Skip To Content
Skip To Navigation
Get Local! Create Your MyBO Account (
or Login
)
Nearly There! Provide Your Name
Welcome! Login to MyBO (
or create your account
)
Almost Done! Create a Password
My Home
My Dashboard
My Blog
My Messages
Community
My Neighborhood
My Groups
Find Groups
My Friends
People Near Me
Events
Find Local Events
Host an Event
Manage My Events
Fundraise
Logout
Organizing for America
Sign-Up
OFA Home
About OFA
Issues
Volunteer
OFA Blog
Store
Donate
Community Blogs
Login
|
Register
|
Search Blogs
Post from
Joe Rospars's Blog
:
Our MySpace Experiment
By
Joe Rospars
- May 2nd, 2007 at 7:11 pm EDT
Comments
|
Mail to a Friend
|
Report Objectionable Content
Tags:
myspace
There have been a lot of questions and comments in this community related to our MySpace profile, and so I wanted to come by and clarify how we got here and answer questions.
Our campaign started quickly. People around here say that this has been like building an airplane in mid-air, having already taken off. This is especially true of the New Media operation. While the campaign in general is going from zero to sixty, our team is at the same time charged with exploring the new ways we can build relationships between Barack and his supporters, and foster relationships among supporters themselves.
When it came to MySpace, we decided to take a leap. We decided to make the attempt to combine the organic support and community-building of a grassroots effort with the official campaign outreach efforts.
In many ways this mirrors what has happened on the campaign's own web site. On February 10th, the day Barack announced his candidacy in Springfield, we launched
My.BarackObama.com
has an unprecedented public utility for supporters.
Even on the campaign's own web site, the organizing efforts and community-building by the grassroots has outpaced the growth of the traditional campaign infrastructure. On the site, over 11,500 people have
created their own blogs
about everything from their issue priorities to their personal experience campaigning locally.
Thousands of events
have been planned using the events tool (social events, planning meetings, small fundraisers), and tens of thousands of people have RSVPed to these grassroots-driven gatherings.
And over 5,000
grassroots volunteer groups
have been founded -- in many states, these groups will be the only organizational presence the campaign has. Even in the early states, staff organizers are hitting ground in places where volunteer groups have already been meeting and organizing. One of the first orders of business for new staff on the ground is getting to know the grassroots who have already started building the movement.
When it comes to MySpace, I'm not sure if a campaign of this size has ever teamed-up with a grassroots volunteer on this scale, but we wanted to give it a try.
Joe Anthony's great work was building community at the www.myspace.com/barackobama address, and so we contacted him.
At that point, the profile had about 40,000 friends, and to our delight, Joe agreed to work with us. Indeed, he seemed relieved to have some help -- he gave us the password, and we began to exchange content, work together, and continue growing this community from the ground-up. We created images that he (and others online) could post, and began going through the process of preparing the profile to be "official" by combing through the content and establishing a plan to ensure that everyone who tried to contact the campaign through the profile received an answer. (People wrote messages and comments in huge numbers, virtually all addressed to Barack or the campaign -- "Will you come speak at my graduation?", "Where do you stand on issue X?", "How can I help locally?", etc.)
We started talking to Joe about formalizing the arrangement, preserving his work building the community, and talking through how to preserve his involvement in the direction and development of the profile.
For a time, both the campaign and Joe had mutual access. Soon after, MySpace launched a promotional campaign to direct traffic to the official candidate pages. The campaign allowed MySpace to promote this unofficial profile because, strictly speaking, there was no official presence. And so MySpace began featuring the profile in candidate promotions -- and the friends and workload grew.
We knew Joe had a full-time job already, and, early on, we floated the idea of moving to Chicago to work for us full-time (potential staffers were moving to Chicago and join the team at that time, and there were openings). I totally agree when
Chris Bowers says
that the New Media/online outreach efforts of campaigns should be a priority -- and we have built an operation here in Chicago and in the early states that reflects that posture.
But Joe seemed to prefer to volunteer part-time from the outside with the campaign to continue building the community. He said he was honored to help out, and we were honored to work with him. We worked through the complications that arose: letting Joe know that he shouldn't work on the site from work, educated him about the rules governing campaign promotion of official Senate material, etc. Joe was right with us, and things continued down the path towards making this unofficial community into an official space run with help from volunteers.
As we progressed, we began to work-up paperwork that would codify this arrangement -- ensuring that the campaign would have full access (what if someone put up an obscene comment during the day while Joe was at work?), and assuming the liability burden (legally, ethically, and politically) for what happened on the site.
At the same time, though, the community had skyrocketed. Nobody expected the grassroots to respond this campaign in such large numbers the way they have, and the rapid growth of the MySpace profile once the MySpace Impact Channel began promoting the various candidates is yet another example of the appeal of Barack. We were well over 100,000 friends, and the burden of administering such a profile became immense.
Unfortunately, at that point, Joe changed the password on the profile, and didn't give us the new one, like he had done in the past. This changed the previous dynamic, and we could no longer access the profile at a moment's notice if need be. We asked Joe what was needed to restore access, and subsequently we received the list of itemized financial requests that have been discussed elsewhere.
This made us uncomfortable. Every day, MySpace was driving tens of thousands of people to the page on the premise that this was more or less our "official" presence -- yet we had no access to the content on the page, and no ability to be responsive to the thousands of messages coming in from supporters seeking information or action from the campaign.
We talked to Joe and made clear that we truly wanted to incorporate the community into the campaign's official presence, but that if these financial demands were a precursor to the campaign having access at all, that we would need to start with an official profile separately and have MySpace promote that instead.
And so it became clear that we needed to have MySpace point people at something we had at least basic access to -- immediately. In MySpace, politicians, musicians, and other public figures have the right to their own name (www.myspace.com/barackobama, www.myspace.com/hillaryclinton, etc.), and so we asked MySpace for use of that URL and to ensure that any promotion of "official" profiles for candidates be directed to the new profile our team created.
The community of the 160,000 still exists, and we've made sure that MySpace will let Joe have access to the community he helped build. And we hope we can continue to work with him to make that as effective as it can be.
At the end of the day, this is all new for everyone -- this Joe, that Joe, and everyone participating or commenting on it. We're flying by the seat of our pants, and establishing new ways of doing things every day. We're going to try new things, and sometimes it's going to work, and sometimes it's not going to work. That's the cost and that's the risk of experimenting. Joe launched this profile for all the right reasons, and for a while grew it with us.
But the ultimate purpose is building a community around the idea that ordinary people can come together and affect change in this country. Barack Obama is the candidate I believe can transform the process and make that change happen.
And, to the extent that more and more people every day come to that same conclusion, my bet is that both profiles will continue to grow.
Reader Comments
Comments RSS
Comments are closed for this post.
Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Joeytj
May 2nd 2007 at 7:40 pm EDT
It's very good to hear the campaign side of the story, and there is something here we did not hear from Joe, that he gave you a LIST of financial demands. He says it was just a 39 000 dollar payment. This is something unprecedented i agree, and for any other campaign or political blogger to say that he deserved the money, they need to really think about it. Joe was a volunteer, and it is/was really difficult for the campaign to asses just how much should they involve him. I just heard a couple of moments ago about a similar case, in which a volunteer helped out with the page of a Sherif's department, and after a couple of year, he demanded payment, something the Sherif's department never expected.
I still think Obama himself should get involved in this, at least talk to Joe. He needs to prove that this really is a grass roots campaign. Unlike the Edwards campaign in wich bloggers become more involved, and its a bit of a down-top relationship, what i am seeing in the Obama campaign is a top-down relationship, but not because the campaign is some sort of controlling machine, its because there are literally hundreds and thousands of new volunteers that really do need to be organized, people who have never entered into politics, something the Edwards campaign hasn't achieved as much, and IMO helps to figure out how everybody in the "net roots" will react, they have been through this before. I don't know. For a Junior Senator from illanois, that has suddenly this huge amount of online fallowing, he is doing pretty good. A few kinks, like this one, but i have no doubt that Obama will come out on top, at least when it comes to the net roots.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Mark from Kent, WA
May 2nd 2007 at 7:53 pm EDT
Uh, perhaps you should ask to see the list.
There were expenses occurred (paid to MySpace).. Certainly that was listed.
He then probably listed his work time @ x per hours as an expense.
Perhaps had to pay for extra email space to handle email traffic. Probably listed.
Hey.. Look! A list!
This campaign is only grass roots if you do not become too successful. Looks like the same-ol same-ol machine to me.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Joeytj
May 2nd 2007 at 8:24 pm EDT
Well, most of the thins you said, included the word "probably" so don't go all out defending Joe, cause you "probably" think he is a all good decent person who got manipulated and destroyed by the big old Obama Machine.
The truth is, Joe dedicated almost 3 years of his life to a myspace web page, which by the way, didn't really become a burden until probably January when the talk about an Obama campaign really took off. To suddenly claim that you deserve 39 000 dollars, comes off as greedy. NOT saying he is, he probably sincerely thinks he deserves the money based on his work, but as you saw, the campaign has legitimate reasons for kneading a page of its own, or thinking it did nothing wrong. You just read (at least, i hope you read it) the campaigns side of the story, and i also hope you read Joe side as well. None of them seem to deny anything, but rather its gives their point of view, which IMO are both valid, and can still patch things up. I really don't see the "old political machine" at work. This whole thing is something new and uncharted, and to simply say one side riped or betrayed the other off, is just mis communication. At least, i hope so.
I agree that it was a mistake to think Joe was just somebody trying to suck money right out of the campaign, or for Joe to think that he could easily get thousands of dollars. He is not the only one dedicating part of his life to THIS or any other campaign. I myself dedicated a big part of my time, and others who physically do even more are not paid, and don't complain as much. I understand some of the worrisome feelings in the campaign that now anybody can reclaim a check for volunteering in the campaign, claiming netroot rights and so on. We should be careful to just trow adjectives around, and say one is "shitting" on the other.
To say that this affects your vote on Obama, is ridiculous.
How a campaign uses MySpace doenst't really matter as much at this point. The campaign did offer him to move to Chicago and be full time, as many others just like him have, and when he denied and made some list with demands, i think that took some of Obama's people by surprise. How to react?. Well, they said "were sorry, but i think we will just start our own". And thats what they did. They didn't steal it, as you can see, they are starting from scratch (you can tell by the friends added). MySpace gave them the same domain, cause its their policy to give politicians, musicians, etc, the domain the want based on their name. Joe still has the old page, or at least the 160 000 friends.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Mark from Kent, WA
May 2nd 2007 at 8:42 pm EDT
I can say probably because they didn't post it.
Did you see it?
Maybe it was:
"Hello,
I don't want to go to Chicago, how about $39,000 + 1/2 of the $10k I invested and I hand it over?
~joe."
If it was extortion and such a bad offering, why did they not post it? (Well, besides the obvious "we relly hope this will go away soon" that will probably be the initial play.)
I might almost see Obama's point if Joe had started this in the last 6 months.. but he started this TWO AND A HALF years ago.
It literally makes me sick that the Obama campaign is fine with someone doing tons of work for them over years and helping to make him even relevent (the first time I heard of Obama was in regards to his internet presense) but the second they won't play instant ball with them...
Screw him.
If they did not like the expense list, why didn't they counter offer?
But all told, this is not about the money.
Joe build a COMMUNITY.
This about the same as having someone setup an Obama support/fan group in a town. You hang out, have fun. Communicate. Trade information. Then one day have the Obama campaign ask to move to a new town - and when you counter offer with an amount which you will hand over the group, instead the swing into town and change the locks on the doors.
Sure, you still have your friends and group...
But it is certainly a changed context and is certainly a slap on the face for the community that grew up around Obama in the first place.
It is the community aspect that I think Obama's group missed out on. (And no, it was not all hundred and whatever thousand.. but there was a decent sized band of people that really banded together on that site before there even was an Obama 08 campaign.. and this is how they were thanked.)
Re: Thank you for addressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Frances
May 2nd 2007 at 10:06 pm EDT
If you offer to volunteer your time-that is your choice to put in as much as little time as you want, and volunteer time is not paid.
I think it's great they offered him a position, but just because they did does not obligate them to pay him for his time-he chose on his own to put that time into his volunteer work.
If they tried to pay everyone who helped them, they would not have any money left to reach more people, outside of those volunteer groups.
Re: Thank you for addressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
thefos
May 2nd 2007 at 10:45 pm EDT
I joined Joe's Myspace group because of Obama, not Joe.
I, too, am a volunteer. I have hitched my wagon to something bigger than myself. I have given more money than I can afford and more time than I have because I believe that Barack Obama is the best candidate that I have seen in my lifetime.
I intend to be friends with Joe on Myspace but I have certainly joined Barack's official Myspace page. If Joe chooses to use his page to hurt instead of help Barack, then I will have to let this friendship go.
I am volunteering my precious time to elect Barack Obama as our next president and quite frankly, I think that in the end, the only person who owns Barack Obama's name is Barack Obama.
Re: Thank you for addressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Joe from San Francisco, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 5:55 am EDT
Bill Richardson didn't feel the need to boot the guy who had already taken myspace.com/billrichardson. Instead he uses myspace.com/richardsonforpresi dent, and I doubt it matters.
Obama could have had a new official profile along with this already thriving community - no need to steal the profile address at all.
...and now they're dragging Joe through the mud? Yeah, I'd say "bullies" about sums it up. Hey Barack, why don't you call 'em off?
Re: Thank you for addressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Gina
May 3rd 2007 at 12:27 pm EDT
Everybody needs to take a deep breath and think. Rushing in to pass judgement and blame never creates positive growth. It's this same soundbite-fed, ignorant, drama queen response that got Bush elected twice. Calm down, be rational, and don't throw the Obama out with the campaign manager's bathwater. There's too much at stake here. We need to act like rational grown-ups if we ever want this country to really change. Can't you just hear the Republicans salivating at this???
Re: Thank you for addressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Alex O
May 3rd 2007 at 1:01 pm EDT
It sounds like Obama's campaign made a wise decision. For those of us who have donated money, particularly students making less than 1/3 of Joe Anthony's request, I'm glad to see that Obama is willing to take a small public relations hit in order to do what's right. Details like changing the password during the negotiations are pretty damning, but instead of going on the offensive, the campaign releases classy blog entries like this one.
The goal is electing Obama in order to heal our democracy. Volunteers and donors receive compensation in the form of a healthy nation and a peaceful world. Consider the hundreds of students who will be volunteering during the summer of 2008, at the height of the campaign. We certainly will not be demanding financial compensation, since our eyes will be on changing the world.
Re: Thank you for addressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Joe from San Francisco, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 3:15 pm EDT
Kind of ironic that he's paying his web and media people multiples of this amount then. The smart thing would have been a counter offer. Failing that, they should have set up myspace/joinobama and let this guy continue to advocate on his own. No, at pretty much every opportunity they have failed to do the right thing. Now it's national news! Obama, stop listening to the guys who created this mess. Make a gesture of giving the profile back and reconcile with the online community.
Until he gives the profile back, it will always be true when they say that he's the guy who took something away from one of his own supporters. Sure, big companies legally take things from the average citizen all the time, but we're against that... right?
As someone who cares about what happens online, I will remember this in 2008. I pray he does the right thing before then. Seriously, I'm very sad today.
Re: Thank you for addressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Daniel from Portland, OR
May 6th 2007 at 8:28 pm EDT
Problem is this account fails to tell the whole story.
Read the account on the blog here
Link
Re: Thank you for addressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Phil
May 21st 2007 at 5:11 pm EDT
Are you THE Joe here? If so, you ought to be ashamed of yourself, you greedy little moron. You were supposed to be helping Obama, not jumping on his bandwagon for your own 15 min. of fame and extorting some money! You could have gotten a job on the campaign. You could have played your cards right. But at every turn YOU did the wrong thing. That's HIS name in the URL, not yours, you idiot! What friggin' right do you have to his name? You built a MySpace page on HIS legacy, not yours. You're a nobody and the more you drag this nonsense out, the more you prove that.
Re: Thank you for addressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
amberdiann
May 8th 2007 at 12:13 am EDT
Bill Richardson did that?
Heh, I guess what they say is true... we'll never have someone positive for president because the good guy will never have enough in campaign contributions.
Obama said FU to grass roots - now it's just the same ole machine.
Re: Thank you for addressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Rachel from Columbia, SC
May 3rd 2007 at 7:47 am EDT
Uh... I just like to clarify... you're not "Joe's friend"... you're some guy who linked to his myspace.
Personally, I find myspace moronic... but it comes down to an issue of first come first serve. This dude already had the url, it was HIS. Obama should at least pay him for it.
Fact is that Joe did the leg work and Obama's people ripped him off.
For a guy who claims to want to work bottom up, change things etc. this sullies his image.
Re: Thank you for addressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Dave from San Mateo, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 5:15 pm EDT
A lot of you are missing the point why this Joe guy is upset. Joe was not holding the site for ransom - it was HIS account to begin with!!! I don't care if he's a scumbag or not. So what if he asked for 39 G's? Call him opportunistic! Hate him, if you will. But steal from him??? C'mon people! This is the sort of thing George Bush and Dick Cheney will do. "If we want it, we'll do it - and we don't give a rat's arse what you think!"
Cut the crap about "I'm a long time volunteer, and I wouldn't dream of asking for money for what I believe in." It's not even about Joe's character now. It's about Obama's. It's about stepping over people to get what you want - even if it's a supporter. (an opportunistic supporter at that) Two wrongs don't make it right. It's during these scenarios that you see what your campaign stands for.
I hate George Bush and his gang of morons to the bone, and will vote democratic regardless of who wins in the primaries. But this small thing really worries me a lot. If the campaign can do this to someone this early, imagine what this president can do to the American people in the future. Oh my, I'm seeing more of the same after 2008.
Re: Thank you for addressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Amy
May 3rd 2007 at 7:00 pm EDT
You don't understand myspace.
On myspace, candidates themselves own their own names. Joe owned nothing. However, his work is amazing, and I applaud that.
I have no problem with Joe asking for money, none at all. It's the way it was done. He locked them out. The campaign had no choice but to reclaim the name owned by the Senator, and the space for which ultimately HE would be responsible, should anything inappropriate appear.
I repeat, Joe gave the campaign no choice. He took aggressive action, without warning, and forced the hand of the campaign. It was a bad decision. The campaign did what they needed to do to protect the candidate.
Joe is an extortionist |
Report to Admin
By
Phil
May 21st 2007 at 4:57 pm EDT
I don't advocate violence, but someone needs to slap some sense into this little egomaniac, Joe! Building his myspace page was SUPPOSED to be about helping OBAMA, not himself. Friends came on-board, not because of some nerd named Joe, but because of Barack Obama, the most inspiring candidate since JFK. MySpace is free and for Joe to later demand money for something he willingly started on his own only shows what a greedy extortionist he really is. This self-serving moron should get a grip and stop wallowing in his 15 minutes of fame, possibly at the expense of losing the best candidate in the next election. Too much is at stake for this petty nonsense to continue. Many people have gladly volunteered to help Obama's campaign. Either Joe is one of them or he is not.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Kristin from Inglewood, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 5:13 am EDT
Has anybody thought that perhaps Joe wasn't in it for the 39 thousand dollars but was rather a plant from some republican hate group who set out to smear Obama and take him out of the race?
I wrote this and it appeared way far down in the blog so sorry I just felt like I had to write it again and try to get it closer to the top..
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Jennifer
May 3rd 2007 at 10:16 am EDT
DUH - he wasn't a plant - he'd been working on it for 2 1/2 years!!!! WELL before Obama started talking about a bid for the presidency.
They've left something out. This campaign doesn't get it. |
Report to Admin
By
Joe from San Francisco, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 6:38 am EDT
I DON'T BELIEVE IT!
According to this story, you were all happy as you started to work towards making Joe's profile the official one, then out of the blue he goes berserk and locks you out? Oh really? You didn't leave anything out there? No disagreement, no hurt feelings. Way to throw your volunteer under the bus. Way to heal the harm done by this.
I can't believe that had to "invoke your right" to seize the profile when another would have worked just as well to start from scratch with. I can't believe you needed immediate access to the still-unofficial profile, even though there was no "obscene comment" (oh no!) needing immediate removal. But I REALLY can't believe you hired people who don't understand online communities to manage your "new media" effort. Apparently they only know a few buzz words.
Guess what. Out here we're all equal, except for those late-comers with money and lawyers who always find a way to push us around. People will identify with someone being stripped of their profile, 'cause it can happen. It was unnecessary and cruel. I know you had the right, but if somebody has my name, I don't any such right. So that makes you the bad guy, and now using you official forum to smear a defenseless volunteer only makes it worse. Somebody get a clue over there!
Scott Goodstein and Joe Rospars don't get the web. If this is what passes for experts at the Obama campaign, I think they are in for some tough times ahead.
P.S. Give the profile back and make your own. Oh, and don't say another bad word about this. Saying that you were honored to work with him, but imagine our surprise when he went berserk.. people are going to see through that.
Re: They've left something out. This campaign doesn't get it. |
Report to Admin
By
amberdiann
May 8th 2007 at 12:16 am EDT
People keep talking about how we should move past this but turning a blind eye is how we snagged Bush.
I don't believe it either, and I actually feel a personal slap to the face.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Amy
May 3rd 2007 at 6:44 pm EDT
Mark from Kent, you're way off base here. The guy locked out the campaign. He locked them out. End of story.
That's the behavior of someone with the best interests of the candidate in mind? He locked them out and then asked for money and other things to let them back in. This all done after he a)was offered a paid position which he refused, and b)had made a good-faith volunteer arrangement with the campaign.
If he had not locked them out first, and had instead started with "This is getting to be too much, can i sell the site to the campaign?" he might have gotten more satisfactory results.
He chose the aggressive rather than the diplomatic approach, and it was a surprise to the campaign. My guess is that someone who is not an Obama supporter influenced him to do the lockout first. Sort of a "pre-emptive strike" if you will.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 11:35 am EDT
Couldn't have said this better myself. Obama gave slap in the face to all of us not just Joe. Believe me it changes my vote and highly suspect of the ethics of his campaign.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Jana from Henderson, NV
May 7th 2007 at 1:25 am EDT
No. It is NOT ridiculous that this interaction with Joe should affect my vote. It HAS affected my vote. The moment that Joe's true grassroots work of years of dedication and zeal was circumvented if not hijacked, this became business as usual. Do you not understand how tired "we" are of this kind of action?Smooth operator comes to mind. You are a smooth operator. Your blog reply with Joe's inserted explanations following your paragraphs is being circulated around MySpace which is how it came to my attention. I deleted Ms. Clinton last week when I was reminded of the scandal regarding her billing practices at her law firm in Arkansas. I will delete Mr. Obama now and forward these exchanges to the Abbess at a monastery with which I remain connected. The sisters have been advocating a vote for Obama. The "Joe's" of this movement represent me. Thank you and maybe you are not the right person to be representing Mr. Obama if controversy is arising all ready on a matter that should have been handled with more sensitivity. Oh, and the $39,000 is only an 'off-the-cuff' negotiating too. I know this. Why is so obscure for you?
