Judicial candidates, Facebook

October 6, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Some local candidates for judge in Indiana are turning to the Internet to spread the word about their campaigns – but they aren’t just creating election Web sites. Some have taken the leap into the social media world and created Facebook group pages.

Yes, that’s right; it’s possible a candidate for a judgeship in your county is on Facebook, a Web site traditionally used by college students to share pictures and information.

I did a search this morning for “Indiana judge” under Facebook groups and found seven attorneys or current judges who have group accounts. It appears most of these groups were created before the primary in May, and the majority of candidates lost. However, Clark Circuit Judge Abe Navarro, his opponent Dan Moore, Harrison County attorney John Evans, and Johnson County Prosecutor Lance Hamner won their respective primaries and are on the November ballot. Only those with a Facebook account can view the candidates’ group pages.

At first, I laughed when I discovered judges or judicial candidates with Facebook group pages because the typical Facebook user probably wasn’t born when these candidates graduated law school. But the more I thought about it, I realized it actually would be an interesting way to try to get the word to younger voters about a candidate. Sure, most young voters won’t think to search Facebook to find out about a candidate, but if they have a friend who knows the candidate, they may be persuaded to become a member of the candidate’s group page and then possibly tell other friends about the candidate.

Is campaigning via social networking going to be the new trend for candidates, beyond the typical political ads, campaign signs, and candidate Web pages? And, do you think you can tell who can win based on how many “friends” or “members” a candidate’s page lists?
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Your comments proved insightful and well-founded. The internet most certainly can be used as a medium for communicating campaign platforms and ideas. I graduated from the Vermont Law School in 2001. The internet as a research and communication tool was an integral part of our curriculum. As such, I value it as a medium for reaching out to our communities.
  • You convinced me. I signed up!

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  2. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

  3. wow is this a bunch of bs! i know the facts!

  4. MCBA .... time for a new release about your entire membership (or is it just the alter ego) being "saddened and disappointed" in the failure to lynch a police officer protecting himself in the line of duty. But this time against Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation: "WASHINGTON — Justice Department lawyers will recommend that no civil rights charges be brought against the police officer who fatally shot an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Mo., after an F.B.I. investigation found no evidence to support charges, law enforcement officials said Wednesday." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/us/justice-department-ferguson-civil-rights-darren-wilson.html?ref=us&_r=0

  5. Dr wail asfour lives 3 hours from the hospital,where if he gets an emergency at least he needs three hours,while even if he is on call he should be in a location where it gives him max 10 minutes to be beside the patient,they get paid double on their on call days ,where look how they handle it,so if the death of the patient occurs on weekend and these doctors still repeat same pattern such issue should be raised,they should be closer to the patient.on other hand if all the death occured on the absence of the Dr and the nurses handle it,the nurses should get trained how to function appearntly they not that good,if the Dr lives 3 hours far from the hospital on his call days he should sleep in the hospital

ADVERTISEMENT