I admit it, I'm totally excited about how "Under Obama, Web Would Be the Way." But I'm also sick of it already. After I recently praised President-elect Barack Obama for running a digital campaign, I've had some time to think about my unoriginality.
Obama has apparently launched a Web site for his dutiful Facebook followers to monitor the transition (do I have to tell you the name of the Web site? change.gov). Kind of impressive, sure, but I'm embarassed at the same time by the trite notion of the Internet evidenced in this CNN lead: "Barack Obama had a formidable online presence during his quest for the White House, and he is once again turning to the Internet to communicate with the American public as president-elect." Ooooh he used the Internet to communicate with the public. Unheard of!
So, the next president is going digital, and that is newsworthy. But as someone somewhere once kind of said, what is the difference between digital and real going to be in the next few generations anyway?
And amid all of this, let's not forget the "digital divide." The digital divide is the gap between the Internet access of the rich and the poor. I am unabashedly in support of all digital endeavors, but meanwhile, it doesn't solve the problem that so many people don't even have that great of access to the Internet, which is a thriving part of our economy.
So props to the new wired Whitehouse, but also, let's see what that digital culture actually produces. Hopefully the Obama administration will change more than just its CSS.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
Is this going to be the new Fireside Chat? We all gather around and read the White House Blog?
It'll be fascinating to watch. Obama is by no means the first to do this, either - Voice of America has been abandoning its radio programs in favor of internet mediums (VOA is the American version of the BBC World Service; no one knows about it because in the late 40s American paranoia about government propaganda led to legislation meaning it couldn't broadcast domestically - I'm sure an interesting argument can be had about the internet and the ethics of government use thereof)
So we have the internet being used by the government for domestic and international mass communication. Ok, well, that means the government cares now - it won't affect the progress of technology, but it will probably propel legislation forward. The first time change.gov is profoundly hacked, or government mass e-mails are spoofed, we'll start seeing tectonic shifts in what has thus far been a largely unregulated medium.
After that, of course, literacy is going to become that much more important. Maybe education will get a boost...
I love the Fireside Chat comparison! That seems to be exactly what this is.
The fact that Obama isn't really the "first" to do this is maybe what I'm driving at. I'm kind of disenchanted by bloggers and newspapers perhaps making it more innovative than it really is.
But then, on the other hand, I'm just trying to hide my own enchantment by a digital democracy...
What a dichotomy I face. And that's OK.
But thanks for the comment and I especially love the point about the first hacking! Didn't even think about that! Ahhhh.
Post a Comment