Group items tagged

Writing in The Wall Street Journal, Peggy Noonan called the speech "strong, thoughtful and important" and noted that its rhetorical style subverted the soundbite-driven coverage of contemporary news media.[41]

Beyond the content of the speech, some media coverage focused on the manner in which it spread through the Internet. Video of the speech "went viral," reaching over 1.3 million views on YouTube within a day of the speech's delivery.[71] By March 27, the speech had been viewed nearly 3.4 million times.[72] In the days after the speech, links to the video and to transcripts of the speech were the most popular items posted on Facebook.[72] The New York Times observed that the transcript of the speech was e-mailed more frequently than their news story on the speech, and suggested that this might be indicative of a new pattern in how young people receive news, avoiding conventional media filters.[72] Maureen Dowd further referenced the phenomenon on March 30, writing in her column that Obama "can ensorcell when he has to, and he has viral appeal. Who else could alchemize a nuanced 40-minute speech on race into must-see YouTube viewing for 20-year-olds?"[73] By May 30, the speech had been viewed on YouTube over 4.5 million times.[74] The Los Angeles Times cited the prominence of the speech and the music video "Yes We Can" as examples of the Obama campaign's success in spreading its message online, in contrast with the campaign of Republican (then) presumptive nominee John McCain.[74]

Mr. Greenwald’s McCain videos, most of which portray the senator as contradicting himself in different settings, have been viewed more than five million times — more than Mr. McCain’s own campaign videos have been downloaded on YouTube.

Mr. Greenwald shows how technology has dispersed the power to shape campaign narratives, potentially upending the way American presidential campaigns are fought.

But in the 2008 race, the first in which campaigns are feeling the full force of the changes wrought by the Web, the most attention-grabbing attacks are increasingly coming from people outside the political world. In some cases they are amateurs operating with nothing but passion, a computer and a YouTube account, in other cases sophisticated media types with more elaborate resources but no campaign experience.