I would recommend that Webb supporters not get 'scandal add'... the media can't move fast enough to keep up with the blogosphere's news cycle and if we don't slow down to suit the media that most voters consume, we're going to end up wasting our opportunities to really give Allen a good thrashing for each individual thing he's done. If we move from racism to corporate crime too soon, nobody's going to be able to hear enough about either to make it stick.
More on the flip..
As I see it, the Allen racism story is starting to die, and far too soon. Not enough media picked it up in the last two days to make it more than a 4-5 day issue. In addition, Virginia media has barely begun to cover the story. Although it may seem like months ago that the story broke to us, most Virginians probably haven't even heard of it yet. Like I said, the blogs' news cycle is much shorter than the media that practically all voters consume. By moving from one Allen scandal to another now, we risk losing the (well deserved) "Allen is racist" meme come November. However worthy other scandals may be, it is to our advantage to continue to talk about Allen's comments and his history (I haven't seen a collection of Allen's racial misdeeds on Kos yet, much less in the Washington Post or local Virginia TV and print.) The scandal is still ripe and still has a lot of material to be covered. So please, friends, don't get distracted by all the other things Allen may have done and end up diluting each scandal in the process. If Burns' firefighter comments can stick around for two weeks or longer, Allen's racist comments (and his history, which Burns doesn't have with firefighters) can last at least as long. Although it may be exciting to discover each new misdeed, remember that bloggers are now feeders for the paid media and we have a political responsibility to see that the voters get the full story on each Allen scandal.
What do you think?
Every paper major paper in the state--except for the RTD--ran an editorial critizing Allen for his comments. None gave any ground on the issue. Quite a few--ABC, the Washington Post, the Daily Press--and others have commented on Allen's history of racism.
The story was picked up by the AP, it was picked up by some of the national media as well, and all of the local TV news channels have covered this story as well.
From a journalistic perspective the question is what other angles are left uncovered?
I think this story will always be in the background--and it could very well resurface if Allen isn't careful. But a journalist is going to look for a fresh angle on this. Any thoughts on new angles?
From a political perspective, I think the best approach now is to put pressure on his campaign donnors--especially corporations who have given money to Allen.
A petition and boycott drive could be done via an online campaign with help from DailyKos.
The petition should document George Allen's long racist history--including this most recent event. The companies should be encouraged to withdraw financial support of the Senator or risk a boycott of their products and services.
In order to be effective my guess is you'd need about 30,000 people or more to sign on--although once again this is probably something that could be done successfully word of mouth through an online petition drive.
that said, a single op-ed in most VA papers isn't nearly enough. we need to make this front page, multiple day news, because having a Senator with that kind of history deserves that kind of notice.
getting kossacks involved is a good idea and a good way to keep the focus on the scandal that has Allen claiming "I didn't call him a monkey, I called him a shithead!" if we just stick to this and pound it for another week we can do him some serious damage.
A few reasons why this isn't getting additional coverage nationally:
1. I suspect there is a perception that having a racist Senator in Virginia is not a newsworthy event. In fact, I've heard this joke on a few blogs. Virginians can thank our representative for affirming some of the more negative stereotypes that people have about Virginia nationally.
2. Senator Allen is a "local" GOP official. He's not a party leader or the president. If he was a party leader like Trent Lott there would be additional fallout (part of the reason is due to power struggles within a political party and people within the party pushing the story).
3. The event happened while congress was not in session. I suspect there may have been a little bit more fallout had that happened, although it's hard to say. On the flipside, this is a slow news period which helped the story get front page coverage. Also, the story gave Webb tons of free publicity in advance of Labor Day which will help him get some additional funds in place for a time when people are paying attention. If the campaign wants to continue pushing this story they can do it creatively on their own dollar in a number of ways.
The "dentist story" isn't getting picked up because the source, George Allen's sister, is claiming that it might not be true (as reported in a very detailed ABC story yesterday). Also, it's not really a newsworthy event for a sitting Senator to be a mean-spirited, sadistical jerk.
It is a news story if a guy with a racist history does something racist.
Unless there's additional fallout (e.g. GOP members start distancing themselves from Allen in a visible way)--then there's no additional news. e.g. If John McCain decided not to attend yesterday's fundraiser the Post probably would have run the story again on its front page--because it would be signalling pretty clearly that a high ranking federal official was about to get dumped by his party.
Long explanation, but I'm a former journalism student with buddies in print and TV media--so I'm interested in the hows and whys of news coverage.
Btw, I don't think this story will ever go away entirely.
- I forgot my second point
- We should get people to ask their Senators what they plan to do about Allen
But this will come up again later, as it should.