In one of those weird unfoldings, the story started not with Markos (Kos), but with a shot at his buddy, fellow blogger, and co-author, Jerome Armstrong. (Jerome started the blog myDD. He and Markos have a book on progressive politics out called Crashing the Gates)
The first shot was that this guy Jerome Armstrong did some funky stuff that had nothing to do with politics â getting paid by companies to tout their stocks, or something like that. Who knows. (It seemed substantive, but itâs not the point of this story)
People then started noticing that Kos and Armstrong hyped a lot of candidates who had one or both of them on the campaign payroll, particularly Armstrong. The charge was, if you want to get endorsed on DailyKos, you just had to hire Armstrong.
The first shot had come from the New York Times. But for some reason, an apparently liberal journal called The New Republic started piling on⦠with some enthusiasm. Apparently thereâs some rivalry â¦I donât know the details.
Somewhere along the line, those sporty chaps at Redstate jumped in.
[Ok ⦠for all the RedState posts that got front-paged on this one, see the bottom of this page. Itâs too distracting right now.]
So the RedState crowd had some âfunâ ⦠and they were obviously trying to bring Kos down. (In addition to being liberal, his blog is, ahem, bigger than theirs) So the question is, did it work?
Well, it didnât look too good for Kos when things started out. He took awhile to blog about it ⦠and when he did, he got very
defensive. So I figured heâd go down â defensive generally means guilty. And the RedState people kept calling him âcultishâ, and his post kind of confimed it.
But slowly, Kos changed his tune. Instead of getting defensive, he started getting sarcastic. He also started linking to other people who were doing the same â and thus, doing less of the talking himself.
Ok, then he got kind of cultish again. But in a slightly cool, rally the troops kind of way.
He went back to using humor, and to showcasing othersâ humor instead of his own, here, and this is the post where he really nailed it. In particular, check out one of the other posts he links to, which is really a quite funny satire of the whole thing. Itâs the second one down, here.
IMHO, the point was, one: Kos is no longer defending himself; instead, he is flexing his network of others who are defending him; and two: the Kossacks are not getting angry; they are just making fun of the other side (who did, in fact, vastly over-extend themselves).
So at this point, Iâd say RedStateâs predicted flame-out is, well, flamed out. Kos has passed a hurdle, his first political scandal; and he did it by doing what he does best–leading by letting others lead.
However, the Kossacks arenât out of the woods yet. Theyâve denied the opponent a victoryâ¦but their tactic of winning through humorous mockery raises my eyebrows. Is that their lot–to be the wise-cracking kids? Kos almost says it himself (from the post linked above):
Really, as much as people try to paint us as “angry”, fact is we have a lot of fun with this stuff. We make politics fun, and do so effortlessly.
But Kos ⦠have you and the Kossacks limited yourselves? Are you now truly the kids who have to be âquiet, adults talking now,â as the RedState folks like to say? Are you guys just in politics for the laughs?
If so, the Kossacks will be tough to attack ⦠but whether they will ever be taken seriously is another question.
What do BMG-ers think?
__
And, just for the record:
In addition to the RedState posts above, here are the rest. Again, these are only the ones that got front-paged.
This one was supposedly related.
All of these were front-paged, by the way.
This one introduced the official âfunny anti-Kos blog graphicâ.
By now, theyâve started talking about how the Armstrong guy did astrology.
More astrology. This one officially mentions Kosâ predicted âFlameout.â
This one had something to do with Kos switching from Paul Hackett to the other guy in Ohio (and also astrology)
This one was supposedly related.
And last but not least (for now)â¦more astrology.
(Hey, at least they’re thorough.)
the SEC complaint against him is here. Here are the excerpts relating specifically to his role in the alleged scheme:
<
p>
<
p>
Whoops.
You characterize this as some conservative blog (which I don’t read) against DailyKos.
<
p>
But, as I posted earlier on BMG, those suggesting the Armstrong-gets-cash-then-Kos-endorses storyline, are Slate, Newsweek, National Journal, New Republic, and the NY Times Business Section (I’m not counting David Brooks op-ed).
<
p>
Those I do read, and I think it’d be hard to characterize all of them as “conservative” – unless you believe The Nation and Michael Moore are “moderate.”
<
p>
Armstrong’s settlement with the SEC, which I guess some guy just posted here, is relevant, your protestation to the contrary.
<
p>
The pattern there: you give Armstrong cash, he says nice things about you online, pretending he’s a disinterested party.
<
p>
The alleged Kos variation: you give Armstrong cash, he gets Kos to say nice things about you online.
<
p>
Bush’s greatest flaw (well really Cheney), I believe, is no capacity for admission of error – instead, just attack the critics’ motives.
<
p>
Clinton’s greatest flaw, I believe, was his skill at parsing words made him think he could never really “get caught” at anything.
<
p>
Your hero Kos combines those flaws.
Kos is not my hero. In general, I prefer reading RedState to DailyKos. I view the Kossites as an interesting cultural and political phenomenon, but not as heroes.
<
p>
This story has many elements. I focused on the dynamic between DailyKos and RedState. If you want to focus on another element (Armstrong, MSM, etc) go ahead. (Next time, try adding substance.)
<
p>
2. Okay, Kos is not your hero. Big Papi and we’ll call it a day.
<
p>
3. I agree that Kossites are an interesting phenomenon. Just like their counterparts on the far right, they polarize at the expense of all of us, and when questioned about a misstep, pretend that they have no centrist critics (i.e., respond to Redstate instead of MSM).
<
p>
So my opinion is that you misread the Kos response – the main theme is “When faced with many critics, choose the critic or two who is easiest to discredit, and then attack only them to sidestep the real charge.”
<
p>
The strategy is no different from Tom Delay’s strategy of attacking the DA, or Bush attacking NYT when it disclosed the illegal wiretapping, or Limbaugh on the drug charges. Obviously the Kos-Armstrong issue at hand is very small potatoes, but it follows the same pattern.
Please keep your comments civil GGW. You don’t do any of us any favors, or yourself any credit, by being obnoxious.
<
p>
2. Bob, aren’t you the guy with posts like “Healey obsesses over prisoner breasts?” Quite civil.
What exactly are you accusing Markos of? That he said nice things about people because someone paid his friend? Is that the new standard? No one who discusses politics is allowed to have friends who are paid by campaigns?
<
p>
I’m sorry but this whole situation ranks way up there with Marshmallow Fluff in the list of things I am not interested in. It has made the entire blogosphere unreadable for the past few days.
The accusation that various magazines are making is as you say: maybe Kos said nice things b/c someone hired his friend. (And maybe not….just allegation).
<
p>
Certainly not illegal. In fact, as you know, this is the specific job of a press agent – you pay them, they are friends with reporters and editors, they get nice stories placed about you.
<
p>
If true, however, it would infuriate Kos readers. They think Kos says nice things when he genuinely admires the person. It goes to his integrity and therefore the value of his “brand.”
<
p>
Moreover, Armstrong is not merely a pal, but Kos’s co-author; the closer link makes it sound like left hand is being paid so right hand says the nice things.
<
p>
Therefore, Kos denies the charge.
<
p>
But you are right – tempest in teapot. I can’t believe I just wrote TWO comments about this. I am lame.
Ok, show of hands, how many of you think Daily Kos is Markos Moulitas? See. Look at all those hands.
<
p>
DailyKos would survive quite well without Markos. The site is not about Moulitas, it is a place for progressives to mingle, propose, vet ideas, discuss issues, and post cute kitten pictures
Markos generally posts once or twice a day but the “Front pagers” do all the heavy lifting (Georgia10, McJoan, Darksyde, SusanG, etc.).
<
p>
Then there are the rest of us.
<
p>
We post our diaries. Some diaries receive enough “recommends” to make the recommended diary list.
<
p>
We comment on other diaries (front pagers included).
<
p>
We “rate” comments (or troll rate if we have “trusted user” status).
<
p>
DailyKos is a model:
<
p>
<
p>
a model of participative government internet style. And quite a useful model at that.
<
p>
As with any participative government, you can kill off, impeach, etc any one individual and the government survives. Daily Kos is the same…
As a matter of fact, if Markos (god forbid) was suddenly stricken with a dread disease or trampled by a herd of yellow elephants, I could easily see daily Kos continuing to thrive in his absence. His main accomplishment has been creating a website that provides a platform and meeting-place for democrats, deaniacs or not, to rant, post thoughtful essays, cat pictures, silliness, expert opinions…the list is endless. The fact that he is now being treated as a “player” or more absurdly “kingpin” is kind of funny….my only worry is that Kos might be letting it go to his head…hopefully not.
<
p>
Incidentally, if I were a candidate I don’t think I’d want to hire that Armstrong fellow. Based on Armstrong’s response to the complaint cited above (he not only didn’t have a lawyer, he didn’t realize that it was a civil matter and he couldn’t get a court-appointed lawyer) he doesn’t sound like the sharpest knife in the drawer, so to speak.
