Fulfillment of Distribution Requirements (Group 1 a.k.a Net Politics)
Textual Analysis – This is pretty straight forward. There is a lot of information on the use of internet in presidential campaigns, especially in 2012. Our main priority was finding the best possible sources. We found many opinion articles and sites that cited others. We resisted the temptation to pick those sources no matter how easy it was to find them. We found sources that reinforce our argument and help answer our historical question.
Visual artifacts – We have graphs and tables that compare candidates’ PPC. We have screenshots of campaign websites from each election. We want to create a timeline on the home page of our website, that will include textual and visual data. Unfortunately, Timeline JS proved to be to difficult for us to use, so we are looking for an alternative.
Data mining – We are planning to use Voyant on the candidates’ social networking websites to determine the agenda of each campaign. In 2004, we found “fundraisers” being used regularly. In 2008, “change,” and “economy” in 2012. The candidates were using those words to connect with voters. We will attempt to show that the repeated usage of those words is an important strategy of the candidates.
Spatial history – We have talked about maps, but we couldn’t think of any that could help our argument. Since the “space” is online (internet), we don’t need traditional elements of spacial history, like maps. If we create the timeline, perhaps it can be the spacial element as well as a visual artifact.
Spatial History* – we have talked about making maps to illustrate the effect of the web on candidates and voters but we weren’t able to come up with a single effective idea as of now.
Thanks, Net Politics, for breaking this down.
Textual analysis: even when dealing with traditional text sources, it is important to identify a method to how you are reading them. What are you looking for? How are you weighing the evidence that you find in various sources? You say “We found sources that reinforce our argument and help answer our historical question.” Did this result from a close reading of short texts? If so, how are you reading them closely in a way that differs from the analysis performed by data mining?
Visual artifacts: What is PPC? Is the latest version of your argument that campaign promises remained strikingly consistent across the elections you are studying? If so, what will the timeline show?
Data mining: our expectation is that you will go deeper than just showing repetition was a preferred campaign strategy. A casual observer of current politics can see this. But you have a big advantage over such a person — you are looking at campaign promises under a microscope across multiple elections. I am guessing that the picture you are seeing is more nuanced and complex.
Spatial: both Luke and I have a hunch that tracking campaign promises to location (by speech location, media outlet, etc.) will yield a meaningful result. Even you show that campaign promises changed not at all from place to place, you could explain the meaning of this.
Sorry — forgot you guys are doing the role of the internet (*not* campaign promises)!
My points on textual analysis and visual artifacts stand. Regarding data mining: substitute “the role of the internet” for “campaign promises” and my point is corrected.
For spatial: As in the case of Brain Drain, I have a hard time believing that there isn’t meaningful spatial variation in the case of various campaign’s deployment of internet initiatives. Have you come across anything comparing the role of social media in urban vs. rural locations?
Professor, I’m wondering why you are using “campaign promises” in your response so much. Our argument is that candidates are able to use internet more effectively with each passing election. We are not planning to make any arguments regarding campaign promises. I believe one of the other groups is doing that.
Yes, caught that mistake — just put up a new comment. Sorry for the confusion. Have too many digital history projects on the brain!