Interesting post by Jeff Jarvis on Edwards' internet campaign

[beachmom]

The reason why I got into the blogs in the first place was because I saw Jeff Jarvis on C-SPAN with the name of his blog buzzmachine.com listed. He got me into the Iraqi blogs, Sully, TPM and dailykos. The rest, as they say, is history. Jeff is more a Hillary Dem and a liberal hawk, but I do think his commentary on blogs and other happenings on the internet are worthy of a peruse.

Here's his take on Edwards' use of the internet for his announcement:

http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/12/28/john-edwards-on-youuuutuuuube/

From a media perspective, Edwards got to put his message out there without reporters and gatekeepers. It didn’t get out far without them, though; this morning, he had fewer than 10,000 views on YouTube. I also wish there had been reporters there who’d pushed him on his answers. Instead, we get his platitudinous and oprahesque message: It’s about change — it’s always about change. “We have to accept responsibility. We have to change the country.” Why? How? He gets to put up his own “news” and interviews with himself: “I actually want the country to see who I am, who I truly am. . . . I’d rather be successful or unsuccessful based on who I really am not based on some plastic Ken doll you put up in front of audiences.” Then again, his video lives in a space of other Edwards moments: We see (Ken) John getting made up in he feels pretty, for example, and we see Wal-Mart counterattack.

Will this campaign still be run by broadcast and cable TV and advertising? I fear so. But just as blogs are now simply part of the media landscape — read and used by journalists, pundits, and politicians — so will the video of campaigns be part of the fabric of campaigns: the candidates’ own statements, their own embarrassing moments, and more.

I think the candidate who is able to seamlessly meld all these pieces of the media, be they the MSM, blogs, YouTube, and of course, in person, will be the most successful campaigner. I may be biased but I'm not all that impressed with what Edwards did media-wise. His dKos diary was contentless, his blog announced before he did, and there is a disjointedness between his internet stuff and the standard morning interview stuff. It may well be that his dailykos diary was where he truly blew it. That was the place where he could have put it all together. Still, Jeff has a point that we have no idea whether this is something revolutionary or overkill. Only time will tell.

[Democrafty]

1. I don't know if invoking Ken was such a good idea. n/t

[karynnj]

3. While reading that was my thought too

I'm old enough (and from Indiana) and the thing it immediately brought to mind was when Dan Quayle in his first run made a somewhat similar statement saying something like he didn't think people should vote for him because he looked like Robert Redford. (Redford was actulally far better looking and had better political views.)

Edwards raises the issue that he is seen as "Ken", which is not as good as Robert Redford. Ken is plastic and bland - and Barbie has avoided marrying him since 1961 (or so), even though she has bought any number of wedding gowns. Not quite the image you want - and Edwards is definately implying that he is seen as Ken. It also implies that he sees something positive in Ken. To me this implies that the comments om his good looks and hair have gone to his head. Vanity anyone?

On the more serious comments that Beachmom made and the blog comment, I agree with them. I thought the NYT designation of Edwards as the most media savvy clueless. His website when it first came out was better than the pared down Kerry web site - but the new Kerry one is far better. I like being able in posts to link to so many speeches - in both text and video. (The people doing the Kerry blog had a big advantage - they had Kerry.)

I was initially concerned when Edwards put out his priorities - until I realized that every Democrat would have the same list - because it was very vague. (I was annoyed that he stold Kerry's "moral leadership" but it fits Kerry better.) I also realized that when they high level sentiments are not backed with specifics - preferably things done or supported in the past and a concrete plan for the future, they are obviously superficial. That was his complaint - and the complaint of many in the media.

The other flack in the media has been his wealth. This is fair only because it is in contrast with Elizabeth Edwards speaking of how they were not like the rich Kerrys. THey are wealthy and by standards of most Americsns were "rich" since they graduated with law degrees. (It's a matter of perspective - from her current income level, they were poor. But in reality, they were young, had excellent educations and skills and could reasonably expect to be very comfortable.) They need to stop saying they were poor - even his parents were comfortably middle class.)

[Democrafty]

4. Right, being Ken is not a good thing.

And, frankly, it never would have occured to me to make that comparison. Until, well, now...

[JanusAscending]

2. Overall, this was my impression of him in '04 .

Just a Ken doll, pretty face. His wife has more substance than he, and a brain to go with it! I for one, got very tired of hearing the same old stump speech from the beginning of the campaign to the end!! It's like he was a robot programed to say the same thing , over and over. I think he is a very nice guy, but has a long way to go, to prove that he's Presidential material to me.:hide: please be kind, but that's just my opinion.

[sandnsea]

5. I think this is all there is

It's been the thing that has stuck with me for a while now. YouTube could work really well for Kerry, a moment like Rassmann in Iowa, some of those great storytelling sessions with little kids, lots of opportunities to see more than the speechifying. But Edwards? It doesn't seem to me that it matters whether he's on the stump, working on a house, or having a family dinner; it's the exact same guy. No tender moments. No letting down any walls. No personal insights at all. I think most people expect to know someone better as time goes on, and yet Edwards is exactly the same today as he was the first time we saw him. That's why none of this instant media is going to help him. People are going to have to want what he's got right out of the gate.

[kerrygoddess]

6. Ouch

You pretty much nailed it there.