DKos is what it is not because of Kos, who is a pretty decent blogger among zillions of pretty decent bloggers, but because of the diary/comment/recommendation system which allows jes’ folks to become a part of the action.
<
p>
That is why we’ve gotten bigger lately, too: Soapblox is a derivation of Scoop. And that’s why this diary exists. 🙂
I know it existed a little while before that, but that it was first to implement a rating system flexible enough to allow for free exchange of ideas without getting overwhelmed by trolls. I was under the impression that being the first such blog was the reason for its initial success, which led to its incredible popularity, which is now pretty much self-perpetuating.
<
p>
Don’t know what makes for a “decent” blogger–Kos himself is nothing special. His greatest attribute in recognizing that the real attraction of his blog is everybody else.
The original Scoop site was Kuro5hin. Rusty (the guy behind K5) created Scoop.
<
p>
Everything else in your comment is true; I just thought I’d point this out…
should have said first “political” scoop blog.
Really? I had no idea. Just the other day I was musing on Scoop and whether it might work here at BMG…
<
p>
Does SoapBlox still have the voting stuff from Scoop, and if so, any thoughts on enabling it or something like it?
<
p>
Don’t get me wrong; I greatly appreciate the job that you and Bob and Dave do, but I worry sometimes about possible FP-worthy stories slipping through the cracks; if some threshold of recommendations by “trusted” users auto-FP’d the story, I think that might have some potential.
<
p>
Just wonderin’…
Your blog treats the whole affair as if it’s a food fight or a game of chess. I’m curious about where you stand on the matter of the basis for Kos’s endorsements or the propriety of his promoting certain stocks………? The issues here are not about who’s winning a debate – they’re about the integrity of the blogosphere.
I found the chess game more interesting than the charges. But as far as that:
<
p>
1. Agreeing with posts above – dailyKos is not solely about Markos M.
2. Markos M. is at his best when he remembers that. He doesn’t always, but what I tried to get at in my post is that he started to remember at the end.
3. The charges are not totally off base. It looks like Markos was straying dangerously towards that which we all entered the game to combat. The question is, is it one-time mistake, or a habit. Too soon to tell.
4. I do think the most interesting thing is the posture of the dailyKos posters coming out of this. What is their game, and what do they want out of it? Do they want to be the adults, or are they happy being the kids?
Equates Grover Norquist and Kos. Here is the first paragraph: “Funny thing about public scrutiny: It works both ways and those who want more of it soon find out such scrutiny can turn around and bite them in the ass. So itâs fun watching the sanctimonious partisans who dominate the political blogs scream in anguish because one of their own is under a microscope.”
The political blog equivalent of the Weekly World News…
Here’s what I see as being the deal.
<
p>
The stock thing is irrelevant. He did or didn’t do it, and the SEC will deal with him.
<
p>
What IS relevant is if the Kos brand has been compromised by trading recommendations for hiring SELECTED consultants, i.e., DID hiring the partner guarantee a nice Kos write-up, and did FAILURE to hire the Kos partner get you a bad write-up or non-mention?
<
p>
This may become an issue, especially in light of how many commercial concerns are PAYING bloggers to give them a nice mention, like ‘I just LOVE American Express!’. It also jeopardizes our hard fought for editorial exemption under McCain-Finegold, as NOW we may all have to credit our comments as in-kind donations, as was originally proposed.
<
p>
The snippy leters of Kos and the let’s starve the story’ memo do nothing for his credibility!
<
p>
Thank heavens nobody has ever paid me for anything!
With respect, Ms. Porcupine, how do we know you’re not paid by some 527 and sitting in Utah or wherever firing off comments on blogs nationwide. Anonymity and credibility just don’t mix well: come on out into the sun. That said, I agree with your comment 😉
My handle on BMG is Andy. My name is Andy, am I any more or less elusive than EB3? What do you know about me? How much would you like me to disclose? The internet is fairly anonymous, sure, The Editors, know where I am sitting right now, or rather what company I work for, but there is plenty I can still do to make sure that my secret identity (I am Superman….DAMNIT, I knew I would slip) is still secret.
Bob, I’m not sure where you’re going with this 1-person crusade on anonymity. If I learned anything from the research I did for this post (because no I’m not so much of a blog fiend that I had all this stuff at my fingertips), it was that on the DailyKos community, many bloggers really like their anonymity, their nicknames, and the opportunity to create a unique net identity and be judged solely on what they write. I mention this because I’m sure it applies to many bloggers here at BMG as well.
