The blog I decided to choose, was the Politician blog on Hillary Rodham Clinton.
New York Times
The blogs is from the Caucus; political blogging from the New York times and the title is Clinton invokes 9/11 with firefighters. Hillary Clinton discuss ways that she will help firefighters whenever they were in need. She recalled Sept. 11 at length and the sacrifices and burdens of firefighters and first-responders that day and afterward – remarks that only made one wonder what kind of a speech Rudy Giuliani would have given if he had chosen to attend the conference. She also received a cheering standing ovation when she said, about politicians’ vows of support for firefighters, “It’s great for the photo ops but how about taking care of the people who have taken care” of the nation. Basically Hillary Clinton wanted all the firefighters to now that she will be their for them in the future if they elect her for upcoming presidency. This speech was a way for her to get all the firefighters vote for the election.
Blogger
The person who wrote this blog, was a writer for the New York Times named, Patrick Healy. The blog was posted March 14Th 2007, at 1:00 p.m. The blog was basically a good tone for Hillary Clinton. It shows how she is lending a helping hand to the future firefighters in need. This blog was both good and bad for Hillary Clinton. Even thought this blog has note been posted for a long period, there still have been many views from people just checking it out and finding out what the blog is about.
Negative comment on Blog
"I have no doubt that Clinton has what it takes to be president. She has been a politician most of her life for all practical purposes. I just don’t believe her on the issues because she won’t take a stand on any of them. I also resent her exploitation of the 9/11 tragedy to get VOTES. I must admit that she is no guiltier than any of the rest in exploiting the deaths, injuries and maiming of thousands of Americans on our own soil for political gain." This was a comment posted by a woman name Lisa, on March 14Th 2007, at 2:08 p.m.. She feels that Hillary Clinton is using the 9/11 tragedy to get votes and doesn't feel that it is acceptable. Even though the blog was discussing something good, there was still negative feedback from people. Even the good can still be looked at as a bad issue.
Positive comment on Blog
"Now that the fund is running out this year, she has asked for additional funds so that we can continue with the medical treatment of those affected by 9/11. Many people in NY (including me) have voted for her this past election because we have seen what a hard-worker she is in advocating for New York. Even many Republicans from upstate NY have voted for her. I think these firefighters have heard from NYC firefighters what a great leader she is." This was a site comment posted by a woman named Helen on March 14Th 2007, at 2:27 p.m. Unlike the first comment, this woman feels that Hillary Clinton's act and speech was great for New York City. She wants people to realize how good Hillary Clinton has been to the NYC, and hopefully others will realize when election time comes around.
Article
Rheingold argues that when people spread the idea that electronic networks are inherently democratic without specifying the hard work that must be done to harvest that democratising power, they can become unwitting agents of commodification. Habermas makes a distinction between the critical functions of communicative processes and functions that aim to influence the decision of consumers, voters and clients. The critical functions are self-regulated and inclusive, while those aiming to influence are implemented by organisations that aim to promote purchasing power, loyalty or conformist behaviour. These two functions compete with each other. The principle of publicity turns “against itself and thereby reduces its critical efficacy” (Habermas in Calhoun, 1993: 437). This was discussed in the article "Does the internet create Democracy?" by Alinta Thornton. In my opinion I have to agree and disagree with that question.
Yes internet does manipulate
The internet somewhat creates Democracy because there are so many articles and blogs that tries to either manipulate people into voting for a particular candidate. Certain blogs will discuss only good things about a politician and leave the bad issues out. The same thing happens with blogs that bad mouths politicians, so people wont vote for them. Some Americans spend half their day on the internet so they are easily manipulated by blogs and articles online.
No it doesn't
But some people could careless about articles on the internet. Many people may read a blog but pay no mind to it at all. They will go with there cut instinct on who they should vote for. And a lot of people will just look at articles and blogs on the internet just to see how everyone feels about the candidates or politicians. Bu in my honest opinion.
My Opinion
But in my honest opinion, I feel that the internet really does have a huge affect on certain peoples votes, because people are easily manipulated. Anything someone says then they feel that the person is either right or wrong. People don't dig deep anymore and find out the truth, they rather go with other people opinions. Just a bunch of COPYCATS.
Refrences-
Thornton, Alinta, Does Internet Create Democracy?, October 2007
M.A. Journalism Thesis, 25 March 2007, from
http://www.wr.com.au/democracy/index.html. Accessed 2001-10-01.
