I spam, therefore I am

S.J. CAHN

During the primary elections earlier this year, much was made in this

column and elsewhere in the Pilot about the unprecedented glut of

political mailers.

There were accusations of “secret deals” and the condemnation of

one by Rep. Chris Cox.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars went into campaign literature and

postage for just the 70th District Assembly race, according to

candidate financial statements at the Secretary of State’s office.

It was grand political theater, in other words -- and maybe one or

two even contributed to voters’ decision-making when they got to the

polls.

Judging by the amount of mailers voters received in Newport-Mesa,

they remain central to campaigns. But, increasingly, there’s another

avenue for getting out political messages: the Internet. (You knew it

was heading that way, right?)

Mass e-mail messages are a remarkably cheap and quick way to reach

people. They can be so successful they’ve launched an entire

marketing niche: spam.

Spam, of course, is considered such a problem these days that

Congress has passed a law against it. The most notable part of that

law is a “do not e-mail registry” that is supposed to be set into

place within the next month.

Don’t worry, though. The law has this important disclaimer: “The

term ‘commercial electronic mail message’ means any electronic mail

message the primary purpose of which is the commercial advertisement

or promotion of a commercial product or service (including content on

an Internet website operated for a commercial purpose).”

In other words: It doesn’t apply to political e-mails.

That’s good news for one outfit that sends as many as four mass

e-mails out a day: the Republican National Committee. Or, more

specifically, the RNC research department.

The department’s e-mail “briefings” have been going strong since

before Howard Dean yelped his way out of the Democratic presidential

nomination. (The second one in my inbox is from Oct. 6. It contains a

quote attributed to U.S. News & World Report: “John Kerry Spokesman,

David Wade: ‘I love watching Howard Dean attack Wesley Clark: a

Gingrich Republican debating a Nixon Republican over who’s the better

Democrat.’” )

In these e-mails, the department frequently reprints articles from

conservative newspaper the Washington Times. It pieces together bits

of news and, yes, tries to spin conclusions or definitions of

politicians and their positions. It highlights “They said it” or “He

said it” quotations.

(One just arrived in the middle of writing this column. “Kerry

Ignores His-Story: Is Kerry’s Rhetoric Better Off Than It Was 4 Years

Ago?”)

And, most interestingly, it occasionally delves into “the

archives” and pulls years-old statements back into the open.

These “archival” pieces range from enlightening to, frankly,

pretty transparent in tossing aside any effort at keeping things in

context.

That, of course, is politics. But I’ve finally signed up (I think)

for the Democratic version, so I’ll keep an eye on whether everyone

isn’t playing fairly.

* S.J. CAHN is the managing editor. He may be reached at (949)

574-4233 or by e-mail at [email protected].