Companies Should Offer Your Soul in Info Sales!

Yesterday, we talked in class about the selling of personal information to companies for building voter lists. While this provides better targeting data for voter lists, it also brings up the question of privacy. When looking over the readings for this week, I saw the New York Times article about donors names being sold to conservative mailing companies. Obviously, these people that donated to that cause chose to do so, and therefore knew what their money was going towards. However, I don't know if I agree that the information should be used in a political sense. Personal information can be used to obtain other information about individuals, some of which could be potentially damaging. This privacy debate is never-ending, just like the Schiavo case!!

"You Can't Get Noticed In Private!"

I love movies! I have 250 DVDs in my collection, and know lines from all of them. One of my favorites is Primary Colors. In one of the my favorite scenes, John Travolta says, "I don't give a shit about privacy. I'm here to get known, and you can't get known in private." When I heard this, it got me thinking about chapter in the The Control Revolution about the marketing of privacy and how privacy of individuals is undermined by websites.

I found what Shapiro says about marketing of privacy interesting, especially about it creating a false sense of confidence. People believe that their information is being used for marketing when it actually leads to junk mail. I think we all fear identity theft like what occurred this past weekend. We can never be too careful about protecting our personal information. That is why people need to be away of the privacy protection they enlist, and what it can prevent. Unless you are Jack Stanton, care about privacy!

110 Meter Spam Hurdles

After reading the article about RSS feeds and their improvement over emails in spreading newsletters, I am convinced that they are much more efficient. As the article suggests, these RSS feeds can get bypass spam filters. This allows the readers to not have their inboxes filled with junk emails. The article suggests that people are now using "disposable" email addresses. By using RSS feeds, Internet users don't have to worry about changing their email addresses because of cluttered inboxes. It is only a matter of time, though, until these feeds are blocked by technology.

The Prophet Speaks

I attended a lecture today from Joe Trippi. He explained to the crowd that we no longer live in the Information Age. Now, he speculated, we live in the Age of Empowerment. The Internet, he said, has allowed people to organize the masses and change the status quo. He went into using blogs for some online fundraising. In a very entertaining story, he talked about working for Howard Dean and the power of one college kid in Tuscon, AZ making the difference in a fundraiser.

During Gov. Dean's Tour during the summer of 2003, he held a fundraiser to raise $1 million in 10 days. As the deadlined neared, and the Gov. was preparing to address a crowd watching the results of the final hours, it was apparent that the campaign would not meet the goal by about $100,000. Then, this kid posts on the campaign's blog that he's spent the most he could afford, but would be willing to give an extra $10 if the Governor would carry a red bat on stage and say "You did it." Well, people started responding, and the campaign hit the mark. However, there was no red bat. Trippi sent an intern on a last ditch effort to find a red bat at 10 pm. Just as Dean went on stage, the intern came sprinting across the parking lot, bat in hand.

I was not a Dean supporter. As a Southern Dem, I'm still not. However, if the Internet can raise $100,000 in mere hours to meet a campaign goal, then I really believe that the possibilities for fundraising, with the right campaign and candidate, could be endless.

Let He Without Sin Cast the First Vote

A discussion I had in a small group today revolved around using the Internet for opposition research as well as self-research. We were discussing how online searches have made things so much easier to find information about yourself and your oppenent. I was not surprised when the facilitator asked everyone in the room, "How many of you have Googled yourself?" The entire room, without exception had done it.

One of the things that he was quick to point out, though, is that not all internet searches are either reliable or desirable. For examples, Internet posts on websites such as this can say whatever they want about a candidate, and can then be cited in a TV ad. To most people, they would not reconsider whether the source was credible or not. Also, by searching criminal records on the national police database, candidates can find themselves in trouble. Each time a search is performed, a record is made of the search. Using this for political gain could cause some legal problems. So while the Internet has advanced researching, it is important still to use restraint in acting on the information gained!

Can matches put out a fire???

We all know that blogs can be used to bring attention to issues that are often passed over or outright ignored by the mainstream media sources (even if you consider Fox News as mainstream). But is it possible to use blogs to spread a viral message to solve a PR crisis? I am reading a book about solving crises, and I began wondering if blogs would be as effective in stopping negative coverage as they are in starting it?

Throw a Dog a Bone

I am also taking "Political Communication Strategy" this summer, and that class focuses on the connection of press secretaries and communications directors with the media. One of the things we have talked about are press kits. So when the topic of press kits came up on Tuesday night, I wondered if online press kits were as effective as actual hard-copy press kits.

From what I can see, online press kits are very useful because they allow the press to access information about the candidate or PAC without having to find the actual paper copy. It is instant access, and can be updated as needed by the campaign. Once the hard-copy is printed, it cannot be changed without sending out more copies to the press. Online press kits, I believe, help the candidate stay on message with the media. They let the candidate throw the media a bone.

Synergy - Coordination, with Style

After tonight's discussion about coordinating all aspects of a media plan (new media with direct mail, TV ads, etc.), I decided to look back on the campaign I worked on during the last election cycle. I wanted to see just how streamlined the messaging was for the campaign. The candidate I worked for in both the KY legislature and on the campaign trail was a 24 year incumbent, but faced a difficult challenger.

The website, although well designed, was not directly tied into the overall media plan. Although the site featured endorsements, issues lists, and biographical information, it did not include updates on the media that was being dispersed. My boss ran multiple direct mail pieces, as well as cable TV spots. These spots, though, were not featured on the website. My boss won the election, by nearly 10%. Had the media plan been coordinated better, I believe this margin could have been larger.

The 1st Amendment, Condemned by the Net?

In "The Control Revolution," the authors, I believe, raise a valid point that I had never considered. The Internet is considered one of the last bastions of free speech (which I wrote about earlier). However, through email filters and blocks, people can, either consciously or subconsciously, choose to not listen to someone's dissenting speech. In a crowd or on the street, people cannot turn off or turn away those they disagree with or do not want to hear.

Shapiro is sure to note that it is not specific to the new media. Exclusion from the media has occurred in the other forms, as well. It is important to have free speech, and I obviously concede the point that not all free speech is valid. On the other hand, dispersion of dissenting speech is also very important. It is difficult, though, to do this because of the nature of the new media.

Net Fundraising Gains Appeal?

We all know that the web has been used a fundraising tool since the 2000 election, and made broad strides in this past election. In "Winning Campaigns Online," the end of one of the online fundraising chapters talks about the future. Granted, the book is slightly outdated, but how often are online checks used in donations? Also, we know that small donors use the Internet to donate, but are large donors using the Internet, too? Or are they still reverting to paper checks?

Must See (Web)TV

I have noticed that one of the newest uses of the new media has been WebTV and flash animation. Websites like JibJab and others became very popular in the last election cycle. The firm that I intern at specializes in flash animation. Every political junkie, as well as those who are not, viewed the online political cartoons, "This Land," mocking the candidates, their supporters, and basically anyone in politics. While it is funny and quite viral, I am curious as to its effectiveness. I suppose that it can be used for spreading a message of donations, attending events, or volunteering. However, I can't imagine it is very effective at persuasion.

Can your own sword stab you in the back?

In the upcoming midterm election cycle, as well as in the off-year elections, we are going to see most campaign websites using blogs on their own websites. These can obviously be used to stir the supporters, spread your message, get people involved, and keep information flowing into and out of the campaign. On the other hand, couldn't the campaign's blog be flooded by the opposition, slamming the host of the blog? I know that the campaign can simply delete of shut down, but that hurts the campaign. It will be interesting to see if negative attacks spill over from advertising to attack each other's websites?

They Say It's Your Birthday!

Before writing my post for the day, I wanted to post on here that a dear friend of mine is having a birthday today. Ash - Happy Birthday!!!!

Audio Blogging?

Yesterday, while I was working, I came across a term and a new message delivery system that I had never heard of before. Granted, I am not the most technologically literate person in the world, but I was surprised at how big it is. It called podcasting. In the simplest of terms, podcasting is audio blogs, hence the name of this entry. They are audio clips that can be saved and listened to at a later, more convenient date. While this can be done with music, like MP3s, I was amazed to find that speeches and radio broadcasts can be treated the same way. If you cannot hear them on the live feed, they can be downloaded and listened to later.

How will podcasts advance in the upcoming election cycle and in the issue advocacy media? It seems to me that this could be a handy tool for mobilization of voters, but persuading people with podcasts would be difficult, because it would require the listener to take the time to download and listen, and therefore, be predisposed to hearing the candidate speak. Any thoughts?

Calling all Reagan Baby Dems!

I am interning presently for a Democratic consulting firm, julianmulvey.com. The company specializes in creating web ads and flash animation ads. If any of you fellow blue bloods would like to see some of their work, go to www.julianmulvey.com. They have done some very creative stuff, considering they have not been in operation long.

Another aspect of the company is their blog, ataridemocrat.com However, you should be forewarned that they do not take kindly to being flooded by comments. So, don't everyone please go to the site at once and post comments. The site is a forum discussing the new media and Democrats who are utilizing it to catch up to our counterparts across the aisle. I strongly suggest any young Democrat who is interested in working on campaigns in the 06 election cycle to look at it!

