Advocacy and Grassroots Engagement
- Michael Cornfield, Vice President of Public Affairs, ElectionMall.com Adjunct Professor in Political Management, The GeorgeWashingtonUniversity Contributing Editor, Politico.com, co-author of “Plays for the Presidency” blog
- Carol C. Darr, Director, Institute for Politics, Democracy and the Internet
- Brian Reich, New Media Director, Cone
- Ned Lamont, Fellow, Harvard Institute of Politics
Mike Krempasky from DC begins by setting the stage of the role of online media since the Dean Campaign (lived and died by the internet) before the panel discussion.
what's the biggest hype out of the campaigns today?
Brian: Something like Twitter--who is twittering for the candidates? John Edwards twitters for himself, but is Obama? Can it offer additional insight? "Shiny object syndrome" in politics. AmEx, please don't watch the presidential campaigns for business advice. The thing missing from politics is the substance. Avoid the twitterfication.
Ned: I wasn't an expert on blogs until about a year ago. The challenge of the friendly incumbent. Blogs allowed a chance to speak to the grassroots. Not just an emotional response, an ongoing conversation. The rap on blogs is that it brings out the extremes. He found a lot of substantive conversation on blogs. Better than 17 seconds on the news or 30 seconds on an ad. Blogs can really look at plans, find holes, fill gaps.
What is a challenge for managing the energy and how do you measure?
Carol: The thing changing in online politics is that you are empowering non-professional political junkies much earlier. In the past, the early power was in the hands of professionals. Power shift since 2004 into the hands of non-professionals from old established political elites and empowering new political elite.
Michael: It is my opinion that the tools are great for volume, but not for valence. Can't sort out the nuances automatically. Human beings are still needed for content analysis.
Let's talk about money. Candidates spent X (anyone get that figure?) online and raised $20 million. It is a high ROI, but that isn't enough. To raise money, you still have to go to people who will max out for you. The difference is that there is an inverse age bias with politics and money. Old people give the most time, money and votes in politics. A lot of them don't care about new media.
How does money aggregate together?
Brian: You raise money from the people who are supportive. Online space gets a lot of attention and people shift political tactics in response. Very small percentage are online. Ned took on an incumbant, but it was very different type of race. Magnification of the minority. The successful campaigns have found ways to use technology to make more efficient the old methods. It isn't a different campaign, it is a more efficient campaign. You can't ignore the field components.
Carol: You are all missing the point. When the money changes, everything changes. You can not raise enough money unless you go to big money. The two candidates (Kerry, Bush) spent 250 million on the campaign. The internet is giving more people opportunities to join the race. Dean was a nobody from nowhere, but he raised more money than anyone else at the time of Iowa primary.
Brian: There is not a credible connection between online money raised and campaigns won.
Michael: The Webb campaign was linked to online, new media, and how to knock off an incumbent. Kos and the "macaca" incident and the online web campaign.
Brian: Short of Webb, the same people are winning for the same reasons. Media and parties have gone too far overboard saying that the politics have changed. However, look at the Darfur crisis. That WAS created through online campaigns and coalitions. It was college students joining together online to push Darfur into the press.
Ned: Maybe it is only 7-14% of the money, but it was early and it was important. It gave credibility to his campaign. 35,000 people early who have invested in your campaign. Took the $25 and turned it into a little bit of grassroots. Trying to get younger demographic involved. Ned crushed Joe in 30 and younger, but Joe crushed Ned in the 60 and over.
Will it ever work? Will the youth ever vote?
Carol: There is a lot of non-profit money trying to get young people to vote. Candidates ignore them, because they don't vote. They don't vote, because candidates ignore them.
Brian: The internet IS the tool to reach young people. Look how PBS documentaries have changed using online tools. The candidates have to accept that talking about the issues is important.
Q: Feel like I'm back in 1988. Looking for the killer app in politics. It is another tool. You can find more information now than at anytime in the past.
Brian: We are looking for another Jim Webbor Bill Clinton. Dynamic, principled, charismatic. Don't just humanize, make it substantive.
Carol: It is empowering people outside of the campaign. You used to want people to donate and volunteer. Now anyone with a camera phone can make a political commercial. All politics are no longer local, they are global. The content is coming from people outside of the campaign.
Richard Edelman: What role can business play in major topics that are political? ie environment.
Ned: yes, companies need to be on board with environmental issues. Bloggers keep you consistent. Webcams keep you consistent. Are you saying the same thing?
Brian: Advocacy groups will set the issues for the 2008 campaign. Full transparency, climate change. Candidates will sign on to realistic policies about big issues. "the less you say, the less trouble you can get it." The internet will speed up politics to where companies and advocacy groups are.
Are the advocacy groups taking the initial risks?
Michael: You are talking about one way use of media. It isn't either/or. Send the candidates to talk to Gates, then put it online.
Carol: You aren't being cynical enough. It all comes down to micro-targeting. You can focus on one issue, find those people to vote on one issue.
Jackie Price: Are young people tired of hearing the talk and not seeing the walk?
Krempasky: There is a difference between online engagement and voting. Passing around an Edwards hair video is different than going to vote.
Ned: The issues were clear, but it was hard to vote. It was complicated to actually vote. He has maintained the mailing list and is blogging, keeping his connections to constituencies.
Brian: It is "shiny object syndrome" that makes it seem like it is important, but isn't really doing anything. Go where the audience already is and have the conversation there. If they are motivated to sign up, will they be motivated to change the world.
Ned: Blogs are an on-ramp to main stream media.
Michael: While you are waiting for a response from Obama, read Obama's chapter on politics in Audacity of Hope. It will explain why politicians are such strange people. The fear of social death when you lose a campaign. Because politicians are so afraid of social death, they are risk averse. They won't experiment and tinker. He calls for courage, not mechanical changes.