A Palin-esque Social Media World - Good or Bad?

As President-elect Barack ObamaBarack Obama's transition teams wind up for an historic inaugural event on January 20th, the campaign machine is still running strong. This time though, instead of an election the Obama team is constructing a new direction in government administration. What many may overlook, however, is whether or not this is really such a good idea.

This week a message went out to all of Obama's campaign supporters as if to say "we're not done with you yet, this campaign is just getting started!" According to a CNN report, the message included a statement from Obama's campaign manager David PlouffeDavid Plouffe, asking for Obama supporters to rally once again on December 13 and 14, with house meetings apparently designed to initiate support for upcoming Obama directives.

The message directs supporters to Obama's website, change.gov. The top of the website indicates the current date, and just to the right, how many more days until inauguration day. A model social media effort, the website includes information about policy initiatives, a blog with daily and weekly updates and information about the transition team, and other news. Also included are areas where users can provide their own stories about what is going on in their world, and even a section where Americans can provide their own ideas for change and government reform.

While all this is impressive, is anyone else concerned that our "it's all about me" society could become even more polarized and selfish as a result of new social media-type developments in politics? Or, does it seems overly obsessive to fear the influence of "regular Americans" on public policy when clearly, most Americans don't have the first clue about major policy initiatives that are suppose to support the welfare of millions, even billions of others, all of whom have different and distinct values and goals for their own lives?

Sarah PalinSarah Palin's rise to fame with her recent Vice Presidential bid is a perfect case in point. While a good 60% of Americans recognized, after at least a couple months of listening to her nonsense, that she was wildly unprepared for such a high office in government, there was and still is, another 40% who feel she would have done a good job.

Whether Palin was or is qualified for such a position is not the most significant concern for the future, however, although it is pretty high up there. Instead the concern stems from the reasons why 40% of Americans felt she would do a good job, despite her obvious lack of experience and knowledge of world affairs. For many it was because she was an "average hockey mom". Somehow this qualification would allow her to make better decisions for America, at least according to her supporters.

So the question is, are average American citizens like you and me truly qualified to make major political and administrative decisions that will affect billions of other lives? And, is it unrealistic to believe that a truly "social media world" could turn into a political nightmare in which public referendums will be required for all major political decisions?

And finally, if these social media efforts are simply to appease, and to gather grassroots support in favor of initiatives Obama hopes to spoon feed to the masses instead of offering real public input on policy positions, then that flags another set of concerns about the health of our political world.

At some point it seems possible that these efforts could lead to either 1) all decisions will require referendum in order to meet the standards of the American electorate, and government will stall, or halt completely, without such referendums, or 2) major political polarizations will occur, in which interest group will be pit against interest group, all jockeying for administrative favor in return for electoral support.

Although these ideas may seem wildly aggrandized, polarization in American politics is a topic that has been widely studied in political circles for many decades now. Most recently in a book by three well-known political scientists, Nolan McCarty, Keith Poole, and Howard Rosenthal. The Book Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches, is a difficult read for those not used to an academic-heavy read, but well worth the effort. The book points to the potential problems of an ever increasingly polarized nation, similar to the one that could be produced as a win-happy Obama electorate looks for more ways to influence politics.

What the book doesn't account for, however, is how events like the 2008 national elections, and the large grass roots efforts of the Obama campaign, may change the political landscape. Will the poor and disenfranchised begin to gain power in a new, social media focused world? Or, will it just take time for the wealthy to find ways of controlling even these political strings as well? And how does Obama's plan for an open government help or hinder polarized political efforts?

In the end, no matter how one feels about an Obama Presidency, there can be no question that Obama's post-election social media roll outs are paving the way for a new and different approach to American Presidential administration. However, what today may be innovation and change could tomorrow become stalemate and revolution if not handled carefully.