Narrowcasting is great, but...
Reading campaignaudit.org's article on narrowcasting discusses many benefits of technology and its application of narrowcast marketing to individuals. However, campaignaudit.org also brings up some potential perils of narrowcasting.
The main argument is, "one side effect is that one-to-one marketing without transparency of the information presented by the campaigns and 527s to individual voters reduces accountability. Leakage of the message to the general public may be very difficult, if not impossible."
One-to-one marketing in some aspects, allows volunteers to say whatever, because there is no one to supervise what is said in their conversations with potential voters. Broadcast marketing such as television ads, provides some sort of check on any misleading information put out there by groups. In addition, because volunteers narrowcast door-to-door, there may not have as much accountability or credibility to voters because volunteers have a bias and there is no way for voters to fact check what they are told or what they see in videos brought to their door.
Although narrowcasting is an innovative way to market, particularly in a campaign, it does present some problems. Campaignaudit.org suggests, "A lesson from the 2004 campaign may be that we need to call on our leaders to clarify regulation on political advertisements on mobile devices and call for increased transparency of campaign messaging and 527 organizations."
The main argument is, "one side effect is that one-to-one marketing without transparency of the information presented by the campaigns and 527s to individual voters reduces accountability. Leakage of the message to the general public may be very difficult, if not impossible."
One-to-one marketing in some aspects, allows volunteers to say whatever, because there is no one to supervise what is said in their conversations with potential voters. Broadcast marketing such as television ads, provides some sort of check on any misleading information put out there by groups. In addition, because volunteers narrowcast door-to-door, there may not have as much accountability or credibility to voters because volunteers have a bias and there is no way for voters to fact check what they are told or what they see in videos brought to their door.
Although narrowcasting is an innovative way to market, particularly in a campaign, it does present some problems. Campaignaudit.org suggests, "A lesson from the 2004 campaign may be that we need to call on our leaders to clarify regulation on political advertisements on mobile devices and call for increased transparency of campaign messaging and 527 organizations."
1 Comments:
If there is any type of a physical record of a particular narrowcasted message (and "physical" could be a captured web video or something similarly digital), then there will always be the chance that that message could eventually be broadcast to the entire public. While candidates can certainly emphasize different messages to different groups, in the end they have to make sure that there aren't glaring contradictions. If there are, chances are they're gonna come back to cause you problems...
Post a Comment
<< Home