America's youth are in worse shape than ever!

Sorry for not writing about an in class topic, but I thought this article would be interesting. According to Time Magazine From 1974 to 2000, the percentage of overweight 6 to 11 years olds more than tripled. Also, among 9 to 13 year olds, only 39% take part in organized exercise each week. The article attributes these numbers to the TV, video games and to especially the Internet.
Children are more interested in spending time in the Internet and playing with video games than involving in outdoor activities.
As I see it, it is great for kids to be involved at an early age with computers. But also it is important, as everything in life, to have a balance. We want intelligent, challenging youth who will be able to develop mentally but also physically. A question that I raise: is the same happening to teenagers and grownups? Are we forgetting to maintain our body healthy because the Internet is consuming our time?

The right to vote!

I can't believe the video we watched yesterday in class! How is it that people want to vote and they have all of those big, huge problems to do it. I agree with some of my classmates. Voters should be responsible for asking, reading, informing themselves about the election process. On the other hand, parties and people encharged of elections are responsible for helping their voters and giving them the tools to know how, where and when to vote. The act of voting is the only of way of preserving democracy, and it can't be spoiled in the way we saw yesterday.

I was impressed, surprised , also terrified to see the mess and the chaos in those precints. It is unbelievable that voters had to wait three and four hours to vote. Also it is crazy that for a precint of 1,100 people only three machines were available. Who is in charge of this? If a country like the U.S. wants its citizens to vote, so make their lives easier!!! And it doesn't have to do with technology, budget, intelligence or anything like that. The process could be much better if there was organization.

I though that in Latin America we were very disorganized. But maybe our voting system can be an example. Unfortunately, in Ecuador the vote is not optional. Everyone has to vote, it is a demand, which I do not agree with, but that is another issue. We have a Institution (The Supreme Tribunal of Elections) they are in charge of the elections across the country. Prior to election day (which by the way is always a Sunday, where no one has to go to work) voters can consult via Internet, phone and in specific places in the city (like mall, schools, universities) where do they have to vote. As voters we get inform on the county we are register, the precint even the booth number where we have to vote. Until here it is responsibility from the voter to get acquainted with that information.

Unfortunately, in Ecuador, the election process lacks of technology. But that doesn't disturbs the process. The precints are open from 7am to 530pm. People vote on papers! Yes, I know you might be thinking about fraud, but until know there has not been one election where fraud has been proven. The precints have people everywhere that guide you inside the building to get to your booth. In Ecuador 8.4% of the population is illiterate and more than 10% is indigenous (not all of them speak Spanish). So, when they arrive to the precint they are lost in space, so guess what do they do? They ask!

As a reporter I have covered the elections and I have never seen anything like I saw yesterday in the video Emi presented. Of course I do not want to generalize, every precint, county, state is different from each other. But if a country like the U.S. which is always talking about democracy, is not protecting the citizens and encouraging them to vote, then what should we think? You have to start cleaning the mess in your own house. You have to improve the election process, you have to encourage citizens to vote and not disappoint them as we saw yesterday. They want to vote, give them the tools to do it!!

Volunteers are the force!

As I see it Bush's campaign was a success in recruiting volunteers. I just read the article The Multilevel Marketing of the President and I conclude that his pyramid strategy and the grassroots efforts were essential winning factors for his presidential race. I read another article, Bush grassroots campaign attempts to recruit students, in which the author mentions the emphasis Bush's campaign made on recruiting volunteers and voters. The Republican campaign understood the importance of targeting small counties, that where left behind by Democrats. Also they focused on young people, the article states that "two of the first 10 national grassroots initiatives launched by the Bush-Cheney campaign have targeted young voters, a tribute to the commitment the campaign has to engage young voters in the political process of the country."

I am not a very big fan of the Republican Party, but I admire the way the build their campaign. I believe politicians should focus more on the common voters. Sometimes it is said that one vote won't make a difference but one, plus one, plus one will definitely make a difference in the candidates voting record. Candidates have to pay more attention, to the small cities, to the rural neighborhoods, to the far away counties, here is where they might find victory.

In places where technology is not available, where computers are not available, where even telephone lines do not exist, (believe me in developing countries there are places that do not even have electricity) the candidates should implement a strong grassroots team with the community. Building leadership among the people, encouraging them to recruit supporters and making them part of the team (captain precints) will assure the candidate's victory. In most of the countries in Latin America and Africa political strategies are based on door to door campaigns. Technology is use for the big cities, but if the candidate is not able to reach the voters, by mail, phone, or internet, he/she has to find a way to spread his message. The candidate has to lean on the community, they will spread the message in person. I know it sounds like an old strategy, but if they have work in the past why shouldn't they keep trying them? The Republicans are a great example of using technology as well as old strategies, and for them it worked.

