I’m so confused by the new strategy of the Brady Campaign when it comes to promoting any grassroots support they can find online. They periodically retweet people who talk about hating gun violence. I get that retweets don’t always equal an endorsement of everything that person has ever tweeted, but I also don’t think it’s a bad idea for an organization to go and look at the last page or two of tweets from anyone they are about to promote on their own channel.
In the post-Peter Hamm era, Brady has been retweeting some interesting folks. They like retweeting folks who use the N word. One of the first people I ever saw them retweet was a blogger who had never before talked about guns or violence issues. Her entire blog was about Jesus and how much she loved Victoria’s Secret panties.
Now, don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with Jesus or Victoria’s pretty underthings. VS makes some damn fine bras if you ask me. But making that a focus of a blog doesn’t exactly make you a great grassroots outreach target on public policy – unless we’re maybe talking TSA policies that discriminate against women who wear underwires.
Another early retweet came from a woman whose previous musings included her proclamation for enjoying…umm…shall we call it sexual activity of the back door variety? It just seems odd to me that the people they want to promote mix messages of gun control. But that’s not such a weird combination of messages when you consider one of the men they retweeted expressed his disapproval for gun violence in one tweet, yet bragged about how much of a thug he and his buddies were just a few tweets prior. Is Brady embracing the thug lifestyle? It seems of all the odd folks to push on Twitter, that is one with a combination of messages that directly undermines their agenda.
Today’s retweets include a young mother who, just 20 hours prior to their retweet was concerned about her toddler son and how he might be ill. As evidenced by the message Brady shared, she’s concerned about gun violence as well. However, she’s apparently not concerned enough about her own choices since she tweeted just two hours after her son was sick that she was smoking weed. Umm… But that’s okay, the other person they retweeted also talked about using drugs just an hour or so before Brady promoted them. Oh, and she declared that “asian women are fucking evil.”
Again, I realize that retweets of one message don’t mean that you endorse everything the person has ever said. I get that it’s a challenge to find a balance to these issues in a day where no topic is off limits in social media. But you would think that the Brady Campaign would at least filter out anyone who has said anything racist or advocating the use of illegal substances in the last 24 hours or most recent page of tweets. It’s called common sense. And considering they call for common sense in gun control, you’d think they’d demonstrate a little bit of it when developing their media strategy.
I’d really appreciate links to the lady who likes VS and the backdoor stuff if it’s not too much trouble. Just to uhhh verify your sources. Yeah that’s the ticket…
Heh. The VS fan I could probably find again, but her blog wasn’t actually that interesting. I like VS products, and even I didn’t find her posts about their products interesting or useful.
As for the other chick, well, that would be a little tougher to find since it’s been a while since they retweeted her. I never planned to do a post on who they were retweeting, it’s just that I noticed these very odd trends as I clicked through to read just who they were promoting on Twitter.
Could this be a lame and desperate attempt to manufacture some grassroot momentum?
In order to appear mainstream, they have to try to have a high volume of individuals talking about gun control.
Their efforts at astroturfing via blogs and web sites seems to have failed miserably.
They keep talking about how the majority of Americans approve of gun control but nothing in their efforts indicates that.
They don’t have popular blogs –other than pro-rights advocates honing their arguments.
What do they have to show their supposed majority?
Retweets seem to be their last ditch effort.
See twitter.com/bradyduds
I’ll admit the tactic is a bit CSGVish, and shows the importance of remaining civil wherever we are online.
The bradyduds account is not meant to be followed (will get annoying really quick), but rather the timeline read through.
Did you also notice the homophobic remark made by Bill Maher in the video they linked to?
Of course Maher will get a pass because he’s a “Progressive”…
Their message is fringe and unpopular why would you think they would avoid retweeting from fringe and crass tweeters?
If they filter out anyone who has said anything racist or advocated the use of illegal substances in the last 24 hours, they wouldn’t have anyone to retweet, would they?
Yes, they would still have the ability to retweet people, Rob. Today, I’ll give them credit for it, I saw the first smart retweet I’ve ever seen from them. They retweeted a Congressman who tweeted that gun control was at the top of his agenda.
I will be broadcasting this.
But that’s not such a weird combination of messages when you consider one of the men they retweeted expressed his disapproval for gun violence in one tweet, yet bragged about how much of a thug he and his buddies were just a few tweets prior. Is Brady embracing the thug lifestyle?
That’s just sensible outreach. Who better to pitch gun control to than somebody who can get guns regardless of the law, and has a vested interest in seeing non-criminals disarmed? ;)
In all seriousness, I assume this is just what happens when your outreach division is a bored intern trying to pull a few credits for a Social Justice degree.