Online video has become an integral part of American politics ever since former Sen. George Allen, R-Va., derided a camera-bearing campaign worker of his opponent as "macaca" in the summer of 2006. More campaigns now task people specifically with following their rivals with cameras in hand; they also produce longer ads just for the Web. Amateurs play the game, too. So do professionals who want people to think they are amateurs. The emergence of online video undeniably has changed American politics, but has it been for good or bad? Do the constant replays and mash-ups of every gaffe, no matter how minor, actually foster less of the straight talk that voters say they want from politicians? A panel of experts explored those questions and more as part of the "Macaca Mania" panel I organized and moderated Saturday at the Blog World and New Media Expo in Las Vegas. The panelists were Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake, Jon Henke of The Next Right, Matthew Sheffield of NewsBusters and Matthew Yglesias of ThinkProgress. To kick off the discussion, I identified four basic types of "macaca moments" that have surfaced over the past two years:
- Foot-in-mouth disease -- comments that politicians make in public and live to regret
- Candid camera -- words and deeds that are caught on tape when politicians are unaware (even if they shouldn't be)
- Words without context -- clips that intentionally distort politicians' statements
- Gotcha! -- planned, confrontational interviews with candidates and lawmakers
In keeping with the subject at hand, I produced a video mash-up that included at least one example from both the right and left for each type of macaca moment.
A great debate ensued among the panelists. I wish I could share that, too. Unfortunately, I had planned to tape the session but foolishly packed my videocamera in my checked bag. Southwest somehow managed to lose it (and all of my clothes) even though my wife and I didn't change planes. Thankfully, Blog World taped the "Macaca Mania" panel. I'll link to it once its online.