Internet's effect on campaigns mixed

Unregulated, the 'Net is home to a new breed of brutal attack ads

POLITICAL CANDIDATES HAVE gone high-tech in the age-old tactic of dirty politics.

Case in point, Georgia’s 2006 Democratic gubernatorial primary race has seen multiple Internet videos that depict candidates in moronic roles.

One includes Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor starring as Jabba the Hutt, the repulsive villain in “Star Wars,” and another video surfaced with Georgia Secretary of State Cathy Cox, Taylor’s opponent, appearing as a disembodied talking head.

Internet attacks have the potential to be extremely successful for several reasons.

First, the Internet and the computer provide an abundance of easily accessible opportunities for production compared to other media.

Therefore, it’s possible for practically anyone to crop and chop, slice and dice or copy and paste images and text in an unlimited variety of ways creating vivid visual images that have devastating effects to political images.

For instance, in Georgia’s 2002 race for Governor, Republican candidate Sonny Perdue’s under-funded campaign upset incumbent Democratic Gov. Roy Barnes’ bid for reelection due in large part to a internet video called “King Rat.”

The video portrayed Barnes as a gargantuan rodent wearing a gold necklace. The video and the media coverage that followed had such an impact that it propelled Perdue to victory.

Secondly, the Internet is a cheap way to throw cheap shots at political adversaries. Virtually all you need is an IP address and someone who is somewhat Internet savvy. Presto, one political smear campaign designed, whether based on the truth or not, to go straight into billions of homes and offices around the world.

Furthermore, these campaigns can be even more effective using a database of e-mail addresses with specific messages targeted to specific audiences.

Third, the Internet is largely unregulated. Because of the relatively short existence of the Internet, few laws have been created to deal with the issues relating to the production and dissemination of the information produced.

Those who are creating these messages are fully aware of this inherent weakness in the law, and take full advantage of the opportunity. And even if this were not the case, the Internet provides a wide range of opportunities for cunning people to disguise their identity and the source of the information.

Lastly, according to a study conducted by the Pew Research Center, more and more people are utilizing the Internet as a way to inform themselves about political issues and candidates.

The study showed a 50 percent increase in the number of people who look for news and election information concerning politics.

The study found that 30 percent of Americans use the Internet as a way to find information and this number is expected to increase.

These attacks are an inevitable political consequence of technology.

Although I think mudslinging campaigns do nothing to serve the public interest, I defend the right of those individuals who create these web-tactic campaigns. The First Amendment serves as a way to create an ocean of topics that swim with a variety of ideas.

It is our responsibility to fish for these ideas. If we don’t agree with what we catch, we can cast our lure again.

Comment on this story in the Opinion forum >>