Companies with names like POLItxt, Mobile Voter, and Mobile Accord filled the room – all brand new firms banking on the profit potential of mobile communication to canvas, register, organize, vote, lobby, and solicit donations from voters with just a few clicks of the thumb.
Profits aside, mobile communication is quite possibly the future of political communication for the wired generation. Young voters are one of the most elusive groups for political and advocacy marketers. They’re the most likely to tune out direct mail, use cell phones as their primary method of telecommunication, contact friends and family using text messages, and fast-forward through commercials using digital video recorders.
]]>Companies with names like POLItxt, Mobile Voter, and Mobile Accord filled the room – all brand new firms banking on the profit potential of mobile communication to canvas, register, organize, vote, lobby, and solicit donations from voters with just a few clicks of the thumb.
Profits aside, mobile communication is quite possibly the future of political communication for the wired generation. Young voters are one of the most elusive groups for political and advocacy marketers. They’re the most likely to tune out direct mail, use cell phones as their primary method of telecommunication, contact friends and family using text messages, and fast-forward through commercials using digital video recorders.
In this fragmented media universe, the always-on and always-in-your-pocket nature of mobile communication stands out as being able to reach, attract and hold the attention of younger voters – perhaps even more so than the Internet.
But with the impending potential for mobile communication also comes “an enormous responsibility,” according to Oliver Star of Mobile Weblog. After all, the cell phone is perhaps the most intrusive, push medium that ever existed. He warns that marketers must not engage in sending unsolicited text messages to unsuspecting voters. “If my phone becomes a mindless buzzing, personal pop-up in my pocket, I’ll trash it and not use it.” (Great quote, right?)
But will voters – and more importantly campaigns – take the plunge? It’s too early to tell. Howard Dean experimented with text messaging to communicate with voters during the 2004 election (think “tune in to ABC tonight” or “filing deadline today!”) with mixed success.
As Matt Gross, Dean's Director of Internet Communications told The Gadflyer in June of 2004:
“Some things didn't work. I started the Dean Wireless Network - a text
messaging service - in April of 2003. More than 4,000 people eventually signed
up, but in comparison to our other efforts it was a failure. Maybe in 2008 - or
2012.”
Further complicating the process are the actual cell phone carriers. Wireless service providers like Verizon and Cingular currently limit mobile payments/contributions to small “micropayments” of $10 – and they take 50% of micropayments as a processing fee! (ouch).
As with all new political technologies, I imagine that adoption of mobile marketing will be part of a natural evolution, not an overnight revolution. So perhaps we’re not there yet, but it would be hard to ignore the fact that mobile marketing is a powerful way to communicate with voters and is here to stay.
]]>
Now, I'm extraordinarily biased here, as I worked with the DSCC on the design and execution of this campaign, but thought it was worth pointing out. There's an open thread at FromTheRoots.org where they're seeking comments and suggestions.
]]>
Now, I'm extraordinarily biased here, as I worked with the DSCC on the design and execution of this campaign, but thought it was worth pointing out. There's an open thread at FromTheRoots.org where they're seeking comments and suggestions.
]]>According to the article -- and conventional wisdom -- although most blogs “draw only a few thousand readers a day,” in primary elections “where voter turnout is low and 'political junkies' who frequent such Web sites are more likely to vote, the blogs might have a real effect.”
According to some critics of the blogosphere, the problem with blogs is that they allow virtually anyone to post anything -- factual or not -- and start the wheels on the rumor mill running full steam ahead.
The anonymous blogger at the center of the piece -– who posts entries as “Not Larry Sabato,” a harmless dig at the Director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics who considers
]]>According to the article -- and conventional wisdom -- although most blogs “draw only a few thousand readers a day,” in primary elections “where voter turnout is low and 'political junkies' who frequent such Web sites are more likely to vote, the blogs might have a real effect.”
According to some critics of the blogosphere, the problem with blogs is that they allow virtually anyone to post anything -- factual or not -- and start the wheels on the rumor mill running full steam ahead.
The anonymous blogger at the center of the piece -– who posts entries as “Not Larry Sabato,” a harmless dig at the Director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics who considers
himself “the most quoted college professor in the land” -- eloquently states the not-so-obvious:
We don't have the same standards as [the mainstream media]. If someone makes a defamatory statement [in our comment section], that has nothing to do with us. We are not responsible for what other people are saying on our blog. It's kind of like a hotel pool. There's no lifeguard. You are responsible for yourself.”