Incompetence!

It is hard for me to imagine that such an important campaign , as the Kerry campaign for President, would have had so many failures. It is not only James Verini who writes about the incompetence of Kerry's campaign. Tony Coehlo, former Gore campaign chairman, described it as a chaos, in a online article in CBS News.

Coehlo states that, no one was in charge and "you have these two teams that are generally not talking to each other. I was not in the United States when the presidential campaigns were working. But I am really surprised that there was (in Kerry's campaign) lack of communication between campaign managers, staffers and volunteers. Also, according to Coehlo, calls and emails for the Kerry campaign were not immediately returned, and that was very bad for the image of the campaign. People tend to lose interest about the candidate when this happens.

It is also sad to read Verini's article and discover that many people involved in Kerry's campaign, were really Bush haters. That means they were working for Kerry not because they truly believe he was the ideal candidate, they just wanted Bush out of the White House. It is like if there was no choice, so you have to choose the less of the evil. Did Americans really felt that way?

This reminds me of a many elections in Ecuador, when we have felt the same way. In our elections, we have two rounds. In the first one we have like 10, 12 candidates running for presidents and then the second round only has the final two. In that stage is when we confront the reality between choosing the less of the evil. Either the rich man, who owns many corporations of the extreme left, or the ex military who was the protagonist of a coup. Though decision eh? For the last three elections it has been the same story, voting not for someone, but against someone. This type of vote damages the real meaning of democracy.

Offline and Online Campaigns

The article by Frank E.Watkins clearly shows how synergy works. I always remember when Emi talks about synergy between online and offline campaigns. Watkin's article explains exactly how a candidate's campaign should work. Jesse Jackson's campaign was focused in winning and they did. They used technology in a effective way and they also worked hard in door to door campaign.

I believe that small campaigns should use all the technology they can afford. But they should also put close attention to offline strategies. In countries where few people have access to the Internet, offline strategies are the most effective for winning a campaign. Candidates visit each house (door to door) and in person they explain their positions on certain issues and their campaign plan. They receive feedback from the electorate and they are able to perceive certain realities and problems that from the Internet are difficult to see.
On the other hand, the online campaign that Jackson managed was very efficient. His volunteers and strategists were all involved in the online campaign. They applied the technology they had, to search for voters and consolidated a mailing lists. With the mailing lists they approached the voters not only to ask for their vote, but also to get them involved with community issues.

Another point that grabbed my attention from this article was the acronym GOTV. This is the first time I read about it. That is because in Ecuador the vote is obligatory. Candidates do not have to put any effort in GOTV operations, because either like it or not, we have to vote. Personally I think the vote should be optional because it makes people aware of the power the vote has. If it is obligatory citizens do not see the importance of it. They just go to the polls and that is it. No participation, no commitment, no nothing and that is how democracy becomes unstable. But that is another story.

Podcasting

I was doing some research on Podcasting and Wikipedia has certainly some interesting information. Podcasting became popular just a year ago, and it was largely used for audio files. The term "podcasting" , comes from the terms "iPod" and "broadcasting" and it is used a as a synonym for "audioblogging" or weblog-based amateur radio.
Politicians have not taken yet advantage of podcasting, which I believe it is very useful for campaigns. Yesterday it was the first time I heard the word podcasting and I started to think of the impact this type of technology will have in future political races. I believe it is very important to hear candidates discussing all types of issues. Podcasting is a great resource because you do not have to wait for an interview in a specific channel or radio station. With podcasting as we saw yesterday, we just need a click and we can hear and even see them, whenever we want to.
I do agree with some classmates, that the production of Edward's videos on line were terrible. On the other hand, it is great to know that former candidates (like Edwards) are using podcasting to deliver their ideas to the public. Citizens should be encouraged to participate in podcastings, asking questions and demanding answers from the candidates. Podcasting helps the candidate and the community to interact. Now, as I see it, it is not only about the Internet and the new world that it has showed us. It is about all sort of tools that technology is presenting us and we should use them to preserve democracy!

The media is fracturing

According to former White House press secretary, air Fleischer, the media is fracturing into more choices and more diversity. In his book, Taking the Heat, he analyzes the changes that have occurred over time with the media. He states that networks have lost viewers as well as newspapers are losing readers. I believe that is totally true, especially within the new generation. Young people do not buy a newspaper to read, they have all the information and several newspapers at once in the Internet. So why bother? TV, radio and newspapers have been losing power since the Internet arrived. Younger people are turning to the web and to blockers for news and for immediate reactions about certain issues. TV and newspapers are too slow for the Internet.