<
p>
In any event, I’ve seen you make this same comment a lot, and I’d suggest you either find a way of breathing new life into the argument, or let it go.
<
p>
(My 2 cents.)
Seriously – the absence of ads on my blog, coupled with my word, may suffice for you. You are correct, none of us know much about one another (we discussed this some on the ‘civility’ thread) so really all you can rely on is a track record over the course of time.
<
p>
As a one-person blog I am either entirely innocent or entirely corrupt,,,
I’ve been reading the Daily KOS for 2 years and do not recognize it in either this diary or some of the upthread posts.
<
p>
Nobody uses the terms Kos Kids or Kossites. The phrase is Kossacks. Anyone who has spent more than 2 hours at the site knows this.
<
p>
I read five or six diaries a day – that would be about 2000 a year. In 2 years I have read maybe 2 dozen diaries by KOS – that is, about one a month. Markos is a minimal presence on KOS. And Jerome is even less prominent. I’ve read perhaps 4 diaries by him. Kossacks joke that Markos doesn’t read the DailyKos. Far more influential than Kos on a daily basis has been Armando. Like others, I have at times vociferously disagreed with Armando.
<
p>
KOS is a bottom-up site. The content is member-generated and policing is done by the 2200 most active users, who are called Trusted Users. I’ve been a trusted user on and off for the past six months. You “earn” that status by getting good ratings from other registered users. (All registered users, not TU’s.)
<
p>
In sum, from the broadest perspective – how Kos operates – to the most trivial – terminology and nicknames – this diary and the anti-Kos comments are inaccurate. Colleagues – go look for yourself.
We are in so much trouble if that’s true.
A right winger just “outed” armando so he has, at least for now, ceased blogging at DKos.
<
p>
If anything, Armando was known for his polemics. Boy could he get your blood boiling 🙂
I totally missed the “outing” of Armando – clearly I haven’t been spending much time at Kos lately. What a bizarre story. But I don’t understand why Armando has taken his ball and gone home. So what if his identity is public? If his blogging was a hazard to his professional activities, (a) he shouldn’t have been doing it at all, since anonymity (obviously) cannot be guaranteed, and (b) the damage is now done, so why not just keep doing what he obviously likes doing? He can’t possibly write anything more incendiary than what he’s already written on the front page of the most widely-read political blog in the country.
<
p>
It’s really a bit of a cautionary tale, isn’t it? And one that suggests that Bob’s crusade to abolish anonymity is a well-founded one. If Armando has been “out” from the beginning, he wouldn’t have had any problems.
What a story.
<
p>
I got really emotional when I read it, but I think I got the wrong idea. They didn’t out Armando for being gay, did they? They just outed him for being a WalMart lawyer. Not quite as bad, imho. But a really surprising and attention-getting story, nonetheless. And the sub-posts were compelling. DKos really is more of a community than I had understood.
<
p>
(PS Surprise surprise, I would not jump from Armando’s story to concluding that therefore, all blog anonymity must be destroyed. Bob is still Don Quixote on that one.)
It’s on the front page, or here’s the link.
Some do call DailyKos community the
Kos Kids and http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=kossitesKossites. I didn’t say it was the Kossacks themselves.
<
p>
I do not agree that Markos is a minimal presence on DailyKos, either judging by the frequency of his front-page posts, or by qualitative measures such as his “status”. But we could argue it all day.
<
p>
As to the rest, your facts about the Kos site are interesting. But I’m not sure which of the comments here you think you’re disagreeing with.
<
p>
What I’d be more interested in talking about is, as a member of the DailyKos community, what do you think about the question I wanted to direct to BMG, on whether the Kossacks want to be taken “seriously”? Or whether they see themselves as the kids giving the adults a good ribbing, and are happy with that. And do you think their use of humor, sarcasm, satire, etc in their posts reflects the kind of presence they are trying to achieve?
Markos is the architect and as such has tremendous influence, but it is a special kind of influence. The site is for Democrats who are committed to making the Democratic party better. If you were to pick the top ten contentious issues on Kos and poll trusted users like me, most of us would be unsure of Kos’ opinions on several – perhaps most – issues. He just doesn’t get involved in most debates. He focuses on the Mission of the site and the rules and resources that keep it working.
<
p>
With respect to the Kos community, I have not had the experiences that made me question the seriousness or heft of the community. I have learned a trememdous amount from MeteorBlades, SusanWu, SusanG, and Jerome a Paris, to name a few, on topics several dozen poltical campaigns, health care, the banking system, how Greek philosophy informs current historical thinking, you name it. I have seen personal narratives, tool, with many compassionate responses.
