copyright © 2010 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
Might we delve deeper into the world of technology. The Ethernet, once ethereal now exists in every avenue of our lives. We have heard the terms; Internet, Intranet, and Extranet. Might do these mean to us personally and professionally? Perhaps, it is best establish a working definition for each of the platforms. Countless experts have written on the topic, the features within the various systems, and the variance in use. Steven L. Telleen, Ph.D., Researcher and former analyst with Giga Information Group in Santa Clara, California explains the distinctions most succinctly. In The Difference Between Internet, Intranet, and Extranet Dr. Telleen writes, “Today I think of Intranets, Extranets, and the Web as collections of content. An Intranet is a set of content shared by a well-defined group within a single organization. An Extranet is a set of content shared by a well-defined group, but one that crosses enterprise boundaries.” In an earlier observation, Telleen, stated, “The Web, in contrast, is an unlimited group.” In his more recent characterization, that element is unchanged. He does however, assert, “These terms may continue to evolve in meaning.”
What is most true, and particularly evident in the Ethernet, change is a constant.
Today, in our travel through time and cyberspace, I hope you will appreciate, as I have come to; the study of electricity is analogous to the Ethernet. Each validates the notion transformations are invisible to the human eye. Turn a switch on or off and things happen. Instantaneously, it would seem, if a toggle were moved in one direction the room is filled with light. In another position, darkness pervades. An engine starts or stops. Press the power switch on your computer, or click on your Internet browser, and the world (world-wide-web) opens up and lets you in. We do not necessarily see what occurs; nay understand it. Yet, our personal universe is altered.
In commerce and cyberspace, change occurs in every moment. Internet, Intranet, and Extranet conversions occur all around us and metamorphosis surrounds us. Whether or not we are aware of these evolutions, the progression will affect us. Indeed, it has. Please consider your own corporation and communications within. Electronic mails are ubiquitous. Employees in your office likely scan, share, and collaborate on files. Most companies have a website. More have begun to acknowledge what is inescapable in modern-day societies, Facebook directs more online users than Google.
“Marketers must focus on social marketing in addition to traditional search, as customers have a multi-pronged way of finding information,” said Jeremiah Owyang, a Web strategist for the Altimeter Group, a San Mateo consulting firm with clients like Gigya. Mister Owyang went on to state, “The clear-cut channels of yesteryear are now an intricate set of connections.”
As we all understand and live, presently, many of us “Go to Meeting” from the comfort of our homes, clothed in pajamas or jeans. We “do lunch” at cyberspace cafés. We talk through text or instant messages. Colleagues in cubicles separated only by a few feet feel no need to leave their desks to make a statement, or request a file. Office workers prefer to send an electronic mail message.
Communication through cyberspace is easier and effortless. Yet, regardless of how we try to communicate a tone, the reader will interpret the essence through his or her own emotional reaction and respond accordingly. Thus, the reality lives. People relate to those they know personally, trust explicitly, and are friendly with, even if only on facebook.
This is the reason for the rise in Internet interactions. The World-Wide-Web is a constant conversation unlike the Marketing monologue most businesses offer. TurboTax has realized the strength of relationships off and by extension online. This big business decided to dive more deeply into what reaps abundant dollars.
One of Gigya’s clients is financial software maker Intuit Inc. Seth Greenberg, Intuit’s director of national media and digital marketing, said the company is betting on social media to draw customers to its TurboTax Web site this year. The tax preparation program generates about $1 billion in revenue in the 10 to 15 weeks leading to April 15.
Half of TurboTax’s 20 million users are on Facebook and each has an average of 150 friends. Intuit is using social media to generate more buzz about the program through the sharing of product reviews and answers to tax preparation questions.
Greenberg coined the phrase “friend-casting” to describe how Intuit is using social media.
“We actually want our customers to be our best sales force, not us,” Greenberg said. “Enabling our 20 million-customer base to be a word-of-mouth army for us is much more interesting.”
Any of us might recognize as Mister Greenberg has: friends, family, and familiars talk. What someone we know says speaks volumes. A recommendation, a referral, the thought that Mom, Dad, brother or sister might reject the services of a particular company because any of these individuals had a very bad experience, weighs heavily on the minds of corporate Executives. Tycoons understand the tonnage known as brand awareness and appeal.
Moguls are mindful of the fact that each of us, in every walk of life is affected by the assessments others make. No organization is exempt from public scrutiny. Just as mothers and father search to find the best babysitter, our parents also model the need to evaluate a butcher, a baker, and a candlestick maker. Countless caregivers, before a baby begins to walk, will work to ensure that their child goes to the most celebrated school.
An education company, a for-profit, public, or private institution must be concerned with what the customer base thinks. Reputation is everything if a business expects to increase earnings, sustain salaries, and preserve profits.
