It's been a busy week in the 2008 presidential campaign--Hillary Clinton launched her online "conversation" (see David Weinberger's spot-on critique) and went to Iowa; John Edwards also did an online video web-chat that he calls a "live online discussion"; Barack Obama laid low and let the explosive growth of one unofficial Facebook group (now at more than 158,000 members) speak for him; and Bill Richardson formally announced his campaign launch.

Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) launched his presidential campaign, via web video, in a hail of controversy regarding comments he made in reference to fellow Democrat, Senator Barack Obama (IL). Within hours, the audio of his remarks made it to YouTube, as did a clip of FOX News -- no stranger to an Obama controversy -- airing Biden's clarification. The senator later joked about it with The Daily Show host, Jon Stewart. (Video here.)

In South Carolina, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) is determined to win as he picked up the support of forty State House members -- all caught on video -- via Laurin Manning of South Carolina '08.

ZDNet tech blogger Donna Bogatin examines the online outreach of Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) and the results are mixed. She labeled his announcement speech ìstaidî and failing to make him stand out from other candidates declaring online. Questioning Biden's ability to connect to potential voters, Bogatin writes, "Perhaps Jill [Biden] should give Joe lessons in networking" after photos of the senator's wife receive more attention than the senator himself.

Jeremy Bronson, reporting for MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, chronicled how candidates are combating the YouTube effect and trying to turn it around in their favor.

Social network scholar Fred Stutzman takes a look at Barack Obama's new social networking site and how all candidates should view social networking sites: "Companies like Youtube and Myspace succeeded because they embraced openness... The candidate who embraces this mentality will make the most sense to the netvoter, as our sensibilities have changed significantly over the past few years."

Eve Fairbanks thinks that candidates' plunge into MySpace and Facebook and other facets of online pop culture isn't cool at all: "assimilating Internet tactics doesn’t mean you have to assimilate Internet culture, too: the unhinged language, the fake intimacy, the studied hipness." Who's to blame? Howard Dean: "Political consultants and aspiring candidates were wowed by the way Dean used the Internet to create energy and momentum behind his upstart campaign. They envied the way young people, inspired by the concept of the Web as 'people power,' were transformed into Deaniacs in droves."

One thing to watch this presidential campaign cycle will be the usage of YouTube by presidential candidates. YouTube allows a presidential candidate yet another avenue to engage potential supporters and voters, and it does so for an incredibly low price tag. All one needs is a digital video camcorder, a computer and an internet connection. The YouTube community doesn't demand the high production values that a TV audience requires. Another important aspect of YouTube is the viral aspect of it, particularly among an increasingly active and growing demographic, young voters.

The Web on the Candidates

YouTube can be friend and enemy to a campaign, reports the Mercury News. The ubiquity of cell phone cameras and online video can make candidates extremely wary the YouTube effect, but they can also use it to their advantage. "One slip, and it's out so fast and goes so far. You're more exposed, but you can react faster, too, so it cuts both ways," Bruce Hildebrand says.

Jeff Jarvis recently launched Prezvid, a blog that covers presidential campaigns' use of video, and his video post about John McCain's use of video is spot on. Jarvis critiques McCain's over-produced videos -- rightly pointing out that his videos look like they're meant for the large screen, but they'll only be seen on computer screens -- and offers unsolicited advice and how to make better use the increasingly important medium.

My parents always taught me that you can learn a lot about a person by looking at the people with whom they choose to associate. It's something I have always believed. It is, however, something that is being tossed on its ear by social networking sites.

My question has been, and remains, what do your MySpace or Facebook friends say about you? Will campaigns be judged on the people they publicly affiliate with via social networking sites? Most importantly, will the media care?

Most mentions of social networking focus on the number of friends a candidate has, but nobody seems to care about the people that make up that number?

The Web on the Candidates

Marianne Richmond at Blog the Campaign in 08 takes a look at the blog on Hillary Clinton's site and find something missing: Hillary.

Mitt Romney is trying his best to replicate Barack Obama's Facebook popularity. However, the University of Arizona's student paper, the Wildcat, points out: "Of the 36 posted photos of Romney's life and campaign, he seems to only interact with white people. (Note to the Romney 2008 campaign: These things can be both an asset and a liability.)"

I tend to be more interested in "how the web is using them" than "how the candidates are using the web" in this site's mission. So of course I'm fascinated by the John Edwards Is Good website. I like the ambiguity of this slogan. Does it mean Edwards is good... looking, for America, at billiards? It could be any of the above.

When I saw first these 80's-inspired t-shirts popping up during the 2004 campaign, I took them for nothing more than a smarmy remark on Edwards' looks from some overly-clever college students. However, it seems that this meme has blossomed into a full-on campaign. While the goal was previously to market the shirt and take pictures of people wearing it in funny places, now the site seems to be semi-seriously promoting the election of John Edwards.

So what made Aregbe's group special? Just as in the case of Ben Parr's "Students Against Facebook News Feed", the success of the group was somewhat arbitrary, but there were factors that contributed to its success. First, Aregbe's group was properly timed. He created it the day after Obama's video "A Message from Barack" made its way around the web. Unlike the inevitable campaign announcements of Edwards and Clinton, Obama's announcement was a pleasant and noteworthy surprise to many. This, combined with the connected nature of Aregbe (his day job is advising college student government) made his timing and placement perfect. The message moved through his network (via Facebook news feeds) like wildfire, quickly arriving on the growth path that has let it to its success today. To boil things down a little more, this was a 1) perfectly-timed message sent to a 2) primed audience by a 3) maven/connector.