Last Globe poll says something like 70% of the electorate hasn’t even heard of Dr Berwick, and he’s spending time on Reddit? On Reddit? Who the heck is managing his campaign?
Perhaps the candidate can join a discussion on Usenet, too.
doublemansays
Reddit is a ridiculously (seriously, ridiculous) popular platform, and an hour of time is probably worth it, although the users are not the most likely to be primary voters – Ads running during Price is Right would better serve that population.
I get your point, though. As far as the 70% not knowing him, however, I think that’s just an enormous failure of the electorate and not a particular campaign.
No one is tuned into this race and mainstream media has decided that Coakley is inevitable so there is so little an individual campaign of an underdog can do.
methuenprogressivesays
As far as the 70% not knowing him, however, I think that’s just an enormous failure of the electorate and not a particular campaign.
He’s spent almost a million dollars. His lack of name recognition is an enormous failure of his campaign staff.
JimCsays
That sounds like a lot (it is), but in terms of governor’s races, I don’t think it’s that much. So we can cut him a bit of slack for being underfunded.
Berwick has just never caught fire.
kbuschsays
Well, then, I guess that settles it.
We’re not good enough for Dr. Berwick.
*
On every dimension, Deval Patrick was doing better at this point in 2006. He started out just as unknown as Dr. Berwick, too. Perhaps the electorate has degenerated in the last 8 years?
doublemansays
That race also received MUCH more coverage from media outlets than this race has.
I still stand by what I said, and it is not about people not supporting Berwick, it’s about being unengaged for this race.
Similarly, 35% of voters have no name recognition for a constitutional officer who has been actively involved in MA politics for decades and who previously ran for governor.
kbuschsays
If running a campaign thirsty for media coverage, an adept campaign manager gets media coverage. Media coverage doesn’t generally just “happen”.
Nationally:
– Ferguson
– Mass shootings
– Flooding, a drought in California
Internationally:
– Israel/Gaza
– Ukraine
– Malaysia Airlines
So why should they cover a Democratic primary election that, at the moment, looks like a cakewalk?
johntmaysays
I am going to speculate that after the Brown/Warren, Markey/Gomez, and all the other elections we all went through recently, the media may think that elections are simply not newsworthy anymore. Maybe they think that the public is tired of it. They could have a point.
As a Berwick supporter, I question the lack of coverage by the Globe. On the other hand, if I was a Grossman/Coakley supporter and the Globe gave Berwick support, maybe I’d wonder why they gave a guy with 10% in the polls that much coverage.
It’s clear that this election is beyond boring at the moment. Apart from folks like us, no one is talking about it. Most voters seem unaware that there is primary or an election on the horizon. I had people this weekend asking me if I thought that Patrick was going to run for another term!
So I am not so quick to crown Coakley nor am I looking for another bandwagon. I am confident that Berwick will pass Grossman in the polls and after that, things might get exciting.
As the ancient curse reads “May you live in interesting times.”
Christophersays
…to decide people are tired of politics. In a democratic system it is their job to cover it anyway. I still think it goes back to the caucuses. If Berwick had rocked the caucuses the way Patrick did in 2006 and thus come out of convention with a strong endorsement maybe the media would notice that there was a fresh face and cover that person.
johntmaysays
There was a time when the media felt an obligation to the public and report the news. Today, 90% of the media (Print, broadcast, radio, billboard, everything) is owned by just 6 corporations (thanks Ronnie!). These corporations have an obligation to their shareholders who expect a profit on their investment.
Christophersays
If you’re like me you turn on the news at a certain time each day, whether local or network, to see what the news is for the day, not to hear about what you already know. I suspect these newscasts have mostly the same audience from day to day regardless of what is happening and therefore have no motive to cater because ad revenues will be the same either way. I diaried about an extreme example of this last year. I don’t think WCVB somehow made more money off the Hernandez case than it would have other important stories that day. In fact they might have lost revenue because I think they cut back on commercial breaks that time.
johntmaysays
Who will spend more on advertising in the media if implemented in Massachusetts, a few casinos or universal health care (Medicare for All)?
Christophersays
You seem to be implying advantages to reporting on side favorably in a particular debate, such as casinos, but it still doesn’t explain the upside down priorities about what is covered, even given a financial motive.
petrsays
On every dimension, Deval Patrick was doing better at this point in 2006. He started out just as unknown as Dr. Berwick, too. Perhaps the electorate has degenerated in the last 8 years?
… really really tired.