Raising Money the New Old Fashioned Way

In The Civic Web, the authors talk about how the Internet has been basically unregulated since it was first conceived. They point out that people or organizations campaigning for candidates on the Internet must still comply with all of the regulations and rulings of the FEC. However, some things do not apply to this, with the standard being whether or not the campaign receives something of value from a contributor. Most campaigning is not tied to the campaign. Campaigning done online does not have to be reported by the campaign. If money is collected and expends, then it must be reported.

In the upcoming 2006 elections, it will be interesting to see if the campaigns utilize non-value Internet gifts like the ones mentioned in the Anderson and Cornfield book. Specifically, with last week's discussion about the use of mobile devices, how will the campaigns use e-mail, text messaging, and instant messaging to spread their message and persuade or mobilize voters?

Kairos Principle?

After reading in the Fogg book about the kairos factor, I have come to the conclusion that this is common sense. Of course, being able to do what you need to do, at specifics times, from wherever you are is considered giving suggestions at opportune moments. Mobile devices allow for people to work away the standard office place, and still perform regular duties. Even devices we now take for granted like laptops or cell phones (i.e. the old Zack Morris phones) made business more productive, and less binding to the typical office setting.

Fogg also goes on to talk about the future of mobile devices and the kairos principle. "By knowing a user's goals, routine, current location, and current task, these mobile systems will be able to determine when the user would be most open to persuading in the form of a reminder, suggestion, or simulated experience" (188). While some of these things can already be done on the common PDA, it will be interesting to see if technology advances to the point of the eBay reference in the book.

Reading Question

I was reading through the press strategy chapter in the "Winning Campaigns Online" book, and I am trying to understand about drafting online press kits. Are these posted as links on the cmapaign website? Or should they be sent through email? How can the press attain these press kits?

Also, in the "Avoid bad publicity" section (pg 200), most of these deal with technical issues, rather than dodging negative press. How can campaigns use the Internet in their rapid response, crisis management situations?

News & the Net

The article by Sylverster Brown from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch is an interesting critique of the new media as a source of uncovering controversy. The author makes the point that the evolution of the Internet as a source of news has eliminated the investigative journalism and scandal-hawking of journalists like Cronkite and Woodward. Instead, the media is moving in the direction of sensationalized stories that make for commercial profits are much more interesting than important stories of abuse.

I don't know if I really agree with this article or the author's main conclusion. While it is true that the more sensational news stories make for better sales, it is false, in my opinion, to assume that the new media has ended the time of deep investigative journalism. Watchdog groups and journalists can now use the Internet to get deeper investigations, and quicker than before. I was watching, "All the President's Men" yesterday, and one scene stood out in my mind. Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman are looking for records of books used to investigate Sen. Edward Kennedy. They searched through hundreds upon hundreds of paper library records. Today, this could be done with a simple click or key stroke. This would allow for more time to do more investigating into the story.

Will the New Media end investigative journalism? I disagree.

The Digital Chastity Belt

The articles that are posted on the class blog today about the use of mobile survaillence is the craziest thing I have ever heard of. Tracking people through their cell phones and watching their actions is a crazy practice. Employees should be mindful of what they are doing while on the job. However, the feeling of being monitored only leads people to feel that they can do nothing.

Is this practice even ethical? If the employees know that they are being watched, then it is assumed that it is. But this is a method of controlling behavior, which is not right!

TWH 

Texters of the World Unite

I thought that the New York Times article from Emi's blog was very interesting. Despite their best efforts, the Chinese government is struggling to limit the communication that was used by protestors during the anti-Japanese protests. The article talks about how text messaging and instant messaging was the primary source of spreading information about it. Also, the government struggled to find the leaders of the protest because it was centralized or flowing from a single source.

When talks about cencorship on the Internet and other methods of communication come up in the near future here in America, I hope that those in the government take a look at this information, and consider that open flowing communication is one of the most important freedoms that we can have. How can you limit the freedoms of those in your own country, and expect others to buy into their movement for the expansion of freedom.

Give Some Sweet Loving Back to your Computer

I read the "Reciprocity Study" in the Fogg book today, and I don't know if I agree with that. As I navigate websites, I don't think about how easy it was and how I can come back to it. A website will be used repeatedly when it is easy to use, but I am not always willing to be helpful to the website. But to some extent, I think that the ease at which someone can navigate a website does influence the number of times a person visits a particular site, and how often they return.

Reciprocity to the computer is hard to determine, but to a particular website, I believe that it is possible.