Tim Russo got chewed out, apparently for lack of genuflection.
And he wasn't the only one; the master of the Buckeye Senate Blog got a piece of Brown's sharp tongue as well. And it reminded him of another time not so long ago that he witnessed questionable behavior from Team Brown.
And check out what OH-2 wrote just yesterday about Brown's efforts to use the blogosphere (emphasis mine):
He's investing a lot of resources online, but I’m not seeing the return on the investment...
[Hackett's] strong suit is dramatic confrontations...
Would Mr. Brown display such churlish behavior to a newspaper reporter? If he did, his temperament would have to be questioned. I am assuming he takes corporate media seriously but new media lightly, so he feels he can talk down to some young upstart (or two) with a blog.
If Mr. Brown wants to learn his lesson the hard way, that's his choice. But if he wants to make things easier, he might start by learning some Dos and Don'ts of Online Political Campaign Marketing.
And it's probably not a bad idea to show a little respect for people who can influence campaigns and elections.
7 comments:
Hey, nice way to take oh02's comment and strip it of all context. In the interest of fairness, here is the full quote:
"While I appreciate hearing from the Congressman online, am I the only one that fears that he may be a little too enamoured with the blogosphere? He’s investing a lot of resources online, but I’m not seeing the return on the investment. As someone who was in management for what F_ed Company called the 2nd worst dot bomb of all time, I know all too well how the pretty lights of the internet can lead people right off cliffs. Don’t be fooled into using the Hackett campaign as a role model. I’m impressed that any of them are able to even turn on their computers let alone master the blogosphere. Their strong suit is dramatic confrontations… case in point the Hackett RV. Luckily that sort of stuff plays well both on the ground and online."
I don't think I omitted "context," just commentary. In any case, I clearly indicated it by ellipses and provided a link to the post. Adding it to the comment section, as you've done, is also a good idea, and I might even do that for all my links.
I am confused, however, as to what is "fairer" about the abridged vs. unabridged post. Perhaps you could explain why one suggests a meaning that is different from the other.
Still... screaming at anyone, blogger or not, at an ODP holiday party? Not savvy, Sherrod. Blog-obsessed or not, Sherrod should know that someone's going to write about things like that.
I posted the full comment because when he talks about "Dramatic confrontations" he's talking about the Hackett campaign-
"Don't be fooled into using the Hackett campaign...I'm impressed they can turn on their computers...their strong suit is dramatic confrontation...case in point the RV"
At least, that was my reading of it.
I read it as a comment referring to the Brown team, but I think you may be right, it is actually a comment about Hackett's team, not Brown's.
In that case it is more ironic than prescient, which is worth only 5 pts.
I'll adjust the post accordingly.
My claim of prescience is my statement that Brown is way too into the blogs. Who would know that he was SO into them that he would chew them out publically. LOL.
Not the kind of drama that I was talking about with Hackett. Hackett inspires people to write and talk about him. Cameras follow him. He's a welcome fixture on political talk shows. There's nothing about Brown's intended public actions that inspire people to follow him. Zzzzzz
Maybe Brown the blogger slayer will help with that.
So basically, Hackett inspires and Brown perspires.
Post a Comment