What exactly does a paid blogger do and are they here also on DU?

[Tinksrival]

I figured it was a matter of time with the importance of the Netroots but how does that effect discussion boards?
Were these Women hired by Edwards campaign instructed to do virtual "Door to Door" campaigning on other discussion boards like religion, cooking, parenting, etc. Is this how it works? :shrug:

[hlthe2b]

1. Makes one wonder, doesn't it?

Shaping public opinion "for hire." Hmmm

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Horse with no Name]

61. Why is this here?

This is a Democratic site in case you were confused by the name.

[Atman]

2. You KNOW they're here.

You should ALWAYS start -- start -- with the assumption that any post on a message board is made by a paid mole. 99% are NOT, but it's the ones that are, and the ones that go viral, that cause the problems. I've never been to a message board that required any proof that you were anything more than an e-mail addy.

.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

9. Do You Truly Believe That? For Real?

:rofl:

[SoCalDem]

12. Damn it.. where's my check? n/t

[trumad]

18. You do it for free.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

21. So Do All Of Us Here.

(edited out crude yet lighthearted and funny joke)

[Atman]

50. Of course I believe it. Do you really believe there are NO PAID MOLES?

Or did you just miss the "99% are NOT" part (which might be a tad low, but I was rounding)?

Anyone in marketing knows targeted message boards are exceptionally good free sources of pr and propaganda catapulting. So paying someone a few bucks to post positive things about you is simply good business, and any candidate that ISN'T doing it is wasting resources and missing out on hitting his/her target markets.

WTF are you smoking tonight? You're on a role with stupid snarky subject lines backed up by nothing but emoticons.

.

[Occulus]

60. When we have true stories of people being paid to post in a certain way,

absolutely. You must begin with the assumption that's it's all crap and find the truth yourself.

(I myself have fallen into that trap several times. Just because something sounds credible doesn't mean it is.)

It can also be applied to real life: if I'm black, and I live in the south, and I see a pickup with confederate flag mudscreens, window decals, and a gun rack, is it rational to assume they're white supremacists? No, but is it rational to assume they might be? Why, yes.

In an environment where the real is identical to the fictional upon first blush, it is imperative to believe all is fictional until proven real. Or,

[Tinksrival]

11. I'm still confused

Were they hired to write on Edward's blog or do they go and write on their own blog or do they just post on other blogs?

[Cha]

26. We had someone admit

it after the 2004 primary..I can't remember who or for whom; can somebody help me out here?

[NashVegas]

51. I Think It Was PeteNYC

Not 100% sure, though.

Will Pitt, too, though will was forthright with it, when he went to work for Dennis Kucinich.

There were others.

Telling traits to look for, in posters who are part of an organized campaign, whether paid or otherwise:

1. Their posts, whether for their candidate or against another, have a tone of confidence about them that comes from having inside information (whether they say they do or not).

2. Paid ones, especially, often have a tone of condescension about them.

3. They travel in groups. Anytime you notice a repeated trend where the same few people post in a campaigner's thread with something like "I agree with XXX" and not much else, odds are good the OP asked their buddies to back them up.

[zonkers]

56. Or its actually them posting as two diff. people. Not hard to do.

[Cha]

63. I was thinking someone from

NYC and that definetly rings the bell.

Yeh, they should get over that "condescension"..it's like a red flag when a freep's not spelling right.

[uppityperson]

49. I want to get paid too. Would dress up as a mole if it'd work.

[earth mom]

3. I've no doubt that's how it works.

And I don't like it. I don't want anyone-even a dem candidate-telling me what to think! :thumbsdown:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

4. No, They Aren't Here, Though Some Will Irrationally Claim Otherwise.

[soothsayer]

5. Hmm, do paid bloggers write in initial caps?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

7. Maybe They Do, Maybe They Don't. Who Knows?

:shrug:

[Atman]

6. What's YOUR salary?

Hmmmmmm?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

8. Not Enough To Live In Jersey The Way We Want To. But I Fail To See How That's Any Of Your Business.

[Atman]

13. Your BLOGGER salary, dude

sheesh.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

16. You Need To Lighten Up, Bro.

I was obviously having a little fun back at you for your absurd insinuation. :)

[Atman]

47. Obviously not obviously, eh?

You had no message, just a subject line snark. WTF was "obvious" about it? Just because YOU knew what you meant, it was "obvious" everyone else did?

