The Increasing Role of the Internet is American Political Discourse

            As the quality and accuracy of reportage from the mainstream media of America continue their decline into obscurity and sycophancy, the so-called “New Media” will see an increase in their power to inform and persuade, resulting in an increased responsibility for the political compass guiding the American ship of state. With talk radio skewing heavily conservative, and most modern political magazines advocating for one side or the other, it is left to the internet to find a balance that will not only appeal to the public on an intellectual level, but provide the information necessary to allow the citizenry to make considered decisions about the future of the nation. With the traditional outlets abdicating their responsibility to be truthful, the people must now determine for themselves what is pertinent and what is garbage.

            The liberal bias of the media has been apparent for some time, but in the Presidential Election of 2008, the coverage went from slanted to outright advocacy. The press shilled for Obama in an unprecedented manner. They went from impartial observers to participants to promoters of then-candidate Obama. The desire of people for an unbiased source of news is apparent in the following chart detailing the Nielsen Ratings for the major cable news stations on a typical day and evening. (I just made a graph based on the information from the first two sets of data on the Nielsen Ratings link. It wouldn't post here.) 

It’s clear that despite denigration by not only the other media outlets, but by the President as well, Fox News is clearly outdrawing its competitors. In fact, during Primetime, they are outdrawing all competitors combined. This is critical, because Fox News is seen to have a conservative skew to its reporting, whereas all of the others, despite obvious liberal bias inherent in their “reporting,” claim to be mainstream. What makes these figures interesting is that Fox is pulling over 46% of the viewers on its own, while the so-called “mainstream” stations are pulling less than 54%, a split which, coincidentally (?), mirrors fairly accurately the results of the Presidential Election. One is left to wonder how the election would have turned out if more people had ignored the Fox-bashing and actually watched a channel that exists to inform viewers, of the facts, rather than the channels that so obviously preferred to advocate for a candidate, rather than actually investigate him.

More and more, people are turning to the internet to find news reported in a way that reflects their view of life, and their political background; and to network with others who have the same world view. There are many sites to choose from. Examples from the left include the Huffington Post, and the Daily Kos, both of which feature news and opinion with a decidedly liberal slant. On the right, Townhall features news and opinions aimed at conservatives. These sites allow interested parties not only to find news that interests them, but to put forth their own opinions in the form of blogs, and also in comments to these blogs, as well as the different articles and news stories to be found there. Concern has been expressed by so-called experts that citizens are now getting their news from outlets that represent their own particular bias, especially with the growth of the internet, and that this leads to a narrow view of current events, as they are not getting all sides of an issue. To this I respond thus: The major outlets have long since abandoned any pretense of impartiality, preferring to advocate for their own beliefs and ignoring legitimate stories that contradict their own beliefs. Note the story of the April 15^th protests that was run on the front page of the New York Times on April 16^th. No, it wasn’t about the largest peaceful protest in American history, the Tax Day Tea Parties, in which nearly a million citizens took to the streets to protest what they believe to be out of control spending by the Federal Government, but of protests by Afghani women, in Afghanistan, over a new law that severely restricted women’s rights. While the Afghan story is certainly compelling reading, in reality, if one were to read only the “Paper of Record,” there would be little indication that anything unusual had happened in the streets of cities nationwide. This is why newspapers in this country are dying slow, miserable deaths: Not because people don’t want to read them, but because people actually expect to learn what’s going on in their city and nation, regardless of the politics. Today’s “journalists” are just not apparently capable of delivering the goods.

On the subject of the Tax Day Tea Parties, despite the insistence of certain news channels (CNN), and certain political figures (Nancy Pelosi), that these were set up by the Republicans, or by Fox News, these were actually a new form of grass roots movement that would not have been possible 10 to 15 years ago. The most amazing thing about the internet, to me, is that it is possible to converse with people almost anywhere in the world, in real time, for essentially the cost of an internet connection. In this manner, the Tea Parties were organized on a local level, but with input and assistance from people around the nation. Even more compelling, these events were recorded and reported on, not only by the traditional outlets, but by the people attending them, some even in real-time. The availability and easy access to what used to be expensive technology allowed people to preserve a true record of what really went on. Witness the story of Susan Roesgen, reporter for CNN, who was, according to the left, hounded by the protestors in Chicago. In fact, beyond not letting an interviewee finish answering her question, footage from the scene not shown on CNN was later posted on YouTube shows that she didn’t have the slightest idea of what she was covering, nor what the protests were actually about. A quick scan of news reports and commentary of that day, both from the Mainstream media and the liberal websites shows that, when they weren’t being ridiculed and mocked, they were being either ignored or misinterpreted. 

Beyond grassroots organizations, there is a new shift toward greater availability to not only information, but to newsmakers themselves. To find where a politician stands on an issue, it is necessary only to visit his website. It is possible to write letters to lawmakers and newspapers without the necessity to buy a stamp or an envelope or even paper. In addition, there are numerous petitions available online, allowing one to lend support to almost any cause or position one could possible desire. And if a petition can’t be found, it’s a small matter to make one up. The power to let one’s voice be heard is more available and quicker than ever before.

The internet takes an old vice, impulse shopping, to an entirely new level. I can buy a copy of that book I liked when I was two from a used book dealer across the country for little more than the price of shipping and handling.  I can find music and movies that have been out of print for years without even leaving the comfort of my home.  This ability brings a new depth to one of the most important functions in politics: Political fundraising.  As the Obama campaign showed during the 2008 election cycle, internet fundraising allows unprecedented access to the wallets of supporters. While this can raise some interesting legal and ethical questions regarding where the money is actually coming from, the point I would like to emphasize is that it is now possible to “impulse give” due to the pervasive nature of modern technology. Where once people used to drop their spare change into, say, a Salvation Army bucket, nowadays they use credit and debit cards to send their change, spare and otherwise, to the cause of their choice. It is almost impossible today to listen to the radio, watch television or even drive down the street without seeing a request for donation to something or someone.  The internet allows the fulfillment of those requests on an almost instantaneous basis.  For politicians, this is the wave of the future, and those that successfully harness that power will have a great advantage over the opponents.

In all seriousness, the internet is changing not only the way we do business, but the way we interact with the world.  While online elections may be in the future, the present still brings powerful uses for a powerful tool. From funding campaigns, to getting the message out, to organizing political activities, all is readily and (generally) cheaply available to almost anyone who wants to avail themselves of it.  It’s possible to network with like-minded people and organize events much more quickly than ever before.  Today, amazingly, it is possible to be a political activist without ever leaving the comfort of your own home.