The primary season hasn't ended, but Democrats have already begun the online battle against Republican presidential nominee John McCain with the launch of McCainpedia. The site is a wiki about McCain, but it's funded by the Democratic National Committee. The goal? To "centralize research material, allowing the general public to use it as they see fit," according to the site's "about" page. In other words, the McCainpedia is a one-stop shop for talking points that can be used to argue against the Republican candidate.
While its name is partly inspired by Wikipedia, the community-written encyclopedia, the McCainpedia is read-only for members of the public, prompting technologists to criticize the site for violating the community-driven ethos of Web 2.0. Given the polarizing nature of elections, the DNC says it is keeping editing in-house to "fully validate all of the information that appears, ensuring accuracy and reliability."
Based on just the headlines, I thought the McCainpedia was destined to become a case study for media literacy classes. But the top of every page clearly reads "A project of the Democratic Party," leaving no confusion about where the information on the wiki is coming from. It seems the biggest issue with the site is that it's not the forum for debate that its name implies, but rather a highly controlled source for opposition research on the Republican candidate.
What do you think: is it fair to call the McCainpedia a wiki if the public can't edit its content? And what are some of the sites you'll be relying on during election season?
Yesterday, as the Republican presidential debate took place via YouTube, the Democratic National Committee quietly launched a rather notable Web 2.0 initiative itself. FlipperTV is a new service from the Democratic Party site that offers a growing library of video clips of the Republican candidates on the campaign trail. Users are encouraged to take the video and "use the footage as they wish." Wink wink.
(Credit:
CNET Networks/Democratic National Committee)
In an era when home-brewed YouTube videos are more entertaining than 90 percent of network television, the DNC's strategy seems obvious. Why pay high-priced advertising companies to create mudslinging attack ads (that could blow up in its face) when you have millions of supporters with the technology to make their own videos and take responsibility for the content. The site even suggests that we "hold these candidates accountable for their comments and actions." ... Read more
- prev
- 1
- next
