Subscribe RSS FeedAs the election race heat s up, we will be able to start to see the way in which the party leaders are using social media or being us ed by it better than previously. This has got to be the most analysed election in history because of the large number of folks monitoring e ach breath of all concern ed.
But does this help us settle on a winner?
Well up unti l yesterday you will have thought it was simply a harmles s stream of info that could do zip to sway folk either way, but when Brown shou ted out the now famous ‘bigot’ slur, things got all heavy rather quickly.
It was repeated across the net in record time and s oon m illions of people knew exact ly what had gone on. The way report s is now distributed means we do not have to hang about for the daily newspaper- we will get it instantl y, much to the chagrin of our hapless leaders.
Of course, this could all be used for exact ly the opposite because good news can also spread quickly – it ’s just not as delicious so you have to try harder.
David Cameron has tri ed and some say succeeded ( many say failed ) by mak ing his series of ‘Webcamerons’. Awful(maybe he should have got some seo training first?). But at least he ’s’s trying and any how, do we ‘d like our leaders to engage with us in this way?
there are numerous that say they should stick to what they ‘re doing best and leave social media well alone rather than fail and embarrass themselves, but there ’s a growing swell of opinion that if they need to engage with the populous, they should embrace new technology and all that it brings.
My p rivate opinion is th at th ey should indeed do this, but just when they learn when to talk and when to shut up.
Tags: Social media
