[media-credit name=’LUKAS KEAPPROTH’ align=’alignnone’ width=’648′][/media-credit]

Five professors at the University of Wisconsin came together Wednesday to reflect on the change the 2008 presidential election could bring about for the United States and the factors that have changed presidential campaigning.

The event, part of the Humanities Now series sponsored by the Center for the Humanities, was moderated by Ben Merens of Wisconsin Public Radio and featured panelists from UW’s political science, journalism, history and communication arts departments. Each panelist brought a critical perspective on different aspects of the current election and commented on how the media have altered the election and have been altered by the election.

Friedland said one of the most interesting aspects of this election is not the projected increased turnout of young voters but the means by which young voters have been reached.

“This is the first network election we have actually seen in which network modalities … are at the center of the campaign,” Friedland said. “If Obama does win… I think this will be a watershed in this pool of political communication.”

The use of social networks to reach out and organize young people has been greatly expanded by the Obama campaign throughout this election, he said. The internet also provides an important alternative source of news to young people than newspapers and television news channels, such as blogs.

Zaeske’s students told her “no one reads books” anymore, and in terms of the youth vote, blogs are how young people are getting involved, she said, adding “the more interactive the better.”

According to UW political science professor Ken Goldstein, blogs matter because they are a way for an individual to get his or her message to the masses and it is important to ask whether it is the method or the fact that the information is available that matters.

“Is it the blog that matters or is it the cheap camera that matters?” he asked.

All of the panelists agreed that the 2008 presidential election is “an historic event” and both Friedland and Suri think the country could be on the verge of a total political realignment, shifting total control to the Democrats.

Friedland said the country is in the midst of an election “in which young people… are projected to vote Obama at a two to one ratio” and where “we may be seeing the beginnings of a new democratic majority.”

Suri said the idea behind this realignment election is that people are voting against something more than they are voting for it. People change parties “when they feel the old system has been ruined by one particular party that they have associated themselves with,” he said.

“Those who might be voting Democrat will not be voting Democrat because they embrace a Democratic position, but because they are anti-neo-conservative foreign policy, anti-neoconservative management,” Suri said.

Goldstein, who analyzes political and advertising data, said data shows Democrats vote for Democrats, Republicans vote for Republicans and other voters vote for the candidate that wins, but what matters most is what percentage of each party votes.