I popped over to read this silly column at CNN about the conservative use of Twitter and had to laugh. The first paragraph is so incredibly short-sighted it could only come from a CNN reporter using progressive bloggers as their primary source. It starts like this:
Liberal bloggers established online political activism, besting their
conservative rivals during President George W. Bush's eight years in
office.
If this is true, who exactly were the warbloggers? If liberal bloggers established political activism, how did we get into the Iraq war? How did Bush increase his Congressional majorities in 2002 and 2004? How did Dan Rather lose his job when bloggers exposed the shoddy reporting of CBS news?
The truth is libertarian and center-right bloggers started the blogosphere, with only a few (Hesiod, Kos,and Atrios) having much of an impact, and that was usually ridicule. As the Bush administration went on, the national mood changed, far more from the press deciding to abandon all pretense of objectivity after 2004 than from anything the progressive blogs did.
The candidates supported by Kos lost every race until 2006, and even in 2008, when new media was supposed to rule the day, far more money came in from large donors to the Obama campaign than the efforts of the Netroots.
The columnist, Eric Kuhn, who purports to understand social media because he has a lame Twitter account, goes on to quote Erickson, Lewis and All, but the main point of the story is missed. The Democratic Party and the progressive infrastructure embraced leftwing bloggers because they were out of power. What this means is Democratic operatives fed information to liberal blogs who dutifully printed whatever was sent their way. The hive mind of the progressive blogosphere is apparent at Kos, who long ago banned anyone who wasn't a progressive. It was his stated policy, and that mindset continues today. Their goal is not discussion, but dissemination of their message.
Compare this to the libertarian and conservative bloggers who received no money, no inside scoops, and definitely no support from Republicans. This is a strength, as the conservative side of the blogosphere carries a multitude of views, while the left side pretty much just links to bigger blogs and mainstream sources.
Want to know what's going on at FiredUp? Read ThinkProgress or TPM or CAP, or any of the other billionaire funded think tanks on the left that drive stories to a uncritical and single-minded progressive blogosphere. In fact, read any liberal blog and you'll find it's 90% based on what some other blogger said, with almost no real analysis. The problem is a logical fallacy called Appeal to Authority. Argue with any progressive and they will try to prove their point by linking to one of these sources. It's on the news, thus it has to be true. Center for American Progress wrote it, therefore it must be true! That isn't debate, it's assertion, and the only reason it gives progressives an advantage online is large parts of the media are in agreement with the progressive worldview. In what appears to be a major learning curve for liberals, kissing ass to those who control the news is now called speaking truth to power.
Conservatives dominate Twitter because they're far better at making connections, and the story of the day has been local news. Connecting to other conservatives gives you alternate points of view - points of view you can't get in the mainstream media. Yes, some idiots claim Fox News or Rush Limbaugh give conservatives their talking points, but if you listen to the shows, you see those news programs following blogs, not driving news to blogs. It's a matter of speed. Bloggers are faster than Talk Radio, which is faster than television, which is faster than newspapers, which is faster than print magazines. Twitter and Facebook now are on the top of that curve, but what Kuhn fails to understand is how communities work.
Liberals didn't best conservative bloggers. They sold out for traffic and advertising and attention, and the Democratic Party gladly took their support and now gives them nothing.
Connecting to liberals gets you the daily talking points of MSNBC, CNN, and now, the White House. Yes, they won in 2006, but it's astounding to see someone from CNN try to claim that those victories were from blogs, and not media attention on Foley, George Allen, Abramoff and the Iraq War. All in all, another shoddy piece of reporting from a "social media" consultant who wasn't there when it happened.