The UK paper, The Guardian decided to launch a letter writing campaign to Ohio.
(supposedly undecided voters) It was called Operation Clark County and over 11 thousand people wrote in to request addresses.
It’s interesting 11 thousand would care to write people in the US and I think overall it’s pretty harmless. The paper published a few responses from the US, most of whom were rather angry. The published emails were to the Guardian.
It doesn’t say if 11 thousand Ohio residents agreed to receiving an email.
There is no sense of the demographics from these emails either.
I wonder if the reaction would be the same if The Guardian and a counterpart US paper reversed it and asked Americans to drop a line to British voters. Would the level of swearing, name calling, defensiveness, anger and threats fly back across the pond?
Right on! Just wanted to say thanks from California for your effort and concern. This IS a very important election … There are so many people here in the States that care about the impact America has on the rest of the world. I am personally saddened for the loss of all innocent lives. The best statement Americans can make to the rest of the world is to not elect Bush for president. Thank you so much for getting involved in our world. California
Consider this: stay out of American electoral politics. Unless you would like a company of US Navy Seals - Republican to a man - to descend upon the offices of the Guardian, bag the lot of you, and transport you to Guantanamo Bay, where you can share quarters with some lonely Taliban shepherd boys. United States
I’d like to believe the emailers wouldn’t say these things face to face to Guardian staff, but then again one never knows.
Published 4 years, 1 month ago
Search
Subscribe 
You are currently browsing the Bene Diction Blogs On weblog archives.
Related Entries
- Award winning Iraq journalist detained by US forces
- Voice in the Desert
- UK Troops
- Guardian letter writing halted
- The unholy blend of North American conservatism
- Fans call it the iTaser
- millenarian narrative
- Scientology plans actions against BBC's Panorama
- Prime Minister Assassinated
- Child Abuse blog carnival
For blog design, Wordpress or MovableType coding or blog consulting, see cre8d design.
Keep in mind that we once held a Revolution just to stop the British from interferring in our politics. A letter-writing campaign is a rather tame approach for us Yanks. ; )
The revolution was mentioned:^)
I just added a bit to this post because there are questions.
If I was in Ohio and my name was given out and I received an unsolicted email I think I’d be a bit leary. But if I was willing to participate, it would be interesting.
Unless I’m misreading these emails were to the paper. I’d like to see some of the agreed participants responses.
And I wonder if US papers get this kind of response often?
The serious point in all this is that the outcome of this election will undoubtedly affect the rest of the world. I’m not sure that “interfering” is the right description - the British and others may not have votes in this election, but we most certainly have an interest in its result.
Given the international newspaper survey results released recently I agree Richard. However, judging by the emails our interest is less than welcome.
Some of those responses were extraordinary, weren’t they?
I live in Dayton, Ohio. It’s been really interesting to see all the attention that we’re receiving by both presidential candidates.
I was unaware that this exercise from the Guardian had took place. In your post you make it sound as though American voters were supposed to expect to receive these letters. That our electoral officials would sell our names and addresses to total strangers outside the country makes me feel as though my privacy is being violated.
Perhaps it is from this perspective that some of the respondents replied to the letters from across the pond.
Take care and keep in touch!
Hi Dan:
I saw the initial story about a week ago, I’ll have to dig back and see if 11 thousand UK residents were given names that were unsolicited.
I don’t know who got what how.
Since we blog, we can talk back and forth at will…I won’t discuss the election, promise.:^)
One of the letters said that if Brits want to have a say in US elections, we shoudl get out here, get citizenship, and vote ourselves. I’m planning to vote in the 2012 election…
Here’s the deal (as I see it):
The Guardian is a left-leaning paper, is it not? Their editorial staff has made no secret that they hold Bush in disdain, so it’s not altogether a stretch to conclude that they want Kerry elected. Thus it appears to this schlub from flyover country that the Guardian is trying to stir up support for Kerry, and not just give their readership a means of saying “Hi!” to some Americans.
What would be the reaction if a newspaper in the United States instigated a letter-writing campaign in an attempt to influence the election in the U.K.? Would people think it was harmless and innocent? I think not. Would people write messages that they “wouldn’t say to the face of the [Newspaper] staff”? I think so. (I’ve heard about football/soccer riots, so I think the wording of some of these letters would take the phospors off the CRT.)
I’m not condoning nasty e-mails and letters. I am saying that we shouldn’t be surprised by the reaction, nor should we think that such a reaction would only come from Americans.
