Are they really that powerful?
While reading the articles on newsletters about Bush and Kerry I asked myself are email newsletters really that powerful? By this I mean if they really have a direct impact on voters? I think that people are tired of opening their mails and having to deal with so much junk. I am not very sure about newsletters"offering a direct line to such every-day influencers around the country." Yes they are indeed a direct line to your daily mail, but I am not sure if they have enough power to influence the electorate.
On the other hand, if you suscribe to your candidate's website is because you are really interested in it, so you will definitely read the email newsletter. If there is so much junk that arrives to the mail, candidates have to make sure that their newsletters are able to caught their electorate's attention. I am not a Bush's fan but I do agree with his last minute strategy. Nielsen's article states that Kerry bombarded his supporters with newsletters asking for money donations. I do not believe that is a good strategy and I bet many supporters started deleting Kerry's emails. People do not like to feel that they are important to their candidate only because of money. According to Nielsen's analysis, Kerry's last minute strategy looked for donations and not for a vote. Terrible mistake!!!
On the other hand, Bush's strategy had a lot of impact. He asked for the people's vote. In his last week newsletters he encouraged citizens to vote. I believe that when people feel important for their candidate there is a better response.
Finally, I had a look at the screenshots of the campaigns that Emi posted, and I felt that Dean's volunteer screenshot grabs attention. The introduction is very personal and he has a clear message that invites people to participate in his campaign. You feel welcome. Kerry's and Bush's interfaces are very cold. They go straight to the point which is not bad, but is always pleasant for the electorate to feel that their candidates really need their support. Each supporter does not wants to feel as another email in the candidate's data base. Is the candidate's strategist task to personalize the relationship between candidate and supporter. Kerry as I see it fail to do it with his newsletters.
On the other hand, if you suscribe to your candidate's website is because you are really interested in it, so you will definitely read the email newsletter. If there is so much junk that arrives to the mail, candidates have to make sure that their newsletters are able to caught their electorate's attention. I am not a Bush's fan but I do agree with his last minute strategy. Nielsen's article states that Kerry bombarded his supporters with newsletters asking for money donations. I do not believe that is a good strategy and I bet many supporters started deleting Kerry's emails. People do not like to feel that they are important to their candidate only because of money. According to Nielsen's analysis, Kerry's last minute strategy looked for donations and not for a vote. Terrible mistake!!!
On the other hand, Bush's strategy had a lot of impact. He asked for the people's vote. In his last week newsletters he encouraged citizens to vote. I believe that when people feel important for their candidate there is a better response.
Finally, I had a look at the screenshots of the campaigns that Emi posted, and I felt that Dean's volunteer screenshot grabs attention. The introduction is very personal and he has a clear message that invites people to participate in his campaign. You feel welcome. Kerry's and Bush's interfaces are very cold. They go straight to the point which is not bad, but is always pleasant for the electorate to feel that their candidates really need their support. Each supporter does not wants to feel as another email in the candidate's data base. Is the candidate's strategist task to personalize the relationship between candidate and supporter. Kerry as I see it fail to do it with his newsletters.
1 Comments:
The points you make in your last paragraph are very astute.
It's always interesting to see how something as seemingly blank and impersonal as an HTML form can speak volumes about a campaign.
9:15 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home