Astroturf and "cyber ambuscade"
No one doubts for a moment politics is a messy business. The left has especially made efforts in unfounded smear ads like the Paul Martin's "soldier's in our cities" TV ads that caused so much outrage during the campaign the Liberals last lost, and more recently, the attack ad running on CTV attempting to smear agriculture minister Ritz over his bit of black humour privately expressed over the listeriosis outbreak.
In the US, this appears to have reached a high art in the use of Youtube to make smear ads masqueraded as "grassroots" sentiment go viral. Rusty Schackleford of the JAWA Report, has assembled a compelling case for corporate "astroturfing" on behalf of the Democrats that may trace back directly to Obama's chief media strategist.
"Astroturfing" is what PR industry insiders call the practice of "manufacturing grassroots support." It tries to disguise itself as a "grassroots" phenomenon -- but it's artificial and inorganic. Hence, "Astroturf." At the corporate level, the practice has been dubbed "a cyber ambuscade" - a campaign designed to upset competitors by deliberately spreading rumours and false information through the use of the internet.
Shackleford painstakingly details a campaign through Youtube, aimed at discrediting Sarah Palin through the use of audio and visual material that perpetuates stories known to be false about the candidate, all the while trying to make them appear as if they originated from the netroots (cyber equivalent to "grassroots", for those trying to keep up. Pejoratively known as "nutroots" when applied to lefty supporters).
Shackleford's exquisite tracking leads circumstantially, but with an apparently compelling clarity, back to the executive owners of a major leagues PR firm with strong Democratic ties, ultimately leading speculatively right back to Obama's chief media honcho.
What makes the connections plausible, is the action of the youtube users as the light was being shone on them - deletions of videos and accounts abound, not something you would expect to see if the users were true nutroots.
There is a difference, for the moment, between grassroots supporters making up stuff to support their favorite candidate all on their own, and a corporate program to purposely spread false innuendo. The US federal election commission has rules of engagement in this regard. Shackleford contends that if the audit trail of users and accounts holds up, FEC regs have been broken, and specific individuals could be (and should be) on the hook for violations.
The read on JAWA is illuminating. If substantiated, and the cursory evidence is certainly compelling, then one has to question the integrity of a political ideology that believes lies, deceit and deception are acceptable means to acquire power.
Shackleford's tale is a rare insight into the politics of hate, where principles have long since withered in the name of winning.
In the US, this appears to have reached a high art in the use of Youtube to make smear ads masqueraded as "grassroots" sentiment go viral. Rusty Schackleford of the JAWA Report, has assembled a compelling case for corporate "astroturfing" on behalf of the Democrats that may trace back directly to Obama's chief media strategist.
"Astroturfing" is what PR industry insiders call the practice of "manufacturing grassroots support." It tries to disguise itself as a "grassroots" phenomenon -- but it's artificial and inorganic. Hence, "Astroturf." At the corporate level, the practice has been dubbed "a cyber ambuscade" - a campaign designed to upset competitors by deliberately spreading rumours and false information through the use of the internet.
Shackleford painstakingly details a campaign through Youtube, aimed at discrediting Sarah Palin through the use of audio and visual material that perpetuates stories known to be false about the candidate, all the while trying to make them appear as if they originated from the netroots (cyber equivalent to "grassroots", for those trying to keep up. Pejoratively known as "nutroots" when applied to lefty supporters).
Shackleford's exquisite tracking leads circumstantially, but with an apparently compelling clarity, back to the executive owners of a major leagues PR firm with strong Democratic ties, ultimately leading speculatively right back to Obama's chief media honcho.
What makes the connections plausible, is the action of the youtube users as the light was being shone on them - deletions of videos and accounts abound, not something you would expect to see if the users were true nutroots.
There is a difference, for the moment, between grassroots supporters making up stuff to support their favorite candidate all on their own, and a corporate program to purposely spread false innuendo. The US federal election commission has rules of engagement in this regard. Shackleford contends that if the audit trail of users and accounts holds up, FEC regs have been broken, and specific individuals could be (and should be) on the hook for violations.
The read on JAWA is illuminating. If substantiated, and the cursory evidence is certainly compelling, then one has to question the integrity of a political ideology that believes lies, deceit and deception are acceptable means to acquire power.
Shackleford's tale is a rare insight into the politics of hate, where principles have long since withered in the name of winning.
posted by Stephen | 9/22/2008 11:17:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home