Boehlert writes: "Tellingly, the fact that the scary sounding group doesn't exist didn't stop a right-wing site from pushing the tall tale; a tale that quickly ricocheted across the conservative media landscape and was touted as a Deeply Troubling Development."
Washington Times commentator and Breitbart.com webmaster Andrew Breitbart, 02/12/11. (photo: Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images)
'Friends of Hamas' and Why the GOP Can't Win the Internet
20 February 13
f you want to appreciate how vast the digital divide is that historically separates conservative failures and liberal accomplishments online, and if you want to add some context to the recent New York Times Magazine feature article on how Republicans' chronic online shortcomings dim the party's electoral chances, just look at how the two camps were marking their time in recent days.
Working with Republicans on Capitol Hill trying to block Chuck Hagel's nomination to become Secretary of Defense, Breitbart's Ben Shapiro recently posted a report suggesting Hagel had allegedly received "foreign funding" over the years from a terrorist-friendly group called Friends of Hamas, but that the payments were being kept secret. The allegation served as part of the right wing's relentless campaign to smear Hagel as being anti-Israel.
Fox Business host Lou Dobbs, National Review columnist Andrew McCarthy, and AM talker Hugh Hewitt all hyped Breitbart's conspiratorial narrative about Hagel's nefarious connections with Friends of Hamas.
Slight problem. Last week, Slate's David Weigel detailed how Friends of Hamas doesn't actually exist. And as New York Daily News reporter Dan Friedman explained, he unwittingly started the Friends of Hamas rumor when he posed the Hagel question to a GOP aide in the form of "an obvious joke." According to Friedman, he asked about both Friends of Hamas and the "Junior League of Hezbollah," and thought that the "names were so over-the-top, so linked to terrorism in the Middle East, that it was clear I was talking hypothetically and hyperbolically."
The GOP aide then apparently shared the Friends of Hamas inquiry with other partisans and Friedman posits that from there it found its way to Breitbart, which published it in the form of "news" under Shapiro's byline. Tellingly, the fact that the scary sounding group doesn't exist didn't stop a right-wing site from pushing the tall tale; a tale that quickly ricocheted across the conservative media landscape and was touted as a Deeply Troubling Development.
It was against that backdrop of routine right-wing dysfunction that the Times published its lengthy article. Author Robert Draper argued -- and many Republican operatives agreed -- that the GOP's perennial online failures have made it almost impossible for the party to communicate effectively with younger voters; voters who have developed a deeply hostile perception of the GOP brand. (i.e. "Polarizing," "narrow-minded.") Draper didn't make reference to the Friends of Hamas debacle, but it could have served as a useful example of how routinely unserious online pursuits have become among Republican boosters.
By comparison, note Monday's news that left-leaning Mother Jones won a prestigious Polk Award for the big campaign scoop David Corn posted online last September about how Mitt Romney, while addressing wealthy donors, disparaged "47 percent" of Americans who "believe they are victims." The blockbuster report, complete with an undercover video, was the fruit of a month's worth of digging by Corn.
The Friends of Hamas farce, coupled with the Polk Award, represent useful bookends when measuring the widening gulf that separates liberals and conservatives online, and how one side has completely lapped the other. (Seven years after its launch, players are still trying to create the "conservative Huffington Post.")
I realize the Times piece focused on "the Republican Party's technological deficiencies," the lopsided battle for a social media edge, revolutionary campaign software, and how senior Republicans are still reluctant to even engage via Twitter. The piece cast a spotlight on how information, and better information, is shared faster and more widely among liberals than it is among conservatives.
But you can't really take what the right-wing media, and specifically bloggers, are doing online and separate that from the GOP's chronic, failed attempts to use the Internet to win elections and bolster its brand. The two are permanently attached.
The truth is, liberals for years bemoaned the fact that conservatives dominated talk radio and there seemed to be something in the DNA of liberal listeners that prevented them from tuning in to like-minded radio hosts endlessly, week after week and year after year. With the Internet, the tables have been turned. Conservatives scratch their heads trying to understand the chasm and why there seems to be a natural disposition on the left to embrace the nonhierarchical style of the Web and turn it into an oversize organizing tool, while so many Republicans simply demurred.
Or worse, they have helped turn the Web into the conservative house of mirrors, as represented by the comically awful and dishonest Friends of Hamas failure.
And talk about deja vu.
Describing how badly Democrats are outclassing them online, a Republican operative told the Times, "They were playing chess while we were playing checkers."
Sound familiar? It should. "For the most part Republicans are stuck in Internet circa 2000." That's how a GOP aide turned blogger described the party's dire problem to the Washington Post in 2007. That same year, a Weekly Standard writer bemoaned, "We're losing the Web right now."
Not much has changed since then. In fact, according to the Times piece things may have gotten worse for Republicans over the last four years, as Mitt Romney's social media thumping proved. (i.e. 12 million Facebook friends registered for Romney vs. 33 million for Obama.) And specifically, the GOP now faces a grave danger in term of reaching and persuading young voters, who electorally appear to be verging on a generational lost cause for Republicans.
Frustrated GOP activists told the Times that the party's corporate rigidity was to blame for the lack of online innovation and success, and that conservative techies are too focused on making money and not devoted enough to helping grow the cause.
After reading the Times article, Salon's Andrew Leonard noted a different reason for endless GOP stumbles in the face of Democratic successes [emphasis added]:
What's really happening is that Democrats have grasped a fundamental attribute of the digital age -- information is easy to share -- and have understood that the best way to take advantage of this special quality is set up a structure in which "smart people" are allowed to operate freely in an environment where information flows fluidly.
Note the significance of "smart people." And just as importantly, I'd suggest, are serious people. Today online, conservatives often lack both.
Just ask Friends of Hamas.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |













Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
The opposite currents making up this pool used to be called "liberal" and "conservative." The GOP belongs nowhere in either camp anymore except where it is: caught in the whirlpools made by the liberals running amok with corporatism, and corporatist rhetorical insistence that it is essentially a force for conservative interests.
Corporatism is in some ways still a status quo conservative force, but those corporations lost in that world of political delusions are rapidly evaporating; the banking/finance chieftains are making sure of that.
The GOP ran adrift because of its radical and eager electioneers, by the Karl Roves: every one of his predecessors in GOP electioneering all the way back to the 1930s. The GOP got completely caught in the political whirlpool it is now stuck in when, in 1998, it forgot the difference between intellectual health and sheer anti-intellectu alism. Today the GOP sees nothing different between them.
Meanwhile, the Democrats run wild with hopey changey stuff, while their big cheese proves himself the most status quo conservative politician in the world. Exactly like his party's most recent predecessor in the same position.
There are many whirlpools.
The one-thought person is a sucker — and will be a sucker in any medium — a fool for Limbaugh, Regnery, Fox, Drudge. Republicans don't have an internet problem, which is why they haven't solved it yet. They have an epistemological problem: how does one know what one knows? That's the crucial companion-thoug ht for any serious person. Without it, you don't get either the jokes or the internet.
Without it you are prey to reductionist messages on talk radio or from a fundamentalist pulpit. Without it you ignore science and other intellectual challenges; you embrace mad constructs (American exceptionalism, free market fundamentalism, the supply side, etc.); you simply make stuff up out of whole cloth (this was Romney's strategy … speaking of a leaden sense of humor).
What is most dangerous about the one-track mind is that it can cynically opt out of the "reality based world", create its own facts by dint of force, and compel the rest of us to live with the fallout. It can do all that because it doesn’t have a second thought.
When the radical right are being complete you-know-what's ... it starts with "a" and ends with "e", and they always are, Breitbart's whereabouts does cheer me up.
Yes, Republicans benefit from their lies in countless ways as we spend so much time and energy countering their attacks but there is no benefit in ignoring the attacks.
RAPES
U.S.A.
The GOP can push all of their lies and distortions of reality online but unlike Fox News and Clear Channel Radio, the internet provides a platform for disputing the bull chit.
yes, the Republicans & their support 'team', a la Fox etc, are not very bright but you have to consider with whom you are dealing. Friedman didn't.
on the other side, where were Hagel's handlers while this was going on? there was no one who said that it wasn't true in a forthright way. It took Slate to bring up that there was no such group!
anyone want to bet that there now IS a group called 'Friends of Hamas'?
I get missives from my right-wing associates from time to time, often in mass emailings. I love to "Snopes" their silly facts and opinions, then send a link to the "fact" rebuttal or a countervailing article back with a simple "reply all". Perhaps I'm a left-wing (radical) troll, but the above writer is correct when she points out that "we have the facts at our fingertips" while we sit at our computers.
This is exactly WHY I read and SUPPORT RSN with periodic contributions. We have the facts on our side. We're at least a step or three ahead of their game. Chess is a great analogy.
No form of genocide against anyone can ever be justified for any reason!
W. Michelet
RSS feed for comments to this post