Google Has Changed Political Debate Forever
When I was on the high school debate team, about 15 years ago, using the Internet was considered strange, if not cheating. We used photocopy machines, print magazines and academic journals almost exclusively. That time in the world's history is now gone forever.
When Sarah Palin and Joe Biden debated in front of one of the largest TV audiences in US election history last week, the two candidates might not have been Googling for facts during the debate, but millions of people watching the debate were. Today Google released some information about what kinds of things viewers were searching for as that debate unfolded, minute by minute. It is amazing both that viewers were able to do such a thing, in real time, and that we're able to watch what people are searching for. The internet in general, and Google in particular, has substantially augmented this important part of public life.
The collective search history provides an interesting look at the world's reaction to what the candidates are saying. Google points out, for example, that one of the hottest searches of the night was "define:maverick." I wouldn't mind learning more about the word maverick myself but I'm struck by the evidence that so many people know the search protocol define: and are comfortable using it in a dynamic situation!
Other interesting, popular search queries mentioned in Google's blog post today included:
- meaning of theocracy
- windfall profits tax
- nucular vs nuclear, nuclear pronunciation, palin nucular, and even nukular
- "When Senator Biden offered a civics lesson ("Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that's the Executive Branch") many people checked, and learned that Article I of the Constitution describes the legislative branch of the U.S. government. The executive branch is described in Article II. Others just searched directly for the role of vice president and vice president duties."
It's pretty incredible to know that these topics resonated enough with the public that they sought to learn more about them online. That people were even curious enough to ask is encouraging (at least for someone hoping the Democrats will win).
Another technology that changed the debate experience was Current's live video stream with a Twitter overlay, which we wrote about immediately after the first Presidential debate.
The candidates may not have used online search while they were debating, but we sure hope they will every day they are in office. It's changed fundamentally our relationship with politics and we hope that politicians can keep up. Maybe they can even take the lead.
1 TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/8526
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
Is it possible that every time someone searched for "maverick" in Google and clicked on the "(definition)" link that it was counted as a search for "define:maverick"? If not, then kudos to Google for getting a sizable population to understand your keyword syntax!
Posted by: Jason Sperske
|
October 6, 2008 4:25 PM
I think the title of this post might be wrong. You seem to be using "Google" in place of "the Internet." It's not Google that changed the debate (or rather our ability to fact check it instantly), but rather the web. Google just happens to be the company that currently provides us the best gateway to get to that information.
I would wager that many of those searches landed people at Wikipedia pages. In other words, Wikipedia is probably changing the debate as much as many other sites. It's the collective power of the now ubiquitous web that is changing things.
Posted by: Josh Catone | October 6, 2008 4:27 PM
I'm always of two minds about this sorta thing. (Ok, those of you who just thought, "Usually of two minds most of the time", there's champagne being served in the lobby. *Not!*)
So long as the numb-nuts stay clumsy this sort of tech won't be used for arcane evil. But if ever someone brandishes a clue-stick ... heaven forbid.
Otherwise, I suggest this can be a signal of where in the uhhhh cognisphere the discussion should be taking place. We're talking fundamentals. (Someone said McCain is tripping over himself because he's torn ... gov't as wholesome tool? or source of evil?)
For e.g. at some point someone noticed that racist policies interfered with profit making. It's just plain bad for business (once you emancipate the slaves, that is).
When folk aren't playing with a stacked deck (or a set of sophistic talking points) then they start to actually ponder social justice as win/win ... which would be a major step. (E.g.: cheaper to give homeless folk apartments than to shell out for endless stream of emergency services. And yes, I know how mercenary that starts.)
We don't need more rocket scientists. We need more sense makers.
heh ... just google "participatory deliberation" *grin*
Posted by: Ben Tremblay | October 6, 2008 4:48 PM
Google has changed almost everything about our lives; for the better though, in my opinion!
Jesse W
http://churchofcowherd.wordpress.com/
Posted by: Jesse Wojdylo | October 6, 2008 6:24 PM
It is my understanding the the Executive isn't allowed to use the Internet directly (or anywhere) for security concerns. If he needs anything from the Internet someone has to look it up for him (or her) and have it printed out (or placed on the Intranet?).
Posted by: Tony | October 6, 2008 6:33 PM
Wow, Tony - that's intense! You really think they can't use a search engine??
@Tony: That seems pretty unlikely... there are a ton of White House staffers working in the West Wing that have access to the Internet. Maybe there isn't net access in the Oval Office, but, what sense would it make to stop the president from going down the hall and using a staff computer to look something up? Plus, it would be almost unthinkable that the residence in the White House doesn't have access to the web. Both of the last two US presidents had school age children during their tenure -- you can bet they had Internet access to get their school book reports done. ;)
Posted by: Josh Catone | October 6, 2008 7:37 PM
It should be no surprise that google is part of our every day life and is very much an influence in the facts we find & the decisions we make. There is no better source for information.
That the searches come in real time as the debate is happening just proves that smart people & multitaskers hang our online.
Posted by: Palin on abortion | October 6, 2008 10:38 PM
And John McCain doesn't even know how to use The Google.
Posted by: Greg Fitz | October 6, 2008 10:40 PM
Google keeps getting better and better in it's search tech. Amazing!
Posted by: free xbox 360 | October 6, 2008 10:46 PM
Oh no! Next debate the campaigns will be deploying searchers so that good search terms come up for them: "McCain aging dotard", "Obama Osama" and so on.
Posted by: GaryB | October 6, 2008 10:50 PM
It should be no surprise that google is part of our every day life and is very much an influence in the facts we find & the decisions we make. There is no better source for information.
That the searches come in real time as the debate is happening just proves that smart people & multitaskers hang our online.
Posted by: Palin on abortion | October 6, 2008 10:57 PM
many people checked, and learned that Article I of the Constitution describes the legislative branch of the U.S. government. The executive branch is described in Article II.
The role of the Vice President is described in Article I,. Section 3 of the Constitution.
Posted by: kthxbai | October 6, 2008 11:06 PM
maybe people "googled" these things because; the suck your parties cock awards were on... or maybe it was becuase of the debate.
both arguments can be made. how bout a more facts, numbers, and less fluff... and..
and in reference to using Google...
"we sure hope they will every day they are in office".
is the writer daft or dumb? if its on Google its common knowledge. the president doesn't need Google. no "blog" or ".RSS" feed has the economic or social leadership capabilities that our next president needs
Posted by: richard m smoker | October 6, 2008 11:09 PM
The problem with this is the filtering that's already been done by google in preparing the graphs and the blog post.
I would be far happier if the unfiltered search data could be provided so we can do our own analysis.
Posted by: Neil | October 6, 2008 11:49 PM
When it's put like this, it really is amazing how googling changed the way of the world.....
Posted by: 800HighTech | October 7, 2008 2:22 AM
Great piece, Marshall. I watched the first presidential debate with a group of friends. Several of us reached for our phones frequently to check facts. Others in the room were vociferously annoyed at us. There is a cultural divide about the use of the mobile devices for spur-of-the-moment research. For me, it is very exciting that questions like "who was Carter's secretary of.." that come up in dinner table conversation can be answered w/o anyone leaving the table. It makes us collectively smarter!
Posted by: Michael Stein | October 7, 2008 4:09 AM
Im telling you dude, one day Google is going to rule the World!
Jiff
www.privacy-center.ru.tc
Posted by: Lisa Jones | October 7, 2008 6:40 AM
John McCain is used to force the election of Barack Obama.
Barack Obama forced you to pay for Wall Street's bailout.
Stop the extortion, blackmail, bribery, and division;
Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, and Cynthia McKinney.
"The two parties should be
almost identical, so that
the American people can
'throw the rascals out'
at any election without
leading to any profound or
extensive shifts in policy."
- Carol Quigley
Posted by: sham debate | October 7, 2008 11:34 AM
I personally think everyone should take a deep breath and watch the candidates duke it out over a very serious topic: pencils.
Check it out at www.animaticmedia.com
Posted by: Jenny | October 7, 2008 2:27 PM
I will doing this myself when the presidential debate starts in 20 mins.
Posted by: Free Xbox 360 | October 7, 2008 5:37 PM
Of course Google has changed the way people search for info. But am I the only one who noticed that the vertical scale is undefined? In other words, the spikes may have been from 0 to 100 people, or 0 to 1 million, or who knows what.
Google does this a lot. Release impressive-looking graphs but not define the content on one of the axes. Without that, you really don't know what you're looking at. It's an old trick, straight out of Huff's: "How to Lie with Statistics".
Posted by: Aoi | October 8, 2008 7:41 AM
very interesting.
Posted by: natalie | October 8, 2008 9:51 PM
well i guess i cannot live with out google active every day..
Google became a part of my life.
Posted by: MNVAMSI | October 9, 2008 10:14 PM
My personal view is that youtube (google subsidiary) dwarfs the impact Google search for fact check by the common citizen is having on the campaign. Now every gaffe is magnified 1000x fold by being replayed endlessly on blogs etc. The average citizen is just not motivated enough to go hunt around for facts through search engines. OTOH, everybody under the age of 40 watches youtube videos like their grandparents watched CBS.
Posted by: Joe | October 13, 2008 12:32 PM
Majority of those searches would have been covered in a basic civics class. Do schools even do government/civics classes anymore?
Posted by: HeyHey | November 4, 2008 9:09 AM
I hope people put Biden's gaff of putting the Executive's prerogatives in Article I of the constitution equivalent to a mistake such as "Tuesday the 18th". The question a listener must ask themselves, "do i believe the ``tuesday'' portion or the ''18'' portion?" it really depends on the context doesn't it.
Contrast this with Palin's inability to grasp Cheney's blatant abuse of both articles of the constitution when he found it convenient to be in both branches, his choice depending on the moment.
While it's laudable that people are searching, one only hopes the search adds to an expansion of the context, a fact hard to glean from the data.
Posted by: marty mcgowan | November 5, 2008 6:41 AM