Tycoons only need to imagine the influence of college graduates, parents, professional persons ages 35 to 54, who as of January 2009 represented a 276% growth rate amongst facebook users. This percentage has doubled in a mere two-month period.
Moms and Dads, Grandmas and Grandpas, guardians, and even we, as individuals, prepare our progeny and ourselves for the finest education. Our careers capture our attention from the time we are first asked, “What do you want to be when you grow up?” We wish to pursue the best and be the best from birth. This is the reason that private schools test 4 and five year olds before an application to a prestigious program is accepted. The vast numbers who work to be Valedictorians speaks to the truth; be it for a business or a business school, a religious institution or an industry that works with private and religious school Educators, public opinions matter.
Hence, within a very short period of time, businesses, en masse, have built blogss. Chief Executive Officers have also chosen to submit their thoughts words and muses. Facebook and other “fun” and well-followed forums have served to expand Executives’ awareness. Perhaps, this is why today, tycoons envision investments in Internet, Intranet, and, or Extranet applications. Undeniably, the Industrial Revolution evolved into the Information Age and brick and mortar business have become far more mobile. Today, we meet and greet our clientele through electronic mediums.
How did this happen? Almost invisibly, advancements began behind closed doors. The concept of global connectivity was first born in the August 1962. It was not until 1972 three years after the formation of ARPANET (Advanced Research Projects Agency Network), a branch of the United States Department of Defense, that a research team successfully fashioned a computer-to-computer chat
By 1994, very little had changed with the exception of a report, entitled “Realizing The Information Future: The Internet and Beyond.” This document served as a draft for what would become the information superhighway. In April 1995, a true evolution occurred.
NSF’s privatization policy was terminated. The NSFNET Backbone was declared defunded. Delphi followed by other commercial networks moved in. Today, we are all connected constantly. If you doubt this, look at the numbers, as well as the reality you live. Microsoft Corporation certainly has.
A web-based company, YouTube, which in 2008 was only three years old, received 13 hours of uploaded video every minute! Now, at the ripe old age of five, YouTube has 24 hours of video uploaded every minute! In two short years, the number of uploads has nearly doubled.
In 2008, The Washington Post noted, “The site logs hundreds of millions of views a week.” Can we begin to imagine how many people are online at YouTube at any given moment now that the site has grown even more popular? Probably not. Nor would most companies be able to comprehend the earning potential. Nevertheless, what each of us likely know is that we have viewed a YouTube video or two. Perchance, you saw one last evening on the news. Indeed, you may have sent a tweet that said, “Wait until you see . . .” From January 2009 to February of the same year, in one month, Twitter grew 1382 percent!
People of every age tweet. Fastest Growing Demographic; women Over 55. Men between 45 and 54 are not far behind. Essentially, Facebook is Your Father’s (and Mother’s) Social Network. Still, neither may be your online home.
Perhaps, you are not amongst the 3 to 4 million that in 2008 used social network technology. You may not include yourself in the later and greater groundswell of social media growth that occurred in 2009. You possibly could not comprehend as Forrester Research reported in the Fall of that year, Number of Social Networking Users Has Doubled Since 2007.
Indeed, this veracity has inspired Microsoft to integrate Social Media into its latest release. In February 2010, banner headlines read, Microsoft adds social networking to Outlook.
The mammoth technology company has read the reports. Microsoft moguls have acknowledged, businesses must think Tribalization. They have tried and failed time and time again, However, Microsoft has finally concluded they must fuse, or infuse the future into their business model. Observers are reminded of the past; Microsoft came late to the Internet party.
Perhaps, you too, or your company’s Executives, might wish to evaluate the evidence Microsoft moguls appraised. You may choose to be amongst the movers and shakers such as Bill Gates, who admittedly, ultimately realized, in what might have been one of those moments of verbalized frustration; it is wise to examine the energy that is electricity and the Ethernet.
People-centricity, which more recently has become Microsoft’s mission, seems to have been born out of a recognition followed by abundant research. President Gates’ insight might have been as my own. Upon further investigation into Internet, Intranet, and Extranet applications, I had to acknowledge that one or each of these platforms are popular, preferable, and even, surprisingly, profitable. After a quick scan of the statistics Microsoft’s most senior Chief Executive could have concluded as I did in an earlier time. the question I most needed to ask was “What the F**K is Social Media?”
The answer, I believe lies in what was before and Only “One Year Later.” The Ethernet is electric. To be effective, any Internet, Intranet, and Extranet system must honor the veracity visible in the numbers. Please ponder the presentations.
Please stay tuned, or tune in again. The next treatise on this topic will further examine the once unimaginable. The Ethernet, just as electricity, is the essential element that moves modern-day civilizations, commerce and citizens worldwide.
References for Internet, Intranet, Extranet realities . . .
- With 15.5 Million Active Blogs, New Technorati Data Shows that Blogging Growth Seems to be Peaking, By Heather Green. BusinessWeek. April 25, 2007
- Turbo Tax Uses Facebook to Connect to Allow Friends to Spread the Word. By Sara Inés Calderón. Inside Facebook. February 3, 2010
- Facebook directs more online users than Google. By Benny Evangelista. San Francisco Chronicle. February 15, 2010
- and New Facebook Statistics Show Big Increase in Content Sharing, Local Business Pages. By Eric Eldon. Inside Facebook. February 15, 2010
- 2009 Facebook Demographics and Statistics Report; 276% Growth in 35-54 Year Old Users. IStragegy Labs. January 5 2009
- Go to Meeting.
- Private School Screening Test Loses Some Clout, By Jenny Anderson. The New York Times. May 6, 2010
- Starbucks: Your Wireless Computer Showcase, By Eric Griffith. Internetnews.com. August 20, 2002
- Texting May Be Taking a Toll, By Katie Hapner. The New York Times. May 25, 2009
- Bad News Comes in Small Bytes, By PO Bronson and Ashley Merrymann. Time. August 8, 2008
- Communication and miscommunication: The role of egocentric processes, By Boaz Keysar. University of Chicago. Intercultural Pragmatics 4-1 (2007), 71-84
- Egocentrism Over E-Mail: Can We Communicate as Well as We Think? By Justin Kruger, Nicholas Epley, and Jason Parker and Zhi-Wen Ng. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Copyright 2005
- Histories of the Internet. Internet Society.
- Hobbes’ Internet Timeline 10, By Robert Hobbes.
- Internet Users. The World Bank
- Microsoft adds social networking to Outlook, By Mike Harvey. Times. February 23, 2010
- Microsoft Turns to Social Media to Promote Internet Explorer 8, By Adam Ostrow. Mashable. March 19, 2008
- Windows 7 Launches, Accompanied by Useless Tweets, Social Media Geek. October 23, 2009
- Study: Enterprise Lags in Social Web Savviness, By Alex Williams. ReadWRiteEnterprises. October 7, 2009
- 2009 Tribalization of Business Study, Deloitte LLP’s Technology, Media & Telecommunications (TMT) . January 29, 2010
- Microsoft’s Lag Time to IPad Leaves HP, Dell Looking (Update2) By Tim Culpan and Ian King. Busonessweek.June 16, 2010
- A Closer Look At Microsoft Spindex, An Experimental Social Aggregator, By Jason Kincaid. TechCrunch. May 9, 2010
- Microsoft comes late to the Internet party. British Broadcasting Company. Friday, 23 June, 2000
- Project Emporia Microsoft Fuse Labs.
- Spindex Microsoft Fuse Labs.
- FUSE Labs Microsoft Fuse Labs.
- Microsoft’s social-networking lab launches new Twitter viewing tool, By Mary Jo Foley. ZDNet. May 27, 2010
- The Net Imperative, The Economist. July 1999
- Twitter and Online Customer Service: Are Your Ears Burning? By Diane Clarkson. Forrester Research. September 14, 2009i
- A Twitterati Calls Out Whirlpool, By Parmy Olson. Forbes. September 2, 2009
- YouTube has 24 hours of video uploaded every minute! Reuters. March 17, 2010
- Twitter’s Tweet Smell Of Success, By Michelle McGiboney, Nielsen Online. March 18, 2009
- Twitter User Age Demographics, By Anand. Tech Crunchies. February 13th, 2009
- The Web in Numbers: The Rise of Social Media, By Stan Schroeder. Mashable/Social Media. April 17, 2009
- Number of Social Networking Users Has Doubled Since 2007, By Adam Ostrow. Mashable/Social Media. July 28, 2009
- Fastest Growing Demographic on Facebook: Women Over 55. By Justin Smith. Inside Network. February 2, 2009
- Executive Summary, Consumer Behavior Online: A 2009 Deep Dive. Forrester Research. July 27, 2009
- Email Statistics. PowerProDirect. 2010.
- SharePoint 2010: Pros and Cons for the Enterprise, By Shawn Shell and Tony Byrne. SharePoint Watch. October 29, 2009
- Eight Pros and Eight Cons to SharePoint 2010, By 2010: Pros and Cons for the Enterprise, By Shawn Shell. SharePoint Watch. October 29, 2009
- A cautionary tale: Do companies need a social media policy? By Mario Sundar. Marketing Nirvana
- Internet, broadband, and cell phone statistics. Pew Internet, January 5, 2010
- Top 10 CEO Blogs, By Mario Sundar. Marketing Nirvana. July 9, 2008
- Top 15 Corporate Blogs (Ranked – May 2008), By Mario Sundar. Marketing Nirvana
- Over 10% of all blogs are corporate! What are the Top 10?, By Mario Sundar. Marketing Nirvana. March 5, 2010
- 7 Ways to Build Brand Awareness, Yahoo Small Business.
- Food Brands Get Sociable on Facebook and Twitter, By Stuart Elliott. The New York Times. June 30, 2010
- Internet, broadband, and cell phone statistics. Pew Internet, January 5, 2010
- Facebook Demographics and Statistics Report 2010. IStrategy Labs. January 4, 2010
- Facebook Demographics and Statistics Report 2010. iStrategy Labs.
- Multitasking Minds. On Point. National; Public Radio. September 29, 2009
- The Rage to Engage, Time Magazine. April 17, 2008
- Internet, broadband, and cell phone statistics. Pew Internet, January 5, 2010
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert
America is faced with an interesting dilemma; whom might the citizens place in the Oval Office. November 2008 will arrive quickly. January 2009 cannot come soon enough. Many qualified candidates vie for the attention of the people. Among the Democrats, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Bill Richardson, and Barack Obama cross the nation each day. All wish to meet expectant constituents. The aspirants ask for only one favor. “Please give me an equal opportunity.” Presidential hopeful, Congressman Dennis Kucinich might make this request with more fervor and with reason. Kucinich excluded from ABC debate.
Sadly, few in the States will have a chance to see the hopefuls up close and personal. Three-hundred and one million Americans live in this nation. Each has a concern. All are affected by the decisions a President makes, no matter their age, class, race, color, creed, sex, gender preference, or religion. Four years ago, 221,256,931 were of age and could vote. More persons, eighteen or older call this country home now.
Of these adults, some see themselves as Democrats, others Republican. In recent years, most Americans declared they have and are Moving On. Numerous feel no need to be part of the two Party system. They are Independent and proud of it.
More Voters Are Steering Away From Party Labels
By Rhodes Cook?
Sunday, June 27, 2004; Page B01
Meet a friend of mine. He is a successful lawyer who lives in the suburbs of Philadelphia, has two grown children, and has been a registered Republican for almost his entire adult life.
That is, until now. Increasingly disenchanted with the GOP, but no fan of the Democrats, he is thinking about re-registering as an independent when he completes a move to a new suburban home and has to change his place of voting.
My friend has plenty of company. In this starkly partisan era of Red and Blue America, we may need a third color to describe those who formally call themselves neither Republican nor Democrat. When it comes to registering voters, the two major parties can only look in envy — and dismay — at the swelling ranks of unaffiliated voters.
Since the waning years of the Reagan administration, or basically since the last periodical cicada mating cycle, the number of “other” voters has proliferated. In the 27 states (plus the District of Columbia) that have been registering voters by party since 1987, the Democratic share has plummeted 8 percentage points, declining from an aggregate total of 51 percent to 43 percent. The Republican share has stayed steady at 33 percent. But the proportion of voters who have not identified themselves with either of the major parties has jumped 8 percentage points, from 16 to 24 percent.
What’s impressive about these numbers (at least in the view of political analysts such as me) isn’t the phenomenon itself, but its staying power. Myriad polls over the past two decades have shown that voters, when asked to identify themselves politically, divide about one-third Democratic, one-third Republican and one-third independent. But in terms of registration, most have opted for one major party or the other — perhaps because, in some states, that was the only way they could vote in a party primary. Only recently, have registration figures begun to reflect the poll numbers.
What’s so significant about the rise of the unaffiliated? Well, it’s one thing to tell a pollster that you consider yourself “independent.” No particular consequence arises from that self-identification. But to register as unaffiliated is a stronger statement of preference (or lack of one). Political parties talk about the “base,” and how to energize it. These numbers suggest that the base is eroding, or at least is harder to identify and rely on.
Regardless of this reality, in the twenty-seven states that require a Party affiliation, eight  percent] of those once registered as Democrats now think themselves ruggedly Independent, researchers and the “objective” news media conclude, if they ask Democrats to discuss only Democrats then they have conducted a comprehensive survey. Researchers believe a rational judgment is made when Republicans reply to an inquiry such as, what do you think of the candidates in your Party. It seems only Independents and those outside the mainstream take the actual pulse of the public. When they do, the results are startling, and quite different from conventional “norms.”
‘Long Shot’ Kucinich Buries Democratic Rivals in Nationwide Poll Among Independent Voters
December 21, 2007
Washington, — Democratic Presidential Candidate Dennis Kucinich, who has been the runaway winner in polls of the Party’s progressive, grassroots base in recent weeks, scored another huge win yesterday by capturing almost 77% of the vote in a nationwide poll sponsored by a coalition of Independent voting groups across the country.
