The title above is a blatant rip-off of the New York Times article published yesterday but I think I’ll roll with it. The article in questions is actually pretty interesting as it touches on President Obama’s Internet campaign and discusses how they are trying to translate that excitement over to official White House business.
As a geek I am stoked about Obama’s thirst for technology but there is a real threat of adopting a technology approach that is too aggressive. First of all, everything the President does becomes a part of the national record… and secondly, do we really want the office of our highest official to be on the same level as sites like 4chan, Something Awful or I Can Haz Cheezburger?
I’m all for the President’s points on his technology agenda, including his stance on net neutrality but I’m still a little iffy regarding his use of the web as a political tool. For instance, his first Weekly Address as President is on YouTube and has garnered nearly 800,000 views and over 5,000 comments. Of those comments nearly half are either vulgar, dimwitted or simple gibberish… is that what we want from the highest office in the world? Is Obama’s team actually going to take any comments on those videos seriously? Should they to begin with? I don’t think so… so disable the comments and save us a lot of grief.
Another aspect of Obama’s "transparency" that people may overlook is his team making the new WhiteHouse.gov an "information source" for all of Americans and the world. The problem with that is people may simply bypass other news outlets for their news which would make the White House the leading source of information on what they are doing, with no pushback from nosey reporters. I know at first it would seem grand to not have to worry about skewed news from either side of the isle but someone has to ask the tough questions and that just won’t happen if the White House is providing all of the information directly to the people. This may be the one time where I actually want reporters to do their jobs.
Do you think I am being silly about Obama’s team controlling the news that we hear via WhiteHouse.gov? Well, remember last week when Obama retook the oath of office from Judge Roberts? Obama’s team limited the news coverage of the event and had the only image of the event as no camera’s from news agencies were allowed in. Obama’s team also refused to identify senior staff members that were directly briefing the press corps regarding the closing of Guantanamo Bay… so you are refusing to give the name of people that have a direct impact on the citizen’s of this country and briefing them on their national security?
It also scares the hell out of me that there are 13,000,000 email addresses from Obama’s campaign that can be mobilized for a cause in a matter of minutes. Now, the White House can’t officially be involved with such moves but the Democratic National Committee has started a group to try and figure out how best to leverage that backing. They have said that they won’t be using those email addresses to push a political agenda but when it comes to politicians of any ilk you’ll have to pardon me for being a little skeptical of it all.
Now, I hope that this hasn’t come off like I am against the Obama campaign or what they are doing. Because for one I love the new look of WhiteHouse.gov and I also like the weekly video addresses and the "everyone has a voice" approach they are taking to the Internet… but I think that they may be getting a little ahead of themselves. Sure, technology is grand and it is amazing how much more information we all have and how we can be more informed… but I’m just not sure how I feel about the most powerful man in the world putting our country and his Presidency squarely in the hands of the same thing that brought us Tila Tequila and Chris Crocker.
Leave Your Response
You must be logged in to post a comment.