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Homeboy
Jul 4th 2007 at 4:00 am EDT
You (and this article) make some very good points. We should also realize that a good portion of those many many myspace users won't even be able to vote. Yes, alot still will be, but like you said:
"To say that this affects your vote on Obama, is ridiculous."
...anyone following Obama in the first place will probably see through the mainstream media's spin on this story.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Tony from Lakewood, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 1:31 am EDT
What worrries me is the more top-down campaign approach that I think I am beginning to see from the Obama camp.
I like what Obama has to say, but I also like what other Democratic presidential candidates have to say, which means that I and many others who hear about this may not be happy about it. This should seriously cooncern the Obama campaign because it can be made into a big issue that is hard to explain fully in soundbites without making the explanation sound harsh or false.
I fully understand that some planning needs to come from the top, but this kind of a campaign stifles creativity and legitimate political expression. Any candidate who thinks they can direct what volunteers do runs the risk of alienating supporters. This is what I and I'm certain many BarackObama My Space friends and people who have supported Barck in the past feel.
Many of Howard Dean' supporters, of which I was a proud member in Long Beach, CA, remember that the power of that campaign in the early stages and until the first primaries was that it was almost completely people-powered. This is wehat drew not just me, but millions of disenfranchised voters into his campaign.
As it grew some direction began to happen, which was fine, but what I see happened with the myspace debacle is that not enough real negotiation was tried and that an agressive top down move was pulled by the Obama camp.
It is important that the problem be resolved somehow. If there is some good faith on both sides it could be resolved and we wouldn't be saying much about this topic at all.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Mwangwanani
May 3rd 2007 at 9:20 am EDT
Do you have a blog on this site?
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Vasily from Washington, DC
May 3rd 2007 at 2:02 pm EDT
I second your concerns, and believe that this episode will, unfortunately, reflect negatively on my candidate. I don't believe that the campaign upheld Sen. Obama's standard for a "new kind of politics" with its actions; on the contrary, this has the stink of old conrtol-obsessed machinery politics about it. I do also think that there is some disregard for Obama volunteers among the campaign staff--for instance, this posting maintains a fundamentally adversarial tone towards a formerly enthusiastic supporter. Even if the facts bear the campaign staffers out, there's no "win" when one takes on one's own supporters. All you've done by not apologizing and accepting a measure of the blame is alienated your own supporters. (The claim that this is all "new" also feels pretty hollow from a guy that presumably got his campaign job by touting ample experience at projects such as "Blog for America".)
This has no effect on my support of Obama, and my belief that he is the candidate that would do the best job of ensuring the safety and prosperity of my community, friends, and family. However, the concern it does open up for me is that Mr. Obama's rhetoric may reach beyond his execution. I do feel that his ideals most closely mirror my own, but I definitely don't think he will be as executing his vision as, for instance, HRC (and not just because of this silly little episode).
It may just be the Bush incompetence jitters, but even as a supporter, I want to see my candidate meet a certain standard when managing a staff exponentially smaller than what it would take to run the country. I apologize for airing my concerns publicly, but I would rather resolve this uncomfortable feeling now (through constructive dialogue, preferably) than have to confront it during his third year in office.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Omestes from Phoenix, AZ
May 3rd 2007 at 2:49 pm EDT
Why shouldn't influence your vote? It just shows how far the campaign (and perhaps Obama) is willing to go to ensure that they win, no matter who they run over. Also the fact that they NEEDED control (which is even more distasteful) of an authentic grassroots movement. They must have unfettered access to the information provided to those 160,000 people. Those people are merely votes, and Joe merely some resource for them to use on their path to victory.
You really can no long call this "grassroots" or organic. It now is a fully controlled aspect of the campaign machine.
It influenced my vote, or at least my potential vote. I'm a fan of Kucinich right now since he isn't frightened of unpopular action, but the odds of him being electable is practically nill, meaning the real choice at the moment is between Clinton, Edwards, and Obama. I can't vote for Clinton, and Edwards is, like Kucinich, ultimately unelectable, leaving only Obama. So while not a decisive event, it still attaches a little more... nuance... to the character of Obama, meaning I'm more likely to vote for someone else.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
BlueVoter
May 2nd 2007 at 9:25 pm EDT
I'm sure everyone will be pleased to know Joe Anthony has posted an update to his site saying that Senator Obama called him personally a little while ago. He was very excited about the call and apparently can't remember the details but I suspect he will by tomorrow. I am glad the campaign is doing the smart thing here. I don't think they necessarily owed him anything (after all, he was offered a full time job) but I think this is a wonderful thing to do any way.
Obama 08
Re: audacity and free/open sourceware |
Report to Admin
By
boatsie
May 3rd 2007 at 2:59 am EDT
... and I agree as I have stated elsewhere but maybe it will be read here (and I think I sense some support for my position here) ...
I feel there is a flagrant disconnect between the stated philosophy of this campaign and how it is being managed. Agreed, that the public response both on and off line has been unprecedented (and probably totallly unexpected) .... however, the total disconnect I experience (and hear vented elsewhere in these pages) between the true candidate and his roots is disturbing and disillusioning.
We have rallied to support Obama financially and if the figures are correct and the majority of contributions are from small donators, then these are the people who should have a voice in this campaign. They are not supporting a candidate who ismanaged by 'old school' handlers who represent the type of Washington business Obama wants to change.
They don't want a candidate who does not have the courage to speak his real opinions in debates, in interviews, in public appearances. It would be nice if the candidate actually participated, read, answered some posts in his own voice.
If he is actually doing this,I guess I am just not in that loop, so please accept my apology.
I suggest that Obama make a "real" green statement and spent a weekend or two home with his family, where he set aside a few hours to communicate openly sans MSM mediation with his netroots on policy issues and concerns. Nobody except Michele and the girls around to preapprove what he says based upon 'polling ' AND cutting back on his carbon footprint by not jetting across the country and driving around in SUVs from one engagement to another. A+ on authenticy and setting an example on sacrifices we are going to have to make to reverse global warming.
A word about polling? Noone has EVER polled me... any of you ever participated in a poll about any of the issues America faces today?
I'd like to see some actual polling take place on talkbarackobama08.com (we have one up there now on impeachment under Domestic issues); Obama can look at the results of these polls and use them to inform his decisons and opinions. (And if this isn't the place where dicussion boards are residing, how about some consolidation...)
This is not a business as usual campaign and we need some highly creative thinkers onboard. Some authenticy and 'audacity' and courage!
Don't really know if my voice is all that welcome here. or ever read. I tend to have very high expectations but frankly, And maybe the problem is that I don't think they are that unreaslistic. I truly believe (as Obama stated at the onset) that this IS the moment! America has to change dramatically, aggressively, innately. We need a powerful, inciteful and honest leader, someone who has the integrity and the faith in human nature to speak truth.
There ARE millions of Americans who are aching for this. They are the audience. Dance with them, not for them.
This is the passion which fueled the original myspace obama effort. In the end, only the parties involved know what actually came down. But it is this passion which must at all costs be nurtured, supported .... and never manipulated.
My suggestion to this campaign? Take the pulse of your enormous and growing base. Seek concensus. Don't make the news, Be the news,
A word on Audacity from wikipedia: "Audacity is a free/open source, cross platform digital audio editor. The source code for Audacity is released under the GNU General Public License. The graphical user interface for the editor has been produced using the wxWidgets library"
and from Roget's: Bold, fearless daring, intrepid
That's what I signed up for!
If you got here,thanks for reading.
Re: audacity and free/open sourceware |
Report to Admin
By
Amy
May 3rd 2007 at 7:06 pm EDT
Good post, thanks.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
BigMike
May 3rd 2007 at 2:35 am EDT
Obama raised $25,000,000.00 in just three months, so what do you expect?!?
Obama = Politics As Usual.
Robert Kagan wrote a piece about Obama in the Washington Post a few days ago, quoting from a speech of his on foreign policy which Kagan thought was great. Robert Kagan is a neocon. This is just the latest example of why Obama = "More of the Same."
I am supporting Senator Mike Gravel for President in 2008! Go Gravel, Go!!!
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Gina
May 3rd 2007 at 2:14 pm EDT
"Obama raised $25,000,000.00 in just three months, so what do you expect?!?
Obama = Politics As Usual."
huh?
your logic is faulty.
Feel Better After Reading This Clarification! |
Report to Admin
By
Barack Daily Buzz - Victory2008.net
May 2nd 2007 at 8:27 pm EDT
Hello Obama activists. The Associated Press story upset me and I called Hope in the campaign office. She encouraged me to read this blog. I feel better after reading this clarification. Many of us have volunteered hundreds if not thousands of hours for the Obama campaign with no official recognition. The inner circle of Obama should recognize and contact grassroots organizers to build a successful campaign.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Ehi Wiseman Eromosele
May 3rd 2007 at 10:58 am EDT
An Honest Open Letter To Joe Anthony
Joe, I am not sure exactly what your intention is.
What exactly is it that you are after?
Now on your site you claim you have been given access back to the site as a gesture of goodwill yet it seems you still are not satisfied.
I have volunteered for my church for over 10 years and I would never dream of asking for compensation for my time. I have helped build, paint and restore my church and I would never seek compensation.
If you truly believe in Barack Obama's message then I am sure you will do the right thing rather than try to harm Barack Obama's campaing which is exactly what you are doing.
You are indeed a very intelligent man and I am sure you are indeed aware of what you are doing and how this is all been played out in the media.
You were offered a full time job and you were also working in conjuction with the campaign initially.
I am not sure why you locked them out when you were quite happy to give them access in the first place?
As you have asked for our advice my advice would be that you do the honourable thing and hand over the url to Barack Obama because as you are well aware Barack Obama has the rights to his name.
Also may i remind you that you are in violation of myspace terms and conditions because you had used Barack Obama's details such as photos, etc initially without Barack Obama's consent because as you said earlier you started the site without out the knowledge of Barack Obama.
FYI: Below is part of Myspace Terms and Conditions as copied and pasted from Myspace and please pay attention to item 14 and you will see you are in violation of the terms already and that is why myspace had the right to shut you out of Barack Obama name profile and I cant see how that can be called bullying.
Implementing the law and the rights of an individual is not bullying just the same way if some one was to use your photos and details with out your consent you have a right to ask them to stop. Surely that is not bullying and why should Barack Obama be viewed differently because he is running for president. In my opinion that is taking advantage of Barack Obama because he is a public figure.
In my opinion you are promoting a double standard because it is Barack Obama and if someone was to do the same to you, I am sure you would agree you have the rights to your name and content and if not then you do not believe in the freedom, privacy and individual rights of free citizens
You said you will post all comments as long as it is not offensive.
I hope you are sincere when you made that statement and I look forward to hearing from you and how you respond. Thank you
Ehi Wiseman
My Space Terms & Conditions
8. Content/Activity Prohibited. The following is a partial list of the kind of Content that is illegal or prohibited to post on or through the MySpace Services. MySpace.com reserves the right to investigate and take appropriate legal action against anyone who, in MySpace.com's sole discretion, violates this provision, including without limitation, removing the offending communication from the MySpace Services and terminating the Membership of such violators. Prohibited Content includes, but is not limited to Content that, in the sole discretion of MySpace.com:
1. is patently offensive and promotes racism, bigotry, hatred or physical harm of any kind against any group or individual;
2. harasses or advocates harassment of another person;
3. exploits people in a sexual or violent manner;
4. contains nudity, violence, or offensive subject matter or contains a link to an adult website;
5. solicits personal information from anyone under 18;
6. provides any telephone numbers, street addresses, last names, URLs or email addresses;
7. promotes information that you know is false or misleading or promotes illegal activities or conduct that is abusive, threatening, obscene, defamatory or libelous;
8. promotes an illegal or unauthorized copy of another person's copyrighted work, such as providing pirated computer programs or links to them, providing information to circumvent manufacture-installed copy-protect devices, or providing pirated music or links to pirated music files;
9. involves the transmission of "junk mail," "chain letters," or unsolicited mass mailing, instant messaging, "spimming," or "spamming";
10. contains restricted or password only access pages or hidden pages or images (those not linked to or from another accessible page);
11. furthers or promotes any criminal activity or enterprise or provides instructional information about illegal activities including, but not limited to making or buying illegal weapons, violating someone's privacy, or providing or creating computer viruses;
12. solicits passwords or personal identifying information for commercial or unlawful purposes from other Users;
13. involves commercial activities and/or sales without our prior written consent such as contests, sweepstakes, barter, advertising, or pyramid schemes;
14. includes a photograph of another person that you have posted without that person's consent; or
15. for band and filmmaker profiles, uses sexually suggestive imagery or any other unfair, misleading or deceptive Content intended to draw traffic to the profile.
The following is a partial list of the kind of activity that is illegal or prohibited on the MySpace Website and through your use of the MySpace Services. MySpace.com reserves the right to investigate and take appropriate legal action against anyone who, in MySpace.com's sole discretion, violates this provision, including without limitation, reporting you to law enforcement authorities. Prohibited activity includes, but is not limited to:
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Omestes from Phoenix, AZ
May 3rd 2007 at 3:02 pm EDT
Wait, he should be grateful of a "gesture of good faith" that was provoked by the backlash of a gesture of "bad faith"? Have you no principles? If someone treats me unjustly I'm not going to take it just because someone tells me "sorry, here is a key to the outhouse of the kingdom I stole from you!".
The campaign folks stole something he worked passionately on for the soul purpose of controlling it for their own ends. He has every right to feel bitter, no matter what pittance the Obama folk give him.
Do the honorable? So he wasn't quite honorable, thus a power-hungry political campaign has the right to do the unhonorable thing?
Yes it is within their rights under the MySpace TOS, but that does not make it the ETHICAL or RESPONSIBLE thing to do, on the Obama campaign's behalf.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 11:46 am EDT
Ehi You miss the point. Anytime during negotiations the Campaign staff or Obama himself asked about taking down a picture. The site would have does not take away that we were a community of same bond in a form led by a professional thoughtful moderator. OBAMA staff took control without consent is a hijack! To redirect me to another site that I DID NOT SIGN UP FOR is insulting and I feel hijacked. I TAKE THAT VERY personal and insulting from Obama and his staff to discard our choice of medium. Not to mention the value of intellectual property that is now just discarded by their camp and gone. POLITICS AS USUAL HAS NEW MEANING. Obama was the first candidate in a very long time that game me hope.. that gave me inspiration that I would get out and volunteer. I am a single mom with cancer. This would be a huge feat. So it is hurtful to have him so easily discard and destroy this site.. this community.. in the manner he did. Obama is accountable.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Karanja "Hussein"
May 3rd 2007 at 11:45 pm EDT
Guys, for those who claim that wots-his-name built a community, I find it most disingenuous that anyone would seriously think that anyone joined that community because of some overzealous net geek. I added that myspace profile to my own because of the name Barack Obama. That a volunteer became overwhelmed is understandable. He should have handed over responsibility at that point. Why would he lock out the official campaign out of a page that he named after the campaign. The Obama campaign in the true goodwill nature Barack allowed him to continue running a page that we all thought had nothing but the best interests of the Barack Obama campaign at heart. Apparently, one man, thought it an opportunity to gain notoriety for himself. I think that the only mistake the Obama campaign did was to agree to work with this clown.... They should have started the official Obama site form the get go, and it would have still grown over a 100,000 strong by now, cuz there were only 40,000 adds at the time - all for Barack - including myself... Also there is this misinformation that the Obama campaign muscled the myspace page from this guy. In fact, what happened, is that the Obama campaign started an official Obama myspace page and it is growing exponentially. The campaign has left this former page to this geek, and it still has the huge number of profiles, although they are decreasing exponentially... I haven't removed myself yet, only because if it returns in the control of the campaign I will be interested in checking it out and see what happens going forward...
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 11:31 am EDT
People joined this site because of interest in Barack Obama long before Obama even threw his hat in the election ring. We stayed because of the integrity of the moderator Joe. Obama staff Hijacked and we all watched it unfold before our eyes. There is many inaccuracies detailed by Joe. And I had every opportunity to join the official and I chose to do so. But am now withdrawing from this camp. Hijack is a Hijack. The original page is of Joe and the grassroots community not Obama's campaign to get information in a forum of exchange outside the Campagin. That is the whole point of the community. Obama staff should respect a grassroots community better than that shows it is Politics as usual. Obama NEEDS TO MAKE HUGE PUBLIC APOLOGY FOR THIS MESS.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Barb
May 6th 2007 at 4:40 am EDT
I have been a Barack Obama supporter for 4 years now. I joined the campaign through Joe Anthony's site and signed an impact note to have him speak in my city. I even had a Demand picture on my site which I have taken down.
After what recently transpired regarding Joe's grassroots site, I have decided to stop all campaigning and wait it out. I am very concerned and am wondering if this campaign is just professional political business as usual. I had hope for a new leadership of honesty and courage for the common man. From this one incident it appears to be more of the strong disregarding the new young enthusiastic voters coming of age this election. It is so disheatening. I hope this fiasco can be resolved in a more ethical manner than as of today. Let's be honest about who asked who to name a $ amount for the site. It's too easy for this machine to give us partial truths. What a great learning tool if you only take the right step. According to President Bush, his team is always right regardless. I am disappointed that Mr. Obama's response is the same in regards to Mr. Anthony.
The internet campaign obviously saw worth in the myspace site or they wouldn't have approached Joe. We are the new frontier and will have a great impact on this next election. Please do not turn your back on supporters you already had.
Do the right thing. Regain our trust.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Clear View
May 6th 2007 at 7:43 am EDT
I spent about 10 hours today reading all the blogs and comments I could find related to this incident. I think having some information straight from the horse's mouth would be helpful when forming ones opinion. I found this more than helpful personally. I have to say that it was more than sad to see perspective voters on this site berating others that were trying to express their opinions on this unfortunate mishandling of the "MySpaceGate" Calling people trolls/plants and the like doesn't shed a very nice light on this subject. I've been a friend on the "Unofficial" Obama myspace page for quite some time and always found that it was handled in a very professional manner. The page was always tagged as an "unofficial" page as far as I knew.
~another average joe
The following blog was taken from Joe Anthony's non-Obama myspace page:
============================== =============
Joe Anthony's comments
============================== =============
Saturday, May 05, 2007
My comments on the campaign's official blog on my.barackobama.com (by Joe Rospars)
Friends,
I'm continuing to receive a steady stream of emails from you all, and the vast majority are supportive. However, there are a few that haven't heard the whole story and unfortunately are jumping to conclusions.
I keep getting requests from the media asking me to clarify certain contradictions in the campaign's official blog on my.barackobama.com, so I'm just going to go ahead and comment on it here.
At this point, what's done is done, and the only point of this is to learn from the mistakes made in this situation, and move on to more positive things.
Below is a copy of Joe Rospars' blog from my.barackobama.com, along with my comments in where key facts were either left out, or are simply misleading.
-Joe Anthony
By Joe Rospars - May 2nd, 2007 at 7:11 pm EDT
Link
There have been a lot of questions and comments in this community related to our MySpace profile, and so I wanted to come by and clarify how we got here and answer questions.
Our campaign started quickly. People around here say that this has been like building an airplane in mid-air, having already taken off. This is especially true of the New Media operation. While the campaign in general is going from zero to sixty, our team is at the same time charged with exploring the new ways we can build relationships between Barack and his supporters, and foster relationships among supporters themselves.
When it came to MySpace, we decided to take a leap. We decided to make the attempt to combine the organic support and community-building of a grassroots effort with the official campaign outreach efforts.
In many ways this mirrors what has happened on the campaign's own web site. On February 10th, the day Barack announced his candidacy in Springfield, we launched My.BarackObama.com has an unprecedented public utility for supporters.
Even on the campaign's own web site, the organizing efforts and community-building by the grassroots has outpaced the growth of the traditional campaign infrastructure. On the site, over 11,500 people have created their own blogs about everything from their issue priorities to their personal experience campaigning locally. Thousands of events have been planned using the events tool (social events, planning meetings, small fundraisers), and tens of thousands of people have RSVPed to these grassroots-driven gatherings.
And over 5,000 grassroots volunteer groups have been founded -- in many states, these groups will be the only organizational presence the campaign has. Even in the early states, staff organizers are hitting ground in places where volunteer groups have already been meeting and organizing. One of the first orders of business for new staff on the ground is getting to know the grassroots who have already started building the movement.
When it comes to MySpace, I'm not sure if a campaign of this size has ever teamed-up with a grassroots volunteer on this scale, but we wanted to give it a try.
Joe Anthony's great work was building community at the
Link
address, and so we contacted him.
At that point, the profile had about 40,000 friends, and to our delight, Joe agreed to work with us. Indeed, he seemed relieved to have some help -- he gave us the password, and we began to exchange content, work together, and continue growing this community from the ground-up. We created images that he (and others online) could post, and began going through the process of preparing the profile to be "official" by combing through the content and establishing a plan to ensure that everyone who tried to contact the campaign through the profile received an answer. (People wrote messages and comments in huge numbers, virtually all addressed to Barack or the campaign -- "Will you come speak at my graduation?", "Where do you stand on issue X?", "How can I help locally?", etc.)
============================== =============
Joe Anthony's comments
============================== =============
Comments on the page were addressed to Barack Obama, because this was a profile in support of Obama, as were many other Obama fan-sites on Myspace. However, I kept a presence as the "moderator" and manager of this profile to avoid this confusion, and most people understood that. As new friends joined the community, some would send emails asking "Is this really you Obama", but most quickly caught on. At all times, there was a disclaimer on the page which read "This profile is not managed or endorsed by Senator Barack Obama".
The vast majority of all emails were addressed to me, Joe, as the moderator (ex. "Dear Joe, when is Obama coming to Iowa?") and I would refer them to the official website, www.barackobama.com if that info. wasn't already posted on the profile. This was always a community for Obama supporters, by an Obama supporter. I do not believe any person on that friends list, that participated in the community, would say otherwise.
In addition, the campaign really has no way of knowing what the messages said, because they only had access to the page for a very short time. With that in mind, I don't understand why they claim this in their blog.
============================== =============
Rospars comments
============================== =============
We started talking to Joe about formalizing the arrangement, preserving his work building the community, and talking through how to preserve his involvement in the direction and development of the profile.
