My Experience with Tethered Technology

As the discussion about generative vs. tethered technology went on, I noticed that the example used was the iPhone vs. the Apple II.

This caught my eye because for the past two and a half years, I've been the proud owner of an iPhone. I was one of the first ones to get it back in the summer of 2007, and I haven't upgraded since. When it first came out, it was certainly a prominent example of "tethered" technology. It had several great features, such as full web browser, the ability to check stocks, YouTube, and of course the iPod itself. Still, there was the feature of being able to grow that was missing.

Since then, iPhone has started to push back some of the boundaries that pre-programmed phones come with. It started in 2008 when Apple allowed iPhone users to download songs from an iTunes application that came from a software update. Then Apple released the App store application, and all hell broke loose. Soon iPhone users (discounting myself) had several pages worth of apps, including the useful (Spanish-English dictionary) to the useless (online drinking games).

Looking back, I would say that although my iPhone did not initially have all the great generative stuff that comes with today's iphones, I don't think that having a tethered piece of technology was all that bad.

First of all, the comparison with Apple II is, I think, a bit unfair. As groundbreaking as iPhone was for cell phones, Apple II was earth shaking for computers. The technology in 1977 was not nearly as developed as it was 10 years later, so of course Apple II would have to be a generative type of technology; if it was tethered then computers would not be the same as they are today, since there would be no innovation.

Technology is so advanced today that there is nothing that Apple could put on its' iPhone that they can't do themselves. Sure, Apple could have made iPhone a piece of generative technology, and they would have subsequently lost millions of dollars in possible revenue. Also, consider this; iPhone 8g models were priced around $500 a pop, and I think if iPhone was generative right off the bat, Apple would have never been able to lower their prices, because they would have never gotten the revenue that these applications bring. After Apple entered into licensing agreements with companies like eBay, Facebook, etc. they were able to make even more money.

Of course, having tethered technology does come with some problems. iPhone, while not as tethered as its initial release in 2007, is still an example of the "Walled Garden", where Apple and AT&T is the gatekeeper. That means whenever I have a problem, I have to deal exclusively with these two companies, instead of being able to switch services. Still, I don't think tethered technology does not have to mean bad technology, and iPhone is living proof of that.

We the Tweeple

According to the latest RealClearPolitics average, Congress' job approval rating stands at a dismal 27 percent, with 64 percent disapproving of how Capitol Hill has handled things.

To be sure, the country has seen better days. In the last year and a half, we've seen a global financial crisis, two wars, a bloodbath over health care reform, crippling deficits, and an energy crisis that although largely forgotten about, will surely hurt our citizens even more if the United States does not develop domestic alternative energy sources here at home.

Still, it's not just the public's dissatisfaction with the way Congress has reacted to these problems, or even the solutions put forward. It's also the perception that Congress, fair or unfair, is out of touch and elitist. That members of Congress believe that they know what's best for ourselves better than we do.

It's that perception that has made certain members of Congress in an unfamiliar spot: vulnerable for defeat, as this new poll for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) demonstrates.

So what are our representatives to do? Well first off, they can undergo an image makeover, as G. Gordon Liddy suggests. Liddy, a former Nixon aide sentenced to 20 years in federal prison for his role in the Watergate scandal, now has a nationally syndicated radio show that reaches millions of listeners. On Capitol Hill yesterday, speaking in front of yours truly and a group of members of the House, Congresswoman Jean Schmidt (R-OH) asked Liddy what they could do to get the people to like them.

Liddy responded that members of Congress should reach out to ordinary, everyday folks in order to combat this perception. That they should go up to an everyday person, who will cast their vote for or against you in the next election, and say hello, talk to that person, get a sense of how they're feeling. Even a letter from a Congressperson, even if its' a form letter, means a great deal to people.

That is where Twitter comes in. Politicians have for the last couple years have tried to reach out to voters as new technology develops. Most high level elected officials now have comprehensive websites, Facebook pages, and YouTube channels. I always assumed that clearly it was not the elected official that was updating the webpages, but members of his staff.

With Twitter however, it's different. Some politicians do tweet themselves, or at least they give the perception that it is them on Twitter. This perception, or reality, allows constituents to reach out directly to their representative.

One sign that Twitter is reinventing the way politicians reach out to the people is the website TweetCongress. Their goals are simple and laid out on the front of the page. "To form a more perfect government, establish communication, and promote transparency." They list members of Congress who tweet, and provide useful stats to show who is active and who is not. Best of all, there is a community page where one can see how the people are trying to reach out to those who represent them in Washington.

In terms of who is winning the Twitter war, a look at the TweetCongress' stats will show which side is winning the Twitter war.

According to TweetCongress, the number one Tweeter is none other than Sen. John McCain, who's total tweets is more than five times the number of tweets the second place holder on that list, which is Sen. Claire McCaskill. The most active Tweeters are the Senate Republicans. Currently locked in a war with the Obama Administration and Senate Democrats over health care reform, the Senate GOP produces a bi-weekly web show called the "Senate Doctors Show" starring Sens. Tom Coburn M.D. and John Barasso M.D.

Most importantly, TweetCongress rates who is the most conversational, that is, who actually Tweets like a normal person would on Twitter, and who is the most political. The top five most conversational are all Republicans, and four of the five most political are Republicans as well.

Right now the GOP is winning the Twitter war. For Democrats who used new media effectively well in the 2008 election to get Barack Obama elected to the presidency, this should be unacceptable. At a time where they should be using every possible avenue to get their message out, they are missing the train on Twitter.

As Barack Obama and the Democrats continue to push a health care reform proposal that will change the way America does health care, and that will affect millions of Americans who vote, they should be trying to shake the image that they are elitist, out of touch, and think they know better for the people than they do. In these difficult times, every politician, whether they are vulnerable in 2010 or not, should be reaching out to the Twitterverse, and letting them know that they do indeed have their best interests at heart in Washington.