Of the more than 80,000 votes cast for Democratic candidates at http://www.independentprimary.com by self-described independent voters, the Ohio Congressman received 61,477, burying second place finisher, former Senator John Edwards, who received only 7,614 votes, or 9.5 percent. . . .
This is the latest in a string of exceptionally strong finishes by Kucinich in national on-line polls. Last month, he topped all other candidates in 47 of 50 states in a poll sponsored by Democracy for America (DFA), in which he received almost 32% of the 150,000-plus votes cast — more than Edwards and Senator Barack Obama combined. In that poll, Kucinich won both Iowa and New Hampshire.
In a survey by the 90,000-member Progressive Democrats of America, Kucinich took 41% of the vote nationwide. And, in a poll conducted by the progressive The Nation magazine, he won with 35% of the vote. Obama came in second with 24%, and Edwards was third with 13%.
The creators of IndependentPrimary.com said their poll was designed to measure the impact of independent-minded voters on the Presidential election and was “part of a movement bringing together ordinary Americans who think that the good of the country is more important than the good of the political parties.”
Nonetheless, Party politics continues to thrive in the television arena. After the Iowa caucus, the first election year “contest” in the United States, and before the first vote was cast in New Hampshire, ABC News hosted another debate. The premise was people would have a chance to hear the candidates, in each Party prior to an actual primary election.
Rather than present all the Presidential hopefuls to an eager public audience, the network decided to restrict the forum. Regardless of the fact that secret ballots nation wide were not yet submitted, ABC declared, it was time to set standards. Certainly, only the supposed “electables” could appear on stage. Thus, the gauntlet was thrown down.
Candidates hoping to be included will need to accomplish any one of three tasks: (a) place in the top four positions in the Iowa caucuses, (b) obtain 5 percent or higher in recent national polls, or (c) obtain 5 percent or higher in recent state polls.
If, as the rules state, a Presidential hopeful must achieve one of these criterion, based on the Progressive polls, it seemed Dennis Kucinich would easily qualify to appear. Yet, he did not. Apparently, ABC News prefers to honor only specific surveys, those not fully representative of the nation as a whole. In an era, when the populace craves change, conventional wisdom rules.
Many muse and malign Iowa as not reflective of the nation, which may or may not be true; yet, they are happy to embrace the polls that offer a far less accurate snapshot of what American voters think. The results in Iowa call the researchers and the media into question. Democrats did not come out in mass for Clinton. The race was not as close as predicted. Nor did Obama come in second. Independents made all the difference in Iowa. Perchance, these unaffiliated voters have loud voices.
Astute analysis reveals what most say is true, the elite, the acceptable thought police control the masses nationwide. People with little opportunity to meet and greet a candidate in person peruse the polls, see numerous advertisements, and possibly read what a few hundred canvassed persons say, and then decide what they will do.
White House 2008: Democratic Nomination
Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. Dec. 19-30, 2007. N=556 registered voters nationwide who are Democrats or lean Democratic. MoE ± 5
“I’m going to read you the names of some Democratic presidential candidates. Which one of the following Democratic candidates would be your first choice for president: [see below]?” If unsure: “Just as of today, would you say you lean toward [see below]?” Names rotated
Hillary Clinton 46 percent
Barack Obama 26 percent
John Edwards 14 percent
Dennis Kucinich 3 percent
Bill Richardson 3 percent
Joe Biden 2 percent
Chris Dodd [The name appears with no percentage listed]
Mike Gravel 0 percent
None (vol.) 2 percent
Unsure 4 percent
Days before the main event, the Iowa Caucuses, according to this reputable Pew survey, the Clinton coronation was certain to occur. With Bill by her side, the public expected to hear an acceptance speech from Hillary Clinton on January 3, 2008. ABC News certainly understood this momentum. Before they decided who would appear on their stage they also polled the public. Registered Democrats and those that lean Left, were interviewed, or at least a full thousand plus were asked of their possible vote.
ABC News/Facebook poll. Dec. 16-19, 2007. N=1,142 adults nationwide. Fieldwork by TNS. Results below are among leaned Democrats.
“If the 2008 Democratic presidential primary or caucus in your state were being held today, and the candidates were [see below], for whom would you vote?”
Hillary Clinton 44 percent
Barack Obama 27 percent
John Edwards 11 percent
Dennis Kucinich 3 percent
Joe Biden 2 percent
Bill Richardson 2 percent
Other/None (vol.) 4 percent
Unsure 7 percent
Again, only weeks before the Iowa caucuses, a study states Clinton is the candidate of choice. Yet, clearly she was not. A third place showing is not the ceremonial introduction to her inauguration. Perchance there is much to learn from the Iowa caucuses.
