<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.techpresident.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>techPresident - 3-D Journalism - Comments</title>
 <link>http://www.techpresident.com/techpres/3_d_journalism</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;3-D Journalism&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>I don&#039;t think we disagree</title>
 <link>http://www.techpresident.com/blog/entry/17939/social_network_analysis_of_2008_is_america_polarized_or_just_really_impressionable#comment-1618</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Valdis--&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Great to hear from you. As you know, I am a big fan of your work. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I don&#039;t think we disagree. I am not saying that activists &lt;ital&gt;should&lt;/ital&gt; pay such close attention to the mainstream media, but that it appears they do because they believe the media is the one institution that can have meta-effects on local conversations. Or rather, its output is the one most visible aspect of the millions of micro-conversations that people are actually having around the election--and activists are attracted to the high-intensity conversations generated by news reporting as opposed to the long tail of water-cooler conversation that most people actually pay attention to.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It may very well be that your mantra is right: &quot;it&#039;s the close conversations&quot; that matter most in affecting individual voting decisions, far more than whatever frames the MSM attempts to place over the course of the election. &lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:42:30 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Micah L. Sifry</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 1618 at http://www.techpresident.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>national network vs. local network</title>
 <link>http://www.techpresident.com/blog/entry/17939/social_network_analysis_of_2008_is_america_polarized_or_just_really_impressionable#comment-1616</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Micah, thanks for the post, the links, and the nice feedback.  Yet, I think we disagree on this one point...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Um, I think this is why so many activists play such close attention to the power of the mainstream media, as it is still the primary network that &quot;binds&quot; us together around elections.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I really don&#039;t care what is happening in the national network, but I do care what my local social network is thinking.  If I were to ever vote for American Idol, I don&#039;t care what the rest of Ohio or the nation are doing.  I do care what the people in my family room are thinking or those on-line at the moment who are discussing this vote with me.  In other words, &quot;friends &amp;amp; family&quot; matter in my vote, but strangers don&#039;t.  Same holds true for government elections.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I stick by my 2004 political mantra -- &quot;it&#039;s the conversations, stupid&quot;... but update it to be more precise: it&#039;s the [close]conversations, stupid.  &quot;close&quot; can be physical or emotional or social distance... the biggest affect is when all 3 are combined.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:22:40 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>orgnet</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 1616 at http://www.techpresident.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
