Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Website instrumental in municipal election

But not without its problems
P>By Alison Taylor

Whistler’s first community-wide non-partisan election website played a pivotal role in the 2005 municipal elections.

It was so popular that discussions are now underway between the website’s creator Duane Perrett and some newly elected councillors to keep the site running as a way to foster community dialogue.

Perrett said he was amazed to find out there were 4,756 hits on his web page on election day last Saturday. While that number does not represent the number of actual users, rather the number of times the homepage came up on any given computer, it highlights the role votewhistler.com played in the election as a way to access information and stimulate debate online.

When Perrett introduced the online forum in the weeks leading up to the election, which allowed people to post comments and questions, the interest in the site grew exponentially. One day he recorded 500 unique computers logging on the site.

"I think it informed a lot of people about Whistler," said Perrett. "And I think the best thing of all about this is that even though we realized that a bunch of us do disagree on things, at least it brought us all together in one way… At least we know that we agree that we can work together and Whistler’s what we’re out for. We’re out to get a better Whistler."

Perrett calls his website a "happy accident," which just exploded over the course of the election campaign, drawing in most of the 24 candidates and hundreds of community members in an interactive Internet forum.

His work on the website and the things he learned about the candidates through the site eventually swayed his own vote last Saturday.

"I myself learned so much about the candidates that I didn’t even vote for the same people I originally was planning on voting (for) before I created the website," said Perrett. "So I’m sure a lot of other people informed themselves and I’m sure that it had an impact on their voting."

But the website is not without its detractors.

Councillor Marianne Wade, who was not re-elected on Saturday night, expressed concerns about the content on the website, particularly some of the anonymous comments that were directed to her.

"I think people used that site to smear people and twist things around and because it can be anonymous, people weren’t attaching their names to it," she said this week.

"It was a constant (barrage) of people really trying to sway the vote, absolutely I would say."

Among the attacks directed at Wade was the criticism that she spends most of her time working as a consultant in Vancouver, the implication being that she is not keyed in to the things going on in Whistler.

While it is true Wade works part-time in Vancouver, she does so by choice to keep herself out of conflicts as a Whistler councillor, she explained this week.

"It was twisted to try and make it look like I wasn’t making a full commitment to the community," said Wade. "What people were trying to do was devalue me."

That is one of the dangers of Internet forums, said Simon Fraser University PhD Kathleen Cross, whose work focuses on political communications specifically with media and elections.

"There are pros and cons to this and it has the capacity to be very positive because of its democratizing effect on who has voice on these things," said Cross. "But without monitoring for tone and responsibility then it doesn’t have that effect."

Perrett said he tried hard to monitor the content of the site. He began with a simple set of rules but quickly found people were crossing the line with their comments.

Most of the postings on the site were anonymous allowing users to write freely without repercussions for their political views. And, as the election drew nearer the comments became more personal and were not always accurate.

Perrett removed the offending content as quickly as possible but there were times when it was posted for several hours before he could catch it.

Most remarks were directed at the two mayoral frontrunners, Ted Nebbeling and Ken Melamed, as well as some of the other candidates such as Wade.

"I think it’s good to have dialogue and I think that would have been healthy but it wasn’t healthy because people totally misused it," said Wade. "And they did it in a very mean-spirited way."

That was not Perrett’s intention. He created votewhistler.com as a way for people to get informed in a non-biased format. He has received a lot of positive feedback about the site.

By posting tape recordings of the mayoral debate and the arts, culture and heritage all candidates meeting, he gave people another forum to learn about the candidates, even people living out of town.

When asked if he thought the website changed the outcome of the election he could not say.

"That’s a big question," he said. "I would hope that it informed everybody and everybody was able to make an informed decision."

Votewhistler.com began in some ways as an experiment, a way for Perrett and his friends to learn more about the candidates in the lead up to the municipal election.

Now the question that remains is how does the site carry on and remain a viable way for people to access information and debate issues of the day.

Cross cautions against too much negative content that is potentially libelous and not completely accurate.

"When you start to get… the negative stuff… then a lot of people just turn off," she said. "If somebody’s not monitoring for the tone then a lot of people just stop posting and the only ones left are the ones that have gripes to pick."

Perrett is aware of this pattern and has been seeking advice on the future of votewhistler.com.

Newly elected councillor Bob Lorriman, who also took some personal hits on the website, agreed there is a problem with people posting inaccurate information.

"I think as a community it’ll be interesting to see how we evolve this so it stays as an important source of information," he said.

Unlike Wade, Lorriman said anonymity is an important facet to the site because it gives people the freedom to say what they want. But he said accusations should be rephrased as questions, which would allow people to respond and clear any misconceptions.

He said: "I hope it keeps going and I think we’re going to have some interesting dialogue as to how do we keep it going and make it work."

A meeting is planned for next week for anybody who wants to get involved in the community forum. Check out www.votewhistler.com for details.