Iowa ‘Entrance Poll’ Offers N.H. Clues
By Jennifer Agiesta and Jon Cohen?
?Saturday, January 5, 2008; A08
Do the outcomes of the Iowa caucuses offer clues to what will happen in Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary? A look at the “entrance poll” taken Thursday night in the Hawkeye State offered five things to watch for next week:
1. Independents matter.
Independents were a small but powerful force in the caucuses of both parties, and an even higher percentage will vote in New Hampshire.
On the Democratic side, independents made up 20 percent of caucusgoers and contributed heavily to Sen. Barack Obama’s victory margin. . . .
In 2000, the last time both parties held contested primaries in New Hampshire, about four in 10 voters called themselves independents. McCain won the GOP primary that year by prevailing among independents, while Republicans went for George W. Bush.
Unaffiliated voters in New Hampshire can choose to participate in either party’s primary, and the fortunes of Obama and McCain may hinge on which way independents break. Washington Post-ABC News polling last month found that more than six in 10 of the state’s independents planned to vote in the Democratic primary.
America is in ruin. The sub-prime disaster is daunting. Once solid citizens seek relief; homes are in foreclosure. Credit crunches cause banks to bleed; they fear the red fluid may flow. Soldiers die daily abroad. More hemorrhaging. Very few industrial jobs exist in the United States. The dollar is devalued. American children are less well educated. Forty-seven million plus are uninsured. Citizens grasp for straws, even for straw polls. The State of the Union is fragile.
People are in a panic. When we contemplate the future, according to a Harvard Report, the National Leadership Index, more than three quarters of Americans think we are in a leadership crisis. Yet, often, our fellow citizens turn to corporate accounts for accurate information. This may be most true among the Independents.
34% of Independents believe that the press is not politically biased.
Perhaps, that is part of the problem; people have faith in polls. Millions trust flawed data. Fallacies flaunted by the elites that favor the status quo have much influence. We might ask own owns the media? The answer is, it is not the average American. Nevertheless, most Americans rely on the press for fair and accurate reporting. Even those aware of what is, often forget.
In 2004, Bagdikian’s revised and expanded book, The New Media Monopoly, shows that only 5 huge corporations — Time Warner, Disney, Murdoch’s News Corporation, Bertelsmann of Germany, and Viacom (formerly CBS) — now control most of the media industry in the U.S. General Electric’s NBC is a close sixth.
Still, millions presume opinion polls are the perfect gauge, or at least as good as it gets. However, ultimately, people are unpredictable. Yet, every news organization declares they know what will be come election day. The press maintains the people tell them what they think. Might we ask, do the media, and the profiteers who own these broadcast organizations tell the people what to believe?
Prominent among the pollsters is the esteemed Wall Street Journal [now owned by billionaire Hillary Clinton backer Rupert Murdoch] and NBC News, a division of General Electric, and a network that energizes the people. Noteworthy, and also a General Electric company, Newsweek Magazine coupled with prestigious Princeton researchers cannot be discounted.
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll conducted by the polling organizations of Peter Hart (D) and Bill McInturff (R). Dec. 14-17, 2007. Asked of Democrats, and non-Democrats who said they would vote in a Democratic presidential primary (from a total sample of 1,008 adults nationwide).
“Let me mention some people who might seek the Democratic nomination for president in 2008. If the next Democratic primary for president were being held today, for which one of the following candidates would you vote . . . ?” If unsure: “Well, which way do you lean?”
Dennis Kucinich 4 percent
Unsure 7 percent
Newsweek Poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. Oct. 31-Nov. 1, 2007. N=433 registered Democrats and leaners nationwide. MoE ± 6.
Dennis Kucinich 4 percent
Unsure 7 percent
If the margin of error pendulum travels in either direction, we must ask, how many more Democrats might vote for Dennis Kucinich. Granted there are those who wish to identify this Presidential hopeful as too extreme or not electable. However, if we assess the assumption of those that claim to speak for the majority we understand the rationale is flawed.
Dennis Kucinich is not viewed favorably by likely voters — 24 percent have a favorable opinion of him, 31 percent have an unfavorable opinion of him, 12 percent are neutral, and 33 percent don’t know enough about him to say. Kucinich’s net favorability rating is -7 percent.
With much help from the media and the moguls who own these resources, many Americans have no idea who Dennis Kucinich is! However, they are intimately familiar with Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and even John Edwards.
Edwards’ supporters say this is not so. “John is being ignored by the media.” Wife Elizabeth spoke of this on Hardball with Chris Matthews. The supportive spouse contends; although John placed second in the race, the focus was on Hillary and Barack. Others picked up on the campaign cry.