What this means for candidates
Now, I'm not one for doomsday scenarios and ultimatums, but the message to politicians couldn't be clearer: ignore blogs at your own peril.
As many candidates in local and national races have begun to learn, blogs can help uncover juicy facts before they appear in the mainstream media and even carry you to victory, but they can also spread malicious rumors and tarnish reputations.
Candidates and their staff members would be wise to read and participate in blog communities that cover their race to engage voters and respond to false rumors before they spread.
In races that are decided by a few hundred or few thousand votes, it can mean the difference between winning and losing on Election Day.
And for bloggers...
While nothing new, bloggers do need to be aware of the reach and influence of their websites. Spreading misinformation is not only immoral, but it could be illegal and open yourself up to liability.
The legal issues are nothing to scoff at. Most bloggers are not incorporated. You don't want to find yourself in trouble with the law, especially for something that you didn't even post yourself.
To combat these problems, bloggers should consider "posting policies," such as the one that the Not Larry Sabato folks use. As they note on their site today:
...anytime we have gotten a request to delete comments from a subject of them we have done so, and will continue to do so.
Not a bad idea.
]]>Carol Darr from the Institute for Politics, Technology & The Internet (IPDI) kicked off the second panel on Internet Communications before the Federal Election Commission. IPDI's comments to the FEC came under increased scrutiny after a blistering review posted on DailyKos. Carol did a good job, though, of explaining what IPDI's comments were all about.
According to Darr, a hypothetically “broadly granted media exemption contains an absolutely unavoidable consequence.” Specifically, she is concerned that corporations and unions could spend large amounts of money under the guise of being a blogger if the FEC crafts a blanket media exemption.
Marc Elias from John Kerry for President was also on the second panel. Elias argued that if the FEC decides to regulate the Internet -- even if it's a mild regulation -- it will cause citizens to "pause" before engaging in online activities for fear of breaking the law. Grassroots activism would be stifled. Elias also noted that the focus should not be on everyday voters but on those who abuse current laws. He gave the example of people who set up fraudulent websites that solicit donations from unassuming citizens.
]]>Carol Darr from the Institute for Politics, Technology & The Internet (IPDI) kicked off the second panel on Internet Communications before the Federal Election Commission. IPDI's comments to the FEC came under increased scrutiny after a blistering review posted on DailyKos. Carol did a good job, though, of explaining what IPDI's comments were all about.
According to Darr, a hypothetically “broadly granted media exemption contains an absolutely unavoidable consequence.” Specifically, she is concerned that corporations and unions could spend large amounts of money under the guise of being a blogger if the FEC crafts a blanket media exemption.
Marc Elias from John Kerry for President was also on the second panel. Elias argued that if the FEC decides to regulate the Internet -- even if it's a mild regulation -- it will cause citizens to "pause" before engaging in online activities for fear of breaking the law. Grassroots activism would be stifled. Elias also noted that the focus should not be on everyday voters but on those who abuse current laws. He gave the example of people who set up fraudulent websites that solicit donations from unassuming citizens.
Don Simon from Democracy 21 asked that campaign finance law be applied to the Internet in a way that will not quash online political activism and speech. Simon argued against a blanket Internet exemption from FEC regulation. In my opinion, he focused on too many hypotheticals and discussed "potential" abuses rather than actual abuses. In the end, however, he supported the adoption of the proposed rules as they appeared in the NPRM.
Matt Stoller of Blogging of the President focused his testimony on how average voters use the Internet. The thrust of his arguments, though, were to put aside the idea that corporations can corrupt elections online. He provided examples of how the idea of corporations using the Internet to peddle influence is not only non-existent and theoretical, but unlikely.
"Inauthenticitiy on the Internet is easily sniffed out by citizens," noted Stoller. According to Matt, the FEC should tread lightly when regulating a medium that has brought about so little corruption and so much increased involvement.
]]>After brief opening comments from FEC Chairman Scott Thomas, Vice Chairman Michael Toner, and Commissioner Ellen Weintraub, the Commission quickly turned to the first set of panelists.
PDF Contributing Editor Mike Krempasky from RedState.org was the first to testify. Mike focused predominantly on the so-called “media exemption” which removes most press activities from the definition of contribution and expenditure.
If bloggers do not receive the press exemption from the FEC, many bloggers who incorporate for the purposes of limiting liability may find themselves making corporate contributions.
Mike said:
There is no doubt to that bloggers are media entities. Nor is there any doubt that the tradition of citizen journalists is a long accepted part of our national culture. From before the very founding of our country, individuals and relative unknowns have contributed to this great conversation…The Commission should extend the media exemption to bloggers and other online publishers with the broadest possible terms.”
John Morris from the Center for Democracy & Technology was up next. John had a very straight-forward message to the Federal Election Commission:
Keep It Simple.
Morris said that the challenge the FEC now faces is:
]]>After brief opening comments from FEC Chairman Scott Thomas, Vice Chairman Michael Toner, and Commissioner Ellen Weintraub, the Commission quickly turned to the first set of panelists.
PDF Contributing Editor Mike Krempasky from RedState.org was the first to testify. Mike focused predominantly on the so-called “media exemption” which removes most press activities from the definition of contribution and expenditure.
If bloggers do not receive the press exemption from the FEC, many bloggers who incorporate for the purposes of limiting liability may find themselves making corporate contributions.
Mike said:
There is no doubt to that bloggers are media entities. Nor is there any doubt that the tradition of citizen journalists is a long accepted part of our national culture. From before the very founding of our country, individuals and relative unknowns have contributed to this great conversation…The Commission should extend the media exemption to bloggers and other online publishers with the broadest possible terms.”
John Morris from the Center for Democracy & Technology was up next. John had a very straight-forward message to the Federal Election Commission:
Keep It Simple.
Morris said that the challenge the FEC now faces is:
“not weather to protect the speech of individuals, but how best to do it. Break out of the mold of existing campaign finance regulation and draft a short and easy to understand statement [protecting] online speech.”
Markos Moulitsas Zuniga of DailyKos.com injected some humor into the proceedings. Echoing Morris’ statements, Zuniga noted that trying to apply current rules to the internet would be like trying to get Markos – a man of average height and build – into a suit intended for an NFL linebacker.
“The Internet is the first truly democratic medium,” noted Markos. He noted that the mere fact that he is testifying is proof that the blogosphere has reached a critical mass.
His point to the FEC was to do the minimum required by the court order.
Lawrence M. Noble from The Center for Responsive Politics dealt with the elephant in the room: how does the FEC craft rules that embrace individual speech while
making sure that labor unions, corporations, and soft money do not corrupt online
speech.
He noted that blogs that incorporate for the purpose of limiting liability and accepting paid online advertisements should not be treated as corporations. But Noble does not believe that all bloggers deserve the press exemption. Rather, he's a big fan of giving bloggers some form of the volunteer exemption.
More to come...
]]>Check it out: FEC treads into sticky web of political blogs
Truth be told, I'm significantly more interested in the titles of recent FEC articles than their substance. I'm just uncertain which titles I like better.
Today, we were handed the "sticky web" by the Tribune. Not bad. But last week, MSNBC brought us the "thorny case." Together, we've got sharp edges and a sweet mess. Hmmm.
MSNBC's "thorny case" was actually a re-print of a Forbes.com article that also ran last w
]]>Check it out: FEC treads into sticky web of political blogs
Truth be told, I'm significantly more interested in the titles of recent FEC articles than their substance. I'm just uncertain which titles I like better.
Today, we were handed the "sticky web" by the Tribune. Not bad. But last week, MSNBC brought us the "thorny case." Together, we've got sharp edges and a sweet mess. Hmmm.
MSNBC's "thorny case" was actually a re-print of a Forbes.com article that also ran last week, but under the banner of "Blogging Through The Tulips." They both, however, reach the same conclusion: "It's a delicate balance indeed." It certainly is.
]]>
Marketers responded, flooded our inboxes on Mondays, and response rates – both open and click-through – tanked:
[Source: MarketingVOX]
However, new research reported today in MarketingVox seems to indicate that there might not actually be a “best day” anymore. While open rates still fluctuate slightly based on the day of week, e-mails sent Monday through Friday seem to have fairly similar open-rates. Click-through rates have evened out, as well:
]]>Marketers responded, flooded our inboxes on Mondays, and response rates – both open and click-through – tanked:
[Source: MarketingVOX]
However, new research reported today in MarketingVox seems to indicate that there might not actually be a “best day” anymore. While open rates still fluctuate slightly based on the day of week, e-mails sent Monday through Friday seem to have fairly similar open-rates. Click-through rates have evened out, as well:
[Source: MarketingVOX]
The key, it seems, remains testing what works best for your particular campaign or organization. While this is old news, without the help from studies guiding our choice of days, we have only our internal data to rely on. So, keep on tracking which days are your old “Mondays” to make sure your members are reading and responding to your important messages.