:eyes:

.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

52. Whoa. You Really Dooooo Need To Lighten Up LOL

Sheesh, didn't think you were so serious.

My apologies that the obvious snark of twisting your premise in order to disarm your weak insinuation put forth to begin with went over your head. Silly me for not thinking you'd actually take my remark as if I truly wouldn't have been able to grasp the simplistic concept that your asking of my salary was a way of accusing me of being a paid blogger, in a thread about being paid to be a blogger. Shame on me for not realizing that you would actually think for a second that my response snarking your sentiment was actually me for no reason whatsoever believing that in a thread about being paid to be a blogger I was being asked what my real life real job salary was... Cause ya know, that woulda made so much sense and all.

I said obvious because it was obvious what you meant to begin with. Therefore, it should've been obvious to you that I was well aware of what you meant, and chose to reply with a wiseass retort that disarmed your comment rather than acknowledged it.

[Atman]

54. Boy, are you ever a dick!

And I mean that in an obviously light-hearted way.

.

[SmokingJacket]

38. You WANT to live in Jersey?

OK. No comment! ;)

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

41. Nope. I'd Rather Live Somewhere Warm And Reasonable. But What Can Ya Do.

:)

[Neshanic]

53. I will gladly trade a Scottsdale apartment for a New Jersey place. Seriously. It's 72 now...

[AndyA]

10. How do you know they're not?

Other than checking IP numbers, I doubt if even the forum administrators would know. And even then, it can be difficult to tell exactly where someone is visiting from.

Sometimes I sense a passion about a candidate that seems a tad bit more than hoping they win an election, or that they'd be good for the country. I've often wondered if they were working for that person...

[Rebellious Republican]

28. If I show you my link, will you show me yours?

I dunno, I guess we need to put our tin foil hats on, I’m glad you have reassured me that moles could not possibly be operating here.

Daschle, Thune and the Blog-Storming of South Dakota

The blogging efforts on behalf of Thune's Senate campaign didn't cause greater civic participation or bring in piles of small donations. Instead nine bloggers -- two of whom were paid $35,000 by Thune's campaign -- formed an alliance that constantly attacked the election coverage of South Dakota's principal newspaper, the Sioux Falls Argus Leader. More specifically, their postings were not primarily aimed at dissuading the general public from trusting the Argus' coverage. Rather, the work of these bloggers was focused on getting into the heads of the three journalists at the Argus who were primarily responsible for covering the Daschle/Thune race: chief political reporter David Kranz, state editor Patrick Lalley, and executive editor Randell Beck.

Led by law student Jason van Beek and University of South Dakota history professor Jon Lauck, the Thune bloggers tormented and rattled the Argus staff for the duration of the 2004 election, clearly influencing the Argus' coverage. They also appear to have been a highly efficient vehicle for injecting classic no-fingerprints-attached opposition research on Daschle -- most of it tidbits that perhaps might never have made it into the old print media -- directly into the political bloodstream of South Dakota. What they did may turn out to be a "dark side of politics" model for campaign-blogger relations in 2005-06 -- made all the more telling by the fact that the Thune bloggers relied heavily on now-discredited Jeff Gannon/James Guckert of Talon News for many of their stories.

