Twitter, Facebook and Transparancy

Interesting read; heard about this on talk radio today. Is cutting out the mainstream media and going directly to the people via Facebook and Twitter really transparent or is it broadcasting orchestrated sound bites? Is blocking the presses' access to historic events transparent? Is it transparent or manipulation? Ann Compton with ABC doesn’t seem to think the White House is lending itself to transparency when the industry that watches, assimilates and then distributes the information is eliminated and/or skipped over. She said the access at the White House is shriveling.

Didn’t Candidate Obama promise a transparent White House? I thought he did.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/presi...2913319&page=1

When a candidate runs, s/he makes a lot of promises.

Once elected...well, Obama is no different than any other elected official. To hold him to a higher standard would be unfair. All politicians do this.

Candidate Obama promised a LOT of things. Some have come to fruition. Others....

In terms of Twitter, Facebook & transparency....they are tools...disruptive technology. Makes them a dual-edged sword depending upon who wields them & why. The good news...they can be used to disseminate a message the "mainstream" media won't. The bad news...they can be used to disseminate a message the mainstream media won't.

When a candidate runs, s/he makes a lot of promises.

Once elected...well, Obama is no different than any other elected official. To hold him to a higher standard would be unfair. All politicians do this. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

He said he was different. He said he could be held to a higher standard. He said things were going to change. So now we can't hold him to the higher standard he promised.

He said he was different. He said he could be held to a higher standard. He said things were going to change. So now we can't hold him to the higher standard he promised.
Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

Ultimately we can hold him to whatever we want to...frankly I didn't buy his bullshit years ago so I can't really say I'm dissapointed. He's been about as (bad as) I expected.

Candidate Obama promised a LOT of things. Some have come to fruition. Others....

In terms of Twitter, Facebook & transparency....they are tools...disruptive technology. Makes them a dual-edged sword depending upon who wields them & why. The good news...they can be used to disseminate a message the "mainstream" media won't. The bad news...they can be used to disseminate a message the mainstream media won't. Originally Posted by Sisyphus

Agree they are powerful in that an entity, often with fewer resources, can get its message out there. I think that is a positive.

What scares me is we are driving our discussion on serious issues down to 140 character soundbites

What scares me is we are driving our discussion on serious issues down to 140 character soundbites Originally Posted by atlcomedy

I don't know that it scares me...but it certainly annoys me a times. It's absurd that it passes for discourse.

Ultimately we can hold him to whatever we want to...frankly I didn't buy his bullshit years ago so I can't really say I'm dissapointed. He's been about as (bad as) I expected. Originally Posted by atlcomedy

+1
Hear, hear!

He said he was different. He said he could be held to a higher standard. He said things were going to change. So now we can't hold him to the higher standard he promised.
Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

And you believed him. You are more naive than I thought.

Obama did say he was different and did promise a "new openness" and "more transparency" in government. And, at the time, he may even have meant it. However, I think that he and his people learned early on that what's really important is not openness but rather controlling the message: controlling what's said, how it's said, and to whom it's said. As a result, we see (and will continue to see) less interaction with the media (print, broadcast, or web), and more use of direct communications to people. In this way, what is said is not open to evaluation or interpretation by a third party, and there is no danger of the spin beginning to wobble. Remember, many people take what is said on the internet as the truth, without bothering to further investigate or evaluate. If you don't believe me, just ask any high school or college teacher. And, afterall, Obama used the social networking mechanisms (arguably a bane on society) very effectively in his campaign.
So, whilst Obama promised a new, higher level of transparency, the reality is far different. In this regard, he should be held to his higher standards, and hasn't met them. SSDD