Underanalyzed?

Though the US presidential primaries have been covered more extensively than ever before in Europe — or so it seems, at least — the case can be made that important “campaign-technical” aspects have been less analyzed or commented on. This might have to do with the fascination of the duel between Obama and Clinton; a story that can be covered in the old-fashioned way, like a horserace. The connection described in the Slate video above between the Santos candidate in the West Wing series and Obama is entertaining stuff. But there are more substantial topics too tackle, as Martin Jönsson does by looking at the social media aspects (in Swedish). Some I have touched on also: Obama’s use of technology, his network’s fundraising and the “bittergate” story (in Norwegian).

2008 definitely is the first real web election, the first time we can really begin to appreciate how web-based services and behaviour is woven into society at so many levels. This doesn’t mean that all old-fashioned skills become obsolete — just look at the enduring importance of the political speech. To be continued!

Participation

Another noteworthy Atlantic article on Obama, this time on his plans to use the web and technology in governing:

What Obama seems to promise is, at its outer limits, a participatory democracy in which the opportunities for participation have been radically expanded. He proposes creating a public, Google-like database of every federal dollar spent. He aims to post every piece of non-emergency legislation online for five days before he signs it so that Americans can comment. A White House blog-also with comments-would be a near certainty. Overseeing this new apparatus would be a chief technology officer.

See also:

Obama’s machine

Nei til pretensiøs blogging!

Barack Obama photo by clockwerks

Lett forsinket slutter jeg meg til Espens nyttårsforsett: ett innlegg per dag må da være mulig å få til. En velplassert lissepasning i form av rett lenke til rett tid er som oftest bedre enn en møysommelig uttenkt og anstrengt verdensforbedrende epistel.

I dag må det handle om den amerikanske presidentvalgkampen. Andrew Sullivan skrev et glødende anbefalingsessay for Barack Obama i desembernummeret av Atlantic. Konklusjonen:

At a time when America’ls estrangement from the world risks tipping into dangerous imbalance, when a country at war with lethal enemies is also increasingly at war with itself, when humankind’ls spiritual yearnings veer between an excess of certainty and an inability to believe anything at all, and when sectarian and racial divides seem as intractable as ever, a man who is a bridge between these worlds may be indispensable. We may in fact have finally found that bridge to the 21st century that Bill Clinton told us about. Its name is Obama.

Samme Sullivan blogger på magasinets nettsider, og har en viktig observasjon i dag som fort kan overses av veldig Clinton-vennlige norske medier (og opinion): Clinton-dynastiet var og er veldig upopulære blant amerikanske medier. De følte seg ofte ført bak lyset i Bill Clintons presidenttid. Dette gir Obama en stor fordel. Atlantic plasserte Sullivans Obama-hyllest på forsiden. Det er et rimelig klart signal.

Sullivan viser også til David Brooks i New York Times, som tar fram de store ordene om Obamas Iowa-seier:

Whatever their political affiliations, Americans are going to feel good about the Obama victory, which is a story of youth, possibility and unity through diversity – the primordial themes of the American experience. And Americans are not going to want to see this stopped. When an African-American man is leading a juggernaut to the White House, do you want to be the one to stand up and say No?

Men som Sullivan peker på: det er akkurat det Hillary nå må gjøre, hvis hun fortsatt ønsker å vinne.

(Foto: clockwerks. Med Creative Commons-lisens.)