Arguing with the Argus
Jason van Beek started his pro-Thune blog, South Dakota Politics, in early January of 2003, about 21 months before the next general election. It was already assumed at the time that Thune would run again for the senate, despite just coming off a loss to Democrat Tim Johnson -- albeit by little more than 500 votes. Polls also showed early on that Daschle could be vulnerable. Van Beek's blog entries in the first year consisted of a mix of posting on news and national politics, commentary on the Argus Leader's political coverage, negative posts about Daschle, and generally supportive posts about Thune's campaign progress. Van Beek soon added a Kranz Watch feature, where he zeroed in on David Kranz's coverage of the Senate election for the Argus, and researched Kranz's past. In four long "bombshell" memos, Van Beek reported that Kranz and Daschle had college ties going back to the late '60s, and that in 1976, when Kranz was an editor at a small South Dakota newspaper, he met with one of South Dakota U.S. Democratic Senator Abourezk's staff and gave advice on how to do better PR. The Senate staffer that Van Beek cited wrote that Kranz was "a good Democrat" in his notes.

Some of the work that van Beek referred to in his “bombshell” memos was by James Guckert (using his nom de plume Jeff Gannon), the now notorious former reporter for the pseudo-journalistic, pro-GOP outlet Talon News. Starting with a few articles in 2003, Guckert would go on to write more than 20 articles about Daschle, David Kranz and the Argus' coverage over the course of the election season. It was Guckert who first correctly reported that Kranz and Daschle had co-organized a Democratic convention in college. Van Beek linked to Guckert's articles on his blog (as would many of the other South Dakota bloggers later on). Over the course of the election, van Beek praised Guckert's and his reporting as "indefatigable" and promoted his articles heavily on his web site. Now that Guckert has been shown to be a partisan journalistic disgrace, all of his reports have been scrubbed from Talon News' website. Links to Guckert’s articles on van Beek’s blog have since been removed, and a defense of Guckert’s reporting on Daschle has been posted.
http://www.personaldemocracy.com/node/378


Blogs: New Medium, Old Politics
The affiliations and identities of bloggers are not always apparent. Take writer Duncan Black, who blogged under the name Atrios. His was a popular liberal blog. During part of the period he was blogging, Black was a senior fellow at a liberal media watchdog group, Media Matters for America. Critics in the blogosphere said this fact wasn't fairly disclosed.

“People are pretty smart in assuming that if a blog is making a case on one side that it’s partisan,” Jamieson said. “The problem is when a blog pretends to hold neutrality but is actually partisan.”

That is not a legal problem, however, but one of ethics. Black eventually claimed credit for his blog and his affiliation with Media Matters. Fellow bloggers heavily publicized his political connections. And Black continued blogging.

Defenders of Black point out that unlike the South Dakota blogs, he was not working on behalf of a campaign. And clearly, absent blog ethical guidelines, what Black did was not that different than many others.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/08/politics/main659955.shtml



Bush's Conspiracy to Riot
After the Miami “Brooks Brothers Riot” – named after the protesters’ preppie clothing – no government action was taken beyond the police rescuing several Democrats who were surrounded and roughed up by the rioters. While no legal charges were filed against the Republicans, newly released documents show that at least a half dozen of the publicly identified rioters were paid by Bush’s recount committee.

The payments to the Republican activists are documented in hundreds of pages of Bush committee records – released grudgingly to the Internal Revenue Service last month, 19 months after the 36-day recount battle ended. Overall, the records provide a road map of how the Bush recount team brought its operatives across state lines to stop then-Vice President Al Gore’s recount efforts.

The records show that the Bush committee spent a total of $13.8 million to frustrate the recount of Florida’s votes and secure the state's crucial electoral votes for Bush. By contrast, the Gore recount operation spent $3.2 million, about one quarter of the Bush total. Bush spent more just on lawyers – $4.4 million – than Gore did on his entire effort.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2002/080502a.html



Miami 'Riot' Squad: Where Are They Now?

By Al Kamen
Monday, January 24, 2005; Page A13
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31074-2005Jan23.html

:shrug:

[Tinksrival]

34. Verrrry innnteresting

Wow, $35,000! I guess it paid off. Daschel was screwed in so many ways. Well, so was Gore for that matter. I guess we all are! AAAAHHHHHGGGGG!

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

44. See my post #43, if you believe there is no such thing.

[Rebellious Republican]

65. Hey MM, what do think "all hat and no cattle".

;-):evilgrin:

[americanstranger]

14. The two that Edwards hired...

...were hired for two things.

