderator (see “Editor’s Comments” in box at right) demands:

HotSoup, Lance Armstrong

Never mind the fact that here the Beltway insiders are pretending they’re like, the new outsiders, man. Because whether you like it or not, Lance Armstrong has a pitch for his side, which you can pretty much ignore and skip to the very end:

HotSoup, Lance Armstrong's question

Is Lance’s ghostwriter a fan of Joyce? Maybe we’ll find the answer if we just click on the “more…” button…? No:

HotSoup, Lance Armstrong, no files

Okay, now I get it. What big issues aren’t being addressed in current online debate? There are none. This comic software glitch is emblematic of why HotSoup.com is going to fall far short of its lofty goals: Try to be everything to everyone, and you will be nothing to nobody.

Others are already doing what they think they are. If they don’t like the partisan debate sites, there are plenty of online forums already offering whatever kinds of debate you want: Slashdot, Kuro5hin, OffTopic.com, Anandtech, even Something Awful and Genmay. Try the Corvette Forums. You might be surprised.

Though most online forums are not about politics, all the big ones have off-topic sections where debates left, right and beyond are carried on around the clock. HotSoup is going to bring you… prepared text from Lance Armstrong’s agent? The experience of being hounded with insipid questions — “Is the sentence stiff enough? Too stiff?” — by Ron Fournier?

Blooper-wise, best of all is the unenlightening, unlinkable and surely soon-to-disappear V-Factor sidebar:

HotSoup V-Factor

Take it away, Mike Turk:

Something called the V-Factor rates posts on a scale between “never” and “definitely will”, but completely fails to indicate what they will never or always do? What the hell is that?

Update: I had thus far left out any mention of Right Wing News blogger John Hawkins’ involvement w/r/t the Conservative Forum he was asked to oversee — which so far is less popular than the now-defunct Conservative Grapevine message board Hawkins once ran all by himself — but now “Hot Corner” is mentioning it, and well, see for yourself:

…. Today we welcome the many readers of “www.rightwingnews” to the Soup ….

Never mind the fact that Hawkins has been on board since before the launch, so it makes no sense to welcome his readers “today.” Apparently HotSoup editors are not among the readers of Hawkins’ site. Because, depending on your browser, typing in “www.rightwingnews” won’t get you very far.

Update, months later: Things I should have said when the site was still operational:

  1. If it was supposed to actually be “hot soup,” it must have been carrot and pea soup. It never looked appetizing.
  2. Per the image asking what issue “our mainstream media and our leaders” were ignoring, why were the “voices” all people featured in the mainstream media?
  3. One of the key points that I did make was that this thing was bound to fail because it never had any buy-in from the famous-for-DC names attached to it. Carter Eskew and Mark McKinnon might have been interesting discussion leaders, but they never tried.
  4. The apparent teenager asking about legalizing marijuana is actually a married adult, possibly with kids. Months later, I saw him on “The Colbert Report.”
  5. The Corvette Forums have actually been pretty big on Fred Thompson.

I think that was about it.

Revisiting The YouTube Election

I was a bit grumpy when Slate’s John Dickerson covered the rising prominence of YouTube in political campaigns as if he was the first person to think of it, but now that it’s Ryan Lizza’s turn to remark upon same for the New York Times, I think it’s time to accept that it’s conventional wisdom already (fast, maybe even faster than YouTube’s own meteoric rise). After all, the Times is nothing if not a lagging indicator.

Lizza doesn’t add a whole lot to the discussion, though he does wring his hands in a manner of which previous commentators have declined:

Some political analysts say that YouTube could force candidates to stop being so artificial, since they know their true personalities will come out anyway. “It will favor a kind of authenticity and directness and honesty that is frankly going to be good,” said Carter Eskew, a media consultant who worked for Senator Lieberman’s primary campaign. “People will say what they really think rather than what they think people want to hear.”

But others see a future where politicians are more vapid and risk averse than ever. Matthew Dowd, a longtime strategist for President Bush who is now a partner in a social networking Internet venture, Hot Soup, looks at the YouTube-ization of politics, and sees the death of spontaneity.

I don’t know the answer to this question; my fallback response is: Some of both. More interesting, I think, is why the two consultants split on the question. Some might guess that Democrats are quicker to embrace new campaign techniques whereas Republicans are slower to deem them necessary, and there may be some truth to that. The GOP had no GOTV strategy to speak of until 2002, although they’ve more than caught up since.

But I think it has less to do with party ideology than recent party (or factional) fortunes, and you’re more likely to embrace (and talk up) a new technology if you need it to deliver for you. In 2004, Dowd helped fend off an unprecedented new media assault on President Bush, so he’s got all the more reason to downplay its positive effects. But there’s also iconoclasts like John McCain, who face uphill battles inside the Republican party, and as of late has been courting conservative online activists to that end.

What interesting things Lizza does have to say about YouTube’s impact is arguably just as true about mere text-based blogging:

These days journalists are concerned not just about being cut out, but about being part of the show. Reporters often suffer the wrath of bloggers in the same way politicians do. At a recent conference of political bloggers in Las Vegas, reporters more than once reminded one another to be discreet in their conversations because anything overheard was fair game for bloggers to post.

Now, as the campaign trail turns into a 24-hour live set, members of the press corps may find themselves starring on YouTube. “At least one big-time journalist will have their career or life ruined because some element of their behavior that was heretofore private will be exposed publicly,” predicted a senior adviser to a potential 2008 presidential candidate.

