Originally entitled "Barack Obama and the DC Escort Agency Madam "
Barack Obama and the DC Madam are two personalities much mentioned in the mainstream media at the moment.
Oh, I’m sorry. Did you come on to this diary because the title led you to believe that there was more to it than just that statement?
How do you now feel? I would feel annoyed, cheated and the victim of a high degree of dishonesty by the diarist. The title was wrongly created to get attention. The integrity that we seek from those writing here is undermined and our confidence eroded in what Daily Kos has come to mean to us.
Well, get used to it. In the intensity of the run up to the primaries there will be a great deal of this happening on Daily Kos and, for the sake of our discourse on here, we need to be on our guard against it. It will not be just titles but whole diaries that will try and draw the community into controversy.
The problem that we face are those that were faced during the last primaries. Each candidate has his or her supporters – strong, committed and passionate. They want to express on here the reasons for that support and why the qualities of their preferred candidate should commend themselves to others. Equally there are those will want to challenge these views, who will want point out weaknesses and want to promote the stronger attributes of their own preferred candidate in the areas under discussion.
The result is going to be highly interesting and highly rewarding debate. For political geeks like me, it is going to be a fascinating period and, looking on from three thousand miles away, a fascinating insight into the American political process.
The highly charged atmosphere on Dkos, however, will create dangers. It will make us very susceptible to emotional responses that will become excessively expressed. Even those who were not here for the last primaries cannot help but be conscious of the bitterness that has lingered on among Dean supporters about the treatment of their candidate.
It will also make us susceptible to being gamed by those who want to use these strong passions for purposes other than straightforward debate. It will become easier to create "controversial" diaries that will get the writer onto the recommended list. By playing not just with titles but with the emotions of the readers, it will be easier for a diarist to increase personal notoriety and to have the thrill and the sense of reinforced self-identity that comes from this strange attraction of being on the recommended list.
Individuals will do it and groups will do it. "Blog swarming", that most irritating of ways of getting a diary recommended and a controversial view supported, will occur with greater frequency. Threads will be dominated by a few with the intention of distorting the wide-ranging and diverse comments that we normally expect. Diarists will be attacked and disparaged. All the worst features will emerge that we meet from time to time in our blogging experience, but made easier and intensified by current passions.
It happened a couple of days ago. A diary was set up that selected Barack Obama as a target: Neocons love Obama. It dominated the Recommended List and created an argument involving over eight hundred comments. The attack on Obama necessitated an excellent rebuttal diary by VirginiaDem Hooked on a neo-con's spin of Obama's speech.
At the same time, its dispiriting message about the ability of a non-Bush, Democratic led United States regaining its position in the world community led to my own rebuttal What the h*ll is this European view on here. Many expressed encouragement from this, despite those from the originating blog trying to drag down the positive message that I was trying to convey by publishing survey research denying the pessimism of the original diary.
What motivated this whole argument that was to lead Lee to raise the question in an excellent diary "a fundamental rift @ dkos?"?
Its genesis can be found here on another blog. It came from a dare: "Migeru dared us to post a version of Bernhard's diary on Barack Obama and the neocons" . Behind it is the belief among far left Europeans that Daily Kos progressives don’t comprehend the true nature of real progressive liberalism, least of all do their candidates. As one writes "I can't imagine how to explain the problem with this sort of thinking to the likes of Welshman and much of the dKos crowd. Hell, I don't think I could explain it to the BT crowd."
More such "fun" and "entertainment" can be expected. "After everyone gets control of themselves--say a couple days--I think you, D.L., should rethink your policy on not endorsing a US candidate, and announce your support for Hilary Clinton on KOS, say about Saturday. Double-Dog Dare You! "
There are those who have indicated that this type of diary has emanated from other blogs dedicated to specific candidates. At best it creates lively debate. At worst, it creates an attack on Democratic candidates that distorts Dkos and drags down the excellence of the whole slate of Democratic candidates. It has the dangers that it can create pie-fights that can destroy the whole debate on here.
Daily Kos is a site dedicated to the election of Democratic Party candidates and is now focussed on ensuring that a Democratic President sits in the Oval Office as a result of the 2008 elections. Anything that distracts from that purpose, that undermines the enthusiasm of those who will make this happen, that discourages those that will be needed to get out the vote, I would suggest have no place on here. Those who use Dkos as a medium to develop a reputation and express these views should properly place value on the purpose of this site and not abuse it by the creation of controversy for its own sake or for the greater enhancement of the name of the diarist.
In the months that are to follow, we should build up, and not drag down, all Democratic candidates. We should be up front about the candidate that we support when discussing others and we should have integrity in our reason for posting diaries. Put simply, we should respect Dkos and its purpose. Especially those who have gained reputations and past accolades for their work.
Otherwise, our contribution is as misleading as the title of this diary.
UPDATE:
Folks, I need your help here. Last week I had a diary picked up by Colbert. That was great. Today the headline of this diary has been picked up by Wonkette. Fortunately to make the point that we liberals do have a sense of humour. What is not so great is that has caused comments on there about circular firing squads and other remarks that do not do justice to our community.
In truth, the diary that started off so well has degenerated, not least through the very blog swarm that was one of its concerns. It will only reinforce some of the views expressed on Wonkette. Far from helping in discussing how we handle disagreements about candidates, it has created its own minor skirmishing. Sides have developed and personalities rather than issues have become dominant. It has been read by some as being a continuation of a personal argument and civility itself has been used as a derogatory description. In other words, it has become the exact opposite of what it was intended to be.
I don’t know what is the correct thing to do in these circumstances. The title is not the problem. It is that this diary is getting noticed. There are many great comments but there are also some bad ones. This is not what I blog for nor what I want to be associated with in my diaries. So, do I pull it or not before others less kind than Wonkette get hold of it.? Is it no worse than many or is it not a good thing to have up in this pre-election time? I am adding a poll for your advice.