Amanda Marcotte (formerly of Pandagon) was hired to run the Edwards blog.

Melissa McEwan (formerly of Shakepeare's Sister) was hired as 'netroots outreach coordinator,' whatever that is. My guess would be sort of an internet press secretary, keeping blogs up to date on the campaign.

It's not like he hired them to go post on blogs or DU to talk about how great he is or anything.

Someone compared it to a journalist going to work as a candidate's press secretary.

- as

[Tinksrival]

19. Thanks for you imput.

No charge, right? Ha! just kidding! :hi:

[americanstranger]

32. Hey, I been blogging for free for a long time.

Nobody would hire me for a campaign, that's for sure - I use the 'F' word a lot on my blog. :)

-as

[Jeanette in FL]

36. Hey, Don from Guam

I haven't seen you here lately, I had wondered where you had gone. Glad to see you.

Moved from Palm Beach County up to Northern Florida, you wouldn't believe how bad it is up here. Thank gawd for those internets. Jeanette in Jupiter, Now in Florida.

[americanstranger]

37. Hey, yourself!

I've been ducking in and out of the internets - for some reason that I can't put my finger on, my musical career is heating up (I'm recording an album! Weeeeeeee!).

Good to see you!

- as

[Jeanette in FL]

39. Good for you

It is a hard nut to crack, but you deserve it. Good news to hear.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

20. Oh Darnit. There Are Them Damn Pesky Facts Again. Damn Facts...

[Porcupine]

48. Says you. You didn't diss Edward's House nt.

.

[Lex]

15. Why wouldn't they be at DU?

Given the number of members and size of DU, why on earth wouldn't they be here pushing their candidate and snarking about the other candidates?

[Cha]

27. They'd be pretty obtuse not

to..like I wrote up thread..somebody admitted it after the 2004 primaries but I can't remember who they were blogging for.

[Dogmudgeon]

17. I've "caught" a few.

Most of them are not too tough to find out. In one case, someone doing a little stealthy lobbying for solar energy put a website link in his sig. It took all of one minute to discover that he was the CEO of that company. And his efforts were absurd, since I don't know of anyone around here who opposes solar entrepreneurs and R&D.

Sometimes, no matter what the issue may be, it's just condescending.

--p!

[ReadTomPaine]

30. I've discovered a few as well, over the years...

This site has quite a large following among beltway staffers, DC cogs, campaign workers and the politicians they represent. As a journalist this is something I know firsthand from conversations with those inside politics with whom I've discussed this issue - I've even seen logged-on DU screens everywhere in DC from GOP senatorial staff offices to Green Party rented rooms with people young and old typing away. This place is taken quite seriously by groups across the board, which is why I always find those who stamp their feet and insist on DU's irrelevance a curious lot.

We get more than our share, needless to say, but it's hardly limited to DU. Every political message board over a certain level of popularity has users of this type. As Democratic power grows, expect the attention paid and the attempt at influence to grow with it.

[leveymg]

22. There's been lots of commercial astroturfing here.

Most recently for the Apple Iphone, before that for E-85 ethanol fuels and a couple car companies.

You can spot it. It's there.

[madfloridian]

23. Yes, they are here. Mostly anti-candidate folks.

Those women were bloggers for a long time. They had their own blogs. The right wing relgious folks are digging back to find anything they can on them. At least, I assume right wing.

In 03, it was the Democratic consultants mostly camped in VT digging for dirt.

[JuniperLea]

24. I know for a fact this is true

Anyone who doubts is naieve...


I just read an internal memo on same... sorry, can't share:(

[Tinksrival]

25. Top secret memo......?

You tease!

[JuniperLea]

29. I work for a PR firm

It's all top secret:)

[leveymg]

31. At least you'll admit it!

We'll be watching you VERY CLOSELY. ;-) :evilgrin:

[JuniperLea]

33. Hahaha!

I wish I could share more... not your typical spin-doctors... will refuse to work for anyone unwilling to "do the right thing". No politics either. Whew! Hahaha!