If you think YouTube is necessary for that, well, tell that to Dan Rather.

And Lizza’s “to be sure” section is particularly weak:

Then again, YouTube’s impact on politics may be exaggerated. For one, the site’s users are generally young and not highly engaged politically.

“Most social networking sites cater to younger audiences, 18 to 24,” says Michael Bassik, vice president of Internet advertising at MSHC Partners, which advises candidates on media strategies. “For the most part, it’s not political conversations taking place there.”

And maybe the Allen video wasn’t all that shocking after all.

Jeff Jarvis, author of the BuzzMachine blog and an Internet consultant to The New York Times Company, doesn’t think all that much has changed.

“Is it news that politicians say stupid things?” he asks. “Of course not.”

As for the former point, arguing that just because political videos don’t draw the same traffic as, say, that especially compelling video where a young woman took one picture of herself each day for three years is a straw man if I’ve ever seen one (and I suspect Lizza has quoted Bassik out of context). All such a video has to do is be “out there,” and YouTube undoubtedly accomplishes that.

As for the latter, well, tell that to Senator Allen.

P.S. Ohio’s Psychobilly Democrat makes a similar argument to that of my penultimate paragraph, noting: “The networked natured of blogs, that one links to another’s content, makes the blunders more accessible to more people across greater ranges of space.” To which I would add, it’s more evidence that all politics is national.

“I Don’t Know Anything About the Blogs”

In a characteristically counterintuitive piece for TNR.com, Ryan Lizza argues that the “second half” of Lamont/Lieberman will fade as a national issue because, as an unnamed DSCC insider tells him, the national party isn’t going to busy itself much with Connecticut this fall:

Why would we spend money defending a seat that will be blue either way?

Later, a different (I think) Senate aide tells him the primary won’t induce Democrats to campaign on immediate withdrawal from Iraq, either:

Our Iraq policy has been driven by [Harry] Reid and [Carl] Levin. To be honest, they could give a rat’s ass about the blogs. In other words, these are policy-based decisions, and aren’t driven by the politics of Connecticut or anywhere else.

Not even a rat’s ass? Really? That might come as a surprise to the readers and commenters at Reid’s Give Em Hell, Harry blog, among the most popular blogs written by an elected Democratic official — almost up there with Conyers Blog, written (or “written”) by a more traditional netroots ally.

It also calls to mind Lamont’s absurd defenestration of Jane Hamsher late last week, for which he apparently paid no price in terms of blogger support (even from Hamsher). And let’s not forget Dem consultant Steve Elmendorf, who paid the ultimate price — excommunication from the left by Markos Moulitsas — for daring to admit:

The bloggers and online donors represent an important resource for the party, but they are not representative of the majority you need to win elections. The trick will be to harness their energy and their money without looking like you are a captive of the activist left.

And what happens if Lizza is right, the Democrats give nothing more than lip service to Lamont, and the Conn. Senate race fades from the national scene? How vocal will the netroots be about their dissatisfaction? How damaging would that be to blogger-politician relations? Might Chuck Schumer, chairman of the DSCC, be the next pariah Democrat — or at least the next Rahm Emanuel?

Could it be that what seemed less than 100 hours ago like the first major gate-crashing will actually end up building more barriers between Beltway Democrats and the party’s online activists?

When Not To Blog

Don’t look now, but Cynthia McKinney — who having been bounced from Congress in 2002 is facing the very real prospect of becoming an ex-member once again — has herself a campaign blog. More than a few public officials have tried their hand at blogging over the past few years, and with a few exceptions, most probably would be better off if they hadn’t. It’s not that they shouldn’t blog, it’s that they should only do it if they’re willing to do it right. I’ve seen many an inept campaign blog in my day, but Rep. McKinney sets a whole new standard.

For example: Although this particular page on her official campaign site does bill itself as a “blog,” and indeed has permalinks, it fails one particular test of blogginess that frankly, I can’t recall ever having seen failed before: The posts are in chronological, not reverse-chronological order.

In other words, the first thing you see when the page loads is an entry from April 20. At the bottom of the page is the latest post, on July 20. You could be forgiven for thinking the site had been abandoned, but no, if you scroll down from the top, the next post is June 17. And that one’s a doozy, responding to the hullabaloo over McKinney’s confrontation with the Capitol police earlier this year:

The good ol’ boy cracker-crats of the Republican party are having themselves a regular hootenanny over allegations that congresswoman Cynthia McKinney landed a punch on a security guard at the Capitol.

To be fair, that post appears to have been authored by a caucasian, although if black-on-black racism is a problem, then white-on-white racism cannot be discounted entirely. The self-described “white boy” is Greg Palast, a journalist whose investigations could be called controversial at best. Perhaps Palast is behind the campaign’s primary day efforts to play on her constituents’ fears about voting machine manufacturer Diebold’s rumored pro-Republican programming tendencies.

But it’s worth asking: If Diebold was certain that ousting McKinney is a good idea — and some prominent Atlanta conservatives want her to stay — then why not install DeKalb Co. Commish Hank Johnson without the trouble of a runoff?

And if you head to the most recent entry of McKinney’s pseudo-blog, she prepares her supporters for the primary fight ahead:

I will be pitted against a mostly unknown and unproven opponent, who will nonetheless have the unanimous backing of big national media and national money. The media and money behind my opponent will do their utmost to polarize the election along racial and party lines.

Indeed, Rep. McKinney would never tolerate, let alone disseminate or seek to gain from, racial or partisan polarization. Right?