However you come out on the politics of the “to-fund or not-to-fund” ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) issue, the radical change in House and Senate’s support for funding of the organization (or defunding as the case may be) is an excellent example of the impact of new media technologies. Information travels across new media distribution channels out of the control of mass media, and corporate and government agendas. In this case, according to Michael Barone of the Washington Examiner, new media sources played a significant role in forcing Washington to address the ACORN issue.
He writes:
Democrats voted 172-75 to defund ACORN; Republicans voted 173-0 to do so. This would not have occurred but for http://biggovernment.com/ the Big Government videos of ACORN employees encouraging tax evasion and prostitution. “Mainstream media” studiously ignored this big, big story, because it put Obama’s political allies in ACORN in a bad light–such an egregious bit of biased coverage that it aroused derision and contempt from Jon Stewart on The Daily Show.
Whether or not you even agree with Barone’s interpretation, you have to admit that new media is making its mark on politics. From text messages to encourage votes to viral videos that impact funding, if you ignore the power of an interconnected network to distribute information, you do so at your peril—or embarrassment. Just as social media networks have tremendous power to support a cause; they can equally expose a transgression.
Plurk This Post 
Buzz This Post 
Delicious 
Reddit This Post 
Stumble This Post
This event also illustrates the potential dangers that “reporting” by social media can foster. These videos were not probed for veracity, put into full context, or adjudicated in anyway. These sites did not convey that some ACORN employees allegedly reported the “investigative” pimp” to authorities, or that one employee went along with the human trafficking discussion to gain information and report it to a law enforcement relative. Regardless of whether some of the surmised claims were proven or not – a lot of damage was done to a huge community organization. Similar tactics used in broadcast media to weed out pedophiles for example, usually do not hold up in a court of law. No matter which side of the story you believe – it sets a potential dangerous precedent for people on all sides of the political spectrum. There may be retaliation with these tactics back and forth – with each subsequent act getting more indignant. It’s something for all of us to be aware of as we move into the digital age.
Andreas – thanks for the comment. It is interesting (and depressing) that policy-makers are willing to make such a dramatic about-face by without establishing the veracity of the claims. I wonder if there is a greater need now more than ever to establish credibility of information sources or were we just blissfully ignorant before? It would seem that the availability of information and voices ought to help expose bad information as quickly.
Thank you for another great post.
I look forward to many more entries with high quality info.
Very interesting and amusing subject. I read with great pleasure.