They are more representative because they are commenting from a "general" site - i.e. the news / TV station, they are more likely to be local.
They have not sought out this more specific website to learn and converse with others and dive into this discussion more in detail.
I would say they have a cursory knowledge and are basing their opinions on that. I suspect that's going to be the "normal" juror based on my limited experience with that process - basically - it scared the hell out of me with regard to the "average joe".
It's pretty much what I see there.
Hi RNC,
I have not spent much time on GOLO, but I was directed there recently by JMFLU and looked a couple of other times also.
I am hopeful that the views presented on GOLO would not be a representative sample of the general population. I think that many of the posters (not all) are men who have had bad divorces and
potentially were abusive/controlling to their former spouses at some point in their life. Some may have just had a hard time getting custody of their children. Hard to know for sure and this is just speculation. There are often opinion leaders on sites such as GOLO and that changes the tone of the conversation. I am just speculating, but I think that some of these individuals feel the need to stick up for Brad. It is almost as though they feel that they are part of the same club. Chat boards have given this group an outlet, which did not used to exist. In a sense, they are forming their own sort of community.
Of course there are others that are not convinced that BC may be guilty that do not fall into the category above, and I wouldn't have a problem with that type of individual being chosen for a jury. Some posters look for alternative theories, question new developments thoroughly and this is very different approach, IMO. They also do not tend to find fault with Nancy.
On another note, I have also been wondering about the possibility that there are also friends of Brad posting on websites. (Although, as we have learned from RKAB and Calgary, he didn't seem to have many of those.) K&B have asked for all web-based material (including chat room conversations) from all of NC's friends that filed affidavits. I'm not sure what this is for, but it seems to be related to controlling public opinion. I think that it would be prudent for TS to do the same with Brad's friends that have filed affidavits. They may not have posted anywhere, but if so, then I think that the same should apply to that camp.
Just some thoughts
BTW, I think that WS is different than sites such as GOLO, mainly because there is an opportunity to form a community based on exploring the case and I have found that most posters engage in a respectful dialogue. I seem to remember reading that the interaction on some websites can be compared to road rage. Because of distance, people will speak and act in a way that they would not normally do in a social situation. I joined WS, because of the community element and the opportunity to communicate with people who clearly have expertise in various areas (including local knowledge) and are interested in analyzing the case more thoroughly.
