As you probably know, I haven't been a big fan of the corporate media, including the Washington Post, for a long time. Close to home, the Post's coverage of Virginia politics is minimal, and what we do get is usually "horse race" stuff or other non-substantive material. For instance, I open the paper this morning and they've done it again. This time, they think they're on to a hot "new media" tool - Twitter - which, once again, they're a day late and a dollar short in catching on to. The other problem with the Post story is that it talks about only one candidate, Creigh Deeds, without mentioning any of the other candidates who use the same service. For instance, Moran4Governor, Terry McAuliffe, Bob McDonnell, Mike Signer, Jon Bowerbank, Jody Wagner, and Bill Bolling. But why mention any of those people, just because they all use this new-fangled contraption called Twitter and they're all running for statewide office this year in Virginia? Nah, that would be too hard, maybe take 5 minutes of research. And the corporate media wonders why it's dying?
P.S. I like Creigh's "tweets," don't get me wrong, but are they any better than Mike Signer's "on the road" tweets or anyone else's? Why only talk about Deeds, when there's a much broader phenomenon to write about here?
