Virtual Tour

The very layout and structure of the Daily Kos diarist community suggests the inherent hierarchy built into the site. The front page features diaries posted sporadically by kos (Zuniga), and more regularly his paid staff, as well entries these editors have promoted to the homepage.

A select group of powerful users are frequently elevated to the “Recommended Diaries” sidebar along the right border which have received a high number of positive ratings. There are about 20 to 30 diarists who consistently make the recommended diary list, having built a reputation and a following of other members on the site.


Each new diary is briefly and unobtrusively displayed on a sidebar under the heading “Recent Diaries” in the bottom corner.


The secondary "Diaries" page displays a more egalitarian selection of entries. The setup is identical to the front page, but here rank-and-file members have a greater chance of seeing their posts make the coveted left column. In the entries themselves, diarists can post straw polls, video clips, and hyperlinks. Below the post, responses are listed in chronological order with a (+/-) rating next to each comment. Members can vote to either recommend or, if they are "trusted" users who have built up cache on the site with positively reviewed comments and diaries, they can vote to hide a comment. Users can also tag diaries as "troll" or "bannable offense" to alert moderators to consider sanctioning the author.


Users can’t edit each other’s postings, though they can add updates and corrections. Instead, Daily Kos gives diarists a bullhorn and a soapbox to write blog entries once a day, and participation in commenting on others’ diaries and feedback. These informal norms are intended to discourage behavior deemed divisive or spiteful. The debate and political activism it engenders are the product of Daily Kos.


Analysis

Daily Kos’ system of aggregation promotes diaries that cohere with Zuniga and his hierarchically privileged members’ philosophy, and to a lesser extent perhaps, the will of the Kossack majority. Points of view that diverge from the site’s vision are invariably rejected outright or buried. Opinions that are seemingly legitimate in broader Democratic circles but depart from the majority or the more-powerful editors may even be stifled. Through consensus, Daily Kos appears to be attempting to build a platform for social action, necessitating a measure of consensus. However, this system could also backfire should members in the vein of Hillary’s proponents challenging the dominant position of the site feel marginalized or silenced. This could ultimately fragment the Daily Kos community and undermine its ability to mobilize and rally behind a united movement.