In the ever-changing world of new media, the limits of using tools like blogs have yet to be set. An article from the Baltimore Sun discusses the limits of blogging in support of presidential candidate John Edwards. According to the article,
"The Internet has been an important campaign tool for Edwards. He, his wife, Elizabeth, and daughter Cate write and post blogs."
Recently, two female campaign bloggers were accused of angering Catholics and conservatives with "intolerant language." Edwards chastised the bloggers, but did not fire them from his campaign. They assured him that it was not their intent to offend anyone.
The article addresses the limits of campaign blogging in this manner:
Phil Noble, founder of the nonpartisan, Charleston, N.C.-based PoliticsOnline, said campaigns are still learning the ropes of Internet politics.
"We have a new technology that's disrupting the whole political process," he said, "and we haven't figured out what the rules are. We had the same thing with television and with radio."
Though these campaign bloggers' motives were to portray as much information to the public as possible, they have a duty to do so in a manner that does not offend anyone. While establishing the limits, it's likely that incidents such as this one are the only way to determine where to draw the line.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment