EWS New Media Blog

November 6, 2008

A Widely Appreciated Victory

Filed under: Politics, history — Tags: , , , — jtannenbaum @ 10:48 pm

With the announcement of Obama as the next president came worldwide talk. Every single country seems to have their own opinion on the subject. Each seems to feel they will be personally affected by the decision. Countries all across the world have come forward speaking of how elated they are with the decision. Surprisingly, almost none have expressed outright disappointment. Worldwide people were watching the election, actively waiting to hear the results. For example, in England their news was said to be completely dominated by our election coverage. All of the headlines , from msnbc, speak to this.

 

-Germans hail Obama’s ‘historic’ victory

-For Israelis ‘The Winner Takes All’

-Cubans hope Obama’s win means ‘better times ahead’

-For Egyptians ‘It’s a new beginning’

-Japan celebrates Obama victory

-Obama: An ‘opportunity and a test’ for Iran

-Afghans hope ‘Obama will help us’

-Obama gets China’s youth vote

-Vietnamese back ‘friend of Hanoi’

-Iraqis say vote smells of ‘honey promises’

-U.S. election is ‘entertaining’ for Chinese

-For Poles, the election is personal

-In Russia, Obama beats McCain

 

And the list goes on and on. I know I don’t follow the elections of any other country closely; in fact I don’t know of anyone, who doesn’t have family in foreign countries, who does.  So my question is, why should one man make such a difference to all these countries? Even if we may be the current most powerful country, we live in a some-what democracy, with checks and balances and various elected officials. Why does such an election weigh so heavily in the minds of so many independent countries?

November 5, 2008

Text Messaging the Results

Filed under: Sports — Tags: , , , — zsavrick67 @ 5:33 pm

About five to six times a day I will get a text message from ESPN.com with breaking sports news reagrding injuries, signings, and any other valuble information on my favorite teams.  Clearly, these texts are always about sports both professional and collegiate.  Yesterday, I was wondering if I would get a text saying, “John McCain has been elected President of the United States” of “Barack Obama has been elected president of the United States.”  Why was I wondering this?  On a concious level, I have no clue, but on a subconcious level I was curious.  Yes, it is a small example but when something that I have a passion for is connected to the most important event in our country at the time, I am happy. 

Sports have been an arena for presidents and presdiential candidates to make themselves personable to the people of the United States.  Every president for the past six presidents has thrown out a first pitch in a Major League Baseball game.  Both Obama and McCain made a final televised apperance on Monday Night Football.  The world champions of every major sport have been invited to the White House to have a ceremony with the President.  George Bush used to own the Texas Rangers.  These are just small examples of how sports has been a positive outlet for presidents.  A sports arena is an oppotrunity to be seen by millions of people at once, it does nto take a televised debate.

November 3, 2008

Campaigns in a Web 2.0 World

Filed under: Internet, Politics, Web 2.0, history — Tags: , , , , — hnodler @ 11:07 pm

2.6 million people voted early in the ever-scrutinized swing state of Florida, pushing the total for early/absentee voting in that state beyond 30% of the electorate. On the eve of one of the most participatory presidential elections in US history, a question on the minds of many political junkies is this: Why do we suddenly care enough to participate in our electoral process?

Is this November’s record-breaking turnout the result of a perfect storm, one which includes an economic crisis, a stunningly unpopular incumbent, the appearance of unlikely candidate with star qualities? Tomorrow, when (hopefully) the winner of this contest is announced, will we quietly ease back into our routines of apathy and passivity? Or has a larger force forever changed the way we think and act politically? In other words, are we now somehow hard-wired for greater political participation?

An article in yesterday’s New York Times suggests that increased political participation may be here to stay and attributes it at least in part to media convergence. Surely it comes as no surprise that our increasingly networked world affords us much richer and more powerful opportunities to swap messages and collaborate, but this feels somehow bigger than mere adoption of technology. This election season model came swiftly, and developed organically, rather than by deliberate design.

Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia, thinks that we’ve only seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to online collaboration. There’s no doubt–we live in exciting times.

Blog at WordPress.com.