One Half of One Percent?

In previous posts, I have lamented how increased investment in online strategy is sorely needed among our political campaigns. I have also touched on how campaigns are behind the curve. Mark Walsh of MediaPost writes of a new study soon to be released by Borrell Associates that examines 2008 online political advertising. From Walsh's story:

(T)he tiny .5% share of political advertising going to the Internet is well below the 9% chunk Borrell estimates the medium gets of ad dollars overall. It garners at least 5% in all other ad categories, including automotive, travel and health.

This is crazy, especially considering how efficient the social web is for promoting a political idea. Campaigns are underfunded, when compared to traditional marketing efforts. Coke has a marketing budget in excess of $400 million a year, whereas the major presidential campaigns will spend less than $150 million. Therefore, it is critical that resources be employed efficiently. What is more efficient than a preexisting, connected set of networks, complete with numerous tools with which to engage and converse?

Gibson Stevens

Gibson Stevens is Brandon Thomas. When I started this, I was a bit unsure of how overt I should be in my blogging. Despite my thoughts on this whole idea of the conversation, I was hesitant to lay my thoughts out in such an open manner.

There is definitely a paradigm shift happening in the manner with which people approach privacy. Friends only 5 or 10 years younger than me have a totally different perspective on who and how others access information about their life, their thoughts, etc. I was unsure initially of what may come by documenting my thoughts. Thus far, the feedback has been positive.

My motivation for keeping this blog is two fold. First, I see tremendous opportunity to improve the methods campaigns (and marketers) are using to reach out to their constituency. I believe those that have been in the game for years are loosing site of the forest among the trees, and apparent opportunities are being missed. My varied background provides for a unique perspective on the space, whereby I hope to help seize these opportunities.

Second, I am branding myself as a web strategist. The idea of the social web is in its infancy. I believe we will see the idea grow to be on par with the birth of the internet itself. The opportunity is vast and wide, and I want to be a part of it.

In addition, web strategy is still buried deep within IT or communications shops, rather than among the senior leadership of an organization. I have had a seat at the table within several organizations. I expect to do so again, to shine the light on this channel to bring the necessary resources (and ROI) to bear...

This site can now also be accessed via www.gbrandonthomas.com. Thanks for reading!

Ron Paul Learns from Zombies

Ok, so maybe the idea didn't come from the Zombies application within Facebook, but given its reach thus far (over 5.4 million installations to date), Ron Paul's campaign may be on to something with their integration of similar ideas.

The application is very simple, yet over 100,000 users are engaged every day. You receive credit for every friend that you bite. You then infect them, and get credit for whomever they bite. Very simple, yet the numbers are crazy.

My thesis is that the numbers are so large due to the competitive element, namely the leader board. By merely presenting the information of how you stack up overall, among your friends and within your networks, users become engaged. Ron Paul is the first example I have seen to port this logic over to political web strategy.

Within his Grassroots Center, the campaign seeks to sign up precinct captains around the country. There also is an additional tool to recruit your friends. What I am excite to see is the leader board on the Grassroots homepage. We shall see if this proves effective in enhancing the recruitment of precinct captains, just as Zombies and other applications have taken off within the Facebook environment. TechPresident noted today that close to 10,000 captains have been recruited thus far.

Shelf Life and Value

I have written several posts about value from the campaign's perspective. Let's not forget it from the user's perspective either.

I like to play with new online tools and services. I am happy to try new things, but my time is also limited. There is a short shelf life for my interest. I have to not only see the potential value of the offering, but also enjoy a valuable experience throughout. When a site gets me to sign up, its an investment on my part - not only to sign up at that time, but to actually use the tool offered. I need a return on that investment.

So when a tool uses email to communicate with me, it too must provide me value, especially when it asks for more of my time.

I recently signed up with Spokeo, one of many sites out there attempting to bring the Facebook News Feed to the general web. Once you sign up, you upload your email contacts, Facebook friends and other networks. Spokeo then consolidates your friends' activity on those other sites in one place. Unfortunately, Spokeo's external integrations are somewhat limited. For example, for Facebook, the only activity that is extracted and placed within your Spokeo feed is the posting of Notes. But again, the idea is interesting and I look forward to its evolution.