Perhaps we are giving the Guardian too much credit Roy.
Lets assume this is a crase publicity stunt.
The paper floats it out knowing full well the type of bites they are going to get are “US soccer hooligans.”
Citizens from three countries are discussing this here without threatening each other.
The CBC will be in Pennsylvania in a few weeks to hold a town hall meeting. It’s a different medium, using the same idea. I’ll be curious to see if participants perceive the questions and opinion as interference.
Bene,
Can you link more info on the CBC affair? I’d like to read a bit more info before saying anything about that one.
Sure. I’ll go see if it’s online.:^)
Found the blub.
http://www.cbc.ca/national/
The main US election page is here.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/uselection2004/index.html
And it may be edited Nat inserts - my mistake. I wasn’t paying much attention.
May I skip the CBC routine and ask you a question?
Bene,
Thanks for the links; I’ll give ‘em a look-see.
While we’re sharing links, take a look at this one: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/comment/story/0,14259,1331210,00.html
Then tell me whether you think the Guardian’s letter campaign was just a publicity stunt, or an attempt to influence the election.
Okay. I understand what you are saying a bit better now.
Thanks.
Aren’t we giving too much credit and not enough credit? The Guardian gets a lot of traffic from this. They have their agenda, it’s right out there.
I don’t think voters care about non-domestic issues and what the rest of us think. I don’t think voters are stupid and would be easily influenced by British opinion or anyone elses.
I understand swing states are being bombarded with ads from both parties.
I may get my wrist slapped for this one Roy.:^)
I don’t see a US newspaper bothering to waste the space to inform about another countries election and suggest writing. Maybe they have, I honestly don’t know. As a Canadian voter I’d shrug it off.
There are 6 hundred thousand American voters in Canada and both parties have been busy soliciting their vote.
I think I’m beginning to understand your frustration, and let me ask you this. Do you believe American voters care to the point they’d allow a foreign newspaper to influence their decision?
Or, do you think a British newspaper campaign could swing the vote?
Bene,
First of all, thanks for the give-and-take. I’ve never known you not to try very hard o understand where another is coming from. We all could use a bit more of that “slow to speak, quick to hear” mentality.
From what I read at the CBC site, they’re not trying to advocate anything other than communication. I’d have to spend some time digging through their archives to see if there’s an obvious slant to their election coverage, but on its face, this doesn’t seem to be on the same level as the Guardian’s schtick.
Let me see if I can answer your questions. Most U.S. papers do offer coverage of elections in other countries. It’s not usually frontpage coverage nor is it in-depth, but it is in there (if you want to get the details, you have to do some digging; the Internet is wonderfully handy for that). I’ve never heard of one trying to influence another country’s election, at least not in my lifetime.
I think the majority of U.S. voters would (and in the case of the Guardian, will) shrug off any such attempt. They’re not the people who are responding with supportive or angry e-mails, either.
I don’t think that any British newspaper (or any other nation’s media for that matter) can swing the vote (and a U.S. paper would be just as ineffective trying the same thing in another country). For me, I’m stuck somewhere between amusement and annoyance: I’m amused that they think this will have any significant impact (judging from the letters they published it seems like the only impact has been to hack off both the Republicans–”How dare you presume…”–and the Democrats–”We appreciate the thought, but back off…”), and I’m annoyed at the “unsolicited advice” aroma of the whole thing.
I heard about this stunt on the radio. My first thought was along the lines of “Oh great, here we go again”. Of course, I happen to live in a swing state, and I am getting bombarded with phone calls, advert mail, begging and pleading, etc. I try to be very polite to the phone callers - I mean, they are only trying to do a job. But it gets real old real quick. I do think that I have managed to make some of them at least think about the reasons why I will not vote for their candidate, and if I can educate I am happy.
I don’t know how I would respond to an unsolicited email from a British newspaper. I think I would politely answer them and then give my unsolicited opinions on a few pertinent matters of British politics.
What is the saying that means don’t give what you don’t want to take? Sauce for geese and ganders?
The internet has changed how we learn.
I think you give me too much credit Roy.
Like many northerners I’ve spend a fair bit of time in the US.
Living in a swing state must be crazy making time, like Alicia talks about. I don’t know that I’d be able to stay polite.:^)
The Guardian editors seems a bit deluded as to both the nature of their project, and its effect:
Ian Katz, Good-Humoured Guardian Editor: In Denial?
http://dailyablution.blogs.com/the_daily_ablution/2004/10/ian_katz_goodhu.html