According to Fleischer, "the immediacy of the Internet and cable news has changed the way all White House reporters do their jobs-for better and for worse". That statement, I believe, is completely true. As a broadcast journalism, it takes a couple of minutes to be on air. As a newspaper writer it takes a whole day to get your story on front page. But if you work as a online newspaper writer you will have your story published immediately. The Internet is winning in time and in content also. Once the story is up, immediate responses appear in blocs, forums etc. Yes, definitely the Internet has changed the way reporters do their jobs.

But the immediacy of the Internet is also a problem for journalists. Not only because the Internet beats broadcasting and newspapers in time, but writers and broadcasts reporters have lost the possibility of analyzing news more in depth. They are so worried on giving the news first and quickly that they have forgotten that analysis is also necessary. Like Fleischer states: "the way journalist do their job has changed-for better or for worst".

Please thank your supporters!

The least candidates can do is thank their supporters. It is almost impossible to believe that an email respond from a campaign to a supporter does not has the words thank you! But as in the example in Winning Campaigns Online there are indeed candidates that forget to say thank you. I would think that the "best strategy" to lose a supporter is to write plain, death emails after they have suscribed, donate or volunteer for a campaign. Emails respond should have a clear, short message. Make it personal and it will have more success. And please, write THANK YOU!

Junk mail is a headache!

People are just tired of receiving junk mail! According to Jupiter Media Matrix, a New York research firm, Americans received an average 440 spam messages in 2000, 571 in 2001 and can expect 1,479 by 2006. I would have think that the numbers were going to be larger, but still is terrible to see your email box full of junk mail. People are so annoyed by junk mail that there are websites which present several tips to avoid them.
I totally agree with Emi and Phil in Chapter 14, people should get the opportunity to opt out from a candidate's mailing list in order to avoid problems with junk mail. It might be the case that they are not interested anymore in what a candidate has to say, and they deserve the chance of unsuscribing.

Blogs to save the country

I just learned from a newspaper back in my country that the President and his cabinet have created blogs to communicate with citizens. In their posts they asked for ideas and community participation. According to the President this is a way through which Ecuadorians will have the opportunity to express their ideas. Since Ecuador has a new government which is not still stable, the government is asking for help. They are doing it via blogs!!!

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.

Date.com

So let's forget about blogs for a moment and lets write about dating. Yes, dating. According to Time Magazine online dating is a $500 million industry. But it is not only the Internet that is making profits with dating, is also cell phone services. You can find all kind of services with your cell phone that will guide you to your soul mate.
But that's not all, Comcast Cable customers can watch video profiles and then log through hurrydate.com to contact the one you found attractive. There are plenty of resources you can use to find a date, friend, girlfriend or boyfriend.
But I ask myself a question, are we really that desperate and that lonely? Yes, technological dating is making profits but how is people dealing with the idea that the Internet and the cell phone will be the savior when searching for company. Technology has help in many things, science, jobs, industry etc.. But in our personal lives has it really helped?

Usability

Usability is the key word. After tonight's class I asked myself how can they be so many errors and problems in a web site, especially to donate money.
People that build websites are sometimes just interested in what looks graphically nice and good, and they forget to make peoples lives easier. It is not possible and not acceptable for a campaign website to have so much problems in the online fundraising area. Like I said before and like how we have been hearing every day in class, usability is the answer. Keep it simple and technological friendly and you will succeed!

Privacy policy

I just finish reading Chapter 11 and I found a very interesting point: adopt a privacy policy. I have read before in other books on fundraising the importance of having a privacy policy for donations. I agree that privacy is important, but why for donations?
I believe that it is better for people to know who you donated money to and how much. I think it is a principle of transparency. But as I see it privacy in fundraising is a big issue and I do not quite yet understand why.

Google maps

I was astonished to see Google's satellite map tool, but there is more to it. It is not only use to find addresses but also to access services from other websites on top of Google maps. Housing maps uses craigslist to graphically locate and map all the house in the listing to their actual physical location. You can filter by price range and city. This tool is very helpful because you can see what place has a better deal,how far is the house you are looking from your work, university, metro station etc.
There is more to it. According to an article from the Washington Post there is a website, created by a 24 year old that uses google satellite map to pinpoint crimes in Chicago. (chicagocrime)
For the city of Chicago this web page has been a great help. People check crime zones every day to see how their neighborhood is doing.
Even though these sites are operating without Google's permission, they are doing nothing to shut them down. It is wonderful publicity for Google maps!