Healy, Patrick, Clinton invokes 9/11 with firefighters, 14 March 2007
New York Times, The Caucus, 25 March 2007, from
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/14/clinton-invokes-911-with-firefighters/
New York Times
The blogs is from the Caucus; political blogging from the New York times and the title is Clinton invokes 9/11 with firefighters. Hillary Clinton discuss ways that she will help firefighters whenever they were in need. She recalled Sept. 11 at length and the sacrifices and burdens of firefighters and first-responders that day and afterward – remarks that only made one wonder what kind of a speech Rudy Giuliani would have given if he had chosen to attend the conference. She also received a cheering standing ovation when she said, about politicians’ vows of support for firefighters, “It’s great for the photo ops but how about taking care of the people who have taken care” of the nation. Basically Hillary Clinton wanted all the firefighters to now that she will be their for them in the future if they elect her for upcoming presidency. This speech was a way for her to get all the firefighters vote for the election.
Blogger
The person who wrote this blog, was a writer for the New York Times named, Patrick Healy. The blog was posted March 14Th 2007, at 1:00 p.m. The blog was basically a good tone for Hillary Clinton. It shows how she is lending a helping hand to the future firefighters in need. This blog was both good and bad for Hillary Clinton. Even thought this blog has note been posted for a long period, there still have been many views from people just checking it out and finding out what the blog is about.
Negative comment on Blog
"I have no doubt that Clinton has what it takes to be president. She has been a politician most of her life for all practical purposes. I just don’t believe her on the issues because she won’t take a stand on any of them. I also resent her exploitation of the 9/11 tragedy to get VOTES. I must admit that she is no guiltier than any of the rest in exploiting the deaths, injuries and maiming of thousands of Americans on our own soil for political gain." This was a comment posted by a woman name Lisa, on March 14Th 2007, at 2:08 p.m.. She feels that Hillary Clinton is using the 9/11 tragedy to get votes and doesn't feel that it is acceptable. Even though the blog was discussing something good, there was still negative feedback from people. Even the good can still be looked at as a bad issue.
Positive comment on Blog
"Now that the fund is running out this year, she has asked for additional funds so that we can continue with the medical treatment of those affected by 9/11. Many people in NY (including me) have voted for her this past election because we have seen what a hard-worker she is in advocating for New York. Even many Republicans from upstate NY have voted for her. I think these firefighters have heard from NYC firefighters what a great leader she is." This was a site comment posted by a woman named Helen on March 14Th 2007, at 2:27 p.m. Unlike the first comment, this woman feels that Hillary Clinton's act and speech was great for New York City. She wants people to realize how good Hillary Clinton has been to the NYC, and hopefully others will realize when election time comes around.
Article
Rheingold argues that when people spread the idea that electronic networks are inherently democratic without specifying the hard work that must be done to harvest that democratising power, they can become unwitting agents of commodification. Habermas makes a distinction between the critical functions of communicative processes and functions that aim to influence the decision of consumers, voters and clients. The critical functions are self-regulated and inclusive, while those aiming to influence are implemented by organisations that aim to promote purchasing power, loyalty or conformist behaviour. These two functions compete with each other. The principle of publicity turns “against itself and thereby reduces its critical efficacy” (Habermas in Calhoun, 1993: 437). This was discussed in the article "Does the internet create Democracy?" by Alinta Thornton. In my opinion I have to agree and disagree with that question.
Yes internet does manipulate
The internet somewhat creates Democracy because there are so many articles and blogs that tries to either manipulate people into voting for a particular candidate. Certain blogs will discuss only good things about a politician and leave the bad issues out. The same thing happens with blogs that bad mouths politicians, so people wont vote for them. Some Americans spend half their day on the internet so they are easily manipulated by blogs and articles online.
No it doesn't
But some people could careless about articles on the internet. Many people may read a blog but pay no mind to it at all. They will go with there cut instinct on who they should vote for. And a lot of people will just look at articles and blogs on the internet just to see how everyone feels about the candidates or politicians. Bu in my honest opinion.
My Opinion
But in my honest opinion, I feel that the internet really does have a huge affect on certain peoples votes, because people are easily manipulated. Anything someone says then they feel that the person is either right or wrong. People don't dig deep anymore and find out the truth, they rather go with other people opinions. Just a bunch of COPYCATS.
Refrences-
Thornton, Alinta, Does Internet Create Democracy?, October 2007
M.A. Journalism Thesis, 25 March 2007, from
http://www.wr.com.au/democracy/index.html. Accessed 2001-10-01.
Healy, Patrick, Clinton invokes 9/11 with firefighters, 14 March 2007
New York Times, The Caucus, 25 March 2007, from
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/14/clinton-invokes-911-with-firefighters/
No comments:
Post a Comment