Monday, March 23
Pat Buchanan opens my eyes. No, Really.
Pat Buchanan doesn't like the apparent casual nature of Barack Obama's presidency. And before I join Chris Matthews in a knee-jerk giggle to the old Latin-Mass lover, I think he has a point. I made this video, which, I'm sure, Pat Buchanan has watched many times just so he can boogie to the Ting Tings:
But watching Pat catch flak for his opinion made me think a bit more about why Obama has made the choice to make the presidency more informal. It runs deeper than just appealing to young people. I was on a train in the past two weeks and gawd, are those college students today addicted to their I-phones. That's obvious, but what are they doing with them? Texting friends. People they choose to be in touch with electronically.
I've noticed a change in my own internet behavior in the past two months. I'm writing this at 2:27 in the afternoon, and true story--I have not checked my actual email inbox today yet. I have email notification and watched the messages as they have come in, but I haven't actually opened and read a single one yet.
But I have read my tweets. And sent out two myself.
You guys know I'm a Twitter believer. But I have come to see that the big bulletin board of people I WORK with on the blogs is the real essential part of my day, more than even email. Therefore, I can't imagine giving up a larger portion of my life to text messaging. Good god, how do people with those little devices ever get anything else done? (I can testify that on a train they don't.)
If Barack Obama is going to tap into the political power of the Iphone/Twitter/text generation, he has to be desirable enough on that level that he will be let into that world. It's a scary and very predictable thing that in a world awash in information, we are all becoming that selective in what kind of information we allow onto our screens.
Is it going too far to say that Obama has to be the kind of President who is also a Facebook Friend in order to have his voice heard? Excellent question, Mister Buchanan, but no matter how we answer: