Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
THE O EFFECT.
Nestled in this New York Times piece on how divided Republican primary voters are on the candidates is this gem:
The poll found that just 1 percent said they might be swayed by the involvement of Oprah Winfrey, who has been campaigning for Mr. Obama in Iowa, South Carolina and New Hampshire the last three days, drawing huge crowds and allowing his campaign to identify new supporters.
Of course only 1 percent said they might be swayed. Who admits to making their political decisions based on Oprah's guidance? Her power here is exposure, headlines, name recognition, and the more subtle influences of power and fame. And she's certainly getting him that. Their sold out appearances and the efficacy of her endorsement have been much-discussed in the news media. So even if people don't think she's having an effect, the fact that it's even being talked about helps Obama's campaign.
COMMENTS (3)
A 1% swing from a single endorsement would be huge, of course.
Posted by: Ben Rosengart | December 11, 2007 4:51 PM
The NY Times reporting of the 29,000 plus Obama/Winfrey event in South Carolina was 6 inches on page 19 on Monday, Dec. 10. Either the Times doesn't consider the largest political event in US history to be newsworthy, or something else is going on. Their coverage of Obama seems in general to reflect an aversion to the Obama campaign.
Posted by: Wantowin | December 11, 2007 10:39 PM
Wantowin - How are you defining the "largest political event in history"?
Posted by: Eric | December 12, 2007 12:31 PM