For a time, both the campaign and Joe had mutual access. Soon after, MySpace launched a promotional campaign to direct traffic to the official candidate pages. The campaign allowed MySpace to promote this unofficial profile because, strictly speaking, there was no official presence. And so MySpace began featuring the profile in candidate promotions -- and the friends and workload grew.
We knew Joe had a full-time job already, and, early on, we floated the idea of moving to Chicago to work for us full-time (potential staffers were moving to Chicago and join the team at that time, and there were openings). I totally agree when Chris Bowers says that the New Media/online outreach efforts of campaigns should be a priority -- and we have built an operation here in Chicago and in the early states that reflects that posture.
============================== =============
Joe Anthony's comments
============================== =============
Chris Hughes did indicate that there were "limited staff positions available in Chicago and I could send them my resume". At this point, although I would've loved to work directly for the campaign, I was happy to continue working on the profile as I had been, and it was more of a priority to maintain my involvement in the page and not let it become like one of the other Candidates profiles. I never sent them a resume, and instead focused on building the page and finding new ways to engage the community.
There was something special happening in this Myspace community, and I did not want to see it turn into a passive source of information run by the campaign. They already had an official website (www.barackobama.com) for that, which I directed a great deal of traffic to.
============================== =============
Rospars comments
============================== =============
But Joe seemed to prefer to volunteer part-time from the outside with the campaign to continue building the community. He said he was honored to help out, and we were honored to work with him. We worked through the complications that arose: letting Joe know that he shouldn't work on the site from work, educated him about the rules governing campaign promotion of official Senate material, etc. Joe was right with us, and things continued down the path towards making this unofficial community into an official space run with help from volunteers.
============================== =============
Joe Anthony's comments
============================== =============
This is true, and I was honored to work with the campaign. There was some question about making this unofficial page an official one. I suggested at one point keeping it an unofficial page endorsed by the campaign and linking to it via the campaign's official website. This was a difficult and complication situation, and I thought carefully about what would be best for the campaign and community.
============================== =============
Rospars comments
============================== =============
As we progressed, we began to work-up paperwork that would codify this arrangement -- ensuring that the campaign would have full access (what if someone put up an obscene comment during the day while Joe was at work?), and assuming the liability burden (legally, ethically, and politically) for what happened on the site.
============================== =============
Joe Anthony's comments
============================== =============
This is about the time I began to restrict access to the profile, and stopped providing the password to the campaign. I agreed that we should have some agreement before moving forward, and money was not an issue at this point. This was a liability issue if this were to be an official profile, not a money issue.
Further, after a closer examination of the Myspace terms of use at that time, I learned that Myspace prohibits allowing access to any user other than the creator of the page. For this reason, and for security purposes mentioned above, I decided I should cease from allowing the campaign access to the profile until we had a formal agreement (and Myspace's consent).
I did however continue to work with the campaign, and implemented every one of their suggestions for the profile. Although they did not have access to the profile for that period, they would call or email me and I would make any changes, post a bulletin or blog, or whatever they asked me to do, all on very short notice.
============================== =============
Rospars comments
============================== =============
At the same time, though, the community had skyrocketed. Nobody expected the grassroots to respond this campaign in such large numbers the way they have, and the rapid growth of the MySpace profile once the MySpace Impact Channel began promoting the various candidates is yet another example of the appeal of Barack. We were well over 100,000 friends, and the burden of administering such a profile became immense.
Unfortunately, at that point, Joe changed the password on the profile, and didn't give us the new one, like he had done in the past. This changed the previous dynamic, and we could no longer access the profile at a moment's notice if need be. We asked Joe what was needed to restore access, and subsequently we received the list of itemized financial requests that have been discussed elsewhere.
============================== =============
Joe Anthony's comments
============================== =============
This is misleading, and why some have gone as far to accuse me of attempting to extort the campaign.
See my previous comment. This not why I stopped providing the password. The itemized financial requests will be discussed further below.
============================== =============
Rospars comments
============================== =============
This made us uncomfortable. Every day, MySpace was driving tens of thousands of people to the page on the premise that this was more or less our "official" presence -- yet we had no access to the content on the page, and no ability to be responsive to the thousands of messages coming in from supporters seeking information or action from the campaign.
============================== =============
Joe Anthony's comments
============================== =============
They did have access to the page, through me. As I mentioned, once the campaign became involved in March of 2007, I implemented any and all of the campaign's suggestions, even though they did not have direct access to the profile. I cooperated with them until the very end.
Also, at all times, an 'away message' was set on the page so that users would be encouraged to contact the campaign directly via their official website. In that away message users were referred to the official site for answers to their questions not included on the Myspace profile. For suggestions regarding the Myspace profile specifically I included my email address associated with the page. I received many emails over the years, and responded to all of them, redirected them to the appropriate source, and signed off as "Joe, moderator". This was an effective system and I implemented many user suggestions, whether it be a new photo, new video, a bulletin about an event I should post, etc.
I also received hundreds, maybe even thousands of emails over the years from people thanking me for working so hard on the page. Many indicated that they didn't know much about Barack Obama prior to joining my fan-site.
============================== =============
Rospars comments
============================== =============
We talked to Joe and made clear that we truly wanted to incorporate the community into the campaign's official presence, but that if these financial demands were a precursor to the campaign having access at all, that we would need to start with an official profile separately and have MySpace promote that instead.
============================== =============
Joe Anthony's comments
============================== =============
This is also misleading, because it leaves something out.
Chris Hughes, in a telephone conversation, indicated that the campaign would prefer to acquire full access to the profile. They did not want an outsider managing an "official" profile, and I understood that. Chris Hughes then suggested that they could offer some type of one-time fee to transfer the profile over to the campaign. I asked him if they had any suggestion or any offer at that time, and he asked me to just think about it and we would speak the following morning. We both agreed that this fee would be largely symbolic, as it was impossible to calculate all of the time I put into it over the past couple of years.
That night, at his request, I did prepare a propsal and emailed it to Chris. I had never prepared such a proposal, and it was on very short notice, but I did the best I could. I thought about it for about 5 hours. I went for a long walk around my neighborhood and thought about what would be fair to all involved. I didn't like the idea of the campaign taking over a Myspace profile which had been a netroots phenomenon before the campaign or Myspace even got involved.
Regardless of my personal convictions, I wanted what was best for the campaign, and obviously Barack Obama, and I trusted that they knew what they were doing. For two and half years I worked very hard without ever expecting to be paid, but if they wanted to take control of this profile and take direct advantage of the community I helped to build, I thought it was fair to be paid. I even specified at that time that the fee was small enough to be cost-effective to the campaign, but large enough to be sure they were taking this community seriously. If they didn't like it, they could've easilly started and built their own Myspace profile and I would've put a link to it on mine. This appears to be what Hillary Clinton did, and it seemed to work out well.
============================== =============
Rospars comments
============================== =============
And so it became clear that we needed to have MySpace point people at something we had at least basic access to -- immediately. In MySpace, politicians, musicians, and other public figures have the right to their own name (www.myspace.com/barackobama,
Link
, etc.), and so we asked MySpace for use of that URL and to ensure that any promotion of "official" profiles for candidates be directed to the new profile our team created.
============================== =============
Joe Anthony's comments
============================== =============
At any time, they could've asked for the URL and that wouldn't have been a problem. The campaign wanted the entire community I built and that was always clear.
After receiving my proposal, and a few postponed meetings, I was contacted by Josh Orton from the campaign. He indicated that he was "flabbergasted" by my proposal and that they did not have any budget for it. He accused me of using the profile for commercial purposes and made no counter-offer. I do not understand why Chris Hughes suggested this one-time fee, if later they had no budget for it and essentially accused me of trying to cash in.
At that time he asserted that I had two options: I could turn the profile over to the campaign, or it would be deleted immediately. I indicated that I would not turn it over to them, and it would be enormously offensive to me, and to all 160,000 members of the community to delete it after all of our hard work.
This conversation was followed up by two emails from Chris Hughes, indicating that they were sorry that I decided to "kill" this profile, and that Myspace needed my consent to transfer the profile over to them.
I responded to each email, indicating that "killing" the profile was not my decision and I would not be held responsible for it. In addition, Myspace did not have my consent to transfer the profile to anyone.
I also wrote that whatever their decision was, I would continue working on the profile until it was deleted.
Shortly afterwards, the profile was not deleted. Instead, Myspace and the campaign took control of the profile, deleted the content, and put a link to the new "official" profile. They used a community that took two and half years to build to quickly gain new 'friends' on their own page. (I'll also mention that I immediately received several emails complaining about how lame the new page is, specifically that it didn't load properly in some browsers).
============================== =============
Rospars comments
============================== =============
The community of the 160,000 still exists, and we've made sure that MySpace will let Joe have access to the community he helped build. And we hope we can continue to work with him to make that as effective as it can be.
============================== =============
Joe Anthony's comments
============================== =============
Myspace returned the blank profile with 160,000 friends (and quickly dropping) to me after I contacted techpresident.com and the news quickly spread throughout the Media. The campaign takes credit for this in Rospars' blog, but it was Myspace that contacted me and agreed to do this. In fact, Liba Rubenstein from Myspace indicated that the campaign would've preferred that the profile be transferred over to them without my consent, but Myspace would not allow that to happen.
The page was "taken" on Monday, and finally "returned" to me on Thursday evening. In my opinion, if I hadn't complained, my profile would've probably been transferred to them, and none of you would ever know that I had anything to do with building it.
I do not blame Myspace for any of this. It is their social-networking site. I do not blame Barack Obama himself either. However, I supported his campaign and helped out by rallying tens of thousands of supporters on Myspace and it worked exceptionally well. For Obama's campaign to try to take this profile, and later even write a blog that subtly accuses me of extortion, is the biggest slap in the face I've ever felt.
Returning a blank profile to me after the fact doesn't mend the situation. An apology just wouldn't mean much either.
============================== =============
Rospars comments
============================== =============
At the end of the day, this is all new for everyone -- this Joe, that Joe, and everyone participating or commenting on it. We're flying by the seat of our pants, and establishing new ways of doing things every day. We're going to try new things, and sometimes it's going to work, and sometimes it's not going to work. That's the cost and that's the risk of experimenting. Joe launched this profile for all the right reasons, and for a while grew it with us.
But the ultimate purpose is building a community around the idea that ordinary people can come together and affect change in this country. Barack Obama is the candidate I believe can transform the process and make that change happen.
And, to the extent that more and more people every day come to that same conclusion, my bet is that both profiles will continue to grow.
============================== =============
Joe Anthony's comments
============================== =============
Well, I'm offended by this rationalization, and it contradicts this entire blog. If it was acceptable for me to operate a Barack Obama fan-site on Myspace with 160,000 users, Joe Rospars' blog wouldn't exist, and none of this would've ever happened.
Barack Obama inspired me to create this profile, but the end result left me jaded enough to never publically support any candidate again.
I'm not asking for anything from Barack Obama or his campaign, but people need to know what happened here.
This profile was a place for "ordinary people to come together and affect change in this country". I worked so hard to build it because I believed in Barack Obama and wanted change as much as everyone on the profile did. Regardless of the campaign's intentions, the campaign quashed not only my right to have this profile, but the very hope that inspired me to build it.
It's a long time until the primaries, and there's a good chance I may get passed this and still vote for Barack Obama. However, this should be a valuable lesson that campaigns should pay closer attention to what's really happening on the internet. We're not a list of names, and we're not inexpensive advertising. We are exactly the ordinary people you speak of, using the internet to attempt to change the world.
Sincerely,
-Joe Anthony
============================== =====
I hope that helps some see the big picture a bit more clearly.
~another average joe
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 12:15 pm EDT
Clear View thank you for taking the time you did regarding this issue. KUDOS for posting Joe's comments against Ropar's. I watched this whole tale unfold before my eyes and I am extremely disheartened that Obama is just another politician. But at the end of the day his staff tried to negotiate the purchase of intellectual property and rights to desiminate information to supporters as they saw fit. To control the information and the community. YES ABSOLUTELY YES there is a cost to that. Unfortunately their mishandling of those negotiations and the ensuing hijack is highly offensive and puts future grassroots net communities at risk.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Karanja "Hussein"
May 7th 2007 at 2:12 am EDT
I too took the campaign's side with hope and optimism regarding this whole debacle. After some deliberation however, I am beginning to fear that this may not go away any time soon. It may yet return to haunt this campaign. The campaign should have allowed the existence of two parallel myspace pages, both an official one as well as the original one, that we had all joined because it had Obama's name on it. It would have contained a clear indication that it was not the official site, and a pointer to the official myspace page. This would have been the best solution, if indeed Joe's price was too high. That Josh Orton and/or Chris Hughes failed to see the potential opportunity and benefits of maintaining a grassroots presence alongside an official myspace presence says plenty about their judgment, or lack of thereof. This was badly mishandled. See my own blog with an open letter to Obama regarding this debacle.
Re: Thank you for adressing this... |
Report to Admin
By
Karanja "Hussein"
May 7th 2007 at 3:50 am EDT
Oh here is the blog
Link
clarification |
Report to Admin
By
Nick
May 2nd 2007 at 7:41 pm EDT
Thanks for the clarification, I knew there was more to this than the blogers and media have been reporting.
Like I said before |
Report to Admin
By
FreedomOfSpeechForObama2008
May 2nd 2007 at 7:45 pm EDT
I'll say it again.
If I took a real persons name ( Barack Obama )under the pretext of supporting them and I give them some success, what would it say about me if I then, turned around and tried to get money from them ? I mean, I spend my free time day in and day out campaigning online for Senator Barack Obama. If my little blog explodes and becomes a massive tool for the Obama Campaign, you know what? I would be happy....because, it helps BARACK OBAMA!. I would not seek to to be PAID for my services. That to me, reeks of a scam artist and I don't like it one tiny bit. You don't offer to help someone and then turn around and demand payment. I can't stand people like that. That's why I never let anyone do jack smack for me. There are some people I wouldn't even take a piece of gum from. Before I know it, I owe them favors.
Re: Like I said before |
Report to Admin
By
John from Swampscott, MA
May 2nd 2007 at 8:49 pm EDT
So tell me, are you saying that the whole campaign staff should work for free?
This guy did Barack a huge favor back when he was a much smaller blip on the screen. Now he has something they want, they don't want to pay his asking price, so they just take it. I'm sick of that kind of thuggish behavior from the Bushies, and it makes me sick to see how quickly people on my side are willing to accept it from one of our own.
This wasn't necessary, and it smacks of bullying.
Re: Like I said before |
Report to Admin
By
alex
May 2nd 2007 at 9:05 pm EDT
What favour did he do? All the people joined thinking that it is Barack's page. Not because of Joe Anthony.
Anyway he still has access to the page he built including the 160000 friends. The campaign took only the URL because only the campaing has the right to use Barack Obama name in Myspace.
If somebody took your name and built a Myspace page you will do the same thing.
Re: Like I said before |
Report to Admin
By
John from Swampscott, MA
May 2nd 2007 at 9:21 pm EDT
No I wouldn't. Remember, Joe didn't "take his name", he started a grass roots group to support Barack. You don't strong-arm people who helped you. You work with them to find a solution. If you can't find one, you make your own site. They felt the site was too valuable to lose, so they should have paid for it, just like they'd pay for any other valuable URL.
You don't treat your friends like that, even if you think you're right. No one has a monopoly on what is right and what is just. That's Bush and the GOP, not us.
Re: Like I said before |
Report to Admin
By
Rachel from Columbia, SC
May 3rd 2007 at 7:51 am EDT
"If somebody took your name and built a Myspace page you will do the same thing."
Man, there are a lot of John Lennon, Jerry Garcia, Britney Spears and every other person under the sun pages... should every single one of them be taken down?
This is a silly comment.
The name belongs to the person who gets there first. As long as Anthony isn't pretending to "BE" Obama it doesn't matter.
Re: Like I said before |
Report to Admin
By
FreedomOfSpeechForObama2008
May 2nd 2007 at 9:14 pm EDT
Exactly,
Reverse the players and you have my position to a tee. This guy was NOT, I repeat NOT a staffer. He tried top extort cash from MY DONATIONS! My cash will NOT go to ANYONE that does NOT work for BARACK OBAMA!
period!
Re: Like I said before |
Report to Admin
By
John from Swampscott, MA
May 2nd 2007 at 9:24 pm EDT
Really? How about TV and radio station owners, and newspaper publishers? We donate to buy from those outlets. Why is it okay to pay them but not someone already friendly to the campaign?
That makes no sense to me, I'm sorry.
Re: Like I said before |
Report to Admin
By
John from Swampscott, MA
May 2nd 2007 at 9:30 pm EDT
And where do you get off accusing Joe of extortion? Extortion is when someone threatens you or your property if you don't pay him. Joe threatened no one, and it was his own property.
Man, some people are so quick to throw a fellow supporter under the bus when the boss paints a scarlet letter on him. This reminds me of the way Snow and Perino treat the Bush whistleblowers.
Take a deep breath and remember, Joe was/is a friend of the campaign. This quickness to turn on a friend is sickening.
Re: Like I said before |
Report to Admin
By
RAH
May 2nd 2007 at 9:43 pm EDT
Bingo. You have just described the actions of Joe. He changed the password so that the Obama's team couldn't access the site. When they contacted him about the access he gave them a list of financial demands, and now it seems that since they didn't comply, he went public and smeared Obama. Once an established relationship and shared workload on the site began, it was a partnership. After all they did offer compensation, but he wanted a whole lot more.
What the Obama's team did was built their own site from scratch and reclaimed their name. All the work that Joe has done is still his for the taking. The took nothing from him.
Re: Like I said before |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 12:17 pm EDT
They took everything from Joe. And not only Joe but from me. Yes. This is personal and I watched them hi-jack this site is extrememly insulting to me.
Re: Like I said before |
Report to Admin
By
Gray
May 3rd 2007 at 6:42 am EDT
Your money goes to all kind of people that don't work for Obama. The campaign hires all kinds of services, all campaigns do. You don't know what you are talking about.
Re: Like I said before |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 11:58 am EDT
There were no requests for cash donations until Obama staff started putting that stuff on. I found the links useful if I chose to do so but was not a requirement of this MySpace community. Believe me all of us noticed the difference in some of the content when official Obama staff arrived and implemented ideas. This does not take away from the original group that is highly offended by the HIJACK of Obama.
Erm. |
Report to Admin
By
Mark from Kent, WA
May 2nd 2007 at 7:50 pm EDT
That PR spin almost crashed my internet browser.
Perspective |
Report to Admin
By
wheelbarrow
May 2nd 2007 at 7:54 pm EDT
I've not been following this issue till this evening. But I have to shake my head sometimes at the way many of us tend to lose perspective over what's really important, I mean, really pressing to many families across America. My brother-in-law just shipped out to Iraq for his third tour. His family and his marriage is practically breaking apart because of the strain from his multiple tours in Iraq.
Can we talk about our troops and their families more? Can we please get this occupation to a quick close and get our troops home safely? I'd love to see more discussions of soldiers and their families. Their voices aren't heard.
Re: Perspective |
Report to Admin
By
Lorraine
May 2nd 2007 at 11:42 pm EDT
AMEN!
A little perspective here. I'm glad the campaign addressed the situation. I'm happy that Senator Obama PERSONALLY spoke to the gentleman. Now it over!
It's time to focus of the reason we all believe in Senator Obama his unwavering support of getting out of Iraq! Bring Hope back to this beautiful Country of ours! And transforming our Country.
I just got back from Bible Study. One young man asked my brother who was the teacher why things happen in the World like they do. My brother said its all about DISTRACTIONS! I would never disrespect this gentleman by calling him a mere distraction but I'm saying in general all the little stuff they is happening is taking our focus off the goals we has set.
We have Countrymen and women dying in Iraq now and we are debating the merits of who owns Senator Obama's name on MySpace.
Come on, loves. We have to re-focus. This is over it time to move on.
Re: Perspective |
Report to Admin
By
Gina
May 3rd 2007 at 2:17 pm EDT
I second that. So moved. Next topic.
You Go!! |
Report to Admin
By
monica
May 2nd 2007 at 7:57 pm EDT
The campaign staff is doing a GREAT job. Obama supporters are proud of you and your work. We know that nothing is perfect and we all make mistakes. Believe me, the true supporters have been standing by waiting for the other side of the story, with no doubts whatsover that integrity guides your actions, even if things don't always go as planned.
Keep up the incredible work and know that we are in it for the long haul!! We know some negativity is part of the process. We stand strong in our support!!!
I'm so proud of Obama and his staff.
Barack the Vote!!!!
Thanks for clarifying |
Report to Admin
By
Katzenkavalier
May 2nd 2007 at 8:00 pm EDT
This was necessary. Still, the campaign should contact this guy Joe privately and try to mend things.
Re: Thanks for clarifying |
Report to Admin
By
Julia from Pasadena
May 2nd 2007 at 8:07 pm EDT
According to his myspace blog, The senator has called him. What do you know, Obama did the right thing again.
I am just learning of all this and read his blog and many people's comments.
I am amazed that someone would even think of being retrospectively paid for his volunteer time. I understand asking to be paid for the future, or even the present, but the past?
I'm going to go figure out what I'm owed. And then try to figure out who to bill.
Re: Thanks for clarifying |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 12:00 pm EDT
Obama staff tried to negotiate new ownership as in any deal of intellectual property. When that did not work out they just TOOK it. That is stealing. That is a HiJack.
Nice try |
Report to Admin
By
Martin Washington
May 2nd 2007 at 8:11 pm EDT
You guys better learn something really fast.
Bullying people, especially those who helped you early on, is an ugly thing to do. Fix it fast, make the fix public, or kiss my support, and thousands of others like me, goodbye. The last thing this country needs is another leader who can't see his mistakes, or one whose unaware of the mistakes of his staff.
Don't ask me for another minute of my time, or one more penny of my cash until you pay Joe Anthony the reasonable amount he requested for his myspace.
Save the spin; only the blind followers will buy it, and there's not enough of them to push you over the top. The rest of us will back you, but only so long as you appear to be different from the over-confident dope we're suffering with now. One hint that Obama is just more of the same, and we're outta here like smoke in the wind.
Think, act.
Re: Nice try |
Report to Admin
By
Vermonter
May 2nd 2007 at 8:13 pm EDT
Don't let the door hit ya...
Re: Nice try |
Report to Admin
By
Martin Washington
May 2nd 2007 at 8:22 pm EDT
Have a nice day, Vermonter. I'm sure you will. Ignorance is bliss.
Re: Nice try |
Report to Admin
By
RAH
May 2nd 2007 at 8:44 pm EDT
Take a hike. You were never here to begin with. Not gonna miss you. Go bother someone else.
Re: Nice try |
Report to Admin
By
John from Swampscott, MA
May 2nd 2007 at 9:09 pm EDT
I've been talking up Barack Obama to my friends for months, but if thugs like RAH and Vermonter are indicative of the mindset of this site, I'm not interested in being part of it. Attacking the loyalty of supporters for disagreeing with an action of the campaign, is too similar to questioning the patriotism of people who don't support the administration.
I never thought I'd see that from my side of the battle. I'm ashamed of my side for acting just like the dopes on the Wingnut sites.
Re: Nice try |
Report to Admin
By
PASBO
May 2nd 2007 at 10:27 pm EDT
Go on John - we don't need people who cave to pressure and hype.
We here wait for facts. Instead you jump for throats and hang your head based on supposition. Get a spine or get out. It's too bad people like you and Bill feel so empathetic with a leech who thinks they are entitled to a share of 'seeming' success - if every person who contributed to this campaign started calling for 'their share' this campaign would bust in an instant.
And for the record they are not attacking your loyalty but your attitude.
Re: Nice try |
Report to Admin
By
John from Swampscott, MA
May 2nd 2007 at 10:43 pm EDT
So it's your way or the highway, eh PASBO?
That sounds inclusive. You'll fit right in with the Tancredo people if you decide to goose-step over the line.
Re: Nice try |
Report to Admin
By
Omestes from Phoenix, AZ
May 3rd 2007 at 3:11 pm EDT
It seems your attacking both, to be honest. He was being honest, and you people jump at him "fine we don't want you", and then you tell him "to get a spine or get out", somehow equating his character with his unfailing support for a politician.
I'm sorry, Obama is just another politician. He might be one you agree with, he might be slightly better than the rest, but he has his flaws. He puts his pants on one leg at a time, his excretions stink, I'm sure he even farts from time to time. He, like all politicians, must act in a certain way, and this includes being controlling and manipulative (as can be seen from the top down nature of this campaign), and trying to make everyone happy. Ethics are reflected, though, in how one carries out such actions.
This was a questionable action, that can be seen as a reflection of ethics. And in my opinion it reflects negatively. In my eyes he went from being "better than Hillary" to "about equal to Hillary".
Re: Nice try |
Report to Admin
By
peter.woodruff
May 2nd 2007 at 11:02 pm EDT
Does it strike anyone else that (name) from (city), (state) may be several monikers for the same troll?
Re: Nice try |
Report to Admin
By
Maria from Jersey City, NJ
May 2nd 2007 at 11:23 pm EDT
You can leave...Obama doesn't need you..You was never a supporter anyway if this is enough to lose your support...The good senator doesn't need your support nor your money...
Re: Nice try |
Report to Admin
By
Rachel from Columbia, SC
May 3rd 2007 at 8:06 am EDT
"You can leave...Obama doesn't need you..You was never a supporter anyway if this is enough to lose your support...The good senator doesn't need your support nor your money..."
Wow man. That's just scary. Does anyone else find this eerily reminiscent of all the "if you're not with us you're against" talk of the Bushies? I mean c'mon people... Listen to yourselves. If people can't criticize candidates then we might as well throw democracy out the window. There are lots of people I've supported and yet still criticized...
It's not a black and white issue. People are allowed to criticize and demand answers.
And if Obama's supporters act like this they're just going to drive off more voters.
Sure I was pissed off and I said some fairly vitriolic things about the way this was handled. But had Obama's supporters and his staff been reasonable and said, "Yeah screwed up, but we're sorry and we're fixing it", I would have come around.
But now, after reading all of this hate against people who dare to criticize Obama from his supporters, I'm just afraid of you all. You sound just like the side you're supposedly fighting.
Looks like I'm voting for Mickey Mouse again.
You guys need to seriously reconsider your attitudes or you're going to lose your candidate a lot more voters. Be reasonable, not fanatical.
Re: Nice try |
Report to Admin
By
yourguide
May 3rd 2007 at 6:46 pm EDT
"You can leave...Obama doesn't need you..You was never a supporter anyway if this is enough to lose your support...The good senator doesn't need your support nor your money..."
WOW - are you kidding, does anyone remember gore/bush/florida 2000 or is that some quaint fairy tale now? Obama needs as many supporters as he can get....wake up!
... |
Report to Admin
By
Vermonter
May 2nd 2007 at 8:11 pm EDT
Thanks Joe...
I'm sure nobody is happy with how this went down. But it shows that people should think twice before leaping to conclusions based on only one side of the story.
And thanks for crossposting it on MyDD and Daily Kos. Many in those communities needed to hear your side.
This is entirely the wrong approach |
Report to Admin
By
Martin from Roswell, GA
May 2nd 2007 at 8:16 pm EDT
Joe, it's nice to see you tipping the ol' hat to Chris Bowers, but although you linked to his post, unless people actually click on it, they'd never know that what Chris spoke about was far more than the small amount you discussed. Sure, the new media portion of a campaign is important, and I'm sure Chris would agree with your characterization of his words in that context.
But let's be real here: the very title of the post itself is "The Netroots Should Not Be Fairly Compensated." That alone should tell anyone how much of Chris' words you DIDN'T mention. The point of this isn't to give Chris Bowers recognition or links or accolades - he has plenty of those. It's because the rest of his words in that post are spot-on, in sharp contrast to much of yours.
The basic points are that the large campaigns have increasingly funneled money to high-paid, inside-the-beltway campaign consultants whose job it is to advise the campaign. This advice can take many forms, but at the end of the day, all of them boil down to an attempt to get the candidate's message out in as positive and honest a light to as many people as possible, in order to win votes on election day. I don't have to tell you this; you know full well that there is no "second" in electoral politics.
Judged on those standards alone, the work which Joe Anthony did on behalf of Barack Obama - as a labor of love, initially, and for quite some time - has been a bargain. Simply do the math (as much as it is possible) on how many votes each of the dollars your campaign spends on this or that high-paid consultant, and divide it into the number of votes gained thereby, and you have a good measure of how effective each tactic, and each consultant is, in quantifiable terms. Sure, there's quite a bit more to running a successful campaign, but just as test scores are one way to judge elementary schools for your child, so is the method above one reasonable way to judge the effetiveness and cost-per-vote of each strategy and consultant.
I am not here to bash the consultant class. I have never been a paid consultant in the inside-the-Beltway sense of the word, though I have been a paid staffer on several campaigns (none for a couple of election cycles, none this time), and a volunteer on even more. I know quite well the life of the volunteer - long car rides, homemade signs, a spirit of cameraderie, endless phone-banking, etc. And anyone who volunteers his or her time to a campaign is indeed a treasure for that campaign. I also know the life of a staffer. And sometimes, when I used to work with the public as a staffer, I would get asked whether I was being paid for my work. Generally, as you know from your own campaign experience, I was working between 70-90 hours per week. And though I was indeed being paid, it wasn't the money that led me to do what I was doing that relentlessly. I did it because I believed in it, and the pay was what allowed me to do it. Had I not been paid, I would not have been able to take several months out of my life to do what I was doing.
Some people are at a point in their lives where the CAN do such things - retired people, people between jobs, independently wealthy people, various others. But most people who have to work for a living need to be compensated for whatever it is they spend the bulk of their waking hours doing. Obviously, I have no idea how much time Joe Anthony spent on the MySpace website he created from scratch, though I assume it was a fair amount in the beginning, figuring out the look, layout, etc - and then less as the initial design phase ended, but steadily growing as the site grew in number of friends.
Chris Bowers' point (and I heartily agree) is that this already has value to the Obama campaign - if it didn't, you wouldn't have bothered with it at all. And we all know Mr. Obama's fundraising totals from the most recent filings. It seems to me, with a war chest exceeded only slightly by ONE other candidate, Mrs. Clinton, the Obama campaign could afford to pay Joe what he was asking - unless his demands were so sky-high that they were ridiculous. However, I suspect if that were the case and Joe were just a huckster on the make who wanted as much as he could grab, like the old domain-squatters of the early '90s, a) he wouldn't have bothered devoting so much of his own time and energy as a volunteer to grow the site and generate the traffic and enthusiasm, and b) the tone of YOUR post above would have been much different. Harsher. More detail-filled. Money-grubbers like that are a breed no one likes, and it woudl have been quite easy to give examples painting him as such and drain away most if not all of his support....if such were the case. But I don't think it was, or is.
If, as I suspect, Joe's "demands" fell well within the reasonable range - indeed, within a range that probably numerous staffers at Obama '08 are already being paid, then what is the problem, honestly? Mr. Anthony delivered to you some 100,000+ qualified, opted-in individuals which the official campaign can simply graft right onto its donor and volunteer (not to mention voter) list. Depending upon how much money we're talking about, that's somewhere between 20 cents and maybe, MAYBE 75 cents per voter/donor/volunteer.
Tell me, if you don't mind, which of your OTHER paid consultants delivers to you that sort of value? And then tell me, again - AND Chris Bowers - why a campaign with coffers as deep as Barack Obama's has chosen to publicly not-fund one of the most committed and effective organizer/activists it has in its roster (or at least HAD, until recently).
Disappointedly,
Pheno
Re: This is entirely the wrong approach |
Report to Admin
By
RAH
May 2nd 2007 at 8:47 pm EDT
What value. It doesn't take much to run a MySpace account. And the Obama team was helping. He could have just stopped working on it if it was too much, but to hold if for ransom was just wrong.
Well, then, I guess the campaign better |
Report to Admin
By
Martin from Roswell, GA
May 3rd 2007 at 2:20 pm EDT
start either firing or simply stop paying all of their currently-employed political staff. Oh, it'd probably be OK for them to keep the administrative assistants and such on staff - after all, they WORK for a living, but the political staff? No way. After all, if Joe Anthony's work isn't worth paying for - even in retrospect - then whose IS? And WHY?
It doesn't take much to run a MySpace account, if you've got two or three dozen friends. But when you're in the 100,000+ range, it definitely does. It's sorta like the difference between administering your family's blog that only extended family and friends visit, vs. administering, say, DailyKos. Same concept, sure - but VERY different scale.
Why a campaign the size and strength of Obama's (both monetarily and in terms of people-power) would balk at such a relatively paltry amount is simply beyond me. Progressive politics remains one of the last venues in which people expect to get something for nothing. Campaigns and causes expect to be able to simply wave their magic wands and bewitch their supporters by whispering the incantation: "my politics are correct" - and thereby avoid having to compensate people fairly for their efforts.
Your "ransom" analogy is completely backward: this isn't a hostage situation, as others have already pointed out. It's not as if the Obama campaign couldn't have - at ANY time - created their OWN MySpace page if they found Joe too difficult or demanding to work with. One cannot hold something for ransom that can be obtained freely elsewhere. Why pay the ransom? And if it's the 100,000+ friends that is what you feel are being held for ransom, then might I suggest that those were never the campaign's to begin with: they were the result of whatever work and effort Mr. Anthony undertook in building up the site.
If that's the case though - and I suspect it IS (that the campaign recognized the value of those opted-in volunteers at Mr. Anthony's site) - then the better analogy isn't kidnapping/ransom, it's a sale - or a contract: one party wants or needs something, another party possesses it: the two parties work out an arrangement where the first party agrees to pay some amount of money to the second in exchange for the thing desired.
Unfortunately, since those are indeed the basic parameters (the Obama campaign thought the MySpace page and its opted-in friends network was valuable, Joe Anthony was the founder and builder of that network), but the Obama campaign has chosen to use technicalities to obtain the site and the network of friends without paying Mr. Anthony, I think there's an even BETTER analogy for what's really gone on here. What do you call it when one party takes something of value from another party without paying for it?
That's right: stealing.
Re: This is entirely the wrong approach |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 1:23 pm EDT
RAH nothing was held for ransom. However there was a HiJack. Obama approached site. Obama wanted site. Obama negotiated for site. Obama did not counter offer. Obama took the site hostage if anyone did.
If you pay one person when does it end? |
Report to Admin
By
Jauyoma from New Orleans, LA
May 2nd 2007 at 11:48 pm EDT
If you pay one person when does it end?
Although I would have prefered that the guy get something in return for his efforts, It would have started a bad precedent and opened Obama to various kinds of political opportunists and hacks.
Tactically long term this move made sense for the Obama campaign
Short term it stinks.
They should have invested more effort in wooing the fellow.
Re: If you pay one person when does it end? |
Report to Admin
By
Martin from Roswell, GA
May 3rd 2007 at 2:31 pm EDT
"If you pay one person, where does it end?"
You're kidding, right?
Because I hate to be melodramatic about it, but I'm sure that's what feudal lords thought, too: "PAY the serfs? Whatever for? I let them live on my land, and I keep out invaders, don't I?" Please tell me that the notion that all (or most) campaign labor should be volunteer isn't alive and well and thriving within the Obama campaign.
Because if it is, then yet another generation of promising young potential-activists, people who might very well make a lifelong career of advocating for progressive values through the political system, might very well reluctantly decide they can't pursue their other dreams (home ownership, starting a family in something other than a one-bedroom apartment in a dangerous section of town, sending children to college, etc.) if they continue along the ill-(or UN-)compensated road of the professional progressive activist. They'll drift off into other areas of interest, eventually finding a career which they can make a living doing, and though they'll still vote, and maybe volunteer when their schedules allow, they won't be the force they could have been.
What does this tell the talented grassroots (or netroots) would-be activist who's thinking about helping or starting something on his/her own for a candidate or cause (s)he believes wholeheartedly in? In no uncertain terms, it tells him/her: DON'T. You won't be hired up front, and if you build something of value to them FIRST, in order to prove your worthiness, the very candidate or issue campaign you support and love will try to either take it from you without payment, or offer you less than it's worth.
THERE'S a great message.
Re: This is entirely the wrong approach |
Report to Admin
By
Bruce from Memphis, TN
May 3rd 2007 at 7:06 pm EDT
Nothing like the voice of experience to sharpen the view. Excellant point. Who do we pay and why?
Here they are. Go get 'em!
MEET OBAMA’S INNER CIRCLE
David Axelrod: Uber campaign strategist; journalist-turned-media consultant who knows how to turn a phrase and throw a punch
Michele Obama: Harvard-educated lawyer; South Side native grounds him in reality, her husband’s “true north”
Bill Daley: Former Clinton Cabinet member and mayoral has quietly asked others for support
Robert Gibbs: Veteran of several campaigns; a seasoned political spokesman with “Northern ruthlessness and Southern charm”
Valerie Jarrett: Friend and confidant; lawyer and former deputy to Mayor Richard Daley who speaks her mind on politics and policy
Peter Rouse: Former top aide to Tom Daschle. Cautious institutionalist known for discretion.
Cassandra Butts: Harvard Law classmate and former senior policy adviser to Dick Gephardt
Jim Reynolds: Chicago financial executive
John Rogers: Mutual fund executive and major Chicago Democratic fundraiser
Bill Daley: Former Clinton Cabinet member and mayoral brother has quietly asked others for support
David Plouffe: Level-headed and low-key, “one of the most well-rounded strategists.”
Michael Froman: Harvard Law classmate, financial executive and former top aide to Bob Rubin
Julius Genachowski: Harvard Law classmate, technology executive and former top aide to FCC chairman
Broderick Johnson: Former Clinton White House aide and telecom lobbyist
Martin Nesbitt: Parking company president close to Pritzker family
Thanks for clarifying. |
Report to Admin
By
BrooklynMan4Obama
May 2nd 2007 at 8:18 pm EDT
I'm glad to hear the campaign office side of the story. But, I also think this was not handled with care.
I know you guys are busy, and working really really hard. But seriously, you had to know it would be a bad idea to seize the guys page in this fashion, especially a supporter. The fact is, he did put a great deal of work into this, and I certainly understands how he feels.
What you guys should do is give him back his myspace page, and simply ask him mark it "unofficial." He could provide a large link to the "official" site. If he is unwilling to do that, leave him be. Let the people decide which page they prefer. No harm will come of it.
Re: Thanks for clarifying. |
Report to Admin
By
Mark from Kent, WA
May 2nd 2007 at 8:22 pm EDT
Uh, that was exactly the current situation.
His was marked "unofficial" and directed people in the right direction for official.
Re: Thanks for clarifying. |
Report to Admin
By
BrooklynMan4Obama
May 2nd 2007 at 8:40 pm EDT
Well, then they should make this guy whole and return to the previous arrangement. Just give this guy his page back and leave him be. No harm will come of it! Really!
I still don't understand why Chicago feels they have to work with him. Its MySpace for crissakes! Let the guy do his thing, and let the campaign have its own page. Let the people sort out which they prefer.
This is going to have very negative ripple effects. Seriously. It's just not wise, nor is it practical. This could have been a strategic opportunity to turn this into a win. I hope the office has not turned into a highly insular center for myopia. It just does not make any sense to me why the campaign would get involved in this way.
A LOT of core support is going to be lost, because this goes right at the "new kind of politics" idea. I've raised money for Obama, I've brought friends to Obama, and I'll still vote for him. But this kind of thing really turns down the enthusiasm.
Re: Thanks for clarifying. |
Report to Admin
By
John from Swampscott, MA
May 2nd 2007 at 8:57 pm EDT
I agree. This was really dumb. If they didn't want to pay him they should have just left him alone. I don't like the idea that they took his site without his permission. I hate when the right pulls that kind of stuff, so I'm not going to condone it when my side does the same thing.
I just can't believe they're not fixing it. This is going to grow and spread so fast. I hope they get out in front of it.
Re: Thanks for clarifying. |
Report to Admin
By
RAH
May 2nd 2007 at 9:55 pm EDT
What is it that people on here don't seem to understand. The Obama's team did NOT take away his site.
They started a new MySpace.com/barackobama site.
All they did was TAKE BACK THE OBAMA'S BRAND. Joe doesn't own the rights to Obama's name. Only Barack Obama does. His site with all 160,000 people and contents he worked sooo hard on all these 3 years, is still available for him. All he has to do is make up another MySpace.com/joewhatever.. name. Barackobama belongs to Barack Obama!
Get it!
Re: Thanks for clarifying. |
Report to Admin
By
Cilla...Currently living in Spain and lovin' it
May 2nd 2007 at 10:07 pm EDT
RAH, don't try to make this point. If they read the post CAREFULLY maybe they will get it. moving right along.
Re: Thanks for clarifying. |
Report to Admin
By
Maria from Jersey City, NJ
May 2nd 2007 at 11:34 pm EDT
Joe Anthony is being greedy.They offered him a job and he rejected the offer which is fine,but to change the password then ask for ransom money?,that's horrible.The Obama staffers could have handled it in a better manner, but this joe anthony is a complete hack trying to get rich off the name of barackobama.
Re: Thanks for clarifying. |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 12:21 pm EDT
No it is the staff trying to steal hard work and intellectual property of a forum or community of people. They did steal it and now all of it is gone. The people remain .. and we will to back JOe to the end.
Re: Thanks for clarifying. |
Report to Admin
By
Dave from San Mateo, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 5:38 pm EDT
So does it mean, www.dave.com belongs to me? Can I take it whenever I feel like taking it? Please use your head before you post something.
RipOff |
Report to Admin
By
EdB
May 2nd 2007 at 8:28 pm EDT
So ... uh ... you offered him a job that he would have to move to accept and would certainly be temporary, but you weren't willing to offer payment for something that would become yours permanently?
This is strike two against Barack in my book.
I'm glad it's still very early in the process. The more time we have to see candidates, the more we'll see how candidates (and their organizations) behave when they don't get their way.
Re: RipOff |
Report to Admin
By
CK Educators with Obama
May 2nd 2007 at 8:36 pm EDT
This is a mean-spirited and snarky "discussion" of the topic. I will be leaving now to do do more important things with my life.
Re: RipOff |
Report to Admin
By
BrooklynMan4Obama
May 2nd 2007 at 8:49 pm EDT
Exactly...I'll make my final point here.
If he wanted $39,000 for control over the site, WHY NOT JUST GIVE IT TO HIM? It isn't like you don't have the money. Put a press release out about it and make it into a good thing!
"Joe did a fabulous job, but now its so big he cant handle it. We want to thank him with a generous check for all his great work. Thanks Joe!" End of story, everyone happy.
Or, if thats too much money or there are some campaign rules preventing such a thing, simply create another "official" page in balance to his unofficial one. Let the people decide which they prefer.
But this way, seizing the guys page? Imagine how you would feel if you were a volunteer of good will and all of a sudden some campaign operative takes over your work, and all you get is a lousy phonecall.
I'm sorry to say, but you all bungled this. And now I see the Senator has endorsed the staff's foul up, and I'm just really disappointed. Like I said, I'll still vote for him, but burner is turned down on simmer.
Re: RipOff |
Report to Admin
By
Danielle Clarke USA Vietnam Vet
May 2nd 2007 at 9:41 pm EDT
I HAVE AN AOL WEB SITE WITH BARACKOBAMA ON IT. ITS NOT MINE. PEOPLE DON'T LOOK AT IT WHEN THEY SEARCH BECAUSE OF ME THEY DO SO BECAUSE IT HAS BARACKS NAME IN IT.
I AM GLAD THE CAMPAIGN DIDN'T FALL FOR THIS EXTORTION AND LOCKING THE SITE'S PASSWORD AFTER WORKING WITH THE CAMPAIGN AND ALL THE VOLUNTEERS THAT HELPED TOO AND THE CAMPAIGN OFFERING JOE A JOB ETC..
GEEZ IF EVERYBODY USED BARACKS NAME ON ANYSITE.COM MANY PEOPLE WOULD JOIN AND THEN THE CAMPAIGN WOULD WHAT?? HAVE TO BUY OUT EVERYONE AT THOSE SITES TOO..?? GET REAL..
THIS SEEMS LIKE JOE OR HIS FRIENDS HERE TRYING TO MAKE THIS INTO A BIG DEAL SO THEY CAN WHAT MAKE US FEEL BAD JOE USED BARACKS NAME AND GOT A LOT OF PEOPLE TO JOIN .. LOL LIKE THE CAMPOAIGN OWES HIM A THING ..LOL.. DON'T PAY HIM OR YOU WILL BE PAYING EVERY TOM DICK OR HARRY WHO USES YOUR NAME AND GETS LOTS OF PEOPLE SIGNED UP..
I THINK MADONNA WENT THROUGH THIS AFTER SOME PERSON USED HER NAME TOO AND THEY LOST AND MADONNA GOT THE SITE.. SHEEESH GET A LIFE AND STOP USING OTHER PEOPLES NAME TO HAVE A LIFE..
