Barack Obama vs. Internet rumors

[Strider]

Thought this was timely considering how it deals with internet rumors...just the sort that someone posted the other day about Michelle Obama.

Barack Obama vs. the Internet rumor machine

By David Sarno June 11, 2008

Rumors have always traveled fast, but when it comes to politics, the whispering campaigns and defamatory leaflets of yesteryear don't hold a candle to the button that beats them all.

"Forward": the marvelous technology that allows truths and untruths alike to be propagated widely, instantly, and at no cost to the sender.

Thanks to Forward-thinking citizens, the online rumors are flying in this campaign like no campaign season before. Dozens and even hundreds of different e-mail chain letters -- most targeting Sen. Barack Obama -- are being circulated in the Internet's muggy back channels, where context suffers and falsehoods flourish. Add in the parts of the political blogosphere that survive on speculation and unsourced hearsay, and you have a petri dish capable of growing such vivid rumors that the best of them actually make it into the mouths of the Washington press corps -- without so much as a factoid to back them up.

At Snopes.com, the urban legends clearinghouse run by a couple in the San Fernando Valley, Barack Obama's page has 18 entries, only one of which Snopes determined to be true. Of the rest, Snopes rated 11 false, four partly true and two undetermined. The same pattern holds true at PolitiFact.com, a project of the St. Petersburg Times and Congressional Quarterly. In its "Chain Emails" section, 21 of the 25 e-mails they've reviewed are marked "Barely True," "False" or "Pants on Fire." Of those, 2 out of 3 were aimed at Obama, and the remainder at Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Why Obama is such a magnet for outlandish Web allegations, while Clinton and especially Sen. John McCain have gotten off easier, invites some tricky questions. No one I talked to for this story wanted to say that the candidate's race, an area that can bring out all kinds of rumor-fueling fears and resentments, is the primary factor. And maybe it isn't: The number of Americans online has grown plenty since 2004, and astronomically since 2000 -- there are a lot more great-aunts sending around e-mail petitions in big, colorful fonts. The Internet is now without a doubt the most effective rumor mill mankind has ever devised. But it's hard to ignore that the rumors about Obama tend to have something to do with his being black.

A glance at the Obama-related canards reveals that they mostly fall into three categories, which sometimes overlap: race, religion and patriotism. Part of the odd nature of Internet rumors which holds true here is that even after they've been debunked in multiple places and for some time, they continue to make the rounds.

Bill Adair, PolitiFact's editor, likened the chain e-mails to virus-like "organisms," calling them "a resilient form of communication that resists scrutiny" and is essentially unfiltered.

"It's not like Hotmail is going to say, 'Well, were not going to deliver that message because it's wrong,' " Adair said. "That message is going to get through, and it's going to be up to the reader to determine if it's true or not."

Obama's campaign has set up a rumor-busting task force that maintains a Web page at Factcheck.barackobama.com, to address some of these stubborn allegations. One section, entitled "Obama Is Not and Has Never Been a Muslim," collates several articles from national media outlets, including two from The Times, that weigh against the claim. Another section, "Obama Is a Patriot Who Loves His Flag and His Country," has an even larger collection of supporting excerpts.

When asked about the churn of questionable rumors, Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor was not shy about noting that "disinformation campaigns are the hallmark of some of the most vicious campaigns on the Republican side. It's not something that's new to this campaign, but it may be getting particular attention this round.

"It's frankly disconcerting when the press corps start asking about rumors that have no basis in fact," he added, "but it's something that we realized early on would be a problem."

Last week one such dubious story made the rounds online -- but this time it was the blogosphere that was cultivating it. Larry Johnson, a former CIA employee and national security analyst, wrote several times on his NoQuarter blog about the existence of a videotape that purportedly showed Michelle Obama using the word "whitey."

But, as Reason Magazine's David Weigel pointed out in multiple critiques of Johnson's information, Johnson had no direct evidence of the video. He had not seen actually seen it, he wrote, but rather had "heard from five separate sources who have spoken directly with people who have seen the tape."

As Weigel told me over the phone, in the world of professional journalism, "No one who didn't want to just get fired would source a story like that."

Weigel also noted in his post that Johnson's account of the tape's key details -- where it took place and which famous personages were in it -- changed over the course of several days, but Johnson's insistence on the tape's existence did not. (I couldn't reach Johnson for a comment.)

Still, the rumor made its way onto more than a few blogs, most of which were conservative. And on June 3, Democratic pundit Bob Beckel alluded to the tape on FOX News, again as hearsay and without naming sources. The videotape of the Beckel segment was passed around in various incarnations on YouTube, adding to the speculation but not the evidence. Finally, a McClatchy reporter asked Obama for his thoughts on the rumor.

"We have seen this before," Obama replied, according to Politico.com's Ben Smith. "There is dirt and lies that are circulated in e-mails, and they pump them out long enough until finally you, a mainstream reporter, asks me about it.

"That gives legs to the story," Obama said.

And that's precisely the dilemma in reporting on rumors. As Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center's FactCheck.org, explained: "The problem is that if the mainstream media address" a particular rumor, "they run the risk that they're actually going to reinforce it. "

On the other hand, she said, in a medium such as e-mail that's largely hidden from public view and for which "there isn't any natural way to make a rebuttal, a whole lot of people are potentially exposed to information that's untrue, and they don't have any way of knowing it."

Jamieson and PolitiFact's Adair agreed that peoples' tendency to buy into forwarded information depends largely on who sent it.

"When you get the e-mail from a friend of yours, you're more likely to believe it than if you get it from a stranger." Only problem with that, Jamieson said, is that, if you consider its origin, "the stuff you're getting from a friend is from a stranger."

This is a campaign in which candidates have been all over YouTube, MySpace and Facebook, and the Web's connective power has awakened a generation of youthful voters. It figures then that e-mail — one of the Internet's oldest technologies — is also the one that's moving the political conversation backwards instead of forward.

[Uncle Bill]

The question still stands; If the tape doesn't exist why the "why'd he vs whitey" spin? I think it's that sort of thing that gives the story legs not emails. People don't know who to believe.

[Pb Derigable]

The question still stands; If the tape doesn't exist why the "why'd he vs whitey" spin? I think it's that sort of thing that gives the story legs not emails. People don't know who to believe.

Personly i think the tape exists, now could she have said why'yd he and not whitey. yes. and thats why it hasn't come out.

[Uncle Bill]

Personly i think the tape exists, now could she have said why'yd he and not whitey. yes. and thats why it hasn't come out.

I tend to agree just because of the propaganda from nobama.

[Big Klu]

Conservatives love them their political chain e-mailiation.

'Barack-a-secret-Muslim' is still doing damage.

[wanna be drummer]

Conservatives love them their political chain e-mailiation.

'Barack-a-secret-Muslim' is still doing damage.

Liberals don't play dirty either?

[Big Klu]

Liberals don't play dirty either?

I don't recall liberals outright lying about a conservative persons' religion.

And not just any religion...the enemy's religion! oooooh.....the enemy...

The point being conservatives are more easily swayed by it than liberals.

Polling shows more conservatives think Obama is a Muslim than liberals. Either conservatives are ignorant, bigots, never heard of (the Christian) Reverend Wright, or Google is only allowed for liberals....

Liberals on a whole do a shit job at smear tactics. McCain is ripe for 'truthful' demolition. If McCain were a democrat, you know a neocon-funded 'swiftboat campaign' would come up saying he was permanently fucked up at the hanoi hilton, that he was a traitor for confessing to war crimes, he's a loose cannon, he's had cancer/heatlthissues, deserted his wife...etc.....

...most of which conservatives likely know nothing of at present, even though the guy has been the defacto nominee for freakin half a year. Because liberals suck at smear tactics, while somehow owning the mainstream media...

[Matthew!]

The question still stands; If the tape doesn't exist why the "why'd he vs whitey" spin? I think it's that sort of thing that gives the story legs not emails. People don't know who to believe.

The "why'd he vs. whitey" spin came up just in case someone's actually gullible enough to believe that a tape exists. Even though nobody has seen such a thing. Trust me, if it existed, it would've been on the internet by now, whether she said 'whitey' or not. Easy.

[cryingbluerain]

liberals suck

Agreed.

[wanna be drummer]

I don't recall liberals outright lying about a conservative persons' religion.

And not just any religion...the enemy's religion! oooooh.....the enemy...

The point being conservatives are more easily swayed by it than liberals.

Polling shows more conservatives think Obama is a Muslim than liberals. Either conservatives are ignorant, bigots, never heard of (the Christian) Reverend Wright, or Google is only allowed for liberals....

Liberals on a whole do a shit job at smear tactics. McCain is ripe for 'truthful' demolition. If McCain were a democrat, you know a neocon-funded 'swiftboat campaign' would come up saying he was permanently fucked up at the hanoi hilton, that he was a traitor for confessing to war crimes, he's a loose cannon, he's had cancer/heatlthissues, deserted his wife...etc.....

...most of which conservatives likely know nothing of at present, even though the guy has been the defacto nominee for freakin half a year. Because liberals suck at smear tactics, while somehow owning the mainstream media...

As of the last few elections, I'd agree with you. Throughtout history though? I don't think so

[Strider]

Let's not forget that on Faux News they like to confuse Obama's name with

Osama...I swear it happens several times a week, followed by some lame-

ass apology.

But they know it works, as most of the doofuses who get their news from

Faux news apparently really believe Obama is a Muslim, related to Saddam

Hussein, likes to sleep with monkeys and is a terrorist.

Perhaps you saw the latest Faux News smear tactic...when Barack and Michelle

gave each other a fist bump, someone on Faux called it a "terrorist fist jab".

Someone asked don't the Dems play dirty, too?

Yes, occasionally, but they are never as good at it as the GOP...and they don't

cross the line into out-and-out lies and depravity that the GOP/Conservatives

manage to get into.

Remember when Bill Clinton ran in 1992 and all the vile stuff that was said not

just about Hilary, but also their daughter Chelsea? All manner of sick stuff about

rape and sexual assault was broadcast on right-wing radio and tv shows. They

teased Chelsea about her looks...and she was just a little girl at the time. So

much for Christian compassion.

But let someone ask a valid question about Dick Cheney's views on gays and

his lesbian daughter(a grown-up and already out-of-the-closet) and you would

have thought the world had ended according to the right-wing pundits.

The thing is, it's a sickness that, helped along by Lee Atwater and Karl Rove, has

turned into a full-blown plague on the GOP. It's like they can't help themselves;

sleazy and dirty is the only way they know now how to campaign.

And Big Klu is right...McCain is RIPE for a takedown...all this sappy stuff about

his Vietnam past; I mean, great, he survived a terrible ordeal...but how does

that make him supposedly a better man for Commander-in-Chief and friend

of every soldier?

Especially when you look at his voting record and you see that he has voted against

nearly EVERY bill aimed at helping military personnel.

McCain and the whole straight talk thing is a fraud.

Throughout this whole primary season, I was taking my time to go thru everyone's

stance on the issues...I didn't want to commit myself early to anyone.

As time went on, I found myself leaning towards Obama over Hilary. But I wasn't

ready yet to count John McCain out. Maybe some of the crap he was saying was

just a sop to the chickenhawks in the GOP, but that he didn't really believe what

he was saying, and if he won election would actually be more of a centrist than

right-wing President.

But then when Clinton and McCain came out with that horrible Gas Tax Holiday

idea...and Obama was the ONLY candidate to NOT PANDER to the crowd; well,

that cinched the deal for me and since then Obama is my guy.

That, and it seems more and more that McCain really is DELUSIONAL...he's

drinking the same koolaid that Cheney and Bush have been drinking.

[allthekingshorses]

I think Accidentally saying Osama while trying to say Obama is easy to do, but it has happened way too often. And the laughing afterwards always gives it away when someone is doing it on purpose.

And then their are the people like Ann Coulter who like to say B. Hussein Obama instead of using his name the way you would with anyone else.

It's a sad day in America when this is practiced on a regular basis on a major news network. How any Republican can take part in that kind of behavior is beyond me. It just reminds me why I'm Independent and not part of the Republican party. Fox News is a disgrace to true Republicans. Honest Abe would not approve.(and no Uncle Bill I don't have proof of that, you can disagree with that too)

[Uncle Bill]

I wouldn't worry too much about nobama I heard he started up his own spin room online, in addition to the usual propaganda at his regular site. I heard they are denying the tape exists. Time will tell I guess. Why'd he spin it? <shrugs>

[Uncle Bill]

I Fox News is a disgrace to true Republicans. Honest Abe would not approve.(and no Uncle Bill I don't have proof of that, you can disagree with that too)

It's funny it's only the lefty's who conplain about fox, they never complain about the No Barak Critism network.

[Uncle Bill]

Let's not forget that on Faux News they like to confuse Obama's name with

Osama...I swear it happens several times a week, followed by some lame-

ass apology.

Another fox news

who can't say obama right

People seem to lose all objectivity once they make up their minds about who they support. It sure appears that way to me anyhow.

[Hermit_]

Republicans rely on smear and lies to win campaigns for three simple reasons:

1. First and foremost: if they were to campaign on the issues.. with honesty and forthrightness.. they'd lose. Every time. So instead they rely on smear, lies, and double-speak.

2. Their smear and lie tactics tend to work. Why? Because by and large the American populace is not as smart as we'd like to think it is. There are millions of marginally-to-minimally intelligent people in this country who are pathetically gullible.. erm, I mean.. who are susceptible to believing the lies and smears doled out by the republicon smear machine. And sadly, even a number of right-leaning moderates.. who otherwise might seem to be somewhat intelligent.. also buy into the smear and lies.. because the smear and lies resonate with their deep-seated prejudices and fears.

3. Machiavellian republicons (that term is redundant, I realize) are unhesitatingly willing to put winning above integrity. For them, the end justifies the means. They have no scruples. They have no shame. There is no low they're unwilling to stoop to.

