Okay- say I wanted to play a really twisted joke on the Kos community and decided to create an online persona for a new progressive candidate. To set this up, I register under the name of a lesser known democratic candidate in a race nobody has paid much attention to here. I register the identity, set up a feel-good website at some bloghost for the candidate, then write an earnest little plea for support and volunteers. Next, I post my very own "new candidate diary" on Dailykos with a nice little Paypal link to contribute to my campaign.
I keep this going for days with positive responses to comments and grateful little speeches in subsequent diaries, depending on the fact that many candidates have no clue what a blog is and won't cop to their online identity being co-opted.
After a week, I expose the whole thing as an experiment in political manipulation and start cruising the right-wing talk show circuit to prove that blogs are the ruination of American politics and should be strictly regulated in the realm of campaign reform, not as Constitutionally protected online media.
So- what's stopping this kind of shit from happening? Nothing, really. Either out of sheer malice or political opportunism, it's a real possibility that the next wave in creative ratf#$%ing will involve online misrepresentation of a candidate at a blog.
The success of this site and its ability to reach interested progressive voters has made it the logical place for elected officials and candidates to reach out for support. It's also become a proving ground of sorts for democratic strategies. So far, the only obvious attempts at disrupting this function of the site have come from obvious trolls. I think we're living on borrowed time.
It's been clear that conventional media doesn't quite know what to make of the success of online alternative media. That's one reason why they've been so willing to accept spin from the right about the motives and associations of progressive bloggers. Oh yeah, I know, there's many reasons, including the fact that the blogs are cutting into their financial futures- setting a bar for online success that it's hard for corporate owned media to measure up to. That's why a successful ratf#$% like I just described would be reported all over the corporate media, with glee and malice.
The level of critical thinking that's present here have been successful in preempting any organized attempts at using the site to disrupt campaigns- but there's a real danger in our success. I'd like to open up a discussion among members of the Dailykos community about how we're going to move forward into the midterm elections. Can we help prevent this kind of abuse or other kinds of online ethical dilemmas from happening?
I have hesitated to post on this subject for a while now, out of concern that talking about dirty tricks might help make them happen. Given the recent proliferation of new candidate diaries, I think it's important that we talk about some ground rules that could help prevent problems from happening at critical points in this election year. Here's a start at two new site rules that I think should be seriously considered:
- All candidates and elected officials must have their User Ids authenticated by Dailykos management before they can post diaries or comments that support their campaigns and/or political goals. That includes the candidates and elected officials, their chiefs of staff, their online coordinators and any other paid staff member that posts on their behalf. Anyone who posts here towards their campaign or political goals without authentication will be asked to comply immediately, or be subject to banning.
- All candidates and elected officials, as well as their paid staff, must disclose their identity and/or affiliation in a signature line present in all posts, even those that aren't directly related to their campaign or official activities. They are welcome to post on Dailykos on all subjects, but in the interests of ethics and full disclosure, they must provide this information so that all posters are aware of their affiliations.
That's not so bad, is it?
To reinforce why this is an important discussion for us to have, let me take you back to the initial diary from Paul Hackett during the special election in Ohio last year. I had some real concerns about this diary and expressed them online, resting on the fact that the very first posting from the candidate was the day before this close election AND that he was apparently asking us to email everybody we knew in a new viral kind of GOTV effort. After quickly getting confirmation from Swingstateproject that it really WAS Paul Hackett, I immediately went online to confirm in several comments that the diary was real and politely urged people to GOTV in the district. By that time, our own special version of the circular firing squad was already inexorably forming, to be met with Hackett's trademark candor- "It's me, quit being a typical Democrat get off my ass." Yup, that's the guy who was herding cats all over SW Ohio.
There was a lot of confusion about that diary, which served to dilute the effectiveness of the candidate's online strategy. It drew attention from the immediate goal of getting him ELECTED. It also helped start a nasty little train of diaries about site ethics and conspiracy theorists that created a lot of bad feelings, some of which I think are still influencing the current Ohio campaign posts.
I think we need to set some basic rules in place for candidates and elected officials soon, given the acceleration of new campaign diaries in recent weeks. The candidates who have already become members of the Dailykos community have set a high standard, using their own common sense and personal ethics. Let's help the next group of candidates out with some real guidance on how they can reach out to the online community in a way that's more resistant to criticism.
OK- have at it.