“No Man’s life liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session”.

- attributed to NY State Judge Gideon Tucker



Monday, October 8, 2007

Campaign 2008: Hillary, Fund Raising and the Web

The other day, I was discussing Presidential candidates with a quasi-liberal friend. The conversation began when I mentioned having watched President Bush's recent address involving vetoing the SCHIPP bill. I'll have a separate post on that.

However, in the course of the address, Bush demonstrated very nuanced knowledge of the tax code and economics, as he explained why his hosts, who file as a SubChapter S corporation, represent a large class of taxpayers who file as individuals with small businesses.

As I discussed the liberal media's distortions and omissions in regard to Bush's record and intellect, I opined that perhaps the new wrinkle coming in the 2008 campaign will be the declining role of money.

Even my friend welcomed this.

My reasoning is as follows. More than four years ago, the internet has become the primary medium for video content distribution of political messages. It's free, controllable, and takes little money to even produce content.

Fred Thompson, a front-running Republican candidate, did not even bother to run his announcement speech on network air time. Instead, he appeared on Jay Leno's show, then ran the announcement speech on his website. I would guess it's on YouTube by now, as well.

Does it still matter that Hillary is ahead on fund raising? When I read the hand-wringing reports that Republican candidates are being out-raised and outspent by Democrats like Obama Bim Baden and Hillary, I wonder if this is the blind spot of the 2008 campaign.

After all, is big, old media really going to report on its own demise? Not likely.

Where will you hear of this shift of substantial resources and effort to the web for content and message distribution?

Not on the networks, I'd bet. And just maybe on cable news.

No, this may be a totally stealth transformation of Presidential campaign operations.

In a way, it would be just desserts for all the campaign finance 'reform' hoopla to which we've been subjected for 30 years.

I'm not saying having money to spend is inconsequential. In a tight race between two similarly-qualified and supported candidates, network and cable air time might indeed give an edge to the better-financed candidate. Even if just for street money, to get out the vote.

But I don't believe, and neither does my Democratic friend, that money can elect a bad candidate. And she doesn't even believe Hillary will win the general election, if nominated.

So suppose Obama is too green, Hillary fractures somewhere on the campaign trail. Could just money really elect John Edwards over Giuliani or Thompson?

Or even elect Hillary, if she begins to break down in the home stretch?

No, I think we may be seeing a major turning point in the democratizing of Presidential elections, without any notice from the major media. Ubiquitous computers and high-speed access allows anyone to search and find information, videos, messages, from all the candidates. On their own time, without media filtering.

If the 2004 election woke everyone up to Howard Dean's internet-based fundraising, perhaps the 2008 election will awaken the professional political campaign managers and handlers to their weakening influence.

If message distribution and consumption heads for the individual-oriented, wild west of the internet, will managed campaigns ever recover their ability to control, shape and disseminate all aspects of their candidate's utterances? Won't the omnipresent oppositions digital camcorder on the campaign trail give each candidate raw footage of each opponent?

Imagine the video messages that could fly between the two party's candidates a year from now, as each edits and presents the other's video appearances on various websites and YouTube.

The last place you may look for live campaign 'news' may be the networks. Or, as my friend opined, perhaps they will basically be reduced to covering the internet campaign duels between the competing websites.

Honestly, I think I can hardly wait for that day. The demise of the political pundits, the campaign managers, and network anchors. And the rise of individual voters to simply surf, view, and decide on their own, without so many filters.

No comments: