Anyone Wants to Discuss How NOT to be Used by RW Smear Machine?

[Sensitivity]

Yes, we were used.

I was ashamed to see good solid DUers jumping on the "spread the slime" bandwagon.

I noticed posts which counter the smear party "locked"

There seemed to be widespread ignoring of the GD2004 rules regading
unreliable sources.

Why did this happen and how we going to prevent this from happening again, and again, and again.

[boxster]

1. How about actually taking the time to think?

The fact that this was getting almost zero mainstream press should have been the first indication.

The conflicting ages, names, and dates was another.

The fact that the only sources were Drudge and the Sun should have precluded *anyone* from jumping on the bandwagon.

[WiseMen]

2. DU should stick to its own rules and manage stories based on RW sources

[rucky]

3. I know you can't call people out,

Maybe I missed something, but I've only seen a few posts from people who believed it, and a few posts from people who completely disbelieved it. Most of the posts were prefaced by an IF it's true - and pretty even-keeled about it, IMO.

Now all the sudden there's a ton of posts directed at a handful of people. I hope you're not suggesting we ignore RW propaganda when it comes around. Seeing as you wish to confront the issue of falling for it, I hope you also want to confront the issue that - like it or not - it's there & it's dangerous.

So my .02 - we can't afford to ignore stories like this. We should assume the shit stinks - but we better be prepared for the possibility that the shit also sticks.

[mzmolly]

5. You said it...

;)

[boxster]

8. I disagree.

Look at any of the early threads about this topic. There were many, many, MANY people who were perpetuating it as if it were completely true. And many who were telling Kerry to pack it up and go home.

[rucky]

12. then I definately missed something

:wow:

[boxster]

20. Yeah, it was pretty bad, especially early.

There were a lot of posts that were essentially demanding that Kerry drop out "for the good of the party", "because now he's unelectable" and similar sentiments.

[okieinpain]

13. great reply, I'm a dean supporter, and I'm not a great fan of kerry

but if this were dean, kerry, or bill clinton. I would be really pissed of if there was even a hint of this crap floating around. to me what gives this legs is the fact that the rumor has been floating around for a while and then finally found a home.

I hope it's all bulls***, I really do. but if we start getting a female a month coming out about kerry, but the election will go bush.
and I'm afraid that I just don't think I could take another 4 years.

[mzmolly]

4. We can't prevent news from creeping into GD2004...

We couldn't prevent it when Dean was the front runner either. The source I personally noted was a British source that I was unfamiliar with, not Drudge. They claimed the woman granted a television interview around Christmas time? I understand now that this source is questionable?

I hope this issue *is* put to rest and the interview does not exist. But I assume you are aware that Drudge and other RW sources have been around DU for some time. Check the archives you'll see ;)

[WiseMen]

6. RW baseless Slime is not NEWS.

[mzmolly]

19. True, but it's ridiculous to infer that DU was above it all before the

Kerry story.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

7. Admin decided it was an issue and was newsworthy. That is understandable.

However, the manner in which the NEWSWORTHINESS was framed is another issue entirely and one where the rules should be applied consistently.

7. You may not post any material from extreme right-wing sources, specifically WorldNetDaily.com, Newsmax.com, FreeRepublic.com, and their ilk. Material from more "mainstream" conservative writers or sources, such as The Washington Times and Fox News, are permitted as long as the post includes a clear warning about the source. (For example: "WARNING: Please note that this article is written by George Will.")

8. If you make a highly questionable and inflammatory factual assertion about a candidate, you must provide a link to a reputable source to back up your claim. Rumor-mongering is not allowed. Allegedly "innocent" questions which are actually an underhanded effort to spread rumors are not allowed. If you really need to know the answer to your question, try Google.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=291793

Had rule 7 been followed, people would and should have been required to point out that the sources of the stories were less than credible.

Had rule 8 been followed at least 100 threads would have been locked.

[BruinAlum]

9. It's not that people were used by RW Smear machine, it was the opposite

It was People using the RW Smear machine because they WANTED it to be true. THAT's what was so pathetic. Everyone knows Drudge is not a reliable source, at least any Democrat knows that.

Very sad. People were willing to exploit trash just because they didn't like Kerry and wanted to see him taken out of the race whether the charges were true or not because they thought candidates getting 1/5 the support he is getting could get the nomination that way. Both damaging the Democratic Party and the chances of winning the election in November with the most electable candidate. Disgusting.

[The Magistrate]

17. An Excellent Point, Ma'am

Some here were indeed hoping to make use of the reactionaries smears for their own purposes, against fellow Democrats.

That is not a wise thing, to say the least....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[WiseMen]

21. But Rove was using us. It is in the psyche now. There will always be

suspicion.

[DuctapeFatwa]

10. There is no way that a candidate can avoid rumors

And with the notable exception of a blue dress situation, it would be difficult for any reporters to "prove or disprove" marital infidelity.

If Candidate X has lunch with a pretty girl, especially if he has lunch with her more than once, all you have to say is "Candidate X and blonde bombshell Jane Jones were seen giggling over linguine at Spago's AGAIN"

And if Candidate X is having an extramarital affair, it is unlikely that he will be seen publicly with her, much less leave any "proof" of the relationship around for the media to pocket.

Truth is not a highly prized commodity in politics to begin with, and campaigns do not change that.

[Tinoire]

16. There you go making sense again.

What's wrong with you Bubba :whrug:

[displacedtexan]

11. The rumor certainly was hot around here.

In fact, here's just a sample of DU discussion:

http://tinyurl.com/2uald

[Catholic Sensation]

14. How I would have handled it if I didn't support Kerry

I would have substituted Dean/Edwards/Sharpton/Kucinich in place of John Kerry's, and figured out what my reaction would have been. (Pissed, as I was when I saw it)

Then I would have considered the source and the evidence supporting this claim, which was zilch no matter what crap posters like to throw against the wall in an effort to make Kerry look bad. (It's Matt Drudge, and as I repeatedly said: he called Blumenthal a wife beater, claimed that John Edwards broke election laws regarding financing, spread the lies regarding the destruction of the White House when Clinton left, and a host of other lies).

It's fairly simple really, it's called maturity, which some of my responces lacked, but nonetheless were more mature than the people who continued to pursue this issue like it was an indisputable fact.

[WillyBrandt]

15. Act older than five years old

And don't revel in hatreds. It's very simple.

[genius]

18. Stay out of DU. It seems the RNC stories come alive here.

Here every possible smear is being posted and it usually stays. What is worse,if you post something pro-Democrat, people want to attack. The best example is the article I cross-posted that a young girl wrote. This looked like a kid hate-site for several days.

From some of the discussions, one could gather that a lot of posters feel the following way?

Those who support the Democratic Party are liers and very bad guys/girls if they are kids. Kids should be wearing diapers at 18 as they are incapable of functioning until that age.

Bush's victims are all psychos and should never be believed. Bush would never do anything to hurt a woman.

Every bad thing anyone could say about a Democratic candidate is true, no matter how unreliable the source.

Every last one of the Democratic candidates should drop out over scandals or electability.