Social media and Politics: A perfect match?

It wasn't long ago that when you wrote to your local representative you had to get a stamp and go to your mailbox, then you had to wait a few weeks to get a response, if any. With the leaps in technology, today you don't have to mail anything besides a ballot. Maybe the reason the Post Office was considering closing on Saturday's was in-part for this reason.

What's clear is that the landscape of politics has changed dramatically. Social Media sites have turned candidates like Barack Obama, who quite possibly wouldn't have won the 2008 election otherwise, into donation machines. Because that is what it's all about. In politics, the candidates who raise the most money will likely win the election.

But also, the candidate who has the biggest social media budget will likely win the election. While Replublicans have called President Barack Obama the "food stamp" president, in 2008 the LA Times labeled Obama the first "Social Media" President because of his use of social networks in his campaign. In 2012, Obama's social media budget was 10 times that of Mitt Romney.

The social media hype is real and the candidate with the most active social media users is a serious contender for the presidency. In todays "social media" world, the candidate with the most active social media constituents, besides Obama, is arguably Ron Paul. Seriously, try explaining the rise of Ron Paul amongst young people. The former Texas congressman who ran for President in 1988, 2008, and 2012 is nearly 80 years old yet draws overflow crowds at places like Iowa State University.

Though Ron Paul won't be running for President in 2016, it's interesting to see if his son Rand Paul will be running 2016 and how much money he can raise against presumed challenger Democrat Hillary Clinton. Whichever the case,  it's clear that social media will have an impact on the 2016 elections, just as they did in 2008 & 2012.

Kickstarter: Technological Breakthrough or Nerdy Panhandling?

Chico band Armed for Apocalypse recently announced that they had started a kickstarter to help the band get to Europe for a slew of European tour dates. Though the band is signed to a record label,with which it has released two albums, they couldn't afford the $5,700 in plane tickets to get to their European destination. So they did what most people in media looking for financial backing do nowadays. They started a Kickstarter!

According to the kickstarter website, the company was founded in April 2009 as a way for creative projects to attain the funding needed for the project. Whether it's related to movies, music (or other creative projects) Kickstarter seems to be all the new rage when it comes to raising money. This sort of internet panhandling works too. Armed for Apocalypse's European tour with 36 Crazy Fists kicks off on November 1st. 

But it's not just local bands that are looking for donations. Former 'Scrubs' star Zach Braff was recently the subject of controversy after he raised $2 million dollars towards his kickstarter campaign to fund the sequel to "Garden State". And rightfully so. With all that money he made from 'Scrubs' and Garden State, is it necessary for the actor/writer/director to ask for his fans to fund the production of the movie? And then pay again to see the movie when it comes out?

Braff rebukes the critics saying the kickstarter campaign has given him the right to "final cut, casting choices, location choices, and cutting down your script". Not only has the kickstarter campaign given artists a new platform to raise money for their projects,  it has given artist's the freedom to create a project without the strings that may be attached to financial backing from sources not found on kickstarter.

Back in the Nineties, Kevin Smith made his debut masterpiece "Clerks" from $27,000 dollars, mostly on maxed-out credit cards. The majority of the film was shot at the convenience store where Smith worked in real-life. Back in the nineties would Smith have used Kickstarter? Probably then but not today. When asked about whether "crowd funding" would be used to fund "Clerks III", Smith asserted that he didn't want to take from the money pot that "could go to budding filmmakers without access to financing", instead opting to finance the film himself.

While kickstarter is a great way for beginning artists to gain money, you have to wonder whether rich actors, such as Zach Braff, are starting kickstarters to both gain funding for their projects and market their project, killing two birds with one proverbial stone. But as long as we have new ways to make money, people will be using those platforms. Either way, if you're an artist looking for funds, it's clear that kickstarter is the way to go.

Social Media Profiles. For Creepers!

You've probably heard it before, "Be careful what you post online", as if the N.S.A. is gonna get all Edward Snowden on you ,and come down tomorrow because you posted a drunk picture from the party last night. Does anyone else find it weird that jobs may look at your Facebook page? 

Technically, Facebook is a social network. But it's a large picture sharing site, also. I mean, it's kind of a personal page that is created for friends and family. So why is a possible employer searching for me on Facebook? It just seems kind of creepy. When I turn in a resume, I don't give my Facebook url to some person I don't know because it's none of their business. Does my profile pic prove that I will be a better worker? No, it doesn't. It's totally irrelevant. Looking into my personal pages online is an invasion of privacy. What's worse is that using my profile pic to possibly disqualify me from a job is unethical.Most Social Networks are not professional enough in atmosphere to be looked at with future employment in mind. 

Some people have realized this and created their profiles according. Privacy settings on Facebook and Google+ have been customized to let the user select "friends" and place them into "groups", allowing the user to decide who sees what on their profile. This may help to develop a "squeaky clean" profile, if wanted. I would suggest everyone with a public profile, switch to a private profile ASAP. Then create groups of friends to decide who sees what. John may be the biggest drunk on the planet but it's hard for people to know that if they don't see it. And apparently, that's what people want, is to not see your drunk pictures on the internet.