Adam Nagourney On the Internet

John Aravosis and Atrios have both commented on Adam Nagourney's take on the internet in politics.  Yes, it's not a very good article.  For instance, AdNags leaves out the very obvious primary challenge to Lieberman, and he doesn't talk about the right-wing blogosphere's penchant for disturbing racism.

What I found fascinating is how Nagourney approaches the piece.  He talked to lots of top Democratic and Republican aides searching for the way they see the internet.  But what about the public?  It seems to me that internet, by lowering the capital costs to participating, tends to distribute political power to more people.  Or at least that's what top Democratic strategists tell me.

Tags: Adam Nagourney (all tags)

Comments

6 Comments

Re: Adam Nagourney On the Internet

I think the Nagourney article was more about setting conventional wisdom among the gang of 500 than it is about writing the definitive exposition on the state of digital American politics.

Ron Brownstein has written a couple of these "The Internet Will Be Important for 2008" articles. It seems that the members of the political journalist class are competing among one another to be seen as the journalistic authority on net politics.

The Dean and Clark uprisings of 2004 shattered the political press's self-image. They had thought they knew all there was to know, and could precisely predict what was going to happen. 2004 showed that they have a huge blindspot when it comes to online activity.

by blueflorida 2006-04-01 12:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Adam Nagourney On the Internet

The article was superficial, disappointing and not nearly critical enough. The political Internet is a fact-free zone. It acts as a megaphone, and the typical Internet site -- liberal or conservative -- is quick to exclude alternative viewpoints. It is mainly a playground for wealthy college grads with too much time on their hands (to which I plead guilty), and zero tolerance for anything that challenges their world view.

That's what the article should have talked about, and it didn't. 'Tis a shame.

by cwilson 2006-04-01 03:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Adam Nagourney On the Internet

Nagourney is a tool and has been since at the least the first time I became aware of his name. If you want credible reporting Nagourney is not the guy you read.

by Andrew C White 2006-04-01 08:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Adam Nagourney On the Internet

What I want to know is how Nagourney did an entire piece without mentioning Senator Russ Feingold.

2008 straw poll

Is he stoopid or does he not see what is going on?

by Bob Brigham 2006-04-01 11:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Adam Nagourney On the Internet

    But Feingold is a Publicity Seeker.  Got that?
     A publicity seeker. A publicity seeker. A publicity seeker.

    Sort of like: Dean Can't Win. Dean can't win. Dean can't win.

    Repeat incantations like this often enough and you too can be a crack political reporter like Adam Nagourney.

by LaughingHistorian 2006-04-02 11:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Adam Nagourney On the Internet

Of course I find it interesting that Markos and Jerome both agreed to talk to Nags after so many of us have warned against it for so long.

How badly do you think they were misquoted or quoted out of context?

by CAModerate 2006-04-02 03:38PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads