Analysis: Technology transforms politics

LOS ANGELES, Oct. 13 (UPI) -- Just as the 2000 presidential election marked the arrival of the Internet as a significant factor in American politics, the 2004 election will likely be remembered for the emergence of DVD technology as a dominant force of political culture.

Thomas K. Arnold, associate publisher and group editor of Video Store magazine, told United Press International the proliferation of digital video-production equipment and an improved DVD distribution system are allowing more voices to be heard in the political process.

"For the first time, people are actively using the DVD and home-video format to actively influence the election," said Arnold.

He cited the example of Michael Moore, who said earlier this year he hoped his movie "Fahrenheit 9/11" would go down in history as the first feature film to help unseat an incumbent president. After the film grossed $119 million at the U.S. box office, Moore asked distributors of the DVD to get it in stores before the Nov. 2 election, and the DVD was released on Oct. 5.

Hollywood has gotten behind the documentary genre, having noticed the commercial success of such project's as Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" and this year's fast food exposé "Super Size Me."

Paola Frecchero, senior vice president of film programming at the Sundance Channel, said documentaries have now entered the pop-culture consciousness.

"Suddenly it's become very chic for sales people and producers to stay in nonfiction," said Frecchero.

Countless video titles -- high-profile and otherwise -- have arrived in the marketplace, many of them getting there without the clout of a major Hollywood distributor. Like Moore, conservative political analyst Mark Taylor -- who narrates the documentary "Buried in the Sand: the Deception of America" -- hopes the film will affect the outcome on Election Day.

"If this has an impact on the election and the re-election of George Bush I'll be pleased," said Taylor.

"Buried in the Sand" contains much of the most graphic footage of terrorist and wartime atrocities available -- including footage that most media consumers have never seen. Taylor and the film's producers charge the mainstream media with keeping the images away from their audiences, but Taylor conceded that the material is too harsh for the mainstream anyway.

"Of course they can't show this on the national news or the front page of the New York Times," said Taylor. "They could have mentioned its existence. They could have linked to a Web site."

Such images as beheadings of hostages and other brutal behavior have been freely available on the Internet, but Taylor said only the most astute Web surfers could find them.

"The majority of people in this country aren't sitting up nights looking for this," he said.

Another campaign-season documentary, "Bush's Brain," examines the president's political history by focusing on White House political adviser Karl Rove. The film -- based on the book by newspaper reporters James C. Moore and Wayne Slater -- depicts Rove as a politician who will stop at nothing to get his candidate over the finish line first.

Joseph Mealey, who co-produced the documentary with Michael Shoob, told UPI the film couldn't have been made just a few years ago, because the technology wasn't accessible at prices he and Shoob could afford. Some conservatives claim the Hollywood elite are in cahoots to defeat President Bush on Nov. 2. Mealey said he wishes that were so.

"Michael and I co-financed the movie," he said. "Neither of us is wealthy."

Mealey said the widespread availability of digital production equipment is probably less important to the current change in the media environment than the Internet -- which provides a distribution system of unprecedented scope and power.

"The fact that two guys basically with limited funds are able to get Karl Rove to some extent in the public consciousness is amazing," he said. "It would have taken deep pockets to do this before, and deep pockets aren't interested in this, because it doesn't sell popcorn."

Elizabeth Thoman, founder of the Santa Monica, Calif.-based Center for Media Literacy (medialit.org), said the proliferation of digital technology makes media literacy more important than ever.

"The fact that more people can make their own media means that we have to be more astute and more educated about interpreting media," she said. "It makes many more voices possible, which is an exciting opportunity, but it also means that there are all kinds of ideas out there and people need to have a more sophisticated internal checklist on what makes something legitimate and what makes it a bunch of nonsense."

Thoman said that the easy access to media-production tools also makes it more important for people who create media to be as media literate as possible.

"The more you understand how people process information," she said, "the better chance you have of crafting your information so people understand it and it's effective -- it gets through."

If the Internet was the new media story of the 2000 election, and digital video production and distribution is the big media story this time around, then what shapes up as the next big thing during the 2008 election?

"Four years is a long time," said Thoman. "My guess is, though, that the increasing amount of wireless communications will make the Internet even more powerful. We're not going to be limited sitting in a chair at our computer, plugged into a wall."

--

(Please send comments to [email protected].)