let's talk about race...

Ok, so the great thing about the Internet is that everyone is equal, right? I mean, for all you know I could be thirty, Hispanic, and male. Of course, if you actually read what I've said this past month, you'd probably know that I was female and in my twenties. But what about my race? I may have alluded to it when trying to prove a point before, but if this was just a normal blog, you'd probably have no way of knowing.

The Internet, and more importantly blogs and chatrooms, offer a person a clean slate. You can have a non-descript handle (identity) and go from forum to forum espousing your views and your next door neighbor or landlord would have no idea it was you. Henry Jenkins wrote a piece in 2002, before the blogosphere exploded, commenting on how everyone assumes that they are talking to another white person in a chatroom. I take this to mean that if you're white in a chatroom you think you're talking to another white person. I'm not sure if he means that if you're black in a chatroom you also assume that everyone else is black, for example.

I have never really participated in a chatroom, but as a member of the blogging community, I can honestly say that I make no racial assumptions about the bloggers I read. I'm much likely to make gender assumptions, and have that color the way I read a person's remarks, than their race. I don't think that being racially blind is necessarily a good thing. But when you see a blog that is obviously catering toward one race or another, for example, Black Independent Voter Network, that does effect how I read it, or if I read it. I tend not to even look at that blog because I have the presumption that my comments wouldn't be valued there, even though most people would probably not know my race based on one paragraph of commentary.

Therefore, I think that it's better for blogs to remain racially neutral, unless they are trying to cater toward a specific racial audience. If the post calls for qualifying your comment with your race or gender, than do so, but otherwise I like that people can say what they think without being prejudged by how they look or act.

Will mobile phones bridge the digital divide?

So even if it were possible to wave a magic wand and cause a computer to appear in every household on earth, it would not achieve very much: a computer is not useful if you have no food or even electricity and cannot read.

According to a friend of mine who has spent a lot of time in Africa, often times when men are given access to computer over there they simply go to porn sites and indulge themselves. I definitely think that the idea from The Economist, that mobile phones can help close the digital divide, is promising. For investors especially, since introducing mobile phones will allow markets in the developed world to tap into the resources of poorer countries. By investing in lesser developed countries, we can allow their markets to grow and develop. Mobile phones are already fairly popular in Africa, for they aren't very expensive. Also people who don't have electricity can use them because they run on batteries.

What mobile phones can do for Africa that computers and the Internet can't, is to capitalize on resources that the Africans and others in similar situations already have. As the article said, what good is giving a computer to someone without electricity or who cannot read? You are ultimately adding to the problem by slowing down progress.

Mobile phones can also help those living under communist rule. When those living in communist North Korea get black market cellphones from their friends in South Korea, they are able to text message and attempt to organize mass protests (smartmobbing) or to just communicate with friends. In a country where the Internet is regulated and calls made on land lines are monitored, cell phones enable a person to keep in touch with the democratic world. Governments have not really found a way to regulate text messaging, and hopefully they will never be able to.

Technology (and globalization) has the advantage of making the world bigger and smaller at the same time. After the recent London bombings, for example, those in the African cities saw the news on TV, and could spread the word into the smaller villages where people may go for days without hearing. The Internet may never reach every person, because it isn't necessary or important in some cultures, but with technological innovations such as mobile phones, hopefully people can be more aware of each other and the world.

the power of the influential...

In February 2004, the Institute for Politics, Democracy & the Internet released a study, Political Influentials Online in the 2004 Election, which demonstrated that citizens involved in presidential politics through the Internet were almost seven times more likely than average Americans to act as opinion leaders among their friends, colleagues and families. The research established that one of the best ways for political candidates to reach the people who reach everyone else is through the Internet.

What the study found was that by properly using the Internet, a campaign can reach these online influentials and propel their campaign forward. As the article noted, these people are no longer just cybergeeks. Pretty much everyone in the Political Management program is there because they strive to be, if they are not already, influentials. By keeping blogs we are commentators on how we view politics, the media, and the Internet. Many people like to be looked to as experts or at least as someone whose opinion is valued on a particular topic. As we have learned in class, and as Carol Darr, Julie Barko, and Brandon Robinson reported in Putting Online Influentials to Work for Your Campaign, campaigns have and must continue to use some of the same techniques.

One of the easiest and best ways to harness the power of an influential is by giving him the opportunity to join and lead. Websites from presidential hopefuls to mayoral candidates can put a volunteer form on their website. With this form, they can determine who is excited to help the candidate. By putting a checkbox asking if they would like to become a precinct leader like Congressman Adam Smith did or by recognizing a volunteer of the month like Senator Harry Reid, campaigns are giving their volunteers power and influence. Something else campaigns have discovered is the power of the forward. A typical influential is the one who spreads the word about the new hot restaurant or bar. The influential in the Internet age forwards newspaper or magazine articles or encourages their friends to view certain websites or to get involved in the campaign that has recognized them as a precinct leader.

I, along with most people I know, constantly check their email. My Outlook is always open when I have my computer on, which is pretty much every waking hour. I have three e-mail addresses, one for school, one for work, and one that I don't mind giving out to websites or strangers. Between the three of them, I average over 100 e-mails a weekday. I probably forward at least five e-mails a day, and e-mail an article or two a week. I don't think I'm unique in these habits, and I don't even consider myself particularly influential. I therefore see the future of campaigns to become consistently more grassroots based with influentials leading the way, and those candidates who embrace the Internet to be most successful.

the bad with a little bit of good...

For my strategic plan assignment for class, I was assigned the Independent Green Party of Virginia. It is not a very attractive site, but its most ineffective aspect was that it is extremely unorganized and its setup just does not make sense. From the web address (votejoinrun.us) to the lack of homepage, from the ever changing headings to the lack of findable sections, the webpage is overflowing with structural flaws.

The first, most basic improvement would be a web address such as igva.com, or something else that alludes to the name of the party. For someone who doesn't know the purpose of the party, the current address seems a bit ambiguous. Not to mention it takes some searching through the site to discover the purpose. You have to click on the Run for Office link on the very bottom of the home page and then the explanation is at the bottom of that page.

My second point is the lack of homepage on this website. The first page you see is entitled IGVA News. It contains the most current candidates that the party is supporting for office. It has been updated two times since the semester started with new candidates. The headings that I thought originally served as links to different webpage settings change with the updates, giving the site no consistency. If you scroll all the way down the news page (which is extremely long) or any other page, there is a list of sections at the bottom. This list should really be given much more prominence, like perhaps as buttons on the sidebar as opposed to the current icon that resides there that again, makes little sense.

However, the IGVA site is full of information. If you have the time to sort through it all, there is just anything you want to know about the party: how to get involved, information about the candidates, and the issues. It may be written in a horrible font, in weird colors, and in no particular order, but it's there. And that's about all that the current site has going for it.