The 'old media' meets the 'new media'.

It's not too soon to look back on the 2004 election and declare it something of a watershed in the history of media and American politics. This was the first election where two of the biggest news stories of the year (the Swift Boat Veterans and Rathergate) were driven into the public consciousness by media vehicles other than traditional network news programs and major daily newspapers.

Talk radio is often referred to as part of the new media even though it is a well-established and largely conservative medium. But in 2004 it was the maturation of two other segments of the new media that combined with talk radio to challenge the ability of traditional big media to set and control the news agenda of the country.

The first segment is, quite obviously, the group of politically oriented Internet sites commonly referred to as blogs. The second segment is twenty-four-hour cable news--but more specifically the meteoric rise to dominance in this segment by the FOX News Channel.

The massive growth and reach of the Internet and FOX over the past four years, combined with a thriving network of local and syndicated talk radio programs, created an alternate channel through which large portions of the country could receive news and information. The result is that for the first time ever vital parts of the news agenda were set and opinion was framed by members of the new media.

Nothing illustrates the significance of this shift and its impact on the political landscape better than the Swift Boat Veterans story. The group originally held a press conference on May 4, 2004, where it announced its opposition to John Kerry. At the time, the story was widely noted in the blogosphere but barely received a mention in the mainstream media.

This lack of initial coverage no doubt contributed to the Kerry campaign's decision three months later to try to ignore the Swift Boat Veterans when they resurfaced in August with the publication of Unfit for Command. This strategy hinged on the assumption that the eight-hundred-pound gorillas of the big media would ignore the story as well, keeping it relegated to the fringes of political debate and deflecting any potentially serious damage from Mr. Kerry.

Initially, this is exactly what transpired as most members of large, mainstream media outlets deemed the Swiftees' charges baseless, partisan, and unfit for coverage. Members of the new media, however, dove in and began fact-checking the accusations, leading to yet more questions and contradictions. Two weeks after the Swift Boat Veterans ran their first ad and Unfit for Command started zooming up the bestseller lists, it became clear that blogs, talk radio, and FOX News had combined to generate such a high degree of public interest over the story that it simply became impossible for other major media outlets to ignore.

On August 19 John Kerry was forced to make a public statement responding to the Swift Boat Veterans' charges. The following day The New York Times ran a front-page story attacking the Swift Boat Vets and alleging a web of connections with Karl Rove and the Bush campaign. The rest, as they say, is history.

Twenty, ten, or perhaps even five years ago the Kerry campaign strategy might have worked because traditional media outlets still held a monopoly over deciding which news stories were disseminated to the public. If big media deemed a story wasn't worthy of coverage, then it didn't get covered. The 2004 election proved that those days are gone.

New media will never replace traditional media. But new media will continue to grow, to develop strength, and to challenge traditional media in setting the news agenda and driving public opinion. Last year the Kerry campaign made a crucial mistake in underestimating the power of new media. It's a mistake few politicians, if any, are likely to make again.

Tom Bevin, left, and John McIntyre produce the blog website RealClear Politics.com. E-mail tom@ realclearpolitics.com and john@ realclearpolitics.com