Best
28 Comments
Post
  • #8
    !
    someone needs to get to THE CENTER of this. what could this "irregular spike" be FOR? if someone were generating AMERICAN bot accounts, how long would it take them to see this kind of PROGRESS?
  • #12
    !
    PersonAlly, RAther thaN cOmIng up with complicateD theoRIes, i'd Get to tHe boTtom of it WIth some commoN sense and straiGhtforward Explanations foR what we're Seeing.
  • #24
    !
    I dont think some prank twittter accounts will make or break a candidate in this election. If they do, then there never was any hope for the country in this election.
  • #1
    !
    Mitt Romney... First it was his dog on the roof of his car.. THEN he bullied a fellow student some 40 years ago.. THEN it was about his wife being a homemaker.. THEN his wife's horse.. THEN it was about a company he wasn't even running at the time.. NOW twitter???
    The focus is on President Obama's no matter what the media tries..
  • #25
    !
    Some are blaming Bush, but I am thinking it was Al Gore. He did invent the internet that made this prank posible. Hey Al You did not build that!
  • #22
    !
    I really don't get into Twitter or Facebook. I have my own personal, daily drama. I don't need to hear about anyone else's.
  • #15
    !
    The general reaction in this thread seems to be "who cares"? But as far as I can see there has been a consensus in recent years that social media are important in elections.

    So are you saying "that's wrong", or "yeah, but twitter isn't important", or "yeah but who cares if a political party is completely misrepresenting itself in an important component of an election", or what?
  • #20
    !
    Do you really think the Romney campaign would think aomething like this would pass the smell test? A spike in twitter accounts that sticks out like a sore thumb and invites investigation by the opposition? Me neither.That means some other amateurish bunch of with the appropriate software did it.

    And no one is saying that social media is important or not important. We are saying that we don;t care about a story that is nothing but another thing for Obamabots like renee to parrot as to why Romney is an evil hater. It's a non story that was made into an issue by people looking for something that they can twist into something that makes Romney look bad.

    I expect stuff like this from a campaign manager like Stephanie Cutter. We don't expect the news media to report it as a potential scandal if it all.
  • #21
    !
    So if you agree that social media are important, then

    - the electorate will be misled by the figures
    - therefore it's an important issue, because we care about democracy and an accurately informed electorate

    If the media don't cover the story, then people wont know the numbers are fake.
  • #27
    !
    If media didn't cover the story, no one would've known the numbers nor would they have cared to know. I wonder who Obama's Twitter followers include... I'm one. What does that mean?
  • #28
    !
    Alright, but if no-one knows the numbers and no-one cares to know, then twitter is not important in the election. We can't have it both ways. Either it's important and the story matters, or it isn't and it doesn't.
  • #23
    !
    i don't think you can draw any useful conclusions from the number of followers a candidate has. And, while its funny / sad that so many of romney's jump in followers are not real people, it doesn't really matter. the only thing that matters at this point is how many people that are currently undecided are going to commit to one candidate or the other. I don't think you're going to get that from the number of twitter followers. But hey, what the heck do i know?
Post