PS: MY SITE HAS NOTHING ABOUT ME ITS JUST BARACK AND LINKS TO THE CAMPAIGN SO THERE IS NO EGO IN IT FOR ME.. LIKE IT SEEMS THERE WAS WITH THIS ISSUE
Re: RipOff..HUMPH YEA RIGHT LOL |
Report to Admin
By
Danielle Clarke USA Vietnam Vet
May 2nd 2007 at 9:46 pm EDT
MY SITE USING BARACKS NAME .. I HOPE ITS OK BY YOU BARACK.. I SHOULD HAVE ASKED BEFORE I DID SO JUST LIKE THIS ANTHONY SHOULD HAVE FOR 2 YRS OHMGAWD .. HERE'S MINE BARACK -
Link
AND I COULD ADD A JOURNAL TOO AND A AOL GROUP AND MANY PEOPLE WOULD JOIN..
BY THE WAY THERE ARE A FEW OTHERS ON AOL..
Re: RipOff..HUMPH YEA RIGHT LOL |
Report to Admin
By
RAH
May 2nd 2007 at 10:00 pm EDT
Finally a voice of reason! YOU ARE ABSOLUTLY RIGHT! Good point! Thanks for your continued support of Barack Obama. I know there's lots more people out their like you!
Re: RipOff..HUMPH YEA RIGHT LOL |
Report to Admin
By
yourguide
May 3rd 2007 at 9:13 pm EDT
And when the campaign takes over control of your site from you and shuts you out will you think that's fair? That's what we are talking about here?
Re: RipOff |
Report to Admin
By
CBC
May 2nd 2007 at 10:08 pm EDT
While I agree it was originally handled ham-handedly, the campaign didn't take his work (the site design or the members), it only took back the Barack Obama name which no one else besides Barack really has a right to anyway. It seems just plain common-sense that Barack Obama should own his own MySpace URL.
Re: RipOff |
Report to Admin
By
Matt from Knoxville, IA
May 2nd 2007 at 10:11 pm EDT
True Dat Brooklynman!
Re: RipOff |
Report to Admin
By
Matt from Knoxville, IA
May 2nd 2007 at 10:11 pm EDT
True Dat Brooklynman!
wah |
Report to Admin
By
Randy from Escondido, CA
May 2nd 2007 at 8:43 pm EDT
Wow alot of folks whine about some trite bs. There are people dying in Iraq and yall are worrying about some greedy guy who wanted to get paid for campaigning which is a volunteer service anyways. We support Barack because we support what he stands for not what we can get out of it. Ya'll including Joe should be ashamed of your behavior. This is not an important issue. It doesn't even register. If you don't support Barack, fine, but do you your slandering on your candidates website. We don't want to hear it.
Re: wah |
Report to Admin
By
Vasily from Washington, DC
May 3rd 2007 at 2:43 pm EDT
I agree with you completely on this point. I am a veteran and would love to hear about issues that address my specific concerns, and posts which tell the story of some of my closest friends and colleagues who are either in the battlefield now, or are at home dealing with the war's medical/psychological aftermath. However, I also don't think that the campaign has done a good job of including us in a substantive discussions of the issues.
This feels like something that is more dynamic and active than the pieces we get handed on issues such as Iraq and healthcare. These issues are not discussed (not by the campaign, at least; the best discussions happen between members) with us, but are foisted upon us. What this tells me is that the campaign does not expect any genuinely substantive input from people not whithin its inner-circle. All I feel like I'm getting are mass form-emails with sterile language or solicitations for my contribution. That's all well and good, but it's not a "new kind of politics," and consequently I don't believe my candidate is being well-served by his new media team.
Re: wah |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 12:24 pm EDT
No slandering. Just asking to display responsibilty the same if he was to be elected. Obama is accountable.
Worried |
Report to Admin
By
John from Swampscott, MA
May 2nd 2007 at 8:43 pm EDT
I don't like what I'm learning about Barack's campaign. It sure sounds like you muscled in on this guy's URL, after he'd built something worth taking. A lot of people here seem to be anxious to believe your excuses, but the bottom line is, it was his, now it's yours, and you gave him nothing in exchange. That sounds like theft and it doesn't reflect well on the campaign.
So far I've liked everything I've heard from Barack, but this makes me very uncomfortable. I agree with a few of the posters above; the campaign needs to do a 180 and fix this mistake now.
Re: Worried |
Report to Admin
By
Danielle Clarke USA Vietnam Vet
May 2nd 2007 at 9:50 pm EDT
GO BACK TO THE SWAMP ANTHONY OR HIS FRIENDS OR EDWARDS OR HILLARY SUPPORTERS WE KNOW WHAT YOUR AFTER AND IT AIN'T THE TRUTH. YOUR HERE TRYING TO USE BARACK AND "HIS' FAME TO GET AHEAD.. GET A LIFE OF "YOUR" OWN OR YOUR HERE TO PUT BARACK DOWN AND WE AREN'T "BUYING" IT
Re: Worried |
Report to Admin
By
Peter Yochum
May 2nd 2007 at 11:03 pm EDT
According to myspace rules, and US law, the URL belongs to Barrack Obama.
He didn't muscle in on anything.
The guy kept his content and all his work. The campaign got what belonged to them.
Nothing stolen by either party.
The campaign can't have somebody freezing them a site that claims to be the voice of Barack Obama.
Nobody took anything over, Obama's camp started a new page with the URL that they were entitled to under the law.
Re: Worried |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 12:25 pm EDT
Yes they took and destroyed all the content of the site. So this is an inaccuracy.
Don't give him a dime |
Report to Admin
By
Mike
May 2nd 2007 at 8:48 pm EDT
The people who gave to the Senator's campaign did not give to buy a Myspace profile.
Joe Schmoo |
Report to Admin
By
RAH
May 2nd 2007 at 8:53 pm EDT
I figured as much! It doesn't take rocket science to figure out that Joe was trying to get paid for services he volunteered for. Then claimed the injured party when his extortion failed.
I'm glad you decided to address this issue. However, a lot of the comments and responses on behalf of Joe, I believe weren't sincere supporters. They were eager for an opportunity to dish dirt on Barack Obama.
You're doing a great job and many people are going to try to influence people against Obama. Don't worry, there's plenty of support to go around.
Re: Joe Schmoo |
Report to Admin
By
Randy from Escondido, CA
May 2nd 2007 at 9:00 pm EDT (Updated May 3rd 2007 at 5:54 pm EDT)
Deleted by Admin
Re: Joe Schmoo |
Report to Admin
By
John from Swampscott, MA
May 2nd 2007 at 9:02 pm EDT
How is it extortion? He didn't threaten to do something to hurt the site. Heck, it was his, he built it. You're saying that if I use my site to help someone with their cause, they have the right to take it from me? That's crazy.
And I don't think we should be so quick to believe a paid campaign worker over a guy who voluteered and did a lot of work when it really mattered.
Theft is theft, whether the other side does it, or mine.
Re: Joe Schmoo |
Report to Admin
By
Hatshepsut
May 2nd 2007 at 9:43 pm EDT
Theft IS theft. And while I don't believe Joe intended it as such, what Joe did was effectively identity theft because rather than register as JoeAnthony he registered as BarackObama at MySpace.
Re: Joe Schmoo |
Report to Admin
By
Danielle Clarke USA Vietnam Vet
May 2nd 2007 at 9:55 pm EDT
DITTO
NOBODY WOULD HAVE CAME IF IT WAS JOE ANTHONY LOL WHAT A JOKER HE IS USING ANOTHERS NAME.. MAYBE BARACK OUGHT TO SUE JOE ANTHONY FOR IDENTITY THEFT/IMPERSONATION
Re: Joe Schmoo |
Report to Admin
By
WillowGr
May 2nd 2007 at 11:15 pm EDT
The Obama campaign DID NOT TAKE THE SITE AWAY. They left the site in tack. Joe has the site, and all 160,000 friends.
The Obama campaign took only Obama's name and started their own site.
Obama's campaign needs control over any site that can be seen as part of his officially campaign.
Re: Joe Schmoo |
Report to Admin
By
Frances
May 2nd 2007 at 10:28 pm EDT
If you use their name, yes they do.
If you built it in your name, that's another story.
Thanks for the response but it was not necessary for me |
Report to Admin
By
Jo
May 2nd 2007 at 9:01 pm EDT
I hope that the campaign staff will stand firm on this. I'm a volunteer for Senator Obama campaign because i share his ideas for this country. If he wins and we'll do what ever will be necessary for that, my ideas will prevail. I'm a volunteer for my parish and i don't ask to be paid for what i'm doing. Being faithful to my lord may not be the same thing as supporting Obama, but I don't think that if someone believe in something, he should ask for a remuneration of his trust or his faith. If any so-called volunteer wants to be paid for his involvment in this movement. I'm gracefully inviting this person to turn himself to Hillary or Edwards campaign. They will pander to get votes at any cost.
Stand firm Sir. We are here because we believe in your ideas for this country.
Thanks |
Report to Admin
By
alex
May 2nd 2007 at 9:14 pm EDT
Thanks for the clarification Joe.
This guy Joe Anthony is a real loser.
Go Obama!!!!!
Re: Thanks |
Report to Admin
By
Gina
May 3rd 2007 at 2:25 pm EDT
This is exactly the kind of attitude that makes us the #1 nation of "reality" shows and Jerry Springer wannabes.... Come on. Do you honestly think Joe Anthony is "a loser"? He obviously felt incredibly strong about this campaign, and a lot of ownership in his site. Problem is this is a first for politics and everybody learned from it. Or should. He still can have an Obama supporter site if he wants to. Nobody has stolen anything away from him.
Re: Thanks |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 12:27 pm EDT
To call Joe Anthony a Loser is to call all 160K+ friends losers. I take that personal.
Is this non-issue all it takes-- |
Report to Admin
By
Linda
May 2nd 2007 at 9:18 pm EDT
--to unravel a grassroots movement? Really?
We need to take a deep breath here--take a step back and calm down.
Bottom line: Obama owns Obama. The Obama campaign staff has every ethical right to manage the message going out under the candidate's name. No volunteer has the right to dictate financial terms for ownership of a name that's not his own. "Friends" on the MySpace Obama site followed the candidate. My daughter was one of them. She believed, like most others, that Anthony's site was the official Obama site.
This is a situation involving good people on both sides and the ruffled feathers of a single volunteer whose demands were unreasonable. I don't see that he "delivered" over a hundred thousand people to Barack Obama. Obama's name, his vision, his candidacy drew them in. That's the simple truth.
Surely we are better than all this hyperbole.
This is not lying the country into war. It's not spying on American citizens; gutting the Bill of Rights; violating the Geneva Conventions; torturing detainees at Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, or black sites; it's not weighting tax breaks on the wrong end of the economic scale; it's not ignoring the needs of the working poor or the shrinking middle class--over 46 million of whom have no health insurance; it's not stealing an election or corrupting the Department of Justice.
It's a spat between an internet volunteer who feels he deserves retroactive pay and a percentage of the action and the campaign staff, which believes he asked too much and went about it in the wrong way.
This defines neither our candidate nor the staff, has nothing at all to do with the deadly serious issues we face as a nation.
Let's not get our cyberspace egos in an uproar here, especially when we were not involved in the transaction.
As for what Barack Obama "owes" his volunteers (besides a real shot at humane governance)--if he's going to have to pay personal calls on everyone who's inconvenienced, feels ignored or has invested a little money in the campaign, please add me to the list. My husband loves Obama, too--but he's got grounds lately to sue me for desertion.
What's important to us? What truly matters for the future of the nation?
The man IS the message. He's done nothing immoral, unethical or illegal. What he's done is give us both a sense of hope and a purpose well worth every effort.
We either believe in this campaign or we don't.
I believe.
Re: Is this non-issue all it takes-- |
Report to Admin
By
Hatshepsut
May 2nd 2007 at 9:34 pm EDT
Well said, Linda.
Re: Is this non-issue all it takes-- |
Report to Admin
By
RAH
May 2nd 2007 at 10:05 pm EDT
Another voice of reason. Very well said, wished I said my piece that way. Thanks for supporting Barack Obama.
Re: Is this non-issue all it takes-- |
Report to Admin
By
Gina
May 3rd 2007 at 2:27 pm EDT
Linda, you Ba-ROCK! :-)
Re: Is this non-issue all it takes-- |
Report to Admin
By
Dave from San Mateo, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 6:07 pm EDT
Wrong. If I legally change my name to Barack Obama, do I own it as well? How about myspace.com/Obamafor08? Will I own it as well? So why do companies buy url names? Why did Fry's electronics buy www.frys.com? Couldn't they just have taken since it was their name in the first place?
How about now - can I take www.dave.com because it has my name?
Maybe Barack has "rights" to it because he's a celebrity now. I still won't vote for Clinton. I'll vote for Obama. But now he's just another politician, and I'm only voting for him cuz he'll probably be the Democratic candidate. Oh well, at least he's not George Bush.
Re: Is this non-issue all it takes-- |
Report to Admin
By
Matt
May 2nd 2007 at 9:58 pm EDT
Couldn't have said it any better. Excellent post!
Re: Is this non-issue all it takes-- |
Report to Admin
By
Erik from Reston, VA
May 2nd 2007 at 10:41 pm EDT
Well put, Linda- Barack owes us good governance. Would you say seizing someone else's hard work because you want it (and you can) is an example of 'good governance'? I wouldn't. *He* made the site, *he* built it long before Mr. Obama ran for president, and *he* has every right to decide its destiny. It's *his*. You can't respect the country without respecting the individual, and this is as disrespectful as it gets. And then the official blogger here has the audacity to call it their "MySpace Experiment".
I will *never* vote for a candidate that tramples on people like this.
Re: Is this non-issue all it takes-- |
Report to Admin
By
Peter Yochum
May 2nd 2007 at 11:07 pm EDT
You talk about ownership and who controls the destiny of the site. I need to point something out.
The content belongs to Joe. The Friends list belongs to Joe.
The URL myspace.com/barackobama belongs to ... Barack Obama.
That's the law.
Both parties got what they have a right to.
Nobody trampled on anybody's rights either way.
Re: Is this non-issue all it takes-- |
Report to Admin
By
Phil In the Cuse
May 2nd 2007 at 11:43 pm EDT
Right on, Linda. As I was reading this stream of comments, one thing kept popping up in my mind - what does this have to do with our campaign, the issues we believe in, our mission to make Barack Obama the next president? Nothing, really.
Yet it does reveal a basic problem that has to be addressed. Thousands of us have joined this campaign, have contributed our hard-earned money to it. And 99.99 percent of us ask for nothing, other than a chance to be a part of history.
That VOLUNTEER, grass-roots spirit must be preserved, as much as possible. In that vein, I hope to see some of you the weekend of May 19 in New Hamsphire for our first canvass, so we can spread the word of our mission across the Granite State!
Those that labor in a volunteer effort, and ask for money retroactively, are out for themselves. We are not like that. We are a VOLUNTEER army, we are growing, and we are ready to work for you Barack Obama!
Re: Is this non-issue all it takes-- |
Report to Admin
By
yourguide
May 3rd 2007 at 9:18 pm EDT
That's not the law. In fact it's nowhere near cybersquatting, it's myspace for petes sake. Beleive me, the campaign wanted the 160K supporters, not the url. Anyone with half a brain in their head who understands myspace will know that the 160K supporters, even if they were under myspace.com/barackobamaisthebe stestOMG would understand the value of the supporters over the url.
They strong armed and got the URL and a bunch of bad press.
Suck it up, apologize, pay the guy for having the foresight that your new media guys didnt have and then you can have my campaign contributions...
Re: Is this non-issue all it takes-- |
Report to Admin
By
Vee
May 3rd 2007 at 12:22 pm EDT
Thank God for VOICE OF REASON!! WELL SAID LINDA! I can't believe the bitterness & mudslinging from non-supporters & from supposedly Obama's supporters. It's not even half way of the entire comments.
We can't be up and arms over this? In a scheme of things, this is NOTHING!! The campaign is still 2 years away, if we're already huffing & puffing now, over a non issue no less, this not going to help all of us in the long run.
People have different understanding in the meaning of the word "volunteer". Some think, me included, volunteering means doing something good for the better good without expecting anything in return. BUT, others think it means you're doing something good & are entitled for financial compensation for your VOLUNTEER work. Well, looks like both parties worked on those differences, so DONE!
Let's go back to the bigger issues at hand. Let's focused on our country's issues at hand & who would be the best leader in uniting us in tackling those issues. I'm so glad, you related this message so wonderfully Linda. THANKS!!!
Re: Is this non-issue all it takes-- |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 12:30 pm EDT
Linda you miss the whole point of a community who gather to share in an exchange on a point of interest. OBAMA was unethical. Yes they stole. Stole greatly from me as part of that community.
Thanks |
Report to Admin
By
alex
May 2nd 2007 at 9:22 pm EDT
Thanks for the clarification Joe.
This guy Joe Anthony is a real loser.
Go Obama!!!!!
Re: Thanks |
Report to Admin
By
John from Swampscott, MA
May 2nd 2007 at 9:36 pm EDT
Ya, he's probably a witch. Burn the witch!
Some of you folks are making me sick. This is not how our side is supposed to behave. I can't believe how quickly we're ready to accept the guilt of one of our own. This guy Joe isn't from the friggin' National Review. He's one of us. Stop sticking your knives in him just because he has a disagreement. Remember, he might just possibly be right.
Re: Thanks |
Report to Admin
By
Danielle Clarke USA Vietnam Vet
May 2nd 2007 at 9:59 pm EDT
SWAMP WE KNOW WHO YOU ARE AND WHAT YOUR DOING HERE GO AWAY WE WON'T BE CHANGED NEITHER WILL THE CAMPAIGN..
Re: Thanks |
Report to Admin
By
John from Swampscott, MA
May 2nd 2007 at 10:13 pm EDT
Brilliant. I disagree so I must be "the enemy". Gee, where else have I heard that kind of stupidity lately?
Re: Thanks |
Report to Admin
By
CBC
May 2nd 2007 at 10:50 pm EDT
I'm sorry that some supporters have been so rude to you. While I don't think Joe Anthony was right in demanding to be paid retroactively for what was done as volunteer work, I do think we should all treat each other with respect. That's what Barack stands for personally and politically, and it's a standard I wish everyone would follow.
Re: Thanks |
Report to Admin
By
alex
May 2nd 2007 at 10:12 pm EDT
He is NOT RIGHT.
He tried to extort money from the campaign by changing the password and denying the campaign access to the Myspace page. The page which by law belongs to Obama because it is run under Barack Obama's name.
He is a criminal. He should be arrested.
Re: Thanks |
Report to Admin
By
Frances
May 2nd 2007 at 10:31 pm EDT
So, are you going to ask for money for your VOLUNTEER efforts, too?
Just curious.
Obama called Joe Anthony |
Report to Admin
By
Christy in Oly
May 2nd 2007 at 9:25 pm EDT
Below is just another example of why I admire Barack Obama. He reached out to Joe Anthony and obviously made a positive impression and a great step toward reconciling their conflict.
From Joe Anthony's MySpace page:
Link
Dated Today May 2, 2007
TC from Barack Obama (!!!)
I just received a phone call from Barack Obama himself.
He expressed his appreciation and we agreed that there is something to be learned by everyone involved at this point. (Frankly, I was a little surprised by the call, and was too nervous to remember any exact quotes)
I assured him that this is just a horrible thing that happened and obviously he wasn't responsible and shouldn't be held responsible. It's his campaign that perhaps mismanaged this whole thing. He of course stands by his campaign, but again. . . much to be learned by all.
I'm sure he has mixed feelings in speaking with me about this, but it was nice of him to call, and quite an honor to finally speak to him!
I guess I have mixed feelings as well, but it was still a great honor.
I urge you all to consider this situation carefully. It'll take time for me to work this out and decide if I will personally continue to support Obama, regardless of how I feel about his campaign's handling of this situation.
It's not right what they did to me and this profile, but it's also wrong to let this change your views of Barack Obama as a candidate.
After all it was Obama that inspired me to do all this.
What a day. I'll keep you posted. . . .
Re: Obama called Joe Anthony |
Report to Admin
By
HopenotFear
May 2nd 2007 at 10:15 pm EDT
hmm, joe isn't playing the game and neither is barack.
wow, this thing got way out of hand.
I had something like this happen to me... |
Report to Admin
By
Hatshepsut
May 2nd 2007 at 9:25 pm EDT
I'm not a politician but I had a very similar situation in my work happen to me recently. I've been working on a project for years, and found out that someone else had been paying someone else to do basically the same things I was doing without any compensation. We talked about pooling our resources and doing the proect together...until she demanded that any profits made would first go to pay back the money she invested. She had decided to invest that money herself without having a partner to help her and it wasn't an expense I would have agreed to in the first place anyway, and then she thought she could shake me down for it. No go. I can understand the Obama campaign's position about refusing to pay Joe.
Perhaps something constructive can come out of this. Perhaps the Obama campaign can make one of its policies new laws that protect the use of names. I do feel that people these days are too lax and ignorant and dismissing of copyright law, and this is an example of identity theft in a way. I know Joe didn't intend it that way but indeed whose to say that someone else wouldn't have gotten the name and used it to bash Obama? Individuals should not be allowed to do this. MySpace has many profiles in famous people's names that are not owned by those individuals and that is simply wrong. If Joe had a page called Barack4President or something I would be sympathetic, but it is MYspace and the MY in this case should be Barack himself, otherwise it is deceptive even if it is not intended that way.
Some lingering questions |
Report to Admin
By
Kim
May 2nd 2007 at 9:28 pm EDT
Joe Rospar's I'm glad to see you respond on behalf of Senator Obama about this situation. I hope to see a resolution in the near future.
I find that most of what you're saying coincides with Joe Anthony's account here:
Link
In it, Anthony claims that a "Chris" from the Obama campaign asked him to come up with a one-time fee for the website transfer. In response to Chris' request, Joe Anthony came up with a number at a meeting the next day. Anthony then said,
"It was clear at that time that there was no "one-time fee". I felt like it was a bit of a setup so that they could have a reason to take the profile without my consent.
I was accused of using this profile for commercial purposes. I was threatened that I would be responsible if the profile was deleted (they even followed up via email to be sure I knew it was my fault!) The conversation really was about them taking control of the profile. There was no counter offer, or anything to suggest that they had any intention of paying me anything at all."
Is Chris' behavior as described by Joe Anthony accurate? Did the Obama campaign ask him for a number and when Anthony came up with one, did Obama staffers not provide a counter-offer and in fact, tried to pressure and/or "threaten" him as Anthony claims?
That is the root of the matter...was Joe Anthony, an Obama supporter, treated fairly and respectfully throughout this process?
be right for what!!! |
Report to Admin
By
Jo
May 2nd 2007 at 9:56 pm EDT
he calls himself a volunteer and now wants to be paid. I find it quite insulting for all of us to suggest that we can exchange our support for money. That will be politics as usual. See Hillary buying Tom Vilsack. We are here to build a movement with Senator Obama. We share his ideas. Sir, I'm looking forward to hear you on may 7 at the Detroit Economic Club. I hope that what will come out that day will be as good as our foreign policy speech.
