What can be said about this year's U.S. election coverage that hasn't been said already? Well, The New York Times gives it a stab by providing some prominent webloggers some prominent space on their Op/Ed pages to give their take on the most important aspects of this year's Presidential campaign. The opinions gathered ranged from conservative to liberal to libidinous (yes, Wonkette), but one thing is not up for an opinion: these are voices that were not anywhere near the map of ContentNation four years ago and that are now as familiar as reality game show hosts to many political aficionados. This year's election has seen the rise of content from countless new sources that have both enriched and enraged the proceedings, most in the hands of individuals and institutions that have nothing to to with established media outlets. Wondering if that has anything to do with the continuing slide in major newspaper circulation numbers announced by the Audit Bureau of Circulations? Yet again good content is where you find it, making the democratic environment of Web content the true choice of the people in this hotly contested election year.

Post-election update: It was interesting to note that the most relevant information during the evening of the election results was by far the Web sites of major news organizations and specialists in political news. While talking heads were droning away antiseptically on television and cable news stations, the raw numbers from exit polls, dramatic headlines, rumors and rumor debunking and second-by-second updates to state-level voting returns were readily available from a wide array of sources. ContentNation was downright vibrant. As to how much this online content changed the electorate's mind is debatable, but clearly it kept them engaged and expanded the range of people engaged in the process.