techPresident - google - Comments

Sara Palin giggles at cancer

Deena — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 15:21:19 -0400

All I could find on the internet was a taste of how she would treat others. I'm surprised this wasn't scrubbed out.

I was appalled to hear this clip where Sara Palin laughs when a talk radio announcer calls one of her political rivals "a b**** and a cancer". The woman referred to is a cancer survivor.

This is not a woman living in lovingkindness to others.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=sara+palin+bitch+cancer&hl=en&emb=...

Searching for Good Comments :-)

EricFrenchman — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 15:00:05 -0400

I made a post earlier in the day, but I don't see them now. I'm not blaming techpresident it was probably my mobile phone connection. So if my earlier and longer response appears, I apologize for the duplication.

1)I didn't see the full extent and premise of Danny's article in your post. Danny's article looked at the presidential campaigns (as in plural) and you chose not to comment on both search campaigns only McCain's. How can you think you offer "unbiased" commentary when you "zing" someone who does marketing while the other is mysteriously absent of marketing.

2) As I wrote to Danny he witnessed us rolling out the search program as the campaign made the announcement. There are many objectives we have for search including ROI and pushing out messages. How do you know we "disappointed"? I have the data and it was an overwhelming success.

Linking to Danny's post without mentioning both sides and not mentioning the WSJ which got Danny to review the search campaigns is unfair.

A few notes

saraholoubek — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 10:26:14 -0400

Eric - I think you are avoiding the point: millions of web users wanted (shall I say, needed) to learn more about Sarah Palin on Friday, and the McCain web team missed the opportunity to present relevant content. This was made painfully clear when I realized that Palin's wikipedia page was the first source of information a few colleagues and I turned to. (that's a whole other story...)

If this was intentional, I'd love to know the details. I do see that there is now a paid search result for "Sarah Palin" with this copy: "Learn More About Sarah Palin/John McCain's Selection for VP./JohnMcCain.com/Palin"

For the record, I first sent my conclusions to techPres on Friday before I saw Danny's post, and forwarded his link on Sat am. I had not read the WSJ article.

On Botching and Paid Search

Nancy Scola — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 21:38:57 -0400

Eric -- Thanks so much for writing. It's good hearing your take, especially considering that, if I'm not mistaken, you help to head up the McCain campaign's paid search operation. I'd be great, then, to get your informed opinion of the situation. But I don't notice in your comment where you detail what's incorrect about the above post.

The search results for "Sarah Palin" as still the same at the moment as when the post was written. Searches for "McCain Palin" still tonight point to a landing page with a photo of the ticket, a donation button, and an e-mail sign-up box. And the extent of the Palin-related content on JohnMcCain.com is still limited to the text of yesterday's remarks. So what, then, differs here from your take?

You Botched Your Post

EricFrenchman — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 20:13:07 -0400

Danny looked before she was officially announced and then watched as the search program was rolled out. I've already emailed and Twittered with Danny about his article.

However, what I find interesting is your lack of reference to the WSJ article which prompted Danny to keep a very close eye on McCain's paid search campaign. Nancy why no mention of that or are you too biased to actually report a nationally recognized article written by the WSJ that showed how really ground breaking McCain's paid search program really is? I guess an accurate reporting of what's really happening is beyond your capability.

Eric Frenchman

Oh they did better than that

Freedomfighter — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 16:05:49 -0400

take a look!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/29/AR200808...

Looks like they were trying to control the story

wsfinkel — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:53:17 -0400

At least on Wikipedia:

A user name Young Trigg, the same name as her son, made over 30 edits to her wikipedia page the night before the announcement.

Hat tip to Daily Kos diarist davefromqueens.

Local Politics

Justine Lam — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:58:08 -0400

Thanks for highlighting that article by Chuck Raasch. The next phase in politics and technology will be utilizing internet/mobile tools to bring back civic participation in our local communities wherever we live.

As former eCampaign Director for Ron Paul's presidential campaign, I learned how key it was for our supporters to be involved on the local level of politics and government. If we had a larger base of political support, we could have done better in primaries than we did otherwise. Our supporters would've understood the rules of the game in every state.

Local politics is the vision that our Republic was founded upon, local community control, individuals organizing to make decisions about their communities & their lives, not a strong centralized federal government in Washington, DC making our decisions.

Currently, I work at Politicker.com an online political news site which is dedicated to covering the very local to state level politics in all 50 states (we have 15 states thus far). Our journalists on-the-ground in each state cover the political news and our anonymous "Wally Edge" gives us insider coverage.

Hopefully, we can help to educate and inform a politically passionate citizenry to become more engaged with politics in their different localities -- which will then trickle up in the political system.

Justine Lam
Director of Online Marketing
http://www.politicker.com

The "debates" so far...

LonewackoDotCom — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 15:42:38 -0400

The "debates" so far haven't featured any real questions, at least about policy matters. They've just been puffballs which generate a stock speech. My discussion of the announcement is here.

The only way to select good user-generated questions is described here. That's much different from the 10questions format, because only bloggers (say, someone who's been blogging for six months) and others with reputation to protect would do the voting. And, their votes would be public, meaning that they'd be putting their reputations on the line if they voted down tough videos or voted up weak videos.

MySpace/MTV

Michael Connery — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:36:24 -0400

Townhall style format? They'll be super smart if they take their cues from the MTV/MySpace Candidate Dialogues. Those events have thus far been the high point of voter-participation in a candidate forum.

I've blogged about them a number of times here on Tech President.

Bob Barr's Open Data Gambit

wyatthull — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:53:38 -0400

Former Congressman Bob Barr's recent entry into the Libertarian nomination race and live donation feed (http://www.barr08.com/) provide Dan B. and others with a shiny new data set to graph, analyze, and discuss. The transparency revolution marches onward! It should be fascinating to track his exploratory committee's donor engagement from Day 1, with the LP Convention in Denver less than two months away.

Obama Spike...

JMalone TN — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 23:58:00 -0500

... on YouTube is an illusion. Since the day before Iowa, and since then, YouTube has been playing with the view counts of certain candidates. Didn't matter how many times you watched a video all the way to the end the count didn't change for Ron Paul views. Want proof. Here you go.

This video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiFsxp5qOpM

For two days this video stayed at 133,302
views although everyone in the comments kept
asking why the view count wasn't changing.
It had 6071 comments and 18 honors. Was ranked
#1 in many of YouTubes catagories including
#1 most viewed for the day. The poster took it
down and reposted it so that the view counter
would reflect new views. It then stayed at 16
although it had 108 comments. This is how Obama
is taking over YouTube. Not more traffic, just
holding back the counts for the real YouTube King
- Dr Ron Paul

The Ron Paul Blimp

littlebier8 — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 11:08:07 -0500

Yeah, I saw it coming guys.

Is Randy Brinson blowing smoke?

tlsmith — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 00:35:23 -0500

That number seems awfuly high. I also think it is high since most people who have access to e-mail have multiple addresses, such as one for work, one for home, and one as a "spam catcher".

We're working on it

Joshua Levy — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 12:23:00 -0500

We're working on fixing the front-page chart -- we'll have it fixed soon.