<
p>
A scan of today’s recommended diaries does not reveal satiric, juvenile, or sarcastic tone to me. I read non-recommended diaries as well and don’t see a difference. I also read Eschaton and find the percentage of satiric remarks higher there because Atrios has so many open threads. Perhaps you have focused on the Open Threads at DKos? I DO find open threads often silly – on every blog I visit.
<
p>
Is Kos having an impact? It has spawned several major blogs, an annual convention that drew over a thousand participants the first time out, participation by major political figures; and I would argue that Ned Lamont would not be where he is without Kos.
<
p>
Do Kossacks want to have an impact? A curious question for a blog whose stated purpose (periodically debated on the site) is to reinvigorate the Democratic Party and whose Frontpagers work their asses off to serve the rest of us. One final statistic – the largest cohort reading Kos is 45 – 54 (27%) and the next largest cohort is OVER 65.
http://www.imediaconnection.com/content/10139.asp
I meant to say “on topics RANGING from various political campaigns….”
Must remember: Preview. Is. My. Friend.
Yes it is interesting to note that the most well represented age group is 45+
<
p>
I wonder why this is… hmmm
<
p>
Great post
Thanks for the thoughts.
<
p>
FYI, I described the DKos community’s voice with words like satire, humor, etc primarily because of the posts from Kos I linked to, which showcased the DKos members or other bloggers responding to the conflict with humor and satire. I suppose I may have made two errors – one, not to distinguish between bloggers at DKos, and bloggers at other sites (although to some extent, they are part of the same community which has spun out of DKos); and two, to look only at the response to the Markos/Armstrong conflict and assume it was representative. As to the second, I simply didn’t have time to do the kind of broad examination that would take.
<
p>
I want to pick up on one of the later points you made, about the question “is Kos [and the DKos community] having an impact”. What I’m really asking, which only occurred to me when reading your post, is not, do they want to have an impact? Obviously, they do. But my question is, in the quest for making an impact, what sort of voice do they want to have? My thoughts below (warning, mild fog ahead…)
<
p>
Some people, and more importantly some communities, have “adult” or serious voices – for example, most politicians (individuals); government organizations taken as a whole (Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, Internal Revenue Service), and newspapers of record, e.g. the New York Times. The type of voice a person or a community has is both a function of what he/she/they do; and, it is also deliberate, chosen to reflect their mission.
<
p>
So, what kind of voice does the DKos community seek to project? If you take charges hurled at you, your community, or a member of your community, and respond with a message that is primarily humorous, satirical, or light-hearted, you have chosen your voice, and it is a child-like voice. I am not saying that’s bad. Child-like voices are both valid, in many situations (how many wrongs have been done by adults?), and a necessary type of pressure relief valve within the overall dialogue.
<
p>
But that doesn’t mean that DKos should necessarily be the one to take on that voice. They should take on whatever voice best reflects the best that is within themselves. So my question is, what voice are they taking on? Do people agree that it is a child-like voice, or not? And, is the voice they are assuming a good choice for their community?
BMG appears to me much like Kos. However the traffic is not in the 500,000 hits per day range thus the voting/recommending process does not work so well.
<
p>
How many of you have “recommended” a diary here or given points to a comment. I noticed that these features appear hardly used.
<
p>
Mark
<
p>
(btw, does BMG use the same software formerly used by Dkos? It looks quite similar to dKos of 2 years ago.)
happen all the time in the box in the upper right-hand corner of the screen. Comment rating is used less frequently, though we’re trying to encourage it.
<
p>
As for software, no, this is not a Scoop site. It runs on Soapblox, which is much more user-friendly from our perspective than Scoop, and which was designed to mimic a lot of Scoop’s community features.
but not in content.
<
p>
It seems to me that much of the material on Daily Kos is horse race, inside baseball stuff, rather than policy. Polling science is interesting, but only as an adjunct to actual policy discussions. Policy discussions almost always decend into childish name-calling: BusHitler! Bush is the terrorist! Repug (?) DINO! and maybe “Lieberman lover!”
<
p>
Socialist Political Theory Seminar Babble:
“Well if it werent for the corporatist, imperialist, fascist, colonialist, capitalist Americans…”
<
p>
or bizzare conspiracy theory:
<
p>
Bush is scretly planning the war for the benefit of Halliburton, which is using the profits to aid Diebold in manipulating election results in Ohio, so that additional funds can go the the oil companies and the GOP lobbyists…
<
p>
I find the content on BMG, though no less liberal, to be far, far more engaging and intellegent than Daily Kos.