Blackberry Blackout

Yesterday half of Washington, DC was brought to its knees; Blackberries across the city lost service. The Washington Post reported, that service was lost for nearly four hours Friday morning.

Although service was restored, Friday's mini-crisis made me think; what happens when technology does not work? We depend so much everyday on items such as Blackberries, cell phones, and PDAs, what happens when we cannot use them, even for a short time?

As technology levels increase, new, amazing products are released on the market, and people become dependent on such products in order to function everyday; what happens when something stops working? Can people still get by when their Blackberry, cell phone, or email is down? Or is society so reliant (or is growing so reliant) on those items, that it cannot function without technology?

Democrats have friends, Republicans have success?

Continuing from my Wednesday post regarding the structural differences of the two political parties and its possible effects on blog and comment accessibility, I came across an interesting post on a Republican blog today regarding the differences between the Democrats use of technology versus the Republicans use of technology.

The author based his post from a technology and politics conference. Although I am sure he is biased, I think that it is always worthwhile to explore your opponent's thought processes and reasoning.

"True, Democrats get a lot of press for their use of technology. But Republicans use technology to win elections. It occurs to me that this phenomenon has to do with the fundamental differences between Republicans and Democrats (in short, our world view is different).
Here's my theory: Democrats view technology as a game. They like to put a lot of effort into blogging and hope to be able to, "create an internet community." Republicans (who by nature are outcome-based and serious) tend to use technology (like micro-targeting) to identify, persuade, and turn-out voters on Election Day."

It is an interesting theory to ponder. Although, I disagree with his verbiage portraying Republicans, it still begs the question: are Democrats more consumed with building bonds with like minded Dems and trying to solve problems, while Republicans remain focused on their uniform message and persuasive targeting?

I know that the two parties are very different, but are one party's characteristics more conducive to being more successful using technology than the others?

The secret to getting Noticed? Be funny and have some email addresses!

I can't think of anyone who had not seen or did not send Jib-Jab's "This Land" via email during the summer of 2004. Jib-Jab is a perfect example of successful viral marketing. Their message was spread to people, who were inspired to send it to their friends and so on. It seems like everyone, including my 81 year-old grandpa, was talking about the Jib-Jab cartoon email.

Recently, Marketing Vox interviewed Jib-Jab co-founder, Gregg Spiridellis. Spiridellis explains the success of Jib-Jab in terms of its viral marketing. He particularly emphasizes the importance of humor in viral marketing. "The ability of marketers to capture the qualities that make some content desirable and even the sort of thing people which to pass along to friends."

He goes on to provide a scope of just HOW successful "This Land"'s really was. "Over the years we've been building an email list of all of our fans. Before This Land took off, we had a little fewer than 200,000. Those fans sparked the chain reaction that sent This Land and the follow up circling the globe more than 80 million times." The domino effect that "This Land" produced allowed Jib-Jab to reach an astronomical amount of people; all spanning from a 200, 000 person email list collected over a few years. Incredible.

Spiridellis further details the reasons for Jib-Jab's skyrocketing success during the 2004 election; timing, increasing level of technology, and an escalated usability of such technology.

"1) First and foremost, it was the right piece of content at the right time. The political dialogue was totally asinine and we seemed to capture that spirit. The writing and enhanced production values made it something people wanted to watch.
2) Broadband penetration has skyrocketed since our 2000 election parody making our work accessible to a much larger.
3) Processor speeds have also increased making it more enjoyable to watch video/animation on a computer.
4) Everyday people are more comfortable with technology. I can't tell you how many times we heard "my grandmother sent it to me." Grandmas were not emailing in 2000."

Jib-Jab is amazing example of the ingredients required and the effects osuccessfulsful viral marketing technique: humor, technology, a good email list, and timing.

Iran and the Impact of the Internet

Another great article on how technology and the Internet are making a difference in places never imagined. An article on Marketing Vox, "Internet Reshaping Middle East Politics, Starting with Iran"sheds some important light on how the Internet is effecting the political system of Iran. The article asks an interesting question, "After all, why place hundreds of thousands of troops, not to mention civilians, into harm's way and spend hundreds of billions of dollars to wage a war when the growth of the internet is already redefining and reshaping Middle East political processes?" Who needs war to bring democracy and freedom when there is the Internet? An interesting proposition.

According to the article, a Stanford study shows that Iran Internet usage is increasing at a higher rate than any Muslim country in the Middle East. The free flow of information and freedom that the Internet brings has brought new ideals and a new form of governing in Iran. "The transformational power of the internet has brought to the election campaign a free-flowing flurry of blogging activity, allowing the campaigns themselves, not just the man - and woman - on the street to bypass restrictive state-run television and the limited number of newspapers."

In the upcoming Iranian presidential election, personal freedom, the economy, and Iran's isolation from the West are important issues. Certainly the heightened use of the Internet has brought about the increased awareness of these issues and will continue to be a part of the solution, first starting with the Iranian political process.

Birds of a feather flock together... and win elections

Today Emi put up a post commenting on the access to public comments conservative blogs provide compared to more left-leaning blogs. It is no surprise that the more liberal blogs are more open to public comments, as they do not require registration, etc.

Why is that? Justin makes an excellent point in his comment to Emi, "Republicans are better at controlling the message...Dems don't have a solid platform to stand behind; they are fragmented."

I could not agree more. It seems that Republicans stick together and try to avoid and/or hide any form of in-fighting, while Democrats are much more factioned, so to speak. In my opinion, there seem to be less divisions of Republicans, then Democrats. For instance, there are moderate Dems, conservative Dems, liberal Dems, etc. All of which, have differing positions on the issues. Republicans exude a stronger sense of unity and a consistent message, this some say(and I tend to agree), has brought them success as of late.

