Adam wrote:
Seems like no-brainer stuff to me. But, more in question, imo though, is the Edwards campaign assertions of vitality based on web traffic that, as the article implies, could have been generated by any number of sources whose affiliations can't really be determined by a hit. And if a hit on John Edwards' webpage is an indication of support for him, then by that turn, I guess that means I'm a supporter of Scientology.

There seems to have been interesting results from the CNN/YouTube debates, so I wonder if the real metric of the Internet's effect on national debate/the political process leading up to the election doesn't come more from participation in the debate (the voiceless get a chance to be heard in the conversation for a cheap webcam and a coherent sentence) and less from just having 24/7 access to information on a website.

Hate to be cynical, but I honestly think for Edwards the metric of success is how many dollars are donated to his campaign through the web site.

I don't think the youtube debate was really any easier to get into than to be a question asker in a televised debate, do you?

RE: Interwebs and Politics?