Are the Social Media Outlets Out-Of-Mainstream?

For over a week now, Ron Paul has been the top ranked search term in Technorati. Yet, to hear the mainstream media tell it, he's not even a contender, for his name is barely mentioned in post-debate coverage, and he doesn't even register in the mainstream media's polling data.  He's not even a blip on their radar screen. So the question is how to square one piece of information with the other. I think the answer is relatively simple, but a bit uncomfortable.

Possible explanations include:

1. The mainstream press is lazy
2. The mainstream press is so conceited that it thinks it should be the filter through which you must judge who is relevant to the upcoming election
3. Internet users, primarily those who frequent blogs, pay closer attention to the details than do the people the pollsters question
4. Ron Paul's supporters are gaming the system
5. There is a strong correlation between the use of Technorati and an interest in Ron Paul

For the record, Paul's name isn't the only one excluded from post-debate coverage and polling results, in either GOP or Democrat primary coverage. It just happens to be the only one appearing in the Technorati's 10 most popular search terms list.

I feel like I should give a full disclosure notice about my knowledge and opinion of Ron Paul, but I'm afraid that the real explanation is so convoluted that it will take up the bulk of this post, and it won't add anything to the point I'm trying to make, which is this:

There is often a big difference between what interests bloggers and blog readers and what interests the rest of the world.

What are your thoughts? Does this difference concern you? Are there any other possible explanations I'm missing? - Cam Beck

Comments

[Brandon McBride]

I have never in my life seen the blatant "sensorship" I have seen regarding Ron Paul.
It has truly scared me....then again after reading his policies, I see why the Corporate media would be scared....This man is a hero with a just cause...and deserves all of our help.

[Michael]

Well said Mr. McBride

[CK]

Very interesting. Well, could be censorship. Could be we live in a big ol' echo chamber. Could be that trends start on the fringes and only then move mainstream (like Paul and like the blogosphere's participation).

I'm not quite sure. But would love for you to keep tracking this stuff; it's fascinating.

[Paul McEnany]

Okay, I think that's Brandon taking this a little too far. Yeah, they're lazy, but it's also somewhat of a reflection of our current environment. All the polls show a different tier of support for McCain, Giuliani and Romney. So guess who will get the most coverage? If Ron Paul starts shooting up the polls, then they'll start covering him just as much as everyone else. There's only so much you can say about someone that's polling below 1 percent, and maybe 5 percent have even heard of.

As the media continues to flatten, I think this will change somewhat, but for now, social media kind of acts like the triple a does for professional baseball. If you can hack it here, you are more likely to hack it there. We're seeing more news being fed from the minor leagues (the gonzalez scandal began from a blog, talking points memo) and entertainment (the lonely sunday guys to SNL and now a movie).

And whether it's macaca on youtube or whatever else, if it makes enough waves in our world, then it gets out onto the big stage as well.

[Cam Beck]

Paul - What concerns me about the "reporting," among other things, is that it's the media's job to let us know who is and what options are available. Their so-called polls that they report on (and even conduct) often don't include these already-labeled "also-rans" in the equation. They've already determined that they aren't worthy.

Thus, the very way the polls are structured ensure the results change very little among the "top-tiered" candidates, which, at least early on, benefit mostly from name recognition rather than strength of ideas.

[Proud American]

"Ron Paul's supporters are gaming the system " This isn't even possible. Just go to YouTube, MySpace, or Meetup. It would be nearly impossible for someone to rigg all this support. I would argue exactly the opposite. They aren't organized, YET ;-)

[Cam Beck]

Hi Proud American - Thank you for checking us out. The corollary to that is that, if Paul supporters aren't gaming the system, and if we can trust the poll numbers from the MSM (which I don't think we can) we may not be a tenth as important as we think we are, here on the Web (which might still be true, regardless of the MSM's trustworthiness).

I do happen to know that Dr. Paul is very popular among Libertarians, and people from that party would love to see Paul succeed. The difference between what I think is a popular practice of both major parties and Libertarians is that Libertarians are united in their steadfast dedication to their philosophical cause, whereas so many of the Big 2 are dedicated to taking a (what they would call "practical") course of action that will result in their party winning - or more accurately, the candidate of the other party losing.

So, no, they aren't "organized," in the same way that the other candidates' supporters are, but they do have the capability to speak with one voice - especially since they likely perceive themselves to have only one real ally running for President in either of the two major parties.

[BuckinOhio]

Old media works together in a monolithic fashion to force beliefs and agendas down the American people's throats. As Joe Sobran pointed out - in a May 27, 1996 New York Times article an Israel-first columnist Ari Shavit, an Israeli columnist, reflected sorrowfully on the wanton Israeli killing of more than a hundred Lebanese civilians in April. “We killed them out of a certain naive hubris. Believing with absolute certitude that now, with the White House, the Senate, and much of the American media in our hands, the lives of others do not count as much as our own....”

The article "In Our Hands" is a readily verifiable FACT.

Go no further than there to understand who has the power to condemn, censor and silence Ron Paul.

[Cam Beck]

BuckinOhio - Thank you for reading. We have several very pointed areas of disagreement about what is "fact" and what is "opinion."

However, since that's not on topic, let's leave that aside. I can point you to my other blog, if you wish, and we can work out the details there.

Ron Paul is not being silenced or censored (Unsuccessful efforts to ban him from the GOP debates notwithstanding). He's being largely ignored. That isn't the same thing.

[ApW]

I took notice of this same issue over at Digg. There is quite a dust-up between Ron Paul supporters and Digg heavyweights tired of seeing his stories making the front page.

Explanation 5 is most likely true given the demographics of tech-savvy blog-readers and Libertarians (young, male, entrepreneurial). But another point to consider is that the MSM's post-debate polls had Ron Paul scoring in the top three. This again may be a self-selection bias in that people who are more likely to watch debates (and follow-up online) are more likely to be Paul supporters. My gut feeling is that the correlation is that those who are more likely to watch debates are the ones who are more likely to seek out the differences between candidates - and Mr. Paul certainly is the most unique of the candidates. The interesting sidelight that supports your second explanation is that even after getting the results of their own polls, the MSM still refused to give Mr. Paul even consideration.

The difference concerns me, but not because of what it says about social media outlets. I think we are well aware of the self-selection bias. What does concern me is MSM's bias against Libertarian ideas, but I'm optimistic that the technorati community is filled with early adopters, not outliers.

[Ron Holland]

Will Ron Paul & Rudy Giuliani Debate Foreign Policy at Freedomfest?
The annual FreedomFest conference, has issued a debate invitation to GOP Presidential candidates Rudy Giuliani and Ron Paul to use FreedomFest ‘07 as a debate venue to further explore their fundamental differences in foreign policy and the war in Iraq that were highlighted in the Columbia, SC debate. To review the debate invitation - www.freedomfest.com/debate.htm
For more information on the July 2007 FreedomFest Conference in Las Vegas, go to
www.freedomfest.com

[Ron Holland]

Read How Ron Paul Became President

A fictional case study about how a future terrorist attack against the US and the Bush administration response elects Ron Paul as President.

Learn what could happen when the United States is hit by another terrorist attack by Islamic extremists that creates an extreme response by Washington in The Final Presidential Executive Order at http://www.swissconfederationinstitute.org/swisspreserve14.htm

This is from a new free online book, “The Swiss Preserve Solution” & the excess reaction results in the election of Ron Paul as President, not in 2008 but in 2012.