[leveymg]

35. Congratulations! Any current openings?

:toast:

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Wiley50]

40. I'm pretty sure we have a gang of them running "Megaphone" software

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article693911.ece

[nam78_two]

42. I don't see why it would be so conspiracy minded or surprising?

:shrug:
I mean it would be one of the easiest things to do, I should think. They are bound to be present on DU, Kos and probably in larger no.s at places like Fark, slashdot(where political issues come up a fair amount) etc. where they can influence opinion at a low cost and anonymously.

Fark for example has drifted a lot more right-wing in the last few years and I assume "the man" is behind it ;).

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

43. NH Repub Charlie Bass had a staffer post on liberal blogs pretending to be a liberal:

http://www.wmur.com/politics/9936715/detail.html

Bass Aide Resigns After Posing As Democrat On Blogs
Bloggers Trace Postings To Congressional Internet Address

POSTED: 10:57 am EDT September 26, 2006
UPDATED: 12:50 pm EDT September 26, 2006
CONCORD, N.H. -- A lead staffer in U.S. Rep. Charlie Bass' office resigned Tuesday after admitting to posting fake messages on political blogs.

Tad Furtado, the No. 2 staffer in Bass' Washington office, resigned after it was revealed that he posed as a Democrat on liberal blogs. Bass said that Furtado posed as a supporter of Bass opponent Paul Hodes but then discussed how difficult it would be to beat Bass.

...

Furtado used the screen names IndieNH and IndyNH on several left-leaning New Hampshire political sites. He was outed after bloggers who ran the sites traced the messages to a U.S. House Internet address.

Bloggers Laura Clawson and Michael Caulfield said they were always suspicious of IndieNH's messages.

"You see this all the time on political blogs, some elaborate act where someone says, 'Now, I hate to say something against a Democrat, but,'" said Clawson, who runs the "Blue Granite" blog. "So you develop an eye for it. And this poster definitely tripped all the wires."

...

http://nhdp.blogspot.com/2006_09_01_nhdp_archive.html

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/states/NH/H/02/

[goodhue]

45. they blog for money

and I'm sure some are amongst us

[jberryhill]

46. There is a very simple way to avoid that sort of thing....

...and it goes back to the old usenet days.

Using real names.

I completely understand the practicality of pseudonymity and its usefulness in certain contexts, but having mass discussions conducted primarily with pseudonyms makes the discussion forum vulnerable to that sort of activity.

It's probably more effective on forums other than those devoted to political discussions per se since, really, most people's minds here are pretty well made up about a lot of issues. I would expect more fertile ground for subtle influence elsewhere, such as the types of topical forums you noted.

[LittleClarkie]

57. Damn, and to think I've been doing this for free all this time.

Ten cents a dance (shows some leg)

Pick me!!!

So where are the recruiters, anyway?

[bigtree]

59. If I supported Edwards, I would do it everyday for free

why pay anyone?

[Quantess]

62. Women? Hired to do "door to door" chatty shit?

About religion and cooking and parenting?
Whatever. I'd personally like to meet one of those broads. I'd give her the time of day.

How exactly, do you back up your info, Tinksrival?

[FrenchieCat]

64. Of course there are paid bloggers that "play" the blogs....

It's kind of like those that call with push polls faking to represent a legit polling Co.

Different folks blog for different reasons: Some of us have the passion that comes from having being disenfranchised for so long, while others enjoy saying what's on our minds...

and I'm sure some get paid and say what's on their bosses' minds.

Come to think of it, I have ran into a few who seem to know what campaigns are gonna do before it happens.

There should be a rule that if one is asked point blank, one should be forced to tell the truth about their status.

And I'll tell you, according to this article, a certain campaign certainly was "monitoring" the blogs real closely for 36 hours.
Update on yesterday's news.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/02/08/bloggers_rehired/

[pinto]

66. Locking.

Please don't imply vague and unsubstantiated claims about DU members. It's divisive in general. If you have a concern about a particular poster's participation here, please use the *alert* function for Moderator/Administrator follow up.

Thanks for your consideration.

[pinto]

67. Locked.

See post above. Thanks.