Final thoughts on blogging

I started this class seeing the internet as a cool extra tool but not an essential part of the campaign. I was trained in campaign field ops under the theory that if you can't count how many votes a use of money will gain you, its not worth the money. Essentialy, i as told, websites don't vote. That was back in 2000. Well, now its clear that websites vote. Blogs vote too. They will never replace campaign field operations, but when used properly, they can be powerful. One main theme of the class I have taken to heart is the need to have synergy between the online and offline campaign. Just as you need to be delivering the same message on the air as in the field, the same needs to happen on the net. The internet is a great organizing tool, a great fundraising tool, and can be a great vote getting tool. Folks, the new media is here and is here to stay.

Misleading ads

The article on factcheck.org about Bush's misleading ad regarding Kerry and special interest money is nothing new in politics. A saying goes that statistics don't lie but liars make statistics. Same goes in opposition research. Almost anything can be taken out of context to make someone look bad. In politics this works well because the person explaining the whole story doesn't look much better by setting the record straight as they keep the story alive. I remember working for a direct mail firm, writing negative mail on state leg. candidates. I used a lien on a persons business from 20 years back and the fact that property taxes had increased during his 20 year tenure to make an argument that he raises taxes but doesn't pay his own. Was it fair, no. But thats politics.

Sharing Ideas

The Future of Ideas excerpt brings up a few interesting points. Of course I understand copyright laws and that artists have the right to be compensated when their work is used directly or indirectly for someone else's profit. This is the American/Capitalist way and as much as I dislike it, its a system that works and isn't going anywhere. However, I'd like to bring up a different perspective. When an artist designs a sculputre, I hope their not doing so because they can make money off of it being in a move. When a songwriter writes a piece of music, is it so they can make money off of the song being used in the opening credits for a popular drama or sitcom? If I were an artist (which thankfully for the artistic community I am not), I would feel honored to have others wanting to use my work. I would be happy that more people would be exposed to my work. Of course compensation would be nice, but i'd rather not get paid and have my work gain exposure than sit back and demand royalties. Has the artistic community really gone that corporate?

2004 Internet Videos.

The IPDI article shows the great development of advertising through the internet through videos. Both campaings used web-video ads in 2004, yet the most watched and linked to was the non-partisan Jib Jab video "This land is Your Land". The article shows how a small investment in marketing through the internet can lead to a large exposure for your message and ad. However, what is interesting to note is that this cycle is dependent on attention from the mainstream earned media. The video cannot simply circulate the web and gain the same exposure that paid media can provide. The three most linked to sites fro both Google and Yahoo were Jib Jab, Moveon, and the Swift Boat Veterans. All three of these groups videos received lavish attention from the mainstream media. IN the latter two cases, this was because of contreversy. IN the case of Jib Jab, it was because of humor. While the Swift Boat Vets only ran their ads in 3 states, they received nationwide coverage. Conclusion: as fast as the net can spread a message, mainstream media is still what makes it all work.

takin another freebee