Twittering exploding in U.S. Congress (and everywhere else)

I spent an hour this morning watching U.S. president Obama's speech to the Congress. And as the cameras sweeped across the aisles and benches I noticed something strange: every now and then, you would see a Congressman staring, not at the president, but at the display of a mobile phone.

Who were they texting? The answer was as obvious today as it would have been incomprehensible a couple of years ago. They were twittering.

From the Washington Post:

"Then there was Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.), in whose name this text message was sent at about the time the president spoke of the need to pull the country together: "Aggie basketball game is about to start on espn2 for those of you that aren't going to bother watching pelosi smirk for the next hour." A few minutes later, another message came through: "Disregard that last Tweet from a staffer."

It's bad enough that Americans are paralyzed by economic jitters. Now the president has to deal with lawmakers paralyzed by Twitter. At a time of national emergency, when America needs the focused attention of contemplative and reflective lawmakers, they are dispatching rapid-fire thoughts in 140 characters or less."

Twitter exploded in Sweden during the first two months of 2009. Pioneers in microblogging were social media fanatics, a few journalists and some bloggers. Jaiku was the most popular microblogging service in Sweden and Finland for a long time, although with a small number of users. And then, for some reason, lots of people switched to Twitter, at the same time as newcomers flooded in.

And now, 60 days later, it's mainstream. Politicians and corporations feel the need for being present at the platform - although, as usually, not everyone knows exactly what to do with it.

Hans Kullin predicted in early January that Twitter would be a crucial tool in the Swedish elections in 2010. We shall see. And I will take a close look tha next time I watch a Riksdag debate. Is that Leif Pagrotsky texting?

Oh, and I'm twittering as liv99ngu.

Obama campaign continues in White House

Obama won and the turnout was probably around 64 %, which is the best result in decades, but still a bit low comparing with, you know, like, umm, Scandinavia.

The important part is that 64 % still are historic numbers in a U.S. context, and it's a proof of the energizing power that especially the Obama campaign had on voters. Tens of thousands of pages will be written about this campaign, and I will probably add to them.

For now, I am satisified with learning that Obama apparently will try to use the powerful network that his campaign built in taking over the administration. Via Politics Online and the BBC I learn that Obama is using a new website, change.gov, as a hub for continuing his successful web strategy.

There's a blog with updates, information on policy areas, an invitation to share thoughts with the new administration, and even job application forms. I don't know whether the new Obama administration is going to actually listen or if it's a brilliant illusion, but I do like the look of it.

In order to retain the enormous goodwill he got during his campaign, Obama must show that his talk of change and inclusion was not a campaign phenomenon only. If he wants to be re-elected, an eternal campaign is his best option.

I predict that this new form for e-government (or trick, depending on how cynical you are) will be copied as well as other parts of the campaign in various parts of the world in the years to come.

And speaking of copying, people in the Republican Party are also calling for change.

OK, so he won, but what's the turnout?

Tonight and early tomorrow I team up with a few expat Americans and Amero-manic Swedes to talk politics, drink American beer and wait for the results.

I hope Obama will win, I think he will, but one of the things I'm most interesting in finding out is what effect this long, dollar-drenched, ingeniously organised, media-hyped, social media-driven campaign has on voter turnout.

Young people? Poor people? Minorities? And, depending on what numbers we will see tomorrow - 50 %, 60 %, 70 % - I have a few recommendations for European political parties. Even if turnout is generally higher than in U.S. elections (in the Swedish parliamentary election in 2006 it was 82 %) there is always a danger in letting voters become disinterested.

Especially the Obama campaign, whith its caleidoskopic array of techniques for organising volunteers and contacting voters, will serve as a source of inspiration.

I'll get back to you on that. For now, an interesting way of self-promotion: