Detailing what he thought was a bug at BarackObama.com, Michael Arrington found it odd that the site listed the "Gay Nigger Association of America for Barack Obama" as a supporter. Some quick digging turned up an error alright. The system automatically displayed the latest group created, whether it was actually supportive or not.

The bug ended up being the openness of the system.

Just a day after I posted about John Edwards texting campaign, a friend told me that Edwards was now using Twitter, a social networking tool that enables users to let friends and strangers know what they're doing.

Twitter became very popular the past couple of weeks, as all of the A-List bloggers, and folks attending SXSW in Austin started signing up and inviting all of their friends. Because of this, Twitter has proven itself as a great means by which candidates can make connections with potential voters.

At about 2:00 PM on April 6, 2007, I submitted a comment to a Tancredo blog post that was driving people to a Laura Ingraham poll (April 4, 2007). Here is my comment:

“These polls have no scientific value. They are self-selected samples and therefore reflect only the views of the limited number of people who take the time to respond to them.

At first, I didn't "get" Twitter. But then I stopped, took a deep breath, and started engaging and connecting through Twitter.

Once I "got it," I started thinking about how I would soon deploy the modern technology with Republican politicians.

Here's what I'm thinking...

He's had the account open for a while, but I just received this email...

Dig in below the fold tweets...

As David and Stowe and a bunch of other people have noticed, Barack Obama is Twittering. Now, I'll gladly apologize if I'm wrong on this, but it appears that Mr. Obama didn't write his first Twitter. There's just something patently un-senatorial about all of those exclamation points.

There are two competing trends in online social technologies. One is that everyone from presidential candidates to up-and-coming musicians are scrambling to master MySpace, Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter. Along the way, they're embracing a new openness that sees value in the networked public sphere. The second is that everyone from the U.S. military to universities are rushing to control the tools that those over whom they have dominion -- from soldiers to swimmers -- use to express themselves online. The Army is both cracking down on milbloggers and YouTubers, citing security and bandwidth; college administrators are banning athletes from Facebook, citing threats to school reputation.

The question for political candidates and political leaders in my mind becomes: you're willing to exploit the enormous potential of new social technologies to further your agendas, but are you willing to stand up for the right of the people you lead to use them?

The Web on the Candidates

Does the performance of a candidate's web page help determine their online effectiveness and the amount of online donations they bring in? Katherine Noyes at TechNewsWorld reports that 62% of respondents to a "nationwide survey" "said they'd abandon the online donation process after two unsuccessful attempts, and 67 percent said they would tell other people if the donation process didn't work well," and "of the 43 percent of survey respondents who had already visited or who planned to visit candidate Web sites, 58 percent said they believe there will be a correlation between the candidate with the best-performing Web site and the ultimate winner of the presidential race." However, these stats ignore the actual content of the web sites -- are candidates blogging, using video, or Twittering? Are they using social networking sites? While a site's poor performance can undeniably aggravate users and discourage them from donating, there also other online factors to consider when judging a candidates' online presence.

The Candidates on the Web

John Edwards has launched a new web site called Support the Troops. End the War, with an overlong url to boot, that is calling for Americans to... support the troops and end the war with a series of actions over Memorial Day weekend. The site begins, "As citizens, we honor and support our troops for their service and sacrifice. As Americans, we are blessed by that sacrifice and support, which keeps us safe and keeps us strong. As patriots, we call on our government to support our troops in the most important way it can - by ending this war and bringing them home," and provides 10 things you can do over Memorial Day weekend toward that end. Otherwise, the site is mostly a place to gather email addresses, though it also provides a way to search for Memorial Day activities near you. However, I live in one of the most populated spots in the country, and the nearest activity ("Donation") was over nine miles away, followed by an activity ("Call/email President Bush and your Congressional Representatives") almost 29 miles away.

In a discussion about the recent French presidential election at the Personal Democracy Forum unConference this past Saturday, Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry presented an interesting thesis: not only did Ségolène Royal's 'net-centric strategy fail to win a majority at the polls, but her campaign's emphasis on citizen participation may have actually backfired entirely by undermining her perception as a leader and by leaving her dependent on a fatally unrepresentative group of voters.