Whoa! Hold on a minute! We've located what

seems to be a straight-talking republican! --->

[Suz]

The deep seated prejudices and fears you mention, Hermit, are so damned deep. It's amazing to watch it get skirted around and rationalized and reversed. I'm fucking sick of hearing "America is not ready." What America? I know more whites than blacks, and more Obama supporters than McCain supporters.

[Uncle Bill]

What America? I know more whites than blacks, and more Obama supporters than McCain supporters.

Do you live in a city? I live in a rural/ suburban type area, I know all white people, and don't know any who support nobama. I'm not saying they don't exist, I just know any. Life long democrats like my inlaws (in their 70's) say they will never vote for him. They were big hillary supporters. I don't know if they will vote for Mccain or stay home, time will tell.

[Big Klu]

Agreed.

I find it hard to believe even you were impressed by that.

As of the last few elections, I'd agree with you. Throughtout history though? I don't think so

Got any good ones then?

I wouldn't worry too much about nobama I heard he started up his own spin room online, in addition to the usual propaganda at his regular site. I heard they are denying the tape exists. Time will tell I guess. Why'd he spin it? <shrugs>

In your opinion...

How does one deny something exists, that is not proven to exist...

...and have you not consider it 'spin'?

And whats this 'nobama' jazz? Liberals call McCain, 'McCain'.

[Suz]

Do you live in a city? I live in a rural/ suburban type area, I know all white people, and don't know any who support nobama. I'm not saying they don't exist, I just know any. Life long democrats like my inlaws (in their 70's) say they will never vote for him. They were big hillary supporters. I don't know if they will vote for Mccain or stay home, time will tell.

Yes, I do.

So.......it's about not being around black people? What's so weird to me is the barely concealed racism thing. It's like, "I'm not a racist but America's not ready for Obama." What the hell does that mean? We all gotta support whomever we support, but all the stupid stuff about him being a closet Muslim, or thinking his wife said "whitey" instead of "why'd he"- that shit is crazy. I'm not saying you're doing that (because I'm too lazy to go back and read all the posts) but some people do.

It's about the issues, for crap's sake. Right? It is to me.

[Uncle Bill]

I'm not saying you're doing that (because I'm too lazy to go back and read all the posts) but some people do.

It's about the issues, for crap's sake. Right? It is to me.

I think there is a lot of closet racism in this country on all sides. My inlaws would deny racism I think (I didn't ask). Personally I would vote for someone regardless of race or gender if I agreed with their views.

[Hermit_]

Do you live in a city? I live in a rural/ suburban type area, I know all white people, and don't know any who support nobama. I'm not saying they don't exist, I just know any. Life long democrats like my inlaws (in their 70's) say they will never vote for him. They were big hillary supporters. I don't know if they will vote for Mccain or stay home, time will tell.

Lifelong democrats (like your in-laws) who avidly

supported Hillary,.. very enthusiastically support:

* universal healthcare

* women's right to choose

* ending the war in Iraq

* ending Bush's tax cuts on the wealthy

* fixing NAFTA

* fixing (funding) No Child Left Behind

* S-CHIPS (Children's Health Insurance)

* a moderate Supreme Court

By November, your in-laws (and others like them)

will realize, with absolute crystal clarity, two things:

1. Barack Obama shares their position on every one those issues, and

2. John McCain opposes their position on every one of those issues.

Your in-laws would be utter and complete fools to vote against

Obama or to sit passively by and not vote for Barack Obama.

Are your in-laws utter and complete fools, Billyboy?

[fwiw..I'm guessing they're not utter and complete fools.

afterall, they are democrats and not republicans, right? ]

They'll vote for Obama. You can bank on it.

[Suz]

Lookout, it's an ANGRY BLACK WOMAN! Everybody run for your lives!!!!

Whaaaaa

Oh, wait- that was in the other thread on this subject. Oh well, it's still funny to me.

[Uncle Bill]

In your opinion...

How does one deny something exists, that is not proven to exist...

...and have you not consider it 'spin'?

And whats this 'nobama' jazz? Liberals call McCain, 'McCain'.

The definition of spin I subscribe to:

"In public relations, spin is a usually pejorative term signifying a heavily biased portrayal in one's own favor of an event or situation; it is a "polite" synonym for propaganda"

I consider anything put out by the campaigns as spin/ propaganda.

As to the second part I guess you must scroll through hermits posts, as do I. ( he owes me a scroll mouse, btw)

[Suz]

I think there is a lot of closet racism in this country on all sides. My inlaws would deny racism I think (I didn't ask). Personally I would vote for someone regardless of race or gender if I agreed with their views.

I understand.