Thus, Democrats allow comments on blogs because there are so many different types of Dems, with so much to say. Republicans are less prone to provide access to comments because they want to ensure that they all uniformly display the same message and unity. The best way to do that is to have less people doing the talking or risking public dissention.

However, I don't think Democrats could pull off the same tactic of restricting comments on blogs. Please note that I am biased, but I think that Dems are too diverse and are a party based on providing a voice for those who can't help themselves. The Republican way of controlling the message particularly on conservative blogs works for them. I think the Democrat way works for them based on what the party represents, but is there another way to display more party unity on the part of the Democrats? Is that what the Dems need to be successful?

"Tell us about yourself..."

I hate filling out online "tell us about yourself" questionnaires. I daresay most people hate filling out online questionnaires. When I want to sign up for something, I want it to without having to answer a thirteen page survey asking everything about me, including the name of my first pet.

Nielsen's article, "Newsletter Usability: Can a Professional Publisher do Better?" speaks to that very fact; people do not like taking the time to answer a questionnaire and if they have to, they do not like divulging personal information about themselves. In his article, Nielsen rates the email newsletter of the Washington Post, commenting on its "nosy questions requesting personal information." Such surveys can be a deterrent to potential visitors and a huge usability problem.

I always assumed that such nosy, demographical questions were asked due to direct marketing and targeted advertising schemes. What I found particularly interesting is that such questions are not even accurate determinants of demograhic behavior. Nielsen recommends, "you should target computational advertising based on each user's explicit behavior, which defines a demographic of one; this is much more valuable than stereotyping people as members of broad groups." Such intrusive and time consuming surveys are not even necessary, according to Nielsen, since they assume and lump certain types of people into irrelevant categories.

I wonder if and how campaigns are implementing any sort of advertising or correspondence tailored more specifically to voters, based off of their explicit behavior, rather then demographic information?

Blogging in Colombia...

Another example of how blogs are becoming increasingly important in the political universe, blogging is spreading to Colombia. In an article featured in the San Francisco Gate, "Colombia Paper offers to Host Vote Blogs", the Columbian newspaper, El Tiempo, has offer to set up blogs for both candidates in the upcoming presidential election.

"The Bogota daily El Tiempo said it would host the Web logs, or blogs, for candidates to explain their proposals and would not edit the content, a unique effort to support democracy in the race for the May 2006 elections."

"Tiempo said the candidates can update their blogs whenever and however they want, but said aggressive attacks on rival candidates would not be allowed. The sites would be linked to El Tiempo's own Web page, which it said is Colombia's most visited Internet site."

It is fascinating to me that technology such as blogs, are being used in such countries as Colombia as a way for candidates to communicate and educate voters in Colombia. I also find it very interesting that the Colombian newspaper would offer to provide such an opportunity for direct dialogue for the candidates and people of Colombia.

The Blogosphere: Enter Corporations

Like candidates, corporations are starting to use blogs as a way to improve their image and communicate with their constituents, consumers. An article appearing in the Detroit Free Press, "Corporations enter the World of Blogs" lends some interesting insight to the application of blogs to the PR gauntlet of the corporate world.

The article centers around General Motors and the introduction of their blog, which was set up in January. Since then, GM Vice Chairman, Bob Lutz, has recently used the blog as a way to quell speculation of rumors regarding the elimination of Buick and Pontiac brands.

Apparently everyone is jumping on the blog bandwagon, joining corporations such as Microsoft and SunMicrosystems. According to the article, blogs are particularly useful in a corporate setting in that, "The Internet journal format, they find, lets businesses expand their reach, generate product buzz and encourage consumer loyalty -- while bypassing traditional media."

Corporate blogs are advantageous in that, "(If) Done well, corporate blogs can create good word-of-mouth among consumers who aren't reading business pages." Corporations are using this application of technology as a PR technique to appeal to the youth, web savvy, and those who are not going to read the Market Section of the Wall Street Journal. The blog provides an opportunity for dialogue between the corporation and consumers. It helps companies with research, at a much less scientific and cheaper cost. And blogs give executives a voice to communicate with consumers and revamp a company's image.

Although the article warns to beware of corporate blogs that have back-fired, due to lack of sincerity, which consumers are able to pick up. Some blogs disguise themselves as ad campaigns, the article sites McDonald's as being guilty of such. However, "as long as companies are prepared to deal with the sometimes harsh comments left by visitors, corporate blogs are a great tool for raising company profiles."

I think it is very interesting and a telltale sign of the impact blogs are having in an increasing technological society.

Check please...

Exploring fundraising options in Nash and Ireland's, Winning Campaigns Online, I have come to learn the importance and value of the innovation of online checks.

I am a huge fan of credit cards, ATM machines, and online banking, I was surprised to learn in Nash and Ireland's chapter on "Choosing a Fundraising System" that most people do not have credit cards or have maxed out on the credit line.

"VISA and Mastercard report that only 60-65% of U.S. adult consumers actually have a major credit card...In fact over 85% of all credit card holders are "revolvers" who are unable to pay off their balance each month and thereby incur revolving annual finance charges of up to 18% and more. "

Nash and Ireland point out because of this fact, donating online by check is a less expensive option for donors to contribute without accumulating those pesky interest rates from credit cards.

The book also maps out some other advantages of donating via online check. Online checks will not get pushed aside on a donor's "to-do" list, nor will it get lost in the mail. Checks will go directly into the campaign account, online checks are cheaper to send and to process as time is saved by staff who do not have to enter the information like they would a paper check.

Having a campaign website with an option to contribute via online checks is a wonderful idea with many benefits both for the donor and staff. However, I wonder how if people are more likely, less likely, or indifferent to giving out their checking account information over the Internet vs. giving their credit card information over the Internet?