Spokeo periodically sends out emails asking you to return to the site to see the new activity. I like the idea and, despite its limitations, I continue to check it out every day or two. However, I continue to get these emails. One of two things are happening. Either there is no logic behind the emails, and they are simply blasted periodically. Or, the couple days in between checks are sufficient to trip the process.

I am a sucker sometimes, so I typically do check the site out when I receive one of these notices, taking time. My problem is that, on at east a couple occasions, the quantity of new activity available for my review was sparse - 4 or 5 entries - hardly worth my time. How many of these will I receive before I ignore them? Worse yet, how many will bug me enough to cancel my account?

My point here is that delivering value to the user must be considered throughout all potential interactions and communications. Spend the time to incorporate the optimal logic for automatic communications, to ensure they add value, rather than detract.

More on Focus, and Porn!

Shameless traffic-driving headline, but I believe an interesting point is to be made nonetheless...

From the Huffington Post, via Jake McKee, Hugh McGuire's Article, "Porn Knows What It’s For — Do You?" provides a more vivid description of a theme I have hit a few times on this blog: focus on value and less on method. From the post:

It seems to me the porn business, one of the most profitable businesses in the Universe, gets this in a way no one else does. Because the porn biz understands exactly what it is for:

Pornographers don’t sell pornography; they provide orgasms.

Looking at it that way, they don’t seem to care much about how they do it — they’ll just find ways to give people the orgasms however people want them given. Dirty postcards, magazines, porno theatres, VHS and Betamax, phone sex, online photos, online videos, chat lines, webcams, cybersex and God knows what else. You don’t hear the porn business whining about Intellectual Property and illegal downloads, and consumers as thieves, because they don’t have time: they’re too busy trying to give the world what it seems to want, more orgasms.

So, stepping out of the peepshow and back to the respectable world, why are newspapers, for instance, having such a hard time? I think it’s because they have a fundamental misunderstanding of what they do.

The value of a newspaper is not that it gives me information; the value of a newspaper is how it selects information - what it puts in and what it leaves out.

Political web strategy suffers from a similar ambiguity in its attempt to execute on its overall objective: to drive votes. It is not about the latest tool or the coolest thing in social media. It is not about a fancy website or a well-produced video. It is all about driving the value you seek, given your goals and objectives.

Value Equation of Online Political Campaigning

There is a ton of buzz about what campaigns are doing online. Obama, Paul and the others are all playing with various tools out there. However, much of the effort is directed at initiatives that are not aligned with the value equation behind political campaigns. There are a lot of ideas and products out there that offer more gimmick than value. Sure, the gimmicks get you ink (see here), but do they actually drive value for the campaign?

I define campaign value as the acquisition of either money or time from an individual. The more of either you have, the more you are able to deploy. In the parlance of Karen Hicks, Clinton's field adviser, it is all about the capacity.

To various extents, the technologies employed today attempt to drive some level of engagement. Sites such as Eventful and Meetup help drive prospective supporters to events that will hopefully engage the individual enough to support the candidate. Sites such as Twitter and Facebook enable campaigns to interact with their constituents. Tools such as campaign video or blogs attempt to offer content to the supporter in the hopes of keeping them on the site and interested in the candidate. Even virtual phone banking has roots with engagement, giving active supporters the opportunity to identify other potential people to engage. The more engaged an individual is, the more likely they are to donate time or money.

I do not deny that all of the above is important. Engagement is critical to generating the capacity to campaign. However, my thesis is that many of the above tools and more that have yet to be uncovered can take online campaigning one step further, from engagement to action.

It is all about focus. Engagement must be the focus in the early stages. However, focus on action must take precedence, as the primary season wears on.

I define action in this context is defined as specific activities that help promote the campaign objectives. Building capacity is just one, fundraising is another. What other actions that align with campaign objectives are there, that can be enhanced / improved / refined with online technology?

10 Examples of Getting Social Media in Politics...

Below are a few examples of campaigns getting it - and by "it" I mean what is becoming the social web. Great effort and dollars has been invested on campaign websites, but it is the online effort outside the traditional campaign website that matters.

1. Clinton's Facebook Page - though it had its faults, the Clinton camp's attempt at driving her Facebook supporters to ask questions was a great attempt at employing the social graph to take action on behalf of the campaign.


2. Edwards' Open Thread - John Edwards does a good job of encouraging conversation with his blog, in particular his use of the common open thread. However, given the glut of positive comments, my sense is they may be moderating this a bit much. Excluding Thompson and Romney, campaigns on both sides at least are maintaining blogs, some better than others...
   


3. The League of Young Voters Facebook Application - with MoveOn, The League of Young Voters makes a decent attempt at enabling the political conversation within Facebook. Though they may be trying to do too much, I love the ability to not only show your support for your favorite candidate, but also define why you like the particular candidate.


4. Obama's Facebook Application - another valuable attempt at engaging via the social web. There are certainly opportunities for improvement. I loved what they did just before Iowa, allowing you to see who among your friends are in Iowa and giving you a means to encourage them to participate in the Caucus. And they remain the only campaign (on the D-side) with an official FB application. Giuliani has one, but it does not appear to be working and only has 900 installations (vs. Obama's still meager 75 K)
   


5. Richardson's Use of Facebook Updates - with the launch of Facebook's Pages system in November, campaigns could (finally) send updates to their vast supporter base within the social network. Richardson was the first and still the most active user of this feature, despite dropping out last week. For Obama, close to 250 K self-identified supporters can be reached; for Clinton, close to 75 K, and these numbers keep growing. It is important that the campaigns continue to diversify the channels with which they communicate with the electorate. Unfortunately, am not a supporter of the Republicans within Facebook, so I am unaware of their activity with this tool.
   


6. Use of Video - All three major campaigns are maintaining a presence on YouTube (see Clinton, Edwards and Obama on the D-side, and Romney, Huckabee, Thompson and McCain on the R-side). Obama, McCain, and Romney have spent significant effort on the video component of his website, whereas the other video sections are less sophisticated. Given the use of campaign websites, I don't see his effort as an advantage at this point. It's all about YouTube...
   


7. Edwards' Use of Twitter - though he hasn't posted since November 6th, their first-mover attempt at using a new technology is valuable (Edwards started twittering a year ago, Obama in April and Clinton just this month after Iowa). Edwards' tweets also appear to be actually from the road, whereas Clinton's and Obama's appear written from their HQ rather than the road. With 4, 199 followers, I am curious as to why Edwards has stopped posting? In 2000, Florida was lost by less than 500 votes... None of the Republican candidates appear to have active Twitter accounts.
   


8. Virtual Phonebanking - Obama , Clinton, Thompson, and McCain offer the opportunity for their supporters to call potential voters from the comfort of their home. Giuliani directs supporters to call talk radio stations and Edwards, Romney and Huckabee appear to have missed the phonebanking boat. Massive phone banks have long been a mainstay (and expense) of traditional field operations. Enabling volunteers to call from home greatly expands the pool of volunteers, as they no longer have to be at a specific place at a specific time. And the campaigns no longer have to buy the phone lines! It will be interesting to see if this takes off, and what impact the isolation of being at home has, versus being among a group of like-minded individuals.


9. Online Organizing of Off-line Events - Led by Obama, all three major Democratic contenders are testing the use of online event management tools, like Eventful and Facebook's Events. Huckabee is using MeetUp (how 2004...), but appears to be the most adventurous in this space. The hindrance at this point appears technical, as the difficulty of updating and managing numerous event sites is very labor-intensive (see #2).


10. Thompson's Fundraising Widget - Though all campaigns have their contribute button visible everywhere, Thompson goes a step further by enabling bloggers and other tech-savvy folks to add a widget to their online presence. Others offer the button, but Thompson's includes fields to input name and email right within the widget. I expect more sophisticated widgets to become available, as the campaign rolls on.