If your e-mail system isn’t quite advanced, check out Constant Contact by Roving or Campaigner by Got Corporation. They’re both really robust and very easy to use.
Anyone else know of a good, inexpensive, do-it-yourself e-mail management solution?
]]>Here’s the data inverted:
At the same time, I couldn’t help but notice a recent Hewlett-Packard study that found that 10% of small businesses surveyed said they now include blogs as part of their overall marketing strategies. The survey was conducted last week and included responses from more than 400 small businesses. Small businesses, it seems, are way ahead of traditional advertisers when it comes to understanding the importance of blog marketing.
]]>Here’s the data inverted:
At the same time, I couldn’t help but notice a recent Hewlett-Packard study that found that 10% of small businesses surveyed said they now include blogs as part of their overall marketing strategies. The survey was conducted last week and included responses from more than 400 small businesses. Small businesses, it seems, are way ahead of traditional advertisers when it comes to understanding the importance of blog marketing.
How are these two finding related, you ask? Well, Morra Aarons and I recently spoke to room full of Madison Avenue creative types and were surprised to find that only one person was willing to say that blogs factor into their marketing plans.
[The lone individual was from TBS, who, you might recall, did a great deal of blog advertising for the Sex and the City DVD. You can see one of their ads here.]
I wonder if the Pew numbers include the people in the room who gave Morra and I the blankest of blank looks. Perhaps that might account for the discrepancy?
]]>IPDI and CTD have invited three prominent election lawyers to help bloggers and citizens understand the ramifications of the FEC's recent Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Internet Communications.
In attendance will be:
- Ken Gross - Partner, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, and CNN analyst on election law.
- Robert F. Bauer - Partner, Perkins Coie, and Counsel to the Democratic Senatorial and Congressional Campaign Committees
- Don Simon - Partner, Sonosky, Chambers, Sachse, Endreson & Perry LLP, and Counsel to Democracy 21
]]>IPDI and CTD have invited three prominent election lawyers to help bloggers and citizens understand the ramifications of the FEC's recent Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Internet Communications.
In attendance will be:
- Ken Gross - Partner, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, and CNN analyst on election law.
- Robert F. Bauer - Partner, Perkins Coie, and Counsel to the Democratic Senatorial and Congressional Campaign Committees
- Don Simon - Partner, Sonosky, Chambers, Sachse, Endreson & Perry LLP, and Counsel to Democracy 21
Click here for more information.
]]>It’s interesting to think back just a few months ago when many bloggers rejected the notion of selling ads on their websites. Now, Google contextual links and Henry Copeland’s Blogads are seen less as an annoyance and more as a right of passage. The presence of ads seems to indicate a steady stream of traffic capable of sustaining an advertising business. Are blogads the new legitimizer?
Another interesting point is that 52 percent of those surveyed said they could earn a living off of their online journals.
]]>It’s interesting to think back just a few months ago when many bloggers rejected the notion of selling ads on their websites. Now, Google contextual links and Henry Copeland’s Blogads are seen less as an annoyance and more as a right of passage. The presence of ads seems to indicate a steady stream of traffic capable of sustaining an advertising business. Are blogads the new legitimizer?
Another interesting point is that 52 percent of those surveyed said they could earn a living off of their online journals. Truly remarkable. With over 85 percent of small and medium-sized businesses failing in the first five years, perhaps blogging really is the next make-it-rich scheme? Just kidding, of course, but it’s encouraging to see how advertising has made it possible for more bloggers to spend more time doing their thing.
]]>Blogs that mention candidates for local office that receive more than 500 hits will be forced to pay a registration fee and will be subject to website traffic audits, according to Chad Jacobs, a San Francisco City Attorney.
The entire Board is set to vote on the measure on April 5th, 2005. I wonder if they'll be forced to register their own blogs!
The legislation was written by Supervisor Sophie Maxwell.
So, I’ll do what I always do and issue a challenge!
Let’s all send quick e-mails – even just a sentence or two – to Supervisor Maxwell.
Encourage her to treat bloggers and cyber-citizens as she would treat traditional journalists and voters. When it comes to protecting our privacy and First Amendment rights, it shouldn’t matter what medium we use. Post your e-mails below so we can keep track!
]]>Blogs that mention candidates for local office that receive more than 500 hits will be forced to pay a registration fee and will be subject to website traffic audits, according to Chad Jacobs, a San Francisco City Attorney.