Blogs for courting voters

I read in this week edition in Times Magazine that John Edwards is courting voters by using several blogs. According to the article he has spent the last two weeks posting comments in tmpcafe and talking points memo about globalization and poverty.
Even though Edwards is not running as a candidate, he is helping himself with technology. The interesting think is that he is not only commenting on several left leaning blogs, he also was the host of a dinner with several bloggers to talk about politics and gain their support. Apparently Edwards sees the impact and power that blogs have among politics.
As I see it politicians are trying to maintain their political image and spreading their political beliefs by using blogs. While many of us might believe that blogs lack credibility others like John Edwards rely on them to maintain political support.

To blog or not blog

Right now I am having a reunion at my house. We are all Latin American between 24 and 28 years old and we are discussing about blogs. None of them except for me have had a blog before. None of them have post any comment in a blog. They all believe that blogs are for people that have a lot of free time. I am trying to convinced them that it is a fun and interesting way to communicate with other persons and to be able to express yourself with freedom .

I do not blame them for thinking that blogs are nonsense. That is because in Latin America blogs are not famous at all. Many people do not know what they are. The ones that have heard about it, think it is a waste of time.
This is a never ending story. Do you think, in a near future, that blogs will make a difference in the way people communicate?

Security

I think that online security should be a priority for people working on online campaigns. I would think that one of the huge problems with online fundraising is that people tend to be afraid to donate money.
Specially in countries where the Internet is a new tool for campaigning, people do not feel comfortable donating money online .

Hard to believe it!

I am reading the Political Consultants' Online Fundraising Primer and I am very surprised. From the beginning of this Political Program I thought that the way each society manages politics cannot be applied to all countries. Every society has a different reality and faces different problems. Politics cannot be handled as a one and only truth.

Some countries around the world respect and admired the U.S for the way democracy is established. As I see it (and tell me if I am wrong) common citizens are able to be part of the elections process. Citizens are volunteers, they put up yard signs, they want to meet their candidate and they get involved in the race. Nobody pays them to do it, they just feel a commitment for electing the best candidate that will suit his/her needs. This is why people donate money to their candidates. Citizens still believe in their representatives, so they support them. But that's the American case.

In other countries I am positive that few citizens will donate money to their citizens. Citizens in some countries do not believe anymore in their politicians. The ones that donate money to X or Y campaign are close, rich friends of the candidate, waiting for a political position. So I applaud the political process in the U.S, which involves citizens and they are able to be active agents.

While reading the document on fundraising I was astonished to learn that online fundraising has developed rapidly. Candidates in the USA are successfully fundraising online almost half the money they make for their campaigns. It seems everyone in the States is now more focused on online campaigning. Will it be a day that the Internet has the same impact around the world? Hopefully yes, but that will take time, education and money.

Journalists and blogs

Yesterday we had a very interesting class, where three journalists came as guest speakers. They work at the Washington Post, CNN and The Hill. The discussion was mostly about approaching politicians and finding stories.

There was a question from a student asking about the use of technology to build stories. One of the journalists mentioned the use of blogs. He said journalists should be careful not to dismiss blogs.
He stated that not all blogs had thoughtful thinking, but there are some political blogs that are very useful for their daily coverage.

Although, he also said that having too much credibility for blogs is not very healthy. He concluded that it will take time for journalists to sit at their desks and read blogs as a source for information. He personally affirmed that he did read blogs but didn't get story ideas from them.

I just wanted to share this with you all because I think that it is interesting that even though journalists do not give much credibility to blogs, they still read them to know people's thinking on issues they report on.

Text messages

Last year, when I used to work as a journalist for a TV station, I did a report on how important text messaging had become in Ecuador.
You wont' believe what I discovered. Ecuador is the third country in the world , that sends more daily messages from cell phones. Philippines and Thailand are second and first. I couldn't believe it! Our population is around 13 million people but almost everyone has a cell phone. It is a strange phenomena that I will try to explain.

More than 60% of our population live in poor conditions. About 30% live in rural areas. So you would ask how they can afford a cell phone? Well, asking for a phone line takes years. There are many places where phone lines are not available, so entire families prefer to have a prepaid plan with a cell phone. The thing is that in most countries in Latin America you are not charged for the incoming calls, just for the ones that you do. Second, the calling minute is very expensive, (at least for us) 7 cents the minute. So, they are plenty of cellular phone plans to make everyone's life easier. Cell phones companies have incredible plans with text messaging. For example a package of 500 messages a month costs 3 dollars. As you can see everyone in Ecuador uses text messaging.
Everyone, is everyone. Teens are crazy sending messages. Students, businessman and even moms are now experts.

The incredible thing is that is not only use as an entertainment tool, also as a work tool as well as a protesting tool. In the last political crisis.. people in Quito used the text messaging to get together in parks, avenues, and government buildings and protest!! To make a phone call to each of your friends and relatives would have been very expensive. But sending a text message and forwarding was the best thing to do.

Who's Fault?

I just read Congressman Conyers letter. It is hard as an international to comment on inside problems of a country. I just wanted to say that I was very glad to see how Newsweek retracted from their story about abuses of the Koran in Guantanamo. That is a good way to do journalism. AS a journalist you can be wrong and accepting it and retracting is the best you can do.
But this weekend the Washington Times, Washington Post and TV daily News are saying that high officials have stated that there were indeed, abuses with The Koran while interrogating prisoners.
I think that what makes a solid democracy is the truth. If US government is hiding this abuses, journalists should start doing serious investigation. The Government shouldn't blame Newsweek for the deaths and for the anger of Muslim countries against the US. Authorities should investigate in depth if abuses did occur and tell the truth!!!!

Just soccer

It is Saturday and I have been sitting here in front of my computer for almost an hour and I do not have anything in my head to write about. If something comes to my mind later I will all let you know.
But I can tell you about soccer. Today is soccer day. Ecuador is playing against Argentina. Argentina is one of the most powerful teams in the world. This game is for the World Cup 2006. Ecuador has been there only once and we expect to be there next year. In Ecuador everything has to do do with soccer. There is not any other popular sport, just soccer.
We have songs that are dedicated to our national team. People go out to the streets everytime the national team wins. It is always a party.
With soccer people forget about political problems, economic problems or any type of problems. Once you are in the stadium people are all happy, cheerful. For Latin Americans soccer is passion. So, Go Ecuador!!!

What is news?

I totally disagree with Sylvester Brown's article. It was a shock for me to read his column. Is he a journalist for real?????

For years, journalists have been criticized for their role towards community. It seems that their work is not focus anymore in being a real voice for the public. The media seems to be more interested in entertaining the community instead of orienting the public. Unfortunately, news have fallen in that category. But I believe there is always hope!!! As a journalist I feel awful to read Brown's column. How he dares to say that Disneyland is today's news.?????!!!!!

I think true journalists still believe in serving the community. We have a commitment to inform not to entertain. How can the war in Iraq? Or the political problems in Latin America be less important than the Runaway bride? Everything because of money (according to Mr. Brown)
Yes, it is true that a TV network lives from the publicity. But that doesn't mean that as a journalist you forget about your views and your commitment to your public.

Disneyland might be news, but also is Representative Conyers story. It is not fair to say that because "the genre" has changed, we forgot our true duties as journalists.

For journalists

Reading Ireland and Nash's book I have become aware of the interest on politicians and web consultants to make journalists lives easier.

While designing the web page for the candidate, it is great to know that they are focusing on journalists. It is interesting and astonishing (at least for me) that they take into account problems that journalists will have to face (like deadlines) and web consultants and campaign managers are eager to help.

I remember myself (back in my country) looking for information in government web pages and they were a chaos! A phone call was more useful than their web page. But we are starting, and at least it was good to know that they have a web page! Believe it or not there were government agencies you couldn't' find in the Internet.

I do not want you to think that we are living in the Stone Age, but technology has arrived very slowly, although changes have taken place. For instance, we have very modern TV stations, but the Internet is something that still has a long road.

New technologies, example of democracy

I just remembered a real life example of how the internet was a tool for democracy. On April, Ecuador's president was overthrown. Not by a military coupe, not by politicians, but by citizens. Ecuadorians were so tired of the anarchy that the former president was using, that they decided to start protesting in the streets against his government.

The first tool that citizens use to call each other attention was the radio. Radio La Luna was the only media that . Was serving as a tool where citizens can call and comment on the president's behavior and attitudes. But the former president wanted to break democracy. So he interrupted several times the radio station and with the army he tried to close it. He was not able to close it, but the signal was interrupted for several hours..

Do you know, what did the radio station did? They created a blog. Citizens could visited radiolaluna.com and you will see chat sessions and comments all over the blog. This was an essential tool for the rallies that citizens organized to protest against the government. For one whole week citizens were in the streets, shouting, singing, walking, and all because they were able to have a tool that was available for them. No government could stop that.....

On April 21 Lucio Gutierrez, former President of Ecuador, took an airplane and headed to Brazil. Citizens pressure Congress and the military to throw him out of power. The media did they work.. But the Internet for the first time in history had its particular and significant participation. The Internet served democracy.