Sunday, June 29, 2008
A Google/Blogger Anti-Anti-Obama Bias?
I certainly hope not. However, this post from Newsbusters is troubling:
This is not a good thing.
Whether this is intentional or accidental, Google/Blogger needs to figure out a way to stop this.
As an addendum, I should note that I stumbled across the Newsbusters post via a cool Facebook app called "Blog Networks." In addition to allowing bloggers to build their own fan base on Facebook, it also gives readers access to random blog posts. This is another reason why I find myself becoming quite the Facebook evangelist. FB has reportedly recently passed MySpace as the worldwide leader in social networking -- though MS still leads in America. This should give Google/Blogger impetus to get its act together, re:the above problem. As powerful as Google is in the technology area, it's not the only game in town.
There are a lot of Facebook users out there and something tells me they won't like any insinuation that Blogger is being manipulated for political purposes. As my friend Steve Clemons noted not too long ago, Facebook has become a major player itself in the news dissemination/political organization/"ideas" marketing realm.
|
It turns out that there is an interesting pattern where it concerns the blogs that Google's Blogspot team have summarily locked down on their service. They all belong to the Just Say No Deal coalition, a group of blogs that are standing against the Obama campaign. It seems the largest portion of these blogs are Hillary supporting blogs, too.One respondent to the post asks if it isn't possible that Blogger automatically "locks" a blog that it gets "spam" complaints about. Blogger does that for sites that could be deemed "offensive." So, if that is the case, then it behooves Blogger to realize that that policy could be easily abused during a political year. Indeed, already other Commenters are talking about flagging various pro-Obama blogs as "spam."All I can say is, WOW! If Google is willing to abuse its power like this even against fellow leftists, what does it plan against conservatives, the folks Google hates even more!?
Here is a list of the Blogspot blogs that have been frozen by Google thus far:
- Blue Lyon @ http://bluelyon.blogspot.com
- Come A Long Way @ http://comealongway.blogspot.com
- Hillary or Bust @ http://hillaryorbust.blogspot.com
- McCain Democrats @ http://mccaindemocrats.blogspot.com
- NObama Blog @ http://nobamablog.blogspot.com
- politicallizard.blogspot.com @ http://thelizardannex.blogspot.com
- Reflections in Tyme @ http://reflections-in-tyme.blogspot.com
This is not a good thing.
Whether this is intentional or accidental, Google/Blogger needs to figure out a way to stop this.
As an addendum, I should note that I stumbled across the Newsbusters post via a cool Facebook app called "Blog Networks." In addition to allowing bloggers to build their own fan base on Facebook, it also gives readers access to random blog posts. This is another reason why I find myself becoming quite the Facebook evangelist. FB has reportedly recently passed MySpace as the worldwide leader in social networking -- though MS still leads in America. This should give Google/Blogger impetus to get its act together, re:the above problem. As powerful as Google is in the technology area, it's not the only game in town.
There are a lot of Facebook users out there and something tells me they won't like any insinuation that Blogger is being manipulated for political purposes. As my friend Steve Clemons noted not too long ago, Facebook has become a major player itself in the news dissemination/political organization/"ideas" marketing realm.
Labels: Facebook., Google, guest bloggers, liberal bias
Monday, May 21, 2007
Drive-Bias Shooting
The Washington Post today has a story about Republicans play ing catch-up in the online political world.
Given sites like Real Clear Politics, Red State and Town Hall, I'm not so sure gap is as wide on the activist side as it may be on the party-structure side. However, there is one quote in here that just drives me up the frickin' wall:
The charge of "liberal bias" in the mainstream media had a resonance at one time, because people like Walter Cronkite, Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, (and their print counterparts), etc. made statements that conservatives could credibly argue were, indeed, liberal. Even if there was no intent to push an explicit liberal agenda, many stories were broadcast (and written) based on a liberal premise of public policy. For example, the story might ask why more funds weren't being made available for child-care: The premise is liberal because a fair question could be asked why government should be paying for child-care in the first place. That's just one example of possible "liberal bias" in a mainstream media story.
That occurred at a time when the anchors, producers, editors, writers, etc. all came from a similar background, went to the same parties, same schools, etc. The mainstream media was run by group think -- and some places like The New York Times, CBS News, etc. are still run that way.
But there is so much more media out there right now. Media is a much more democratic (small-"d") entity. That includes talk radio. That certainly includes blogs. And it certainly includes YouTube. But how can YouTube be liberally "biased"? It's open to everyone -- unlike the Old Media entities. Anyone can post anything (within standards of decency, of course) they want, from any point of view.
Or no point of view, as the case may be.
But now, Charlie Gerow (who I've met a few times -- perfectly nice guy) feels the need to create a "conservative" YouTube, thus encouraging conservative video creators to abandon YouTube -- and making a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Create a YouTube competitor if you want, but drop the "bias" BS, please!
(The same argument, by the way, holds for charges of bias at Wikipedia, though that is a little more dicey, given how entries can be more easily sabotaged by people with political agendas and other axes to grind.)
|
Given sites like Real Clear Politics, Red State and Town Hall, I'm not so sure gap is as wide on the activist side as it may be on the party-structure side. However, there is one quote in here that just drives me up the frickin' wall:
And Republicans are hardly conceding the fight in the 2008 campaign.Grrr..."the liberal bias" of YouTube? Oh, give me a break, please! Stop the whining, for the love of God!
Besides TechRepublican, the group blog started two weeks ago by All, who worked as communications director for Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.), there is QubeTV, founded in March as an alternative to what one of its founders, Charlie Gerow, a former Reagan campaign aide, calls "the liberal bias" of YouTube.
The charge of "liberal bias" in the mainstream media had a resonance at one time, because people like Walter Cronkite, Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, (and their print counterparts), etc. made statements that conservatives could credibly argue were, indeed, liberal. Even if there was no intent to push an explicit liberal agenda, many stories were broadcast (and written) based on a liberal premise of public policy. For example, the story might ask why more funds weren't being made available for child-care: The premise is liberal because a fair question could be asked why government should be paying for child-care in the first place. That's just one example of possible "liberal bias" in a mainstream media story.
That occurred at a time when the anchors, producers, editors, writers, etc. all came from a similar background, went to the same parties, same schools, etc. The mainstream media was run by group think -- and some places like The New York Times, CBS News, etc. are still run that way.
But there is so much more media out there right now. Media is a much more democratic (small-"d") entity. That includes talk radio. That certainly includes blogs. And it certainly includes YouTube. But how can YouTube be liberally "biased"? It's open to everyone -- unlike the Old Media entities. Anyone can post anything (within standards of decency, of course) they want, from any point of view.
Or no point of view, as the case may be.
But now, Charlie Gerow (who I've met a few times -- perfectly nice guy) feels the need to create a "conservative" YouTube, thus encouraging conservative video creators to abandon YouTube -- and making a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Create a YouTube competitor if you want, but drop the "bias" BS, please!
(The same argument, by the way, holds for charges of bias at Wikipedia, though that is a little more dicey, given how entries can be more easily sabotaged by people with political agendas and other axes to grind.)
Labels: liberal bias, Mainstream Media, YouTube