Just after the Iowa caucuses, the periodicals were flooded with the premise, Edwards: ‘The People’s Candidate,’ does not receive the attention the other front-runners do. The theory now espoused is, former Senators Edwards’ proposals threaten the corporate tycoons who own the press. If Edwards is elected, there will be true change. Profits will dwindle. Thus, to ensure that the people do not hear Edwards message the media does not cover the candidate.
While the supposition seems apt, the fact is John Edwards appears prominently in ever poll. He stands solidly on center stage during each debate. Edwards receives equal time and is essentially invested in the status quo. John Edwards does not challenge the conglomerates as Dennis Kucinich does.
John Edwards does not fully separate himself from those who support the standards of today. Goldman Sachs, Citigroup Incorporated, legal firms galore, and Fortress Investment Group all contribute bundles to his campaign.
Hedge-Fund Ties Help Edwards Campaign
Firms Increase Political Gifts
By John Solomon and Alec MacGillis?
Monday, April 23, 2007; A01
Two years ago, former senator John Edwards of North Carolina, gearing up for his second run at the Democratic presidential nomination, gave a speech decrying the “two different economies in this country: one for wealthy insiders and then one for everybody else.”
Four months later, he began working for the kind of firm that to many Wall Street critics embodies the economy of wealthy insiders — a hedge fund.
Edwards became a consultant for Fortress Investment Group, a New York-based firm known mainly for its hedge funds, just as the funds were gaining prominence in the financial world — and in the public consciousness, where awe over their outsize returns has mixed with misgivings about a rarefied industry that is, on the whole, run by and for extremely wealthy people and operates largely in secrecy.
Transparency, truthfulness, all the public clamors for is indeed hidden from view. While John Edwards may wish to posture as the people’s candidate and a menace to mainstream media, he is not much of a danger to the elites. Indeed, each poll includes his name. Not all the surveys mention Presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich.
Former Senator and Vice Presidential aspirant John Edwards was invited to every public debate. An organization never thought to question Edwards’ viability. Edwards has forever been deemed electable. He has more than equal access to the people. Dennis Kucinich, the true candidate of the people does not.
While the Federal Communication Commission [FCC] rules, which govern radio and television licenses, states stations must operate in the public’s interest, we can see they do not. ABC News is our most recent example. This network limits our option to see and hear each of the Presidential hopefuls, even before the first secret ballot is cast. Denying access to all the aspirants, to disallow a participant in a debate seems antithetical to the intent of the FCC regulations. To produce polls to validate and justify obstruction is not to inform the people. Yet, here we are. Inaccurate as these seem to be, the surveys solidify the message the media and magnates wish to express.
American Research Group poll. Dec. 9-12, 2007. N=600 likely Democratic primary and caucus voters nationwide. MoE ± 4.
“If the 2008 Democratic presidential preference primary/caucus were being held today between [see below], for whom would you vote?”
Dennis Kucinich 4 percent
Unsure 10 percent
Gallup Poll. Nov. 11-14, 2007. N=485 Democrats and Democratic leaners nationwide. MoE ± 5.
“Next, I’m going to read a list of people who may be running in the Democratic primary for president in the next election. After I read all the names, please tell me which of those candidates you would be most likely to support for the Democratic nomination for president in the year 2008, or if you would support someone else. . . .” Names rotated.
Dennis Kucinich 4 percent
None (vol.)/Unsure 8 percent
Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. Oct. 17-23, 2007. N=837 registered voters nationwide who are Democrats or lean Democratic. MoE ± 4.
“I’m going to read you the names of some Democratic presidential candidates. Who would you most like to see nominated as the Democratic Party’s candidate for president in 2008: [see below]?” If unsure: “Is there anyone you are leaning toward as of today?” Names rotated
Dennis Kucinich 4 percent
Unsure 7 percent
We can see again and again, among the Democrats, routinely Dennis Kucinich often ranks one percentage point below the arbitrary requirement. The number of undecided voters is high. Perchance these individuals seek further information. However, with thanks to the restrictions imposed by ABC News, [and other organizations] a discussion panel meant to enlighten the electorate restricts their exposure to a meaningful alternative.
Some of the studies do not even mention the possible President, Dennis Kucinich. Hence, when the results are released they are invalid; yet, offered as truth. The American people are lead to believe as the media decides. The press makes the final pronouncement. They will tell us who delivers the message, when, where, why, and how.
CBS News Poll. Oct. 12-16, 2007. N=456 Democratic primary voters nationwide. MoE ± 5.
