Campaign Weblogging
Do you think Presidential campaign weblogging is mediocre at best? Last month, Jeff Commaroto argued that. The only one he liked was that of my ultimate boss Fred Thompson:
There is only one blog I regularly look at, Fred Thompson’s. Now for all I know that is written by a team of speechwriters or bloggers. It says it comes from Fred Thompson’s own hands though, reads like it does and because of that he is 100% accountable for what is written on the page. If he writes a blog post entitled ‘Fifty-Two Reasons We Should Nuke the Moon & Hawaii’, he cannot just pass it off as misinterpreted or some other persons idea.
He followed up with another post a few days ago. Let me quote part of it:
An important aspect of my assertion is the logical constraints of a campaign. In a campaign the candidate is the decision maker as well as the product that the organization works to further and sell to the public. The campaign can be seen as a model for the presidency. If a person runs an effective campaign a voter assumes it is a sign, rightly or wrongly, that they will run an effective administration. The other way to look at this is that a campaign can also be effective when through perception they convince voters that the opposition is incapable of running an effective administration and achieving like-minded objectives.
When advisors or speechmakers or any staffers become more vocal or visual than the candidate, when they provide messages that are counter to that campaigns administration and focus, the voter doesn’t see an avenue of depth, they see chaos. We bloggers are completely different. We live off the niche and the counter, we like to challenge and comment and create movements and discussions.
What appeals to me about most blogs is either that they are written by people I already know in the MSM/establishment or they are written by people who are not controlled in any way, shape or form by the MSM or by direct corporate, military, governmental or religious influence. I like the idea that if they support a candidate or position, they tell me so. Not because they are employed by a campaign but because it’s the way they feel.
Bloggers hired by a campaign are employed to spread the official messages and keep the debate civil and controlled. These posts, as I pointed out, are often predictable, uninteresting and just an extension of the overall PR. We understand who is paying the bills as readers and over time this makes the writers points seem less credible as they are no longer unique but just extensions of the campaign message.
A campaign weblog, like all other external communication, is about pushing the candidate’s message. A weblogger has to find that balance in their writing where it sounds real and honest, but focuses attention on the candidate. A weblog is also about connecting to supporters. That role is a little simpler. Dropping a few comments and acknowledging what’s being talked about add a lot. People like knowing they’re being heard.
So, what campaign weblogs do you read? What do you think are the best ones? Do you think campaign weblogging is a hopeless endeavor?
“Why Campaign Bloggers are Boring”
Disclaimer: I work for Friends of Fred Thompson.