Go Obama!!!
Re: be right for what!!! |
Report to Admin
By
Frances
May 2nd 2007 at 10:34 pm EDT
agreed
The MySpace TOS |
Report to Admin
By
Hatshepsut
May 2nd 2007 at 9:59 pm EDT
Interesting to read:
Link
On more than one occasion Joe violated these terms-when he shared his password with the campaign AND when he tried to sell the profile to them. The campaign shouldn't have been using the password though even though he gave it to them.
Learning |
Report to Admin
By
Martin Washington
May 2nd 2007 at 10:01 pm EDT
Wow! I learned a lot this evening.
I learned that the thugs who police the GOP campaigns have counterparts on the left. Some of them are right here on this blog, questioning the loyalty of any dissenters.
I learned that dissenters on our campaigns are trashed just as quickly as the GOP trashes the Paul O'Neills, Richard Clarkes, and the Eric Shinsekis.
I learned that people will shut their eyes to the smearing of their friends if the the paid New Media guy of their political hero, casts him in a bad light.
I learned that I'm just as uncomfortable with blind faith from Democrats as I am from the wingnuts.
I learned it's time to shove off. Maybe I'll keep supporting Barack Obama, but it's going to be a lot tougher now that I've seen some of the zealots in his camp. I hope he does some housecleaning within his organization before it's time for me to decide.
Good night.
Re: Learning |
Report to Admin
By
PASBO
May 2nd 2007 at 10:46 pm EDT
Yeah I just learned that 'Bill' and 'John' from supposedly 'liberal' New England have no record or entries on this site...
Give me a 'P'
Give me an 'L'
Give me an 'A'
Give me an 'N'
Give me a 'T'
What's that spell - PLANT!!!
No wonder they seem to be the only two on here who refuse to budge their position or discuss it without leveling charges about those who are trying to find the real story here. They made up their minds before they got here and were merely trying to sow dissent and attempt to smear the reasonable and rational supporters of Barack Obama. These people really are easy to spot. They make no convincing arguments concerning their position and they are constantly smearing anyone who points out the fact.
Goodnight everyone - make sure you all work up your tally sheets of what the campaign owes you for your freely volunteered time (just to clarify the last report I read said that Joe demanded money then changed the password, which he had readily shared before, when he was refused) then let's get about revising history so that JFK says "Ask not whay you can do for your country! Ask what your country owes you!" - Just Kidding Of Course! (we would have to substitute CAMPAIGN!)
Goodnight All!
Obama '08!
-PASBO
Re: Learning |
Report to Admin
By
Joe from San Francisco, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 10:27 pm EDT
Another knife in the back from an Obama supporter with no inside knowledge of what happened. I'd say Bill was spot on, except he should have anticipated being called a plant, after calling out the fanatics.
By the way, you are missing the point now that the story has blazed across the internet and onto my television. You can spin it all you want here, but people will judge freely on thousands of other web sites. It would have been better - and it would still be better - to have shown more empathy toward a lone supporter. "Just because you can" wasn't enough reason to take down this guy's work. Instead, nobody admits to any fault. Politics as usual, isn't it?
you say your about little guy..... |
Report to Admin
By
Matt from Knoxville, IA
May 2nd 2007 at 10:02 pm EDT
It was theft to assimilate Joe Anthony's 'My Space' site that he started a couple years ago. Imagine, thinking he was helping a guy out, that Barack Obama could make a difference in the White House, but instead gets the DC dagger in the back for all the sweat and tears. Hey everybody.... guess what?.... This is what you'll get in 2008 with Obama as president.
If I were you Mr. Obama, I would repent, pay Joe $30,000 or $40,000 for the site that has generated 160,000 TRUE grassroots supporters. Good will is cheap,and is peanuts compared with the millions you'll spend on endless lame TV ads.
Because this fact is true: Once the your campaign slickmiesters turn it into a polished turd, no one will be able to tell from the next canidate's website. You will also piss off a good 50% of the 160,000 that Joe Anthony got for you, right when the field is crowded and percentages are tight.
Good luck Mr. Obama.... you're gonna need it!
Re: you say your about little guy..... |
Report to Admin
By
Cilla...Currently living in Spain and lovin' it
May 2nd 2007 at 10:13 pm EDT
In the words of Chris Matthews:
HAAAAAAAA!!!!!
Re: you say your about little guy..... |
Report to Admin
By
Matt from Knoxville, IA
May 2nd 2007 at 10:19 pm EDT
In the words of Matt Brown... HUH?!?
Re: you say your about little guy..... |
Report to Admin
By
HopenotFear
May 2nd 2007 at 10:23 pm EDT
matt, your concerns have been noted, now let's move on.
facebook guy was a good model of volunteering |
Report to Admin
By
HopenotFear
May 2nd 2007 at 10:30 pm EDT
the facebook guy delivered over 300,000 supporters but never asked for a dime. i volunteer my barackobama supporters in my school district. since november of last year, i've spent on average 30hrs a week helping out my school's group. i was one of the earliest persons to build the biggest group for barack on facebook. i've never asked for a dime. i support barack to the point of making some sacrifices.
i don't know if joe should take money from the campaign, but i wouldn't. either way the campaign should've invited barack to talk to the guy in person before things got out of hand. but it is clear that joe can't be let off the hook either. he's great but he could've done better.
Re: facebook guy was a good model of volunteering |
Report to Admin
By
Lorraine
May 2nd 2007 at 11:55 pm EDT
My cousin is in college. Facebook is all the rage on the campus. Before this situation came around, I asked her about the "Senator Obama" movement on campus. The first thing she said, is he on Facebook. Of course, I didn't know. She said if he is everybody knows about him.
chris mattews haaaaaaa |
Report to Admin
By
HopenotFear
May 2nd 2007 at 10:22 pm EDT
haaaaaaaaaaaaa, ilove you cilla. i'm called priscilla TOO!
these folks who create profiles for 5mins, trash barack and move on are really lucky that this isn't hillary's blog. HRC culles all blog posts, but barack isn't afraid to face 5mins friends like this dude who claims bla bla bla.
i agree, in the words of chris mattews, haaaaaaaaaaa, haaaaaaaaaa, haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Re: chris mattews haaaaaaa |
Report to Admin
By
Matt from Knoxville, IA
May 2nd 2007 at 10:45 pm EDT
Keep eating the pabulum and go to sleep... it will all be over soon sweetie.....
I think I have given extremely fair comments! I don't attribute this to Barack personally, I have a problem with the hacks that seem to work for him!
This is the big guy squashing the little guy and that is the true principle I am pointing out. yeah, I just joined an hour ago... but I can leave and choose from about eight other candidates too if you like.... Am I wasting my time airing my true feelings?
Re: chris mattews haaaaaaa |
Report to Admin
By
Cilla...Currently living in Spain and lovin' it
May 3rd 2007 at 10:42 am EDT
WHAT'S UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Nice to see someone understands my Chris Matthews impression.
Re: you say your about little guy..... |
Report to Admin
By
Lorraine
May 2nd 2007 at 11:51 pm EDT
I love Chris Matthews. I know he is a little over the top sometimes but he is always enjoyable to watch on MSNBC.
Re: you say your about little guy..... |
Report to Admin
By
Dennis from Saint Petersburg, FL
May 3rd 2007 at 12:15 am EDT
I added Obama as my friend, NOT Joe. He's a volunteer; he should have taken the full time job offered to him by the campaign staff. I will readd Obama as my friend. All of this helps with publicity. I will send the news to all of my friends, and now they can add him as well.
to Bill from Orono |
Report to Admin
By
Jo
May 2nd 2007 at 10:20 pm EDT
Personally, i have nothing against Joe Anthony and I think a lot of people here share my feelings. But to compare Joe Anthony and Eric Shinseki. Give me a break!!! If he has a contract as an employee of the campaign and has been mistreated. I'll be the first person to support him. Robert Gibbs or David Axelrod are employed by the campaign. In fact, i'll be mad at them if i found that the money that i'm giving to this campaign was wasted. Go to the FEC report for the first quarter. the biggest salary in the campaign staff was $25,000.00. This guy was asking 39,000.00 for three months (It is in the NY Times). If he wants to work as a member of the campaign staff, and he has some credentials, all he has to do is to apply. I heard that they propose it to him and he declines it. Don't pretend that you are a volunteer only to sell your trust. If you believe in something or someone, money can not buy it.
Re: to Bill from Orono |
Report to Admin
By
Matt from Knoxville, IA
May 2nd 2007 at 10:36 pm EDT
It's not about the time necessarily, it's about creating a thing, a site, where a bonifide number of grassroots supporters join together, supporting a candidate. Having your creation, your baby swallowed whole by the campaign monster, and you know who the "campaign" is. It is those ambitious throat-slitters, gunning for a position in an Obama administration, making these kind of quality decisions.
Obama needs to tame his weasels.... they are making him look bad!
Re: to Bill from Orono |
Report to Admin
By
Peter Yochum
May 2nd 2007 at 11:13 pm EDT
You're overestimating myspace by calling it a grassroots community.
It doesn't get you names, or phone numbers, or email addresses.
what it does is allow you to see people's screen names and they can drop by and leave messages like "you rock." Its primary tool is as a message center for the campaign, not as an organizing tool. There's no community there.
Further, whatever community there was, Joe retained. He gets all content and names and the Obama campaign has never contested his right to that.
The issue is does Barack own the rights to his name? Myspace and the US law says he does.
End of story. If you read the whole diary by Joe Rospars' you'll see where you're wrong.
Re: to Bill from Orono |
Report to Admin
By
Matt from Knoxville, IA
May 3rd 2007 at 1:10 pm EDT
Stealing is stealing....
Obama's campaign handled it wrong. Politics suck... all of this is a waste of time.
Re: to Bill from Orono |
Report to Admin
By
Joe from San Francisco, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 10:35 pm EDT
Barack didn't need that URL. Other candidates don't have theirs on myspace. They can still have an official site that everyone can easily find.
The law was on Barack's side, but beating a supporter with the law was ugly - and very public. What kind of person would do that?
Re: to Bill from Orono |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 12:46 pm EDT
You miss the whole myspace community if utilized effectively. I am a single mom.. I work. I have cancer. If I have time in a day to learn what is going in the world I use the internet.. available for my hours. Do not underestimate the power of networking via myspace. Joe was a professional moderator. WE all respected that. It was not like any other site. So do "we" friends come with a price... if directing our interest to be fed by what a campaign staff wants us to hear as opposed to a community outside the inner circle. YES!! Intellectual property has a price. They tried to negotiate the rights of access like any url. They took what they could not negotiate.
Tough call, but Anthony is wrong, Obama is right |
Report to Admin
By
Chad from Tucson, AZ
May 2nd 2007 at 10:22 pm EDT
I just read both sides, this post, and Anthony's comment:
Link
To me, it comes down to one thing: Anthony changed the password BEFORE the Obama campaign refused to pay, even though he was already collaborating with them on it. If Anthony could show an email where the campaign refused to pay, or could show that they refused to respond to his request for compensation, THEN I could support his position, and agree that he was right in changing the password.
However, since he changed the password, and THEN asked for money, that changes the situation entirely. Even if the campaign staffers were bullying him, and being complete jerks, he should have made a good faith effort to come to an agreement over the compensation BEFORE locking them out. If he locked them out, and THEN asked for money, then I think they were justified in seizing control of the account, since he was already collaborating with them on it.
It's also important to consider that they were already collaborating on it, and that it's the "official" "Impact" MySpace site. I think that means that it was a joint endeavor, no matter how long he had been working on it. If he changed the password on it, and THEN asked for money, the Obama campaign was justified in taking control of it.
PLUS, MySpace has offered to allow him to start a new page, and reinstate all of the friends. So, really, he's not out anything except the barackobama profile name and "Impact" status, which I think the campaign should have control of, even if he started it.
I think he could have got paid off AND not had this blow up, and everyone would have been happy. Instead, he got emotional and changed the password.
You may say that Obama's campaign SHOULD have sent him an email first explicitly asking him to change the password back, but by having MySpace take action to remove the site (he was warned), this should have been warning enough.
I think that if they had paid him off, essentially just to get the password, this DOES smell of extortion slightly - even if he was totally sincere and had years of work in the site. It's a grey area - what if he had 1 year of work on the site and 50K friends? What's that worth? What if he had 6 months and 10K friends? What's that worth? Its a slippery slope, and would have set a bad precedent for the Obama campaign to pay for access to a site, and again, the fact that they had already collaborated is key.
Tough call, but that's how I see it. He made a mistake, and had to pay for it. Obama's campaign was heavy handed, but they acted quickly in a bad situation. I agree they needed access to this site immediately, because of it's unique "official" status, and they did what they had to in order to get access to it. Too bad it makes everybody look bad. It would be good PR to still pay him the 10K he shelled out for the "Impact" profile status, but they shouldn't be obligated to.
I'm sure people can poke holes in these rambling arguments, especially since I don't even have time to proofread it. Fire away :)
-- Chad
Re: Tough call, but Anthony is wrong, Obama is right |
Report to Admin
By
Erik from Reston, VA
May 2nd 2007 at 10:44 pm EDT
Did he not have the right to change the password to *his* site? Did he not have reason to fear that Mr. Obama's staff would confiscate the site? Clearly they intended to take possession of it one way or another. Wouldn't *you* change the password of your site if someobody else knew it, intended to take it, and could just as easily lock you out of it?
Re: Tough call, but Anthony is wrong, Obama is right |
Report to Admin
By
CBC
May 2nd 2007 at 11:08 pm EDT
That's ridiculous. He gave the campaign the password in the first place. They didn't muscle it from him or steal it.
Joe Anthony's changing the password was a power play to get the money he wanted for the site--no money, no access. He had no reason except money to keep them out of the site. He welcomed their changes and factual corrections until he started to see the potential of big dollar signs.
And the explosion in # of friends was due to Barack, not to Joe Anthony. Had he never started this site, the campaign would no doubt have started one in Feb. or March and would have 160,000 members of their own by now. Due to this unfortunate turn of events, they're starting from scratch now and building up again. (But I do think they handled it without sufficient grace and respect for Joe Anthony and I'm sure they would do things differently if they could go back in time.)
Re: Tough call, but Anthony is wrong, Obama is right |
Report to Admin
By
RAH
May 3rd 2007 at 12:24 am EDT
You made a very valid and honest point. If anyone disagrees with you then they are not true supporters and are here to stir up trouble. Obama's true supporters understood the issues. The ones still complaining aren't worth commenting about.
Re: Tough call, but Anthony is wrong, Obama is right |
Report to Admin
By
Hatshepsut
May 2nd 2007 at 10:51 pm EDT
To make a long story short: MySpace policy prohibits selling a profile. Whatever we think of Joe, he violated that policy by trying to sell it. The Obama campaign did the legal thing by refusing the money. MySpace did the right thing by enforcing their policy. There are rules for a reason-If you want to live by bending the rules, then join the Bush camp!
But Joe Rospars-You did make a mistake in engaging in an informal relationship with this guy. Don't do things so casually in the future. Make sure you have your legal house in order next time.
Re: Tough call, but Anthony is wrong, Obama is right |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 3:33 pm EDT
Obama campaign should not have tried to strong hold into getting control of the site. In new net space grass roots networking.. there are few holes through that philosophy legally. To see a business sale negotiations, which would include a MySpace page, would rightfully go to the new owner with no violation of MySpace terms.
The campaign acted unethically from the beginning and then did hijack the site without consent. HHmm??
No tough call about it .... |
Report to Admin
By
Deana
May 3rd 2007 at 1:21 am EDT
"To me, it comes down to one thing: Anthony changed the password BEFORE the Obama campaign refused to pay, even though he was already collaborating with them on it." .....
**********************
Chad -- I agree with your entire assessment, and in particular, your starting sentence (above) seems to capture this issue from onset.
It seems this guy, Joe, thought he may have discovered a way to make a little more extra money for himself. Greed. What a shame.
There are many supporters out here lending their professional skills -- and time, energy -- in a variety of capacities (in our communities, states, and/or cyberworld) to help this campaign, and are not looking for personal financial compensation. Our pay will be seeing our country turned around in positive direction ... when we get our candidate elected.
But as far as this guy: I think the campaign's offering of $40K was more than generous in exchange for his maintaining a profile on myspace. Wherein the profile garnered traffic due to the name of someone else attached to it (and not just any 'someone'; an extremely well-known public figure).
Further: I don't know much about the site; but I doubt updating a profile is that labor intensive; not worthy of the financial requests he seems to have been demanding.
It's unknown if he had signed a confidentiality agreement with the campaign or not, but if he was physically not in Chicago he was functioning in essentially an uncontrolled and unmonitored capacity wherein it could have been quite dangerous to the campaign: he could have begun to attempt to solicit funds from those who contacted him via the myspace profile. And unbeknownst to the contributor and/or the campaign -- those funds could have landed in his personal account.
There are quite a few open loopholes that could have gone astray with the uncontrolled arrangement. And while I'm not suggesting he was doing anything wrong, however, it seems the sinister possibilities became evident when he secretly changed the password, and locked out the campaign staff.
And his anger re: threatening that he has lost his vote .... Something is just amuck with the guy. Overall to me it just simply demonstrates the shame of greed.
Still not sure we're getting the full picture |
Report to Admin
By
Kim
May 2nd 2007 at 10:31 pm EDT
But it sounds like we will soon. Here's a recent update from Techpresident
Link
who writes:
As for Joe Rospars lengthy post on "Our MySpace Experiment," you can read the whole thing for yourself. Most of it tracks with my own reporting on how the relationship between Anthony and the Obama new media team started out, all the way up through their initial discussions with him about possibly coming on board and working out an understanding for shared management of the site.
But what strikes me as odd about it is Rospars' claim that Anthony's "list of itemized financial requests" came unbidden, after the workload on the page exploded and Anthony cut off the campaign's password access to the site. Rospars would have you believe that Anthony was in effect extorting the campaign by witholding access, but my notes of my conversations with Obama staff, which were "on background" make clear that Anthony only produced that proposal (the $39,000 plus the $10,000 for possible advertising spending by the campaign on MySpace) at the request of Chris Hughes.
I should add here that I know Rospars a little and based on our past conversations and his general reputation among politech folks, he's a straight shooter. I don't think he's saying anything other than what he believes were the actual version of events. But what I don't know is whether Rospars was personally involved in all the details of the relationship with Anthony, or what he's written here reflects what others who were more directly involved are feeding him.
It's possible that we will soon see a clarification of this issue, since Anthony tells me that Rospars offered to let him post something on the campaign blog, or at least send in some kind of correction or clarification. "I'm going to call him or email him the things I don't agree with," Anthony told me, "and at least give him the possibility to correct that before I blog about. I'm still somewhat an Obama supporter," he concluded.
Lack of foresight |
Report to Admin
By
Steven from Littleton, MA
May 2nd 2007 at 10:54 pm EDT
All the negative publicity about the MySpace controversy can't be doing any good for Obama's campaign.
Before the campaign staff went to war against Anthony, they should have considered the possible consequences of "victory". By failing to use diplomacy to negotiate a mutually agreeable deal the Obama campaign aroused an insurgency in the blogosphere.
Re: Lack of foresight |
Report to Admin
By
Connie
May 2nd 2007 at 11:08 pm EDT
I cannot believe this blog, and I wondering for the 100th time, why Obama is even running for president when he has too put up with so much B.S.: not black enough, not experienced enough, not mean enough, and now, he doesn't want to pay his "volunteer."
I can't wait to get back to meaningful topics.
Re: Lack of foresight |
Report to Admin
By
Lorraine
May 3rd 2007 at 12:00 am EDT
Connie,
You are reading my mind. Senator Obama is getting hammered daily about the little things. He has a calling this is the ONLY reason I can see him putting himself through all this mess.
We need to discuss the issues not this situation. It's over, lets move on.
BTW, Mitt Rommey is on The Jay Leno Show.
Re: Lack of foresight |
Report to Admin
By
Gina
May 3rd 2007 at 2:38 pm EDT
He's getting hammered with the little things BECAUSE he is so good. A huge threat to the rest of them. The nature of our nation. aaaahhhh....
Re: Lack of foresight |
Report to Admin
By
Joe from San Francisco, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 10:39 pm EDT
Yeah, so what if his people were mean and pushed somebody around. I'm sure it says nothing about his character.
Re: Lack of foresight |
Report to Admin
By
Paul Kekai Manansala
May 3rd 2007 at 12:24 am EDT
>I can't wait to get back to meaningful topics.
Where do I send my invoice to the campaign ;)
when the grassroots turn to weeds |
Report to Admin
By
Liz
May 2nd 2007 at 11:07 pm EDT
My interpretation of this "he say-they say" incident: a Barack Obama enthusiast cyber-squatted on his candidate's name; the campaign, instead of asking MySpace administrators to return the "Barack Obama" URL to its rightful owner, attempted to work with the enthusiast; he became uncooperative and asked for what the campaign saw as unreasonable compensation; so the campaign claims the myspace.com/barackobama URL and the enthusiaist retains the content and the 160,000 MySpace friends.
The lesson I take away from this unfortunate incident is that not all self-identified grassroots participants understand the time, commitment, and above all sacrifice required to make a top-flight political campaign work. Sure, we all fancy ourselves being associated with a charismatic leader who could likely become the next American president. But a volunteer who actually quits his/her job and moves to another part of the country to contribute to a 12 to 21 month-long campaign in which victory is no guarantee has, I think, made the realization that his/her work is not "all about me." This cyber-squatter, his enthusiasm for Obama aside, never appreciated what would be expected of him if he was allowed to retain his candidate's MySpace URL.
In a broader perspective, none of this matters as much as, say, the Iraqi War, universal health care, global warming, the impact of globalization on U.S. jobs, door-to-door campaigning in Iowa, etc., But for now, everyone winds up with mud in their faces: the enthusiaist comes away looking like an extortionist, and the Obama campaign, whose image is about the support of the masses, appears as if its abusing a volunteer.
Re: when the grassroots turn to weeds |
Report to Admin
By
Connie
May 2nd 2007 at 11:13 pm EDT
Abusing a volunteer?! Who's going to demand payment next?
Re: when the grassroots turn to weeds |
Report to Admin
By
Liz
May 2nd 2007 at 11:33 pm EDT
I wrote that it *appears* as if the campaign is abusing a volunteer (as opposed to really exploiting someone, a la Clintonistas). My point is that once the Obama enthusiast asked for money, none of the parties involved could make a move without looking underhanded.