We’ve had statewide races in 2006, 2008, twice in 2010, another in 2012 and again in 2013. It’s 2014 and here we go again. That’s seven races in eight years. And the national media is getting all hotted up over the 2016 version of “the most important election in our lifetime (again)”… I think the CommonWealth can be forgiven a fair bit of ‘electoral fatigue’ however much that might hurt the good Dr’s chances and/or feelings…
kbuschsays
or stated differently, we’ve had two special Senate elections.
Christophersays
…if we had the same laws as I believe just about every other state has and let the Governor appoint until the next biennium we would have all these extra elections. Kerry becoming SOS triggered four special elections by my count, whereas waiting until this cycle to elect might have triggered some additional vacancies, but not additional elections.
JMGreenesays
I think that’s just an enormous failure of the electorate
Pesky primary voters, not supporting my preferred candidate.
perry41says
That would include my daughter. She hasn’t missed voting since she turned 18. I reminded her that the primary was coming up and urged her to vote for Berwick.
Her reply: “Never heard of him.”
We’ve got a problem.
johntmaysays
How does a campaign reach people like your daughter?
kbuschsays
Steve Bouchard and Cindy Friedman have a most excellent answer to this question.
That’s their job after all.
SomervilleTomsays
I think a better question is “how do people his daughter reach the campaign?”
In my view, voters have a responsibility to educate themselves about elections, candidates, and issues. I’m a strong supporter of making it easy to register and easy to vote — I have equally strong misgivings about attempts to actively encourage citizens to do the same. It reminds me of evangelizing on behalf of a church — in my view, the original motivation must come from the prospective voter/congregant.
My issue with my children — especially my younger children (18 and 20) — is persuading them that their vote means anything. My son, in particular, feels that by voting he only makes a corrupt and failing institution more so.
He is no libertarian or right winger, he is the opposite. He views the entire political process — especially here in Massachusetts — as so hopelessly owned by the 1%, and so pervasively corrupt and in their service, that he is unwilling to participate in the process.
A growing number of twenty-something college graduates are defaulting on student loans and walking away from the entire processes. Too many of them tell me, quite sincerely, that they can’t get any jobs in their field anyway and can’t possibly get or afford any additional credit anyway, so that negative credit ratings don’t matter to them. They see the resulting wage garnishment as just one more tax, an amount less than their obligations under their loans, and a tax that is at least temporarily suspended each time they move from one minimum-wage (or sub-minimum wage) job to the next.
At least some of my fervor about our pervasive culture of corruption is the result of spending years attempting to explain it away in response to questions from my increasing cynical adult children.
I fear that we vastly understate just how broken our culture is. I fear that the disinterest in voting is just one of many symptoms that our political system is equally broken.
I suggest that the events of Ferguson may be a foretaste of what we may expect if we fail to fix the problem. Those military assault teams and their weapons are just as effective against white folks as they are against their current targets. Just ask the residents of Watertown.
JimCsays
But on this, I completely agree:
I fear that we vastly understate just how broken our culture is. I fear that the disinterest in voting is just one of many symptoms that our political system is equally broken.
In my view, Massachusetts has the best, most successful, close-to-the-people political system in America (and therefore, the world). But it still needs a lot of work.
perry41says
“As a Berwick supporter, I question the lack of coverage by the Globe. On the other hand, if I was a Grossman/Coakley supporter and the Globe gave Berwick support, maybe I’d wonder why they gave a guy with 10% in the polls that much coverage.”
This is a major part of the problem. My daughter, actually 40-something, scans the Globe online, so the only names she’s likely to see are Coakley and Grossman.
Also, you are conflating coverage and support, as the media also seem to be. If a candidate is not mentioned, how does a voter know he/she exists?
Most of what I’ve learned about Berwick comes from BMG, not the mainstream media.
johntmaysays
I am wondering who will advertize more in corporate media and help increase revenue to satisfy shareholder demand: casinos and competing health insurance companies or Medicare for all and no casinos? What’s in for corporate media if Berwick and not any of the others get elected?
kbuschsays
That may be true johntmay, but it would really surprise me to find newspapers putting their thumb on the scale to make sure the world has a more plentiful supply of events that sell newspapers.
Not only is it difficult to predict what events will sell newspapers but there is still a professional ethic among journalists that impedes such super-sly moves.
rcmaurosays
I think it must have been a good break for him!
The session lasted about an hour and most of the questions were friendly. I would guess that it’s nice to have it out there so that others can read it and comment, and for people already supporting Don Berwick, it was a nice opportunity to interact in an informal way and learn some fun facts.
As for me, I was super-excited to learn that Don is a Brahms fan! His favorite piece (the Violin Concerto) is perfect for a systems guy. You have one part that has to be played by a prodigiously talented person and another part that’s basically a symphony by itself, and they have to happen at the same time and in coordination. And it all works because the players have the same goal. Gives you an idea of how Don Berwick would govern.
Why not BMG? Was it something we said?
…IMHO…
http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2dnmuq/i_am_don_berwick_nonprofit_executive_health_care/
Last Globe poll says something like 70% of the electorate hasn’t even heard of Dr Berwick, and he’s spending time on Reddit? On Reddit? Who the heck is managing his campaign?
Perhaps the candidate can join a discussion on Usenet, too.
Reddit is a ridiculously (seriously, ridiculous) popular platform, and an hour of time is probably worth it, although the users are not the most likely to be primary voters – Ads running during Price is Right would better serve that population.
I get your point, though. As far as the 70% not knowing him, however, I think that’s just an enormous failure of the electorate and not a particular campaign.
No one is tuned into this race and mainstream media has decided that Coakley is inevitable so there is so little an individual campaign of an underdog can do.
He’s spent almost a million dollars. His lack of name recognition is an enormous failure of his campaign staff.
That sounds like a lot (it is), but in terms of governor’s races, I don’t think it’s that much. So we can cut him a bit of slack for being underfunded.
Berwick has just never caught fire.
Well, then, I guess that settles it.
We’re not good enough for Dr. Berwick.
*
On every dimension, Deval Patrick was doing better at this point in 2006. He started out just as unknown as Dr. Berwick, too. Perhaps the electorate has degenerated in the last 8 years?
That race also received MUCH more coverage from media outlets than this race has.
I still stand by what I said, and it is not about people not supporting Berwick, it’s about being unengaged for this race.
Similarly, 35% of voters have no name recognition for a constitutional officer who has been actively involved in MA politics for decades and who previously ran for governor.
If running a campaign thirsty for media coverage, an adept campaign manager gets media coverage. Media coverage doesn’t generally just “happen”.
Locally:
-Probation trial
– Tsarnaev prosecution
– Aaron Hernandez prosecution
– Casinos
Nationally:
– Ferguson
– Mass shootings
– Flooding, a drought in California
Internationally:
– Israel/Gaza
– Ukraine
– Malaysia Airlines
So why should they cover a Democratic primary election that, at the moment, looks like a cakewalk?
I am going to speculate that after the Brown/Warren, Markey/Gomez, and all the other elections we all went through recently, the media may think that elections are simply not newsworthy anymore. Maybe they think that the public is tired of it. They could have a point.
As a Berwick supporter, I question the lack of coverage by the Globe. On the other hand, if I was a Grossman/Coakley supporter and the Globe gave Berwick support, maybe I’d wonder why they gave a guy with 10% in the polls that much coverage.
It’s clear that this election is beyond boring at the moment. Apart from folks like us, no one is talking about it. Most voters seem unaware that there is primary or an election on the horizon. I had people this weekend asking me if I thought that Patrick was going to run for another term!
So I am not so quick to crown Coakley nor am I looking for another bandwagon. I am confident that Berwick will pass Grossman in the polls and after that, things might get exciting.
As the ancient curse reads “May you live in interesting times.”
…to decide people are tired of politics. In a democratic system it is their job to cover it anyway. I still think it goes back to the caucuses. If Berwick had rocked the caucuses the way Patrick did in 2006 and thus come out of convention with a strong endorsement maybe the media would notice that there was a fresh face and cover that person.
There was a time when the media felt an obligation to the public and report the news. Today, 90% of the media (Print, broadcast, radio, billboard, everything) is owned by just 6 corporations (thanks Ronnie!). These corporations have an obligation to their shareholders who expect a profit on their investment.
If you’re like me you turn on the news at a certain time each day, whether local or network, to see what the news is for the day, not to hear about what you already know. I suspect these newscasts have mostly the same audience from day to day regardless of what is happening and therefore have no motive to cater because ad revenues will be the same either way. I diaried about an extreme example of this last year. I don’t think WCVB somehow made more money off the Hernandez case than it would have other important stories that day. In fact they might have lost revenue because I think they cut back on commercial breaks that time.
Who will spend more on advertising in the media if implemented in Massachusetts, a few casinos or universal health care (Medicare for All)?
You seem to be implying advantages to reporting on side favorably in a particular debate, such as casinos, but it still doesn’t explain the upside down priorities about what is covered, even given a financial motive.
… really really tired.
We’ve had statewide races in 2006, 2008, twice in 2010, another in 2012 and again in 2013. It’s 2014 and here we go again. That’s seven races in eight years. And the national media is getting all hotted up over the 2016 version of “the most important election in our lifetime (again)”… I think the CommonWealth can be forgiven a fair bit of ‘electoral fatigue’ however much that might hurt the good Dr’s chances and/or feelings…
or stated differently, we’ve had two special Senate elections.
…if we had the same laws as I believe just about every other state has and let the Governor appoint until the next biennium we would have all these extra elections. Kerry becoming SOS triggered four special elections by my count, whereas waiting until this cycle to elect might have triggered some additional vacancies, but not additional elections.
Pesky primary voters, not supporting my preferred candidate.
That would include my daughter. She hasn’t missed voting since she turned 18. I reminded her that the primary was coming up and urged her to vote for Berwick.
Her reply: “Never heard of him.”
We’ve got a problem.
How does a campaign reach people like your daughter?
Steve Bouchard and Cindy Friedman have a most excellent answer to this question.
That’s their job after all.
I think a better question is “how do people his daughter reach the campaign?”
In my view, voters have a responsibility to educate themselves about elections, candidates, and issues. I’m a strong supporter of making it easy to register and easy to vote — I have equally strong misgivings about attempts to actively encourage citizens to do the same. It reminds me of evangelizing on behalf of a church — in my view, the original motivation must come from the prospective voter/congregant.
My issue with my children — especially my younger children (18 and 20) — is persuading them that their vote means anything. My son, in particular, feels that by voting he only makes a corrupt and failing institution more so.
He is no libertarian or right winger, he is the opposite. He views the entire political process — especially here in Massachusetts — as so hopelessly owned by the 1%, and so pervasively corrupt and in their service, that he is unwilling to participate in the process.
A growing number of twenty-something college graduates are defaulting on student loans and walking away from the entire processes. Too many of them tell me, quite sincerely, that they can’t get any jobs in their field anyway and can’t possibly get or afford any additional credit anyway, so that negative credit ratings don’t matter to them. They see the resulting wage garnishment as just one more tax, an amount less than their obligations under their loans, and a tax that is at least temporarily suspended each time they move from one minimum-wage (or sub-minimum wage) job to the next.
At least some of my fervor about our pervasive culture of corruption is the result of spending years attempting to explain it away in response to questions from my increasing cynical adult children.
I fear that we vastly understate just how broken our culture is. I fear that the disinterest in voting is just one of many symptoms that our political system is equally broken.
I suggest that the events of Ferguson may be a foretaste of what we may expect if we fail to fix the problem. Those military assault teams and their weapons are just as effective against white folks as they are against their current targets. Just ask the residents of Watertown.
But on this, I completely agree:
In my view, Massachusetts has the best, most successful, close-to-the-people political system in America (and therefore, the world). But it still needs a lot of work.
“As a Berwick supporter, I question the lack of coverage by the Globe. On the other hand, if I was a Grossman/Coakley supporter and the Globe gave Berwick support, maybe I’d wonder why they gave a guy with 10% in the polls that much coverage.”
This is a major part of the problem. My daughter, actually 40-something, scans the Globe online, so the only names she’s likely to see are Coakley and Grossman.
Also, you are conflating coverage and support, as the media also seem to be. If a candidate is not mentioned, how does a voter know he/she exists?
Most of what I’ve learned about Berwick comes from BMG, not the mainstream media.
I am wondering who will advertize more in corporate media and help increase revenue to satisfy shareholder demand: casinos and competing health insurance companies or Medicare for all and no casinos? What’s in for corporate media if Berwick and not any of the others get elected?
That may be true johntmay, but it would really surprise me to find newspapers putting their thumb on the scale to make sure the world has a more plentiful supply of events that sell newspapers.
Not only is it difficult to predict what events will sell newspapers but there is still a professional ethic among journalists that impedes such super-sly moves.
I think it must have been a good break for him!
The session lasted about an hour and most of the questions were friendly. I would guess that it’s nice to have it out there so that others can read it and comment, and for people already supporting Don Berwick, it was a nice opportunity to interact in an informal way and learn some fun facts.
As for me, I was super-excited to learn that Don is a Brahms fan! His favorite piece (the Violin Concerto) is perfect for a systems guy. You have one part that has to be played by a prodigiously talented person and another part that’s basically a symphony by itself, and they have to happen at the same time and in coordination. And it all works because the players have the same goal. Gives you an idea of how Don Berwick would govern.