So I was flipping through the channels and came across the Colbert Report. But, unfortunately, it was ending so I was only able to catch a few minutes. Anyway, the guest for that night was a representative from the republican party. They were discussing how technology was involved in elections. Colbert asked the representative if someone would be more likely to vote for a candidate running for office if they used things like facebook, myspace, and twitter. The representative without hesitation said that it wouldn't help nor make an influence on the voters.
However, I can't help but have a different opinion. I think that a candidate's use of technology can have a very deep impression on voters. I remember that so many people looked down on McCain because he wasn't able to use even basic technology like email. I would think that a candidate might be able to even connect more to the younger voters by using recent technology.
Thoughts?
Mary Quien
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I would also note Obama's utilization of the internet. And look who won: Obama, not McCain. So, it seems that technology might have a bearing on elections. Because technology is growing so rapidly and becoming such a large part of our culture, any candidate who doesn't utilize technology might be viewed as out of touch with culture, as was McCain.
I can see where the guy on the Colbert report is coming from, though. It would be great if technology were not an issue. But times are changing, technology is changing, and elections will have to change in order to accomodate these changes. Technology is both a blessing and a curse, but, either way, it's a reality. Politicians need to realize this if they want to be successful.
Emily T.
Kids like us are always on the computer: from Microsoft Word to facebook to www.blogger.com. Repeat cycle. The more we see something online, the more connected to it we become. All it takes is a quick google search to learn more about what we see on the internet. If we were to see something in a book, however, I feel that we'd be less inclined to do the extra research. The world wide web is truly the world at our fingertips. It's all a matter of convenience.
Obama's whole campaign was the support for "Change." A man who doesn't know how to access his e-mail is anything but changing and innovative.
(Sam Maliha)
Well, of course that representative from the Republican Party had bias, and his point of view probably wouldn't match with us (the Y2K generation!).
But as Emily stated, one reason Obama won was probably due to his superior use of technology. He quickly perceived the advantages in using social networks, Twitter, and Youtube videos, in the same way that FDR took advantage of radio technology to hold his Fireside Chats.
Furthermore, some criticized McCain during the campaign as remaining "out-of-touch" and disconnected with the common people, if he could barely use the Internet and email while the rest of the population has been Facebooking like crazy. After all, technology defines our world today. Ignore it at your own peril.
-Eric W.
I definitely agree that by utilizing technology, a candidate has a better chance of winning an election, but it also has influences beyond that. Don't you prefer a president that can use a computer over one that cannot? Since technology is all around us, as many of you have said, I feel like the president should be able to adequately use technology. It may not be necessary for the job, but it definitely would help. On top of that, quite frankly, you look much smarter as a candidate when you can use email, than when you cannot. We all know how simple email is, and the idea that the President of the United States cannot use email is disturbing. Therefore, technological awareness is an important criteria to consider in electing a President and should have an effect on the election.
(Arvind Kalidindi)
It is definitely an advantage to utilize today's technology in one's campaign; however, I would suggest a candidate to be very careful in choosing how he/she is going to use it. For example, posting Youtube videos to show his recent activities or broadcasting advertisements would be a smart use of technology, but excessive dependency on technology can result in harm.
For example, I do not think any one of us would want Obama to start a Facebook page and start writing on people's walls. We obviously don't wish the President to waste his time on Facebook. Using technology can be a political strategy;however,having an email account should not be the only reason to vote for that candidate(obviously Barack Obama had more than that in his campaign).
Jennifer Park
Obviously many of those of younger generations found McCain at fault for his inability to use email, but of course this was not the sole factor which led them to vote for Obama. It was merely one aspect. A much larger aspect was Obama's youth and charisma, which appealed to younger voters much more than did McCain's seemingly strained speech and movement.
I agree with Jenn that technology can have negative effects on presidential candidates if not used wisely. Sending emails is one thing, but using Facebook or Twitter is a completely different thing. In order for candidates to maintain their level of professionalism, it is best that they simply demonstrate their ability to use technology and "connect" with younger generations and do not overstep their boundaries. This is exactly what President Obama did, and thus technology was quite a benefit for him. McCain, unfortunately, did not have this advantage.
(Janet Lee)
The key is balance. Although this is off topic, I was reminded of the conversation that I held with my parents earlier this morning. Technology, in more ways than one, is leading us to grow out of our childhoods sooner than our parents did. With quick, easy access to the internet, we are bound to become more worldly at a faster pace. When my parents were children, they'd jump rope or play racket ball for hours. With the world at our fingertips, we are expected to learn so much in such a short period of time.
Therefore, had McCain won the presidency, would we have expected him to progress through his term more slowly because of his lack of aptitude in the technological realm? Do we expect Obama to complete tasks more quickly or efficiently?
(Sam Maliha)
While I would be inclined to believe that McCain lost due to his failure to connect with the youth, the initial impression doesn't stick. Honestly, Obama's reliance on his media campaign, and in particular, his internet campaign, was not a definite thing. The youth voter turnout has always been low. Thus, they are not considered the "prime" age group or constituent group to appeal to and campaign for. Why place bets on something that may not work?
I think that rather than the Internet being the new tool of politics, I think it might be a possible but not definite one. Obama was only able to use it because of his existing persona. As a candidate, he was portrayed as a relatively young and progressive person, even before the internet campaign. Thus, the campaign did not start the fire, it simply made it bigger.
So while I don't agree with the statement that it would have no impact whatsoever, I do not believe that every candidate should get a Twitter or a Facebook. The demographics are not right and many politicians would still be able to win by appealing to more stable demographics than the youth.
Post a Comment