“Suppose the race for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination in 2008 comes down to a choice among Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards. Who would you most like to see nominated: Clinton, Obama, Edwards — or would you rather see someone else nominated?” Names rotated
Clinton 51 percent
Obama 23 percent
Edwards 13 percent
Other/None 7 percent
Unsure 6 percent
Hillary Clinton is the clear winner . . .or was, until the people of Iowa decided otherwise. Since the caucus, all we thought we knew is topsy-turvy, turned on its head, and twisted in the wind, except for the fact that Independents decide. In This Race, Independents Are the Prize. If the Independent voter, which might be any of us, has little or no ability to hear from a candidate, we must ask ourselves, is this America, the land of the free.
If First Amendment rights are not granted to a celebrated Congressman, a Presidential candidate, can we, the people authentically choose who will represent us. In a nation where the news is dictated, manufactured, and manipulated, do the citizens actually know who is or would have been electable? Probably not. None of us has yet had an opportunity to read the polls that address this issue.
Nevertheless, another canvass did appear, although it was well hidden from view. This tally was not prominently presented as the other surveys were. Although, ABC News and Facebook hosted the recent debate jointly, access to this account was concealed. Yet, here it is.
Barack Obama 60.65 percent
Hillary Clinton 18.21 percent
John Edwards 9.74 percent
Dennis Kucinich 6.51 percent
Bill Richardson 2.61 percent
Mike Gravel 2.29 percent
The definitive Facebook figures show that the future President, Dennis Kucinich placed fourth in the tally used to determine what the voters think of the candidates. The virtually invisible Presidential hopeful, Congressman Kucinich received a greater number of votes than Bill Richardson, a contender deemed acceptable by those who supposedly educate the masses. While Richardson did not receive the required 5 percent in this analysis, he did appear on stage. John Edwards total was not much higher than Kucinich’s. Had this slate appeared, Americans might have known what we are supposed to. forget Dennis Kucinich is viable, electable, and purposely excluded from many a national forum.
America, will we continue to let conglomerates control the message and us, or will we finally decide to take our country back?
Sources, Surveys, and Secrets . . .
- Kucinich excluded from ABC debate. Press TV. January 5, 2008
- The World Book. Central Intelligence Agency.
- Facebook co-sponsors N.H. debate, not without controversy, By Declan McCullagh. C/Net News. January 3, 2008 8:43 AM
- ‘Long Shot’ Kucinich Buries Democratic Rivals in Nationwide Poll Among Independent Voters. FindLaw. Yahoo News. December 21, 2007
- White House 2008: Democratic Nomination
- Iowa ‘Entrance Poll’ Offers N.H. Clues, By Jennifer Agiesta and Jon Cohen.?Washington Post. Saturday, January 5, 2008; A08
- pdf Iowa ‘Entrance Poll’ Offers N.H. Clues, By Jennifer Agiesta and Jon Cohen.?Washington Post. Saturday, January 5, 2008; A08
- Findings Of WMUR/CNN Primary Poll. Source: University of New Hampshire Survey Center. WMUR. Internet Broadcasting.
- National Voter Turnout in Federal Elections: 1960-2004. Info Please.
- Moving On, More Voters Are Steering Away From Party Labels. By Rhodes Cook. Washington Post.??Sunday, June 27, 2004; Page B01
- pdf Moving On, More Voters Are Steering Away From Party Labels. By Rhodes Cook. Washington Post.??Sunday, June 27, 2004; Page B01
- Public Interest, Convenience and Necessity. Museum of Broadcast and Communications.
- National Leadership Index, Center For Public Leadership. John F. Kennedy. School of Government. Harvard University. 2007
- Own Owns What? Columbia Journalism Review.
- Study: Securities suits up on subprime crisis. Jacksonville Business Journal. January 4, 2008
- Loan bailout is not likely to help many homeowners, By Kathleen Pender. San Francisco Chronicle. Sunday, December 9, 2007
- Loss leaders, The costs of the credit crunch mount. There may be more pain to come. The Economist . November 1, 2007
- U.S. falls in education rank compared to other countries, By Elaine Wu. The Kapio Newspress. October 4, 2005
- The Uninsured in America. Public Broadcasting Services.
- Hardball: Elizabeth Edwards Asks What’s It Going To Take To Mention John Edwards. By: Nicole Belle. Crooks and Liars. Saturday, January 5th, 2008
- Edwards: ‘The People’s Candidate’, By Dan Balz. Washington Post. January 4, 2008
- Elizabeth Edwards See Clinton As Copycat. ABC News. September 20, 2007
- Universal Health Care Through Shared Responsibility. John Edwards ’08
- Hedge-Fund Ties Help Edwards Campaign Firms Increase Political Gifts. By John Solomon and Alec MacGillis. Washington Post ?Monday, April 23, 2007; A01
- In This Race, Independents Are the Prize, By Jeff Zeleny. The New York Times. January 6, 2008
- pdf In This Race, Independents Are the Prize, By Jeff Zeleny. The New York Times. January 6, 2008