The Influence of The Internet On Politics

In the 2004 presidential race, Howard Dean showed others how to use the Internet to raise funds and spread his message. And now, Hillary Clinton has announced her candidacy for president via a message on her website.

These examples show the rising influence of the Internet as a communications medium. From websites that state a politicians position on issues, to blogs that expose details that would have once remained hidden, cyberspace is the new information medium, supplanting the written word and challenging the broadcast media.

The advantages of using the Internet are obvious: instantaneous communications and extremely low cost come to mind. But it can also be a double-edged sword for politicians, since it provides a wealth of information which may not always paint them in a favorable light.

The real winner in this is the consumer. No longer are we hampered by a few biased sources of information. Websites exist for every possible point of view.

This raises a question about the future, however. If you look at talk radio, it is dominated by conservative talk show hosts. Television has many more liberal channels than conservative. What will the Internet of tomorrow look like?

What will the internet look like? I think it will look like whatever "we" (Time's Person Of The Year) want it to look like. I like the analogy of the internet being a double-edged sword. That sums it up with perfection. Through the internet, the microscope that politicians have always been under, has been magnified tremendously. I have no sympathy, as it comes with the territory. It frustrates me to watch candidates spend as much time undermining their opponent as they do running their own race. But again, I guess it all comes with the territory.

I've found myself boycotting more radio stations, television newscasts, etc., in exchange for a more neutral perspective. For instance, Above Top Secret. It is only through this site that I have begun to acknowledge the blatant bias in the media as they inundate us with their agendas.

the internet shows you that politics is not really a two way race, it is a one way race, just having different people bidding to win.

people can see more clearly now, that the left right thing really does not matter.

remember people said that republicans were for samll government control, but under bush, government probably have much more powers today over our lifes, just a continuation of bill clinton policies.

it depends on whether the internet of tomorrow will be censored, like you will have to send your webpage of to be analysed before they put it up sort of stuff, if that happens there will be no real free speech on the web. but thats tomorrow, will it happen only time will tell.

[edit on 21-1-2007 by andy1033]

I hope you're right about it being whatever we want it to be. I do worry about the occasional piece of legislation that pops up trying to regulate it in some fashion.

More disturbing is the potential influence of some media celebrities. Bill O'Reilly, for example, has expressed his distaste for blogs quite a few times. And he occasionally claims that there is "no control" over what people say on the net. He's entitled to his opinion, but he does have a large aduience who listens.

Originally posted by jsobecky
Bill O'Reilly, for example, has expressed his distaste for blogs quite a few times. And he occasionally claims that there is "no control" over what people say on the net. He's entitled to his opinion, but he does have a large aduience who listens.

That is the absolute definition of hypocrisy right there. Bill O'Reilly, complaining about the freedom of speech of the average citizen through their own web space, yet he says whatever he damn pleases on his television show.

The average Joe can say whatever he/she wishes, it is up to the audience to listen.

yep but there will be a big push to censor the internet as if they want to control info, they will not want people getting there views from people outside there control.

bill just does not like the fact that the public have more than just him to listen to, in propaganda you have to control all the news outlets and that will definately be the web one day.

they will probably use the fact of paedos or something to get the internet changed, because the public know it is wrong that stuff is out there.

so you should use what ever free speech you have now, until the day comes when it will be censored, we all know it will happen, you will not be able to put stuff on the web until someone says its ok, maybe thats the system they have in china today, i do not know, but they sound very closed in.

[edit on 21-1-2007 by andy1033]

How can the government regulate something they do not own? How can they possibly pass legislation something that is beyond their realm of control?

Maybe I am wrong, but I fail to see how the government feels they have any control over what individuals do with their own web space.

i understand where you are going, but does not the chinese regulate there internet. i am sure they will one day, because they are always talking about it.

seeing as we are becoming more of a one world society may be the key, it may be some sort of international thing, like you say no one country owns it. but you can gurantee they are looking into it.

but rememeber did they not say that in a few years time you may need to do a finger print or something to get on the web on your computer, they are discussing these things, and with the paedo thing, that may be used as a frightener or something.

I think if "they" wanted to control the internet, "they" could.

After all, "they" do control the phone lines, cable lines and satellite feeds.

It's just a matter of time until "they" exercise that control under the guise of National Security. Of course I'm talkin of the US; I feel the beginnings of censorship ala Chinese style already happening with the restrictions being placed on MySpace and Youtube.

[edit on 21-1-2007 by whaaa]

People powered, internet politics is our last stand against corporate wholesale media, politics and parties. Even a total unknown can run for federal office now with the right message and earn the support of 20,000 or more small dollar donors to compete.

Though most don't. You still have to be amazingly creative.

Originally posted by andy1033
yep but there will be a big push to censor the internet as if they want to control info, they will not want people getting there views from people outside there control.

they will probably use the fact of paedos or something to get the internet changed, because the public know it is wrong that stuff is out there.

Very true. I see something like this happening:

A child predator finds a victim through an internet chat room or whatever.

A high-profile case results.

Legislation is passed that is intended to keep minors away from offensive websites.

To accomplish this, we need information about the occupants of your house, such as age, screen name, etc.

It will branch off from there.

Another catalyst could be a terror attack that used the net for planning or whatever.

Originally posted by jsobecky
Legislation is passed that is intended to keep minors away from offensive websites.

Which would simply be the icing on the cake for the state taking the role of the parents. It is the role of the parents to govern what their children are doing online. It is not that much of a task for parents who are ready and willing to take the appropriate steps to insure the safety of their children.

But, parents are naive and they would never want to think that "Little Johnny" would do such a thing. It is no wonder that the state has had to step in time and time again.

cyberspace is the new information medium, supplanting the written word and challenging the broadcast media.

Challenging is a good word but make no mistake... the broadcast media is still the champ. Dean did well in organizing his campaign via the net but ultimately some political jabs via the broadcast media and his own horrific scream did him in.

I get more news on the internet than I do via television. Perhaps the broadcast media will be in more jeapardy as the older generation (being less comp literate) begins to die off. Certainly, both internet service providers and users will fight against an excess amount of gov't regulation.

Originally posted by chissler

Originally posted by jsobecky
Legislation is passed that is intended to keep minors away from offensive websites.

Which would simply be the icing on the cake for the state taking the role of the parents. It is the role of the parents to govern what their children are doing online. It is not that much of a task for parents who are ready and willing to take the appropriate steps to insure the safety of their children.

But, parents are naive and they would never want to think that "Little Johnny" would do such a thing. It is no wonder that the state has had to step in time and time again.

Raising kids is not an easy task, given all the outside influences today. But it can be done. The problem is, the case that will trigger any legislation will not be tragedy that occurs in spite of the loving, watchful parents, but instead it will be the neglected kid that falls prey to some predator. Or maybe it will be both. There are more instances of the latter.

Back to political candidates, another advantage for them to use the net to announce their candidacy is that they don't have to answer any questions. At least until they see which way the wind is blowing.