Regardless of one’s personal interest in politics, images from the videos were impossible to forget: Obama Girl swooning over a shirtless Obama, destitute Wassup guys, and Will.i.am singing “Yes We Can.” The videos were produced without involvement from the Obama campaign and will remain as lasting pieces of campaign memorabilia. The precise impact these videos had on voters is difficult to calculate, and it may take some time for YouTube users to reflect the actual influence of the videos. However it is clear that user produced videos were a major piece of the media pie in the ’08 election. It is a major accomplishment for a medium, YouTube, that did not even exist in 2004. Candidates campaigning for the 2012 election cannot ignore millions upon millions of views of supportive media that they had nothing to with creating.

For the good of the future partnership between technology and politics, Barack Obama should not thank the Internet and wish it well. He should consider the Internet a member of his cabinet. He should maintain and expand upon his image on the Internet. He should use his popularity on the Internet to bring transparency to the Oval Office and use the tools that we use to illustrate that transparency. By 2012 there should be a presidential, not just a Barack Obama, presence on the Internet that the proceeding president will inherit.

Campaigns will need a department for keeping up with new tools that will spread messages rapidly. If a video can be uploaded to a site before breakfast and reach 2,000,000 by dinner, embrace the site. Release content on it. Release a lot of content on it. Show the American people that you are one of us; that you are progressing with us. If a phenomenon like the Internet -the most significant technological development since the printing press – emerges, do not patronize us about its proper use. Use it how we use it. Technologies that spread messages rapidly will help elect a candidate. It is a fact that cannot ever be ignored by a presidential candidate ever again.

Campaigns should provide guidelines to users who aspire to create supportive content. Therefore any piece of content that fails to meet those guidelines by default does not meet the approval of the campaign. Not a single word needs to be said about it by the campaign, because their word is implicit. Obama supporters who created supportive content certainly sought his approval, and in cases like “Sing for Change,” the producers who meant well were also seriously mistaken about the potential effects of their efforts.

As Obama has proven, a candidate need not slam his or her opponent. Attacking media will bubble to the surface courtesy of the candidate’s supporters, and the popular media will explode like a geyser and rain upon us. One McCain supporter made rain with the release of Obama’s “Redistribution of Wealth” radio discussion from several years ago. The video was nothing more than audio from the broadcast accompanied by the default trippy media player visualization but nevertheless rose to the top due to the potential for damage it contained. Candidates in 2012 must squash attacking media by steadfastly pressing forward with a consistent and clear message that demonstrates that he or she is not what the media claims. Obama’s message had nothing to do with socialism so the attack had little merit. It did however rally McCain’s supporter base, so this type of media will never disappear. A combination of clear track record, transparency, and consistent message may be the only way to muffle attacks. Too much talk will only endure it longer than necessary. A new dominant piece of media will appear the following day anyway.

The number of feet on the ground certainly appears to have helped Obama win the election. Reaching lots of people on a personal level clearly means more support, and in turn more people who support you will be willing to produce content for you. It’s a no-brainer. If people support you, get them on the ground, and live up to their expectations in order to keep them there and recruit more.

This reflection was not possible a week ago. Our heads were full of media and emotion. It still may be too soon to recommend a plan for the 2012 candidates. However it is no longer possible to ignore the content that users create, and candidates must not ignore the media that provide it. Any plan that meets at least those two criteria can’t be that bad.

Zipster08, an aging white male of perhaps 72, accommodates his lack of substance with an extravagant display of patriotism. He positions himself in front of the camera as most do – from the shoulders up – and wears an American flag scarf around his neck. Zipster08 documented his response to his first ever viewing of a presidential debate, and he thought it was really exciting. “Zip” admitted to not really knowing anything about any of the issues but felt himself qualified enough as an American to declare Barack Obama the clear winner of the first debate. To quote Zip, “I think Barack Obama kicked John McCain’s butt!” Zip’s measure of a winner is confidence and eloquence, very surface level qualities are important to people like Zip who zoned out at the first mention of $700B. Giving Zip a more of your time will allow you to discover that even though Obama won the debate, both men are qualified because of their ability to pronounce more than once the name of the president of “Pakistan or whatever.” Zip’s worldview is innocently narrow. He mentions how people in other countries have such funny names. Zip would not hurt a fly or say anything to offend anyone, and he even compared the upcoming vice-presidential election to the Mary Tyler Moore show. He just wants to have fun and be heard.

TheAmazingAtheist, or “Athe” in this discourse, like Zipster08 has limited knowledge of the issues, but his opinion is much more fierce and dangerous. The video in reference has a startling 1.1 million views. He opens his piece by declaring John McCain to be mentally retarded, a recurring theme in the video. The purpose of the video however is to wax disdainful about McCain’s choice of a running mate. “Who the fuck is Sarah Palin?,” Athe rhetorically asks before answering his own question with, “Oh yeah, she’s a retard!” His problems with her include the way she speaks and looks. The fact that Palin reminds him of Nancy Pelosi means a lot of Athe because of Pelosi’s low popularity. The pronunciation of “McCain/Palin” alone is enough for Athe to vote Obama, because the sound of the two words together is “the word used to describe two elderly midgets crawl up your ass and tap dance in your lower intestines wearing wooden cloggers.” On the other hand, Obama/Biden is a synonym for shindig. The video continues for several more minutes, and his argument becomes more graphic and detailed while staying clear of any discussion of actual issues. The purpose of this video appears to be to demonstrate edgy humor, but it is painful to watch and most of what he says is offensive to anyone on either side of the political field.

Goyo1997 is a a girl far too young to vote, and if the numbers of her user name are any indication, she is approximately 11 years old. “Goyo” is the only one of the 3 who attempts to form an opinion based on an issue. She, like others, believes that John McCain’s experience as a prisoner of war qualifies him to be president, while Barack Obama is under-qualified because of his status as “mayor for 2+ years.” Her opinion is well formed for someone of her age, and she thoughtfully adds up years of experience and qualities important to her to pick her candidate. She touches upon health care, one of many issues with a level of importance not discussed by either Zipster08 or TheAmazingAtheist. Goyo believes that John McCain’s health care plan is better than Obama’s plan because it requires Americans to pay for it. She further explains that what you get for free is not as good as what you pay for. Analogizing health care with a corn dog, she indulges that if one gets a free hot dog at the street fair, it will not be as good as the corn dog that costs $1.00, it will taste better and leave one wanting another. This is food for thought indeed. Moreover it is an honest attempt by an American citizen using all the knowledge with which she has been presented at this early stage of her life to tackle problems that other YouTubers have been avoiding their entire lives.

The response to Goyo1997′s video overall was very thoughtful and supportive. Of course there is partisan opinion sprinkled about some actual commentary. While her video said little more than the first two albeit with equal authenticity, Goyo’s obvious innocence forgives a style of opinion held by many adults over the age of 18 who intend to vote in November.

Whatever value these videos hold now or will hold after November 4, 2008, they represent the way this election has captivated all Americans. The medium that is video allows us to look into the eyes of these Americans and listen. This is good for America. People are, for better or worse, engaging with the mechanics of our nation. If YouTubers are seeking popularity with their opinions, the bad opinions will be squashed. New voices will emerge, and the competition to be heard will be based on quality. This will require anyone with an opinion to become more educated about their subject. It will become a greater challenge to compare health care to corn dogs.

Reference Videos:

Zipster08: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yzhon6bBeU
TheAmazingAtheist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=135SdtFzV2U&feature=related
Goyo1997: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-dCGQVZ6Cc