Other parties have got with the times and I've found that one of the best ways to keep up to date with politicians has been through their respective blogs: the Lib Dems have one of the best bloggers in Wales in the form of Peter Black who's excellent for regular and topical debate, Bethan Jenkins – Plaid's rising star – frequently blogs on her work and Conservative leader Nick Bourne posts on an infrequent but fairly regular basis.
There are also blogs from 'grass roots' party supporters for many of the other parties but considering Labour are the biggest party in the country and considering they have more AMs than anyone else, one would think a blogger might be among them...
Is it just easier to attack the government than defend it, do you think? Or are Labour just too busy governing?
Could it be that the Labour party are missing a trick? After all, while other parties pride themselves on getting people involved Labour seem content to hide away in Cardiff Bay...
I'd love to know your thoughts on this one!
Dewi Tri
PS If there is a good Labour-supporting blog that hasn't crossed my path please let me know!
7 comments:
I have been a consistent presence (or menace) in the Welsh blogosphere, and a Labour supporting one at that. I think you raise some important points;
Firstly, Plaid in particular seem far keener to encourage activists and members to blog and use the medium as a source of information and profile raising. I applaud them for that.
Secondly, I personally think that blogging is very niche, read by the converted and unlikely to actually make any difference compared to more traditional campaigning techniques. Hand on heart, I just don’t think blogging is important to the result of elections, and as such, taking a strategic party decision to ‘have more bloggers’ seems a bit pointless. Politicos are not a fair reflection of society at large, despite what we all think.
Thirdly, I honestly think that many of the people down Cardiff Bay in the Labour Ranks have been burned regarding researchers being sacked – Dave Collins was sacked for his ‘brain dead language’ comment, I was sacked for not declaring to the AM I worked for that I kept a blog (exposed by said ‘brain dead’ comment). Many simply ‘troll’ blogs (which all party staffers do) or use elaborate wheezes such as aliases to hide who they are, which is far easier to attack and post smears.
Fourthly, I think as I blogged about this week, Labour is losing its ‘insurgency’ factor, which is inevitable when you have been in Government for so long. Blogging naturally lends itself to attack and scrutiny of those in power, rather than standing up for a Government’s record or commending a policy. I just think it is far easier to tell people what they are doing wrong, rather than telling people what to do right.
Fifthly, fact is that politicians of all parties are committed to keeping debate watertight, look at some of the poltician’s blogs, they are moderated to the hilt and the most sanitised comments get published.
Hope that is helpful, I am hardly someone in the ‘know’ re: Welsh Labour, but there we are.
Marcus
I would agree that Labour are under represented on the blogshpere, especially since one of their best in Normal Mouth packed it in. However I would say that Huw Lewis blogs more often and more topical that Nick Bourne. The Tories through Glyn Davies, David Jones, Miss Wagstaff etc do have a decent aray of bloggers but nick's is very poor. Very stagnant for long periods and when it is used offers nothing but a press release. He hasn't even blogged to address the Lord Roberts review (or lack of it).
A healthy blogsphere needs representatives of all party's and at the moment maybe Labour are the party least represented and the one that needs it most.
“A healthy blogsphere needs representatives of all party's and at the moment maybe Labour are the party least represented and the one that needs it most.”
While I totally agree with your premise, I personally don’t hold sufficient value in the ‘blogosphere’ to truly make Labour’s current lack of bloggers a real electoral or political problem. Fact is that blogging is supposed to offer a more ‘democratized’ platform, where organic opinion formers can debate and share views outside of the media ‘gatekeepers’ and party machines.
I am yet to see how blogs have really increased political engagement beyond the core audience, which will always be present. While it has led to people have a ‘voice’ via blogging, I am at a loss to see whether blogs have any impact outside its niche.
Consider some of the Labour politicians who do blog, they are very sanitised (sans Huw Lewis who I think understands the platform well) and moderated to curtail debate or scrutiny. Frankly, what the blogosphere needs is open debates, not parties and politicians moderating and using bloggers as mules for the party line.
There is a fine line between parties encouraging politicians and members to blog, another to begin using them as cheerleaders – the best blogs are the ones that talk outside the party spin and have more of an independent view on things.
I am not saying Labour needs it to win votes just that it needs a profile on the blogsphere.
I think the main impact of the blogs on the electorate is that it has an influence on the media which in turn has an influence on the electorate, sort of indirectly winning or loosing votes. It is still in its infancy so the impact is hard to judge.
"I think the main impact of the blogs on the electorate is that it has an influence on the media which in turn has an influence on the electorate, sort of indirectly winning or loosing votes. It is still in its infancy so the impact is hard to judge."
Again, very sound reasoning for sure, but it is reasoning lacking in evidence.
The media seeing blogging as a threat, so again I am yet to see real evidence that blogs are really influencing the media. The only blogs quoted in the mainstream media are from politicians, who are already ‘elite’ actors within the political debate who are merely using a blog to enter said debate – it is merely about the medium being different, nothing more.
The point about mediums is a key one, as you have alluded to, many politicians merely post press releases online and write frankly boring bollocks – it is this electronic brochure approach that devalues blogs.
The problem for many is that they seeing the culture of ‘blogging’ as immoral, people can post all kinds of lies, smears and insults without recrimination or legal boundaries. Take a look at blogs around the scene, all the nasty comments are from ‘anons’ who I would guess are staff members or bloggers hiding. This is hardly a ‘debate’, the fact is that blogging is a digital jungle that can potential trample over common decency of political debate.
Blogging has solidified and provided a landscape for politicos to use, but it is too lawless to be place that could ever replace traditional media or other debate spaces.
"The media seeing blogging as a threat, so again I am yet to see real evidence that blogs are really influencing the media."
Watch any episode of Dragons Eye or Waterfront and you will see them using blog posts as if it is their new and brilliant take on politics in Wales
Gavin
But that is my point – Waterfront and Dragons Eye are political bubble programmes – made for and watched by people who have a large interest in politics.
I think you misread my point – fact is that there is a tipping point where ‘paid for’ media will be no longer be able to compete with ‘free’ content. The threat comes from the business case of producing paid for materials, using professional journalists and funding the distribution and sales channels for such a publication.
Bloggers can link to a western mail story online, or indeed quote it directly – what return does the western mail get from their investment in time, money and effort to produce that article?
The problem is that although there may be many bloggers who maintain decent editorial standards, abide by the law and potentially offer a rich source of news and/or debate, there are many more who don’t. What price our democracy if the traditional media if it is replaced by the wild west of the internet? Consider the smears on the Obama campaign, which were all generated from blogs and the internet. Fact is that reputable media companies, even stuff like Fox News, are liable to legal action if they commit libel/slander etc.
That is why the media see blogging as a threat – not because they don’t refer to it or use it to report news, it is because their business models cannot compete with free content.
Post a Comment