The entire Board is set to vote on the measure on April 5th, 2005. I wonder if they'll be forced to register their own blogs!
The legislation was written by Supervisor Sophie Maxwell.
So, I’ll do what I always do and issue a challenge!
Let’s all send quick e-mails – even just a sentence or two – to Supervisor Maxwell.
Encourage her to treat bloggers and cyber-citizens as she would treat traditional journalists and voters. When it comes to protecting our privacy and First Amendment rights, it shouldn’t matter what medium we use. Post your e-mails below so we can keep track!
The announcement comes as a huge relief to many of us, as just a few weeks ago the online blogging and journalism community was up in arms over an interview with FEC Commissioner Bradley Smith in which he hints at a possible “crack-down” on political speech on the Internet.
]]>The announcement comes as a huge relief to many of us, as just a few weeks ago the online blogging and journalism community was up in arms over an interview with FEC Commissioner Bradley Smith in which he hints at a possible “crack-down” on political speech on the Internet.
The other piece of good news comes in the form of a time period. While many had thought the FEC would only provide a 30-day public comment period, they have actually allocated a full 60-days for comments.
In addition to crafting new rules regarding blogging and the illusive “media exception,” the FEC has also proposed changes to the definition of “public communication,” which had previously excluded paid advertisements on the Internet from many of the restrictions that apply to paid ads on all other outlets, such as television and radio. Following Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly’s decision in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Shays v. FEC, 337 F. Supp. 2d 28 (D.D.C. 2004), the FEC had no choice but to include the Internet under the definition of “public communication.” We'll just have to wait and see whatCongress has to say about that.
After digesting the proposed rules, I know I join my colleagues at Online Coalition in asking for your opinions. If what Declan says is right, we might be able to declare a huge victory for the blogosphere, journalism, and free speech, all at once.
Stay tuned.
]]>The one impressive thing about the "diagnosis" that Frist made on the Senate floor was that it involved -- you guessed it -- technology!
Frist apparently used a digital video of Schiavo to determine that the Florida woman who has been fed artificially since she was brain damaged in 1990 might not be in a vegitative state. Think that's against a few ethical standards, but moving on...
Now, I'm not one for partisan rants, but I just couldn't resist...
Imagine Frist leaves the Senate and takes up medicine again. I can see the ads now.
]]>"Are you sick? Injured? Worried about a medical problem, but can't afford a physician? Well, worry no longer! Because Former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, MD, doesn't even need to see you to make a diagnosis and prescribe care.
The one impressive thing about the "diagnosis" that Frist made on the Senate floor was that it involved -- you guessed it -- technology!
Frist apparently used a digital video of Schiavo to determine that the Florida woman who has been fed artificially since she was brain damaged in 1990 might not be in a vegitative state. Think that's against a few ethical standards, but moving on...
Now, I'm not one for partisan rants, but I just couldn't resist...
Imagine Frist leaves the Senate and takes up medicine again. I can see the ads now.
"Are you sick? Injured? Worried about a medical problem, but can't afford a physician? Well, worry no longer! Because Former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, MD, doesn't even need to see you to make a diagnosis and prescribe care.
I think we should take full advantage of Frist's openness to use technology to craft legislation and make a diagnosis.
So, I'll issue a challenge:
Take a digital picture or video of your medical problem – tennis elbow, acne, runny nose, hemorrhoids, or whatever ails you - and send it to the doctor in charge of the US Senate and your health care.
Everyone, take two minutes and upload your photos to Flickr.com. "Tag" the photo "Frist." If we get critical mass, we'll send everyone's photos to Dean Rosen, the good doctor's Health Care policy director!
Howard Dean might have brought us the "ah-ha!" moment in politics and the Internet. Dr. Frist is now pleased to present us with the “Kodak” moment.
]]>Pew also reports that 29% of Americans specifically read political news online in 2004, up from only 18% during the last presidential election cycle. Additionally, 11% went online to donate, volunteer, or learn about political events to attend.
Candidates who continue to ignore the Internet as a viable communications medium would be wise to take note of this compelling study.
Also noteworthy is Michael Cornfield’s commentary that accompanied the report.
]]>Pew also reports that 29% of Americans specifically read political news online in 2004, up from only 18% during the last presidential election cycle. Additionally, 11% went online to donate, volunteer, or learn about political events to attend.
Candidates who continue to ignore the Internet as a viable communications medium would be wise to take note of this compelling study.
Also noteworthy is Michael Cornfield’s commentary that accompanied the report. Check it out.
]]>