Re: when the grassroots turn to weeds |
Report to Admin
By
Lorraine
May 3rd 2007 at 12:03 am EDT
No the Clintonistas would have just DESTROY Mr. Anthony. They would have there handlers make up lies about him and put it to the MSM.
This poster has been removed due to objectionable or inappropriate postings
Re: when the grassroots turn to weeds |
Report to Admin
By
CBC
May 2nd 2007 at 11:29 pm EDT
Well said. Thanks.
silly silly |
Report to Admin
By
CW from Eugene
May 2nd 2007 at 11:18 pm EDT
Is this still being discussed? How ridiculous...
Am I going to see this case on Judge Judy?
Re: silly silly |
Report to Admin
By
Mark from Kent, WA
May 3rd 2007 at 12:03 am EDT
No, but you sure can expect to see it in press for a while.
The AP article going over the wire means that it will stay tracked by main media so long as new events and data come along.
It sounds like Joe is going to submit a counter point to Joe, Chris and company re: this blog post. Depending on how that is handles, depends on how much longer this stays an event.
techPresident (one of the epicenters) has already posted regarding this .. uh .. description of events.
Link
What a few of the more rabid (and rather scary in a zealot kind of way) people here are failing to recognize...
Anytime you piss on x% of the voters, you incrementally decrease your ability to win. Politics is not about right in a legal sense.. And when you cause issues that fall into discussions of what is morally right - like this - you end up with people on different sides of the fence.
Had they thought it through - or even thought out the possible backlash re: the actions they took with MySpace - they should have seen this coming. To not see it coming means they either (a) don't really get the net or (b) get it and don't mind pissing away some amount of voter sentiment over this issue.
Most can live with (a) so long as some type of addtional actions are taken to right the situation. If it is (b).. well.. Maybe they will learn for the next time they run a campaign.
They have stirred up a group of internet hardcore users, innovators and participants. Some agree with Obama, some don't (refer to slashdot, etc.) But the net-net is that this is an event that should have never happened, but protracting it certainly will not help the cause. A group of tech saavy people who are mad and on a mission can drag this out for a long, long time.
It mostly comes down to:
- Did the campaign solicit an offer from Joe? (Indications are that yes, they did.)
- If so, then why on earth would they protract this even longer with an assertion by Joe Rospars that it wasn't?
- Did the campaign make a counter offer? (And if not, why not.)
- Did the campaign even entertain the notion of assigning people to work directly with Joe to help with the load and let Joe continue his efforts? (This would jibe with a "grassroots" campaign. Taking a site to the motherland (headquarters in Chicago) does not.)
Eh. I guess all told...
Politics is still the same.
Re: silly silly |
Report to Admin
By
Mark from Kent, WA
May 3rd 2007 at 12:04 am EDT
Heh, downside of posting on the way to bed.
"It sounds like Joe is going to submit a counter point to Joe, Chris and company.."
should be:
"It sounds like Anthony is going to submit a counter point to Joe, Chris and company.."
Re: silly silly |
Report to Admin
By
CW from Eugene
May 3rd 2007 at 1:26 am EDT
The campaign had the right to take control of the username. Anthony had the right to maintain his page under a different username or to jump on in a more official capacity with the campaign. All concerned handled it in a less than optimal way. Joe Anthony was naive to this kind of situation, and both he and the official new media at HQ brought their personal attachments and egos into the issue. This kind of thing happens. It is called real life. Both sides should have been clearer about the terms of their partnership from day one. Unfortunately in this echo-chamber of the info-sphere, people are out there to find the smallest isolated episode and balloon it in to a reason to raise hell. In this case, it is to magnify this into calling bs on Obama, to call him a hypocrite. The fact is, mistakes are going to be made by imperfect people. A few mistakes are no reason to give up on continuing to work to change our politics.
For all those who want to hurt this campaign over this, they are the ones playing and perpetuating the old political games. It is pretty immature to think everything done by every person in every department of the campaign is always going to live up to the higher ideals.
I think we have wasted enough time arguing about PR.
This is another reason why PR, of any kind, is the last kind of job I would want.
Re: silly silly |
Report to Admin
By
Gina
May 3rd 2007 at 2:40 pm EDT
YES!!!! EXACTLY EXACTLY EXACTLY!!!!
Politics As Usual |
Report to Admin
By
BigMike
May 3rd 2007 at 12:59 am EDT
I am sorry to say, but this shows that Barack Obama is just "Politics As Usual."
"Anthony wrote on his MySpace blog that he was heartbroken that the Obama campaign was ``bullying'' him out of the page he built."
So Sad. And do not be surprised if this is just a foreshadowing of what an Obama presidency would be like...a lot of lip-service about how "this is your campaign," but in the end, it will just be lipservice.
If you are interested in a candidate who doesn't want to TAKE your Power, but rather, one who wants to actually GIVE you power, then please learn more about Senator Mike Gravel.
Power to the People!
Re: Politics As Usual |
Report to Admin
By
Maria from Jersey City, NJ
May 3rd 2007 at 1:09 am EDT
So you're only here to promote mike gravel and put down Obama??..Why are you fishing for support in an Obama website??...
Re: Politics As Usual |
Report to Admin
By
BigMike
May 3rd 2007 at 2:14 am EDT
Because I am afraid that Barack Obama is going to be the next Bill Clinton: intelligent, articulate, charismatic, handsome, and in the end, a faithful servant to the Powers That Be. Robert Kagan had an article about him in the Washington Post a few days ago, quoting from a speech of his on foreign policy which Kagan thought was great. Robert Kagan is a neocon.
Tonight on the Colbert Report, Senator Gravel was right on point: Obama is raking in millions from the hedge fund masters.
While I am sure Obama would do a lot of good in the White House, I am also certain that he would stop short of really empowering the People. And this myspace situation is just a preview. I am open to discussion, I welcome other points of view, but for now, I am with Mike Gravel.
If you'd rather be right than effective... |
Report to Admin
By
Liz
May 3rd 2007 at 10:05 am EDT
... then more eggroll to you. Now take a hike, troll.
so.... |
Report to Admin
By
Randy from Escondido, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 1:34 am EDT
So I'm throwing in my vote for Mark from WA as the troll of the week. In my assessment Big from MA comes in a close second but cant quite match the trollness displayed by Mark. Do I have any seconds?
Re: so.... |
Report to Admin
By
Jacqueline from Carson City, NV
May 3rd 2007 at 2:10 am EDT
Not really meaning to be a troll but I am wondering if this fred thompson is the GOD like figure the repugs are making him out to be, also the media is helping, naturaly,tehee..
Again, not a concern troll, not a troll at all, just curious, I plan on voting for Obama in the primarys and the general.
Re: so.... |
Report to Admin
By
Mark from Kent, WA
May 3rd 2007 at 12:55 pm EDT
Wewt!
I r a troll!
Let's move on |
Report to Admin
By
L. Hamilton
May 3rd 2007 at 2:24 am EDT
Outside of the blogosphere, this is truly a nonissue.
Re: Let's move on |
Report to Admin
By
BigMike
May 3rd 2007 at 2:28 am EDT
Yes, but it DOES give you a preview of what an Obama presidency would be like. A vote for Obama is a vote for More Of The Same.
Re: Let's move on |
Report to Admin
By
BigMike
May 3rd 2007 at 2:29 am EDT
Got Liberal? Support Mike Gravel!!!
Re: Let's move on |
Report to Admin
By
L. Hamilton
May 3rd 2007 at 2:34 am EDT
What kind of idealist are you that this minor little myspace dustup is *so* disillusioning that you are *so* disheartened about Obama's presidency?
Please. If this is how you choose your politics, please vote elsewhere.
Re: Let's move on |
Report to Admin
By
L. Hamilton
May 3rd 2007 at 2:37 am EDT
Feel free to waste your vote on Mike Gravel. The rest of us have real-world problems to tend to.
Re: Let's move on |
Report to Admin
By
BigMike
May 3rd 2007 at 2:54 am EDT
A vote for Mike Gravel isn't a "wasted" vote.
A vote for Obama is a wasted vote. When you vote for a politician, you hand your power over to them. And they go off and faithfully serve their $$$ masters.
That's what Bill Clinton did, and that is what Obama is poised to do.
Mike Gravel wants to let YOU be the lawmaker. With Direct Democracy.
Please, don't call me an idealist. I am a realist. As in, I am really thinking about how things SHOULD be, and I am picking the candidate who comes closest to that.
Look, the Dems in Washington have failed us...Barack included. If Barack gets elected, you can expect More Of The Same.
The challenges we face are too great--we can't simply get a little bit better. We need a transformation in government, a transfer of Power to the People. And in 2008, Mike Gravel will make that happen!!!
Re: Let's move on |
Report to Admin
By
L. Hamilton
May 3rd 2007 at 3:02 am EDT
Explain to me exactly how your direct democracy works? You're saying that Mike Gravel will be able to please and appease each and every person in this country? Again, please.
Obama's campaign made a choice based on the law. Public figures have the right to have control over their own image. Period. We have laws in this country. Are you saying that Gravel is not going to make decisions based on laws?
Re: Let's move on |
Report to Admin
By
CW from Eugene
May 3rd 2007 at 3:23 am EDT
Direct democracy may work on the local level of small communities, but for most purposes it will not work at the level of the federal government which is responsible for issues affecting 300 million people. Though maybe more complex than it needs to be because of some of the undesirable aspects of our system as it has come to function (i.e. pork), there is some necessary complexity involved in anything as large as the United States of America that means you need to have representatives devoted full time to weighing the legislation. Most people simply do not have the time to inform themselves enough. I mean, how many people do you know (and is this a representative sample of the general voting population) who even regularly watch C-Span? Representative democracy also provides checks on the tyranny of the masses that is a danger with direct democracy in any sizeable political unit. Elected officials take input from their constituents and exercise their judgment in order to represent those interests and the interests of the country as a whole (at least ideally). The kind of political influence that causes the real situation to be less than ideal (lobbyist access, institutionalized bribery in all its forms) is just the kind of thing that can restore this system to the way it was meant to function. Obama is the only candidate with a credible record of working for the necessary reforms who has enough pragmatism to make it there to push for them as President. He is not taking money from lobbyists. Many of the people here feel, I think rightly, that his campaign is taking a great deal of input from our activities online and at public events. This is why he has waited before detailing policy proposals, because he is listening and learning from both the people at large and from those with expertise in fields relevant to the particular policy area. Our efforts do matter. If a couple people have unfortunate experiences which are upsetting (and maybe they are upset because they let their egos get in the way of the larger movement), then that is regrettable, but it is far from representative of what Obama and this campaign are about.
Re: Let's move on |
Report to Admin
By
CW from Eugene
May 3rd 2007 at 3:25 am EDT
Sorry, rushed to post without re-reading again:
Error: The kind of political influence that causes the real situation to be less than ideal (lobbyist access, institutionalized bribery in all its forms) is just the kind of thing that can restore this system to the way it was meant to function.
This should read: The kind of political influence that causes the real situation to be less than ideal (lobbyist access, institutionalized bribery in all its forms) is just the kind of thing that needs to be done away with to restore this system to the way it was meant to function.
Re: Let's move on |
Report to Admin
By
CW from Eugene
May 3rd 2007 at 6:27 am EDT
Aww, no one took my comment as a lead in to discussing something of substance...I feel my efforts on behalf of this campaign are not appreciated. : (
Heh heh : )
Gravel = Nader in '00 general |
Report to Admin
By
Deana
May 3rd 2007 at 3:35 am EDT
Look here 'Big' --
Mike Gravel cannot win the primary. If he stays in this race until the end the primary the only function he will have, by being extreme left, is taking votes AWAY from the most leftist (Obama) of the candidates who CAN win.
If the voters are ignorant enough Gravel will play the function that Nader in the '00 general election (pulling votes away from Gore).
Anyone who votes FOR Gravel and/or Kuccinich instead of Obama would essentially be casting a vote for HRC. HRC: a person who still can't apologize and admit she made a mistake in voting to go to war with Iraq.
So please take your Mike Gravel and/or Dave Kuccinich schtick elsewhere and stick it.
Setting bad precedent.... |
Report to Admin
By
'Wale
May 3rd 2007 at 2:50 am EDT
I don't care how much time Joe Anthony devoted to his Barack Obama webpage on my space. The subject of money changing hands should never have been brought up. I wish a legal binding document had been introduced earlier on in the process, then we could have avoided this trivial mess.
Frankly there's a lot we still don't know:
1) Did the Obama campaign offer a one time fee to Joe Anthony prior to Joe asking for 39K? If yes then Joe should offer proof and Obama's camp might need to pay him.
2) Did Joe Anthony freeze (change the MySpace password) the Obama campaign out before making his claim? If Yes then this reeks of extortion and Joe (and all of us) needs to move one, there are more serious (Iraq, healthcare) issues to deal with.....
Obama's campaign is embroiled in this situation chiefly as a result of the freedoms they grant their volunteers. HRC and Edwards campaigns control all blog content on their sites. No room for trolls (like you sometimes find on Obama's site).
And lastly, If I decided to bill Obama for all the volunteer work I've done (and God knows I have a FULLTIME job too), the invoice will probably run somewhere in the thousands - I've gotten over 100 friends and family to switch their allegiance to Obama from other candidates (mainly Clinton), bought his books and given them out to inform others, raised over $5000 for the campaign through various means and also helped to organize events.
What sort of precedent would it set if the campaign decided to cave in and pay Joe (not to mention that the campaign had every right under MySpace rules to retrieve their rightful URL) ? Would that mean that they'd have to pay the people over at RUNOBAMA.com or DRAFTOBAMA.com, after all those guys built websites from the ground up dedicated to Obama, much more difficult to do than moderating a page on MySpace, and it is arguable that they (RUNOBAMA delivered a petition of over 12000 names to Obama in New Hampshire back in December. This played an important role in convincing Barack to run) had more to do with Obama deciding to run than anyone else alive. The guy that created 1 million strong Facebook group (which has over 300,000 friends) for Barack never asked for money either.
I simply believe that paying Joe Anthony for his commendable work would have been a mistake and set bad precedent, not only for Obama past/present/future online volunteers, but for online political volunteering in general. A clear line has to be drawn. If you choose to be a volunteer (even if your volunteering efforts have as much impact as Joe's Obama MySpace page) then understand that your efforts are going to be free. Period.
Re: Setting bad precedent.... |
Report to Admin
By
L. Hamilton
May 3rd 2007 at 2:59 am EDT
Exactly. Why is it that just because he was a *successful* volunteer that puts him in a category of being entitled to ask for money? And don't forget he was a volunteer.
Don't all volunteers aim to be successful?
If I have a successful fundraiser for Obama where I raise a lot of money, does that entitle me to turn around and then ask for a percentage of the profit? Absolutely not. Especially if there were no binding agreement from the campaign before I organized the event.
The campaign did right by him when they offered him a job. He rejected that offer. They didn't owe him anything else. What transpired after that I see it as a shakedown attempt that backfired.
Re: Setting bad precedent.... |
Report to Admin
By
Randy from Escondido, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 3:09 am EDT
This whole thing is fricking stupid and i honestly don't think the American people give a damn. What gets on my nerves are the trolls that come over here trying to change votes. I think these folks are either republicans or from the Clinton / Edwards camps. It's not going to work but it is getting on my nerves. They're so transparent it's pathetic. This is exactly the kind of politics Barack wants to change. These folks think it's just part of politics as usual and they know so much. We're going to show them it doesn't have to be.
Re: Setting bad precedent.... |
Report to Admin
By
L. Hamilton
May 3rd 2007 at 3:20 am EDT
If anything I think the campaign should gain some votes from this. It shows that the Obama campaign has some COMMON SENSE, something that has been sorely missing from our political discussion for some time.
Re: Setting bad precedent.... |
Report to Admin
By
Novlette, Todos Somos Americanos!
May 3rd 2007 at 8:18 am EDT
THANK YOU!
You have laid out my thoughts exactly!! It does not matter how much time he spent on this he was a VOLUNTEER!!
All VOLUNTEERS offer something of value to this campaign. whether that something is low-tech or high-tech.
Our purpose is to elect someone to a position where he could have a lasting, positive impact on our country.
The vast majority of Obama supporters understand this. This too shall pass.
Missy
Re: Setting bad precedent.... |
Report to Admin
By
Joe from San Francisco, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 10:45 pm EDT
Fine, so don't pay him anything. But don't steal his site. The campaign could have put up a new site and had it be the most visited Obama profile on myspace within a few months. That would have been the honest way to do it. I guess it was easier to take it from Joe. Not a very classy move.
This poster has been removed due to objectionable or inappropriate postings
I'd like to suggest a solution |
Report to Admin
By
Ming
May 3rd 2007 at 3:37 am EDT
Dear Joe R.,
I'd like to suggest a solution to the myspace situation. It seems to me that the myspace/barackobama URL could direct people to an "in between" page, that allowed people to "click here for the original page Joe Anthony created in support of Senator Obama" and "click here for the Obama campaign's new and official myspace page." I think it would also be nice to acknowledge the tremendous efforts of Joe Anthony in support of Obama over the past two years, and for the campaign to say that it hopes that Joe A's friends will continue to be actively engaged in their community on his page as well as join the official campaign page.
And if, on that "click here" page, Joe A and the campaign could say they both agree that Joe should retain the contents and the friends of the page he has worked so hard on, and that the campaign should have control and responsibility for the official campaign myspace site, I think that would be nice.
Oh, and I'd like 50 bucks for submitting this idea. :D just kidding. Seriously, I think things got a little heated there, but ultimately we're all on the same side, and there's room for a really nice way forward that takes care of all parties.
Move on... |
Report to Admin
By
yyoo
May 3rd 2007 at 3:38 am EDT
Apologize. Give the guy what he wants. Move on. This promises to be a distraction from Obama's message and momemtum. Perhaps the other guy was entirely in the wrong. But this is a battle that should have never been fought in the first place. There are much bigger battles out there, including a war that our country should have never fought in the first place.
If Mr. Obama's campaign can't retreat from this meaningless battle, can any of us ask even more of Mr. Bush--that he retreat from his godforsaken war?
Re: Move on... |
Report to Admin
By
Gina
May 3rd 2007 at 2:46 pm EDT
No, he should not just buy him off. That's just what we DON'T need in our President...
Re: Move on... |
Report to Admin
By
yyoo
May 3rd 2007 at 4:31 pm EDT
They wouldn't be buying him off. They would be buying his "friends" list. They buy such contact lists all the time. And if they don't like the asking price, why not make a counteroffer?
Re: Move on... |
Report to Admin
By
Peter Yochum
May 4th 2007 at 1:52 am EDT
You can't buy or sell friends list.
First of all, that is blatantly against myspace's terms of service
Not that it matters. The friends list is only myspace aliases. It doesn't get you any e-mails, real names, phone numbers.
Its useless to the campaign. Thats why they wouldn't have paid 39k for it even if they were allowed to.
Re: Move on... |
Report to Admin
By
yyoo
May 3rd 2007 at 4:31 pm EDT
They wouldn't be buying him off. They would be buying his "friends" list. They buy such contact lists all the time. And if they don't like the asking price, why not make a counteroffer?
hehe |
Report to Admin
By
Randy from Escondido, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 3:46 am EDT
Just to add a little funniness to this blog,
Here's a youtube link to Will Farrell playing George Bush talking about global warming. The first time I saw it it made me cry in laughter. Many of u may have alrdy seen this but if u haven't check it out.
Link
Totally absurd |
Report to Admin
By
Audrey from New York, NY
May 3rd 2007 at 3:50 am EDT
I cannot believe this became a major news story. It's in today's Washington Post, NY Times and Fox News and by the end of the day, it will be picked up by everyone.
Who the hell is running Obama's campaign? After, and only after it becomes MSM news, Obama picks up the phone and calls Joe Anthony? And that is considered sufficient?
Obama is running for President of the United States. Good Lord!
Re: Totally absurd |
Report to Admin
By
Joeytj
May 3rd 2007 at 4:34 am EDT
I dont think he called him, cause the media were suddenly awakening to the story, but because Obama himself probably only got told or new about this today. He has said that he gets his news mostly like the rest of us, and a lot of what his campaign has done he didn't know about after only a while. So yeah, Obama is a busy man.
Re: Totally absurd |
Report to Admin
By
Vasily from Washington, DC
May 3rd 2007 at 3:10 pm EDT
Unfortunitely, the media is taking this as an opportunity to blame Obama personally for this screw-up (with headlines such as, "That's MySpace: Obama takes control of popular Web page from former supporter"). He is a busy man, and this story is especially vapid, but that is not how campaign professionals should approach it. This was handled very poorly. If you're going to run a machine campaign, run it with aplomb like the Clintonistas. If you're going to go above the fray, then you should really think about how to treat people with the proper respect. Pick a strategy and execute it faithfully...but before you do, fire your incompetent and unresponsive new media team.
Re: Totally absurd |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 1:48 pm EDT
Not only is the media blaming Obama. Obama is accountable for bad negotations of administering his campaign. I blame Obama. Fix it.
Re: Totally absurd |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 1:48 pm EDT
Not only is the media blaming Obama. Obama is accountable for bad negotations of administering his campaign. I blame Obama. Fix it.
fix it |
Report to Admin
By
Brianna from Vancouver, WA
May 3rd 2007 at 4:52 am EDT
Here the bottom line... you need to fix this problems quickly. The amount of people that Joe has access to is enormous. This is a problem because a large majority of Americans (myspace users included) tend to make snap judgments on what they hear or read. I can see people equating Obama and his campaign as being "bullies" as it has been said. I don't agree entirely, but others may. There are other people that have taken the side of Obama and claim that Joe was being greedy...but what does that matter? He doesn't have anything to lose. He is not running for president. The only thing that should matter is preserving votes from the people that feel Joe was slighted. Save face and say your sorry. Work something out. Its bad press and its reaching over 160,000 people.
Re: fix it |
Report to Admin
By
KO
May 6th 2007 at 12:51 pm EDT
160K + plus my 800..and so on. Because they will know the true story of bad negotiations in a campaign.
an even worse kind of swindle |
Report to Admin
By
Kristin from Inglewood, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 5:10 am EDT
Has anybody thought that perhaps Joe wasn't in it for the 39 thousand dollars but was rather a plant from some republican hate group who set out to smear Obama and take him out of the race?
Re: an even worse kind of swindle |
Report to Admin
By
CW from Eugene
May 3rd 2007 at 6:25 am EDT
You know...umm...probably not. Though I don't put much past the repugnantans. I think what we had here was a failure to communicate....
Shame on you Obama campaign. |
Report to Admin
By
Gray
May 3rd 2007 at 6:28 am EDT
If you were in the White House would you step all over people, including your fiends, the way you stepped over Joe Anthony?
You arrogant bastards, what Anthony asked for was more that reasonable.
Forget Obama, go Clinton!
This poster has been removed due to objectionable or inappropriate postings
Contest |
Report to Admin
By
Strong Heart
May 3rd 2007 at 6:43 am EDT
Can we end this American Ego Contest and get back to the Fidelity for Change!!!
obama and hillary. |
Report to Admin
By
Kevin from Indio, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 6:54 am EDT
look. you and hillary are the front runners. so how about teaming up publicly. it might not make howard dean a happy camper... but that might get you gop money and votes. campaign together already. you don't have to play who the dominant partner is yet.... in fact... you can make a joke about it... something like... we're waiting until the primaries are over to see who is on top.
in the meantime.... your campaigners aren't trying to off one another, you have access to each other's money machines... and in areas where one's campaign message isn't as strong... tailor the other's so it will be. serious. your cooperation will rout the other dems and will serve to fire a salvo straight across the bow of the gop's battleship. they'll have to stop a juggernaut with 2 years of campaigning behind it instead of one with 9 months of campaigning. this means that posts, news articles, websites, advertising, posters, handbills, etc. will all be maximized and debts can be consolidated... the gop will be tooth and nail before giuliani takes the lead and gop attacks on him will be fresh in people's mind. did i tell yah the gop is throwin' this one? you know i did. BUT, you folks will have to be crowd-pleasers or we'll whomp the sh|t out of you in 2012. :)
New topics, anyone? |
Report to Admin
By
CW from Eugene
May 3rd 2007 at 7:06 am EDT
Sam or someone PLEASE post some new, issue-relevant topics to push this one down the page and get people discussing something relevant!
Lordy!
Re: New topics, anyone? |
Report to Admin
By
rich
May 3rd 2007 at 8:35 am EDT
CW -
I second that.
This whole issue reminds me of the analogy of the tail (ie. volunteer Joe who suddenly started seeing $s) trying to wag the dog (Obama campaign).
There's the first repub televised debate tonight.
For starters, just on first impressions, what's the difference between the group of repubs running for prez, versus the dems ?
Well, all the repub candidates are white males ?
What does that say about the repub party in 2007 ?
Re: New topics, anyone? |
Report to Admin
By
Kevin from Indio, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 9:59 am EDT
it says the gop isn't trying to hard. its the dems turn in the dunk tank.
cheers!
Happy Birthday Pete |
Report to Admin
By
Strong Heart
May 3rd 2007 at 7:19 am EDT
If I Had A Hammer
words and music by Lee Hays and Pete Seeger
If I had a hammer
I'd hammer in the morning
I'd hammer in the evening
All over this land
I'd hammer out danger
I'd hammer out a warning
I'd hammer out love between my brothers and my sisters
All over this land
If I had a bell
I'd ring it in the morning
I'd ring it in the evening
All over this land
I'd ring out danger
I'd ring out a warning
I'd ring out love between my brothers and my sisters
All over this land
If I had a song
I'd sing it in the morning
I'd sing it in the evening
All over this land
I'd sing out danger
I'd sing out a warning
I'd sing out love between my brothers and my sisters
All over this land
Well I've got a hammer
And I've got a bell
And I've got a song to sing
All over this land
It's the hammer of justice
It's the bell of freedom
It's the song about love between my brothers and my sisters
All over this land
There are no questions... |
Report to Admin
By
Rachel from Columbia, SC
May 3rd 2007 at 7:38 am EDT
But I certainly have a few comments to make.
The first being, what a sleazy thing to do. You stole the guy's work. You can attempt to justify it all you want, but when it comes down to it you've robbed him.
My second comment: Obama has lost my vote over this fiasco. I decided to vote for him because he seemed "different" and more "honest" than the usual run of the mill scumbags set before us. Guess people aren't always what they seem...
And a peace of advice for you, Obama's appeal is largely to young voters. And young voters are media and internet savvy. Issues like this are important to us, they resonate with us. This issue could lose you a lot of the younger demographic. Especially since there are newspapers reporting it and who knows how many people blogging about it.
So do the right thing. Pay the man for his work, do the right thing and maybe, just maybe you can keep pushing the "moral high ground" image.
Please forgive all the quotation marks. It's as close as you can get to biting sarcasm when typing.
Re: There are no questions... |
Report to Admin
By
Rachel from Columbia, SC
May 3rd 2007 at 8:13 am EDT
Okay.
After a bit more research into this issue I'm less ticked off. (Plus I realized I made several spelling/grammar errors in my previous post, which tells me I was really t'd off)
However, I still think the site was wrong and this will damage their stance as being for the little guy.
Plus some of the Obama supporters are really freaking me out. I'll probably end up still voting for the guy (because honestly, he's the lesser of the evils). I have to say, as someone who worked for a while in PR and marketing, they need to fix this puppy. It's time to hand over the cash or the URL. Whether they're right or not they need to do one of the other just to placate the public. Obama will come out smelling like roses if he just hands over the cash or the URL.
Re: There are no questions... |
Report to Admin
By
CW from Eugene
May 3rd 2007 at 8:27 am EDT
Yeah, some of the people on here are being quite harsh in either direction. I saw this before school yesterday and wisely decided to wait until after school to make any conclusions...rumors travel fast online while the facts lag behind. At least online we get to develop our own filters rather than having someone else strain it down to insipid pablum for us...but if we don't make that effort then we become cogs in a insidious rumor mill that puts the checkout aisle rags to shame...
Generalissimo |
Report to Admin
By
Strong Heart
May 3rd 2007 at 8:32 am EDT
Generalissimo Bush says, “I’m the Commander Guy”. I say he’s the Master of Disaster!!!
The Beauty of Obama |
Report to Admin
By
alex
May 3rd 2007 at 9:04 am EDT
The willingness to believe
Two days of angst and the beauty of Obama
Read more
Link
Lost my vote |
Report to Admin
By
David from White Plains, NY
May 3rd 2007 at 9:08 am EDT
You have no idea how many votes you have lost because of this! Certainly mine. Good luck out there.
waiting for a new topic |
Report to Admin
By
rich
May 3rd 2007 at 9:33 am EDT
Just hitting the blog file tab on this community blog to see if another topic comes up to replace this one.
Re: waiting for a new topic |
Report to Admin
By
YesWeCan Carol
May 3rd 2007 at 9:51 am EDT
I'm neither young nor a devoted blogger. I can't believe anyone would quarrel, haggle or cast ill-hearted criticisms over a cyberspace issue. Take a look around at REALITY (not reality TV). Get busy being engaged in changing YOUR COUNTRY.
It sounds like this Joe Anthony character can become the next Anna Nicole Smith. I'd like to see a thread run this long on universal healthcare, the oil war, homelessness, veterans' affairs, Darfur, Homeland Security - REAL ISSUES.
Re: waiting for a new topic |
Report to Admin
By
rich
May 3rd 2007 at 9:59 am EDT
Carol -
Amen.
Re: waiting for a new topic |
Report to Admin
By
Julee
May 3rd 2007 at 10:01 am EDT
Carol,
Avail yourself of the information before you marginalize this. This guy spent hours of his own time developing something that the campaign used to thei highest extent, then came in and took away...I think all of the 140,000 people who joined the guy's site are not insignificant in a campaign that claims to be "Your campaign"...that is what the Senator promises, so his staff should reflect that in the way they treat their volunteers.
Homeland security and the Bush disaster is not going to be remedied if this Obama campaign falls apart...a "top-down" approach does not work. 140,000 people are A LOT of people...and maybe you were not part of it, but those of us (not reality TV show watchers...I resent that) who became involved that way, are concerned. I am a middle aged professional, lest you think you are talking down to some community of teenagers.
Re: waiting for a new topic |
Report to Admin
By
rich
May 3rd 2007 at 10:20 am EDT
Yes, leave it at that.
Just hitting the blog file tab on this community blog to see if another topic comes up to replace this one.
What's on tap today ?
It's National Prayer Day and tonight is the first televised debate amongst the repub candidates.
I wish I could see it but I'm working my second job in the evening.
I have volunteered on this campaign and in the past with the Howard Dean campaign and others. It was time and effort well spent on my part IMO and I wasn't expecting anything personally in return (compensation, a job, etc.).
My wife, who's a professional just like me, took time to write a letter to President Bush regarding the tragedy in Darfur, asking if he could put pressure on China to stop trading with Sudan, and if not, to stress the point that the U.S. olympic atheletes might boycott the summer 2008 Olympic games that are to be held in China.
I did not particularly like writing the letter but in the interest of the greater good of trying to help the situation for the Darfur people of Sudan, I swallowed my pride and my feelings about Bush and helped my wife with input of the letter and mailed it.
Sometimes "it takes a village" to get something accomplished and not everyone is going to particularly like all the means to the end.
Ok, if I didn't make any sense with all of this, I apologize. I was just hoping that all affected parties in this MySpace issue would just take a step back and try to resolve their differences.
As for me and my wife, we did not get interested in Obama '08 campaign through MySpace.
Re: waiting for a new topic |
Report to Admin
By
rich
May 3rd 2007 at 11:18 am EDT
I've just been hitting the blog file tab on this community blog to see if another topic comes up to replace this one.
and now there is a new topic (open letter to DNC Chairman Howard Dean)
I'm glad for the new topic
Re: waiting for a new topic |
Report to Admin
By
Rachel from Columbia, SC
May 3rd 2007 at 8:36 pm EDT
"I'm neither young nor a devoted blogger. I can't believe anyone would quarrel, haggle or cast ill-hearted criticisms over a cyberspace issue. Take a look around at REALITY (not reality TV). Get busy being engaged in changing YOUR COUNTRY."
A person's online behavior is a decent indicator of their personality and attitude. Just because you don't understand it's importance doesn't mean others don't. The internet, whether you can accept it or not, is REALITY. It's the greatest tool for unfettered, honest communication in the world. If someone behaves in an ethically ambiguous way online, it makes you think they would do so in "reality".
This is very important. You really need to do some research and understand exactly how important the internet is right now. Have you been living under a rock for the past 15 years?
The internet allows EVERYONE to have a voice. For someone like Obama, who claims to be for the little guy, actions like this are not helping his cause.
myspace and big time politics |
Report to Admin
By
Julee
May 3rd 2007 at 9:48 am EDT
I am a volunteer for the campaign. I first came on board because I joined Joe's "unofficial fan site", which was the appropriate tag name for Joe, given the "Myspace" rules. It was never an "official" site. That is what this site is for.
I heard of the first New Hampshire town hall meeting because of one of Joe's posts. I attended that meeting and at that meeting I signed up to volunteer. I am just ONE person. I have donated a lot of my $$ to attend fundraisers and was planning to canvass in NH next week.
I am very discouraged by the way Scott Goodstein treated Joe Anthony, who apparently spent hours of his time trying to work with the Obama campaign to maintain the site to their liking...even though it was an unofficial site. It generated LOTS of support and networked a lot of people, while under Joe's care, most of whom I am guessing think that this stinks.
THE BOTTOM LINE: YOU (the campaign) should have hired this guy to maintain this "unofficial fan site" to your liking, under a signed contract that stated some "do's and dont's" for Joe Anthony to abide by.
BAD NEWS ALL AROUND. I have volunteered for campaigns before, and this approach is not good. I agree with a previous thread calling it a "top-down" approach...I am very disappointed.
Re: myspace and big time politics |
Report to Admin
By
YesWeCan Carol
May 3rd 2007 at 9:58 am EDT
Would you be happier voting for Joe as a write-in candidate? It sounds like you have more loyalty to him at this point.
Re: myspace and big time politics |
Report to Admin
By
Julee
May 3rd 2007 at 10:06 am EDT
Clearly you do not blog much, because your posts are insulting. Everyone should be able to express their concern about the way the campaign has handled a strong devotee and member of the Obama grassroots community.
I do not need to be insulted by being asked if I want to vote for person...you present yourself in a small-minded manner...I am guessing you do not see that. I can be concerned about this, and continue to "work toward changing my country" all at the same time. Your generalizations are insulting. But, we share support for Obama, so lets leave it at that. OK?
Re: myspace and big time politics |
Report to Admin
By
YesWeCan Carol
May 3rd 2007 at 10:28 am EDT
Julee - I'm glad to learn "we share support for Obama." I trust that Barack's campaign staff arrived at a decision that was in the best interest of the larger-scale effort towards securing the Presidency in '08. If I were truly "small-minded", I wouldn't be a volunteer for Obama.
Re: myspace and big time politics |
Report to Admin
By
Julee
May 3rd 2007 at 11:12 am EDT
"If I were truly "small-minded", I wouldn't be a volunteer for Obama."
That's true too!
Re: myspace and big time politics |
Report to Admin
By
rich
May 3rd 2007 at 11:17 am EDT
I've just been hitting the blog file tab on this community blog to see if another topic comes up to replace this one.
and now there is a new topic (open letter to DNC Chairman Howard Dean)
I'm glad for the new topic
You did a bad thing to your MySpace friends |
Report to Admin
By
John from San Francisco, CA
May 3rd 2007 at 10:07 am EDT
"The community of the 160,000 still exists, and we've made sure that MySpace will let Joe have access to the community he helped build."
How generous of you and Rupert Murdoch's News Corp.
This sounds like a lot of spin to this journalism professor. The story may blow over but part of that community will remain disapointed at the way this was handled. We don't need another selfish administration in office.
Re: You did a bad thing to your MySpace friends |
Report to Admin
By
L. Hamilton
May 3rd 2007 at 10:17 am EDT
I hope that soon there will be another blog post about rising infant mortality rates in the black community; the best way to pull out of Iraq with the least amount of human misery; how we can compassionately yet fairly solve the illegal immigration issue, things that truly matter to the American people.
Whether Joe Anthony got paid for his volunteer work is of no consequence to me.
I move that all reasonable people stop responding to this blog. I am officially taking myself off this issue.
Let's leave it to die a trollish death.
Re: You did a bad thing to your MySpace friends |
Report to Admin
By
Julee
May 3rd 2007 at 10:23 am EDT
John,
I agree. It is not trivial as some have suggested. It speaks to the philosophy of respecting the "little guy". I will not change my support for Obama, but I do think there is great need for the Senator to know how so many of his supporters feel about this issue...so that this type of thing does not happen again. He will need to let his highly paid consultants know that the grass roots are to be RESPECTED and not just USED.
I am guessing he does care about this issue, but like so many political candidates...the "handlers" always screw often up!
Joe Anthony was probably more valuable |
Report to Admin
By
Justin
May 3rd 2007 at 10:22 am EDT
than many of the beltway "advisors" (with losing records no less) this campaign will waste millions on. Unnecessarily alienating the net-activists by discounting the value of their work and support is an extremely bad idea if this campaign wants to win.
Re: Joe Anthony was probably more valuable |
Report to Admin
By
Julee
May 3rd 2007 at 10:25 am EDT
I agree.
SHOCKED |
Report to Admin
By
Jennifer
May 3rd 2007 at 10:28 am EDT
I was a little surprised this morning to look at my friends list and see no picture of Barack Obama and a ? as the name!!!! I hadn't been paying any attention to the whole strife between Mr. Anthony and the campaign I guess. I'll admit that I'm a bit torn. I would never NOT be a Barack Obama supporter, but I looked through some blogs on Joe's personal page and on the ? page and there are a lot of pissed off people - some who are now vowing to support everyone from Clinton to Gravel!!! I am just really concerned on how this is going to effect the campaign.
Netroots is a whole new ballpark. I read a posting somewhere earlier today that I'll paraphrase about that you if you don't start with total control of something its better to have no control, because your friends will support you until you start telling them what to say about you! Oh - so true! I think that's what this is really about - a campaign that obviously wants to control their candidates image 100%. In a TRUE GRASSROOTS campaign utilizing the internet, that's just not possible. And its also OK!!! We don't want someone who is overmanaged, glossed over. And the whole thing about - what if someone posts a crude comment while Joe's at work, I believe the controls were set so all comments had to be preapproved - so that never would have happened!
Barack Obama needs to apologize, people on the net are very forgiving people and I think that's really all it would take - that and a vow to not continue to micromanage!
today's question |
Report to Admin
By
rich
May 3rd 2007 at 10:39 am EDT
Do egos trump issues in a campaign ?
Re: today's question |
Report to Admin
By
clsez
May 3rd 2007 at 11:08 am EDT
We all know that Obama probably delegated this negotiation to his team who served him so terribly. Just like Rumsfeld had to go, Obama, someone has take responsibility. You also must put out a net-release that aligns your action on this with what you say you hold dear. There were definitely better ways to handle this situation with your core constituents no matter who was aggrieved because as you well know, perception can many times quite sufficiently fill the vacuum created by greyzone facts. Couldn't the negotiations have taken longer, with enough input from the major blog owners? Couldn't this have come to a head after truly exhaustive attempts that would have clearly put most on your side of the argument? If you do not understand the importance of this, then I would have to wonder. Do not take too long either. This should be instinctive on your part if you claim to understand why these young people follow you. We do not want to perceive arrogance on your side. There is enough of that out there. Get up ahead of this and reassure the energized folk who are at liberty to see this in anyway they want to. Even 50/50 odds are not what you want here as other candidates are nipping at your heels. There is still a long time to go but you cannot conjure up what the effects of this will be down the road or what other surprises await you. The price is small.
Re: today's question |
Report to Admin
By
rich
May 3rd 2007 at 11:16 am EDT
I've just been hitting the blog file tab on this community blog to see if another topic comes up to replace this one.
and now there is a new topic (open letter to DNC Chairman Howard Dean)
I'm glad for the new topic
Re: today's question |
Report to Admin
By
monica
May 3rd 2007 at 11:27 am EDT
AMEN!
An Honest Open Letter To Joe Anthony |
Report to Admin
By
Ehi Wiseman Eromosele
May 3rd 2007 at 11:02 am EDT
An Honest Open Letter To Joe Anthony
Joe, I am not sure exactly what your intention is.
What exactly is it that you are after?
Now on your site you claim you have been given access back to the site as a gesture of goodwill yet it seems you still are not satisfied.
I have volunteered for my church for over 10 years and I would never dream of asking for compensation for my time. I have helped build, paint and restore my church and I would never seek compensation.
If you truly believe in Barack Obama's message then I am sure you will do the right thing rather than try to harm Barack Obama's campaing which is exactly what you are doing.
You are indeed a very intelligent man and I am sure you are indeed aware of what you are doing and how this is all been played out in the media.
You were offered a full time job and you were also working in conjuction with the campaign initially.
I am not sure why you locked them out when you were quite happy to give them access in the first place?
As you have asked for our advice my advice would be that you do the honourable thing and hand over the url to Barack Obama because as you are well aware Barack Obama has the rights to his name.
Also may i remind you that you are in violation of myspace terms and conditions because you had used Barack Obama's details such as photos, etc initially without Barack Obama's consent because as you said earlier you started the site without out the knowledge of Barack Obama.
FYI: Below is part of Myspace Terms and Conditions as copied and pasted from Myspace and please pay attention to item 14 and you will see you are in violation of the terms already and that is why myspace had the right to shut you out of Barack Obama name profile and I cant see how that can be called bullying.
Implementing the law and the rights of an individual is not bullying just the same way if some one was to use your photos and details with out your consent you have a right to ask them to stop. Surely that is not bullying and why should Barack Obama be viewed differently because he is running for president. In my opinion that is taking advantage of Barack Obama because he is a public figure.
In my opinion you are promoting a double standard because it is Barack Obama and if someone was to do the same to you, I am sure you would agree you have the rights to your name and content and if not then you do not believe in the freedom, privacy and individual rights of free citizens
You said you will post all comments as long as it is not offensive.
I hope you are sincere when you made that statement and I look forward to hearing from you and how you respond. Thank you
Ehi Wiseman
My Space Terms & Conditions
8. Content/Activity Prohibited. The following is a partial list of the kind of Content that is illegal or prohibited to post on or through the MySpace Services. MySpace.com reserves the right to investigate and take appropriate legal action against anyone who, in MySpace.com's sole discretion, violates this provision, including without limitation, removing the offending communication from the MySpace Services and terminating the Membership of such violators. Prohibited Content includes, but is not limited to Content that, in the sole discretion of MySpace.com:
1. is patently offensive and promotes racism, bigotry, hatred or physical harm of any kind against any group or individual;
2. harasses or advocates harassment of another person;
3. exploits people in a sexual or violent manner;
4. contains nudity, violence, or offensive subject matter or contains a link to an adult website;
5. solicits personal information from anyone under 18;
6. provides any telephone numbers, street addresses, last names, URLs or email addresses;
7. promotes information that you know is false or misleading or promotes illegal activities or conduct that is abusive, threatening, obscene, defamatory or libelous;
8. promotes an illegal or unauthorized copy of another person's copyrighted work, such as providing pirated computer programs or links to them, providing information to circumvent manufacture-installed copy-protect devices, or providing pirated music or links to pirated music files;
9. involves the transmission of "junk mail," "chain letters," or unsolicited mass mailing, instant messaging, "spimming," or "spamming";
10. contains restricted or password only access pages or hidden pages or images (those not linked to or from another accessible page);
11. furthers or promotes any criminal activity or enterprise or provides instructional information about illegal activities including, but not limited to making or buying illegal weapons, violating someone's privacy, or providing or creating computer viruses;
12. solicits passwords or personal identifying information for commercial or unlawful purposes from other Users;
13. involves commercial activities and/or sales without our prior written consent such as contests, sweepstakes, barter, advertising, or pyramid schemes;
14. includes a photograph of another person that you have posted without that person's consent; or
15. for band and filmmaker profiles, uses sexually suggestive imagery or any other unfair, misleading or deceptive Content intended to draw traffic to the profile.
The following is a partial list of the kind of activity that is illegal or prohibited on the MySpace Website and through your use of the MySpace Services. MySpace.com reserves the right to investigate and take appropriate legal action against anyone who, in MySpace.com's sole discretion, violates this provision, including without limitation, reporting you to law enforcement authorities. Prohibited activity includes, but is not limited to:
Re: An Honest Open Letter To Joe Anthony |
Report to Admin
By
monica
May 3rd 2007 at 11:25 am EDT
I posted a few replies to the Joe Anthony "open letter" on myspace and neither got posted. I was very careful not to use offensive language, but I did disagree with him and most of his anti-obama posters. My nonscientific assessment was that 99.9% of the posts were extremely supportive of Joe. It's obvious to me he is screening posts from dissenters. Unlike the Barack Obama campaign which allows all to voice their opinions.
I know a lot about Obama and his campaign and from what I've seen they operate with integrity. I don't know Joe from Adam, but his censurship proves to me his motives are suspect and his behavior seems very unprofessional, almost pouty.
Re: An Honest Open Letter To Joe Anthony |
Report to Admin
