Google in the Political Sphere: You Can't Stop the Signal

Google's presence on the political scene has been sharply on the rise, to such a degree that it seems, like the internet, to be everywhere all at once. The company's California headquarters has become a necessary stop for most presidential candidates touring high-tech Silicon Valley. Seventeen of the candidates have submitted about 1000 videos to its YouTube site, which hosts an even larger section of political video by amateur producers. YouTube has recently hired an editor for politics to cover the burgeoning interest in all things wonky, and Google has become one of the largest beneficiaries of political ads on the internet. To publicize its policy positions, the company launched the Google Public Policy Blog in June.

And so Google's most recent foray--last night's Democratic presidential debate, cosponsored with CNN--seems a natural extension into the public sphere. The company also plans to cosponsor a debate for Republicans Sep. 17th, again presenting citizen's questions via YouTube videos. Google's emergence on the political scene is undeniable after last night's debate; and it looks like things will be getting a bit messier, a bit more out of control. But I don't see that as anything to worry about.

The bottom-up access provided by YouTube seems in keeping with the emphasis on creativity, sharing, and openness that is evident in the management of Google's workplace. YouTube offers great potential for creative communication and expression. Citizens can harness the power of images for persuasion as well as inquiry, while candidates can use the free forum to go beyond frustratingly brief television ads and reach entirely new audiences.

But as the mainstream media is quick to point out, there is a loss of control associated with this medium. Content generated by voters can undermine the consultant-driven images to which the candidates so desperately try to conform. You can be sure that Barack Obama never imagined himself as the sexual object of the "Obama Girl" video, one of the most viewed of all the debate submissions

And last night's questions were often off-script: As Robb Henzi, a summer intern at Google, noted in a quick interview after, "The issues that people asked questions about may not have correlated with the issues that hog the headlines." Moreover, images of talking snowmen and lesbian couples that accompanied voters' questions made the event less formal than is usual and sometimes caught the candidates off guard.

Voters' videos were subject to another type of scrutiny in media outlets that covered the debate. A tendency to screen the funnier videos as examples allowed newscasters and others to avoid serious or controversial voter concerns, and the homemade videos were sometimes held up to ridicule. Intentionally or not, the fresh voices outside of official channels were made to seem illegitimate.

But these kinds of assaults are to be expected when ordinary people disrupt the workings of top-down political and media organizations. Considering this disruptive potential, some have questioned whether Google will start to look more like a media company. CEO Eric Schmidt has said it won't happen: "Google is not in the content business.... We are a distribution mechanism and a monetization mechanism for our partners. This is an important line that we've decided not to cross."

Google will keep the signal going, as our citizens and candidates add to the democratic data stream that is speeding in all directions at once: recirculated, reevaluated, and reappropriated. You can't stop the signal.