adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Politics

From Facebook to faceoff: The bumpy road to shaping local politics

Published

 on

Back in 2015, Asheville Politics was one of a handful of fledgling online platforms seeking to increase public engagement at City Council meetings. Nearly eight years later, the Facebook group’s membership has grown tenfold to over 11,000 members, reflecting social media’s dramatically increased importance in politics at all levels.

“There just aren’t that many public forums for people that want to talk about politics,” says longtime activist Robyn Josephs, an administrator for multiple Facebook groups, including this one. “You could sit in a coffee shop and talk to one person, but you can sit in Asheville Politics and type at 12,000 people,” she notes.

That broad reach is why Bailey Stockwell is a frequent poster, sharing information about events listed on another Facebook group, East Asheville for Safety and Truth. She co-founded E.A.S.T. last November to oppose the low-barrier homeless shelter proposed for the former Ramada Inn on River Ford Parkway.

“Social media is such a convenient way to keep up with what’s going on and find out when and where you need to be to advocate for those things that you care about the most,” says Stockwell. Since its creation, her group has grown considerably both in size — it now boasts some 2,600 members — and scope, having broadened its focus to cover local politics in general.

Cross-posting events on Asheville Politics, such as a Sept. 8 candidate forum at the East Asheville Library, enables Stockwell to reach thousands more people. Yet she says she doesn’t always feel welcome on the site.

“If you make any comments that are right-leaning, they will attack you,” Stockwell maintains, adding that she and her fellow E.A.S.T. administrators “call it an echo chamber.”

But former Asheville Politics administrator Rich Lee, one of the group’s founding members, says he hears “equal amounts of complaints that we’re not making it safe enough for conservatives as that we’re not making it safe for progressives.”

And despite their differences, both Lee and Stockwell say their respective groups have real-world impact on local politics.

“I’ll call certain people I’ve met off of the page and be like, ‘Hey, you need to be here,’” says Stockwell, citing strong attendance at both the candidate forum and a Sept. 6 neighborhood meeting about the proposed town house development on Pinnacle View Road in Oakley.

Meanwhile, Lee maintains, “Some of the most dedicated readers of Asheville Politics are local officials. Almost anytime I talk to them, they mention a recent conversation on AP.”

Whatever a particular group’s politics may be, however, participants will all pretty quickly confront the challenges inherent in any freewheeling, ongoing public conversation. And opinions vary on how much that rough-and-tumble interferes with achieving posters’ goals.

Backyard party politics

According to Lee, the folks who created Asheville Politics in November 2013 looked to backyard parties as their model when considering how to moderate the content.

“If you had a party at your house and somebody was hogging the stereo or just shouting everybody down or being belligerent, you wouldn’t think twice about saying, ‘Dude, you’ve got to cut that out,’” Lee points out. “Nobody expects your backyard to be a forum where people are free to express themselves in the most obnoxious or overbearing ways.”

That approach continues to guide the group’s administrators, says Josephs. When they take down posts, she explains, it’s “because the intent is to be unkind. It’s not the content: We want as many different voices as possible.”

Longtime member and frequent poster Andrew Celwyn, who became an administrator when Lee stepped down in 2019, says, “We have suspended several members for being rude or offensive to another member, but we don’t remove people unless they repeatedly violate the rules.” The most common reasons members are removed, says Celwyn, are for posting on national rather than local issues or for posting ads. He did, however, recall one person who was removed for posting anti-vaccine information.

“It is a left-leaning page,” Celwyn concedes, adding “we try not to be in the business of shaping what gets put on the page, other than keeping it local and trying to keep it centered on politics.”

One way Asheville Politics differs from other local pages — and perhaps makes the exchanges more like in-person conversations — is its policy of banning GIFs and memes.

“A page like ours pushes people to refine their arguments and make them better, so they have a greater chance of influencing our elected officials and others,” says Celwyn, adding that his own appointment to the Buncombe County Tourism Development Authority board is an example of online involvement turning into real-world action.

Similarly, Lee credits his group with inspiring the property tax grant program introduced in Buncombe County, Woodfin and Asheville last year. “I can confidently say that that idea entered the local discussion through Asheville Politics,” he asserts. Now in its second year, the program lets homeowners apply for up to $500 to help cover housing-related expenses such as property taxes, mortgage payments and insurance.

Celwyn also highlights another kind of impact, calling his group “the id of local liberal politics that doesn’t always get its way but is often driving where it’s eventually going.”

Both sides now?

When E.A.S.T. membership grew large enough that Stockwell knew she couldn’t continue to single-handedly manage the page, she wanted to assemble a politically diverse group of moderators. The idea, she says, was “to find some trusted people that are versatile in their beliefs.”

Of the five administrators, Stockwell and two others are registered Democrats; the other two are registered Republicans. “We come from different walks of life, and that makes it work,” she explains. “The goal is to bring people together to at least agree to disagree or find common ground and compromise. If there’s a conversation going on that’s heated but they’re getting somewhere, I’m going to let that freedom of speech ring.”

But when a conversation descends into name-calling or foul language, the administrators will often put a stop to it. Each decision, she says, is determined by a majority vote.

And despite Stockwell’s commitment to diversity, E.A.S.T. is widely seen as having a predominantly right-leaning membership, which she attributes to the media and political organizations that reached out when the group began voicing concerns about the homeless shelter.

“In the beginning, it was the Republicans who brought in all the help,” remembers Stockwell, noting that the Buncombe County GOP reached out to her, and about a month after the group was established, Chad Nesbitt did a story on his SKYline News Facebook page that triggered an influx of new members. Whenever local media do a story about E.A.S.T., the group picks up about 100 more people, she reports.

“I am very center-leaning,” says Stockwell. “I fluctuate based on what I think is right or wrong, not based on party lines.” At the same time, however, she believes it’s “important to hear both sides, whether they win or not. I think everybody needs to have that opportunity.”

The illusion of influence?

But not everyone who’s active in such groups is convinced of their ability to affect the world beyond their own virtual borders. “Dialogue gives people an opportunity to say what they want to say: It doesn’t change people’s minds,” says Josephs, who also serves as an administrator for the Black Mountain Exchange.

And as an early group administrator who attended summits hosted by Facebook and also briefly worked for the company, Josephs knows better than most how much control the social media giant has over its groups.

First of all, she notes, Facebook’s algorithms screen posts before administrators and moderators even see them, which sometimes results in nonsensical bans such as labeling the phrase “stupid Americans” hate speech. “If you say, ‘I’m in my garden with my hoe,’ that post will be gone,” Josephs explains.

Accordingly, she notes, much of the blame for alleged censorship that’s directed at moderators and administrators of pages like Asheville Politics should rightly be assigned to Facebook. The company, says Josephs, doesn’t always let people know that its algorithms have blocked their posts, and it doesn’t share the content of those posts with administrators.

“It’s only when the members show us a screenshot and we see what was removed,” she says, that “we can explain to them how they can enter into the process of asking it to be reversed” by Facebook’s independent oversight board.

In Josephs’ view, it’s really Facebook that has all the power. “What kind of influence does [Asheville Politics] have outside of the group? A lot less than people want to think,” she asserts.

For his part, Lee wonders whether some of his own early optimism may have been misplaced. “We started with this idea that more education about the workings of local government was going to lead to more cooperative, better-informed decision-making,” he recalls. “When I hear about Asheville Politics now from random members of the public, I’m more likely to hear that there’s just a bunch of angry people and radicals.” Nonetheless, he remains proud of the site and its work, saying, “I still believe in the potential of groups like Asheville Politics to bring people together.”

Editor’s note: This article was updated on Oct. 21 to accurately reflect the online groups that Robyn Josephs is involved in. 

Source link

News

Beyoncé channels Pamela Anderson in ‘Baywatch’ for Halloween video asking viewers to vote

Published

 on

 

NEW YORK (AP) — In a new video posted early Election Day, Beyoncé channels Pamela Anderson in the television program “Baywatch” – red one-piece swimsuit and all – and asks viewers to vote.

In the two-and-a-half-minute clip, set to most of “Bodyguard,” a four-minute cut from her 2024 country album “Cowboy Carter,” Beyoncé cosplays as Anderson’s character before concluding with a simple message, written in white text: “Happy Beylloween,” followed by “Vote.”

At a rally for Donald Trump in Pittsburgh on Monday night, the former president spoke dismissively about Beyoncé’s appearance at a Kamala Harris rally in Houston in October, drawing boos for the megastar from his supporters.

“Beyoncé would come in. Everyone’s expecting a couple of songs. There were no songs. There was no happiness,” Trump said.

She did not perform — unlike in 2016, when she performed at a presidential campaign rally for Hillary Clinton in Cleveland – but she endorsed Harris and gave a moving speech, initially joined onstage by her Destiny’s Child bandmate Kelly Rowland.

“I’m not here as a celebrity, I’m not here as a politician. I’m here as a mother,” Beyoncé said.

“A mother who cares deeply about the world my children and all of our children live in, a world where we have the freedom to control our bodies, a world where we’re not divided,” she said at the rally in Houston, her hometown.

“Imagine our daughters growing up seeing what’s possible with no ceilings, no limitations,” she continued. “We must vote, and we need you.”

The Harris campaign has taken on Beyonce’s track “Freedom,” a cut from her landmark 2016 album “Lemonade,” as its anthem.

Harris used the song in July during her first official public appearance as a presidential candidate at her campaign headquarters in Delaware. That same month, Beyoncé’s mother, Tina Knowles, publicly endorsed Harris for president.

Beyoncé gave permission to Harris to use the song, a campaign official who was granted anonymity to discuss private campaign operations confirmed to The Associated Press.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

News

Justin Trudeau’s Announcing Cuts to Immigration Could Facilitate a Trump Win

Published

 on

Outside of sports and a “Cold front coming down from Canada,” American news media only report on Canadian events that they believe are, or will be, influential to the US. Therefore, when Justin Trudeau’s announcement, having finally read the room, that Canada will be reducing the number of permanent residents admitted by more than 20 percent and temporary residents like skilled workers and college students will be cut by more than half made news south of the border, I knew the American media felt Trudeau’s about-face on immigration was newsworthy because many Americans would relate to Trudeau realizing Canada was accepting more immigrants than it could manage and are hoping their next POTUS will follow Trudeau’s playbook.

Canada, with lots of space and lacking convenient geographical ways for illegal immigrants to enter the country, though still many do, has a global reputation for being incredibly accepting of immigrants. On the surface, Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver appear to be multicultural havens. However, as the saying goes, “Too much of a good thing is never good,” resulting in a sharp rise in anti-immigrant sentiment, which you can almost taste in the air. A growing number of Canadians, regardless of their political affiliation, are blaming recent immigrants for causing the housing affordability crises, inflation, rise in crime and unemployment/stagnant wages.

Throughout history, populations have engulfed themselves in a tribal frenzy, a psychological state where people identify strongly with their own group, often leading to a ‘us versus them’ mentality. This has led to quick shifts from complacency to panic and finger-pointing at groups outside their tribe, a phenomenon that is not unique to any particular culture or time period.

My take on why the American news media found Trudeau’s blatantly obvious attempt to save his political career, balancing appeasement between the pitchfork crowd, who want a halt to immigration until Canada gets its house in order, and immigrant voters, who traditionally vote Liberal, newsworthy; the American news media, as do I, believe immigration fatigue is why Kamala Harris is going to lose on November 5th.

Because they frequently get the outcome wrong, I don’t take polls seriously. According to polls in 2014, Tim Hudak’s Progressive Conservatives and Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals were in a dead heat in Ontario, yet Wynne won with more than twice as many seats. In the 2018 Quebec election, most polls had the Coalition Avenir Québec with a 1-to-5-point lead over the governing Liberals. The result: The Coalition Avenir Québec enjoyed a landslide victory, winning 74 of 125 seats. Then there’s how the 2016 US election polls showing Donald Trump didn’t have a chance of winning against Hillary Clinton were ridiculously way off, highlighting the importance of the election day poll and, applicable in this election as it was in 2016, not to discount ‘shy Trump supporters;’ voters who support Trump but are hesitant to express their views publicly due to social or political pressure.

My distrust in polls aside, polls indicate Harris is leading by a few points. One would think that Trump’s many over-the-top shenanigans, which would be entertaining were he not the POTUS or again seeking the Oval Office, would have him far down in the polls. Trump is toe-to-toe with Harris in the polls because his approach to the economy—middle-class Americans are nostalgic for the relatively strong economic performance during Trump’s first three years in office—and immigration, which Americans are hyper-focused on right now, appeals to many Americans. In his quest to win votes, Trump is doing what anyone seeking political office needs to do: telling the people what they want to hear, strategically using populism—populism that serves your best interests is good populism—to evoke emotional responses. Harris isn’t doing herself any favours, nor moving voters, by going the “But, but… the orange man is bad!” route, while Trump cultivates support from “weird” marginal voting groups.

To Harris’s credit, things could have fallen apart when Biden abruptly stepped aside. Instead, Harris quickly clinched the nomination and had a strong first few weeks, erasing the deficit Biden had given her. The Democratic convention was a success, as was her acceptance speech. Her performance at the September 10th debate with Donald Trump was first-rate.

Harris’ Achilles heel is she’s now making promises she could have made and implemented while VP, making immigration and the economy Harris’ liabilities, especially since she’s been sitting next to Biden, watching the US turn into the circus it has become. These liabilities, basically her only liabilities, negate her stance on abortion, democracy, healthcare, a long-winning issue for Democrats, and Trump’s character. All Harris has offered voters is “feel-good vibes” over substance. In contrast, Trump offers the tangible political tornado (read: steamroll the problems Americans are facing) many Americans seek. With Trump, there’s no doubt that change, admittedly in a messy fashion, will happen. If enough Americans believe the changes he’ll implement will benefit them and their country…

The case against Harris on immigration, at a time when there’s a huge global backlash to immigration, even as the American news media are pointing out, in famously immigrant-friendly Canada, is relatively straightforward: During the first three years of the Biden-Harris administration, illegal Southern border crossings increased significantly.

The words illegal immigration, to put it mildly, irks most Americans. On the legal immigration front, according to Forbes, most billion-dollar startups were founded by immigrants. Google, Microsoft, and Oracle, to name three, have immigrants as CEOs. Immigrants, with tech skills and an entrepreneurial thirst, have kept America leading the world. I like to think that Americans and Canadians understand the best immigration policy is to strategically let enough of these immigrants in who’ll increase GDP and tax base and not rely on social programs. In other words, Americans and Canadians, and arguably citizens of European countries, expect their governments to be more strategic about immigration.

The days of the words on a bronze plaque mounted inside the Statue of Liberty pedestal’s lower level, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…” are no longer tolerated. Americans only want immigrants who’ll benefit America.

Does Trump demagogue the immigration issue with xenophobic and racist tropes, many of which are outright lies, such as claiming Haitian immigrants in Ohio are abducting and eating pets? Absolutely. However, such unhinged talk signals to Americans who are worried about the steady influx of illegal immigrants into their country that Trump can handle immigration so that it’s beneficial to the country as opposed to being an issue of economic stress.

In many ways, if polls are to be believed, Harris is paying the price for Biden and her lax policies early in their term. Yes, stimulus spending quickly rebuilt the job market, but at the cost of higher inflation. Loosen border policies at a time when anti-immigrant sentiment was increasing was a gross miscalculation, much like Trudeau’s immigration quota increase, and Biden indulging himself in running for re-election should never have happened.

If Trump wins, Democrats will proclaim that everyone is sexist, racist and misogynous, not to mention a likely White Supremacist, and for good measure, they’ll beat the “voter suppression” button. If Harris wins, Trump supporters will repeat voter fraud—since July, Elon Musk has tweeted on Twitter at least 22 times about voters being “imported” from abroad—being widespread.

Regardless of who wins tomorrow, Americans need to cool down; and give the divisive rhetoric a long overdue break. The right to an opinion belongs to everyone. Someone whose opinion differs from yours is not by default sexist, racist, a fascist or anything else; they simply disagree with you. Americans adopting the respectful mindset to agree to disagree would be the best thing they could do for the United States of America.

______________________________________________________________

 

Nick Kossovan, a self-described connoisseur of human psychology, writes about what’s

on his mind from Toronto. You can follow Nick on Twitter and Instagram @NKossovan.

Continue Reading

Politics

RFK Jr. says Trump would push to remove fluoride from drinking water. ‘It’s possible,’ Trump says

Published

 on

 

PHOENIX (AP) — Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a prominent proponent of debunked public health claims whom Donald Trump has promised to put in charge of health initiatives, said Saturday that Trump would push to remove fluoride from drinking water on his first day in office if elected president.

Fluoride strengthens teeth and reduces cavities by replacing minerals lost during normal wear and tear, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The addition of low levels of fluoride to drinking water has long been considered one of the greatest public health achievements of the last century.

Kennedy made the declaration Saturday on the social media platform X alongside a variety of claims about the heath effects of fluoride.

“On January 20, the Trump White House will advise all U.S​. water systems to remove fluoride from public water,” Kennedy wrote. Trump and his wife, Melania Trump, “want to Make America Healthy Again,” he added, repeating a phrase Trump often uses and links to Kennedy.

Trump told NBC News on Sunday that he had not spoken to Kennedy about fluoride yet, “but it sounds OK to me. You know it’s possible.”

The former president declined to say whether he would seek a Cabinet role for Kennedy, a job that would require Senate confirmation, but added, “He’s going to have a big role in the administration.”

Asked whether banning certain vaccines would be on the table, Trump said he would talk to Kennedy and others about that. Trump described Kennedy as “a very talented guy and has strong views.”

The sudden and unexpected weekend social media post evoked the chaotic policymaking that defined Trump’s White House tenure, when he would issue policy declarations on Twitter at virtually all hours. It also underscored the concerns many experts have about Kennedy, who has long promoted debunked theories about vaccine safety, having influence over U.S. public health.

In 1950, federal officials endorsed water fluoridation to prevent tooth decay, and continued to promote it even after fluoride toothpaste brands hit the market several years later. Though fluoride can come from a number of sources, drinking water is the main source for Americans, researchers say.

Officials lowered their recommendation for drinking water fluoride levels in 2015 to address a tooth condition called fluorosis, that can cause splotches on teeth and was becoming more common in U.S. kids.

In August, a federal agency determined “with moderate confidence” that there is a link between higher levels of fluoride exposure and lower IQ in kids. The National Toxicology Program based its conclusion on studies involving fluoride levels at about twice the recommended limit for drinking water.

A federal judge later cited that study in ordering the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to further regulate fluoride in drinking water. U.S. District Judge Edward Chen cautioned that it’s not certain that the amount of fluoride typically added to water is causing lower IQ in kids, but he concluded that mounting research points to an unreasonable risk that it could be. He ordered the EPA to take steps to lower that risk, but didn’t say what those measures should be.

In his X post Saturday, Kennedy tagged Michael Connett, the lead attorney representing the plaintiff in that lawsuit, the environmental advocacy group Food & Water Watch.

Kennedy’s anti-vaccine organization has a lawsuit pending against news organizations including The Associated Press, accusing them of violating antitrust laws by taking action to identify misinformation, including about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines. Kennedy is on leave from the group but is listed as one of its attorneys in the lawsuit.

What role Kennedy might hold if Trump wins on Tuesday remains unclear. Kennedy recently told NewsNation that Trump asked him to “reorganize” agencies including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and some agencies under the Department of Agriculture.

But for now, the former independent presidential candidate has become one of Trump’s top surrogates. Trump frequently mentions having the support of Kennedy, a scion of a Democratic dynasty and the son of former Attorney General Robert Kennedy and nephew of President John F. Kennedy.

Kennedy traveled with Trump Friday and spoke at his rallies in Michigan and Wisconsin.

Trump said Saturday that he told Kennedy: “You can work on food, you can work on anything you want” except oil policy.

“He wants health, he wants women’s health, he wants men’s health, he wants kids, he wants everything,” Trump added.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending