Keen: Internet's Lack of Impact is 'Most Significant'

Andrew Keen is the author of "Cult of the Amateur: How the Internet is Killing our Culture." Keen is a prominent media personality who has appeared on The Colbert Report, The Today Show, FOX News, CNN International, NPR's Weekend Edition, BBC Newsnight and many other television and radio shows in America and overseas. He has written for publications such as The Wall Street Journal, The London Guardian, and The Weekly Standard.

Photo courtesy of The Globe and Mail

Alexander Heffner: What is your reaction to the huge youth turnout this election season—and the rise of Barack Obama through powerhouse Dean-like Internet fundraising?

Andrew Keen: Obama's done a good job. He's a real politician and is using the Internet properly as a strategic weapon. The Internet is a good sales and marketing adjunct for political campaigns. But he's a brilliant speaker, and that's what counts. The Internet is not critical in Barack Obama's political successes. Either, pre- or post-Internet, Obama wins.

AH: In brief, how has the "cult of the amateur" impacted this presidential election most significantly thus far?

AK: Its lack of an impact is most significant, I think. I don't think the Internet's been hugely important. The critical events happen on the mainstream media. In the Republican race, the Internet hasn't had a real impact at all. The race would have had the same outcome with or without the Internet.

AH: What would make Obama an Internet candidate?

AK: If his strategy was based on his online presence, which it isn't. Most of the reason that he's been successful is his support from wealthy communities and young people who think he's the next JFK. That just reflects that he's an iconic figure. Web sites don't win elections. The reason he's performed so well in the caucuses is because of his strong and intelligent organization, particularly in preparation for these caucuses.

AH: What about Ron Paul's rise as an online superstar?

AK: The key distinction between someone like Paul and Obama is that Paul is a clown who's essentially irrelevant outside of the Internet. Obama's credible and he knows what he's talking about. It's failed to make or break him. For Paul, the Internet both made him and broke him, in the sense that the underworld libertarian cult following didn't break through because it's a real world.

AH: In 2004, the YouTube phenomenon hardly existed the way it has this cycle. Supporters argue it's an excellent tool for accountability in campaigns and government; those few contrarians suggest it makes the complex superficial and dissuades good-intentioned people from running for public office for fear of public embarrassment. So is the Web site a net plus or minus for our society and democracy?

AK: I don't think it's had much of an impact on the Democratic or Republican race. I don't really see what role YouTube has played. There's so much crap on it. People have been looking for a YouTube moment, but the worst that happened with McCain is the "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb" Iran video. I haven't seen the candidates "exposed" on YouTube. I don't the Web site is very important because the vast majority of people who use it have already made up their minds.

AH: It won't persuade any undecided voters to turn in a particular direction?

AK: I'm very doubtful that YouTube convinced many uncommitted voters to vote for X and Y. YouTube, of course, trivializes everything. And then all that is captured are highlights. The problem with YouTube is that it dumbs everything. I don't think it's been a dumbing-down election, and if YouTube has tried to trivialize the election, it hasn't. The media and voters have behaved impeccably. However, It can be used in a very dangerous and corrosive way ... people are lazy and they trust this as real media, even in a 30-second climate. What YouTube does is report on the world inaccurately. It's an overall minus.

AH: During the campaign, how did you react to the anti-Clinton 1984 spoof?

AK: The fact again is that the ad reflected no political message. HRC isn't big brother. An Obama supporter put it up. If you're unclear about good or bad, that's not convincing. That kind of video is fraught and meaningless. It's a sideshow and spectacle of people who are starring at a reflection and believe it's real. It's a classic example of all noise and no substance.

AH: Where do you get your political news on the Internet?

AK: Newspapers exclusively, sometimes online. The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The London Guardian. I don't consume any of the new media.

AH: Final predictions on the Internet's role in shaping the election?

AK: The Internet is full of unsubstantiated rumors. Obama is very vulnerable, particularly as a young African-American with the middle name Hussein. But the fact that he's got a lot of enemies and he's still won many states shows his strength as a candidate.