This article discusses Edwards' efforts to use new media to gain an edge in the 2008 elections. Formally announcing his candidacy via youtube, encouraging voters to text message their support, blogging through his own site www.onecorps.com, Edwards is, according to those quoted in the article, ahead of the online campaign curve. The article interestingly compares Edwards' approach to that of former Virginia Governor Mark Warner. Warner too utilized the online avenues but, according to Nancy Scola (former Hill staffer Howard Dean campaign volunteer) came across stiff and uneasy online. The implication here is that not only a campaign, but a particular type of personality, must be staged online to be effective. This leads me to wonder whether particular personalities translate across media - can Edwards mobilize his supporters outside of cyberspace? Although this report positively announces that twice as many Americans use the web as their primary source of news about the 2006 elections as they did in 2002, it seems to posit that the real political audience is still reached through TV. Concluding with a reference to Howard Dean, the article settles on the view that the Internet is an increasingly important medium, but still only one piece of the campaign puzzle, leaving us a bit unsure of the implications regarding Edwards' mastery of online tools. Ultimately, when it comes to presidential campaigns, does money still rule - or will the internet increasingly become THE most important piece of a candidate's strategy? In the future, could e-campaigns prove a democratizing force in the uneven playing-field of big-money politics?

Michael Cornfield's Commentary summarizes the ways in which the internet has become an essential medium of American politics. Cornfield outlines five major innovations of the Howard Dean (Joe Trippi, manager) 2004 campaign: news-pegged fundraising appeals, net-organized local gatherings, blogging, online referenda, decentralized decision-making. Cornfield examines the different Deanian techniques that Kerry and Bush utilized in their campaigns - Kerry focused more on fund-raising while Bush concentrated on grass-roots mobilization. Cornfield ultimately concludes that the Democrats started too late and were not effectively organized.

In an effort to analyze the techniques utilized by the emerging 2008 candidates, this article is useful for historicizing Internet politicking. One of the most interesting comments is Cornfield's re-imagining the concept of an "activist" - who might soon include "people who do little more than what ten minutes a month at their computers enable them to do." Although Moveon.org got 500,000 people to sign the petition against impeaching President Clinton, the House ultimately voted for impeachment. The organization's real power seems to have come from fund-raising for candidates. Is online activism now (say online petitions or virtual marches) as effective (in terms of real-world effects in policy, etc.) as live-action grassroots efforts - or could it be in the future?

This article (as its title indicates) is focused on the internet aspect of the 2004 campaign and does not offer a well-rounded examination of other campaign factors.