Traditional Media Analysis Using a Political Campaign as an Example

Being the Rich Sage, I’ll cover diverse topics related to business, Internet business and just plain old wisdom, which does not seem to be all that important these days with the “new paradigm”.  My thought is that its true wisdom, the timeless philosophies never go “out of style” — they are move vital than ever. 

After voting in several elections, just because I felt I had to exercise my greatest responsibility, I finally have a choice that lives up to timeless traditions, ageless philosophies and iron-clad principles.  It’s a very special time in history for me –what I feel is a badly needed turning-point.

I have no choice but to tell you about it. I have no choice but to do all I can to help the cause.  So, please pardom my thoughts, if you are not an Americal citizen…  Actually, if you hold your investments in $Dollar$, this message should be very important to you!

Much of my writing from this point is about the Ron Paul Presidential Campaign. 

Via todays’ update, I’ll discuss traditional media and “getting the message out” using a classic example that I’ve followed for most of the year. It’s a rather long post looking at two elements of  media and communications.

First some background and credits — I am using the famous painting by the name of “The Great Wave”by Japanese Artist Hokusai (1760-1849).  I’ve put the original and my ‘own work’ below to make my point.  Following that, I’ve used the example of Ron Paul’s 2008 Presidential Campaign, and their use of the Internet to build a following and broadcast their message.

Going Through the Elements 1 to 3 in the Edited Wave Figure: 

#1 is where the masses are.  Earlier this year, the masses were not doing much.  They were getting fed a message by the media that the media thought would prevail.  Now a few more of the masses are making so much noise and getting so much attention, they are starting to push upward and create a force.  If you look at the structure of a wave, a “foundation” to support it must be there or it will collapse. In the political world, just search Howard Dean to see an example of what happens when the “foundation” crumbles.  Waves are no different than a “house of cards” –pull the wrong card and the house will crumble down in an instant.  Political movements are no different –they need all the elements –1, 2 & 3.  Without #3, nothing much will happen at #1 and for certain, no media message will come out.

#2 is the traditional media–From print to television (and their online counterparts) –these are folks that pay their mortgage by mostly reporting their opinion to the masses.  All in all, they follow a proven plan to inform their readers (AND retain them) while telling us what they think we want to hear.  The traditional media tend not to understand the speed of the Internet and the intellect of those who use it.  They also don’t tend to follow the “lone individual with a voice of his/her own” –at least at the start.

 #3 is the online community–Many of us are free to voice our opinion (often anonymously), and mostly for free.  Many of us can voice our opinion with no ramifications nor accountability.  So much so that often “FIRE!” is cried and everyone reacts when there is only smoke.  We are also very well informed, as we tend to read a lot and watch news and understand it –we know when we are fed sound bites.  When we set our sights on an idea, we express it online and find fellow ‘Netizens who share those ideas. When they are good ideas, we find a lot of feed back. When we express bad ideas, we get “digitally nukes”.  Regardless, we express our ideas.

I’ve Set the Stage: Let Me Make My Point:

Many are calling a vast conspiracy in the 2008 Presidential race because the media is avoiding the one and only candidate who they (and I must say “me too”) think is a real (honorable principled) choice in many years. 

As I pointed out, those who are at position #1, at the front of the wave, are often Internet users with time to read, see and understand the points of view, jumped on the candidate.  That was in the early part of the year a little after Ron Paul announced his candidacy.  After just one debate and some interesting perspectives that were honest, he stood out as the obvious choice. 

The online “buzz” about him has spread (mainly online) because it takes 10 to 15 minutes of ones time to really get his message, although, I find it very difficult to understand why people don’t spend that time.  Anyway, the early “buzz” is now moving the masses (the support I’ve pointed to at #3 has started) and the “ground swell” that the Internet users were expecting is just now forming.  Personally, I find it just perfect timing.  Building the “buzz” takes a while because the mode of communications has changed for the people getting the message via the Internet, but the normal populace is still relying on traditional media, which takes a while to report what happens.

The traditional media –print and TV, who “pay their bills” (and mortgage) as I’ve said doing what they do — are lagging behind for various reasons about the candidate.  Only now –a good nine months after the announcement of Ron Paul’s candidacy (and a good 4 or 5 months after his first debate) are they getting around the talking about the issues and his policies (overall philosophy).

My contention here is that all this is a NORMAL PROCESS –not a vast conspiracy as many have screamed.  The traditional press is very slow to get to any message.  They are very much like some politicians.

HUGE MISTAKE by MEDIA:

Todays’ media does not understand the plugged-in, all ways on, instantly responsive users of the Internet.  They still think that voting on American Idol and an Internet Poll are the same thing, when in reality one is a popularity contest (Idol) and the other is a reflection of the opinions of the readers and their organizational skills.  Many of the media organizations put out polls on the Internet after debates, and when they get the unexpected feedback from the viewers, via the Internet, they were not happy.  Mainly because the results did not reflect what they expected.  However, the right thing to do after seeing the results is to discuss the outcome –NOT to completely dismiss it and call it a “mistake” of some kind.  They media is not suppose to MAKE the NEWS, they are suppose to report it.

The problem started when CNN, CNBC and many other networks didn’t understand the instant and highly-accurate responses of WELL INFORMED voters who watched the debates and then turned to the Internet when they wanted to voice their opinion.

In the past, someone that a newspaper hired had to call you at home, and ask a few questions to get the results of a debate.  Then after a day or two we’d hear the results with the announcement that the poll had an accuracy of +/- 3 points.

Those days are gone because these days many of the phone numbers of the “general population” are not listed in any “phone book” — VOIP, cell phone, etc. are the norm and the old landlines are getting dropped, so, when you call someone at home most often an “old school”, not so well informed response is recorded.

MY FEAR:

If you take the same process and let the *people* voice their opinion, the outcome is even more accurate, but there is one problem in all this:  Does the smart, principled candidate with integrity win a US Presidential Candidate? Or will it be the same old story?  

I think it’s about time for a revolution!

MY HOPE:

This was not a Friday rant, but a thought that I’ve had for sometime and I am happy that I’ve put it on digital paper. I hope you understood the fact that we are very lucky to be a part of history, where we have the power, not only via the Internet, but also with our vote to make a real difference –the first in a long time. Please exercise that and uphold your responsibility.

Let’s hope the masses will understand this message…
I’ll let a quote by John Adams make my point:

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” John Quincy Adams

Rich Sage

For the first time I’ll try to embed a video… Here it is:
Who is Ron Paul?