This diary will be updated daily with links to five newspaper articles related to the 2008 presidential campaign from key swing states. Please go to these articles and leave productive polite comments that counter the wide-spread right-wing filth that infests many local newspapers. This is a simple and easy way to try to persuade undecided voters in key states to vote for Obama (or against McCain).
See HERE for background and the list of newspapers involved.
(Action time, boys and girls! The first “American Blogger” winner takes flight–with YOU on board! – promoted by Paul Rosenberg)
I’m proud to announce the launch of the Swing State Newspaper Project (apologies to Swing State Project for the similarity of the name), with the initial targeting diary HERE.
The idea came about in the American Blogger series initiated by Paul Rosenberg. You can jump right in by clicking the link if you want to, but to get yourself grounded, especially if you’re not familiar with idea, or need a refresher, this diary explains it all for you.
Here was the original impetus for the idea,
If you’ve ever spent time reading local and regional newspaper sites on the internet, you’ve probably noticed a disturbing phenomenon; right-wingers have run amok in the comments sections of the newspapers. Progressives may rule blogs and online fundraising and organizing, but when it comes to influencing more traditional media, even if it’s in an internet forum, we lag behind. Sometimes far behind. This becomes increasingly problematic as we draw closer to the election. Many more voters read online newspapers than read blogs. So it becomes very important to not only rebut these ignoramuses, but to provide additional context and knock down bad information in news articles covering the presidential race.
To combat this I suggested we monitor online newspaper sites in key swing states until the election. Readers would comment on stories, knock down attacks, add truth to the discussion, and in many cases, contact reporters directly to encourage better reporting (if they got it wrong) or thank them for outstanding writing (if they got it right).
After getting a lot of good ideas for how to carry this idea forward (see here), I’ve come up with a plan for how to proceed. We’ll see how this goes. It may need to be modified or expanded if the project is a success, but I’m ready to get it started.
Go to the extended entry to see the plan.
There’s More…
:: (24
Comments, 775 words in story)
digg it
Just a quick update on the swing state newspaper project for those interested. It’s been a little delayed this week as I’ve been catching up on work-related stuff. But I’ve almost completed the pool of newspapers to consider and have noted whether they allow user comments, display the reporter’s email address, the newspaper website, and the number of people that the newspaper’s metropolitan area covers. Right now I’m limiting the pool to newspapers in the five largest metropolitan areas in a state. So, sorry for the delay, but with some help from others we’ll be kick-starting this thing very soon.
(This is our first AMERICAN BLOGGER winner–voted the best idea from our comment section of last week for your consideration. – promoted by Paul Rosenberg)
If you’ve even spent time reading local and regional newspaper sites on the internet, you’ve probably noticed a disturbing phenomenon; right-wingers have run amok in the comments sections of the newspapers. Progressives may rule blogs and online fundraising and organizing, but when it comes to influencing more traditional media, even if it’s in an internet forum, we lag behind. Sometimes far behind. This becomes increasingly problematic as we draw closer to the election. Many more voters read online newspapers than read blogs. So it will become increasingly important to not only rebut these ignoramuses, but to provide additional context and knock down bad information in news articles covering the presidential race.
There’s More…
:: (47
Comments, 1068 words in story)
digg it
Late last week SEIU indefinitely postponed a planned unionization vote for over 8,000 nurses within the Catholic Healthcare Partners (CHP) hospital system in several states including Ohio and Kentucky. The vote for unionization was expected to pass and nurses in these extremely anti-union areas would have won a victory for on-the-job representation and for the entire progressive movement. So what happened? A rival union decided they knew what was best for these workers before the vote occurred and sabotaged the whole thing. Why? That’s what these nurses are trying to figure out now…and the answers are enough to make any progressive’s blood boil. More below the fold.
There’s More…
:: (4
Comments, 1431 words in story)
digg it
