Thursday, July 24, 2008

New media questions


Undernews?
If you click on the Slate links in this post, you will see Mickey Kaus mention the "under-news." I think we know, in a general way, what he means, but exactly what is -- and isn't -- the under-news. On the day of this writing, the Google NEWS serach engine does not seem to pull up Politico-com articles. You have to get them, I think, from a general web search. But that, in a mechanistic way, is an interesting statement. And it may not matter, because Politico articles are headed into the MSM anyway. But then there will be another Politico, outside the campfire.


Do the Dems rule the 'net?
This Politico article raises relevant questions about whether the GOP trails in new media. But how much of an impact do, for instance, TPM and HuffPo really make?

1 comment:

ThresherK said...

Some new-media people have to geek over the WSJ article by Amy Chozick asking the question "Is Obama too thin to be president?"

What she didn't do for "data": Read a blog. Read blog commenters. Read emails from voters on the street.

What she did do: Create a new Yahoo message board thread, asking the whole world Anyone having a hard time relating to him and his "no excess body fat"?

She got one respondent who answered in the affirmative. Twenty other comments were split between those who wanted to know if Chozick got paid for doing this, and noticing that the one "Won't vote for any beanpole guy" writer hadn't made another Yahoo post in their entire life.

Chozick invented a new internet tradition: Chumming. Came up with a premise, created a message thread, got one anonymous (if not sockpuppet) person to answer in the affirmative, and there's her story.

Is that every new-media guru's worst nightmare? It's the exact opposite of reporting.

(And bonus points for the Yahoo message board original having been "disappeared". Google beerbellygirl comment site:messages.yahoo.com to discover the saved copy.)