How Social Media Gave Mike Gravel an Identity and a Platform

There are kings and there are king makers. Social media is an example of a 'space' that serves both functions. Take for example the case of Mike Gravel, until about a week ago he was a complete unknown, but since the 2008 Democratic Presidential Primary Debate of April 26th, he is all that the people can talk about.

Of course part of it has to do with his his rather aggressive and argumentative (perhaps you could call it controversial) mannerisms, but that did nothing but to get him barred from mainstream media outlets. Not only did he get uninvited to the CNN debate, but he also got de-listed from the MSNBC online polls.

We're not ranking Mike Gravel... This guy's not just a third-tier longshot, he might be a little, um, off. Seriously, he was downright rude. Why should anyone agree to appear on stage with him? And why should any mainstream Democratic group invite him?)

But people can only censor you if you are restricted by the draconian and parochial laws of editorial control that mainstream media outlets have to abide by. With social media, editorial control is given back to the people, no one person or team of people can make a decision to censor someone. And that is exactly what has happened in the case of Mike Gravel.

If you look at the archive of Gravel-related content submitted to Digg or Reddit for example, you will see that the communities there, in response to the mainstream media shunning Gravel, have given him a platform and have gone out of their way to make his voice heard. When he was banned from CNN, the people circulated petitions (Digg, Reddit) and when he wasn't given the due exposure on television, they helped by giving his YouTube account exposure.

While the mainstream media is calling his candidacy a long-shot, the people have already elected him president. And that is the power of social media.

Enjoy the post? Here are some more that may interest you.

There are no trackbacks for this post yet.

Jason Mikael Pittam, May 3, 2007

Wow, take a look at that traffic chart! That's a dream for new sites. Social media is kicking butt!

Adam Abeles, May 3, 2007

MIKE GRAVEL is What the PEOPLE WANT! This is clear!

Stephen Glauser, May 3, 2007

"the people have already elected him president." Come on, that's a little extreme isn't it?

I mean, what is the combined American userbase of all of the social media websites on the Gravel bandwagon? A couple million?

How many of them are under 18, and thus not able to vote? How many of those able to vote are going to be too lazy to leave their computers and stand in line at the polling station (I'm one of these, btw). How many of these users that plan on voting are even on the Gravelwagon?

While Social media may be powerful on the internet, and growing in power in the MSM, I think that quote completely invalidated this entire post.

I mean, did you really say that?

Stephen Glauser, May 3, 2007

I forgot to add: Gravel is awesome.

Debbie, May 3, 2007

Mike Gravel needs to be heard in an unbiased media I hadn't heard of him before the debate and I now know We have NOT heard from him nearly enough ! Let the People of America decide the next President NOT the media's Choice,OUR informed and freely decided upon choice. It is Time to forget labels and listen to the message. Let us hear MORE

rick gregory, May 3, 2007

Who?

BigMike, May 3, 2007

I am with Mike Gravel all the way...Power to the People!

Tom, May 3, 2007

Stephen Glauser has a point - to say the people have already elected Mike Gravel president, based on the buzz created by a very small but vocal subset of Americans, many of whom have no say in the electoral process, is quite an overstatement.

That said, I've never heard of this guy before, and he seems to have some really interesting ideas. I just need to read between his lines before I decide what I think of him.

Andrew Swihart, May 3, 2007

Go here: http://nationaljournal.com/racerankings/wh08/democrats/ And rank Gravel #1 on their poll, they will be forced to reinstate listing him in the rank list. Thanks!

david, May 3, 2007

Do you think a candidte which says on TV

"The military industrial complex owns the goverment lock, stock, barrel... and controls our culture"

Will EVER be allowed to say that again on corporate media- Think again. EVEN THE DAILY SHOW did a hatched job on him editinghis commments to make him look looney. They took him off the nationaljournal.com rankings because they can't allow him any platform. 100's of billions in revenue for corporatios are at stake. Better not get in the way of that!

Joseph, May 3, 2007

.Gravel a breath of fresh air,and cnn wants to shut him out,not the American way. All voices must be listen to for how is one to select a person.

David, May 3, 2007

If we start shunning candidates for giving straight answers and talking with true conviction, then all really is lost. Whether or not you agree with Gravel's policies, he truly is a great model for any Presidential candidate, there is no BS with him.

Stephen Glauser, May 3, 2007

Also, I believe CNN has redacted their previous position and have invited him to be a part of the next debate.

Ronald Greene, May 3, 2007

I agree that the people have already elected him president and the media is doing everything that it can to prevent us from finding out. For example, in support of your chart after the debate on Thursday, the internet just exploded. It got 5 million hits in 72 hours said Alex Colvin, Gravel's press secretary. Contributors flooded the campaign with donations at least $50,000 in the past week and the organizers of a CNN debate who had said Gravel wasn't invited, changed their minds. This man can become president of the U.S. and no one should doubt it now.

Adam Audette, May 3, 2007

I agree with Stephen that Muhammad's election of Gravel to the presidency is a bit overstated... ahem... but it doesn't invalidate the post. It just needs an edit :-)

This post is brilliant (ok, maybe it's a little idealogical). It's true that social media is powerful. But it's not ready to shake up mainstream media or the political system any time soon. What really jumped out at me was the thesis:

"With social media, editorial control is given back to the people, no one person or team of people can make a decision to censor someone."

Let's look at probably the most powerful social site there is right now: Digg. I don't know if it was 1 person there or the whole team, but they certainly made a decision to censor the hd-dvd stories (and banning users, too). And let's not forget them banning sites like Lee Odden's because he talks about SEO (guess he's now unbanned).

The social media space is young and ripe, it's not a paradise of equality and justice. I doubt it ever can be; it's a human construct after all.

Jon Empey, May 4, 2007

Gravel is right about the military industrial complex.

George Washigton warned us, James Madison warned us, Dwight Eisenhower warned us, but we didn't listen.

And now everyone is so brainwashed about 'American greatness', 'freedom' and worst of all, 'democracy', that they can't even begin to see the problem.

The government controls all the money, the educational system, the communications systems, the electrical supply, the food supply, and all the real guns now, so good luck guys, your chances of even starting a Revolution to take back your government are pretty damn slim, and the odds of success are far worse than Mike Gravel's chances of becoming President. After all, he is a former U.S. Senator, and a recognized, accredited by the government, candidate.

SEO Loser, May 4, 2007

Great writing as usual here, but I gotta say I disagree with your use of the word "censorship." Especially in Digg-esque regions of the internet, all you hear is censorship-this, censorship-that--and don't get me wrong; free, open speech is crucial to our society, but saying you don't want a guy who was rude or annoying to participate in future debates isn't censorship.