Featur e
found radio and TV raised turnout by 0.8% and 0.5% re- spectively, but were unable to prove their effectiveness in mobilizing a specific campaign’s supporters. They found a strong utility bias to real-life volunteers connecting with people in their own communities. Volunteer phoning would generate about one vote for every 38 contacts and door-to-door would generate one in 14. The ability to have personalized, dynamic and interactive communica- tions increased the effectiveness of engagement. The consultants agree this is the way we are going - to the new social web 2.0, which will connect many-many
Social media is great at keeping a story alive.
relationships allowing nanotargeting and engage people in new ways. After all, look at the success of Howard Dean, Barak Obama, and the Arab uprising. This storyline is wrong. From the emotional appeal of mass media, the In- ternet is actually a step back from FDR’s fireside chat, or Kennedy’s TV charisma. What social media does introduce is the importance of the network and drastically reduces the cost to participate. However, the most influential twitters and viral online material continues to be the mainstream press and corpo- rate-created content. Just as radio and television have their best practices to connect with audiences, so too does social media have its place in the communications mix, but it by
20 Campaigns & Elections | Canadian Edition
no means replaces any of them. Barack Obama’s social media presence was seen as the
juggernaut that got him from obscurity to win the coun- try’s top job. It was just an interesting story blown out of proportion by the media. Social media is most effective at raising awareness which is exactly what Barack Obama needed to be taken seriously – Hilary Clinton could not have benefited from it near as much. It was a lot easier for Obama to use this space because it was relatively ‘free for the taking’, his emulators will not find the bounty as pronounced.
Social media isn’t a panacea for all campaigns. Like any
tool, it’s best used for what it’s good at. The Tea Party used it to amplify a committed communities message to the national stage. They were able to control the message by bringing issues to the surface, increasing awareness and the length of time that it was a story. That’s another thing so- cial media is great at – keeping a story alive. While this led to a powerful punch on Election Day, many analysts have noted that the full power of the movement didn’t connect directly with the ballot box. Two-weeks prior to the 2010 mid-terms Gallop
poll found that 58% of Americans desired a third party and the trend appears likely to continue (in 2003 it was found only 40% preferred a third party as an option). It re- quires a lot of work to form the consensus between people that provides a good balance of interests to form a stable enough base to win an election, and requires organization of this base, not just buzz. The requirement of organiza- tion for a grassroots movement to reach its full potential appears a tad anachronistic, but it is exactly in the better
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62